Roster Speculation 2015-16 Pt. III

[Sabretooth]

I think Girgs probably starts out as the top C over Larsson. I thought Larsson did fine there down the stretch, but it was a small sample size, and I still liked Girgs there better. I think we'll definitely see Kane and Ennis as the top line wingers. Moulson-Eichel-Larsson seems like a good bet for "2nd line". Moulson should shine with a Center like Eichel, but Larsson could also take Center responsibilities when needed if/when Eichel has some growing pains.

 

[FearTheBeard]

Hoffman, Zib, Stone


Any chance we can sing them to offersheets? Obviuosly not all three but can the Sens really sign all 3 if we toss decent sized money at one of them?

I would sign Zibs or Stone to a contract at $5,000,000 a year and Hoffman to one at $3,500,000


They wont let 2 of the three walk but I would imagine they wouldnt be able to make both and then sign the third.

Tim should just offer sheet all 3 at the same time and then look at Brian like this at the family reunion when he finds out

 

[My Cozen Dylan]

perhaps, but the cap is really not a factor for us for the next few years. Most of our better players are signed or on ELC's. 5 years from now is when we could run into cap casualties. I think you take a chance on him to see if he can show anything early on and get a trade. I hate the idea of paying someone to play for someone else.

It'll start becoming a factor next offseason when we need to re-up Risto and Girgs, then even more so each year following. $2M is too much for more than two years.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

agreed.

But there might be some middle ground.

Buffalo retains 800k (800k cap hit for 4 years - instead of the 8 years that they'd eat if they bought him out)

Arizona gets Hodgson at 3.45 million cap hit for 4 years)

3.45 million is really not a lot... especially for a team that has to hit the floor and is going to struggle to draw anyone in free agency

Good idea. I know 800k isn't a ton, especially in 8 years, but we might be in a really tight cap situation when we're ostensibly a great team in years 5-8, and that 800k could be the difference when trying to keep our version of Hammer or Hamilton.

 

[stokes84]

For a 6th Rounder like Gagner. Done deal for me.

Gagner had 37 points in 60ish games before his trade. And he was, amazingly, less of a defensive liability than Hodgson. Nobody is going to willingly let us out of jail for no reason. Maybe we could go CoHo + 3rd for a 7th. You are going to have to make it worth someone's time.

 

[flashsabre]

Yes, I'm assuming, especially based on Murray's comments, that Grigorenko is gone.

As for Kaleta, I don't want him either, but they've entered negotiations with him, and he is a decent 4th liner, so long as he plays clean.

I refuse to accept Larsson as a 1C in any scenario. Long term, he's a solid 3C IMO.

I think everyone sees Larsson as a good 3rd line centre but in a year when you are breaking in 18 and 19 year old centres someone needs to be there to shelter them until they are ready for the top 2 centre spots.

in a year when those two are ready for more responsibility then Larsson slides down the lineup. It works better than acquiring O'Reilly who you would have to find a place for somewhere else in the lineup a year from now at a $7 million a year clip. Larsson showed enough at the end of the year to indicate he can be a temp top centre until the others are ready during a transition year.

 

[My Cozen Dylan]

Gagner had 37 points in 60ish games before his trade. And he was, amazingly, less of a defensive liability than Hodgson. Nobody is going to willingly let us out of jail for no reason. Maybe we could go CoHo + 3rd for a 7th. You are going to have to make it worth someone's time.

Arizona is the only team I see taking a flyer, but I really disagree with that in general. A 6th is nothing. Despite the fact that people propose all the time on here the whole, "Add a high pick to a bad contract for a low pick" deal, it'll never be done in the real world because that's a GM admitting he's made a bad deal. Granted, Hodgson wasn't Murray's contract, but it makes more sense to just buy him out than to do what you're proposing.

 

[Jame]

I think Girgs probably starts out as the top C over Larsson. I thought Larsson did fine there down the stretch, but it was a small sample size, and I still liked Girgs there better. I think we'll definitely see Kane and Ennis as the top line wingers. Moulson-Eichel-Larsson seems like a good bet for "2nd line". Moulson should shine with a Center like Eichel, but Larsson could also take Center responsibilities when needed if/when Eichel has some growing pains.

the numbers say you should feel other wise. Both Ennis and Moulson were significantly better in every facet with Larsson as opposed to Girgensons

Ennis WITH Girgs
GF 1.75
GA 2.52
CF 37.07
CA 67.47

Ennis WITHOUT Girgs
GF 1.78
GA 2.17
CF 45.47
CA 71.90

Ennis WITH Larsson
GF 2.18
GA 1.09
CF 45.55
CA 63.33

Ennis WITHOUT Larsson
GF 1.66
GA 2.63
CF 40.53
CA 71.20

Moulson WITH Girgs
GF 2.19
GA 2.63
CF 39.74
CA 65.45

Moulson WITHOUT Girgs
GF 2.15
GA 2.15
CF 47.21
CA 66.77

Moulson WITH Larsson
GF 2.95
GA 1.48
CF 53.48
CA 62.34

Moulson WITHOUT Larsson
GF 1.99
GA 2.53
CF 42.25
CA 67.18

 

[My Cozen Dylan]

I think everyone sees Larsson as a good 3rd line centre but in a year when you are breaking in 18 and 19 year old centres someone needs to be there to shelter them until they are ready for the top 2 centre spots.

in a year when those two are ready for more responsibility then Larsson slides down the lineup. It works better than acquiring O'Reilly who you would have to find a place for somewhere else in the lineup a year from now at a $7 million a year clip. Larsson showed enough at the end of the year to indicate he can be a temp top centre until the others are ready during a transition year.

Too small of a sample size for Larsson IMO.

But I've said this a lot. I'm in the vast minority, but I don't agree with sheltering Eichel and Reinhart just because we can. IMO they'll be ready for the roles I've slotted them in.

 

[My Cozen Dylan]

the numbers say you should feel other wise. Both Ennis and Moulson were significantly better in every facet with Larsson as opposed to Girgensons

Ennis WITH Girgs
GF 1.75
GA 2.52
CF 37.07
CA 67.47

Ennis WITHOUT Girgs
GF 1.78
GA 2.17
CF 45.47
CA 71.90

Ennis WITH Larsson
GF 2.18
GA 1.09
CF 45.55
CA 63.33

Ennis WITHOUT Larsson
GF 1.66
GA 2.63
CF 40.53
CA 71.20

Moulson WITH Girgs
GF 2.19
GA 2.63
CF 39.74
CA 65.45

Moulson WITHOUT Girgs
GF 2.15
GA 2.15
CF 47.21
CA 66.77

Moulson WITH Larsson
GF 2.95
GA 1.48
CF 53.48
CA 62.34

Moulson WITHOUT Larsson
GF 1.99
GA 2.53
CF 42.25
CA 67.18

IMO any statistic from last season should be thrown out.

 

[Jame]

Gagner had 37 points in 60ish games before his trade. And he was, amazingly, less of a defensive liability than Hodgson. Nobody is going to willingly let us out of jail for no reason. Maybe we could go CoHo + 3rd for a 7th. You are going to have to make it worth someone's time.

team's are going to be capable of recognizing Hodgson's role, linemates, ice time last year, and the impact it has on production.

In a top 6 role, he had 78 points in 120 games the previous 2 seasons (0.65 pts per game or 53 pts per 82 games). We aren't going to get much in return, Nolan made sure of that, but to pretend a player 1 year removed from 44 in 72 at 24 yrs of age has NO value, is silly.

side bar: Why did Murray mention a possible buyout... maybe to drum up some value from a team that knows it has very little chance to sign him if he's bought out?

 

[Jame]

IMO any statistic from last season should be thrown out.

That's hillarious

 

[TehDoak]

Gagner had 37 points in 60ish games before his trade. And he was, amazingly, less of a defensive liability than Hodgson. Nobody is going to willingly let us out of jail for no reason. Maybe we could go CoHo + 3rd for a 7th. You are going to have to make it worth someone's time.

Hodgson had 44 points in 72 games in 13/14 on the worst offensive team in the league.

Hodgson knew this year was a write off, he knew the coach was an idiot, so he mailed it in. And he'll pay for that in a trade or a buyout. I have to think a 40-50 point winger locked up @ 3M per (with 25% retention) is going to interest a few teams.

Arizona just makes too much sense IMHO.

 

[FamilyGuy716]

I liked Regier's ability to win trades but he sure screwed up on Hodgson and Grigorenko. Should have done a bridge contract for Hodgson and not kept Grigorenko up past 9 games.

 

[FamilyGuy716]

the numbers say you should feel other wise. Both Ennis and Moulson were significantly better in every facet with Larsson as opposed to Girgensons

Ennis WITH Girgs
GF 1.75
GA 2.52
CF 37.07
CA 67.47

Ennis WITHOUT Girgs
GF 1.78
GA 2.17
CF 45.47
CA 71.90

Ennis WITH Larsson
GF 2.18
GA 1.09
CF 45.55
CA 63.33

Ennis WITHOUT Larsson
GF 1.66
GA 2.63
CF 40.53
CA 71.20

Moulson WITH Girgs
GF 2.19
GA 2.63
CF 39.74
CA 65.45

Moulson WITHOUT Girgs
GF 2.15
GA 2.15
CF 47.21
CA 66.77

Moulson WITH Larsson
GF 2.95
GA 1.48
CF 53.48
CA 62.34

Moulson WITHOUT Larsson
GF 1.99
GA 2.53
CF 42.25
CA 67.18

I still think they'll have Girgensons as the 1C but those numbers speak well for our future. Larsson is going to be a great player for us. It ultimately allows us to put Girgensons on the wing while Larsson is the center on the Selke line.

 

[Sabretooth]

the numbers say you should feel other wise. Both Ennis and Moulson were significantly better in every facet with Larsson as opposed to Girgensons

Ennis WITH Girgs
GF 1.75
GA 2.52
CF 37.07
CA 67.47

Ennis WITHOUT Girgs
GF 1.78
GA 2.17
CF 45.47
CA 71.90

Ennis WITH Larsson
GF 2.18
GA 1.09
CF 45.55
CA 63.33

Ennis WITHOUT Larsson
GF 1.66
GA 2.63
CF 40.53
CA 71.20

Moulson WITH Girgs
GF 2.19
GA 2.63
CF 39.74
CA 65.45

Moulson WITHOUT Girgs
GF 2.15
GA 2.15
CF 47.21
CA 66.77

Moulson WITH Larsson
GF 2.95
GA 1.48
CF 53.48
CA 62.34

Moulson WITHOUT Larsson
GF 1.99
GA 2.53
CF 42.25
CA 67.18

Which site do you get these stats from? I'd like to play around with some things.

 

[tmack224]

Tim should just offer sheet all 3 at the same time and then look at Brian like this at the family reunion when he finds out

After the way he went to the podium, didnt thank anyone, and drafted Reinhart like a boss. I could see him walking into the Family reunion, handing him a peice of paper with all 3 offers, saying "Checkmate"


Then leaving.

 

[Jame]

I liked Regier's ability to win trades but he sure screwed up on Hodgson and Grigorenko. Should have done a bridge contract for Hodgson and not kept Grigorenko up past 9 games.

The Hodgson contract looked fine last year, when he was playing in a role that the contract was given under.

I dont really view Hodgson's contract as an issue.

If a trade can't be found, put him on waivers. If someone claims him... fine. If no one does, he can go to Rochester and pile up points while rebuilding his trade value.

The only time the cap space becomes an issue is in the final two years of his deal. When he'll be 27 yrs old. Every team seems to find a way to get someone to take a bad contract. If his contract is still considered "untradeable", i'm sure we'll find a way...

 

[Jame]

Which site do you get these stats from? I'd like to play around with some things.

stats.hockeyanalysis.com

 

[gallagt01]

I like Larsson. I think he's going to be a very good player.

I also think there's a good chance he's traded this summer.

 

[Jame]

I still think they'll have Girgensons as the 1C but those numbers speak well for our future. Larsson is going to be a great player for us. It ultimately allows us to put Girgensons on the wing while Larsson is the center on the Selke line.

agreed.

Most people seem to think that Girgensons is the player that Larsson actually is

 

[Jame]

I like Larsson. I think he's going to be a very good player.

I also think there's a good chance he's traded this summer.

I agree. If Murray is looking to do something big, Larsson is going to be the piece that the other teams are realistically asking for.

 

[gallagt01]

I agree. If Murray is looking to do something big, Larsson is going to be the piece that the other teams are realistically asking for.

Yeah.

Would you move Larsson in a trade for an unsigned O'Reilly?

I'm not sure I would, though I've cooled on the idea of trading for an unsigned O'Reilly of late (adding great, prime-aged players in free agency is becoming obsolete and O'Reilly, being a year from FA, is going to reap the benefits and cash in big time next year -- I don't see him signing an extension for less than $8 million per anywhere he goes).

 

[Jame]

Yeah.

Would you move Larsson in a trade for an unsigned O'Reilly?

I'm not sure I would, though I've cooled on the idea of trading for an unsigned O'Reilly of late (adding great, prime-aged players in free agency is becoming obsolete and O'Reilly, being a year from FA, is going to reap the benefits and cash in big time next year).

No. I think Larsson is on his way to being Oreilly's equal. My lineup projections deploy him in the same way. He bridges the gap to young talent as a top 6 center... and then slides over to wing to support those young stud top centers as they take over the role. Ultimately, if development and roster building go as planned, he slides into the shutdown role, either as a center or shotgun winger

Would I trade Larsson in a big ass package for OEL? Yes.

 

[FamilyGuy716]

No. I think Larsson is on his way to being Oreilly's equal. My lineup projections deploy him in the same way. He bridges the gap to young talent as a top 6 center... and then slides over to wing to support those young stud top centers as they take over the role. Ultimately, if development and roster building go as planned, he slides into the shutdown role, either as a center or shotgun winger

Would I trade Larsson in a big ass package for OEL? Yes.

And there it is, the only reason we should give up Larsson, 21st OV 2015 and 2016 1st is OEL!