2020 Off-Season Discussion Part III

[_Del_]

I think we will find ourselves having to possibly give up a long term signing in a deal to get rid of Kessel

Kessel is owed 850k this year and 5.1M next year. You don't give up assets to trade him. You take another bad contract.
I'd look to the Isle's and take Boychuk at 66% and target guys like Bellows and Jenkins. Saves us a touch of money and cap, gives a grizzled vet on the backend which makes moving Demers or Goose easier, we don't add term.

 

[Jakey53]

I think we will find ourselves having to possibly give up a long term signing in a deal to get rid of Kessel or some others. I think that would make the most likely odd man out Schmaltz, if needing to deal a longer deal. Dvorak would be the next, but that would require a move to upgrade at C, or we would have to have a great contingency plan with someone like Haula.

This makes no sense, at all.

 

[Jamieh]

Kessel is owed 850k this year and 5.1M next year. You don't give up assets to trade him. You take another bad contract.
I'd look to the Isle's and take Boychuk at 66% and target guys like Bellows and Jenkins. Saves us a touch of money and cap, gives a grizzled vet on the backend which makes moving Demers or Goose easier, we don't add term.

I dont see any fit between Kessel and the Islanders style. Its not really a coincidence that Phil was traded out of Toronto just as Lou was being hired. Especially if you actually want an asset from them

 

[BUX7PHX]

You’re suggesting that we would give away Schmaltz or Dvorak just to be rid of Kessel?

Not necessarily. I guess what was implied is that a contract like Kessel, Goligoski, or some others that may make sense to move could also be packaged with Dvorak or Schmaltz for a more enticing deal, but there are not many teams able to accept that, due to salary. Kessel will not return major long term help for us. He will either be another swap of cap dumps and maybe get a prospect or later pick out of it, which amounts to very little. So, if Schmaltz and Kessel were made available, do we get the opportunity with a longer term prospect to work with, as a result?

Maybe a comparable asset on that front would be like Roslovic or even Alex Tuch to go along with a 1 or 2 year cap dump. If Bryan Little had only 2 years left in his deal, as opposed to 4, something like Roslovic, Little, and some other piece for Kessel and Schmaltz could make sense. Maybe the example is a little backwards, but if the right deal comes along to move Kessel and it requires Schmaltz or another young player for the front office to restart deals with (as an example, Roslovic may not immediately pay dividends now and we bridge deal, but if Roslovic is a year or two away from the breakout season, we played this right because we would get similar production to Schmaltz at a lower salary short term).

I doubt there are a lot of teams that would consider being able to work these moves in because of cap reasons, but there may be a possibility to essentially replace Schmaltz with a younger and cost-controlled version whom we think is ready to break out soon. Maybe like the Erat-Forsberg trade of more established player for young up-and-comer, but with some cap dumps to even out the salary

 

[WrinkledPossum]

I don't think Kessel is going anywhere. His cap hit is a lot for teams to take on. It makes no sense at all for us to add things to a deal to move him.

He is also only under contract 2 more seasons and owed 5.1M per year. At 5.1M owed it isn't that bad for us to keep him.

 

[rt]

Not necessarily. I guess what was implied is that a contract like Kessel, Goligoski, or some others that may make sense to move could also be packaged with Dvorak or Schmaltz for a more enticing deal, but there are not many teams able to accept that, due to salary. Kessel will not return major long term help for us. He will either be another swap of cap dumps and maybe get a prospect or later pick out of it, which amounts to very little. So, if Schmaltz and Kessel were made available, do we get the opportunity with a longer term prospect to work with, as a result?

Maybe a comparable asset on that front would be like Roslovic or even Alex Tuch to go along with a 1 or 2 year cap dump. If Bryan Little had only 2 years left in his deal, as opposed to 4, something like Roslovic, Little, and some other piece for Kessel and Schmaltz could make sense. Maybe the example is a little backwards, but if the right deal comes along to move Kessel and it requires Schmaltz or another young player for the front office to restart deals with (as an example, Roslovic may not immediately pay dividends now and we bridge deal, but if Roslovic is a year or two away from the breakout season, we played this right because we would get similar production to Schmaltz at a lower salary short term).

I doubt there are a lot of teams that would consider being able to work these moves in because of cap reasons, but there may be a possibility to essentially replace Schmaltz with a younger and cost-controlled version whom we think is ready to break out soon. Maybe like the Erat-Forsberg trade of more established player for young up-and-comer, but with some cap dumps to even out the salary

I don’t understand why you would want to hurt the value of another asset by attaching Kessel. He’s only due another 1m this year and 5m next year. Easier to ride it out. At least for this season. If he manages to rebound a bit, you can actually get an asset moving him at the TDL or next offseason, rather than having to lose an asset to move him now. If he’s bad enough this year, he might be willing to just retire.

He remaining compensation for this season is so low that, I don’t really see any reason not to just ride it out and see what happens. Buying him out next offseason might be a fine option too.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I don’t understand why you would want to hurt the value of another asset by attaching Kessel. He’s only due another 1m this year and 5m next year. Easier to ride it out. At least for this season. If he manages to rebound a bit, you can actually get an asset moving him at the TDL or next offseason, rather than having to lose an asset to move him now. If he’s bad enough this year, he might be willing to just retire.

He remaining compensation for this season is so low that, I don’t really see any reason not to just ride it out and see what happens. Buying him out next offseason might be a fine option too.

Understood. Unlike a player like Little, Kessel has the opportunity to play. Not saying it will be at the level seen in the past, or even as bad as he was last year. That was more the premise - we take on someone who can't play. Kessel still can, so the question becomes how much negative value would be associated? It would be the type of thing that squares up some sort of a deal for a prospect that hasn't quite put it all together, but if and when it happens in the next 2 years, you want that player on your roster.

 

[Mosby]

It's going to be very difficult to move Kessel because of his very restrictive NTC and because I'd guess very few teams actually like him. Then you have him coming off a very poor season. There are maybe two suitors at best.

 

[TheLegend]

Sens are like 20 below the floor now. Even if they re-sign all their guys to generous deals, they're still likely to fall short. And it's also good to have a buffer so they can move out more guys at the deadline and stay above the floor.

Anyway, that's a good landing spot for Stepan, even more so if we can bring in a replacement C like Wennberg if he is bought out by the CBJs.

$18,295,833 under the floor per Cap Friendly.

But they have picks:
2020
Rd. 1 (3), Rd. 2 (4), Rd. 3 (2)

2021
Rd. 1 (1), Rd. 2 (3), Rd. 3 (1)

 

[_Del_]

I think we just have too many Kessels. Tired of looking at them, and you can't hide or insulate all of them. You can't win with a roster like that. You can hide one or two. It's easy to dream away Kessel, but harder to do. He's also not owed a ton of money, so he's probably playing out the contract here.

That's why I'm all for Schmaltz for Dumba or Zacha+ or Bennett+. Schmaltz 's top end is higher than anyone on our roster, including Keller, imo. But he's effective like that only when he goes inside and shoots. When you're a player whose entire history is plagued by questions about why you shy away from the inside and are reluctant to shoot, I don't see a core player in you. Let someone else take the gamble and the perimeter points, and fill out the roster with an actual C or defenseman.

 

[Mosby]

It's a helluva rebuild for sure. Ottawa takes way too much shit.

 

[PainForShane]

I think we just have too many Kessels. Tired of looking at them, and you can't hide or insulate all of them. You can't win with a roster like that. You can hide one or two. It's easy to dream away Kessel, but harder to do. He's also not owed a ton of money, so he's probably playing out the contract here.

That's why I'm all for Schmaltz for Dumba or Zacha+ or Bennett+. Schmaltz 's top end is higher than anyone on our roster, including Keller, imo. But he's effective like that only when he goes inside and shoots. When you're a player whose entire history is plagued by questions about why you shy away from the inside and are reluctant to shoot, I don't see a core player in you. Let someone else take the gamble and the perimeter points, and fill out the roster with an actual C or defenseman.

@_Del_ I'm happy to do a deep dive with you on this. So many poster just read these posts and say "Good player" or "Bad player" there's never any gray area and most players are somewhere in the middle -- every player has strengths and weaknesses and Schmaltz is no different.

To my eyes, Schmaltz is a creative playmaker in the offensive zone, kind of like a poor man's Mitch Marner if that makes sense. Patrick Kane loved playing on his line and was surprised he was traded. I agree he never cuts inside and rarely shoots, but as a setup man playing center I think he would actually be pretty good if he had a winger who knew how to get into open spaces and actually shoot the puck (say, Laine?). He's also below average defensively and since we were logjammed at center this year after the Soderstrom trade (thanks Chayka), we put him on wing and he was pretty useless this year despite being our leading point producer, imo a big part of that was never cutting inside or shooting like you said.

That's not his game though, never has been. Most goals he's ever scored (at any level) is 21 and that was with the Blackhawks. The guy's not a goal scorer. Nick Schmaltz Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

That said. Offensive zone creativity is rare which I think is why Chayka said he was 'a hell of a player.' Also Rick Tocchet's system doesn't really allow for that it's just cycle the puck over and over which makes no sense with a roster as small / soft as we are. Different discusson.

Anyway if you play keep playing Schmaltz on wing imo he'll continue to be useless imo because of the reasons you said. If you put him in the middle with wingers who like to shoot / can get open in traffic? That I would like to see

 

[PainForShane]

To be clear though I hate hate HATE Schmaltz' contract. Paying him too much, too much term when imo he still hasn't proven anything at this level. All he brings is one-dimensional offense and on most teams right now he's barely a top six player, no reason to give anyone that much money or term to someone so unproven / young.

All I'm arguing is that IF he has a scoring winger on his line he COULD BE part of the core. If we don't get anyone like this (at this stage of his career, best case Kessel is also a setup man), maybe float his name and see who else might want him and his ridiculous contract. Keller at wing and Schmaltz at center did have some chemistry for the 10-15 games immediately following the trade, we could maybe try that again and see if that chemistry is repeatable

 

[Coyotedroppings]

I rarely witness this one and done team cycle the puck.

 

[_Del_]

He's also below average defensively

He doesn't play defense. He makes flybys and poke checks. That isn't "below average". It's awful. Particularly from the center position.

a big part of that was never cutting inside or shooting like you said.

That's not his game though, never has been.

Correct, which is why he'll never be more than he is. Which is a shame. Almost every Schmaltz goal you can imagine starts with him cutting inside and shooting. He doesn't do it. It's also where he gets his nicest assists, because it opens up lanes for other players. He doesn't do it. When he does do it, he's an All-Star caliber player. He has higher offensive skill than anyone on the roster. But it doesn't matter because he doesn't do it. Never has, and wouldn't gamble his contract on him ever doing it.

Anyway if you play keep playing Schmaltz on wing imo he'll continue to be useless imo because of the reasons you said.

No, it magnifies his weaknesses at center, because everyone beyond peewee coaches expect their center to be defensively responsible and play between the circles, not just be a distributor of pucks.

I don't care how many perimeter points you put up if you won't play D and bail on the puck to avoid contact. We can't win games that way. You can get by with players like that playing second fiddle, but you can't win with a core made of them. He isn't a core player. I don't hate Schmaltz, I just see what he is. He doesn't create enough offense from the outside to justify the liabilities. If he played inside, he definitely could. But as you so elegantly note, he never has.

It's like talking about Ghost. Ghost is not a bad player. He's just not a core player that you pay core money to or tie up core cap with.

If he was signed at $4M and we didn't already have Keller and Kessel who love to play the perimeter, he could be a good player to amplify someone else's numbers. He doesn't do the things he needs to do to drive play often enough for any other role.

I'd happily trade him to someone who thinks he can augment their offense like Minnesota for Dumba, or for someone who thinks they can change him or is happy with 50 pts and no defense for a guy that can fill a hole at center. You can find a way to win with three reliable, unglamoroustwo way centers. Let's find them. You can't win with a bunch of one-dimensional liabilities on wing who score around 50 pts each depsite their "amazing" chemistry.

 

[_Del_]

I rarely witness this one and done team cycle the puck.

You'd have to work the wall.

When you won't work the wall to keep or gain the puck because you avoid contact like the plague, and you won't play inside the circles, what are you contributing exactly? It's not "possession" no matter how well you skate with the puck.

Rookie Keller was amazing on the wall. He was like Garland without the chip on his shoulder. Haven't seen it since. Schmaltz has never shown it to anyone, ever. He's my choice to go even though I think he's the most talented player on the roster in terms of vision and raw skill.

 

[_Del_]

Keller at wing and Schmaltz at center did have some chemistry for the 10-15 games immediately following the trade,

It was more like four great games, and they bled goals against. I can dig up the old posts:

That happened in exactly four of those games. He was outstanding in those four games.

In the other thirteen we were 4-9 and he was a negative nine along with Keller. He was good for the powerplay, though.

Further debunking the myth:
We were outscored 45-32 in those thirteen games.
That's 2.46 GF/G and 3.46 GA/G.
Our season average without Schmaltz is 2.48 GF/G and 2.61 GA/G.
Even if we include the four outstanding games he had when he first came over, we were outscored 47-50 while he was in the lineup. That gets us to 2.76 GF/G but 2.94 GA/G.
We gained .28 goals per game and gave up .34 more goals with him in the lineup counting all his games. Not a massive benefit (if any, we lost value in goal differential). If the real Schmaltz is the player we saw in the last 13 games he played and not the first four games, we scored .02 FEWER goals with him in the lineup and gave up .85 goals MORE with him in the lineup.

Too bad they are dreck defensively. But on the PP, sure.


Schmaltz 17GP 5-9-14 -8
4-3-7 of that came on the PP
So 1-6-7 even strength while -8

Keller 17GP 2-13-15 -9
Eight of those points were on the PP
2-5-7 and -9 even strength

That's good for what, over a goal a game against?

So much gets made of the first four games where Schmaltz and Keller were both 2-3-5 and we went 4-0, but each only had three even strength points in that stretch while Josh Archibald was 2-3-5 and +5 in those same games, several guys with 2 goals, etc Even in those games that line wasn't carrying us alone, it just seemed the most dynamic that we've seen in recent memory.

Taking out those four games where they were white hot (with the rest of the team), Schmaltz is 3-6-9 in 13 games, -9. 1-6-7 even strength.
Keller is 0-10-10, -10 in 13. 0-4-4 even strength.

It's like our own urban legend that these guys were overpowering together. They put up solid numbers, and the PP came alive (both good things), but they weren't carrying the team. We were 8-9 with them together in the lineup, outscored 47-50.

I don't think we win more games with them paired even strength when they are -9/-8 with 3-12-14 combined.

For comparison in the same 17 game stretch:
Cousins: 3-5-8, +/-0 even strength
Archibald: 3-4-7, +1 even strength
Panik: 3-4-7, +/- 0 even strength
Keller: 2-5-7, -9 even strength
Schmaltz: 1-6-7, -8 even strength

Why in the world would we keep them together 5v5?! If we decide the four games were an anomaly, the numbers all just get worse.

 

[XX]

As much as I hate Schmaltz' inability to shoot and his low work rate, his talent doesn't grow on trees and isn't readily available. The problem is the coach already has to play 'hide the Kessel' at ES for basically zero gain, leading to at least one line being exposed to a matchup they'd probably want to avoid.

Schmaltz/Kessel/Keller need to be offset by strong possession players and/or sheer depth, something the Coyotes don't exactly have an abundance of.

Of the U25 guys, Schmaltz is clearly the one on the chopping block, but I'd like to see him with a new coach and no Kessel if at all possible. If they move him, whatever. Spend that cap space wisely.

 

[rt]

Schmaltz just needs to go to the inside. That's it. If he just goes to the inside, he's an extremely valuable hockey player. When he skates in straight lines, he's great. When he takes long, looping circles, he's useless.

 

[rt]

It's a helluva rebuild for sure. Ottawa takes way too much shit.

If I could trade all of the picks, players and coaches who's rights we control for all of the picks, players and coaches who's rights they control, I'd do it in a second.

 

[_Del_]

Schmaltz just needs to go to the inside. That's it. If he just goes to the inside, he's an extremely valuable hockey player. When he skates in straight lines, he's great. When he takes long, looping circles, he's useless.

Completely true. He just doesn't. I'd trade him and Raanta for Dumba and not much, and I'd never blink even if he suddenly figures it out in Minny.

 

[PainForShane]

It was more like four great games, and they bled goals against. I can dig up the old posts:

I remember watching the games in real time (home games in person) and thinking they had chemistry (when Schmaltz played center). Lots of unpredictable east-west and drop passes, seemed able to open up shooting lanes at will. To your point I'm sure a lot of that was on the PP. They weren't the Sedins by any stretch but I thought certainly something worth building off of.

Thanks for digging up the posts, good stats in there (esp their +/- and how many GA the team allowed in those games). That said how do you become a better defensive center? Maybe by taking reps at center. In college Schmaltz was a +44 in 37 GP (?!) his sophomore year for the national championship N. Dakota team, a lot of that's probably because the team was good and of course it helps to have Brock Boeser on your wing. And yes, defense in the NHL vs college is completely different. But I'd argue it would have been easier to help Schmaltz become at least an average defensive center than making him into a goal scoring winger.

2015–16 North Dakota Fighting Hawks men's ice hockey season - Wikipedia

If he was signed at $4M and we didn't already have Keller and Kessel who love to play the perimeter, he could be a good player to amplify someone else's numbers. He doesn't do the things he needs to do to drive play often enough for any other role.

This 100%. If you give him DVo's contract no issue with keeping him for the long term. ~6m is way too much on a long term deal for a one-dimensional playmaking winger. Trading him would mean relatively low value though because of that awful contract and because he hasn't really been good for us. It is truly a horrible contract and the biggest reason I'm glad Chayka is gone. That said what do you do?

GET A PROPER COACH who is known for developing young players. Esp because most of your team is young.

If you think it's too late for Schmaltz at center, I don't disagree but I do think the return would be low, that contract is terrible for what he brings. I don't think he makes any sense at wing at all. But yeah, if you can get some grease for him (e.g., a pro like Hornqvist who unfortunately was just dealt), our team needs that and yes it's probably worth making a move

 

[_Del_]

So what do you do?

Trade him. For players that bring the things we don't have and can make our other floaters more effective.

 

[technoviking]

Schmaltz just needs to go to the inside. That's it. If he just goes to the inside, he's an extremely valuable hockey player. When he skates in straight lines, he's great. When he takes long, looping circles, he's useless.

100 percent agree, that’s why I imagine Schmaltz is such a frustrating player for this staff because when he is skating in straight lines he actually has been able to make good things happen.

 

[PainForShane]

Trade him. For players that bring the things we don't have and can make our other floaters more effective.

You know what?

If we traded him straight up for a guy like Jordan Martinook our team would be better. It's hard to argue that's not the case. I agree

EDIT: after poking around capfriendly, Jordan Martinook is making $2m a year for the Canes and is also an assistant captain. #ThanksChayka