Speculation: I. 2014 Stars Offseason Thread: The New Star Has Risen

[Rune Forumwalker]

Is the upgrade from Eakin to
Lee/Trochek/Namestnikov worth moving Daley right now?

If it's for Daley, I'd pass.

 

[Hull Fan]

Yes, it is. Which is what Eakin put up this year as practically a rookie. While it may have been his 2nd season, the first was a lockout shortened year in which was only 48 games. He also played 30 games with Washington the season before which is more games than anyone on my list has played.

I think he has a fair point that Eakin could outscore a one of those rookie centers.

I think you have something that works with Rou-Eakin-Garbutt and I think we all agree we don't them to be broken up or our defacto 2nd line next season. So getting someone else to fill that role makes sense, especially a good playmaker to help Nuke establish himself as a scoring forward. So assuming Benn/Seguin is our 1st line and matches up against the other team's checking line and Eakin and company get the checking role against the other team's best line that leaves 2nd line against 2nd line or 4th line and yeah I'm willing to make an avatar bet that if these guys are in the NHL more than 70 games, averaging more than 10 minutes a night they'll outscore Eakin. Dallas is a better team if they find a 2C almost as much as they would be if they bring in a top 4 defender. Scoring depth was an issue for most of the season and hopefully whomever you bring in would be an asset to the power play.

Grigorenko may be the only iffy one considering how poor offensively Buffalo is.

 

[Hull Fan]

Is the upgrade from Eakin to
Lee/Trochek/Namestnikov worth moving Daley right now?

Not without something else coming back. I think they should move Daley because his value has never been higher. That said his value is at least a 2nd round pick plus Lee. If that 2nd or equivalent comes back then yeah Dallas should make that deal, imo.

If they move Daley I'd imagine they have a plan in place to acquire someone else or truly trust that Klingberg is NHL ready from the start. I don't think trading Daley happens in a vacuum and Connauton becomes the 6th defender full stop.

 

[Rune Forumwalker]

His 30 games in Washington aside, I was basically saying I can see Eakin getting to 40 points next season (or 40+).

Also no way I move Daley unless there isn't another veteran D just as good guaranteed to be here. There is actually the makings of a decent Top 4 with him. Without him, not so much.

Dillion - Daley
Goli - Nemeth
Benn - Gonch
Connauton

 

[Hull Fan]

His 30 games in Washington aside, I was basically saying I can see Eakin getting to 40 points next season (or 40+).

Also no way I move Daley unless there isn't another veteran D just as good guaranteed to be here. There is actually the makings of a decent Top 4 with him. Without him, not so much.

Dillion - Daley
Goli - Nemeth
Benn - Gonch
Connauton

You lost me when you had Gonchar instead of Connauton and I've soured some on Connauton though I still think he has upside if he gets the chance to play regularly but Gonchar is done.

 

[Rune Forumwalker]

I'm not saying Gonch is or should be ahead of KC, but rather I see (or would hope) those 2-3 rotate scratches.

 

[FrailSwan]

Man that defense still looks terrible with Gonchar in it. I'm so ready for that experiment to end.

 

[Hull Fan]

I'm not saying Gonch is or should be ahead of KC, but rather I see (or would hope) those 2-3 rotate scratches.

Why would you want to stunt Connauton's growth for Gonchar's last dying legs? If say Dallas had another young d-man like Gaunce in that tweener situation where they couldn't go down trading scratches makes sense but otherwise there's no reason, other than to make Gonchar happy to play him unless Connauton is just flat out awful and also deserves to be scratched. In which case he'd be your 7th and I'd hope someone else is called up.

 

[Mr Misty]

I think you vastly overestimate Eakin and the ability of Garbutt and Roussel to not only duplicate their numbers but increase them next year when they're exclusively playing the other team's best line night in and night out.

35 points from a rookie 2C is very attainable especially if Nichushkin is on the line.

That said if Boston wants to shed salary or do something crazy again I'd give up anybody not named Benn, Seguin or Nichushkin along with our 1st and another roster player or prospect of their choice to bring back Krejci. I'd just bet that one of Spooner or Koko goes before he does. In fact they'd move both Marchand and Eriksson before that happens but hey Chiarelli is crazy so who knows.

As for Lee I think you'd have to give up Daley to get him because G is probably right Chaisson isn't what they need unless he's part of a bigger deal that sends one of their young defenders back. Same might be said for Namestnikov and Tampa who would probably target a defender.

What I meant was, I would be surprised if any of those guys out produced Eakin if all other factors were held constant.

None of the guys you mentioned is a solution next year IMO. Maybe it is just personal philosophical differences, but I'd rather bring in somebody proven than speculate on potential especially since neither Chiasson nor Nichushkin really made a splash this year.

 

[Rune Forumwalker]

Why would you want to stunt Connauton's growth for Gonchar's last dying legs? If say Dallas had another young d-man like Gaunce in that tweener situation where they couldn't go down trading scratches makes sense but otherwise there's no reason, other than to make Gonchar happy to play him unless Connauton is just flat out awful and also deserves to be scratched. In which case he'd be your 7th and I'd hope someone else is called up.

It's not about stunting his growth. He's got to earn that playing time, which shouldn't be a problem if Gonch plays like he did at the start of this past season again. I'm not that high on KC, but if he outplays Gonch I am down for him taking his spot relegating the old Russian to the pressbox.

 

[glovesave_35]

I was penciling in Horcoff at center, but it wouldn't be a bad idea to keep him at wing with Sceviour like the playoffs.

My hesitation would be I think McKenzie is probably ready to make the jump now. He's already going to be turning 24 years old next year, and he's built to be the type of guy to start on the 4th line and see if he can work his way up.

If the 4th line is Horcoff-Fiddler/McClement-Sceviour, I don't think he's probably ready to step into a 2nd line role at the NHL level, and as awesome as Ritchie looks, I think Dallas will be conservative with him since he's only 21.

I think you capitalize on McKenzie and Sceviour's chemistry on the 4th line and save a ton of money. Then you would have a bit more in the budget for 2nd line center.

I hear what you're saying about McKenzie but what about the gaping hole that Fiddler's departure presents?

I don't have a problem with playing Sceviour up the lineup. He's not a liability defensively and might give some punch offensively. I don't see adding a McClement type as something that keeps McKenzie held down in the minors.

 

[glovesave_35]

I'm no hockey coach, but to me it makes the most sense to not switch styles of play between lines. Keep the transition game fast with four lines rolling.

I disagree. Switching some amount of "style" between lines is fine as long as you've got the ponies. When we had Richards and Ribeiro we had a line that played up and down, fast paced hockey. We also had a line that played a deliberate puck possession style. Both were very effective on the same team. The problem right now is that we don't have the personnel to do that. If we had Ribeiro, Chiasson would be on his line and they would both do their thing. We don't have a slow it down type of dominant offensive player like that for Chiasson to play with, though.

 

[Hull Fan]

It's not about stunting his growth. He's got to earn that playing time, which shouldn't be a problem if Gonch plays like he did at the start of this past season again. I'm not that high on KC, but if he outplays Gonch I am down for him taking his spot relegating the old Russian to the pressbox.

i think he did earn time down the stretch and Ruff still played Gonchar because of the vet thing. i'd rather not go through that again because I doubt Gonchar will be happy as the 7th only.

 

[Hull Fan]

I disagree. Switching some amount of "style" between lines is fine as long as you've got the ponies. When we had Richards and Ribeiro we had a line that played up and down, fast paced hockey. We also had a line that played a deliberate puck possession style. Both were very effective on the same team. The problem right now is that we don't have the personnel to do that. If we had Ribeiro, Chiasson would be on his line and they would both do their thing. We don't have a slow it down type of dominant offensive player like that for Chiasson to play with, though.

That I agree with. You have to find 3 guys who style meshes and no one seems to mesh with Chiasson.

 

[glovesave_35]

i think he did earn time down the stretch and Ruff still played Gonchar because of the vet thing. i'd rather not go through that again because I doubt Gonchar will be happy as the 7th only.

In summation, you're not unhappy with Gonchar listed over KC on the depth chart, you're unhappy if he's listed on the depth chart at all.

Until he is traded our bought out, we have to assume he will be here.

 

[Rune Forumwalker]

If we had Ribeiro, Chiasson would be on his line and they would both do their thing. We don't have a slow it down type of dominant offensive player like that for Chiasson to play with, though.

This is the reason I figured Chiasson might work well in Phoenix when G brought up the idea of Stone for Chiasson.

 

[Hull Fan]

In summation, you're not unhappy with Gonchar listed over KC on the depth chart, you're unhappy if he's listed on the depth chart at all.

Until he is traded our bought out, we have to assume he will be here.

If I actually thought he'd be the 7th I'd have no issue. There are worse things than collecting that paycheck. I just worry there'd be waves and the best player wouldn't play every night which is a problem on an already questionable defense.

 

[glovesave_35]

If I actually thought he'd be the 7th I'd have no issue. There are worse things than collecting that paycheck. I just worry there'd be waves and the best player wouldn't play every night which is a problem on an already questionable defense.

I see what you're saying. I don't think Gonchar is going to be a 30 game guy who is mostly a healthy scratch. The veteran/money thing will probably win out. Honestly, I fault Connauton for not showing more in his limited time to make benching Gonchar an obvious solution.

 

[Kalamazoo Wings]

I think you capitalize on McKenzie and Sceviour's chemistry on the 4th line and save a ton of money. Then you would have a bit more in the budget for 2nd line center.

I think so too

I make the case that I don't believe in his offense long term. He's got stone hands. He's not a scorer at this level or any other level he's ever played and never will be. A career high 17 goals is terrible, especially when you consider he scored that in the USHL. He's got good vision and can set up his teammates but loses board battles and isn't spectacular defensively in his own zone. Part of that was his abysmal linemates but he was a liability on the power play and without all that PP time in the future he'll never score enough to carry a trade all on his own. He may be able to tip pucks in practice but his net front ability was practically horrible given the amount of PP TOI he received all season.

Chiasson isn't a horrible player we should dump just because but I contend as soon as the middle of next year he'll be the 3rd or perhaps 4th best right winger on this club. Limited minutes, lesser talented linemates, age, and below average shot are going to severely limit his upside. I'd compare him to Drew Stafford of the last two seasons who should be better but his numbers will never add up.

So if you're asking me would I rather have Chiasson who may be a 40 point winger or gamble and trust that my scouts know what they see and target a guy like Anders Lee to be a 50-60 point center with Nuke on the 2nd line, you're darn right I make that trade. It may fail and Lee never amounts to anything but his numbers in the AHL and his short time in the NHL say he won't. I'd be willing to add to make that trade happen.

And I'd contend that all of the above centers I listed in my previous post will have at least one 50 point season in their first 3 full years in the NHL and Chiasson never will.

I take this bet, and I say good luck targeting Lee Mr. Nill. It's like teams targeting Chiasson last off-season, more or less a non-starter.

Is the upgrade from Eakin to
Lee/Trochek/Namestnikov worth moving Daley right now?

Tough call, might be worth a try from Dallas' perspective. Would never happen with these players. GMs want to see their young guys play, and determine their value to get the most out of the asset and make the dollar go the furthest. It's a main reason the great author and teacher Jim Nill claims that UFA is about the secondary player these days. The good ones are locked up long term, and the youngens you do get are likely reclamation projects, or lost cause drunks with no ability to finish in the playoffs.

Not without something else coming back. I think they should move Daley because his value has never been higher. That said his value is at least a 2nd round pick plus Lee. If that 2nd or equivalent comes back then yeah Dallas should make that deal, imo.

If they move Daley I'd imagine they have a plan in place to acquire someone else or truly trust that Klingberg is NHL ready from the start. I don't think trading Daley happens in a vacuum and Connauton becomes the 6th defender full stop.

Again, not going to happen. Lee will not be moved unless it's a major upgrade to the NYI roster and more specifically upfront. Expecting an excelling prospect and a pick for a midling type 30 plus year old defender won't go over. Garth is bad, but even he's capable of finding better ways to reach the cap floor.

 

[Hull Fan]

I see what you're saying. I don't think Gonchar is going to be a 30 game guy who is mostly a healthy scratch. The veteran/money thing will probably win out. Honestly, I fault Connauton for not showing more in his limited time to make benching Gonchar an obvious solution.

I think it's hard to show your stuff when you're continuously in and out of the line up and then you're matched up with Gonchar as his partner. He didn't really play with anyone else. I wish he had played better but I don't think it would have mattered. Whitney was flat out terrible but he wasn't scratched till the bitter end. Knowing Gonchar was helping Nuke and had an extra year also plays into that.

Hopefully now the team takes a step forward and the feelings of soon to be gone vets will no longer really matter if their play dictates them sitting out.

 

[Hull Fan]

Again, not going to happen. Lee will not be moved unless it's a major upgrade to the NYI roster and more specifically upfront. Expecting an excelling prospect and a pick for a midling type 30 plus year old defender won't go over. Garth is bad, but even he's capable of finding better ways to reach the cap floor.

NYI traded their best defenseman McDonald and they weren't very good to begin with. They have several younger players but could really use Daley on their back end to soak up minutes and provide that steady veteran play they need. If it were about cap there are several other guys who have bigger hits that could beef up their bottom line. Instead it should be about icing the best team they can and winning this year not 2 or 3 years later when Lee hits his stride. Yes that potential matters but Daley isn't exactly a stop gap with 3 years remaining on his contract, he could potentially be a good bridge guy.

 

[BigG44]

I hear what you're saying about McKenzie but what about the gaping hole that Fiddler's departure presents?

I don't have a problem with playing Sceviour up the lineup. He's not a liability defensively and might give some punch offensively. I don't see adding a McClement type as something that keeps McKenzie held down in the minors.

I would say the Eakin line which was the 2nd line more than adequately and in fact improves upon Fiddler and his line. Then, you would also have a stout 4th line as previously described with McKenzie and Sceviour.

To me, your going from Eakin - Fiddler - Horcoff to New 2nd Line C - Eakin - Horcoff and we're already talking about a significant improvement.

That said, unless Peverley's career is over or Chiasson is traded, McKenzie is out adding two players via trade or FA .. even centers. With the current players signed, they are at 10. However, if you can make the budget work, I don't think it's a requirement to leave a spot for McKenzie.

I don't know under the budget that you could add two centers and a top D which would be another hesitation, but if you couldn't add that D it might be a pretty good plan to add a 4th line C short term. McClement would be fine or in the past I've mentioned I'm pretty interested in Vitale.

I think it would cost about $8 million in cash to sign say B. Richards or Legwand and Vitale to front loaded contracts.

Benn-Seguin-Pevs/Sceviour/Chiasson
Nichushkin-Richards/Legwand-Pevs/Sceviour/Chiasson
Roussel - Eakin - Garbutt
Horcoff-Vitale-Pevs/Sceviour/Chiasson

 

[BigG44]

B. Richards or Legwand would be heavily front loaded like Lecavalier. Vitale not so much. I think he'd come in at the $1.5 to $2 million range ... similar to Fids last deal.

 

[NFKappaB]

Do not want Legwand.

 

[Stars99Lobo37]

Do not want Legwand.

Agreed.