GDT: Game 50: Seattle Kraken (16-29-4) @ Winnipeg Jets (21-18-8)- 5pm PST

[The Marquis]

Listening to Fitz call the game tonight was a treat.

Was this a one-off or will we get to listen to him again?

A one off, but Knowing how great Forslund is, I wouldn’t be surprised if he gets the nationals more often, which opens up the spot for Fitz. I’m rather surprised Forslund isn’t already a national only guy. He’s so good.

 

[The Marquis]

You can find hard workers for less than 1M in free agency with ease. When you are the 4th highest paid forward on the team and your best attribute is that you work hard, that's not a good sign. Yes they have no cap issues so you can easily keep him but he does nothing to help the team win and won't be around after next trade deadline if he makes it that long. Just cut the losses now and give his spot to someone else.

I don’t disagree. My only though to the contrary is that we’re assuming the Kraken are more than a year from being good… so if Donskoi does the typical contract year miracle, we get more for him at that time. If we’re going to probably suck, might want to be patient to gain the most with our few opportunities to do so.

 

[HoseEmDown]

his cap hit is troublesome, but I’m not sure it’s troublesome enough. If he had several years left I’d feel like they need to move on. With what he has left, they might be served better letting him improve in a contract year and moving him at the deadline.

I don't know if he's going to improve. Who is he going to play with that'll get the best out of him? He's been played with just about everyone and he hasn't seemed to find any chemistry. He's a decent player and steps up in the playoffs. He just seems like he either doesn't have the chemistry here or he needs to play with better players and that isn’t happening next year. Maybe a playoff team will look past this season and think he has something still, take back a bad contract, get a decent pick and run.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

Do you actually see him turning his value around? His caphit isn't helping his cause especially with how he is producing. You can find much better production than that for less in free agency this summer. So once the trade deadline ends his value is only going to get worse. Maybe by next deadline a team is looking to add wants him retained for a mid pick if your lucky. But that still would mean you have to keep him around for that long. Dump his ass and give his time to a kid in the minors and then sign a guy or two in free agency for less.

Yeah. I actually do think he can turn it around. But it really depends on what your expectations are from Donskoi. He can be good for 35-45 points in a season and think he can do that next season.

I have said this several times that I am not opposed to moving any player on our team as long as it makes sense. Selling on Donskoi makes no sense to me this season.

 

[The Marquis]

Contract year turnaround is a shocking thing.

 

[gstommylee]

Yeah. I actually do think he can turn it around. But it really depends on what your expectations are from Donskoi. He can be good for 35-45 points in a season and think he can do that next season.

I have said this several times that I am not opposed to moving any player on our team as long as it makes sense. Selling on Donskoi makes no sense to me this season.

so moving our best players cause it make sense.. So you want the next 2-4 years be in the same spot we are now cause you want move any one just cause it make sense...

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

so moving our best players cause it make sense.. So you want the next 2-4 years be in the same spot we are now cause you want move any one just cause it make sense...

I have no idea what you are trying to say here to be honest. But yes, I will move any one on our team right now as long as the return makes sense. We have no game-breakers on our team. None. 0.

If there is an opportunity that presents itself where we can acquire such player(s) for the right price, yeah, I would move anyone. McCann, Dunn, etc.

 

[HoseEmDown]

Yeah. I actually do think he can turn it around. But it really depends on what your expectations are from Donskoi. He can be good for 35-45 points in a season and think he can do that next season.

I have said this several times that I am not opposed to moving any player on our team as long as it makes sense. Selling on Donskoi makes no sense to me this season.

Only 1 forward is looking like they will break 50 points. 3 will be 40 or better. Schwartz would have but won't unless he comes back soon. Maybe you can say he's struggling because there's not much offense around him. I just don't think he'll be a 40 point guy here, 30 I can see if he remembers how to shoot. But I suspect Berniers will get a lot of ice time and chances next year in the top 6. Then you still got Eberle, Schwartz, Gourde, McCann and Wennberg. Donskoi is a 3rd liner and it will be tough to score 30 on the 3rd line in Seattle. He's a RW like Appleton and it would make more sense to play Appleton as the 3rd line RW. Tanev will be coming back from injury, try to sign Donato, Blackwell and see how much Jankrok wants. Just feel like Donskoi is a luxury next year that's not worth it if he isn't producing.

 

[gstommylee]

I have no idea what you are trying to say here to be honest. But yes, I will move any one on our team right now as long as the return makes sense. We have no game-breakers on our team. None. 0.

If there is an opportunity that presents itself where we can acquire such player(s) for the right price, yeah, I would move anyone. McCann, Dunn, etc.

so you want the team to stink the next 3-4 years as long as it make sense just for prospects that won't be ready right away or won't be ready the next 2 years or won't make it to the NHL at all..

We need a core set of player to build with aka untouchables.

 

[HoseEmDown]

so you want the team to stink the next 3-4 years as long as it make sense just for prospects that won't be ready right away or won't be ready the next 2 years or won't make it to the NHL at all..

We need a core set of player to build with aka untouchables.

I don't think an expansion team should have untouchables outside of its draft picks. You have no idea who's going to be your core yet. You may have some guys signed longer than others or playing better than others but it doesn't mean they're core. I would assume Francis considers guys like Oleksiak, Larsson and Gourde core since they are signed multiple years at a hefty price as well as being key pieces. But if a team made a ridiculous offer he hopefully wouldn't turn it down. It doesn't mean he wants the team to stink, he's just doing what's best for the team. McCann isn't signed long term so until he does he shouldn't be untouchable and Dunn is on a 2 year deal. Again if he signs long term then untouchable but you never know if they may want out and aren't willing to sign. So I would keep all my options open.

 

[RainyCityHockey]

so you want the team to stink the next 3-4 years as long as it make sense just for prospects that won't be ready right away or won't be ready the next 2 years or won't make it to the NHL at all..

We need a core set of player to build with aka untouchables.

The way you do that is by drafting well with the picks you got yourself or through trades.

The whole point was that we don't really have those core guys, but rather a couple of good ones that can be part of a core because they might fit well with the actual untouchable players.

Anyways, game 50 and yet another loss.
At least it keeps us in a good draft lottery position, so far.

Though, I doubt we'll finish below the Flyers and at least one of Buffalo/New Jersey.
So it's probably going to be a pick in the #5 - #8 range while hoping we don't fall more than one spot in the lottery.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

so you want the team to stink the next 3-4 years as long as it make sense just for prospects that won't be ready right away or won't be ready the next 2 years or won't make it to the NHL at all..

We need a core set of player to build with aka untouchables.

You can't have a core that does not have any game changers or elite players. 'Character' players can only take a team so far. So yes, I would move any of the players we grabbed in the expansion draft out for more talent.

 

[kihei]

You can find hard workers for less than 1M in free agency with ease. When you are the 4th highest paid forward on the team and your best attribute is that you work hard, that's not a good sign. Yes they have no cap issues so you can easily keep him but he does nothing to help the team win and won't be around after next trade deadline if he makes it that long. Just cut the losses now and give his spot to someone else.

I complemented him on his play tonight. That doesn't mean I consider him expendable or anything close to it. In the grand scheme of things, he is small fry.

Basically I would trade anyone on the current NHL roster for the right price. Any improvement in the next couple of years will likely be modest until our own draft picks develop. If we get super lucky with a trade or two, maybe the process can be less onerous to go through, but we don't have a line up we can fix overnight. I'd like to think we could contend by year four. That is going to require patience on the part of the fanbase.

 

[The Marquis]

That’s the problem with our core. To have a core, you need a core player or players. We have guys that compliment the core, but no actual core to build around. 28 of the NHL teams aren’t going to build around a core of ANY of our players. Gio a few years back, sure. A couple in the future, maybe. McCann? He’s about the only guy with a chance of being a core guy, but 32 goals, 60 points is not the guy you build around, he’s the guy that compliments the core, while being part of it, but when that’s the best you’ve got? You have no core. If you call our core what it MAY be…. McCann, Gourde, Dunn…. These are middle six and middle pair guys on 28 teams. That’s not a diss on them, they are good NHL players… but come on.

At least 20 teams have 4 players or more better than our best guy.

off the top of my head…

Tampa. Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman, Vasilevsky. That’s your core. There are 2-3 other players

Toronto. Matthew’s, Marner, Tavares, Nylander, Campbell, probably a couple more.

Boston: Bergeron, McAvoy, Marchand, Pastrnak

Edmonton: McDavid, Nurse, Draisaitl, Kane, Nugent-Hopkins, Hyman

Calgary: Tkachuk, Mangiapane, Markstrom, Gaudreau

Do I need to keep going? Dallas, Los Angeles, Minnesota, Chicago, Detroit, Nashville, Washington, NYR, NYI, Carolina, Vegas, Florida, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Colorado might all be better than our best guys. Lmfao. Partially joking.

Hell, even New Jersey has half a core in Hughes and Hischier. Philly has half a fading core. There are maybe 5 teams in the NHL without a true core and they all suck and the Kraken are one, especially in light of the expiring contracts.

The Kraken are highly unlikely to be good next season. The NHL rarely works that way… as such, asset values need to be maximized. Get the most for your assets especially if you’ll probably suck for another year anyway.

 

[The Marquis]

To get to my point, which I didn’t point out… if a guy like Donskoi isn’t performing well, but has another year on his contract… do you trade him away at his lowest value of his career, or do you hope he picks it up, as most do, in his contract year and try to move him for more? Do you want a 3rd round pick or potential for a 2nd or first. Your team is probably going to suck anyway, if you want them to suck less in 3-4 years, you take the risk on season 2 being bad. Sure, it might not work out, but trends would say he’ll improve. I take that risk 80% of the time. That other 20? Somebody is willing to pay for his potential in that contract year.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

That’s the problem with our core. To have a core, you need a core player or players. We have guys that compliment the core, but no actual core to build around. 28 of the NHL teams aren’t going to build around a core of ANY of our players. Gio a few years back, sure. A couple in the future, maybe. McCann? He’s about the only guy with a chance of being a core guy, but 32 goals, 60 points is not the guy you build around, he’s the guy that compliments the core, while being part of it, but when that’s the best you’ve got? You have no core. If you call our core what it MAY be…. McCann, Gourde, Dunn…. These are middle six and middle pair guys on 28 teams. That’s not a diss on them, they are good NHL players… but come on.

At least 20 teams have 4 players or more better than our best guy.

off the top of my head…

Tampa. Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman, Vasilevsky. That’s your core. There are 2-3 other players

Toronto. Matthew’s, Marner, Tavares, Nylander, Campbell, probably a couple more.

Boston: Bergeron, McAvoy, Marchand, Pastrnak

Edmonton: McDavid, Nurse, Draisaitl, Kane, Nugent-Hopkins, Hyman

Calgary: Tkachuk, Mangiapane, Markstrom, Gaudreau

Do I need to keep going? Dallas, Los Angeles, Minnesota, Chicago, Detroit, Nashville, Washington, NYR, NYI, Carolina, Vegas, Florida, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Colorado might all be better than our best guys. Lmfao. Partially joking.

Hell, even New Jersey has half a core in Hughes and Hischier. Philly has half a fading core. There are maybe 5 teams in the NHL without a true core and they all suck and the Kraken are one, especially in light of the expiring contracts.

The Kraken are highly unlikely to be good next season. The NHL rarely works that way… as such, asset values need to be maximized. Get the most for your assets especially if you’ll probably suck for another year anyway.

Your zero carb beer must have kicked in. You mentioned Colorado in the 'might be better than our best guys' ..

But what you are saying is exactly the point. Your core needs to be the skill/talent players. You can't count on vets and character players to be your core. If you do, the team is very likely to be bad. The idea is that you build around that elite talent and fill it with complimentary players the like of Schwartz, Gourde, McCann, etc.

Skill/talent on its own does not guarantee anything either (Eg: Oilers). There definitely needs to be leadership and a strong work ethic in the locker room but I feel like those are easier to fill in than getting franchise/elite players. Also, the idea here is not to trade all our vets at once. Its more to move pieces that can be moved if it is for a chance to land a franchise/elite player.

 

[The Marquis]

Your zero carb beer must have kicked in. You mentioned Colorado in the 'might be better than our best guys' ..

But what you are saying is exactly the point. Your core needs to be the skill/talent players. You can't count on vets and character players to be your core. If you do, the team is very likely to be bad. The idea is that you build around that elite talent and fill it with complimentary players the like of Schwartz, Gourde, McCann, etc.

Skill/talent on its own does not guarantee anything either (Eg: Oilers). There definitely needs to be leadership and a strong work ethic in the locker room but I feel like those are easier to fill in than getting franchise/elite players. Also, the idea here is not to trade all our vets at once. Its more to move pieces that can be moved if it is for a chance to land a franchise/elite player.

your point on the Oilers is interesting as they are in a situation where they have a core, but very little to compliment the core. Imagine the Oilers with McCann, Dunn, Gourde and Schwartz complimenting that core. That’s a good hockey team. They still need more D, even with that though.

 

[kihei]

I agree with the above entirely, but I do think we do need to identify and develop the players on our present roster who might improve enough and hang around long enough to complement our eventual core, and in some cases (Dunn?) become part of it. I'd like to see our younger players get more ice time to see if Geekie, Appleton, Soucy, et al, have what it takes to contribute long term. Hopefully a few of the expansion guys will develop in that manner or contending will be an even longer process.

I was responding to The Marquis' long post, but I agree as well with both posts that followed.