Speculation: Roster Building Thread LVIII: At part 58, I am out of titles.

[Tawnos]

He really isn't. Hes commonly caught out of position, especially on the PP.



Yeah this is his one "strength", but this is easily negated by teams who choose to dump the puck into his corner. He gets beat to most pucks and the ones he doesn't, he usually gets bottled up which results in a turnover or three before he eventually panic clears the puck, gets stopped by the goalie or ends up in the net.



This is so subjective. I've seen him make some good reads, but the amount of terrible reads that resulted in him being caught up ice in no mans land which led to odd man rushes the other way were astronomical.




Rapid fire time:


Then what is execution? Surely it isn't failure to do things properly.

I hate to pull this card, but it's clear you've never been on a bench before.

AV's stubbornness to adjust his style was part of it, so was overplaying horrible hockey players.

Staal is not the best option of the 3 to hold onto. Cleanest buy out and weakest player.

He's not actually any cleaner of a buyout than Smith. And he saves us less money in the year where we need the savings the most (this year). Smith, also, is absolutely a worse D than Staal. The only thing holding onto Smith really has over holding onto Staal is Staal's NMC. That being said, I don't want Smith anywhere near Hartford either.

Execution is doing what the coaching staff asks you to do. Which I already stated. If the coach says "next time you're in front of the net with this guy, do this" and he tries to do that, that's execution. The success or failure of him doing it is less important than the attempt. At least at this stage of things. It's the reason why guys like Vesey stayed in the lineup when Buchnevich would get scratched. Ditto Pionk vs DeAngelo. It's ability to accept instruction. And don't take this to the extreme, I'm not saying that anyone can just go in and do this and have it be acceptable to the coaches. And the more a team tries to contend, the more important succeeding in execution becomes. For now, the fact of execution is the most important thing.

I have been on a bench before. So pull that card all you want. You're wrong.

Subjective evaluation is not less valuable than objective evaluation, but it can be disagreed upon. Saying "this is so subjective" isn't the criticism you think it is.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Risto the next to go?

 

[NYR Viper]

Also, that gives the Sabres:

Montour
Ristoleinen
Bogosian
Miller
Jokiharju

Al on the right side. I would assume something would need to give soon?

 

[Deleted member 23124]

The expansion draft in an interesting consideration in all of this.

In terms of most likely to be around and need protection:
The D they'll have eligible for the expansion draft are Trouba, Skjei, DeAngelo, Hajek, Lindgren.
The F they'll have eligible are Panarin, Zibanejad, Chytil, Andersson, Howden, Buchnevich, Lemieux.

I'm assuming that Kreider, Namestnikov, Strome, and Fast will all be gone by then. Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox, Rykov, Shesterkin, Reunanen, among others will all be exempt.

So they're set on forwards. They will need to bring someone in specifically to expose. On D... they can only protect 3. That's going to end up leading to some maneuvering. @brians1128 could easily be right. They could end up deciding TDA is redundant and that would factor in the maneuvering.

If those are the eligible players, why not just pick 18 (is that the correct number) skaters rather than X forwards and X d-men? You have 12 players named there.

 

[Thirty One]

Starting to think Alex Nylander was never realistic for Vesey...

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

He's not actually any cleaner of a buyout than Smith. And he saves us less money in the year where we need the savings the most (this year). Smith, also, is absolutely a worse D than Staal. The only thing holding onto Smith really has over holding onto Staal is Staal's NMC. That being said, I don't want Smith anywhere near Hartford either.

Execution is doing what the coaching staff asks you to do. Which I already stated. If the coach says "next time you're in front of the net with this guy, do this" and he tries to do that, that's execution. The success or failure of him doing it is less important than the attempt. At least at this stage of things. It's the reason why guys like Vesey stayed in the lineup when Buchnevich would get scratched. Ditto Pionk vs DeAngelo. It's ability to accept instruction. And don't take this to the extreme, I'm not saying that anyone can just go in and do this and have it be acceptable to the coaches.

I have been on a bench before. So pull that card all you want. You're wrong.

Subjective evaluation is not less valuable than objective evaluation, but it can be disagreed upon. Saying "this is so subjective" isn't the criticism you think it is.

LOL okay. Its clear that you have no idea what you're looking at.

We should have just agreed to disagree on this one a while ago.

 

[Tawnos]

If those are the eligible players, why not just pick 18 (is that the correct number) skaters rather than X forwards and X d-men? You have 12 players named there.

You can either protect 7 F, 3 D and 1 G or 8 skaters and 2 goalies.

 

[Tawnos]

LOL okay. Its clear that you have no idea what you're looking at.

We should have just agreed to disagree on this one a while ago.

The player is completely untrustworthy.

 

[Tawnos]

So which 3 dmen will they protect? Trouba and who?

I guess they can protect Georgiev since Hank's contract will be up...and that's assuming Georgiev is still on the team then.

Trouba for sure. If Skjei is gone, I'd guess they'd protect DeAngelo and Hajek, provided that Hajek continues to progress.

 

[Tob]

CHI management: We have scoring, we don't need scoring, that's why we traded Panarin for Saad, for grit.
CHI management: We need more grit and our window is now so we need more grit. That's why we added Shaw.
CHI management: We need some scoring so we had to trade away a good young D for someone who's maybe an NHLer
CHI management in August: We need defense upgrades and we don't have enough grit, that's why we've acquired Marc Staal.

 

[Ghost of jas]

CHI management: We have scoring, we don't need scoring, that's why we traded Panarin for Saad, for grit.
CHI management: We need more grit and our window is now so we need more grit. That's why we added Shaw.
CHI management: We need some scoring so we had to trade away a good young D for someone who's maybe an NHLer
CHI management in August: We need defense upgrades and we don't have enough grit, that's why we've acquired Marc Staal.

This needs to happen.

 

[brians1128]

The expansion draft in an interesting consideration in all of this.

In terms of most likely to be around and need protection:
The D they'll have eligible for the expansion draft are Trouba, Skjei, DeAngelo, Hajek, Lindgren.
The F they'll have eligible are Panarin, Zibanejad, Chytil, Andersson, Howden, Buchnevich, Lemieux.

I'm assuming that Kreider, Namestnikov, Strome, and Fast will all be gone by then. Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox, Rykov, Shesterkin, Reunanen, among others will all be exempt.

So they're set on forwards. They will need to bring someone in specifically to expose. On D... they can only protect 3. That's going to end up leading to some maneuvering. @brians1128 could easily be right. They could end up deciding TDA is redundant and that would factor in the maneuvering.

Im no Gm but I'd be dealing from a position of strength. Can you eventually deal TDA for an exempt forward and expose lindgren? Is it Hajek? Its still too early to call but I think the player we lose will be on the back end

 

[Tawnos]

Im no Gm but I'd be dealing from a position of strength. Can you eventually deal TDA for an exempt forward and expose lindgren? Is it Hajek? Its still too early to call but I think the player we lose will be on the back end

2 years is a long time for this stuff. In two years, we might not care if we lose Howden in the expansion draft, but we did hang on to Strome, for example.

But yeah, I'd prefer to trade one of those 3 D than lose them for nothing. The problem is that a lot of teams will be in that situation.

 

[Deleted member 23124]

You can either protect 7 F, 3 D and 1 G or 8 skaters and 2 goalies.

Thanks for the correction. I knew my number was too high, but didn't realize it was THAT high.

 

[brians1128]

Trouba for sure. If Skjei is gone, I'd guess they'd protect DeAngelo and Hajek, provided that Hajek continues to progress.

Hajek will be interesting, it will take this season to make that call IMO, I remember last season @Steve Kournianos saying that if Hajek played at 75% of this (his little stint) consintantly, he would be a top pairing defenseman

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Im no Gm but I'd be dealing from a position of strength. Can you eventually deal TDA for an exempt forward and expose lindgren? Is it Hajek? Its still too early to call but I think the player we lose will be on the back end

IF the rules are the same as last time then yeah, you can cut a deal with Seattle to stay away from taking a player.

I mean they have to agree to it, but you can do it.

 

[Tawnos]

Thanks for the correction. I knew my number was too high, but didn't realize it was THAT high.

No problem. It seems crazy, but when you think about it... why should teams be able to protect much more than half their roster?

 

[brians1128]

2 years is a long time for this stuff. In two years, we might not care if we lose Howden in the expansion draft, but we did hang on to Strome, for example.

But yeah, I'd prefer to trade one of those 3 D than lose them for nothing. The problem is that a lot of teams will be in that situation.

Absolutely just was changing the discussion a bit in this thread..

 

[brians1128]

IF the rules are the same as last time then yeah, you can cut a deal with Seattle to stay away from taking a player.

I mean they have to agree to it, but you can do it.

I think as it gets closer this will become more and more important

 

[I Eat Crow]

Don't know what Chicago is thinking here on the surface.

Last time they took on a reclamation project in Strome, it worked out for them. We'll see.

 

[Tawnos]

I think as it gets closer this will become more and more important

We're going to see a bunch of UFA signings next offseason for 2 years that would normally be just for one, just teams making sure they have someone to expose.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Don't know what Chicago is thinking here on the surface.

Last time they took on a reclamation project in Strome, it worked out for them. We'll see.

Strome at least put up numbers in the AHL and they were able to pair him with a guy he had had success with previously (even if it was in the OHL). Nylander has been a pretty massive disappointment and they moved a pretty valuable piece to get him.

 

[SA16]

Strome at least put up numbers in the AHL and they were able to pair him with a guy he had had success with previously (even if it was in the OHL). Nylander has been a pretty massive disappointment and they moved a pretty valuable piece to get him.

Yea Strome was never a bust. He was great in the AHL and for some reason Arizona never gave him a chance in an offensive role. Nylander, on the other hand, has been rather awful in the AHL and even his European products lags far behind his brother.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Dahlin, Johnson, Jokiharju, Miller and Montour is a nice core of D.

 

[haohmaru]

Thread title: "Quit Staaling and retire already"