Value of: Jonas Brodin.

[Bazeek]

I'm not sure that it'd require overpayment, whatever one thinks that is. I just don't see Guerin trading him for "value." Trading Brodin means losing something important from the blueline, which is still the backbone of the team. If he pulls the trigger the deal needs to fill a more crucial hole somewhere else, and the only such hole we have is at center.

 

[Merrrlin]

No reason to think that the Wild will ever tear down to the roots with Liepold as the owner. Don't think that is his style or interest. Retool at most until we see otherwise.

Normally I applaud that...but I can think of few organizations that could benefit from a complete tear down more...Personally I would love to see Minny thrive, I used to sell plows out near the Wisconsin border, I know those are good hockey folk that way.

I don't see the the potential to excel, and adding a Danault or even somehow a Trocheck changes that.

 

[thestonedkoala]

Like a top 5 prospect league wide, right? And a 1st overall pick?

More like a Toronto's 1st and Suzuki at minimum.

I'd love Necas for Brodin, plus a few things thrown in there to even it out. But that'd be a great ground work to work with.

 

[57special]

Danault would be such a typical Wild player. Excellent D, underrated. I just don't see MTL trading a francophone top 6 C, especially one who is a coach'es dream. I also think that the Wild would prefer one of KK, Suzuki, or Domi, as they already have a lockdown young C in Ericksson-Ek. They need a young C with offensive chops to play with Kaprizov and Fiala for the next decade(projecting bit here).

I do think that trading Dumba or Brodin is far from the 1st thing that is on GMBG's mind. Someone will have get his attention with a truly attractive offer, as opposed to a non lottery 1st and a tweener A/B prospect.

 

[Morbo]

No. With Kaprizov joining next season, the Wild will have a log jam at both wings. At the top of organizational needs is the center position.

Guess we have different definitions of "logjam".

 

[Bazeek]

Why not? We were turning cartwheels when we got Boldy at #12 oa last year, because most had him valued as a top 10 pick. Our enthusiasm has been tempered this year after a mediocre college season. Again, HFB members value prospects more than GM's do, who realize that they can't always wait 4 years for a prospect to (maybe) blossom, because they will be fired after the 3rd season.

Because you're ignoring the dimension of time.

In a league with a salary cap those early ELC and RFA years are the most valuable years a player has, and Brodin's just over a year away from UFA. A draft pick carries more risk, but even if you end up with a player that's not as good as Brodin you still get 10 years of team control and cheap cap hits.

Brodin's only 26 and his next contract shouldn't be all that expensive, so it's not like he's a 29 year old forward that's positioned to get an albatross contract. He's the sort of player that's going to bring a lot to whatever team he's on for years. I wouldn't expect a #10 overall for 1.5 years of him, though.

 

[57special]

And i think you are ignoring the element of chance inherent with any prospect. Trading Brodin for a prospect who never makes a dent in the NHL is the sort of thing that gets you fired.

 

[Bazeek]

And i think you are ignoring the element of chance inherent with any prospect. Trading Brodin for a prospect who never makes a dent in the NHL is the sort of thing that gets you fired.

I'm against trading him for futures for exactly that reason. But it's what he's likely to return if Guerin decides to pursue that sort of deal.

 

[57special]

Here are the #10oa picks in the 5 years previous to Brodin;
Frolik
Ellerby
Hodgson
Paajarvi
McIlwraith

And the ones 5 years after;

Koekkoek
Nichushkin
Ritchie
Rantanen
Jost

There is one player on that list that everyone would trade for Brodin. You would have to be their mother to trade for any of the others. The Wild getting a #10oa pick (after the draw is done) in exchange for Brodin, who is young, and still has plenty of hockey left, is not the steal that some would have you believe.

Now, if it's before the lottery draw, then it's another story. You might end up with the #14 oa, or you might have to hire a coach who speaks French.

 

[MuckOG]

Guess we have different definitions of "logjam".

What's your definition of a top 6 log jam? Mine would be this:

Fiala - Center - Kaprizov
Parise - Staal - Zuccarello
Zucker/Greenway/Donato - Ek - Kunin
4th liners - Foligno and Hartman

We can't move Parise and Zuccarello because of their NMCs....and we also have plethora of prospects that play the wing, such as Boldy, Beckman and Firstov.

The need is at center.

 

[57special]

Forgot Zucker

 

[Chrisinroch]

A young-ish good skating, playmaking center who can distribute to Fiala and Kaprisof moves the needle a lot. Depending on the player, MN would likely have to add another player or prospect.

 

[Srsly]

How about a 24 year old, 6’5, first round selected, beast that goes by the name of Gauthier? Jk

RNH straight up seems to be about the right value to me.

 

[MuckOG]

How about a 24 year old, 6’5, first round selected, beast that goes by the name of Gauthier? Jk

RNH straight up seems to be about the right value to me.

I wouldn't hate that deal.

 

[Bazeek]

Here are the #10oa picks in the 5 years previous to Brodin;
Frolik
Ellerby
Hodgson
Paajarvi
McIlwraith

And the ones 5 years after;

Koekkoek
Nichushkin
Ritchie
Rantanen
Jost

There is one player on that list that everyone would trade for Brodin. You would have to be their mother to trade for any of the others. The Wild getting a #10oa pick (after the draw is done) in exchange for Brodin, who is young, and still has plenty of hockey left, is not the steal that some would have you believe.

Now, if it's before the lottery draw, then it's another story. You might end up with the #14 oa, or you might have to hire a coach who speaks French.

If we open it up to the range just after #10 we see guys like...

2007 - Ryan McDonagh (#12), Kevin Shattenkirk (#14)
2008 - Erik Karlsson (#15)
2009 - Ryan Ellis (#11)
2010 - Cam Fowler (#12), Jaden Schwartz (#14)
2011 - JT Miller (#15)
2012 - Filip Forsberg (#11)
2013 - Max Domi (#12), Josh Morrisey (#13), Ryan Pulock (#15)
2014 - Kevin Fiala (#11), Jakub Vrana (#13), Dylan Larkin (#15)
2015 - Rantanen (#10) *
2016 - Charlie McAvoy (#14), Luke Kunin (#15)

*2015 is the year Boston had picks 13-15, which were a little dubious and didn't turn into much. But 16-18 were Barzal, Connor and Chabot

Obviously there's a lot of chaff selected in that range too, but pick #10 is kind of a case study in why it's better to look at a range of picks rather than a specific position. All of those players were available and could have credibly been picked at #10. If trading Brodin could get us a pick in that range I'd be extremely open to it, but I don't expect he would.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

Normally I applaud that...but I can think of few organizations that could benefit from a complete tear down more...Personally I would love to see Minny thrive, I used to sell plows out near the Wisconsin border, I know those are good hockey folk that way.

I don't see the the potential to excel, and adding a Danault or even somehow a Trocheck changes that.

Yes/no. I can see both sides of this. A well executed and lucky re-build where you land 1-2 all stars and hit on some other 2-5 picks.....sure, sounds fun. But the flip side is crap lotto-luck, more misses than hits in the draft and years of 3 year re-build cycles until you finally get lucky.....no bueno.

 

[thestonedkoala]

Guess we have different definitions of "logjam".

Who are the Wild wingers?

 

[57special]

@ Bazeek ... but you are depending on the Wild being that very special team that just happens to pick the exception to the rule, like we did with Kaprizov, though even that took us 5 rounds to figure out. It just isn't reality, or we would've taken Boeser instead Ek, and Tarasenko instead of whoever we took that year. What i did was simply take the 10 players surrounding Brodin taken at the exact same spot that he was, which is the reality, not a hypothetical. At the time these teams took those players, they truly thought those were the best prospects available.

You are cherry picking the hits, and ignoring the misses.

 

[AKL]

If we open it up to the range just after #10 we see guys like...

2007 - Ryan McDonagh (#12), Kevin Shattenkirk (#14)
2008 - Erik Karlsson (#15)
2009 - Ryan Ellis (#11)
2010 - Cam Fowler (#12), Jaden Schwartz (#14)
2011 - JT Miller (#15)
2012 - Filip Forsberg (#11)
2013 - Max Domi (#12), Josh Morrisey (#13), Ryan Pulock (#15)
2014 - Kevin Fiala (#11), Jakub Vrana (#13), Dylan Larkin (#15)
2015 - Rantanen (#10) *
2016 - Charlie McAvoy (#14), Luke Kunin (#15)

*2015 is the year Boston had picks 13-15, which were a little dubious and didn't turn into much. But 16-18 were Barzal, Connor and Chabot

Obviously there's a lot of chaff selected in that range too, but pick #10 is kind of a case study in why it's better to look at a range of picks rather than a specific position. All of those players were available and could have credibly been picked at #10. If trading Brodin could get us a pick in that range I'd be extremely open to it, but I don't expect he would.

I would love to trade Brodin for another Fiala to play on Fiala’s opposite wing

 

[AKL]

@ Bazeek ... but you are depending on the Wild being that very special team that just happens to pick the exception to the rule, like we did with Kaprizov, though even that took us 5 rounds to figure out. It just isn't reality, or we would've taken Boeser instead Ek, and Tarasenko instead of whoever we took that year. What i did was simply take the 10 players surrounding Brodin taken at the exact same spot that he was, which is the reality, not a hypothetical. At the time these teams took those players, they truly thought those were the best prospects available.

You are cherry picking the hits, and ignoring the misses.

The ironic part is he’s looking at it holistically and you’re the one ignoring context and cherry picking the failures.

The fact of the matter is that your entire argument relies on the idea that the Wild organization would have picked those exact same players that were picked at 10 every single year and that’s wholly unrealistic at best.

 

[Bazeek]

@ Bazeek ... but you are depending on the Wild being that very special team that just happens to pick the exception to the rule, like we did with Kaprizov, though even that took us 5 rounds to figure out. It just isn't reality, or we would've taken Boeser instead Ek, and Tarasenko instead of whoever we took that year. What i did was simply take the 10 players surrounding Brodin taken at the exact same spot that he was, which is the reality, not a hypothetical. At the time these teams took those players, they truly thought those were the best prospects available.

You are cherry picking the hits, and ignoring the misses.

I think there's difference between plucking Kaprizov out of the 5th or Point out of the 3rd, and picking a guy that's projected to go somewhere from 10-15 at #10. It does require competent scouting and some luck, but it's not exactly a moonshot. Especially with more recent drafts (2013 or so onward) the number of outright misses in that range is pretty low.

 

[57special]

We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Archijerej]

I also think that the Wild would prefer one of KK, Suzuki, or Domi

Domi for Brodin would certainly be a possibility. Suzuki or Kotkaniemi? Doubt it.

Danault would be such a typical Wild player. Excellent D, underrated. I just don't see MTL trading a francophone top 6 C

Given the makeup of our roster, Danault is pretty much untouchable. He's our best centerman.

 

[Sota Popinski]

i like brodin, but he’s so underrated that he’s overrated now. canes should go after cheaper options like demelo and dillon, who are actually playing better than brodin. well dillon is anyway. demelo has made every pair better

Dillon is playing better than Brodin? That is preposterous.

 

[Archijerej]

Domi is a face of the franchise now.

He most certainly is not.

Danault may be available - to me this is good value both ways.

If you are only getting Danault, though, is it worth it? He's a very good player, and can shut down top players. Just not sure that's the right move.

If you think Domi's a more valuable player in Montreal's management estimation, and thus less available than Danault, then you have it backwards.