Rumor: Coyotes Pursuing Taylor Hall per Friedman

[YotesFan47]

That is still a net gain, in my eyes.

Again, when is Raanta pushing Kuemper out of his starting spot? Raanta will play no more than 7 games total after the trade deadline. That is inclusive of the playoffs, provided that Kuemper does not get injured. Palmieri will play more than 7 games for us after the trade deadline. He also has 1 more year left on his deal at a reasonable price, same as Kuemper having 1 more year. We won't find a player of Palmieri's caliber at that price in free agency. We can find a backup goalie for as much or less than what Raanta is making and not get a significant drop-off in the caliber of the player.

Saying Raanta will only get 7 games after the deadline isn't bad considering there is only 17 games following Feb 24th. That's 41% of the starts and a potential 14 points. Having two goaltenders that are excelling has been the bread and butter of our success. That would also be 17 games where we would be in a pickle of Kuemper were to be injured at any point because we traded part of our elite tandem.

There are going to be some surprise forwards available come 2/24 and given our progress this season, I'm perfectly happy to wait and see how things shake out. We don't need Hall, he would be expensive to acquire and if it means taking our only real strength and making it a potential weakness, I'm not about it. I don't even want to see us move our 1st yet. We seem to have a strong scouting staff for the first time in ever and giving up the statistically best pick we have when we are not a cup contender seems foolish. I'll trade our 2nd, a tweener roster player, and a b or lower prospect for help but that's the max I think we should do at this point.

 

[RABBIT]

I don't trade Raanta for Kyle Palmieri. I think Raanta is the better asset.

 

[XX]

I mainly don't like Palmieri because he doesn't create his own offense aka he's not very good at exits/entries, so he would struggle here even more than someone like Kessel. Kreider is a better fit. The player has to be a good fit and a demonstrable upgrade on the player he is pushing out of the lineup. People flippantly talking about taking Fischer or Vinny out don't really seem to understand how the team is built. Being good and having few to no passengers is a new thing; it requires a change in mindset.

 

[rt]

I mainly don't like Palmieri because he doesn't create his own offense aka he's not very good at exits/entries, so he would struggle here even more than someone like Kessel. Kreider is a better fit. The player has to be a good fit and a demonstrable upgrade on the player he is pushing out of the lineup. People flippantly talking about taking Fischer or Vinny out don't really seem to understand how the team is built.

Well the team isn't built on everyone being the same and doing the same things. Only one guy on the line is going to complete the zone entry anyway, right? It's okay to let someone else be the puck carrier and have a finisher down low. Lack of rush scoring isn't our problem, it's finishing around the net. We've got playmakers for days. Palmieri is good on the cycle, good around the net, and scores truck loads of goals. He finishes chances.

I've watched Conor Garland be pretty successful around the net, and in the "house". I'd happily take another, bigger, better version of that. People are pretty pleased with Soderberg's offensive contributions, too. It seems to be working out okay for him, even though he doesn't play like Schmaltz or Kessel. Of Kyle Palmieri's 27 goals last season, at least 19-20 of them were scored in the "house". With the majority of them being within five feet of the net. Not just tips either (of which there were plenty) but also lethal one-timers. He's a legitimate shooting threat with pure sniping ability. He's someone for the shot allergic Kellers, Schmaltzes, Hinostrozas, and Kessels to feed pucks to that can actually do something with them. Which is severely lacking on this team.

He excels in the hard areas of the ice, and has pure sniping skill.

You need a mix of skill sets to be successful. A lot of the times our offense has struggled has been as a result of too many players playing the same way. What Palmieri does for a living is the exact thing our PP is missing most (apart from a time-machine for OEL, of course).

In the 4 seasons from 15-16 to 18-19 there were only 30 players with more goals than Palmieri. Only 9 with more PP goals. This is despite the fact that New Jersey was 27th out of 30 in goals scored in that span. He's an elite finisher, which is exactly what we need. He scores his goals by living in the area of the ice that is usually unoccupied by Coyotes at the moment.

 

[XX]

Well the team isn't built on everyone being the same and doing the same things. Only one guy on the line is going to complete the zone entry anyway, right?

The more players capable of doing it on the ice at once, the better your offense and defense are. This is especially important if you play high tempo counter attack style like the Coyotes do.

He excels in the hard areas of the ice, and has pure sniping skill.

Anybody you'd be looking at as an upgrade has 'pure sniping skill' in the context of the modern game. Guys don't have unlimited time to set up anymore.

A lot of the times our offense has struggled has been as a result of too many players playing the same way.

It has actually struggled because Derek Stepan and Kessel have been two of the worst forwards in the league at even strength, and they're often on 2 different lines. Palmieri's production will drop off once he comes here, no doubt. Kreider's drop will be less severe, which is why I prefer him.

What Palmieri does for a living is the exact thing our PP is missing most (apart from a time-machine for OEL, of course).

The majority of the game is not played on the PP. You are talking about a marginal gain in a marginal situation. In a vacuum, it'd be nice.

Trading Raanta for Palmieri is a net loss, because whatever marginal gain you get by 'upgrading' Vinny to Palmieri is easily wiped out by the delta between Raanta and his replacement.

 

[rt]

The more players capable of doing it on the ice at once, the better your offense and defense are. This is especially important if you play high tempo counter attack style like the Coyotes do.



Anybody you'd be looking at as an upgrade has 'pure sniping skill' in the context of the modern game. Guys don't have unlimited time to set up anymore.




It has actually struggled because Derek Stepan and Kessel have been two of the worst forwards in the league at even strength, and they're often on 2 different lines. Palmieri's production will drop off once he comes here, no doubt. Kreider's drop will be less severe, which is why I prefer him.



The majority of the game is not played on the PP. You are talking about a marginal gain in a marginal situation. In a vacuum, it'd be nice.

Trading Raanta for Palmieri is a net loss, because whatever marginal gain you get by 'upgrading' Vinny to Palmieri is easily wiped out by the delta between Raanta and his replacement.

Won’t argue the Raanta part. Will say acting like a guy isn’t modern, when he’s averaging 27 goals per season the last half decade is maybe misguided. He clearly gets
enough of that time and space that’s become so limited. Whatever has changed to make the game more modern is suiting Palmieri just fine. He’s one of the most effective modern wingers in the modern NHL.

 

[XX]

Won’t argue the Raanta part. Will say acting like a guy isn’t modern, when he’s averaging 27 goals per season the last half decade is maybe misguided. He clearly gets
enough of that time and space that’s become so limited. Whatever has changed to make the game more modern is suiting Palmieri just fine. He’s one of the most effective modern wingers in the modern NHL.

I didn't say he wasn't 'modern'

I meant that any guy that would be a clear upgrade on someone like Vinny would have a skillset of a similar caliber. They'd all be good enough.

It just matters far more that a guy is in a position to get a scoring chance to begin with than raw shooting ability. Kessel was a great shooter until he came to the Coyotes and promptly stopped working for high percentage chances. Been better the last two games, but it illustrates the problem with falling in love with a narrative or archetype. The difference between Vrbata and other elite forwards was his inability to consistently gain the zone and skate with the puck. He was still productive, but the Coyotes have specialized in a way that makes that sort of player even less useful.

I advocated for Palmieri as an option earlier, by the way. I'm capable of understanding his strengths. I just don't agree with the logic on that move at all, because it's a net loss. If there's one thing this team has no business messing with, it's the goalie setup this year. I'd only do it for Hall. Even then, I'd have plenty of concern.

Kreider is on an expiring contract and is having a miserable year. Chayka has a good relationship with Gorton. I'd look there first. Kreider also plays well with Stepan, which might get Mr. Bud Light out of performance hell.

 

[rt]

All fair.

 

[BUX7PHX]

Saying Raanta will only get 7 games after the deadline isn't bad considering there is only 17 games following Feb 24th. That's 41% of the starts and a potential 14 points. Having two goaltenders that are excelling has been the bread and butter of our success. That would also be 17 games where we would be in a pickle of Kuemper were to be injured at any point because we traded part of our elite tandem.

There are going to be some surprise forwards available come 2/24 and given our progress this season, I'm perfectly happy to wait and see how things shake out. We don't need Hall, he would be expensive to acquire and if it means taking our only real strength and making it a potential weakness, I'm not about it. I don't even want to see us move our 1st yet. We seem to have a strong scouting staff for the first time in ever and giving up the statistically best pick we have when we are not a cup contender seems foolish. I'll trade our 2nd, a tweener roster player, and a b or lower prospect for help but that's the max I think we should do at this point.

I should have just stuck with percentages, haha. I expect Raanta to only play in about 20-25% of the remaining games after the deadline. This is inclusive of a hypothetical playoff run, which I mentioned.

I guess that is where context comes into play. I had mentioned that I think that the Coyotes are a playoff team and could play about 10-17 playoff games, so my 6-7 games at 20-25% of the remaining games works out. Of those 7 games, how many would occur after we have locked down a spot?

This scenario could easily happen: we have to get 1 point in the final 7 games to lock down 3rd place in the Pacific. We are 9 points behind 2nd place, so unlikely to catch up. If Raanta starts game 76 and we get a tie, while the 2md place team wins, Raanta could get 3 or 4 of the next starts.

Are they starts? Sure, but I think I should have been a little more clear in the idea that the closer we are to home ice advantage, the less I see us turning to Raanta. That percent could dwindle down into the low teens over the course of the year and the playoffs. The earlier we make it into the playoffs, the more likely it is that we see a 50/50 or even 60/40 split. The games Raanta would play in would be somewhat inconsequential to getting into the playoffs. Our value would be in gaining home-ice advantage, so if you had to rely on gaining and securing home ice advantage over the last 6 games (1 back to back in those), do you continue with the Kuemper Raanta timeshare of 2:1, or do you start Kuemper every game until you are secure one way or another?

It's the latter for me 100% of the time. The 7 games that Raanta will see will likely be after we have secured a playoff berth, and might even come with knowing what our seed is and little change that can be done with it. This was why I asked Jakey before: gun to your head - it is a do or die game. Who do you start, Kuemper or Raanta?

Give me Kuemper 100% of the time.

 

[YotesFan47]

I should have just stuck with percentages, haha. I expect Raanta to only play in about 20-25% of the remaining games after the deadline. This is inclusive of a hypothetical playoff run, which I mentioned.

I guess that is where context comes into play. I had mentioned that I think that the Coyotes are a playoff team and could play about 10-17 playoff games, so my 6-7 games at 20-25% of the remaining games works out. Of those 7 games, how many would occur after we have locked down a spot?

This scenario could easily happen: we have to get 1 point in the final 7 games to lock down 3rd place in the Pacific. We are 9 points behind 2nd place, so unlikely to catch up. If Raanta starts game 76 and we get a tie, while the 2md place team wins, Raanta could get 3 or 4 of the next starts.

Are they starts? Sure, but I think I should have been a little more clear in the idea that the closer we are to home ice advantage, the less I see us turning to Raanta. That percent could dwindle down into the low teens over the course of the year and the playoffs. The earlier we make it into the playoffs, the more likely it is that we see a 50/50 or even 60/40 split. The games Raanta would play in would be somewhat inconsequential to getting into the playoffs. Our value would be in gaining home-ice advantage, so if you had to rely on gaining and securing home ice advantage over the last 6 games (1 back to back in those), do you continue with the Kuemper Raanta timeshare of 2:1, or do you start Kuemper every game until you are secure one way or another?

It's the latter for me 100% of the time. The 7 games that Raanta will see will likely be after we have secured a playoff berth, and might even come with knowing what our seed is and little change that can be done with it. This was why I asked Jakey before: gun to your head - it is a do or die game. Who do you start, Kuemper or Raanta?

Give me Kuemper 100% of the time.

My bad, for whatever reason I omitted the bolded in my head.

I get the principal of running our starter and working towards home ice advantage, I just put little value on home ice this season. I really don't see this as our year so my priorities are more focused on getting experience and setting us up for further success. In my head, every move we make is long term because setting ourselves up for a minimum of 10 years of making the playoffs and going deep is the goal. That creates financial stability in the form of ticket and merch sales, a track record of success, and helps drive players/personnel to want to be part of our organization. Even if we miss out on a cup over the course of the 10 years we will have the building blocks of a strong fan base built where parents are fans and their children become fans. The sport will grow in the state and programs will be created and respected, making us a real hockey destination.

There will be points where we will make short term moves to put us over the top but we are at the very beginning of that road. We need to keep from cutting our own legs out from under us by making decisions that cripple our future too early. Every decision should be about building our brand as one of success and longevity, not adding the bandwagon fan for 1-2 seasons. We should win a cup eventually.

 

[BUX7PHX]

My bad, for whatever reason I omitted the bolded in my head.

I get the principal of running our starter and working towards home ice advantage, I just put little value on home ice this season. I really don't see this as our year so my priorities are more focused on getting experience and setting us up for further success. In my head, every move we make is long term because setting ourselves up for a minimum of 10 years of making the playoffs and going deep is the goal. That creates financial stability in the form of ticket and merch sales, a track record of success, and helps drive players/personnel to want to be part of our organization. Even if we miss out on a cup over the course of the 10 years we will have the building blocks of a strong fan base built where parents are fans and their children become fans. The sport will grow in the state and programs will be created and respected, making us a real hockey destination.

There will be points where we will make short term moves to put us over the top but we are at the very beginning of that road. We need to keep from cutting our own legs out from under us by making decisions that cripple our future too early. Every decision should be about building our brand as one of success and longevity, not adding the bandwagon fan for 1-2 seasons. We should win a cup eventually.

I can agree with everything that was just stated, with regard to moves being tracked for the long term. I guess that my response to that is Raanta has a year left on his deal after this one, and in my mind, he hasn't been quite what had been hoped for, primarily due to health. My argument is that what we lose in Raanta can likely be filled, but probably not quite at the level that Raanta is at, so having that occur for a few games is fine by me. The addition of a player like a Hall or Palmieri is also buying into what we are capable of in the playoffs. In January, few would have predicted the Blues becoming champions, as an example. Saying this may not be our year isn't the attitude to have. It should be to see what sort of team we can ice and how they can challenge other teams. We have a much better means to challenge with a Hall or Palmieri on ice vs. taking out Kuemper and putting Raanta in.

Maybe this is another way to put it: if we were to have a breakout playoffs, is it because Raanta stepped in for a lackluster Kuemper and stole series after series, or is it because a player like Palmieri allowed us to be a little more efficient in scoring and add something to the team that we lacked? I just see such a limited chance that Raanta replace Kuemper as the #1 at any time in the foreseeable future. I see it being much more likely that a Hall, Palmieri, Kreider, or <insert name of forward> will go the Stempniak route and average a PPG after the deadline while we still get just as good goalie play. The only way this works against us is if Kuemper goes down with a long term injury.

In my eyes, that can also build greater future success as well. If we flame out in the WCF, but it is done without trading Raanta, alright, we have a good team and Raanta was a part of it, but probably had little to do with the playoff success. If we flame out in the WCF but traded Raanta to do so, as a fan, I would think that the optics would state that a fan would attribute that trade as being a reason why we made the WCF. The fans then see that our GM has a good eye on what deals can and should be made to improve our chances. I think that builds the buzz in the fanbase, in addition to whom we pick up. If that player is a UFA at the end of the year, he may buy in to the vision of our GM. Raanta would have already bought in, but we shouldn't have an intention of re-signing him if Kuemper is producing the way he is.

I think people are making a mountain out of a molehill over giving up Raanta. If he was our normal starter, this could be different, but he isn't. A trade of Raanta as a strength is not going to hurt as much as it seems, especially if we are only talking about a handful of games in the stretch run and playoffs.

 

[cobra427]

I can agree with everything that was just stated, with regard to moves being tracked for the long term. I guess that my response to that is Raanta has a year left on his deal after this one, and in my mind, he hasn't been quite what had been hoped for, primarily due to health. My argument is that what we lose in Raanta can likely be filled, but probably not quite at the level that Raanta is at, so having that occur for a few games is fine by me. The addition of a player like a Hall or Palmieri is also buying into what we are capable of in the playoffs. In January, few would have predicted the Blues becoming champions, as an example. Saying this may not be our year isn't the attitude to have. It should be to see what sort of team we can ice and how they can challenge other teams. We have a much better means to challenge with a Hall or Palmieri on ice vs. taking out Kuemper and putting Raanta in.

Maybe this is another way to put it: if we were to have a breakout playoffs, is it because Raanta stepped in for a lackluster Kuemper and stole series after series, or is it because a player like Palmieri allowed us to be a little more efficient in scoring and add something to the team that we lacked? I just see such a limited chance that Raanta replace Kuemper as the #1 at any time in the foreseeable future. I see it being much more likely that a Hall, Palmieri, Kreider, or <insert name of forward> will go the Stempniak route and average a PPG after the deadline while we still get just as good goalie play. The only way this works against us is if Kuemper goes down with a long term injury.

In my eyes, that can also build greater future success as well. If we flame out in the WCF, but it is done without trading Raanta, alright, we have a good team and Raanta was a part of it, but probably had little to do with the playoff success. If we flame out in the WCF but traded Raanta to do so, as a fan, I would think that the optics would state that a fan would attribute that trade as being a reason why we made the WCF. The fans then see that our GM has a good eye on what deals can and should be made to improve our chances. I think that builds the buzz in the fanbase, in addition to whom we pick up. If that player is a UFA at the end of the year, he may buy in to the vision of our GM. Raanta would have already bought in, but we shouldn't have an intention of re-signing him if Kuemper is producing the way he is.

I think people are making a mountain out of a molehill over giving up Raanta. If he was our normal starter, this could be different, but he isn't. A trade of Raanta as a strength is not going to hurt as much as it seems, especially if we are only talking about a handful of games in the stretch run and playoffs.

The only reason to keep Raanta is if Kuemper gets injured. Assuming we make the playoffs, Kuemper will get all the starts.

But who would want Raanta? He has not proven he can handle a full time starters load, and he isn't 23 years old. Would a rebuilding team want him and his salary for 1 year at his age with his injury history? I don't think so, and if they take the chance, they won't be giving up much to get him, 2nd round pick and/or cap dump.

The other scenario is an eastern conference playoff team with an injured starter. They would need Raanta for this year and a playoff run. For that, they would pay a higher price, but again, who would they give up of value that would help us this year and in the playoffs? Maybe Raanta for an RHD that can PK and eliminate our need for AHL D men in our line up. I could possibly see that, but I don't see us getting a Hall or other top 6 scoring forward with Raanta as the center piece.

 

[Fuhrious]

I should have just stuck with percentages, haha. I expect Raanta to only play in about 20-25% of the remaining games after the deadline. This is inclusive of a hypothetical playoff run, which I mentioned.

I guess that is where context comes into play. I had mentioned that I think that the Coyotes are a playoff team and could play about 10-17 playoff games, so my 6-7 games at 20-25% of the remaining games works out. Of those 7 games, how many would occur after we have locked down a spot?

This scenario could easily happen: we have to get 1 point in the final 7 games to lock down 3rd place in the Pacific. We are 9 points behind 2nd place, so unlikely to catch up. If Raanta starts game 76 and we get a tie, while the 2md place team wins, Raanta could get 3 or 4 of the next starts.

Are they starts? Sure, but I think I should have been a little more clear in the idea that the closer we are to home ice advantage, the less I see us turning to Raanta. That percent could dwindle down into the low teens over the course of the year and the playoffs. The earlier we make it into the playoffs, the more likely it is that we see a 50/50 or even 60/40 split. The games Raanta would play in would be somewhat inconsequential to getting into the playoffs. Our value would be in gaining home-ice advantage, so if you had to rely on gaining and securing home ice advantage over the last 6 games (1 back to back in those), do you continue with the Kuemper Raanta timeshare of 2:1, or do you start Kuemper every game until you are secure one way or another?

It's the latter for me 100% of the time. The 7 games that Raanta will see will likely be after we have secured a playoff berth, and might even come with knowing what our seed is and little change that can be done with it. This was why I asked Jakey before: gun to your head - it is a do or die game. Who do you start, Kuemper or Raanta?

Give me Kuemper 100% of the time.

This posits a universe where we trade Raanta for Hall/Palmeiri more or less straight up. I feel like the more likely scenario is Raanta and at least one other relevant piece of our current squad. Even the loss of a much-moaned about player like Stepan or OEL leaves a hole not easily filled by a Hayton or a Capo. I just cant agree that a move like that would be a net gain for our current team or it's realistic short-term or long-term ambitions.

 

[BUX7PHX]

The only reason to keep Raanta is if Kuemper gets injured. Assuming we make the playoffs, Kuemper will get all the starts.

But who would want Raanta? He has not proven he can handle a full time starters load, and he isn't 23 years old. Would a rebuilding team want him and his salary for 1 year at his age with his injury history? I don't think so, and if they take the chance, they won't be giving up much to get him, 2nd round pick and/or cap dump.

The other scenario is an eastern conference playoff team with an injured starter. They would need Raanta for this year and a playoff run. For that, they would pay a higher price, but again, who would they give up of value that would help us this year and in the playoffs? Maybe Raanta for an RHD that can PK and eliminate our need for AHL D men in our line up. I could possibly see that, but I don't see us getting a Hall or other top 6 scoring forward with Raanta as the center piece.

These days, there are some teams that would welcome this type of scenario. The Blue Jackets would be the perfect candidate. Their current starters are Joonas Korpisalo and Elvis Merzilikins. Both are 25 and RFAs. Raanta could be anywhere between 30 and 55 games. If he gets 55 games or more, it is because he absolutely blew the competition away. I think NJ is the right place, given what has gone on with Schneider. The way that I see it, a goalie on a one or two year deal remaining is perfect. Think about these teams that sign goalies longer term, and then you only get a productive year half of the time. I would much rather make a mistake on a 1 or 2 year deal than a multi-year deal. This is the perfect opportunity to see if he catches fire for your team and you can extend him as needed. If he did well in NJ at the end of the year, and into next season, then you may have found yourself a viable option at a good price for another 1-3 years. If not, you took the chance and aren't saddled with a bad deal for years.

Kind of to Fuhrious point now, it is not just Raanta that gets traded. Raanta is but one piece. When you take all of it together in a deal:

Hall >>>>> Hinostroza. Hinostroza has youth and maybe it breaks out in NJ. I think that the forward lineup is better with Palmieri in over Hinostroza

Hall >> Capobianco

Hall >> 1st round pick in the 20s

Hall >> Raanta. The reason why I have Raanta as more valuable than Hinostroza is because his value to another team is far greater than his value to us. We aren't starting Raanta over Kuemper (would you?). We have guy who plays half the time of a better goalie, so he isn't exactly a piece that we have to have in the lineup to do well. Whereas I would argue that we have to have a Kessel or Schmaltz in the lineup to make our offense look dangerous. So, we have an asset that means something to our team, but can mean far more to another team. Look at it like the time we picked up Bryzgalov off of waivers. Next thing you know, our goalie position is pretty solid for the next 2.5 years or so. The same can happen for another team, because we have a 1B asset in Raanta who can be productive.​

I totally understand that goalie is one of the positions that trade value is hard to figure. Remember that the Devils did trade for Schneider, sending the 9th OA pick to Vancouver. Definitely different circumstances with Schneider behind Luongo in Vancouver and this was a deal to get that starter for the next 2-10 years (he still had 2 years left on a 3 year deal when traded). But it is not like it doesn't happen or hasn't happened. For me, Raanta represents the best opportunity of a trade from the perspective of player value and contract (both reasonable for the team picking up Raanta and for us to deal in order to take on salary for this year and future years). I understand that he isn't the only piece, but giving up 1.5 more seasons of Raanta's deal seems like an easy price to pay to add to the value of a deal.

 

[BUX7PHX]

This posits a universe where we trade Raanta for Hall/Palmeiri more or less straight up. I feel like the more likely scenario is Raanta and at least one other relevant piece of our current squad. Even the loss of a much-moaned about player like Stepan or OEL leaves a hole not easily filled by a Hayton or a Capo. I just cant agree that a move like that would be a net gain for our current team or it's realistic short-term or long-term ambitions.

I agree, and that is my point - we are not giving up someone who is expected to be in the lineup every night. If we dealt Hinostroza, I would expect Hinostroza to be on the ice for the Devils for as many games as possible. For Raanta, that number could be 30, it could be 40, it could be 50. It certainly won't be 82. It probably will not be more than 60. For us, we lose very little in the big scheme of things to gain quite a bit.

Let's say that we are capable of making the SCF right now at this moment. How much more or less likely are we to be in that position with Raanta starting over or splitting time with Kuemper? How much more or less likely are we to be in that position by adding Hall or Palmieri, where the price included Raanta? If we are a SCF type of team, we could get Hall for 17 regular season games, plus about 18-24 playoff games. That's nearly 40 games of Hall. I bet that Raanta would get fewer than 40 games total in the post-trade deadline 19-20 season and the 20-21 season as Kuemper's backup. Give me Hall for 40 games over Raanta for 40 games, even at the additional cost of a late 1st, Hinostroza and some other piece.

 

[TheLegend]

Friedman today on the Hall situation....

 

[rt]

Friedman today on the Hall situation....

Seems insane to me that Friedman would even have to say that Girard is off the table. He’s playing 22mins a game for the Avs and he’s 21. Of course he’s not available for a UFA. Same with Byram. Of course they’re not trading the 4th overall pick from six months ago.

Shero is out of his mind if he thinks he’s going to get a blue chip like that. It’s not going to happen. No chance. That’s like thinking we would trade Chychrun or Hayton for Hall. No f***ing way.

 

[rt]

Just realized New Jersey has given up the 8th FEWEST shots against per game played in the NHL this season. And yet have surrendered the 2nd MOST goals against pet game played in the NHL this season.

Antti Raanta would single-handedly and instantaneously make New Jersey competitive instead of just getting run over every game.

 

[rt]

To NJD
Raanta
Hinostroza
Capobianco
2021 Conditional 2nd (becomes 1st if Hall re-signs with Arizona)

To ARI
Hall (50% retained)

 

[Grimes]

To NJD
Raanta
Hinostroza
Capobianco
2021 Conditional 2nd (becomes 1st if Hall re-signs with Arizona)

To ARI
Hall (50% retained)

LET'S DO THIS!!!!

 

[Sinurgy]

Just realized New Jersey has given up the 8th FEWEST shots against per game played in the NHL this season. And yet have surrendered the 2nd MOST goals against pet game played in the NHL this season.

Antti Raanta would single-handedly and instantaneously make New Jersey competitive instead of just getting run over every game.

That's gotta be frustrating for the team. Imagine working your ass off defensively to limit the other teams chances only to get smoked anyway because your goalies can't stop a beach ball. NJ goaltending has officially reached Bryzgalov playoffs level!

 

[XX]

Seems insane to me that Friedman would even have to say that Girard is off the table. He’s playing 22mins a game for the Avs and he’s 21. Of course he’s not available for a UFA. Same with Byram. Of course they’re not trading the 4th overall pick from six months ago.

Shero is out of his mind if he thinks he’s going to get a blue chip like that. It’s not going to happen. No chance. That’s like thinking we would trade Chychrun or Hayton for Hall. No ****ing way.

Shero is in the driver's seat right now, he can just ask for whatever and stick to it this early in the season. If some team panics and bites, he wins. He only loses leverage if a deal goes right down to the TDL.

With the emergence of Makar and Graves, Girard isn't as outlandish as you think. It would be a bit like if Bahl and Soderstrom showed up and played lights out, and OEL wasn't a f***ing train wreck.

 

[Jakey53]

To NJD
Raanta
Hinostroza
Capobianco
2021 Conditional 2nd (becomes 1st if Hall re-signs with Arizona)

To ARI
Hall (50% retained)

I only trade Raanta IF Hall signs with us. I think giving up this much for 40 games is crazy. Hall will make us better, but not SC contender better. Our D sucks right now because we don't have any NHL ready D, and I think Capo is closest we have. What happens next year if Hall walks. No back up goalie with a s---, no proven NHL D who can step in for our aging D.

 

[DOTS13]

The only reason to keep Raanta is if Kuemper gets injured. Assuming we make the playoffs, Kuemper will get all the starts.

But who would want Raanta? He has not proven he can handle a full time starters load, and he isn't 23 years old. Would a rebuilding team want him and his salary for 1 year at his age with his injury history? I don't think so, and if they take the chance, they won't be giving up much to get him, 2nd round pick and/or cap dump.

The other scenario is an eastern conference playoff team with an injured starter. They would need Raanta for this year and a playoff run. For that, they would pay a higher price, but again, who would they give up of value that would help us this year and in the playoffs? Maybe Raanta for an RHD that can PK and eliminate our need for AHL D men in our line up. I could possibly see that, but I don't see us getting a Hall or other top 6 scoring forward with Raanta as the center piece.

This is such a tough call. I love having Raanta, it makes us so much more competitive this season and next. But...

I kind of like the idea of sending Raanta somewhere for a high pick. That’s how teams sustain a winning culture, when you can send current assets for future assets, without blowing up the team. Anyone think he could draw a first rounder out of someone like Toronto? Probably not, but nice to think about getting another high pick while still having a good season.

 

[Jamieh]

This is such a tough call. I love having Raanta, it makes us so much more competitive this season and next. But...

I kind of like the idea of sending Raanta somewhere for a high pick. That’s how teams sustain a winning culture, when you can send current assets for future assets, without blowing up the team. Anyone think he could draw a first rounder out of someone like Toronto? Probably not, but nice to think about getting another high pick while still having a good season.

I don't think Toronto would do it anyway but they can't really trade any of next couple 1st rounders as this years is traded to Carolina with Marleau and is lottery protected. As they currently sit outside playoffs this year I doubt Dubas is dumb enough to trade next years in case they need it.