Proposal: Viability in Trading Mantha to New Jersey or Buffalo for their 1st Rounder?

[Tetsuo]

If Mantha only signs a short term deal, then I think it could make sense to move on from him. He could very well sign a one or two year deal again and hope to cash in on a big contract year. While I agree that having vets is an important part of building the locker room, if a player doesn't want to be here then they won't make for a good locker room presence.

At least publicly, Mantha has expressed interest in staying with Detroit long term, so there is no sense is moving on from a proven top 6 player who wants to be here. It sends a signal to potential free agents, within the org and outside of it, that we are not interested in winning, which is counter productive. If we were stocked at his position, then that is one thing, but we are threadbare at every position.

In short, there are no easy or quick answers that are worth pursuing. We don't have the talent, depth or depth of talent that makes selling actual assets easy. AA and Green don't count in my mind, because both were damaged goods (for very different reasons). The silver lining in all of this is that the Wings are one of the best positioned teams to take on contracts for draft picks and still have room to spend big in FA once they are ready to compete.

 

[Snuggs]

Man... Just pay the kid, collect talent and lets get good. I don't want to be in a perpetual rebuild like Buffalo's been in or Arizona had for what seemed like a whole decade.

I mean obviously, if he'll only do a short-term thing, you trade him cause you have too at the risk of losing him for nothing but dang it, lets cross that bridge when it comes and until then just try and sign the kid.

At least you've got a good grasp on the money situation Red Wings are about to be in, they'll be able to spend(This year if they want to) the next few years and resign/sign guys they want.

Like collecting picks, and trading guys like AA/Green are ideal moves imo. They had absolutely no futures here, and you gained future picks which are going to help the rebuild, NHL draft to me is a scatter-shot approach, the more picks the more chances to hit no matter the round. This next season they'll have guys to dangle for mid rounders like Helm/Filppula/Nemeth/Bernier/Glendenning/Fabbri*Maybe. I don't think trading one of the younger and top if not the top offensive talent on the team is the route to go.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

If Mantha only signs a short term deal, then I think it could make sense to move on from him. He could very well sign a one or two year deal again and hope to cash in on a big contract year. While I agree that having vets is an important part of building the locker room, if a player doesn't want to be here then they won't make for a good locker room presence.

At least publicly, Mantha has expressed interest in staying with Detroit long term, so there is no sense is moving on from a proven top 6 player who wants to be here. It sends a signal to potential free agents, within the org and outside of it, that we are not interested in winning, which is counter productive. If we were stocked at his position, then that is one thing, but we are threadbare at every position.

In short, there are no easy or quick answers that are worth pursuing. We don't have the talent, depth or depth of talent that makes selling actual assets easy. AA and Green don't count in my mind, because both were damaged goods (for very different reasons). The silver lining in all of this is that the Wings are one of the best positioned teams to take on contracts for draft picks and still have room to spend big in FA once they are ready to compete.

You really can’t trust anything these players say. Even Larkin. If they are tired of losing and want out (generally ie eichel) they aren’t going to publicly be dicks about it. They’ll say all the right things play out their contracts and sign elsewhere.

 

[Killerjas]

I don't think they would trade a 7th of 8th overall pick for Mantha, but maybe I am overvalueing a top 10 pick and undervalueing Mantha.

 

[pz29]

I question the wisdom of getting rid of one of your two best players for an unknown. If this is not a "perpetual rebuild," I don't know what is. I get a feeling sometimes that some people on this board get a twisted pleasure our of DRW being "permanently terrible."

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

We debated back and forth on "tanking" in another topic. Trading Mantha right now is tanking. There is no hockey purpose for it, outside of trying to improve draft selection. He is, as of now, likely to re-sign and with the cap being frozen for the next three years... I think his agent will have a very hard time pushing for some beyond the pale salary.

Tell me that Mantha turns down 8/52 if the Wings bring it to him, right now.

 

[Tetsuo]

You really can’t trust anything these players say. Even Larkin. If they are tired of losing and want out (generally ie eichel) they aren’t going to publicly be dicks about it. They’ll say all the right things play out their contracts and sign elsewhere.

I agree. They are coached to provide answers that the public wants to hear, no matter what their actual opinions may be. Now, this doesn't always go as planned, but more likely than not players provide answers that serve the interest of the team/league. My point is that Mantha has, to this point, publicly expressed interest in staying, which indicates that he is at least willing to say the right things publicly in order to stay, even if he really doesn't want to. Because how his contract negotiation turns out will indicate, in part, how interested he actually is in staying. Don't forget that Mantha will also have some leverage, despite his injury history, when comes to a contract, because he and his team know that the chances of the Wings finding another top line wing who can fill his skates is slim.

 

[Tetsuo]

We debated back and forth on "tanking" in another topic. Trading Mantha right now is tanking. There is no hockey purpose for it, outside of trying to improve draft selection. He is, as of now, likely to re-sign and with the cap being frozen for the next three years... I think his agent will have a very hard time pushing for some beyond the pale salary.

Tell me that Mantha turns down 8/52 if the Wings bring it to him, right now.

If he and his team think after a full, healthy, season he is able to demonstrate that he is a top 20 W and deserves a higher percentage of the Cap. He could also force his way to UFA and be one of the top options next off season if he wanted. An 8-year contract probably takes Mantha to the end of his career, or at least very close to it, so if he doesn't want to be Detroit-bound for whatever reason, then an 8-year contract would work against that prerogative.

I think all of those are valid possibilities at this point, given that we have heard no rumors one way or the other.

 

[RedWingzz]

It's an interesting idea that has already come across my mind. Part of me says yes, trade him for a top 10 pick if possible because we aren't even a playoff bubble team for at least 2 years, and realistically more like 4 or 5. By then he's 29 years old, and who knows how his body will hold up with all the injury issues.

Then the other part of me thinks it's nonsense to consider trading our best goal scorer and second best player. That said, if NJ wanted him badly and offered something insane like 7th overall and a high end prospect like Ty Smith, I would do it. Obviously the Devils would never do this, but I'm just speaking hypothetically, if the deal is too good to be true, I'd trade him.

We don't have any untradeable assets in my mind with the exception of Seider, the 4th overall pick and Larkin.

 

[Winger98]

We debated back and forth on "tanking" in another topic. Trading Mantha right now is tanking. There is no hockey purpose for it, outside of trying to improve draft selection. He is, as of now, likely to re-sign and with the cap being frozen for the next three years... I think his agent will have a very hard time pushing for some beyond the pale salary.

Tell me that Mantha turns down 8/52 if the Wings bring it to him, right now.

He turns it down. He could probably get $6m a season on a short term deal.

 

[MBH]

A trade he is winning right now, I know it is a tough blow to the leader of the AA fan-club. He was just as bad in Edmonton if not worse. Sorry champ, AA is a really bad hockey player when he chooses not to engage, which is for roughly 90% of the time he is playing.

That was the return he could get a pure offensive floater specialist. Guy has about as much value as Glendening and really there is nobody to blame for that except AA. I really hope he used the deal as a kick in the ass and put it together. Enormous talent, but for whatever reason he doesn't want to tap in on it, it is is sad. But man am I glad he isn't trying to trade him at the draft with a flat cap, thank goodness Yzerman cut the cord.

Mantha isn't AA, he might get hurt a lot. But we haven't had nearly the same issues of him playing hard for several years now. Other GMs are not going to view him the same way. He should return a very healthy package. But you're never going to build a winning team without some decent vets to teach them. Will Mantha, Bert and Larkin be great when we do the winning? Hard to say. But we are going to need some talent to bring up the next generation. We are going to need some of these guys. I know there is the faction that feels we are already in full tank mode, we really are not, trading the Bertuzzi's and Mantha types is a real tank job, a gruesome deal. If you get to the end of these next deals or a few years in and moves open up fine, we shouldn't be in a rush to gut the only real top six talent we have. What the hell are we going to watch during this if we don't at least keep those three guys?

We traded AA for low value. Late-second round value.
That's poor asset management.

We just finished with the worst season in franchise history (factoring in loser points) with Mantha.
So, I don't know man. I think we can deal.

Looking at a plan that puts us back in playoff contention in 4-5 years, I'm fine with Larkin at 27 and Bertuzzi at 28 as veteran forwards.

I'd keep Mantha around, too. But there's a "strike while the iron is hot" factor about trading Mantha.

He probably never had more value than he did at the trade deadline. His value is going to come down now, because you're going to be paying him at a newer, inflated salary.
But I think he's still young enough to land a big haul.

There's been speculation in Quebec media Montreal will offer sheet him. My guess is if they do, they'll offer him a shade below the threshold that would cost them two firsts, a second and third. So a cap hit of around $8.4M.

Are we willing to pay that? $8,4M?
Are we OK with the return of a 1st, 2nd and 3rd?
If Montreal sucks again, that's fine. But there's also the possibility they make the playoffs and win a round. Now you're looking at 22nd overall, 53rd and 84th.

If Montreal is willing to give up a top 10 pick and sweeten the deal - I'd give it a long look.

But I'm not trading away Mantha for peanuts. It's gotta be high returns.

Trading away 25-year-old 30-goal men... I mean, 24-goal men - for peanuts is bad practice.

 

[ShippinItDaily]

Not sure why either team would take Mantha.
He's about to get REAL expensive despite never scoring 25 goals.
He's got 2-3 years left, most likely, at his athletic prime.
And these teams aren't close to having winners.
So why not just stay where they are, draft Holtz, or Quinn, or Raymond/Perfetti, if they fall that far.
Montreal, at 9, could be an option.
They've got enough talent on their roster and they frankly can't afford to do anything but try to win when they've got Price and Weber under contract. But even still, yeah, Montreal needs a winger. But is an expensive winger at the top of their wants list?
And I think I'd want a bit more than 9th overall for Mantha. Not sure they'd give it.

So, I'm glad to trade Mantha in the right deal. But I don't know any team gives us what I think we'd need to make it worth it.

But, yzerman traded Athanasiou for a couple bags of pucks. So who knows?

I think both teams should be interested. They both have had a lot of very high picks in recent years and in the case of Buffalo at least, I think patience is starting to wear thin. Mantha would be exactly the type of player they need. I'm talking about somebody who can drive a line and help spread out their offense so they are harder to match against. If you have Mantha, there is less pressure to find an elite C to fit into the #2 hole.

In the case of New Jersey, they have very little committed money and already have used two #1 overall picks to select centers. I'm sure a lot of questions surround Jack Hughes after what many will see as a disappointing rookie season, but there should still be a lot of hope there. How much better of a player can you expect to get than Mantha to ride shotgun to Hughes and help his development from a load-carrying perspective? Hischier would fit in real nice as the #2 guy, taking on the tougher matchups. Also, in New Jersey's case, you're divisional front-runners (Washington and Pittsburgh) have aging cores that could very well be in decline when Hughes hits his stride. You also have Palmieri set to hit UFA after only one more season, leaving a big hole for your top scoring winger.

New Jersey has a lot of "ifs" going on, but they should still be in a better spot to take advantage of Mantha's best years than Detroit.

 

[ShippinItDaily]

I love Mantha. But drafting 4th made me re-consider a move and I’m for it. In this instance I’d consider if there was more involved. Not for those picks alone. However, if we move him later on it, it probably won’t be for top 10 picks but quantity picks. Later first, B prospect, 2-3 rd pick

The idea to trade Mantha became more worthy of consideration when the lottery results came in and the timeline of the rebuild increased with the unfavourable result. If he's at or close to peak market value and you likely aren't going to be able to take advantage of his peak effectiveness, then you need to seriously consider moving him.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

We traded AA for low value. Late-second round value.
That's poor asset management.

We just finished with the worst season in franchise history (factoring in loser points) with Mantha.
So, I don't know man. I think we can deal.

Looking at a plan that puts us back in playoff contention in 4-5 years, I'm fine with Larkin at 27 and Bertuzzi at 28 as veteran forwards.

I'd keep Mantha around, too. But there's a "strike while the iron is hot" factor about trading Mantha.

He probably never had more value than he did at the trade deadline. His value is going to come down now, because you're going to be paying him at a newer, inflated salary.
But I think he's still young enough to land a big haul.

There's been speculation in Quebec media Montreal will offer sheet him. My guess is if they do, they'll offer him a shade below the threshold that would cost them two firsts, a second and third. So a cap hit of around $8.4M.

Are we willing to pay that? $8,4M?
Are we OK with the return of a 1st, 2nd and 3rd?
If Montreal sucks again, that's fine. But there's also the possibility they make the playoffs and win a round. Now you're looking at 22nd overall, 53rd and 84th.

If Montreal is willing to give up a top 10 pick and sweeten the deal - I'd give it a long look.

But I'm not trading away Mantha for peanuts. It's gotta be high returns.

Trading away 25-year-old 30-goal men... I mean, 24-goal men - for peanuts is bad practice.

We have to have him under contract to avoid your offer-sheet angle and trade him anyway. I wouldn't let Montreal bully me and I would make very clear with the second most cap space and no reason to put more on the books for the next little bit, that there would be considerable retribution for messing with us. We are not Carolina, we will pay you back in kind.

Which leads me to my second point why is Mantha only taking a five year contract? Keep in mind your total sum is divided by 5 to come up with your offer-sheet. We can beat Mantha's total intake in your proposal especially with the tax differences with a 7 year 6.5 million offer... They clear 42 million bucks and they upgrade their package, honestly why are we not beating that? I think you forgot your offer sheet rules in this scenario as I am sure a lot of people in Montreal are doing.

I will trade Mantha for a kings ransom for sure. I don't think we have a truly untouchable player in the system, but there are those that would cost a considerable amount to acquire. One top 10 pick isn't enough for a guy with his talents. If Montreal wants to poison pill us with a 5 year deal, I match it and I tell Mantha and his agent there is no scenario where I don't match it. If I am trading Mantha, it isn't to Montreal, they don't have the assets that we need. But if they don't win the lottery, 9th overall and Romonov is intriguing to me, it won't be to them, but that is the base and I want to build on it (which will really rattle the Habs) or they can keep dreaming about their french superstar. Trading a 6'5" goal scorer like Mantha should be the absolute last result for this team, something that we pull in the middle of his next contract.

By the way Bert and Larkin are going to be pissed if we trade Mantha. I know they weren't happy about AA, but Yzerman could tell them they know why it happened, his attitude running thin with a ton of people in Detroit wasn't exactly a secret. You can continue to bury your head in the sand on AA, again I had hopes he would take it to heart and change, same no show guy from most nights in Detroit showed up out there too.

Even if the idea is to deal Mantha, okay pump his stats through the roof with a full season of health with the MLB line and convince him you will pay him a premium to keep on a 3 or 4 year deal. I personally would lock him up long-term. I can stomach anything up to the Kevin Hayes deal in terms of 7 year 50 million with the 7.14 cap hit. Not ideal, but I can go there before I let him walk. Why would he leave almost 10 million on the table to sign in Montreal?

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

We traded AA for low value. Late-second round value.
That's poor asset management.

We just finished with the worst season in franchise history (factoring in loser points) with Mantha.
So, I don't know man. I think we can deal.

Looking at a plan that puts us back in playoff contention in 4-5 years, I'm fine with Larkin at 27 and Bertuzzi at 28 as veteran forwards.

I'd keep Mantha around, too. But there's a "strike while the iron is hot" factor about trading Mantha.

He probably never had more value than he did at the trade deadline. His value is going to come down now, because you're going to be paying him at a newer, inflated salary.
But I think he's still young enough to land a big haul.

There's been speculation in Quebec media Montreal will offer sheet him. My guess is if they do, they'll offer him a shade below the threshold that would cost them two firsts, a second and third. So a cap hit of around $8.4M.

Are we willing to pay that? $8,4M?
Are we OK with the return of a 1st, 2nd and 3rd?
If Montreal sucks again, that's fine. But there's also the possibility they make the playoffs and win a round. Now you're looking at 22nd overall, 53rd and 84th.

If Montreal is willing to give up a top 10 pick and sweeten the deal - I'd give it a long look.

But I'm not trading away Mantha for peanuts. It's gotta be high returns.

Trading away 25-year-old 30-goal men... I mean, 24-goal men - for peanuts is bad practice.

The very reason why you’re okay dealing Mantha (he’s about to be expensive) is why AA had no real tangible value and nowhere close to what a 30 goal scorer should have. In 19-20, AA showed the worst parts of his game and while +/- doesn’t tend to mean a whole lot... he was -42. That’s not competition level or bad luck. That means you are getting beat like a drum quite often.

AA already had one protracted holdout where he and his agent brought in a different league to try to gain some leverage. So you’re not getting him to sign for any kind of discount. He was basically a 15 goal defensive sieve in 19-20, but you’d be paying him based on the fact that he scored more and was a bit better defensively in other years.

Everything about AA’s play pointed to him being a streaky gamble to sign. Yzerman didn’t feel like spinning the roulette wheel on whether he would care that night anymore.

AA has first line talent. He also has the defensive focus of a five year old and a complete inability to play the cycle in the offensive zone. If he’s not getting transition chances, he’s essentially garbage. If he is getting transition chances, he becomes a stud.

It isn’t bad asset management to get a 2nd round pick now from a guy who you’re likely to let walk or have to greatly overpay to keep. AA’s salary demands would always be greater than his actual contributions.

e: some bad grammar fixes.

 

[Vector Cereal]

Not in favour of trading Mantha. I think the age gap between Bert Mantha Larkin and Zadina Seider (4OA pick) works well. Contractually, if Mantha and Bert sign for ~6 years, their contracts will expire when Zadina and Seider would be finishing their post elc bridge deals. Ability wise, once Mantha and Bert are on the wrong side of their peak and decline to second line caliber players, Zadina and (4OA - gunning for Perfetti or Raymond) should be top line caliber players. The guards change quite smoothly here.

For me, any deal for Mantha needs to include a player that can join our top 6 now(i.e. not going back to juniors). I'm thinking a player like Martin Necas, Cody Glass, Robert Thomas, or Nick Suzuki as the centerpiece - all have no doubt to become our second line center right away and have quite a bit of room to grow. You'd need to add more to get Mantha, and there's cap issues for Vegas and St. Louis, so I'm not sure there's a fit there.

 

[Hatter of the Beach]

Would do

Mantha
32nd

for NJ’s top two picks (assuming Jersey would be willing to do it if Yotes pick doesn’t win the lottery).

Then there is a dream scenario where Stutz falls To 4th, we get one of Drysdale, Perfetti, Rossi or Raymond with NJ’s pick, and then a faller (maybe even Askarov) with the Yotes pick in the mid teens. Will it happen? Almost assuredly not. Does each step sound semi plausible as independent events? Yes

 

[rhef3]

If by chance the wings were trading Mantha I would rather go higher

Just a quick proposal

To LA
Mantha , 4th

to Det
#2, Arthur Kaliyev, 35th pick 2020

It gives us Byfield or Stutzle, a great prospect in Kaliyev and another high 2nd rounder

 

[Hatter of the Beach]

If by chance the wings were trading Mantha I would rather go higher

Just a quick proposal

To LA
Mantha , 4th

to Det
#2, Arthur Kaliyev, 35th pick 2020

It gives us Byfield or Stutzle, a great prospect in Kaliyev and another high 2nd rounder

the problem with this is the Kings would be hesitant to trade for Mantha for the same reason we’re debating trading him; he’s a few years ahead of their team’s projected peak.

would do it in a heartbeat though

 

[Cyborg Yzerberg]

When is the last time anything like this happened? A top 6 winger for a top ten pick?

 

[SirloinUB]

We have to have him under contract to avoid your offer-sheet angle and trade him anyway. I wouldn't let Montreal bully me and I would make very clear with the second most cap space and no reason to put more on the books for the next little bit, that there would be considerable retribution for messing with us. We are not Carolina, we will pay you back in kind.

Which leads me to my second point why is Mantha only taking a five year contract? Keep in mind your total sum is divided by 5 to come up with your offer-sheet. We can beat Mantha's total intake in your proposal especially with the tax differences with a 7 year 6.5 million offer... They clear 42 million bucks and they upgrade their package, honestly why are we not beating that? I think you forgot your offer sheet rules in this scenario as I am sure a lot of people in Montreal are doing.

I will trade Mantha for a kings ransom for sure. I don't think we have a truly untouchable player in the system, but there are those that would cost a considerable amount to acquire. One top 10 pick isn't enough for a guy with his talents. If Montreal wants to poison pill us with a 5 year deal, I match it and I tell Mantha and his agent there is no scenario where I don't match it. If I am trading Mantha, it isn't to Montreal, they don't have the assets that we need. But if they don't win the lottery, 9th overall and Romonov is intriguing to me, it won't be to them, but that is the base and I want to build on it (which will really rattle the Habs) or they can keep dreaming about their french superstar. Trading a 6'5" goal scorer like Mantha should be the absolute last result for this team, something that we pull in the middle of his next contract.

By the way Bert and Larkin are going to be pissed if we trade Mantha. I know they weren't happy about AA, but Yzerman could tell them they know why it happened, his attitude running thin with a ton of people in Detroit wasn't exactly a secret. You can continue to bury your head in the sand on AA, again I had hopes he would take it to heart and change, same no show guy from most nights in Detroit showed up out there too.

Even if the idea is to deal Mantha, okay pump his stats through the roof with a full season of health with the MLB line and convince him you will pay him a premium to keep on a 3 or 4 year deal. I personally would lock him up long-term. I can stomach anything up to the Kevin Hayes deal in terms of 7 year 50 million with the 7.14 cap hit. Not ideal, but I can go there before I let him walk. Why would he leave almost 10 million on the table to sign in Montreal?

As far as I’m concerned This is the only opinion worth having in regards to Mantha and anything else is wrong. I firmly believe Mantha is worth keeping and near untouchable. Not literally untouchable. Any trade really has to impress me otherwise I look to keep him.

 

[MBH]

the problem with this is the Kings would be hesitant to trade for Mantha for the same reason we’re debating trading him; he’s a few years ahead of their team’s projected peak.

would do it in a heartbeat though

Yep.
Who wants Mantha?
You're looking at teams that want to win the next 3-5 years.
How many of those teams have a top 10 pick to trade?
Montreal - if they lose. We'd probably have to talk Alzner, too.
Chicago - but I doubt they can afford him.

 

[SuperScript29]

No.

 

[MBH]

The very reason why you’re okay dealing Mantha (he’s about to be expensive) is why AA had no real tangible value and nowhere close to what a 30 goal scorer should have. In 19-20, AA showed the worst parts of his game and while +/- doesn’t tend to mean a whole lot... he was -42. That’s not competition level or bad luck. That means you are getting beat like a drum quite often.

The reason I am willing to deal Mantha is because I think we can reasonably get important pieces for him.
I'm not for trading Mantha for a late first. I'm for trading Mantha for a top 10 pick - or youth with top 10 pick value.

We got very little back for AA. The chances of getting anything of value at 50th overall...

As for AA and luck. On-Ice Save % is literally a stat some use to measure luck.
AA had the lowest on-ice save percentage in the NHL last year.
Player Season Totals - Natural Stat Trick

If Yzerman wanted to dump AA, he should have a) traded him before the start of the season or b) kept him and repaired his value before trading him.

AA already had one protracted holdout where he and his agent brought in a different league to try to gain some leverage. So you’re not getting him to sign for any kind of discount. He was basically a 15 goal defensive sieve in 19-20, but you’d be paying him based on the fact that he scored more and was a bit better defensively in other years.

AA will be in no position to demand a big contract. More hyperbole.
Every single thing you post about AA is exaggerated.

Everything about AA’s play pointed to him being a streaky gamble to sign. Yzerman didn’t feel like spinning the roulette wheel on whether he would care that night anymore.

So he traded him for what amounts to very little.

AA has first line talent. He also has the defensive focus of a five year old and a complete inability to play the cycle in the offensive zone. If he’s not getting transition chances, he’s essentially garbage. If he is getting transition chances, he becomes a stud.

Hyperbole.

It isn’t bad asset management to get a 2nd round pick now from a guy who you’re likely to let walk or have to greatly overpay to keep. AA’s salary demands would always be greater than his actual contributions.

It is when you could have gotten a first for him 8 months ago. Or a first for him in a year.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

The reason I am willing to deal Mantha is because I think we can reasonably get important pieces for him.
I'm not for trading Mantha for a late first. I'm for trading Mantha for a top 10 pick - or youth with top 10 pick value.

We got very little back for AA. The chances of getting anything of value at 50th overall...

As for AA and luck. On-Ice Save % is literally a stat some use to measure luck.
AA had the lowest on-ice save percentage in the NHL last year.
Player Season Totals - Natural Stat Trick

If Yzerman wanted to dump AA, he should have a) traded him before the start of the season or b) kept him and repaired his value before trading him.



AA will be in no position to demand a big contract. More hyperbole.
Every single thing you post about AA is exaggerated.



So he traded him for what amounts to very little.



Hyperbole.



It is when you could have gotten a first for him 8 months ago. Or a first for him in a year.

What in those advanced stats you linked says anything about him rehabbing his value? He went to a much better team with much better “luck” and he was still awful until he got hurt.

AA was a 30 goal scorer like Jonathan Cheechoo was a 50 goal scorer... yeah, it happened, but you’re crazy to bank on it.

He wasn’t in a position to have Ferris push for the 2.5m contract his first RFA trip but that didn’t stop him then. There were several direct comparables which should be the easy answer in an RFA context that said 2x1.9 was the upper end and 2x1.6 or 2x1.7 as the low end... but they brought the specter of the KHL in. His agent would point to “30 goals” and bad luck and you’d be paying in the 5M+ range for him or he’d be sitting out again.

AA has undeniable talent. But he’s also woefully mismatched to any role but transition scoring winger. He is atrocious in the face off dot if you try to play him at C. He is not very good in sustained PP cycles. He’s absolutely got the wheels to be a two-way stud and take a lot more risks because he should be able to recover. But he doesn’t. He takes the risk but doesn’t recover as much as you would think he probably should.

His skill is blazing speed and individual play. He’s incredibly puck dominant to be at his most effective and he’s just not successful enough with the puck to justify him having it on his stick all the time above virtually any other legitimate top 6 forward in the league.

I would have been floored if a team offered a 1st for AA after his 18-19. I will be even more floored if when we start hockey back up he does anything close to rehabbing his value to that point. He is the exact type of player (heavily offensive wing) that tends to be traded for less than fans think they are worth. Just like a Barclay Goodrow is the type of player traded for way more than what fans think.