Armchair Gm Thread II

[Scoresberg]

Ever since they increased the o-zone size, wingers have had more demanding job defensively. If the opponent comes out of the corner with a puck and you're babysitting the defenseman at the blue line, they can just walk into a good scoring chance with all that added space. If you're too close then the defenseman has a lot of time and space to make plays should the puck get past you.

On the weak side you have to collapse so you can support the slot, but if you're unable to get back to defending the weak side defender if the play shifts to your side again you possibly give up a high danger scoring chance.

Clearing pucks out of the d-zone isn't that simple either. You often have your back against the neutral zone when you receive the puck at the boards with pressure coming from at least the defender behind you and possibly the closest forward.

Centers do have demanding responsibilities as well, I'm just trying to point out it's not like wingers have it somehow easier. Someone who has played their entire life (or at least several years prior to their draft) as a center may be a terrible winger.

Centers are expected to make (quick) plays and support defenders in the d-zone and wingers in the o-zone. This is where getting used to the game speed at wing may be beneficial, thought. If you're unable to make a quick play with a bouncing puck as a winger you can just tie it up at the boards or dump it in. At the same time you get a better idea at how you can support your teammates when you eventually move to center. I'm sure there are other benefits in starting young players at wing I'm unaware of. Why would professional hockey teams with smarter hockey minds do it otherwise?

I know what I said may sound like I'm arguing with myself stating benefits for both approaches, but it's just not that simple and there isn't one universal way that works for everyone. If you're good enough then I lean towards agreeing with @nine_inch_fang, put them straight into the position they've been practicing for years.

Can we sticky this post? Really good info for people who haven’t played hockey themselves and don’t really have a grasp on how different positions differ from each other.

 

[nine_inch_fang]

Ever since they increased the o-zone size, wingers have had more demanding job defensively. If the opponent comes out of the corner with a puck and you're babysitting the defenseman at the blue line, they can just walk into a good scoring chance with all that added space. If you're too close then the defenseman has a lot of time and space to make plays should the puck get past you.

On the weak side you have to collapse so you can support the slot, but if you're unable to get back to defending the weak side defender if the play shifts to your side again you possibly give up a high danger scoring chance.

Clearing pucks out of the d-zone isn't that simple either. You often have your back against the neutral zone when you receive the puck at the boards with pressure coming from at least the defender behind you and possibly the closest forward.

Centers do have demanding responsibilities as well, I'm just trying to point out it's not like wingers have it somehow easier. Someone who has played their entire life (or at least several years prior to their draft) as a center may be a terrible winger.

Centers are expected to make (quick) plays and support defenders in the d-zone and wingers in the o-zone. This is where getting used to the game speed at wing may be beneficial, thought. If you're unable to make a quick play with a bouncing puck as a winger you can just tie it up at the boards or dump it in. At the same time you get a better idea at how you can support your teammates when you eventually move to center. I'm sure there are other benefits in starting young players at wing I'm unaware of. Why would professional hockey teams with smarter hockey minds do it otherwise?

I know what I said may sound like I'm arguing with myself stating benefits for both approaches, but it's just not that simple and there isn't one universal way that works for everyone. If you're good enough then I lean towards agreeing with @nine_inch_fang, put them straight into the position they've been practicing for years.

Great points about the defensive zone responsibilities of a winger. I know many people think it should be easy to slide from center to wing but that's not necessarily true.

Your last point goes to what I'm trying to convey. If everyone in player development all the way from the NHL GM to the AHL assistant coaches think a player still in the AHL is going to be a NHL center and that is all he plays for the AHL club then you should use him as a center when he gets called up. The problem is that many times, hell almost all of the time, an NHL coach isn't worrying about player development they are worried about winning that game that night. People saying "that's the way it always has been done and always will" aren't taking into account the different agendas people have and blindly accepting that it's "the best way".

A scenario we've seen before:

• A team has a center get hurt
• GM calls up a center prospect that is ready for a look in the NHL
• Coach moves a player that plays 90% of the time as a winger in the NHL but was a center in juniors to cover for that center, someone he trusts, someone good on the PK. A Calle Jarnkrok type player.
• Coach then plays the kid at wing. A position he hasn't played in years, maybe never since he was probably always one of the best on his team.
• Coach is then disappointed with how the player preforms on the ice. Says something like, "The effort was there and he's going to be a great player for us one day but he's just not ready yet. The game was too fast for him and he seemed a little lost out there, needs to work on his positioning."
• Player gets sent back down, dejected, so he can work on positioning.

My question is, was that call up good for his development? What positioning exactly is he supposed to work on? Does he have an attitude problem if he's dejected and frustrated?

We've talked about it for years when a top 6 prospect is brought up and the Barry Trotzes of the world play them with 4th line grinders and wonder why they don't produce. I've always thought the same thing about centers. Is it really a wonder the Preds have never developed a center?

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

I would say Tomasino looked great at RW last year, both in Milwaukee and with Team Canada, so to me it's no big deal if he just keeps on looking great at RW.

Glass I don't know about.

But both of them, it sounds like the argument should maybe be that *IF* we want them to be NHL centers, and *IF* we want to win NHL games on a given night as I think we do want to do... then... put them at center to develop in Milwaukee? I don't see any real harm in that. They are both on ELCs and waiver exempt, having development time offline from the pressures of winning NHL games is a reasonable alternative.

Playing wing in the NHL while they get up to speed is also a reasonable alternative.

Flipping back and forth as injuries, their performance, and our team performance dictate is also a reasonable path.

Bottom line, I just don't see any point in setting anything in stone for them as of today. People just need to keep in mind that they may or may not be NHL-ready, and may or may not ultimately end up as centers in the NHL. It's a fluid situation with a lot of variables and unknowns.

 

[herzausstein]

Looks like we extended Allard for 1 more season. Wasn't sure if we'd keep him or not.

 

[nine_inch_fang]

We've been bouncing back and forth on what position Tomasino is or will be but as usual we don't have all the fact, or any of them really. Maybe the decision has been made by the player development group and the player himself that he'll transition to wing and continue to spend his time in the AHL at that position to be prepared as best as possible for the NHL.

@Porter Stoutheart , I would agree any player that is going to be expected to play center in the NHL should be playing center in the AHL. They should also be left there to fully develop their chops at that level. If you rush them to the NHL because you need the scoring touch they possess but you put them at wing I believe you are stunting their development. I really do liken it to defensemen, this is why we always say "Dmen take longer to develop", they need the time to refine their game at the AHL level and I think centers should be treated the same way. Carrier is a perfect example of a kid that just needed a little extra time to get to the right level, which was fine for a Dman in this organization but centers are always rushed into service as wingers.

Ultimately, every player is different and the player development department should be helping the players figure out where they fit in as they mature. It's nice to see that part of team management expanding the way it is now and the NHL - AHL team connection becoming one seamless group more and more over the years.

 

[herzausstein]

The more I think about it, the less I want to sign Granlund. Maybe grab Haula as a fall back center plan but I want to see a big emphasis on letting the young guys battle for spots. The 2022 draft is very deep with some really great talent at the top. If worst comes to worst and we fail, we might get a Wright, Lambert, Savoie and solve our long term center issue or if Tomasino/Glass get a shot at center and look great possibly go for Miroshnichenko, Yurov, Slafkovsky at wing. I hate losing but watching the young players get legit NHL shots could make the season tolerable. The best time i had last season is when we had alot of injuries and watching young/hungry players really make a push to show they belong.

 

[Flgatorguy87]

The more I think about it, the less I want to sign Granlund. Maybe grab Haula as a fall back center plan but I want to see a big emphasis on letting the young guys battle for spots. The 2022 draft is very deep with some really great talent at the top. If worst comes to worst and we fail, we might get a Wright, Lambert, Savoie and solve our long term center issue or if Tomasino/Glass get a shot at center and look great possibly go for Miroshnichenko, Yurov, Slafkovsky at wing. I hate losing but watching the young players get legit NHL shots could make the season tolerable. The best time i had last season is when we had alot of injuries and watching young/hungry players really make a push to show they belong.

This is what I have been pushing. This isn't tanking. This is smart team development. We know what this team looks like with Granlund on it. We don't know what the young guys can be yet. How are we going to move forward and develop a new core if we keep giving away 21 minutes a night to 29 year old free agents.

 

[LCPreds]

This is what I have been pushing. This isn't tanking. This is smart team development. We know what this team looks like with Granlund on it. We don't know what the young guys can be yet. How are we going to move forward and develop a new core if we keep giving away 21 minutes a night to 29 year old free agents.

Looking at each move individually may not be tanking. It's how all of the individual moves add up. For example, Granlund in a vacuum of just Granlund vs. his replacement may not be a massive difference. I do think Granlund is likely worth at least a couple of wins vs. whoever his replacement is. But once you add on top of that the likelihood that we may have 25%+ of the cap completely unused this season then how does one measure that in the scope of tanking?

Not to beat a dead horse but I went to the arena this weekend to scope out the available seats. Just curious how many were available. It's not as many as it was a few years ago (pre-SCF) but it seems like there were a lot more available than the last couple of years. In addition, I couldn't believe how much the seats cost. Fortunately we're somewhat price protected due to having our seats for so long but wow there is no way I would buy in at those prices as the team stands currently. And neither will a lot of other folks if this team follows up the last few disappointing years with a year or two of missing the playoffs. Not to mention that so many familiar faces that fringe folks recognize are now gone. It comes across even worse if we're only spending 75% of the cap allotment. The money going to players is going down but the seat prices are not doing the same.

With that said, I know you don't just want to blow all of your money for the sake of spending it. Maybe they can get a year reprieve of being miserly and waiting for the right moves next offseason. But considering we can already estimate what they would need to resign players like Ek & FF9, plus the fact that we're trending young, how else are they going to spend it other than going after some big free agents like a Landeskog (or next offseason's equivalent)?

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

I don't think trying to re-sign Granlund is the difference between contending and tanking. He's a pretty decent player, so you try to retain him at a pretty decent contract. But you don't bend over backward for it. If we get him on our terms, great, he'll help. If he wants to chase more somewhere else, fair enough, it's not going to cripple us to lose him.

Either way we still NEED another goalie. Either way our D corps is already set in stone. Either way basically all our other forward slots are filled/fillable.

So I wouldn't make the Granlund pursuit out to be something more dramatic or crucial than it needs to be.

 

[Armourboy]

Having a guy like Granlund just gives you options which is where his real value lies. He's basically just a better version of Jarnkrok which isn't bad to have even if you want a youth movement. That said you don't want to overpay for that value either.

 

[Scoresberg]

Man, I'm hoping we can get Raanta as a backup.

 

[PredsV82]

Man, I'm hoping we can get Raanta as a backup.

Depending on how Poile wants to do this, we can certainly afford to pay a backup more than a lot of teams that are going to be looking. He might even be willing to give the right person two years

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

Having a guy like Granlund just gives you options which is where his real value lies. He's basically just a better version of Jarnkrok which isn't bad to have even if you want a youth movement. That said you don't want to overpay for that value either.

Especially when grooming young players, you can never have too many options. Granlund can play up and down the lineup on the wing or at center so would be very useful to retain. Expecting to dump a bunch of minutes on to young players and expecting them to be able to carry that load and develop is not usually a recipe for success. A Granlund provides reliable production and performance to backstop the team if the young players struggle and can be moved around should they prove to be successful.

 

[Flgatorguy87]

Especially when grooming young players, you can never have too many options. Granlund can play up and down the lineup on the wing or at center so would be very useful to retain. Expecting to dump a bunch of minutes on to young players and expecting them to be able to carry that load and develop is not usually a recipe for success. A Granlund provides reliable production and performance to backstop the team if the young players struggle and can be moved around should they prove to be successful.

Completely agree. If we could sign Granlund for about 18 months then it's perfect.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Man, I'm hoping we can get Raanta as a backup.

Ingram would probably not mind this either, since it would likely ensure him of some NHL paychecks.

 

[Gh24]

I wonder if Granlund wants to stay long term, but the team is not willing to pay him what he wants for more than few years. Or if they have already come to an agreement and just waited for UFA period to save them from protecting him. Or if what the team is offering seems a bit low to Granlund and he wants to see what would be out there.

I believe he has said he wants to find stability for his family through his next contract. Could have been last year

 

[LCPreds]

I don't see any reason to shy away from 3 years with Granlund. Great thing about Granlund is that if we're not doing great he will be very easy to flip at the deadline. It's not like he's going to cause us a cap issue based on what we have available.

I do feel kind of cold saying that given the "stability for his family" post above...

 

[Flgatorguy87]

Any other good to decent, veteran centers that can be a stop gap? I mean Haula makes a ton of sense if Granlund won't do a shorter term. I just can't see paying Granlund 5m "ish" as early as next year. I can't see him wanting less than 4 years. That gets him back to the money pot at 33 which is a good spot to try and squeeze out another deal if he is still producing.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Any other good to decent, veteran centers that can be a stop gap? I mean Haula makes a ton of sense if Granlund won't do a shorter term. I just can't see paying Granlund 5m "ish" as early as next year. I can't see him wanting less than 4 years. That gets him back to the money pot at 33 which is a good spot to try and squeeze out another deal if he is still producing.

I would certainly be willing to look at Bonino short-term. There are a fair number of older stop-gap types on the UFA list... Getzlaf, Stastny, Zajac, Bozak, Krejci. But I'm not sure how much jump those guys really have anymore, and that's really what Granlund helped bring. Just you might be able to sign some of them for only 1-year?

 

[nine_inch_fang]

I don't think Granlund gets in the way of the youngsters. It's when you bring in him, Haula, Richardson, Cousins all at the same time with Jarnkrok and Arvidsson still on the roster after talking about a youth movement.
But with Haula, Richardson, Arvi, and Jarnkrok gone there's room for Granlund and the youngsters.

 

[Legionnaire11]

Ingram would probably not mind this either, since it would likely ensure him of some NHL paychecks.

Haha yes, I was just rating Raanta for my league, and the guy can't stay healthy lately.

 

[Flgatorguy87]

If anyone wants to listen to Poiles weekly spot on 102.5. Was a pretty interesting listen this week. Hour 1, at 15 min mark

 

[Softball99]

Bogo leaving the leaf's

 

[AintLifeGrand]

If we sign Suter, these lines look pretty good

Forsberg-Johansen-Duchene (Belle Meade Country Club)
Suter-Glass-Tolvanen
Trenin -Tomasino-Kunin
Olivier-Sissons-Jeannot

 

[nine_inch_fang]

If we sign Suter, these lines look pretty good

Forsberg-Johansen-Duchene (Belle Meade Country Club)
Suter-Glass-Tolvanen
Trenin -Tomasino-Kunin
Olivier-Sissons-Jeannot

He's listed as a center but I have no idea what he played last year.
You definitely might not worry about Granlund if you can nab him.