2018 Roster and Fantasy GM Thread

[krutovsdonut]

Do you think Beagle and Roussel signed with Vancouver because they thought we would be a winning team?

i think roussel and beagle chose to sign with the canucks for a combination of money/term and the team itself, including but not limited to their assessment of the prospects of the team winning and being part of that. i am not saying we were the best shot for winning they were offered, but i am saying that we had enough going for us that they took our offer instead of taking a little less to go elsewhere whch is what i think they would have done if they expected 4 years of losing here.

schaller i don't know. he may not have had another offer close enough to be choosey.

 

[Fire Benning]

Think there's an August or September trade coming up involving a forward, just a hunch.

 

[Bleach Clean]

and i am sure they could have made close to the same money and term elsewhere. so you are talking about them going to a team regardless of its prospects to win because of the incremental difference between that team's offer and the next offer. i think that is unlikely with so many options and given the reputations of these players. i also think an opinion it was all about the dough is just projecting your benning hate on a player who hasn't played a game for us yet: e.g. "anybody willing to sign this terrible team must be a bloodless mercenary".

and you might want to read my posts before throwing a straw man and a gif at me. it doesn't follow from me disagreeing with trugrit that i have the opposite extreme view. so no, i am not saying money had nothing to do with it. if you go back to the post that started this little exchange i said money and term was obviously part of it.

Huge assumption on your part in bold.

Let's boil this down: I'm sure every FA looks at a team and ponders it's ability to win now and long term. It's never not a concern. Just as a every FA looks at term, AAV, position on the team etc... What it comes down to is the priority the player placed upon money. With Beagle's and Roussel's contracts, and the state of this team, it seems clear that money was more important to either player than winning was to either player.

How can we conclude this? This team has been terrible for some time. It's expected to continue being terrible for at least 1-2 years. Meaning, half of their deals will be done by the optimistic timeline of being competitive again. Is that prioritizing winning? No, I would say not. Their reputation, their options and what each thinks of the prospect pool is secondary to that pursuit of money. Just like we don't know what's going to happen, they don't know.

I think you're muddying the waters by saying that money was a factor, just not a determinant. It's not about extremes no, but it's definitely not about dismissing primary motivators either. You either think they prioritized money, or you don't. Many think they did, and it's not hard to see why.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Huge assumption on your part in bold.

Let's boil this down: I'm sure every FA looks at a team and ponders it's ability to win now and long term. It's never not a concern. Just as a every FA looks at term, AAV, position on the team etc... What it comes down to is the priority the player placed upon money. With Beagle's and Roussel's contracts, and the state of this team, it seems clear that money was more important to either player than winning was to either player.

How can we conclude this? This team has been terrible for some time. It's expected to continue being terrible for at least 1-2 years. Meaning, half of their deals will be done by the optimistic timeline of being competitive again. Is that prioritizing winning? No, I would say not. Their reputation, their options and what each thinks of the prospect pool is secondary to that pursuit of money. Just like we don't know what's going to happen, they don't know.

I think you're muddying the waters by saying that money was a factor, just not a determinant. It's not about extremes no, but it's definitely not about dismissing primary motivators either. You either think they prioritized money, or you don't. Many think they did, and it's not hard to see why.

1. thanks for conceding it was not just about the money which is my only point. i did not prioritize their motivations one way or the other.

2. whatever is my response to the part where you fight a strawman to the death.

3. lol at you accusing me of muddying the waters when you agree with me.

 

[Bleach Clean]

1. thanks for conceding it was not just about the money which is my only point. i did not prioritize their motivations one way or the other.

2. whatever is my response to the part where you fight a strawman to the death.

3. lol at you accusing me of muddying the waters when you agree with me.

1. What FA _only_ thinks about money and nothing else when signing a deal? Even a mercenary considers the context.

2. I contest that the strawman is actually introduced into this conversation by yourself. True Grit says "They certainly didn't come here to win." You took that to mean that these players didn't even consider this team's ability to win or lose at all. That's your error, not his. Your assumption is that True Grit is attributing zero consideration to team context onto each player.

3. I don't agree with you. You're still hiding behind "money may have been a factor". I'm saying it was the priority for both of these 4th liners. Very different perspectives.

 

[krutovsdonut]

1. What FA _only_ thinks about money and nothing else when signing a deal? Even a mercenary considers the context.

2. I contest that the strawman is actually introduced into this conversation by yourself. True Grit says "They certainly didn't come here to win." You took that to mean that these players didn't even consider this team's ability to win/lose at all. That's your error, not his.

3. I don't agree with you. You're still hiding behind "money may have been a factor". I'm saying it was the priority for both of these 4th liners. Very different perspectives.

seriously? "i contest the origins of the strawman". lol. what unmitigated horseshit.

you are just trying to pick a fight here by provoking a ridiculous argument about nothing. it's like an episode of seinfeld written by an unfunny newman.

i say good day sir.

 

[Bleach Clean]

seriously? "i contest the origins of the strawman". lol. what unmitigated horse****.

you are just trying to pick a fight here by provoking a ridiculous argument about nothing. it's like an episode of seinfeld written by an unfunny newman.

i say good day sir.

I was being polite. I could have just called you out for fabricating the argument to which you were so vehemently opposed. Maybe I should have?

You read into "They certainly didn't come here to win" and _interpreted_ that to mean 'they gave no consideration to winning or losing whatsoever'. Consideration doesn't imply priority. You're setting up a false dichotomy whereby a character player cannot be regarded as chasing the money. When in fact, character players chase money sometimes. It happens. It's a business. It's Beagle's job to earn the most money he can while playing. In this case, he prioritized money because he certainly didn't prioritize winning. That's all True Grit was conveying.

 

[Grip it N RYP it]

Gagner + 5th for Hossa trade incoming

"We had to add a pick to get the deal done with Chicago. Like, they weren't gonna do the deal unless we added the pick, so, but we like what Hossa brings to our group. Like, hes a scorer, he's a player you can win with, he can rip the puck and he brings leadership, which is really gonna help mentor our young guys going forward. We think he's in Slovakia right now and stuff or whatever but for now we're excited to get his picture up and goin' tapped to a locker stall, to remind our young guys of all the things he does the right way and brings to the game."

 

[Josepho]

If I had to guess our next trade, it'd probably be a package around Gagner and Hutton to Chicago.

I then would expect Hutton to rebound to something resemblant of his rookie year.

 

[Superlative Soup]

Think there's an August or September trade coming up involving a forward, just a hunch.

Agreed, Jimbo adding another bottom 6er.

 

[Savoie92]

Hey guys i got a general fantasy hockey question for you guys. I'm not aware of your rosters and prospects so would you consider Markstrom your starter this year? did you pick someone up or expect a prospect to take his place?

Thanks for the help

 

[Wo Yorfat]

Hey guys i got a general fantasy hockey question for you guys. I'm not aware of your rosters and prospects so would you consider Markstrom your starter this year? did you pick someone up or expect a prospect to take his place?

Thanks for the help

Yes, he went into last yr as our starter w Nilsson behind him. This yr I expect the exact same. Nothing about Nilsson makes me think he will win the job, and Demko is presumably still a yr away from being in the conversation. I think you'll get 50+ starts outta Markstrom.

 

[Savoie92]

Thanks for the response. Our league just removed the "L" category and added saves. I presume he will get lots of rubber sent his way.

Hope you guys have a good year and continue moving forward. I love when the Flames have good competition with their rivalries!

 

[Horvat1C]

Canucks:

Pettersson - Horvat - Boeser
Baertschi - Gagner - Goldobin
Roussel - Sutter - Eriksson
Leipsic - Beagle - Virtanen
Schaller

Edler - Gudbranson
Del Zotto - Tanev
Pouliot - Stetcher
Hutton, Biega

Markstrom
Nilsson

Waive: Granlund and Gaunce

Comets:

Dahlen - Granlund - Boucher
Motte - Kero - Lind
Gadjovich - Gaudette - Palmu
Archibald - Gaunce - Jasek
MacEwan, MacMaster, Hamilton, Darcy, Bancks, Carcone

Juolevi - McEneny
Sautner - Chatfield
Brisebois - Sifers
Blujus, Dirk, Anselmini

Demko
Bachman

- Developing our offensive prospects (Pettersson, Goldobin and Leipsic) is challenging with this roster. I had hoped we could find a better 2C for that. But those 3 are interchangeable in the lineup based on chemistry, confidence and slumps. Whoever's playing the best plays with Horvat and Boeser and whoever needs a change up goes down with Beagle and Virtanen. This way we don't risk Goldobin or Leipsic on waivers. Goldobin in particular is someone that I think could have a breakout year if managed correctly.

- I expect Juolevi to start in Utica coming off his back surgery, but he should play at least half of the year in the NHL. Injuries will likely be how he makes the jump initially and then hopefully we can trade a body (Hutton, Del Zotto, Pouliot) for him to stay up for the year. Until then, he get's #1 minutes in Utica and both powerplay and penalty killing time.

- I had hoped Gaudette could be our 4C for the year and adjust to the NHL with "easy" minutes, but it doesn't looks like there's any room for him. I think developing him as a center should be a priority, so it's probably best that he goes and plays that in Utica. He's likely the first call up when injuries hit.

- Dahlen looked somewhat overwhelmed in his short stint in Utica at the end of this past year. There really isn't any space for him, so he get's a chance at redemption of sorts. He's likely near the top of the list in terms of call ups and it's not unreasonable to say that he could spend a good chunk of the year in the NHL.

- All of Lind, Gadjovich, Jasek, Brisebois and Chatfield get regular time in the AHL. Brisebois is someone that I'd like to see get more minutes there, but the play of all these guys determines how and where they're used.

- Hughes back to Michigan for the year and he can sign either with the Canucks or Comets after his season is over.

 

[Bad Goalie]

Canucks:

Pettersson - Horvat - Boeser
Baertschi - Gagner - Goldobin
Roussel - Sutter - Eriksson
Leipsic - Beagle - Virtanen
Schaller

Edler - Gudbranson
Del Zotto - Tanev
Pouliot - Stetcher
Hutton, Biega

Markstrom
Nilsson

Waive: Granlund and Gaunce

Comets:

Dahlen - Granlund - Boucher
Motte - Kero - Lind
Gadjovich - Gaudette - Palmu
Archibald - Gaunce - Jasek
MacEwan, MacMaster, Hamilton, Darcy, Bancks, Carcone

Juolevi - McEneny
Sautner - Chatfield
Brisebois - Sifers
Blujus, Dirk, Anselmini

Demko
Bachman

- Developing our offensive prospects (Pettersson, Goldobin and Leipsic) is challenging with this roster. I had hoped we could find a better 2C for that. But those 3 are interchangeable in the lineup based on chemistry, confidence and slumps. Whoever's playing the best plays with Horvat and Boeser and whoever needs a change up goes down with Beagle and Virtanen. This way we don't risk Goldobin or Leipsic on waivers. Goldobin in particular is someone that I think could have a breakout year if managed correctly.

- I expect Juolevi to start in Utica coming off his back surgery, but he should play at least half of the year in the NHL. Injuries will likely be how he makes the jump initially and then hopefully we can trade a body (Hutton, Del Zotto, Pouliot) for him to stay up for the year. Until then, he get's #1 minutes in Utica and both powerplay and penalty killing time.

- I had hoped Gaudette could be our 4C for the year and adjust to the NHL with "easy" minutes, but it doesn't looks like there's any room for him. I think developing him as a center should be a priority, so it's probably best that he goes and plays that in Utica. He's likely the first call up when injuries hit.

- Dahlen looked somewhat overwhelmed in his short stint in Utica at the end of this past year. There really isn't any space for him, so he get's a chance at redemption of sorts. He's likely near the top of the list in terms of call ups and it's not unreasonable to say that he could spend a good chunk of the year in the NHL.

- All of Lind, Gadjovich, Jasek, Brisebois and Chatfield get regular time in the AHL. Brisebois is someone that I'd like to see get more minutes there, but the play of all these guys determines how and where they're used.

- Hughes back to Michigan for the year and he can sign either with the Canucks or Comets after his season is over.

I don't see much wrong with your list. I think the Granlund demotion after a new contract with a raise would be a surprise. $1,450,000 is a very rare pay check in the AHL. I think we may see some kind of trade that sees Granlund still in Vancouver or with another franchise. Gaudette will likely be called up and not come back. Should this be the setup, the Comets seriuosly still need to add a very good play making center as the need for the talented wings will be critical when the numbers in the middle disappear on the Comets.

Defensively I agree on Hughes and Juolevi and when he goes up and doesn't come back there is nothing close to a #1 D left on the roster. That guy needs to be brought in before the season as well. Anselmini and Dirk are not AHL material and will be in the Zoo. Blujus is better than Sifers. With Dirk and Anselmini off the roster and Juolevi up in Vancouver the list of D you have put forth will be down to exactly 6. So, again I say the #1 AHL d-man who will not get a call-up needs to be added.

One very good puck moving D-man and one very good play making center are essential to glue this group together. Your roster lists 6 veterans. Leaving Hamilton and Bancks out of the lineup makes 4, Blujus plays and Sifers sits and that's 3. There is room for the extra center and the extra D-man in the lineup. If you bring in one of those guys who only rates as a Veteran Exempt, 5 vets and the VE can all play.

No matter how this roster stacks up, the 18 listed each game night is going to leave a lot of forward talent sitting in the well watching the game from behind the glass with the back-up goalie for the night.

If MacMaster plays the way he did over the last 13 games and the 5 playoff games, someone on your list is going to sit out a lot of games. He and Jasek were dynamite together. Tanner still put up 2nd highest point total in the playoffs without Jasek. Cull knows what he has in this kid. Benning should have used one of his 50 contracts on this kid, especially seeing some of the past guys he's given one to.

As a top prospect Lind needs to play, but he was very unimpressive in his games here at the end of last season. So unimpressive that Cull scratched him in all 5 playoff games even with Jasek out of the lineup. I hope to god he isn't the second coming of Cassels. I doubt it.

I can also tell you that MacEwen isn't going to take kindly to being out of the lineup that saw him put up 33 points in 66 GP as a rookie last season.

I think your lineup will see a lot of twists and turns over the first 25 games or so as Cull allows time for the talent to sort itself out. He is going to eventually zero in on a pretty set lineup maybe rotating a couple sets of guys to allow all 4 to get semi regular ice time.

No matter how Benning tries to screw this up, there is going to be talent on the wings in Utica. Up the middle remains to be seen as we don't know what triggers Jimbo still has cocked to pull and thus the Utica centers are up in the air except for Darcy, Hamilton, and likely Kero. Darcy and Hamilton are not the kind of talent the Wings I referred to are going to require. I can see guys that will likely get demoted, but waivers and then injuries at both levels will decimate the Comets center spot unless a couple more are acquired. There is plenty of space available for them.

 

[Horvat1C]

I don't see much wrong with your list. I think the Granlund demotion after a new contract with a raise would be a surprise. $1,450,000 is a very rare pay check in the AHL. I think we may see some kind of trade that sees Granlund still in Vancouver or with another franchise. Gaudette will likely be called up and not come back. Should this be the setup, the Comets seriuosly still need to add a very good play making center as the need for the talented wings will be critical when the numbers in the middle disappear on the Comets.

Defensively I agree on Hughes and Juolevi and when he goes up and doesn't come back there is nothing close to a #1 D left on the roster. That guy needs to be brought in before the season as well. Anselmini and Dirk are not AHL material and will be in the Zoo. Blujus is better than Sifers. With Dirk and Anselmini off the roster and Juolevi up in Vancouver the list of D you have put forth will be down to exactly 6. So, again I say the #1 AHL d-man who will not get a call-up needs to be added.

One very good puck moving D-man and one very good play making center are essential to glue this group together. Your roster lists 6 veterans. Leaving Hamilton and Bancks out of the lineup makes 4, Blujus plays and Sifers sits and that's 3. There is room for the extra center and the extra D-man in the lineup. If you bring in one of those guys who only rates as a Veteran Exempt, 5 vets and the VE can all play.

No matter how this roster stacks up, the 18 listed each game night is going to leave a lot of forward talent sitting in the well watching the game from behind the glass with the back-up goalie for the night.

If MacMaster plays the way he did over the last 13 games and the 5 playoff games, someone on your list is going to sit out a lot of games. He and Jasek were dynamite together. Tanner still put up 2nd highest point total in the playoffs without Jasek. Cull knows what he has in this kid. Benning should have used one of his 50 contracts on this kid, especially seeing some of the past guys he's given one to.

As a top prospect Lind needs to play, but he was very unimpressive in his games here at the end of last season. So unimpressive that Cull scratched him in all 5 playoff games even with Jasek out of the lineup. I hope to god he isn't the second coming of Cassels. I doubt it.

I can also tell you that MacEwen isn't going to take kindly to being out of the lineup that saw him put up 33 points in 66 GP as a rookie last season.

I think your lineup will see a lot of twists and turns over the first 25 games or so as Cull allows time for the talent to sort itself out. He is going to eventually zero in on a pretty set lineup maybe rotating a couple sets of guys to allow all 4 to get semi regular ice time.

No matter how Benning tries to screw this up, there is going to be talent on the wings in Utica. Up the middle remains to be seen as we don't know what triggers Jimbo still has cocked to pull and thus the Utica centers are up in the air except for Darcy, Hamilton, and likely Kero. Darcy and Hamilton are not the kind of talent the Wings I referred to are going to require. I can see guys that will likely get demoted, but waivers and then injuries at both levels will decimate the Comets center spot unless a couple more are acquired. There is plenty of space available for them.

If we could add a mid/late pick for Granlund out of camp I'd be all for it. I don't see that as being too likely though as every NHL team will be sorting through their marginal NHL talent as well. Maybe a team like Arizona or New Jersey offers a pick though. The other thing is Schaller might be on IR to start the year, so Granlund could be our 13th forward out of camp until he's healthy. I think there's a higher chance he get's claimed if we wave him a couple weeks into the season though as there will be some injuries and everyone will know what they have with their roster.

McEneny is probably the closest thing the Comets have to a 1D excluding Juolevi. It's tough to gauge where he will be coming off another major injury though. I agree we should look to add another good defenseman and center though.

In terms of Utica's line combinations, everything is extremely tentative and not in any way how I expect it to remain for the entire year. If Granlund isn't available for Utica, then a spot opens up for either MacEwan or MacMaster (after Motte is moved to center). Other than that, I don't see anyone in that lineup I would take out for either one before injuries hit. The main thing I wanted to show with my Utica roster was that our prime rookies (Dahlen, Lind, Gadjovich, Jasek, Palmu and Juolevi) should all be in good spots to develop their respective games. I don't know enough about the Comets specifically to really comment on their ECHL depth.

There should be some moves that happen even past training camp based on prospects earning their spots after a call up. Gaudette sticking in the NHL after his first stint would mean we either trade a forward or waive them, where they could end up in Utica. Same thing applies for Juolevi, Dahlen, etc.

 

[turkulad]

If Tampa would lose out on Karlsson, would you be willing to do:
To TB: Brandon Sutter, Chris Tanev with retention (+)
To VAN: Tyler Johnson, Cal Foote (+)

They'd save some money while getting a more purely defensive 3C and they'd get Tanev on a bargain.
We'd get a better 2C to ease in Pettersson/Gaudette and the RD prospect we'd need.

Picks and lesser prospects could be used as balancing pieces, I really don't have a full grasp on each player's exact value, but as a basis, would this work..? Don't shoot me tho.

 

[BROCK HUGHES]

If Tampa would lose out on Karlsson, would you be willing to do:
To TB: Brandon Sutter, Chris Tanev with retention (+)
To VAN: Tyler Johnson, Cal Foote (+)

They'd save some money while getting a more purely defensive 3C and they'd get Tanev on a bargain.
We'd get a better 2C to ease in Pettersson/Gaudette and the RD prospect we'd need.

Picks and lesser prospects could be used as balancing pieces, I really don't have a full grasp on each player's exact value, but as a basis, would this work..? Don't shoot me tho.

In my opinion i would do it..But would Jimbo..Being Sutter is his foundation peice.Tanev would create a spot for Hughes.so im good with that.

 

[bossram]

If Tampa would lose out on Karlsson, would you be willing to do:
To TB: Brandon Sutter, Chris Tanev with retention (+)
To VAN: Tyler Johnson, Cal Foote (+)

They'd save some money while getting a more purely defensive 3C and they'd get Tanev on a bargain.
We'd get a better 2C to ease in Pettersson/Gaudette and the RD prospect we'd need.

Picks and lesser prospects could be used as balancing pieces, I really don't have a full grasp on each player's exact value, but as a basis, would this work..? Don't shoot me tho.

I see no incentive for Tampa to swap Sutter and Johnson.

The basis of such a deal looks something like Tanev for Foote, which is probably ballpark value. I'm just not really a fan of Foote, and if we're moving Tanev to TB, I'd prefer some of their other prospects as targets. We probably have to take on Callahan or Coburn to make the cap hits work.

 

[THE Green Man]

I see no incentive for Tampa to swap Sutter and Johnson.

The basis of such a deal looks something like Tanev for Foote, which is probably ballpark value. I'm just not really a fan of Foote, and if we're moving Tanev to TB, I'd prefer some of their other prospects as targets. We probably have to take on Callahan or Coburn to make the cap hits work.

That's surprising. Obviously Tampa has a lot of good prospects but Foote is exactly the guy I'd want in a Tanev deal with Tampa. Who do you have ahead of him?

 

[sting101]

If we could add a mid/late pick for Granlund out of camp I'd be all for it. I don't see that as being too likely though as every NHL team will be sorting through their marginal NHL talent as well. Maybe a team like Arizona or New Jersey offers a pick though. The other thing is Schaller might be on IR to start the year, so Granlund could be our 13th forward out of camp until he's healthy. I think there's a higher chance he get's claimed if we wave him a couple weeks into the season though as there will be some injuries and everyone will know what they have with their roster.

McEneny is probably the closest thing the Comets have to a 1D excluding Juolevi. It's tough to gauge where he will be coming off another major injury though. I agree we should look to add another good defenseman and center though.

In terms of Utica's line combinations, everything is extremely tentative and not in any way how I expect it to remain for the entire year. If Granlund isn't available for Utica, then a spot opens up for either MacEwan or MacMaster (after Motte is moved to center). Other than that, I don't see anyone in that lineup I would take out for either one before injuries hit. The main thing I wanted to show with my Utica roster was that our prime rookies (Dahlen, Lind, Gadjovich, Jasek, Palmu and Juolevi) should all be in good spots to develop their respective games. I don't know enough about the Comets specifically to really comment on their ECHL depth.

There should be some moves that happen even past training camp based on prospects earning their spots after a call up. Gaudette sticking in the NHL after his first stint would mean we either trade a forward or waive them, where they could end up in Utica. Same thing applies for Juolevi, Dahlen, etc.

Have i missed something?

Also Philip Holm just signed in the KHL. Leipsic for nothing....thanks Vegas.

 

[TruGr1t]

If we can get anything resembling positive value for a couple contract anchors like Gagner and Del Zotto my opinion of management will immediately improve. They're worth about half what they make.

Good organizations rightly view players like Beagle and Roussel as replaceable.

 

[bossram]

That's surprising. Obviously Tampa has a lot of good prospects but Foote is exactly the guy I'd want in a Tanev deal with Tampa. Who do you have ahead of him?

I'd rather have guys like Raddysh, Cirelli, Joseph or Volkov honestly.

 

[THE Green Man]

I'd rather have guys like Raddysh, Cirelli, Joseph or Volkov honestly.

To each their own. Personally I'd put Foote ahead of all of them based still on organizational need.

 

[Horvat1C]

Have i missed something?

Also Philip Holm just signed in the KHL. Leipsic for nothing....thanks Vegas.

Schaller had surgery on his hand at the end of this season. This article says that it's expected to keep him out for 3 months, which would affect his summer training, but he should actually be fine for camp.

Canucks continue to add grit in free agency, signing Tim Schaller