4ish million isn’t bad for a shutdown Center these days.
As mentioned earlier, we need him to play with Boeser- that means he's needed for offensive zone starts. Bo is plenty capable of being that 200ft player we drafted him to be, however with the current makeup of the roster he is going to be doing less of that role than ever before. Years past the Sedins almost had to start in the offensive zones, and now that they are gone, Bo will take on a lot more of those draws that were previously designated to them. Once we have a legit 1C option (Hughes next year hopefully) Bo will be back to playing the 2C like we had Kesler doing for years.
Come on that's ridiculous- if someone offers 3 3rd round picks for Sutter you take that no matter what. You can always sign stop gap defensive centers in free agency to cover for Sutter in the short term. As much as Sutter's contract is inflated, he provides a tremendous importance in development of the prospects offensive games, but if anyone is willing to severely overpay for him you have to make the deal.
100% agree.
I'll retract the "ridiculous" and replace it with "crazy". However my point stands that if someone is willing to severely overpay for Sutter I would move him in a heartbeat. If a guy like Jay Beagle does hit market, we could add him instead of Sutter by giving him ridiculous AAV on a 2-3 year deal. I do agree with you that Sutter is very needed in this system to allow the offensive games to grow of the younger players, but any overpayment and he needs to go. A trade at his market value, I hold onto him- much like a Tanev situation.In this case, I would rather be more civil than calling your argument or position "ridiculous".
First, of course, no team is going to offer us 3 3rd round picks- and that is because that would be an overpayment.
I am not a big fan of Sutter at all, but he offers things that this team needs. I see free agent options to replace some of what he brings; however, not all of what he does. And I just don't believe we are an attractive spot for players, other than the likes of Gagner types where we have to overpay for uselessness; so who is going to agree to come here. We always say, you can find these players in free agency... really??? Sometimes, maybe.
Being an overpayment aside, 3 lottery tickets, each with a maybe 30% chance (on average), of becoming a low level NHL players years down the road- does not get me excited about moving a player who can help our young players to develop and even live in a professional way.
I might do it, and would be more motivated if I found a player who could not fail while taking those minutes for a couple of years, but I literally might not- and I don't see how that position is "ridiculous".
It was hypothetical and rhetorical statement,, but regardless, I wouldn't even unquestionably move him for a second- unless it was earlier than ours and then I would likely have to do it, but still only probably. Would you trade him for Kole Lind, for example? Kole has had a fantastic draft plus 1, and I think it is still less than 50% that he becomes an better than average NHL player in the future.
I am sure a lot of people on this site would do this without thinking. I just don't believe that is the way to help develop players. And some here don't seem to take into consideration what that looks like when they go for the draft rebuild. I suppose that might make sense on a board build around hockey Futures.
Brendan Gaunce is just as good as Sutter defensively, he needs to be put back at C now. The only difference between the two is Sutter's low-percentage-shot generation and the resulting (rare) goals.
Unless the return makes sense I’d like to see gaunce get the 2nd most Dzone starts behind sutter for a year. That frees up Bo to take henriks Ozone starts. And then puts gaudette next on that list.
Nevermind, we don't need Sutter for his goals anyways...
After acquiring Henrique last year, I just don't understand why Murray would want this guy. He does like trash though.
