Confirmed with Link: Coyotes trade Letunov, 2017 6th to San Jose for 2016 4th + 2017 3rd

[lanky]

I like Letunov a lot.

My positive spin: there's more room now for Logan Brown.

 

[ClassLessCoyote]

We could have done better than this trade.

 

[hbk]

Needed to acquire a 4th to give us option on flyers pick. Letunov a 3-4 year project pick. Frame is the issue. He's never going to be that hulking monster and with MacInnis, Gaudet, Dvorak, Strome, and potentially another C in the first round this year we di:not have a spot for him and worse the agent knows it. He wasn't going to sign and realistically the best we could have gotten by waiting too long is a 3rd round pick (see Vesey). We got more.

I credit some other posters who raised signability as a potential issue two years ago. Good call.

 

[Foggy1097]

I like Letunov a lot.

My positive spin: there's more room now for Logan Brown.

Hoping that we don't draft Logan Brown, unless we end up trading Hanzal which I kind of doubt will happen. We can't play the 6-7 good C's that are already in the system as it is so we don't really need another one unless it's a massive upgrade over someone else. The best D prospect in the system is probably Kyle Wood, who they got in the Boedker deal...that is not a good thing haha. If they keep that 7th overall pick they have to take the best D available unless an ELITE forward somehow manages to slip all the way to #7...

 

[ClassLessCoyote]

Needed to acquire a 4th to give us option on flyers pick. Letunov a 3-4 year project pick. Frame is the issue. He's never going to be that hulking monster and with MacInnis, Gaudet, Dvorak, Strome, and potentially another C in the first round this year we di:not have a spot for him and worse the agent knows it. He wasn't going to sign and realistically the best we could have gotten by waiting too long is a 3rd round pick (see Vesey). We got more.

I credit some other posters who raised signability as a potential issue two years ago. Good call.

I get the issue with the 4th round pick and the issue with NCAA players with the loophole but I thought we could have done better trading wise.

 

[hbk]

I get the issue with the 4th round pick and the issue with NCAA players with the loophole but I thought we could have done better trading wise.

Maybe later in year. Right now draft picks are a premium currency

 

[hbk]

Hoping that we don't draft Logan Brown, unless we end up trading Hanzal which I kind of doubt will happen. We can't play the 6-7 good C's that are already in the system as it is so we don't really need another one unless it's a massive upgrade over someone else. The best D prospect in the system is probably Kyle Wood, who they got in the Boedker deal...that is not a good thing haha. If they keep that 7th overall pick they have to take the best D available unless an ELITE forward somehow manages to slip all the way to #7...

BPA. I'm convinced on Brown. I'd rather move up from 20 to mid teens to draft Fabbro than take a d at 7.

 

[AZviaNJ]

BPA. I'm convinced on Brown. I'd rather move up from 20 to mid teens to draft Fabbro than take a d at 7.

agreed. According to Bobby Mac report Brown/Chychrun/Sergachev all there at 7, but top 5 D grouping all gone by 20 and next wave all gone by 37.

Hopefully Daytsuk deal gets done and we move up to 16 as part of it and/or add 46

 

[mouser]

Hoping that we don't draft Logan Brown, unless we end up trading Hanzal which I kind of doubt will happen. We can't play the 6-7 good C's that are already in the system as it is so we don't really need another one unless it's a massive upgrade over someone else. The best D prospect in the system is probably Kyle Wood, who they got in the Boedker deal...that is not a good thing haha. If they keep that 7th overall pick they have to take the best D available unless an ELITE forward somehow manages to slip all the way to #7...

I've generally found that overloading on C's is fine. There's still a good chance that a prospect like Dvorak ends up at wing in the NHL.

Remember looking at old Red Wings rosters many years ago with 7-8 centers and 6-7 wingers among their forwards. It's not unusual for skilled centers to be able to play wing when needed. It's less common to find a wing that can play center.

 

[BUX7PHX]

agreed. According to Bobby Mac report Brown/Chychrun/Sergachev all there at 7, but top 5 D grouping all gone by 20 and next wave all gone by 37.

Hopefully Daytsuk deal gets done and we move up to 16 as part of it and/or add 46

Still holding that none of the top 6 are available at #20, and even if this report is correct, which one goes later than that? Think the top 6 D are all in the top 20-24 players, and 20-24 players is where the threshold of getting a certain level of prospect ends. That next group will have a lot of D for teams to get their hands on.

I might be tempted to take a defenseman at #20 who is not one of the top 6 - the only one that I might be interested in at that point is Johansen (NHL bloodlines with brother and Kelowna seems to produce defensemen every year). Our analytics department would have to be so confident in their evaluation for that to happen, and I am not certain that it even results in Johansen being that high.

I have been fine with trading back and continue to think that is our best option to get the best quality defenseman at the right value, though.

 

[Palmer2Fitz]

BPA. I'm convinced on Brown. I'd rather move up from 20 to mid teens to draft Fabbro than take a d at 7.

This ^^^

 

[Foggy1097]

I've generally found that overloading on C's is fine. There's still a good chance that a prospect like Dvorak ends up at wing in the NHL.

Remember looking at old Red Wings rosters many years ago with 7-8 centers and 6-7 wingers among their forwards. It's not unusual for skilled centers to be able to play wing when needed. It's less common to find a wing that can play center.

Yeah good point. I think Merkley will be one of those guys that converts to wing and Dvorak might as well. I just think if you have an opportunity at #7 to take the first D in the draft and get your pick of the guy you think is the best...you have to take it if you're ARI. I like the idea of using the #20 pick to move up though and still get a solid guy in the teens somewhere. Never heard of Fabbro though...I've been hearing lots of Juolevi, Chychrun, Sergachev, Bean...but no Fabbro. If anyone is thinking he'll get picked in the teens then he must be kind of under the radar...

 

[Ebb]

Hoping that we don't draft Logan Brown, unless we end up trading Hanzal which I kind of doubt will happen.

Even if we keep Hanzal, Brown won't be ready for at least 2-3 years. Hanzal's contract is up after next season, and even if we extend it, he'll most likely be slowing down and/or becoming more injury prone around the time that Brown could compete for a spot on the roster. Being the size he is, Brown may possibly need a few years in the A as well.

Current depth:

• Hanzal (possibly gone after next season)
• Vermette (gone after next season)
• Richardson (two seasons remaining--could possibly be moved at a trade deadline if we aren't in a playoff position))
• Strome
• Dvorak (if not converted to wing)
• Dauphin
• Gaudet (RFA, could potentially be moved since he's close to earning a #4C role)
• MacInnis
  

So, we do need a Center or two in our prospect pool.

Projecting ahead to 2017-2018, if we drafted Brown, our depth would be...

• Strome
• Dvorak
• Richardson
• Dauphin
• Gaudet
• MacInnis
• Brown (OHL)

And projecting ahead even further to 2018-2019...

• Strome
• Dvorak
• MacInnis
• Brown
• Dauphin?
• Gaudet?

 

[Mosby]

I think Richardson goes to Vegas.