Speculation: Trouba to Boston for Krug (prospect and draft pick)

[Gm0ney]

I should clarify that the Leafs traded Kessel for picks...the first rounder was used to get Andersen. I think the Leafs were able to take advantage of the somewhat soft market for goalies. Perhaps your management can spot other market opportunities.

The market is always pretty soft for goalies. Andersen didn't come that cheap - a late 1st and a 2nd. Edmonton got Talbot for a 2nd and a 3rd. Jones was acquired by the Sharks for a late 1st and a prospect. Plus there are a number of decent UFAs on the market - Bishop, Elliott, Mason, Miller, Bernier, Fleury possibly.

More goalies than spots...supply outstrips demand and lowers prices.

 

[CaptainChef]

**** trading Trouba - do whatever it takes to get him signed this summer and be done with it. Anything else is just settling, and putting the franchise back a step. He's a #1D, and he's 23. Lock him up for 8 years.

Don't want Krug, prospect and a pick - I want to ****ing start winning. Way too much talent strewn throughout the line-up to take a step in the wrong direction.

Pretty easy to say that, and in fact I don't hear anybody on here arguing for trading rather than keeping him, but there's this little matter about him wanting to be here at all.

Is the solution to offer him a ridiculous amount (8 X 8 is on the verge of that), to see if he's really changed his mind. But, knowing him & his agent, that really won't accomplish anything desirable right now. In fact, I doubt they will even entertain offers this summer.

Next summer, maybe he'll be in that space where he'll consider a more than reasonable offer. For now, I'm not sure Chevy has a clear read on his desire to stay or go, and furthermore there may be no way to really sit down with them to determine that.

 

[Gm0ney]

Pretty easy to say that, and in fact I don't hear anybody on here arguing for trading rather than keeping him, but there's this little matter about him wanting to be here at all.

Is the solution to offer him a ridiculous amount (8 X 8 is on the verge of that), to see if he's really changed his mind. But, knowing him & his agent, that really won't accomplish anything desirable right now. In fact, I doubt they will even entertain offers this summer.

Next summer, maybe he'll be in that space where he'll consider a more than reasonable offer. For now, I'm not sure Chevy has a clear read on his desire to stay or go, and furthermore there may be no way to really sit down with them to determine that.

If Chevy calls up Trouba's agent this summer and says what do you want for 6, 7, 8 years and they don't want to talk about it at all? The read should be pretty clear.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

If Chevy calls up Trouba's agent this summer and says what do you want for 6, 7, 8 years and they don't want to talk about it at all? The read should be pretty clear.

Yep. Be ready to make the offer, but if they're still reluctant, then make your next move.

But do everything you can to sign the damned guy.

 

[CaptainChef]

I really don't think we get Trouba on an eight year deal. It doesn't make sense for someone as confident in his ability and with his agent not to maximize his contracts. IMO we go right to the face of arbitration with Trouba and get a 4-5 year deal at pretty close to UFA money. The price to pay for getting 2 years cheap on an RFA. Also sets Trouba up for the big UFA contract in his late 20's in the heart of his prime. IMO that will be the best possible outcome if Chevy is able to grind it out down to the wire.

I hear you, but by including those RFA years into a longer-term contract, he gets both security and guaranteed high annual pay.

So he's currently making ~3.0 for each of his next 2 years. Assuming he goes to arbitration for his last 2 RFA years, maybe he gets 4-5.0 for those. After that he's a UFA and presumably should be worth 8.0 or more a year.

Assuming he signs a 6 x 7.5 contract rather than going to arbitration. That's the equivalent of getting 5.0 X2 for his UFA years, and 8.75 x 4 for his first UFA years. Next contract comes due when he's ~31 -- still should be worth a lot for 5 years from there.

Another scenario is he signs a 8 X 8 contract going into arbitration. That's guaranteeing him ~9.0 for his first 6 UFA years, but he probably might be a little more challenged getting a decent follow-up contract at 33.

Personally, I see him taking a 4-5 year contract at 7-7.5 going into arbitration. Pays him well for those years, but still young enough to make a killing on his last contract if he is as good as he should be.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

How much less do you think his value would be at the trade deadline in 3 years time heading to UFA. You would get a Shattenkirk haul and two years to contend prior to. It took Chicago until it's second year to win a cup once they took their step forward. Even if we don't quite follow their model at least we make ourselves more attractive to other players if we start winning and open up more options. It also gives us some time to train a or acquire some potential replacements without taking a step back.

Also trading our elite assets imo is like starting over as as a franchise we take a step back which wastes more years of Scheifele's prime, the rest of Wheeler, Buff and Little's good years. You start trading our elite talent for lesser talent you might as well blow it up and start over again. I only trade Trouba for an equivilant player or an overpay. He doesn't want to sign then he can have fun making less money in arbitration the next few years.

2 years to contend. A 2 year rental. A Shattenkirk haul? A prospect, a very late first in a weak draft class and a 2nd 2 years from now is not much of a haul.

Chicago winning in the 2nd year of contention is just one instance. There are plenty of other instances of very good teams who never win a cup, or who win once after contending for years. How many cups do the Canucks have with the twins? The Capitals with Ovi?

To be able to plan on winning the cup you have to build a team and an organization that is capable of contending year after year and hope that everything falls into place for you at least once.

What we are talking about here is not a policy of forever trading our assets just before they start to pay off. It is one instance of maximizing the value of a player who doesn't want to be here.

You use Shattenkirk as an example. How much more might the Blues have got for him if they had traded him sooner? There was certainly a lot of talk last off-season. They chose to do what you are suggesting and they got peanuts. Meanwhile how many cups did they win while they had him?

I think everybody is a little too worried about a step back. Not that trading Trouba this year wouldn't be a step back. But it needn't be a big one. 1 year and then we are right back, maybe stronger. Yes we would lose a year of Wheeler, Buff, Little. Not ideal. Trouba wanting to leave would not be ideal. Ideal is signing him for 8 years. If he insists on leaving we are going to lose something no matter how we proceed. I think getting value for him now is the best way to minimize that loss.

If Trouba can't be satisfied here we are going to lose something, somewhere, somehow. There is no plan that can completely eliminate that.

 

[roccerfeller]

On the final jets 3 in 3, Lawless and orlesky both had convincing body language that no way was Chevy gonna trade trouba. Didn't even entertain exploring that option.

Obviously Chevy hasn't come out one way or another and explicitly said anything at least publicly, but perhaps Chevy indicated extending trouba is very high on the priority list to one or both of them in a more private setting

 

[ffh]

2 years to contend. A 2 year rental. A Shattenkirk haul? A prospect, a very late first in a weak draft class and a 2nd 2 years from now is not much of a haul.

Chicago winning in the 2nd year of contention is just one instance. There are plenty of other instances of very good teams who never win a cup, or who win once after contending for years. How many cups do the Canucks have with the twins? The Capitals with Ovi?

To be able to plan on winning the cup you have to build a team and an organization that is capable of contending year after year and hope that everything falls into place for you at least once.

What we are talking about here is not a policy of forever trading our assets just before they start to pay off. It is one instance of maximizing the value of a player who doesn't want to be here.

You use Shattenkirk as an example. How much more might the Blues have got for him if they had traded him sooner? There was certainly a lot of talk last off-season. They chose to do what you are suggesting and they got peanuts. Meanwhile how many cups did they win while they had him?

I think everybody is a little too worried about a step back. Not that trading Trouba this year wouldn't be a step back. But it needn't be a big one. 1 year and then we are right back, maybe stronger. Yes we would lose a year of Wheeler, Buff, Little. Not ideal. Trouba wanting to leave would not be ideal. Ideal is signing him for 8 years. If he insists on leaving we are going to lose something no matter how we proceed. I think getting value for him now is the best way to minimize that loss.

If Trouba can't be satisfied here we are going to lose something, somewhere, somehow. There is no plan that can completely eliminate that.

Offer trouba a 4,5,6,7and 8 year extention deal july 1st. If he doesn't sign by end of July trade him. I'm guessing the only reason he is going to world championshios is to strengthen his trade value for the jets.

 

[gbill2004*]

On the final jets 3 in 3, Chevy and orlesky both had convincing body language that no way was Chevy gonna trade trouba. Didn't even entertain exploring that option.

Obviously Chevy hasn't come out one way or another and explicitly said anything at least publicly, but perhaps Chevy indicated extending trouba is very high on the priority list to one or both of them in a more private setting

Is Orlesky co-GM now?

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I really don't think we get Trouba on an eight year deal. It doesn't make sense for someone as confident in his ability and with his agent not to maximize his contracts. IMO we go right to the face of arbitration with Trouba and get a 4-5 year deal at pretty close to UFA money. The price to pay for getting 2 years cheap on an RFA. Also sets Trouba up for the big UFA contract in his late 20's in the heart of his prime. IMO that will be the best possible outcome if Chevy is able to grind it out down to the wire.

If we could be reasonably certain of that result I would agree. But this assumes that we get to the courthouse steps - and then get a deal for 5 years. I am taking the position that Trouba gets to the courthouse steps and continues with arbitration because the game plan is to get to UFA by the shortest route.

What you are suggesting is about the same as getting him to sign now but for 6 years instead of 8. That allows him to go for that next big contract. If that is all the problem is I'd sign him for 6 in a heartbeat. 8 is preferable but if he wants 6 that is OK too.

None of us knows which is more likely. That doesn't mean it is 50/50, or a coin toss. One scenario is, in fact more likely than the other. But which one is unknown to us. Therefore my suggestion that we find out. Get his intentions revealed and then proceed accordingly once we know the rules to the game.

 

[roccerfeller]

Is Orlesky co-GM now?

oops

That's actually a typo on my part. I meant to say Lawless.


my own "reading in too deep" speculation, of course.

 

[gbill2004*]

So everyone now agrees that Trouba is getting more money than Scheifele? This summer the consensus on that was no.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Pretty easy to say that, and in fact I don't hear anybody on here arguing for trading rather than keeping him, but there's this little matter about him wanting to be here at all.

Is the solution to offer him a ridiculous amount (8 X 8 is on the verge of that), to see if he's really changed his mind. But, knowing him & his agent, that really won't accomplish anything desirable right now. In fact, I doubt they will even entertain offers this summer.

Next summer, maybe he'll be in that space where he'll consider a more than reasonable offer. For now, I'm not sure Chevy has a clear read on his desire to stay or go, and furthermore there may be no way to really sit down with them to determine that.

I'm pretty certain Chevy does not have a clear read on his desire to stay or to go. This is where it could get tough. If they aren't even willing to talk, what do you do? Is that a clue to the longer term plan? Or is it just Overhardt playing his usual games? Do you interpret that the same way you would interpret them turning down your best offer, or do you simply sit back and wait another year?

Once again we are left in that doubtful position of disadvantage where all possibilities are still open. My best guess is that it would imply the same thing as the refused big offer but I lack the certainty I would like.

I would still start shopping him but without the zeal I would have had if he had indeed turned down that big offer. If I get an offer I like, I pull the trigger. But if the best offer is not quite there I would wait it out another year.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

On the final jets 3 in 3, Lawless and orlesky both had convincing body language that no way was Chevy gonna trade trouba. Didn't even entertain exploring that option.

Obviously Chevy hasn't come out one way or another and explicitly said anything at least publicly, but perhaps Chevy indicated extending trouba is very high on the priority list to one or both of them in a more private setting

Really, extending Trouba for as long as possible should be front and centre in Chevy's mind at this point. The thing is that the determination should be to do that now, not later. It is only when/if that effort fails that the other possibilities rise to the surface.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Offer trouba a 4,5,6,7and 8 year extention deal july 1st. If he doesn't sign by end of July trade him. I'm guessing the only reason he is going to world championshios is to strengthen his trade value for the jets.

Agree with the first 2 sentences, though 4 and 5 are unattractive terms. The best way for him to strengthen his trade value now is to sit on the season he just put in. The only things he can do at the WC are to fail to play up to that standard or to get injured.

That stage might get his profile on HFBoards a little higher but the GM's have scouting staffs to tell them how good he was this year.

 

[DeepFrickinValue]

Really, extending Trouba for as long as possible should be front and cendtre in Chevy's mind at this point. The thing is that the determination should be to do that now, not later. It is only when/if that effort fails that the other possibilities rise to the surface.

I would do 8x8. If he doesn't sign then trade him. Could see Toronto wanting him. Seems (grumble grumble) Toronto has a very good 2 year window ahead to get the cup.

 

[ps241]

So everyone now agrees that Trouba is getting more money than Scheifele? This summer the consensus on that was no.

I guess a few things have changed. First off Trouba signed the bridge which means we got two cheap years but will be buying two more UFA years than we would have last summer and that costs allot of money. Secondly, he stepped up in a pretty big way this past season and took his game to a clear cut #1 franchise type D man level.

Jacob took a gamble on himself and it will paid off in his next deal whether its the Jets paying him or someone else.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

So everyone now agrees that Trouba is getting more money than Scheifele? This summer the consensus on that was no.

It isn't that simple. Scheifele signed for 8 years, 4 RFA and 4 UFA. If Trouba signed for 8 on top of the 2 bridge that is 10 total. It is also 2 RFA and 6 UFA. Or look at him signing for 6. That would have it expire at the same time as Scheifele's. The last 6 have to be higher to get to the same total over the 8 years.

The reason players want bridge deals (at least 1 reason) is so that they can demonstrate that they are worth more. Trouba got that, did that.

 

[Say What]

So everyone now agrees that Trouba is getting more money than Scheifele? This summer the consensus on that was no.

I would venture a guess at near the same overall value (*6M - 6.2M AAV). IMO, if Jacob Trouba won't accept $7M (I personally believe that's the ceiling) over 6-8 years (3-5 UFA years), he'll be earning his contract elsewhere.

The bridge deal will ultimately mitigate his *overall cost (from the Jets POV). For me, the sticking point will be how TNSE and the Trouba Camp reconcile the 3+ Million lost/gained on the current bridge contract (who budges towards whom).

Kurt Overhardt will want something close to $7.75M (annually) to recoup; TNSE will want a deal not exceeding $7M to stand firm. Who pays for the holdout (rhetorical question).

 

[surixon]

I guess a few things have changed. First off Trouba signed the bridge which means we got two cheap years but will be buying two more UFA years than we would have last summer and that costs allot of money. Secondly, he stepped up in a pretty big way this past season and took his game to a clear cut #1 franchise type D man level.

Jacob took a gamble on himself and it will paid off in his next deal whether its the Jets paying him or someone else.

Scheifele also signed when he had half a year worth of playing at a high level and as such left cash on the table as he wasn't sufficiently proven. Had Scheifele inked a bridge and then posted the year he just had we would be looking at paying him around $8 to 8.5 million a year after his bridge. Timing is everything, we got Scheifele inked long term just as he was taking his step up. Trouba in the other hand is coming off a dominant franchise defenseman calibre of year and has leverage in that he still has a year left on his bride that he can use to further drive up his value. If the Jets want to sign him they will have to compensate him for what he might do next season as well as this past one.