Proposal: Trade ideas

Flat Ronnie

Registered User
Feb 11, 2014
5,581
2,976
Where does that notion come from? He's actually not, he's far from a two way center and isn't as good as Stamkos offensively, Duchene would be a good 2nd line center but all he does is offer more of what we already have, Stamkos brings something different.

Yeah he isn't interchangeable because he's clearly the #1 center....

Palat can play with anyone without a drop in performance? hmm.... 13 points in 29 games, Drouin 13 points in 21 games, Duchene 18 points in 23 games, it's hilarious that Stamkos is still outscoring all of them while missing 45% of the season so far. Palat and Drouin have combined for 6 more points and 1 more goal in 33 more games played than Stamkos, let that sink in for sec.

This^
 

tjs*

Registered User
Mar 18, 2016
2,103
0
As a Blues fan a Shattenkirk for Johnson deal sounds great. Adding conditional picks isn't a big deal either. It sounded like Lebrun was playing matchmaker and wanted Yzerman and Armstrong to just kiss already on TSN.

I'd say: Shattenkirk plus conditional 1st round pick (if he doesn't resign) for Tyler Johnson.

Horrible deal for Tampa considering Shattenkirk's a UFA and Johnson an RFA, or that with Stamkos's tendency to get injured Johnson is effectively our 1C a good portion of the time. TJ's having a rough year but he's a beast in the playoffs and his value both in a vacuum and to the Lightning is far greater than a few months of a rental and possibly a low first round pick. If we really want Shattenkirk we can make a play for him in the summer without giving up our de facto 1C.
 

RegularSznAllStars

Registered User
Sep 23, 2014
1,996
805
Horrible deal for Tampa considering Shattenkirk's a UFA and Johnson an RFA, or that with Stamkos's tendency to get injured Johnson is effectively our 1C a good portion of the time. TJ's having a rough year but he's a beast in the playoffs and his value both in a vacuum and to the Lightning is far greater than a few months of a rental and possibly a low first round pick. If we really want Shattenkirk we can make a play for him in the summer without giving up our de facto 1C.

We would be in deep **** without Johnson as our number 2 center. He isnt putting up points right now, but no one who can take his spot has potential to do that.
 

Jesus comma Brodin

Effing Norris-Byng Brodin
Feb 22, 2013
7,612
3,086
Minnesota
Hey all, MN Wild fan here.. Have read a bit that ya'll are looking for another top 4 defensemen possibly by the deadline, Scandella/Dumba enticing at all? At what cost? We would be looking for top 6 winger...
 

LTIR Trickery

Plz stop pucks
Jun 27, 2007
23,875
2,684
Scrip Club
I see we've officially hit our time of year where the problem is Hedman is "soft" and we're just not "tough enough" or "too easy to play against".
 

Flat Ronnie

Registered User
Feb 11, 2014
5,581
2,976
I see we've officially hit our time of year where the problem is Hedman is "soft" and we're just not "tough enough" or "too easy to play against".

Well, we are definitely easy to play against physically.

However, Hedman is the last person we need to worry about. He doesn't have to be tough since he gives us everything else.
 

LTIR Trickery

Plz stop pucks
Jun 27, 2007
23,875
2,684
Scrip Club
Well, we are definitely easy to play against physically.

However, Hedman is the last person we need to worry about. He doesn't have to be tough since he gives us everything else.

If toughness won games, we'd have been swept by the Isles in the playoffs last year. Otherwise yes, I agree on Hedman.

It is a bad argument, if we're playing the way we have (possession over 52%) we have teams running, tired, and trying to outhit us. I still have to look at the numbers, but it feels an awful lot like our zone exits are bad, but our zone entries are actually not bad.

Real truth is we have a LOT of underachievers this year and a hole that needs to be filled defensively. I'm not sure how to approach the offense just yet, you want to find someone to harp on, but there are just so many issues offensively that I also believe are an extension of tired forwards (and lack of zone exits, added responsibility) that i'm looking at nearly everyone a bit confused. Also read that Iginla will waive at the deadline, and I wouldn't be shocked if Steve kicks the tires.
 

Flat Ronnie

Registered User
Feb 11, 2014
5,581
2,976
If toughness won games, we'd have been swept by the Isles in the playoffs last year. Otherwise yes, I agree on Hedman.

It is a bad argument, if we're playing the way we have (possession over 52%) we have teams running, tired, and trying to outhit us. I still have to look at the numbers, but it feels an awful lot like our zone exits are bad, but our zone entries are actually not bad.

Real truth is we have a LOT of underachievers this year and a hole that needs to be filled defensively. I'm not sure how to approach the offense just yet, you want to find someone to harp on, but there are just so many issues offensively that I also believe are an extension of tired forwards (and lack of zone exits, added responsibility) that i'm looking at nearly everyone a bit confused. Also read that Iginla will waive at the deadline, and I wouldn't be shocked if Steve kicks the tires.

What could Iginla bring to us other than veteran leadership? Dudes pretty washed up at this point.
 

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
29,114
18,212
Replacing Garrison with Scandella (26 yrs old LHD with 3 more years at 4m) would be perfect...
 

Jesus comma Brodin

Effing Norris-Byng Brodin
Feb 22, 2013
7,612
3,086
Minnesota
Replacing Garrison with Scandella (26 yrs old LHD with 3 more years at 4m) would be perfect...

I doubt he would be enough for Johnson or especially Drouin... Looking for picks or what type of deal are you thinking?

(Sorry to waltz into your thread but I am curious)
 

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
29,114
18,212
I doubt he would be enough for Johnson or especially Drouin... Looking for picks or what type of deal are you thinking?

(Sorry to waltz into your thread but I am curious)

Not for Johnson or Palat, we'd have to shed salary and if wingers or forwards are what you're looking for Killorn, Namestnikov or Filppula would be first up. Yzerman doesn't deal for rentals but Scandella wouldn't be, so I think picks/prospects would be on the table.
 

Bolt 45

Registered User
Oct 19, 2015
1,598
819
Where does that notion come from? He's actually not, he's far from a two way center and isn't as good as Stamkos offensively, Duchene would be a good 2nd line center but all he does is offer more of what we already have, Stamkos brings something different.

Yeah he isn't interchangeable because he's clearly the #1 center....

Palat can play with anyone without a drop in performance? hmm.... 13 points in 29 games, Drouin 13 points in 21 games, Duchene 18 points in 23 games, it's hilarious that Stamkos is still outscoring all of them while missing 45% of the season so far. Palat and Drouin have combined for 6 more points and 1 more goal in 33 more games played than Stamkos, let that sink in for sec.

Palat's just playing poorly. Reuniting the Triplets didn't change that. If and/or when he finds his game it's not going to suddenly vanish whenever Coop shuffles the lines on him. Drouin shows up when he feels like it. Again, this happens whether he's playing on the first line or on the fourth line. Furthermore, neither Palat nor Drouin is making 8.5 mil per (2 of which should probably be going to Kuch).

Over the past few seasons Stamkos has "clearly" been our #1 center on paper. Johnson's been our #1 on the ice. Not even sure that's debatable, to be honest.

Duchene is a phenomenal two-way center if we're comparing him to Stamkos. He's more versatile, and plays with a lot more energy. You slap Stammer's C on his jersey and you let his play show your younger guys how it's done. I mean, you're right in that, ideally, you bring Duchene in without moving Stamkos... a rich-getting-richer Kessel to Pittsburgh type of move. But Stammer's new contract makes that pretty much impossible, and Denver's going to want something in return. And, no, they can't have Drouin.

Look, Stamkos is an elite sniper when the wind is blowing just right, and Venus is in retrograde, and he happens to have an elite playmaker who's selfless enough to feed him the puck, night-in and night-out for an entire season. But an elite playmaker, like Kuch, can make anyone look good. And in Kuch's case, he's probably going to get bored with snaking passes through a sea of people to a statue near the face off circle. So you bring in Duchene, and use that extra 2.5 million dollars to shore up the D.
 

Flat Ronnie

Registered User
Feb 11, 2014
5,581
2,976
Palat's just playing poorly. Reuniting the Triplets didn't change that. If and/or when he finds his game it's not going to suddenly vanish whenever Coop shuffles the lines on him. Drouin shows up when he feels like it. Again, this happens whether he's playing on the first line or on the fourth line. Furthermore, neither Palat nor Drouin is making 8.5 mil per (2 of which should probably be going to Kuch).

Over the past few seasons Stamkos has "clearly" been our #1 center on paper. Johnson's been our #1 on the ice. Not even sure that's debatable, to be honest.

Duchene is a phenomenal two-way center if we're comparing him to Stamkos. He's more versatile, and plays with a lot more energy. You slap Stammer's C on his jersey and you let his play show your younger guys how it's done. I mean, you're right in that, ideally, you bring Duchene in without moving Stamkos... a rich-getting-richer Kessel to Pittsburgh type of move. But Stammer's new contract makes that pretty much impossible, and Denver's going to want something in return. And, no, they can't have Drouin.

Look, Stamkos is an elite sniper when the wind is blowing just right, and Venus is in retrograde, and he happens to have an elite playmaker who's selfless enough to feed him the puck, night-in and night-out for an entire season. But an elite playmaker, like Kuch, can make anyone look good. And in Kuch's case, he's probably going to get bored with snaking passes through a sea of people to a statue near the face off circle. So you bring in Duchene, and use that extra 2.5 million dollars to shore up the D.

Where is this 'get rid of Stamkos' mindset coming from? The whole freakin offense fell apart when he went down - you think thats just a coincidence?

Also, Stamkos was racking up points before he was paired with Kuch. Dude has had to play with everyone on the team the past 3 years. He finds a way to put the puck in the net regardless.

You obviously haven't watched him play since about last Feb/Mar...great on the PK, limited his TOs, good backcheck, was setting up goals for linemates. Your Stamkos/TyJo analysis is from 2015.

Everyone thinks the player we don't have is better than Stamkos - just nutty. Stamkos and Kuch are the only two threats we have NIGHT IN AND NIGHT OUT. Why get rid of one for a "better two way player"? Do you see what's happening now with a bunch of two way players? Are you a glutton for punishment?
 
Last edited:

Bolt 45

Registered User
Oct 19, 2015
1,598
819
Where is this 'get rid of Stamkos' mindset coming from? The whole freakin offense fell apart when he went down - you think thats just a coincidence?

Also, Stamkos was racking up points before he was paired with Kuch. Dude has had to play with everyone on the team the past 3 years. He finds a way to put the puck in the net regardless.

You obviously haven't watched him play since about last Feb/Mar...great on the PK, limited his TOs, good backcheck, was setting up goals for linemates. Your Stamkos/TyJo analysis is from 2015.

Everyone thinks the player we don't have is better than Stamkos - just nutty. Stamkos and Kuch are the only two threats we have NIGHT IN AND NIGHT OUT. Why get rid of one for a "better two way player"? Do you see what's happening now with a bunch of two way players? Are you a glutton for punishment?

It is a coicidence, because nobody is scoring, including guys who never see ice time with Stamkos. This same exact team did just fine the last time he went down, if I recall. Was that a coincidence? That being said, I don't like that we have the exact same team that we did. Virtually everyone else in the East made moves and we did nothing. Hence this thread.

Racking up points? We're paying him to be THE guy, not to keep pace with the other guys. Great on the PK? You mean he jumped in on a couple of of 2-on-1s with Palat, an actual natural on the PK? Okay. Setting up goals for teammates? Kuch? There's a shocker. Good backcheck? I didn't really notice him, which, to be fair, probably bolsters your case. Limited TOs? It's embarrassing that this needs to be pointed out at all. It should be a given (and I'll refrain from pointing out a particularly embarrassing turnover early in the year against a particular player, no matter how ironic it is given the trade proposal we're debating).

Stamkos is underachieving would be my point. Why should he need a new 8.5 million dollar a year contract to work on his game? As an example, Ovechkin isn't anywhere close to the player he was when came into the league. He worked on improving his entire game while continuing to put up more goals than anyone else. If Stamkos worked half as hard to get his chances as Ovechkin does he'd be be potting 70 a year, every year. Seriously.

I don't necessarily think that "the player we don't have" is better than Stamkos. I just think that players we don't have could make our team better as a unit.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad