Confirmed with Link: [ARI/NYR] Derek Stepan and Antti Raanta for 7th overall and Anthony DeAngelo

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,978
9,040
DeAngelo was not a big piece of the future. He was - and is - a project. He is on his third team in three years. That should indicate to you what his true value is.

I've already shown you Raanta's numbers in the NHL. Raanta is a better goalie than Chad Johnson. And the Coyotes made it to the playoffs with Ilya Bryzgalov as our starter and Mikael Tellqvist as the backup, so I really don't understand all this angst about a goalie who's not only leaps and bounds better than those two, but also better than any goalie option we have had in the time since.



DeAngelo has many issues, but one of them is NOT confidence. And I really would like to see your personal definition of "strong character" if you're going to use that descriptor for DeAngelo.



It's the appetite for puck-movers around here. There are people who still talk about Yandle and wishing he'd come back, and Yands is two teams and three years removed from Arizona.



I'll give you $6.5M over five years' worth of reasons. :D

Raanta is an upgrade over Mike Smith - perhaps not in flashiness or total innate skill, but in attitude, consistency, and performance. And even if he falls flat on his face this year (which is not likely), we aren't tied to him beyond next season. Getting rid of Smith was a no-brainer.

As for 7OA, when we were in the F40 chat room watching the draft, I got the sense as everything unfolded that the Coyotes' staff really didn't think very highly of the forward corps available this year - they waited 75 picks before picking up their first one. And defense being as much of a developmental crap shoot as it is, waiting until 23 to draft in order to acquire a pair of desperately-needed assets seemed like acceptable risk.

For me, 7OA was the most valuable piece we gave up on draft day. But Stepan is a better #1 center than Hanzal was, and while he may not be better in the long run than, say, a Dvorak or a Strome (if Dylan pans out), RIGHT NOW he plugs an enormous hole in our lineup. I think we got fair value in the trade and if we had to do it over again, I would do it without question.

I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying, but I hate to give up the 7OA. I know the draft is a crap shoot, and maybe when I see Stepan play I might change my mind. I like Raanta, but to say he is an upgrade on Smith at this time is incorrect. I guess maybe I'm being a homer here and want trades to be more lopsided in favor of the Coyotes.:)
 

BUX7PHX

Registered User
Jul 7, 2011
5,581
1,350
For me losing the 7OA is what hurts. We have no idea what happens behind closed doors and how everything goes down, but I would have kept Smith and offered the Rangers the 23OA and AD. Why were the Rangers so willing to trade Stepan?

All a part of the process. This wasn't last year's #7 OA, and as such, the players that were available at #7 were likely to be further behind the top 6 in our prospect pool anyhow.

Eventually, once you have a ton of young players, the best thing is to surround them with some seasoning. Unlike the Oilers, instead of spending year after year putting players out there when they may not have been as polished (Eberle, RNH, and the like come to mind), we are balancing the fact that we don't want these players to be relied upon yet. A year or two from now, as they come into their own, we will be fine.

The one thing that is more intriguing to me is that these moves sounded exactly like the type that Tippett would have had in mind. I guess he and Barroway had larger directional differences, cause I don't see Tippett vetoing these deals if he were still coach.
 

Summer Rose

Red Like Roses
Sponsor
May 3, 2012
90,728
20,420
Gainesville, Florida
I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying, but I hate to give up the 7OA. I know the draft is a crap shoot, and maybe when I see Stepan play I might change my mind. I like Raanta, but to say he is an upgrade on Smith at this time is incorrect. I guess maybe I'm being a homer here and want trades to be more lopsided in favor of the Coyotes.:)

I like this analogy since I mentioned to a friend yesterday that transitioning an impressive backup goalie into a starting role is also a crap shoot. We really just traded one set of dice for another with this trade.
 

The Feckless Puck

Registered Loser
Sponsor
Oct 26, 2006
18,236
10,488
I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying, but I hate to give up the 7OA. I know the draft is a crap shoot, and maybe when I see Stepan play I might change my mind. I like Raanta, but to say he is an upgrade on Smith at this time is incorrect. I guess maybe I'm being a homer here and want trades to be more lopsided in favor of the Coyotes.:)

Well, ironically enough, this is where we missed Maloney because he seems to know where all the skeletons are buried in the New York area... :laugh: That is, after all, how we got Duclair from the Rags.

I think, though, that while we really won the Blackhawks trade outright, we weren't going to get much more than a draw from the Rangers. Stepan, after all, is one of the rarest commodities in the league - a legit two-way impact center - and he wasn't going to come cheap. In my own judgement, the trade was fair value for both sides, and sometimes that's the best you can hope for - I certainly prefer that to overpayment. We got two proven NHL players (Raanta proved himself, IMO, when Lundqvist was injured), and NYR got two assets that could pay off big for them a few years down the road. Good trade.

I like this analogy since I mentioned to a friend yesterday that transitioning an impressive backup goalie into a starting role is also a crap shoot. We really just traded one set of dice for another with this trade.

That's exactly right. The question then becomes, how much patience do you have to wait and see if your gamble paid off? The Coyotes are very definitely not in a position to wait - New York, on the other hand, has all the time in the world.

Like I said, for me first round picks are treasures. Whenever a team trades one, I cringe. But considering what names we passed up at 23, it's obvious that the Coyotes' scouts valued some of these kids much differently than I did, and to borrow a page from Jakey's script, they get paid a lot more to evaluate this stuff than I do... ;)
 

Grimes

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jan 5, 2012
8,437
4,801
Tippet's Doghouse
The one thing that is more intriguing to me is that these moves sounded exactly like the type that Tippett would have had in mind. I guess he and Barroway had larger directional differences, cause I don't see Tippett vetoing these deals if he were still coach.

Don't forget we essentially are even to last years real salary. The difference is Smith and Doan are out, and Stepan and Hjarlmasson are in. Tippet was never going to let Smith go, meaning we were never going to be able to spend an extra 5 million on a piece we needed, especially under the half-assed ownership group we used to have.
 

BUX7PHX

Registered User
Jul 7, 2011
5,581
1,350
Don't forget we essentially are even to last years real salary. The difference is Smith and Doan are out, and Stepan and Hjarlmasson are in. Tippet was never going to let Smith go, meaning we were never going to be able to spend an extra 5 million on a piece we needed, especially under the half-assed ownership group we used to have.

I will grant that Tippett probably would not have wanted to give up Smith.

But Stepan and Hjalmarsson fit the profile of players he would have gone after.
 

The Feckless Puck

Registered Loser
Sponsor
Oct 26, 2006
18,236
10,488
I will grant that Tippett probably would not have wanted to give up Smith.

But Stepan and Hjalmarsson fit the profile of players he would have gone after.

I think people forget that while Tippett might be set in his ways and wants to do things his way, he's not stupid. Of course he'd have liked Chayka's trades - I think anyone with any balanced sense can see that the roster got a pretty big upgrade on draft day. Perhaps part of his frustration was that the franchise didn't go that big in the past, and only did incremental upgrades (i.e. Goligoski last year was the only really big deal we made, and Maloney got gun-shy after the Ribeiro flameout). But doing so at the cost of HIS GUYS would have made him mad too.
 

FinnishCoyote

Registered User
Jan 3, 2017
1,284
1,692
Guys, how many players you could see hitting +50 points next year?

I think OEL, Domi, Dvorak, Stepan, Duke if he bounces back and maybe Keller if he plays in NHL next year.

Obviously not all of them, but that is HUGE improvement from last year. When only 1 of our guys hitted 50 and that guy is most likely gone next year

Edit: Oops, accidentally wrote this in this thread. Meant to write this in Offseason roster discussion
 

rt

The Kinder, Gentler Version
May 13, 2004
96,889
45,257
A Rockwellian Pleasantville
I agree Tippett's not dumb. But he is stubborn. No way his precious "Schhhmitty" gets feat on his watch.

Also agree on gunshy DM. First the Jokinen disaster then Ribeiro and he just wanted to tinker safely. Doesn't work with a crap team.
 

cobra427

Registered User
May 6, 2012
9,327
3,347
All a part of the process. This wasn't last year's #7 OA, and as such, the players that were available at #7 were likely to be further behind the top 6 in our prospect pool anyhow.

Eventually, once you have a ton of young players, the best thing is to surround them with some seasoning. Unlike the Oilers, instead of spending year after year putting players out there when they may not have been as polished (Eberle, RNH, and the like come to mind), we are balancing the fact that we don't want these players to be relied upon yet. A year or two from now, as they come into their own, we will be fine.

The one thing that is more intriguing to me is that these moves sounded exactly like the type that Tippett would have had in mind. I guess he and Barroway had larger directional differences, cause I don't see Tippett vetoing these deals if he were still coach.

I don't think Tip would have wanted to tell Doan he is done and would not have wanted to trade Smith either. This was a power struggle, and Tip lost, Barroway is calling the shots now, Chayka was the messenger. Having said that, Tip would love Chalmers and Stepan as palyers. We just picked up maybe our second best D and our best C (at least for now). they are both proven players we can rely on.

NY is taking risk with AD and the pick, and no Stepan any more. I can't figure out what Chicago is thinking. Murphy was a 5/6D for us last year with our crappy D core. I saw on the chicago board, and some guys have Murphy penciled in as a 2D. I will be stunned if he fills that roll.

In both deals we got the 2 best players that fill our biggest holes. Goal tending is a crap shoot, could be fine or not, hard to say.
 

Dr VinnyBoombatz

formerly ctwin22
Mar 21, 2008
10,911
6,445
Chandler, AZ
In both deals we got the 2 best players that fill our biggest holes. Goal tending is a crap shoot, could be fine or not, hard to say.

The winners in 99.9% of trades is the person who got the best player.

In both cases we got the best player Hjalmarsson & Stepan. Now, it could turn out that DeAngelo really begins to impress and that trade will change, but I'd argue at this stage in the youngsters development, it was essential to get a 1C (albeit the bottom of the league 1C) to shelter Strome and provide some quality to the lineup.

We just went from: Dvorak/Strome/Richardson/Cousins (which would have been a disaster) to Stepan/Dvorak/Strome/Cousins

Combine that with increase in wing play and a different system that uses the strength of the team and I think we'll begin seeing results.
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,978
9,040
The winners in 99.9% of trades is the person who got the best player.

In both cases we got the best player Hjalmarsson & Stepan. Now, it could turn out that DeAngelo really begins to impress and that trade will change, but I'd argue at this stage in the youngsters development, it was essential to get a 1C (albeit the bottom of the league 1C) to shelter Strome and provide some quality to the lineup.

We just went from: Dvorak/Strome/Richardson/Cousins (which would have been a disaster) to Stepan/Dvorak/Strome/Cousins

Combine that with increase in wing play and a different system that uses the strength of the team and I think we'll begin seeing results.

I'm interested to see what happens to Richardson. Can't he play RW?
 

BUX7PHX

Registered User
Jul 7, 2011
5,581
1,350
Richardson can play any of the forward positions. He's a super utility player.

I have a strange feeling that Richardson could be a casualty after we see what we have at camp. I see four players that impact this idea, specifically Strome, Crouse, Keller, and Fischer. If all four of them make a statement at professional camp and force their way on the roster, then it doesn't make much sense to keep Richardson.

That being said, I think at least two of those four spend time in the AHL this year, so Richardson likely stays. Will be interested to see just where he is at from a health standpoint.
 

Mosby

<3 Uncle Gary
Feb 16, 2012
23,378
18,080
Toronto
I hope we don't kill off Richie. We got burned doing that to Vermette and had to scrap heap it with Holland and Co.
 

cobra427

Registered User
May 6, 2012
9,327
3,347
I hope we don't kill off Richie. We got burned doing that to Vermette and had to scrap heap it with Holland and Co.

I am pretty sure Richardson was leading the team in scoring last year when he got hurt, was playing well. He is a solid vet C and I think he will be our 3C or 4C. If we have injuries at C, or if DVO regresses, and or Strome/keller take another year, Richardson can fill a roll. Forget the Burmi's and Hollands of the world.
 

BUX7PHX

Registered User
Jul 7, 2011
5,581
1,350
I hope we don't kill off Richie. We got burned doing that to Vermette and had to scrap heap it with Holland and Co.

The only difference that I would say is that if something were to take place with Richardson, it would happen after camp. We took Vermette away under an unrealistic expectation that two of Strome, Dvorak, and Dauphin would make the team. It would take a major uphill push from our rookies this year, but if it is clear that 3 or 4 of them deserve and earn roster spots, then it would be something on our minds.

It is such a longshot to happen, but for all we know, Richardson may also be tentative in action or not be able to play at the same level prior to the break. At that rate, it wouldn't make sense to keep him either.
 

Ebb

the nondescript
Dec 22, 2015
2,374
176
PA
Cousins is no F/O man. Richardson should center 4th with Cousins on wing.

Well, I haven't seen him play, but his NHL stats have his FO% between 41-46 (aNHL career ~44%), which is fine on the 4th if we don't find a 3C or Richardson struggles.
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,978
9,040
I have a strange feeling that Richardson could be a casualty after we see what we have at camp. I see four players that impact this idea, specifically Strome, Crouse, Keller, and Fischer. If all four of them make a statement at professional camp and force their way on the roster, then it doesn't make much sense to keep Richardson.

That being said, I think at least two of those four spend time in the AHL this year, so Richardson likely stays. Will be interested to see just where he is at from a health standpoint.

I hope we don't kill off Richie. We got burned doing that to Vermette and had to scrap heap it with Holland and Co.

I agree. We need someone to win a FO.
 

Mosby

<3 Uncle Gary
Feb 16, 2012
23,378
18,080
Toronto
As it stands, of Stepan, Dvo, Strome, Cousins, and Richie, Richie is the only one who won more than 50% of his faceoffs.
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,978
9,040
I am pretty sure Richardson was leading the team in scoring last year when he got hurt, was playing well. He is a solid vet C and I think he will be our 3C or 4C. If we have injuries at C, or if DVO regresses, and or Strome/keller take another year, Richardson can fill a roll. Forget the Burmi's and Hollands of the world.

I agree.:nod:
 

RR

Registered User
Mar 8, 2009
8,821
64
Cave Creek, AZ
I am pretty sure Richardson was leading the team in scoring last year when he got hurt, was playing well. He is a solid vet C and I think he will be our 3C or 4C. If we have injuries at C, or if DVO regresses, and or Strome/keller take another year, Richardson can fill a roll. Forget the Burmi's and Hollands of the world.

If he comes back healthy I agree. I'm worried he won't because that was a badly broken leg and he's 33 in February. That's a tough recovery.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->