GDT: Avalanche @ Sabres | 10:30 AM MT | February 14, 2016

[CobraAcesS]

Yes.

Just curious, what established NHL player would you trade the first round pick for? Considering we'd be a stones throw away from free-agency?

The only way I've ever been ok with that was earlier in this year when it would actually help us make the playoffs, and with the idea that the forward would already be signed or at least with the plan of signing that forward (and lottery protected). People didn't agree with that, but we should trade it in the off-season?

Nah...

 

[Iceberg]

Just curious, what established NHL player would you trade the first round pick for? Considering we'd be a stones throw away from free-agency?

The only way I've ever been ok with that was earlier in this year when it would actually help us make the playoffs, and with the idea that the forward would already be signed or at least with the plan of signing that forward (and lottery protected). People didn't agree with that, but we should trade it in the off-season?

Nah...

If you can trade for a young player, that will be under team control for a few more seasons, it could still be a good deal in the offseason, why not?

 

[CobraAcesS]

If you can trade for a young player, that will be under team control for a few more seasons, it could still be a good deal in the offseason, why not?

Yeah sure, which young player?

 

[Iceberg]

Yeah sure, which young player?

I don't know who would be available, i mean, we know Drouin is available.

But lets say PHI is crazy enough to trade Simmonds, wouldn't you be willing to package a 1st for him? He is 27 ans signed for 3 more years after this one at a very good cap number.

How about Atkinson, he has two more years before UFA, would you trade it for him?

Would you package a 1st for Hamonic?

 

[CobraAcesS]

I don't know who would be available, i mean, we know Drouin is available.

But lets say PHI is crazy enough to trade Simmonds, wouldn't you be willing to package a 1st for him? He is 27 ans signed for 3 more years after this one at a very good cap number.

How about Atkinson, he has two more years before UFA, would you trade it for him?

Would you package a 1st for Hamonic?

Hamonic would take more on that 1st than we're willing to give IMO

Atkinson, maybe... That's a tough one to be honest. It really depends on where the pick is. Actually like some of the guys in the draft more at our range, even outside of the top 11 or so. Especially with our own small energy spark coming in Compher.

Drouin will probably command a plus on that first we cannot afford, unless everyone is right and Tampa's price comes way down. Who knows...

Simmonds I would absolutely love, hard to imagine a 1st plus whatever we can part with being enough.

That is the real problem IMO, is that we don't have much that's expendable to package with that 1st round pick in order to turn it into something.

 

[AvsRobin]

If Hextall is smart, he is cashing in on Simmonds soon.

If we're smart. We're staying away.

 

[CobraAcesS]

If Hextall is smart, he is cashing in on Simmonds soon.

If we're smart. We're staying away.

Why? Because of cost?

 

[HugeMetalFan]

You guys see what's happening to this board? A lot of posters being pessimistic about the team's future, losing faith in our core's abilities, virtually questioning the direction the franchise is heading to...

What do you think is going on in the players' heads? Sure, they're professionals, but they're human, too. What kind of team culture does it set if they're doubting themselves (and eventually each other)?

And could this lack of confidence come from the system that is in place? Under no circumstances am I an expert on hockey, but I would definitely feel more confident controlling the play and having the puck on my stick, rather than constantly chasing the puck. You want to create, not react.

The question is: Are we so bad possession-wise because the players we currently have are not good enough, or are the players we currently have not performing well enough because our system does not value possession?

My take here is that the truth is usually somewhere in between and both the players and the coaches have to somehow figure it out. Part of it comes with maturation of our core, because we have to rely on 20-year old guys to develop. Unfortunately, we have to approach current situation as if the rebuild started in 2013. We have to realize that this team is still far away from being consistent, because the veterans we have invested to are declining and our draft picks are still far away from ready.

In conclusion, I think we have to be patient and hope our young/core guys develop to their potential and that their current mental vulnerability will be cured by surrounding them with quality complementary pieces that are hopefully already in our system.

 

[Ivan13]

Simmonds is doing the most damage playing on the PP with two of the best PP forwards in the world, whoever gets him will regret it IMHO. Of course if you can get him for a 1st and some run of the mill prospect, you do it, but I don't see why Flyers would do that.

 

[AvsRobin]

Simmonds is doing the most damage playing on the PP with two of the best PP forwards in the world, whoever gets him will regret it IMHO. Of course if you can get him for a 1st and some run of the mill prospect, you do it, but I don't see why Flyers would do that.

This. He is a PP-specialist but pretty meh 5v5. Still a good player. But his body is likely going to break down in a few years too. He'd be good to go after if you were in a win-now-mode. Which we aren't.

 

[Iceberg]

By my account, Simmond has 22 EV points, MacKinnon has 27, Soderberg has 26, Landeskog has 24.

He has played 4 less games than Soderberg and MacKinnon. That is not bad considering his cap hit.

 

[Iceberg]

This. He is a PP-specialist but pretty meh 5v5. Still a good player. But his body is likely going to break down in a few years too. He'd be good to go after if you were in a win-now-mode. Which we aren't.

So, when should we trade Landeskog? He is 23 and already dealing with injuries and has a bigger cap hit. Maybe around 26yo?

 

[Nihiliste]

Only re: a couple comments about firing Roy - honestly he started the season unprepared but made a lot of adjustments over the course of the season that have us in the position where we can at least talk playoff chances. The problem is not really the system, it's our weak depth. Whoever you replace Roy with is not going to be an upgrade with this roster unless you have a chance to bring in a truly premiere coach - there are only a couple of those and none are available. The problem with this team for the last many years has been in the front office. Our poor asset management and total failure to build a system which provides young cost controlled depth are the biggest reason the team on the ice looks like it does.

 

[AvsRobin]

So, when should we trade Landeskog? He is 23 and already dealing with injuries and has a bigger cap hit. Maybe around 26yo?

Considering he is elite 5v5 and likely is going to be for the next 5-6 years I would hold onto him.

 

[cgf]

You guys see what's happening to this board? A lot of posters being pessimistic about the team's future, losing faith in our core's abilities, virtually questioning the direction the franchise is heading to...

What do you think is going on in the players' heads? Sure, they're professionals, but they're human, too. What kind of team culture does it set if they're doubting themselves (and eventually each other)?

And could this lack of confidence come from the system that is in place? Under no circumstances am I an expert on hockey, but I would definitely feel more confident controlling the play and having the puck on my stick, rather than constantly chasing the puck. You want to create, not react.

The question is: Are we so bad possession-wise because the players we currently have are not good enough, or are the players we currently have not performing well enough because our system does not value possession?

My take here is that the truth is usually somewhere in between and both the players and the coaches have to somehow figure it out. Part of it comes with maturation of our core, because we have to rely on 20-year old guys to develop. Unfortunately, we have to approach current situation as if the rebuild started in 2013. We have to realize that this team is still far away from being consistent, because the veterans we have invested to are declining and our draft picks are still far away from ready.

In conclusion, I think we have to be patient and hope our young/core guys develop to their potential and that their current mental vulnerability will be cured by surrounding them with quality complementary pieces that are hopefully already in our system.

Most players are dumb, but they still aren't as clueless as our fans.

 

[Iceberg]

Considering he is elite 5v5 and likely is going to be for the next 5-6 years I would hold onto him.

But isn't his body likely to break down? Or are we going to see a less physical Landeskog from now on.

I think we are already seeing that, isn't that going to affect his play and 5v5 production from now on? This year he has only 2 more EV points than Simmonds.

 

[AvsRobin]

But isn't his body likely to break down? Or are we going to see a less physical Landeskog from now on.

I think we are already seeing that, isn't that going to affect his play and 5v5 production from now on? This year he has only 2 more EV points than Simmonds.

Probably. But I don't see why this is a concern now. We can re-visit that thought in five years.

 

[Iceberg]

Probably. But I don't see why this is a concern now. We can re-visit that thought in five years.

I say three years.

About Simmonds, i think this concern about his body breaking down is overrated, as he is not on a Dustin Brown contract. At less than 4.0M it would be well worth the risk, even if he is not elite 5v5.

 

[cgf]

Agreed. Landeskog + our 1st + Rantanen for Simmonds sounds fair.

 

[Jayevs]

Would someone mind posting how the lines ended?

 

[Iceberg]

Agreed. Landeskog + our 1st + Rantanen for Simmonds sounds fair.

Add Gudas from PHI and it is a deal.

 

[the_fan]

What's your definition of consistent? Because he doesn't score and have 10+ hits every single game?Because he's one of the most, if not the most, consistent players on the team.

Do you want his body to break down by the time he turns 27?

As far as power forwards go, let's compare Landeskog to Lucic or Ovechkin as far as hitting go. Those guys been in the NHL longer than Landeskog and they're both throwing their body around every game and they're consistent as far as physicality goes. Landeskog has few good games and then he's pretty quiet for a while where he's pretty useless as a power forward.

Some people make the he's playing with injury excuse since like last season, if he's that injured that's gonna prevent him to be consistent for rest of his career, just trade him while he still has value, but I don't think he's playing with injury, he's just an inconsistent player, reminds me of Stastny

 

[tigervixxxen]

would someone mind posting how the lines ended?

12-7-9
92-34-14
25-29-40
55-62-27

 

[LazRNN]

You guys see what's happening to this board? A lot of posters being pessimistic about the team's future, losing faith in our core's abilities, virtually questioning the direction the franchise is heading to...

What do you think is going on in the players' heads? Sure, they're professionals, but they're human, too. What kind of team culture does it set if they're doubting themselves (and eventually each other)?

And could this lack of confidence come from the system that is in place? Under no circumstances am I an expert on hockey, but I would definitely feel more confident controlling the play and having the puck on my stick, rather than constantly chasing the puck. You want to create, not react.

The question is: Are we so bad possession-wise because the players we currently have are not good enough, or are the players we currently have not performing well enough because our system does not value possession?

My take here is that the truth is usually somewhere in between and both the players and the coaches have to somehow figure it out. Part of it comes with maturation of our core, because we have to rely on 20-year old guys to develop. Unfortunately, we have to approach current situation as if the rebuild started in 2013. We have to realize that this team is still far away from being consistent, because the veterans we have invested to are declining and our draft picks are still far away from ready.

In conclusion, I think we have to be patient and hope our young/core guys develop to their potential and that their current mental vulnerability will be cured by surrounding them with quality complementary pieces that are hopefully already in our system.

Good post. Sports fans tend to be cursed with short term memories (I'm no exception). It wasn't that long ago that this team, with the same coaching staff and largely the same roster, was playing good hockey with some moxie and crawled back into a playoff spot. They've been bad lately but there's no reason why what is happening now is more indicative of the future than that stretch where they climbed back into playoff contention. It's clear they have some roster issues which may only be fixed in the off season, but the team with it's present roster can play better than they are now, and it shouldn't be surprising to anyone if they have another stretch where they play well and secure a playoff spot.

Hell look at that other team in town that just finished their season. I don't think many observers would have called that finish during a period in November. Things change in a season. It happens all the time yet fans always think the present state will last forever.

 

[cgf]

One of these days we'll get to see the yeti play with Matt. Stick MacK with whichever of Landy, Greg or Lake aren't on the 34-9 line and we'd have a passable top 6 even without a Mikko call up or trade.