Confirmed with Link: [TBL/CHI] Lightning trade two 1st rd picks, Raddysh, and Katchouk for Brandon Hagel, and two 4th rd picks

[Rschmitz]

I think we will have to wait and see how well he gets in close. If he's still battling in there, well, those are the guys we need. Because even though those soft spots disappear, that's still where the majority of goals are scored in the playoffs. I remember Yanni Gourde looking pretty terrible in his first couple of runs, but then he figured it out in 2020. He didn't score the lights out or anything, and neither will Hagel, but 5+ goals on a lengthy run would, IMO, be good.

To me, Cirelli is still a guy we're waiting for to "figure it out" in the playoffs. He was just okay, IMO, last year, and one of our worst forwards the year before.

So I just think we should wait and see. Maybe Hagel gets bullied in the playoffs, but there's also a chance he can dart in like a Brayden Point and get his stick on a puck before somebody wraps him up. Or maybe he's strong enough to be more of a Killorn type up there. All I'm really saying is, even if those dirty areas get even dirtier in the playoffs, I would rather take a chance on a guy who scores in those areas than a guy who doesn't. Perimeter scorers tend to disappear entirely come playoff time (with exceptions, of course... Kucherov).

He doesn’t have the speed/stickhandling of Point or the size and the ability to play in a box like Killer though, I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect him to grow into that. Gourde is a good comparison minus the “pest” factor, a non-complimentary comparison would be Conacher with more speed.

I agree, would rather have a high effort guy willing to pay the price in front of the net, but I thought there were cheaper choices or better fits like Crouse or Puljujarvi. Just saying I am on the fence, way too many people liking the trade just because of the strategy or because we are going for it, not enough analyzing the opportunity cost of using the assets on someone else. Perhaps Hagel was the only guy available, or perhaps JBB just really likes him. I guess that will be revealed in time too.

 

[BoltzManConstant]

He doesn’t have the speed/stickhandling of Point or the size and the ability to play in a box like Killer though, I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect him to grow into that. Gourde is a good comparison minus the “pest” factor, a non-complimentary comparison would be Conacher with more speed.

I agree, would rather have a high effort guy willing to pay the price in front of the net, but I thought there were cheaper choices or better fits like Crouse or Puljujarvi. Just saying I am on the fence, way too many people liking the trade just because of the strategy or because we are going for it, not enough analyzing the opportunity cost of using the assets on someone else. Perhaps Hagel was the only guy available, or perhaps JBB just really likes him. I guess that will be revealed in time too.

Agree that people are overrating Hagel here, but he's a significant bargain relative to his cap hit, unlike Katchouk and Raddysh, who were worth what they were getting paid. And swapping Hagel into the lineup for Raddysh makes us a fair bit better on paper; hopefully by the playoffs he'll have had enough time to integrate into the team so that shows up on the ice as well.

But that's not why we made this particular move. Our cap crunch runs through summer 2024 when Stammer's contract ends. Hagel is a bargain over that entire period, whereas Crouse and Puljujarvi's contracts end with this season. That perfect fit makes him that much more valuable to us. We're desperate for bargains in each of those years, and now we've got a guy who's a bargain in all of them.

If you wanted a pure rental, then yes we could have gotten more for less. But that approach is shortsighted, and hasn't worked out for us in the past (see, e.g. Savard vs Coleman&Goodrow). It takes time to get guys up to speed -- heck, who knows whether Coleman & Goodrow would've panned out in the 2020 playoffs if not for the pause and restart. They were incredibly valuable to us all of the 2021 season, though.

Trading away picks costs us literally nothing at the NHL level over this and the next two seasons, when our resource constraints are at their tightest. After that, we'll have room to make moves for free agents, etc. Medium-term thinking is my favorite thinking (long enough that it's not subject to the vagaries and randomness of just one season, short enough that you're not falling into the trap of making "projections" that are really just wishes and hopes), so I think it's a solid move. If we could've spent less on him, I'd call it a great move -- but Chicago's GM did a good job, extracted full value from us.

 

[Rschmitz]

Agree that people are overrating Hagel here, but he's a significant bargain relative to his cap hit, unlike Katchouk and Raddysh, who were worth what they were getting paid. And swapping Hagel into the lineup for Raddysh makes us a fair bit better on paper; hopefully by the playoffs he'll have had enough time to integrate into the team so that shows up on the ice as well.

But that's not why we made this particular move. Our cap crunch runs through summer 2024 when Stammer's contract ends. Hagel is a bargain over that entire period, whereas Crouse and Puljujarvi's contracts end with this season. That perfect fit makes him that much more valuable to us. We're desperate for bargains in each of those years, and now we've got a guy who's a bargain in all of them.

If you wanted a pure rental, then yes we could have gotten more for less. But that approach is shortsighted, and hasn't worked out for us in the past (see, e.g. Savard vs Coleman&Goodrow). It takes time to get guys up to speed -- heck, who knows whether Coleman & Goodrow would've panned out in the 2020 playoffs if not for the pause and restart. They were incredibly valuable to us all of the 2021 season, though.

Trading away picks costs us literally nothing at the NHL level over this and the next two seasons, when our resource constraints are at their tightest. After that, we'll have room to make moves for free agents, etc. Medium-term thinking is my favorite thinking (long enough that it's not subject to the vagaries and randomness of just one season, short enough that you're not falling into the trap of making "projections" that are really just wishes and hopes), so I think it's a solid move. If we could've spent less on him, I'd call it a great move -- but Chicago's GM did a good job, extracted full value from us.

Crouse and Puljujarvi are both RFA's at the end of this year though, not rentals, they aren't going to make significantly more than Hagel on their new contracts. Those are just two examples off the top of my head, there are more. I'm not questioning the type of deal, just asking aloud if this deal in particular was the one to make when we'll be picking up breadcrumbs for the next 3 years to try and fill any holes we may have. Guess we'll find out

 

[BoltzManConstant]

Crouse and Puljujarvi are both RFA's at the end of this year though, not rentals, they aren't going to make significantly more than Hagel on their new contracts. Those are just two examples off the top of my head, there are more. I'm not questioning the type of deal, just asking aloud if this deal in particular was the one to make when we'll be picking up breadcrumbs for the next 3 years to try and fill any holes we may have. Guess we'll find out

We don't need bodies, we need bargains (from a cap hit standpoint). Puljujarvi and Crouse are due for new contracts, so they're not going to be bargains. Hagel will be a bargain for two more years.

I didn't say those two are rentals -- if we wanted a pure rental we could've found someone who's better on paper this year than Hagel for less than we spent on Hagel. But that wasn't the move.

I don't get what you mean by "picking up breadcrumb for the next 3 years to try and fill holes" -- the Hagel deal was specifically a play to fill those exact holes. Somewhere between one and two of the first round picks we spent were to get a quality guy for cheap for the extra two years, as compared to a rental.

If your concern is with losing Katchouk and Raddysh, I wouldn't worry about it. We've got enough replacement-level guys in Syracuse that we're not going to miss them.

But yeah, there will presumably be other deals to compare this against by the time the deadline hits tomorrow. So far, there's not one I would've chosen over this move. Like, we could've got Jarnkrok for a lot less -- probably Raddysh & Katchouk and a 2nd or so. And I'd feel better in the playoffs with him than with Raddysh in the lineup (though not as good as with Hagel), but that does nothing for us over the next two years.

 

[DFC]

He doesn’t have the speed/stickhandling of Point or the size and the ability to play in a box like Killer though, I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect him to grow into that. Gourde is a good comparison minus the “pest” factor, a non-complimentary comparison would be Conacher with more speed.

I agree, would rather have a high effort guy willing to pay the price in front of the net, but I thought there were cheaper choices or better fits like Crouse or Puljujarvi. Just saying I am on the fence, way too many people liking the trade just because of the strategy or because we are going for it, not enough analyzing the opportunity cost of using the assets on someone else. Perhaps Hagel was the only guy available, or perhaps JBB just really likes him. I guess that will be revealed in time too.

I used Point for the speed, but nobody's expecting 14 goals. But 5-7? That's Gourde range, and I think that's achievable. And for a guy making 1.5, I feel like that would be great value. If he can do it for three years, it's worth the price we paid.

 

[Rschmitz]

We don't need bodies, we need bargains (from a cap hit standpoint). Puljujarvi and Crouse are due for new contracts, so they're not going to be bargains. Hagel will be a bargain for two more years.

I didn't say those two are rentals -- if we wanted a pure rental we could've found someone who's better on paper this year than Hagel for less than we spent on Hagel. But that wasn't the move.

I don't get what you mean by "picking up breadcrumb for the next 3 years to try and fill holes" -- the Hagel deal was specifically a play to fill those exact holes. Somewhere between one and two of the first round picks we spent were to get a quality guy for cheap for the extra two years, as compared to a rental.

If your concern is with losing Katchouk and Raddysh, I wouldn't worry about it. We've got enough replacement-level guys in Syracuse that we're not going to miss them.

But yeah, there will presumably be other deals to compare this against by the time the deadline hits tomorrow. So far, there's not one I would've chosen over this move. Like, we could've got Jarnkrok for a lot less -- probably Raddysh & Katchouk and a 2nd or so. And I'd feel better in the playoffs with him than with Raddysh in the lineup (though not as good as with Hagel), but that does nothing for us over the next two years.

They aren't going to cost significantly more than the 1.5 Hagel is making, it's also much easier for us to sell guys to come here and win cups and play with the talent.

I'm not doing the "look at that amazing deal we missed out in hindsight" card while playing armchair GM, what I mean is that we are going to have bigger holes to fill over the next three years than third line energy winger. I don't even know if that is our biggest hole right now, the health of our defense isn't great.

Your Jarnkrok example is actually a good one, we just don't agree. Some immediate help now in the short term for a lot less, you're getting a guy who has a lot of NHL experience and more of a sure thing. What we gave up is a huge commitment for someone who doesn't have a ton of NHL experience, you really have to believe not only that he can maintain his play and improve away from his linemates in Chicago but that we aren't going to need to fill other holes along the way.

 

[Rschmitz]

I used Point for the speed, but nobody's expecting 14 goals. But 5-7? That's Gourde range, and I think that's achievable. And for a guy making 1.5, I feel like that would be great value. If he can do it for three years, it's worth the price we paid.

I'll take the under, if he's playing the same role as Gourde.

He seen decent PP time in Chicago and his most frequent linemates were Toews and Kane, he shouldn't get that here. If he scores 5-7 with Bellamare and Perry as his linemates I'll be happy.

 

[BoltzManConstant]

They aren't going to cost significantly more than the 1.5 Hagel is making, it's also much easier for us to sell guys to come here and win cups and play with the talent.

I'm not doing the "look at that amazing deal we missed out in hindsight" card while playing armchair GM, what I mean is that we are going to have bigger holes to fill over the next three years than third line energy winger. I don't even know if that is our biggest hole right now, the health of our defense isn't great.

Your Jarnkrok example is actually a good one, we just don't agree. Some immediate help now in the short term for a lot less, you're getting a guy who has a lot of NHL experience and more of a sure thing. What we gave up is a huge commitment for someone who doesn't have a ton of NHL experience, you really have to believe not only that he can maintain his play and improve away from his linemates in Chicago but that we aren't going to need to fill other holes along the way.

We're going to be losing (to free agency or trade) one of Killer or Palat this offseason. Replacing that with Hagel is a small to mid downgrade with a $3m-$4m cap savings. Most of that goes to Pointer's raise ($2.75m), but some of it can go to a raise to Joseph and to Rutta if necessary (I'm not convinced he'll get more than his current $1.2m, but people here think he's worth $2m or more). There will also be $1m from the cap going up, so we should have some money left over.

That gives us a pretty equivalent roster to the one we started with this year. The D corps would be identical. We'd have Vasy and some cheapo backup. The forwards would be identical save for Hagel swapping in for Palat or Killorn and two guys from Syracuse (e.g. ABB & Smith) swapping in for Raddysh and Katchouk. But actually with the money left over we can probably do better than one of those Syracuse guys, likely an aging vet willing to take a

The year after is where stuff gets really spicy, with raises for Cirelli, Serg and Cernak. Seems unlikely we can fit them all in without losing something. But again, a strong middle 6 guy at only $1.5m per is exactly the kind of thing that'll help us get through that.

Jarnkrok doesn't give us any of that, in addition to just not being as good as Hagel this year.

 

[Rschmitz]

We're going to be losing (to free agency or trade) one of Killer or Palat this offseason. Replacing that with Hagel is a small to mid downgrade with a $3m-$4m cap savings. Most of that goes to Pointer's raise ($2.75m), but some of it can go to a raise to Joseph and to Rutta if necessary (I'm not convinced he'll get more than his current $1.2m, but people here think he's worth $2m or more). There will also be $1m from the cap going up, so we should have some money left over.

That gives us a pretty equivalent roster to the one we started with this year. The D corps would be identical. We'd have Vasy and some cheapo backup. The forwards would be identical save for Hagel swapping in for Palat or Killorn and two guys from Syracuse (e.g. ABB & Smith) swapping in for Raddysh and Katchouk. But actually with the money left over we can probably do better than one of those Syracuse guys, likely an aging vet willing to take a

The year after is where stuff gets really spicy, with raises for Cirelli, Serg and Cernak. Seems unlikely we can fit them all in without losing something. But again, a strong middle 6 guy at only $1.5m per is exactly the kind of thing that'll help us get through that.

Jarnkrok doesn't give us any of that, in addition to just not being as good as Hagel this year.

You don't think we could find a productive tweener forward who wants to come here for <2million this offseason? We didn't have to invest all our meaningful draft capital to find cheap production. We signed two really good ones that came for 1 mill and they didn't need to play with Toews and Kane to make a difference. Surprising to me how many are handwaving his unsustainable shot% over just ~110 NHL games. Let's hope the scouts did their jobs

 

[TheDaysOf 04]

 

[LeafLoyalist]

I think we will have to wait and see how well he gets in close. If he's still battling in there, well, those are the guys we need. Because even though those soft spots disappear, that's still where the majority of goals are scored in the playoffs. I remember Yanni Gourde looking pretty terrible in his first couple of runs, but then he figured it out in 2020. He didn't score the lights out or anything, and neither will Hagel, but 5+ goals on a lengthy run would, IMO, be good.

To me, Cirelli is still a guy we're waiting for to "figure it out" in the playoffs. He was just okay, IMO, last year, and one of our worst forwards the year before.

So I just think we should wait and see. Maybe Hagel gets bullied in the playoffs, but there's also a chance he can dart in like a Brayden Point and get his stick on a puck before somebody wraps him up. Or maybe he's strong enough to be more of a Killorn type up there. All I'm really saying is, even if those dirty areas get even dirtier in the playoffs, I would rather take a chance on a guy who scores in those areas than a guy who doesn't. Perimeter scorers tend to disappear entirely come playoff time (with exceptions, of course... Kucherov).

Just curious on this comment about Cirelli, I hope you are not one of those fans that only look at 2 stats..."G" & "A", although important there are certain players that you need for a Cup run, to say that Cirelli is still a guy figuring it out in the playoffs, is absurd given the average ice time he gets in the playoffs, 17-18 mins a night and + if OT, and some of the hardest minutes, not easy PP time. I'm sure your coach John Cooper would agree with your comment (sarcasm) if he keeps tapping his shoulder. If you would ask 32 GM's in the NHL if they would want Cirelli on there team for playoff run, i'm certain 32 out of 32 would say YES....Toronto would take him in a heart beat. Yes he doesn't get on the board as frequently as some of the stars, he does the dirty work that the stars don't want to do, and he scores big goals when needed.

 

[BoltzManConstant]

You don't think we could find a productive tweener forward who wants to come here for <2million this offseason? We didn't have to invest all our meaningful draft capital to find cheap production. We signed two really good ones that came for 1 mill and they didn't need to play with Toews and Kane to make a difference. Surprising to me how many are handwaving his unsustainable shot% over just ~110 NHL games. Let's hope the scouts did their jobs

Your argument boils down to a belief that Hagel brings the same value as a guy earning $1.5m on an open market contract.

If that's your position, then of course it's an overpay. But it's wrong. He would get way more than that.

And he brings more to the table than either Perry or Bellemare. Significantly more than Bellemare, who's worth his contract. Perry has outplayed his contract (but the dude is 36, part of his reduced cost is in bearing the risk that he could fall apart at any time).

 

[Rschmitz]

Your argument boils down to a belief that Hagel brings the same value as a guy earning $1.5m on an open market contract.

If that's your position, then of course it's an overpay. But it's wrong. He would get way more than that.

And he brings more to the table than either Perry or Bellemare. Significantly more than Bellemare, who's worth his contract. Perry has outplayed his contract (but the dude is 36, part of his reduced cost is in bearing the risk that he could fall apart at any time).

It wasn’t. My point is that you can fill holes with cheap but productive talent, it doesn’t have to be Hagel level. We have to be more selective of the holes we fill than in prior years, and I am concerned of our ability to do that now.

The deal could end up being fine for us, just saying that if this was a deal for next year or the year after, JBB now has to find a way to get some assets back down the road to fill the bigger holes that come up.

 

[Zwui21]

 

[DFC]

Just curious on this comment about Cirelli, I hope you are not one of those fans that only look at 2 stats..."G" & "A", although important there are certain players that you need for a Cup run, to say that Cirelli is still a guy figuring it out in the playoffs, is absurd given the average ice time he gets in the playoffs, 17-18 mins a night and + if OT, and some of the hardest minutes, not easy PP time. I'm sure your coach John Cooper would agree with your comment (sarcasm) if he keeps tapping his shoulder. If you would ask 32 GM's in the NHL if they would want Cirelli on there team for playoff run, i'm certain 32 out of 32 would say YES....Toronto would take him in a heart beat. Yes he doesn't get on the board as frequently as some of the stars, he does the dirty work that the stars don't want to do, and he scores big goals when needed.

Cirelli is a go to guy in the regular season. But he hasn't figured out how to maintain his level of play in the post season. To the point that we are often wondering if he's injured. He will get his minutes from Coop because Coop goes with the guys who have earned his trust. It's not really that he's been bad anyway. He just doesnt have the same impact. He's not putting up big points this season, but he's been fine. The playoffs are a different thing. He's been a little better than a warm body most nights.

 

[Rschmitz]

Just curious on this comment about Cirelli, I hope you are not one of those fans that only look at 2 stats..."G" & "A", although important there are certain players that you need for a Cup run, to say that Cirelli is still a guy figuring it out in the playoffs, is absurd given the average ice time he gets in the playoffs, 17-18 mins a night and + if OT, and some of the hardest minutes, not easy PP time. I'm sure your coach John Cooper would agree with your comment (sarcasm) if he keeps tapping his shoulder. If you would ask 32 GM's in the NHL if they would want Cirelli on there team for playoff run, i'm certain 32 out of 32 would say YES....Toronto would take him in a heart beat. Yes he doesn't get on the board as frequently as some of the stars, he does the dirty work that the stars don't want to do, and he scores big goals when needed.

DFC is one of the more intelligent fans here and gives measured responses. I think you are being hypersensitive to the nuance he is providing on Cirelli, which is that he hasn't performed to his capabilities in the postseason. I don't think you'll find a Lightning fan who disagrees with that assessment.

It's weird, because his style of play should make him that much better in the tight checking games where space is limited.

 

[LeafLoyalist]

Cirelli is a go to guy in the regular season. But he hasn't figured out how to maintain his level of play in the post season. To the point that we are often wondering if he's injured. He will get his minutes from Coop because Coop goes with the guys who have earned his trust. It's not really that he's been bad anyway. He just doesnt have the same impact. He's not putting up big points this season, but he's been fine. The playoffs are a different thing. He's been a little better than a warm body most nights.

Playoffs are a completely different game, if you are not a main staple on a top PP it's difficult to put up points anywhere near the level of the regular season. Your comment 'coop goes with the guys that have EARNED his trust', from what I know of Cirelli he is the type of player that does all the little things right, focuses on the defensive side of the puck, as a fan that relates to boring hockey. If Coop (one of the best coaches in the NHL, and back to back Cup champion) trusts this player, then I would have to believe he has figured it out in the playoffs. When you are so focused on defensive play you tend to give up the risky plays that may turn into good scoring chances, that's just the way it is. I understand your perspective we all want every single player on our team to perform like stars, but that's not possible...my slight nuance is to the label that he is 'still figuring it out', not sure that it's a true statement, you said it yourself...he has earned coops trust, so that is 'figuring it out'....it's 2 stanley cup championships, not sure your coach would continue to play someone 17-18 mins on a cup champion team that is trying to 'figure it out'. I've watched Cirelli since the Oshawa days and never has he ever seemed to try to figure things out, he just always made an impact no matter what, whether he had a minor injury or not.

 

[LeafLoyalist]

DFC is one of the more intelligent fans here and gives measured responses. I think you are being hypersensitive to the nuance he is providing on Cirelli, which is that he hasn't performed to his capabilities in the postseason. I don't think you'll find a Lightning fan who disagrees with that assessment.

It's weird, because his style of play should make him that much better in the tight checking games where space is limited.

I can understand that assessment, playoffs are a different game though, tighter checking, more focus on the defensive strategy, and cirelli is more defensive than offensive.

 

[DFC]

Playoffs are a completely different game, if you are not a main staple on a top PP it's difficult to put up points anywhere near the level of the regular season. Your comment 'coop goes with the guys that have EARNED his trust', from what I know of Cirelli he is the type of player that does all the little things right, focuses on the defensive side of the puck, as a fan that relates to boring hockey. If Coop (one of the best coaches in the NHL, and back to back Cup champion) trusts this player, then I would have to believe he has figured it out in the playoffs. When you are so focused on defensive play you tend to give up the risky plays that may turn into good scoring chances, that's just the way it is. I understand your perspective we all want every single player on our team to perform like stars, but that's not possible...my slight nuance is to the label that he is 'still figuring it out', not sure that it's a true statement, you said it yourself...he has earned coops trust, so that is 'figuring it out'....it's 2 stanley cup championships, not sure your coach would continue to play someone 17-18 mins on a cup champion team that is trying to 'figure it out'. I've watched Cirelli since the Oshawa days and never has he ever seemed to try to figure things out, he just always made an impact no matter what, whether he had a minor injury or not.

Nobody complained about Gourde. Cirelli just wasnt as effective.

I'm also not saying teams wouldn't want him. I'm saying he hasn't really found his game in the playoffs the way we have seen other guys find theirs over time. It's one of the reasons I'm hopeful about our future, because if a guy like Cirelli becomes our 4th or 5th best forward, the way he is in the regular season, it compensates for losses.

 

[DFC]

DFC is one of the more intelligent fans here and gives measured responses. I think you are being hypersensitive to the nuance he is providing on Cirelli, which is that he hasn't performed to his capabilities in the postseason. I don't think you'll find a Lightning fan who disagrees with that assessment.

It's weird, because his style of play should make him that much better in the tight checking games where space is limited.

I think it might be a strength thing. We saw Gourde struggle for a couple of seasons before becoming the best version of himself in the two runs (despite not a lot of points). Its just a different level of battling for space that guys have to figure out how to do.

Cirelli is still like 24. I'm not saying he's a guy who will never be a big factor in the playoffs. I am saying he doesnt seem to have figured it out yet.

 

[Whoshattenkirkshoes]

Cirelli is a go to guy in the regular season. But he hasn't figured out how to maintain his level of play in the post season. To the point that we are often wondering if he's injured. He will get his minutes from Coop because Coop goes with the guys who have earned his trust. It's not really that he's been bad anyway. He just doesnt have the same impact. He's not putting up big points this season, but he's been fine. The playoffs are a different thing. He's been a little better than a warm body most nights.

I will say one thing that I believe attributes to it and that is the line combos. Multiple times last year Tony shined playing with Goodrow. He struggles playing with skill players like Tyler Johnson and Stamkos.

 

[LeafLoyalist]

I will say one thing that I believe attributes to it and that is the line combos. Multiple times last year Tony shined playing with Goodrow. He struggles playing with skill players like Tyler Johnson and Stamkos.

Valid point, linemates obviously make a big difference in a players mind set and performance. From what i understand Cirelli has been playing alot with Killorn, a very similar type player, puck possession and grind game, hard to see him fit with Johnson, who was not the same Johnson past couple years. There is also a valid point made by earlier post of his age, still a fairly young player that has played alot of hockey, with his style of game it takes it toll on the body and with the 2 short off seasons Tampa hasn't had much time to recover. Tampa has been leaking lately, a team that has played the most hockey over past 2 years. Going to be an entertaining last few weeks of the season, regardless the Atlantic looks tough, and I'm sure Tampa will still be a legit contender when playoffs start, best of luck rest of the season.

 

[Zwui21]

I will say one thing that I believe attributes to it and that is the line combos. Multiple times last year Tony shined playing with Goodrow. He struggles playing with skill players like Tyler Johnson and Stamkos.

Yup I think those lines need some fine tuning.
Personally I could see a case where we put Hagel on the second line and Cirelli on the third line.
Stammer needs someone to set him up and someone he can set up, Hagel is offensively more gifted than Cirelli IMO, especially the current version of Cirelli we are seeing.
This would also allow Stammer to play C instead of wing, something it's known he likes more.

 

[NatoGhost]

Cirelli seemed a couple of steps behind after the covid break and never fully caught up during the bubble. It was pretty much agreed by Lightning fans. Hard to say why for sure but maybe being out of playing shape just hit him worse. That was the one of the 2 playoffs were referring to. Last year's he was better if I recall correctly but didn't particularly shine either.

 

[Whoshattenkirkshoes]

Cirelli seemed a couple of steps behind after the covid break and never fully caught up during the bubble. It was pretty much agreed by Lightning fans. Hard to say why for sure but maybe being out of playing shape just hit him worse. That was the one of the 2 playoffs were referring to. Last year's he was better if I recall correctly but didn't particularly shine either.

He cant play with players like Stammer, yet Coop shoved it down his throat all season long.

Do you guys remember how bad Gourde was before the "3rd" line? It's all about putting these guys in ideal situations, but yes Cirelli came out of the covid break looking really slow