Speculation: Fantasy GM and Rumor Roundup Thread | "Trader Jim" gearing up for TDL

[Nucker101]

Like, for the new regime the first thing they have to do is come in here and build a new identity for this slow, soft team. We need to get faster, more competitive, harder to play against. And you have to figure out which guys can fit that sort of team.

And to me, that list is :

JT Miller (80% of the time)
Tyler Motte
Matthew Highmore
Juho Lammikko
Vasili Podkolzin
Nils Hoglander
Quinn Hughes
Luke Schenn

Those are the guys who if you dropped them into a Vegas or Colorado or Tampa would fit in and succeed (or in the case of Podkolzin and Hoglander, inconsistently show those traits as young guys but can be expected to be those types of players).

And that makes it a hell of a lot harder to move any of the guys on that list, unless you get a major overpayment. And that's the problem they're having with JT Miller as well.

It would be a hell of a thing to trade away like half the list of guys who fit where you want to go starting next year but get stuck keeping a pile of guys who represent the shit team this has been in the past. And they want to do a re-tool, not a rebuild.

Totally agree with this thinking, my only hesitancy is selling Pettersson right now, I do think he can bounceback like Hughes has, maybe not to exactly what he used to be in terms of impact but at least in terms of production bouncing back to an extent. Even if you don’t want him here long term, I’d gamble onto holding him for another year and then look to move him when he (hopefully) is scoring at 65-70 point pace.

I also think Garland has some nice shit disturber tendencies that make him hard to play against, I think he’s the type of player who would actually be more effective on a team that’s hard to play against. I’d also happily keep Burroughs around as organizational depth.

But other than that, I agree with your list. I’d shop around the likes of Horvat, Boeser, Myers, Pearson and eventually Pettersson(unless he somehow becomes less afraid of contact again).

 

[m9]

Teams like Colorado and Florida are hugely stacked toward one side on their bluelines and do just fine.

I don't really care about draft picks (especially mid-late rounders) as much as most here.

These guys need to come in and build the team they want with the identity they want. I'm totally fine spending a few picks to get rid of Jim Benning's junk and not taking a pick or two in order to keep one or two moveable guys who fit where the team is going.

I find it strange when people are more concerned about getting surplus 4th round picks over the actual team on the actual ice. Again, we aren't playing a video game. We're trying to re-profile this team on the ice with a new identity and build in a positive direction. Keep the guys you believe in who fit the identity and culture you're trying to build, unless you get an offer you can't say no to.

I don't look at this Schenn thing as a "surplus 4th" or whatever. We both know he's worth more than that.

If you trade him for a pick/prospect and Hamonic can improve his stature enough so that he can be moved at this deadline or in the off-season for either an actual asset then you come out far ahead. I don't really consider this a "video game move", it's just maximizing assets when the team is out of it.

 

[Tact]

If Motte is looking for a Beagle type contract (I don’t blame him - he should cash in) then we must stay away and make the hard decision by selling him this TDL. It sucks because he’s been a good player for us which makes it hard but needs to be done.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

Schenn can get moved next year. Keep him unless you fetch a 2nd/3rd

 

[Canadian Canuck]

Pearson/Motte/Halak all should be moved no questions asked.

One of Miller/Boeser/Horvat should be moved.

 

[Canucker]

If Motte is looking for a Beagle type contract (I don’t blame him - he should cash in) then we must stay away and make the hard decision by selling him this TDL. It sucks because he’s been a good player for us which makes it hard but needs to be done.

I love Motte as a player, but we should have at least a couple guys in the system ready to come up and replace guys like Motte at a moments notice....perhaps not as seasoned, but play the same way...110% hustle. We have Lockwood, but the system is pretty barren past that.

 

[Dana Murzyn]

Like, for the new regime the first thing they have to do is come in here and build a new identity for this slow, soft team. We need to get faster, more competitive, harder to play against. And you have to figure out which guys can fit that sort of team.

And to me, that list is :

JT Miller (80% of the time)
Tyler Motte
Matthew Highmore
Juho Lammikko
Vasili Podkolzin
Nils Hoglander
Quinn Hughes
Luke Schenn

Those are the guys who if you dropped them into a Vegas or Colorado or Tampa would fit in and succeed (or in the case of Podkolzin and Hoglander, inconsistently show those traits as young guys but can be expected to be those types of players).

And that makes it a hell of a lot harder to move any of the guys on that list, unless you get a major overpayment. And that's the problem they're having with JT Miller as well.

It would be a hell of a thing to trade away like half the list of guys who fit where you want to go starting next year but get stuck keeping a pile of guys who represent the shit team this has been in the past. And they want to do a re-tool, not a rebuild.

My fear is we'd see bad Miller way more than 20% of the time during the grim rebuild that's coming. Sulky, cranky, checked out, and costing a fortune doing it. That's not going to help the team's identity much.

I say keep all the others on your list, but spend the big coin.

 

[MS]

My fear is we'd see bad Miller way more than 20% of the time during the grim rebuild that's coming. Sulky, cranky, checked out, and costing a fortune doing it. That's not going to help the team's identity much.

I say keep all the others on your list, but spend the big coin.

Yeah, I've been pro trading Miller for sure. The return should be massive, his age doesn't really fit, and he probably isn't signing here anyway. The only hedge would be if the offers are unexpectedly low and he does show an interest in staying at a reasonable price.

And obviously if a Tyler Motte has insane contract demands and you can get a 2nd for him, you do that. But if his demands are reasonable and you can only get a 3rd-4th? Ehhhhhhhh ... I'd lean toward keeping him.

Generally speaking, it's a higher priority for me that this group are able to build the team they want with the identity they want and the players that fit that identity - and are able to starting now - than that we're taking extra steps backward so we can have fancy pick surplus that doesn't really mean a hell of a lot.

________

For the record, I'm not overly expecting a 'grim rebuild'. Organizations with leadership and the right tone tend to overachieve on the ice and I'm expecting a worse roster next year on paper will actually win more than theoretically 'better' Benning rosters did while the organization was a rudderless mess.

 

[VanillaCoke]

The logic behind trading miller now is the same for trading schenn now.

You dont need to trade him rn, but you should if any team will give you something worthwhile, nobody is saying thats a 4th.

The whole point is you're getting something that is more valuable for a retooling team than schenns toughness.

If you can't find 10 replacements for schenn in the AHL, UFA or waivers between now and Sept you're not trying very hard.

Because hughes needs a babysitter is hilarious logic too.

 

[MS]

The logic behind trading miller now is the same for trading schenn now.

You dont need to trade him rn, but you should if any team will give you something worthwhile, nobody is saying thats a 4th.

The whole point is you're getting something that is more valuable for a retooling team than schenns toughness.

If you can't find 10 replacements for schenn in the AHL, UFA or waivers between now and Sept you're not trying very hard.

Because hughes needs a babysitter is hilarious logic too.

Luke Schenn has been terrific this year and is probably playing the best hockey of his entire career, essentially as this team's #4 defender.

He's probably been a $3 million+ asset in terms of value from $800k. It's absolutely *not* easy to replace that with a guy from the AHL.

And I was probably the biggest critic of that signing last summer.

 

[Petey But Really Jim]

With other sports teams where there’s a known figure as president and a lesser known GM, there’s always a cutesy portmanteaus of their names.

Example with the Blue Jays president Shapiro and GM Atkins = Shapkins

Cubs Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer = Thed

I’m sure well be talking about Allford or Jimtrik or something at some point. Whatever catches on.

Shapkins must have only caught on once Siemien and Ray blew up cause it was definitely Shatkins for a good long while among the online fanbase.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Luke Schenn has been terrific this year and is probably playing the best hockey of his entire career, essentially as this team's #4 defender.

He's probably been a $3 million+ asset in terms of value from $800k. It's absolutely *not* easy to replace that with a guy from the AHL.

And I was probably the biggest critic of that signing last summer.

I cant believe that this is a discussion, again especially with you and melvin...

I disagree with your bad boeser takes but atleast i can understand them, same with horvat. I'd keep him for 10 years but i can see why others are ready to trade him.

We're talking about 32 yr old Luke schenn.

Who you've already said had no value 6 months ago, so if he's now an "irreplaceable $3 million + asset" why the hell wouldn't we sell high in case his value drops 6 months from now.
Get some even better asset(s) that could actually help contribute for 5+ years once we're competitive annually.

I fail to see how toughness and hughes pal are even close to reasonable enough reasons to hold on to him until he's worthless. Like so many others we've already let walk for zero cough Calgary cough...

And to top it off we have Burroughs who is seemingly a younger ready made toughness replacement IF one wanted to argue that aspect.

It makes no sense

 

[Canucker]

I cant believe that this is a discussion, again especially with you and melvin...

I disagree with your bad boeser takes but atleast i can understand them, same with horvat. I'd keep him for 10 years but i can see why others are ready to trade him.

We're talking about 32 yr old Luke schenn.

Who you've already said had no value 6 months ago, so if he's now an "irreplaceable $3 million + asset" why the hell wouldn't we sell high in case his value drops 6 months from now.
Get some even better asset(s) that could actually help contribute for 5+ years once we're competitive annually.

I fail to see how toughness and hughes pal are even close to reasonable enough reasons to hold on to him until he's worthless. Like so many others we've already let walk for zero cough Calgary cough...

And to top it off we have Burroughs who is seemingly a younger ready made toughness replacement IF one wanted to argue that aspect.

It makes no sense

I don't think anyone is suggesting turning down a 2nd round pick and a B prospect, or something of that value, if offered for Schenn...but if the offers aren't up to snuff, Schenn is an easy guy to keep.

 

[VanillaCoke]

I don't think anyone is suggesting turning down a 2nd round pick and a B prospect, or something of that value, if offered for Schenn...but if the offers aren't up to snuff, Schenn is an easy guy to keep.

We need everything more than we need a 32 year old dman who was worthless 6 months ago.

The premise is he's a valuable top 4 dman right now. So we should get value commensurate with that.

Im sure previous tdls have had depth dmen traded for assets we could use.

Maybe not a 2nd but who knows, stranger things have happened and certainly you could get a younger asset that could contribute more for 10 years instead of one.

 

[ginner classic]

Would love to move Hamonic, but then you're likely having to add an asset to move on instead of getting one back for Schenn.

Your personal opinion on "sides" isn't really relevant to how the team will approach it, though. At this point, they've played a RH guy on the left simply because the previous inept GM somehow built an all-in team with only two NHL LHD. We'll see if it's something they move forward with - not sure what past Bruce/JR teams show from that standpoint.

I agree on Hughes, but Hamonic was mostly fine there last year. I don't think cashing in Schenn this year and moving Hamonic into that role temporarily is the end of the world.. especially if that gives Hamonic enough of a bump to make his contract moveable this offseason.

Hamonic may be tradable on July 2nd 2022.
Myers is tradeable July 2, 2023.
OEL becomes more buyout friendly that same summer.

I don't see any of those guys moving before then.

 

[Canucker]

We need everything more than we need a 32 year old dman who was worthless 6 months ago.

The premise is he's a valuable top 4 dman right now. So we should get value commensurate with that.

Im sure previous tdls have had depth dmen traded for assets we could use.

Maybe not a 2nd but who knows, stranger things have happened and certainly you could get a younger asset that could contribute more for 10 years instead of one.

For me, we have a pairing with Schenn and Hughes that works, I'm fine keeping that pairing together unless someone makes it worth my while to move him...even if we find a more permanent replacement as Hughes partner....having a low cost, serviceable defenseman who can play with Hughes in the event its necessary has value. Schenn can be traded at the next deadline if necessary. Flogging him off just to be rid of him because someone offered something isn't a good enough reason for me.

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

Schenn and Hughes is like having a dominant pair making 9 million together. If we can average 9 million a pairing we will be in nice shape going forward. A blue chip ELC Dman will go a long way to helping this out in a Miller/Boeser/Garland trade.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Hamonic may be tradable on July 2nd 2022.
Myers is tradeable July 2, 2023.
OEL becomes more buyout friendly that same summer.

I don't see any of those guys moving before then.

I could see Hamonic moved..Until there’s some sort of succession plan (JR trades for a young RHD) I don’t see Myers going anywhere for awhile..They’re not going to downgrade the right side to Schenn,Poolman,Juulsen,Woo and Hamonic.

 

[VanillaCoke]

For me, we have a pairing with Schenn and Hughes that works, I'm fine keeping that pairing together unless someone makes it worth my while to move him...even if we find a more permanent replacement as Hughes partner....having a low cost, serviceable defenseman who can play with Hughes in the event its necessary has value. Schenn can be traded at the next deadline if necessary. Flogging him off just to be rid of him because someone offered something isn't a good enough reason for me.

Again, the premise is he's a 3 million dollar top 4 dman asset.

Which is not flogging him off or getting rid of for nothing, surely previous tdl have examples of assets we could use more going forward.
And certainly anomalies have occurred frequently enough.

Its maximizing value right now while he has some, compared with almost any other time in the last 5 years when he had none and was in the AHL.

We could use the younger better assets we'd presumably get more than 1.4 years of 33 yr old schenns value being capable of playing with Hughes.

If Hughes is the dman we need him to be to become a contender, he needs to be able to play with multiple other partners.

None of which will be Luke Schenn in a SCF.

 

[Canucker]

Again, the premise is he's a 3 million dollar top 4 dman asset.

Which is not flogging him off or getting rid of.

Its maximizing value right now while he has some, compared with almost any other time in the last 5 years when he had none and was in the AHL.

We could use the younger better assets we'd presumably get more than 1.4 years of 33 yr old schenns value being capable of playing with Hughes.

If Hughes is the dman we need him to be to become a contender, he needs to be able to play with multiple other partners.

None of which will be Luke Schenn in a SCF.

Sure, if thats the valuation and the expected return we're basing it on...then by all means move him if we can get it.

 

[Bubbles]

I cant believe that this is a discussion, again especially with you and melvin...

I disagree with your bad boeser takes but atleast i can understand them, same with horvat. I'd keep him for 10 years but i can see why others are ready to trade him.

We're talking about 32 yr old Luke schenn.

Who you've already said had no value 6 months ago, so if he's now an "irreplaceable $3 million + asset" why the hell wouldn't we sell high in case his value drops 6 months from now.
Get some even better asset(s) that could actually help contribute for 5+ years once we're competitive annually.

I fail to see how toughness and hughes pal are even close to reasonable enough reasons to hold on to him until he's worthless. Like so many others we've already let walk for zero cough Calgary cough...

And to top it off we have Burroughs who is seemingly a younger ready made toughness replacement IF one wanted to argue that aspect.

It makes no sense

This reminds me when I was laughed off the board because I suggested trading Virtanen at his peak (pre-Bubble) but everyone was saying "he'll break out!!" "You're crazy, he's scoring at at 30 goal pace!!!

 

[sting101]

This reminds me when I was laughed off the board because I suggested trading Virtanen at his peak (pre-Bubble) but everyone was saying "he'll break out!!" "You're crazy, he's scoring at at 30 goal pace!!!

It fairness some of us didn't expect his breakout to be Shawshank and were just expecting enough professionalism to ditch pizza concerts beer and sluts for enough of his time to be able to sprint up and down the ice for 12-15minutes in at least 70ish games. Don't think top6 was really what i was thinking either but a bit of a play driving 3rd liner who could elevate at times.

What a waste

 

[Melvin]

I cant believe that this is a discussion, again especially with you and melvin...

I disagree with your bad boeser takes but atleast i can understand them, same with horvat. I'd keep him for 10 years but i can see why others are ready to trade him.

We're talking about 32 yr old Luke schenn.

Who you've already said had no value 6 months ago, so if he's now an "irreplaceable $3 million + asset" why the hell wouldn't we sell high in case his value drops 6 months from now.
Get some even better asset(s) that could actually help contribute for 5+ years once we're competitive annually.

I fail to see how toughness and hughes pal are even close to reasonable enough reasons to hold on to him until he's worthless. Like so many others we've already let walk for zero cough Calgary cough...

And to top it off we have Burroughs who is seemingly a younger ready made toughness replacement IF one wanted to argue that aspect.

It makes no sense

because the difference between selling low and selling high is nothing.

what he’s going to return in a trade is very little. A late round pick maybe. Look, I’m not the most touchy feely guy on the board, but there are some intangible reasons to keep him, and you need stopgaps regardless. It’s impossible to find a stopgap who is going to be cheaper than him.

“Selling high” is generally something I agree with, but he’s still not going to get you anything particularly useful. It doesn’t save you any money, gain you any capspace. Even I value some of the intangible culture stuff more than I value a 4th round pick.

look, if I’m wrong and some team wants to give us a first for him then sure, pull the trigger. I just really doubt that his perceived value around the league has changed all that much despite his good play.

Selling high generally means selling when a players perceived value is higher than his actual value. Like with Boeser.

 

[VanillaCoke]

So Boesers perceived value is higher than irl.

But schenns "$3 million + asset" and "top 4 dman" value isnt higher than his irl 33 yr old toughness and capable partner for hughes value..

Okay gotcha.

And again the premise is you're getting more than a 4th, which nobody has brought up that i can see except for you 2 advocating to keep him.

Stranger tdl deals have happened, if they're going to happen this year, we should sell schenn while he has value. Which he might not in 6 months, and definitely wont have any in 18 months.

 

[Lindgren]

because the difference between selling low and selling high is nothing.

what he’s going to return in a trade is very little. A late round pick maybe. Look, I’m not the most touchy feely guy on the board, but there are some intangible reasons to keep him, and you need stopgaps regardless. It’s impossible to find a stopgap who is going to be cheaper than him.

“Selling high” is generally something I agree with, but he’s still not going to get you anything particularly useful. It doesn’t save you any money, gain you any capspace. Even I value some of the intangible culture stuff more than I value a 4th round pick.

look, if I’m wrong and some team wants to give us a first for him then sure, pull the trigger. I just really doubt that his perceived value around the league has changed all that much despite his good play.

Selling high generally means selling when a players perceived value is higher than his actual value. Like with Boeser.

MS thinks his value is that of a cheap top-four D, a 3 million dollar asset, or something like that, so he shouldn't be traded.
You think it makes little difference that he's been playing well: his value is still low and he won't get much back.

I think you're both wrong. (And both of you can't be right.)

We might not find out, because he might not be traded. But if he's kept, it'll feel like part of a program to remain mediocre. I'll be disappointed.



Not that disappointed, but ... disappointed.