GDT: Free Agency / Fantasy GM Part 6

[DonnyNucker]

About the fact that they had 2 top 20 dmen and a really good #3 in Hamhuis, and even Yannick Weber played closed to the level of a #4 paired with Hamhuis that one year (but fell off next season).

Weber was awful. I don’t care if Hamhuis carried him, that doesn’t make him a number 4 lol

 

[DonnyNucker]

In my opinion, loss of Toffoli hurts the most - did not like the trade at the time but I was surprised how good he looked on our team, and there's no sure way to fill in for the void he left.

Very unfortunate loss.

He played 10 games

 

[DonnyNucker]

Best possible (realistic) trade I can come up with right now:

Benn (500k retained), Roussel and Brisebois for Colin Miller. Saves Buffalo cash and balances out their LD and LW depth chart. Saves us a bit of cap this year and costs a bit the next, costs extra cash (which is why I could see ownership declining it). We could then look for some waiver fodder (Kylington, Juulsen, McKeown), and/or cheap UFAs (Koekkoek, Hutton) to fill out the rest.

Why do you want to look for waiver fodder. Why don’t we try our prospects instead of another teams crap. Let’s give either Rathbone or OJ a chance

 

[DonnyNucker]

Couldn't the Canucks have walked away from his arbitration and still signed him as a free agent?

No they couldn’t have walked away

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Huh? Your post seemed to imply that the Canucks were wise to walk away from Stecher based on his potential arbitration award, but that wasn't the only option on the table for the Canucks.

Stecher, a player who is a solid bottom pairing dman who is a passable top 4 when injuries arise, at $1.7 million is much preferrable over whoever takes his spot (likely to be a fringe #6/7). Losing Stecher just means losing a significant depth piece, which Benning has been horrible at acquiring (Pedan, Larsen, Pouliot, Clendening, Bartkowski, etc.).

They were...

 

[Mal Reynolds]

Why do you want to look for waiver fodder. Why don’t we try our prospects instead of another teams crap. Let’s give either Rathbone or OJ a chance

Because some of that "crap" may actually have upside... doesn't hurt to roll the dice on a (essentially) free asset

 

[DonnyNucker]

Because some of that "crap" may actually have upside... doesn't hurt to roll the dice on a (essentially) free asset

Can our crap not have upside ffs

I like Rathbone and want to see what he has got

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I still think that Benning is going pick up a vet 3rd pairing D before all is said and done..However, through inevitable injuries (especially in a condensed schedule) Juolevi,Rathbone, Rafferty will get their shot.

 

[ginner classic]

I don't see Buffalo going for this. Offensive depth is still lacking a little bit, but Benn is junk for them (they have two potential top four D in the minors, and Davidson if things get really hairy with them), Roussel is a bottom six forward with little hope to move up in the line up short of a catastrophe's worth of forward injuries, and Brisebois can't even stay in the NHL as a 7th D. Miller's is still an asset, especially with a reasonable cap hit and no internal pressure to move him, and likely a top four D. Nothing we're sending them has any value what so ever.

I don't think he's a bad target, I just think it will take more than 2 cap dumps and a tweener with ho hum numbers in the AHL and 8 games in the NHL (he's 23, so he's got to improve, he's just not got pedigree, being freshly drafted, or a promising upswing in metrics to claim he has value).

I'd consider Sutter+futures+possible retention for Miller, but what do we add? I'd argue Sutter would contribute more to Buffalo then Roussel, and his expiring contract is probably a plus. Miller still has value at his cap hit, Sutter retained to match his salary is at best neutral value, and we still have to solve for X.

Miller is 4th on their right side depth chart @3.8 M and Kreuger didn't like him. They need left side D.

The move is cash positive for Buffalo of about 1.5M over two years. I used Roussel to match the two years liability on Miller's deal. I was not opposed to Sutter being in the deal instead of Roussel, it just doesn't work for us over both years.

I would give up additional assets to make this deal happen.

 

[DonnyNucker]

I still think that Benning is going pick up a vet 3rd pairing D before all is said and done..However, through inevitable injuries (especially in a condensed schedule) Juolevi,Rathbone, Rafferty will get their shot.

If they want to upgrade Benn? Sure, great. But I want one spot open for a rookie

 

[Mal Reynolds]

Can our crap not have upside ffs

I like Rathbone and want to see what he has got

I wasn't saying otherwise

But I see no issue with their suggestion that the Canucks keep their eyes peeled for any interesting names on waivers when the season finally starts (or perhaps they're thinking the Canucks could leverage em as trade targets who *could* be waived, it's a bit unclear)

It's free depth, injuries happen, and you can always waive em again if things don't work out

 

[DonnyNucker]

I wasn't saying otherwise

But I see no issue with their suggestion that the Canucks keep their eyes peeled for any interesting names on waivers when the season finally starts (or perhaps they're thinking the Canucks could leverage em as trade targets who *could* be waived, it's a bit unclear)

It's free depth, injuries happen, and you can always waive em again if things don't work out

Sure, like I just said if we can upgrade Benn for free that’s great. I just don’t want all the rookies blocked

 

[ginner classic]

Can our crap not have upside ffs

I like Rathbone and want to see what he has got

Juulsen and McKeown are both right shot right side defensive D and vastly superior to Chatfield (who should not even be a consideration for us).

Rathbone is probably not NHL ready and why force it?

Juolevi has a spot as 3LD.

 

[Mal Reynolds]

Sure, like I just said if we can upgrade Benn for free that’s great. I just don’t want all the rookies blocked

Right, I get that

Personally, if I were managing the team, I'd want the kids to have to earn their spot. Nothing crazy, just have a vet 6/7 making close to the league minimum who you could trade or waive if the kids are ready

Personal philosophy, if you will, especially on defense

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

No they couldn’t have walked away

What prevented the Canucks from letting Stecher hit free agency and then offer him a contract then?

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Can't walk away unless the award was over around $4MM which was not happening.

So the Canucks couldn’t have done what the Wings did in waiting for Stecher to become a free agent and then offer him a contract?