Trade: Calgary Michael Frolik to Buffalo for a 4th

[Doohicksie]

50 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

He traded the base. He gutted the base. Murray ***** us. 

Perhaps you've forgotten, but back then we called the base "the rotten core."

[Taro T]

50 minutes ago, Thorny said:

If a true second line forward can be had for draft picks, a young player that will be here for the foreseeable future, you absolutely move the picks. Our best offensive player is in his prime right now, as is his wingman, and our 9 mil LW will soon be exiting it. We need the help now. You don't shy away from moving a pick that, if things go to plan, becomes a top 6 player in several years.  

When Murray was arguably trying to jumpstart the rebuild too soon, Jack was a rookie. It's a totally different situation now. Adding a ROR type player for a package like we paid the first time would be ideal timing. I'm not saying to toss away picks for older players, or expiring contracts. But for good win now players, absolutely. 

You'll not get argument here that they need to bring in help for today/ the near future.

But REALLY believe that Botterill sees the window paralleling Dahlin's development, not Eichel's.  Until a move is made that contradicts that (such as the sort you mention) will stick to that belief.

[Thorner]

39 minutes ago, Taro T said:

You'll not get argument here that they need to bring in help for today/ the near future.

But REALLY believe that Botterill sees the window paralleling Dahlin's development, not Eichel's.  Until a move is made that contradicts that (such as the sort you mention) will stick to that belief.

A mistake, especially taking into account recent data that suggests forwards are not-insignificantly more valuable than D men in the current game. Looking at things like Wins Above Replacement. 

Jack has also proven to be all-world, as much I love Dahlin there’s no guarantee he gets to that. Dahlin’s prime starts probably ~23/24 considering he’s on D...That takes Jack to 27 or 28. 

I can’t say I’m comfortable with that being the target, if that’s so. Seems likely that it is, I’ve mentioned before Friedman’s comment re:  Botterill pre 2018 lottery about what a win would afford Jason. 

The GM is clearly comfortable casting himself in the Tortoise role, we’ll see if that works out considering Jack’s the Hare. 

THIS EDIT in before @Doohickie mentions Yzerman’s Red Wings. ??

Edited January 14, 2020 by Thorny

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Doohickie said:

Perhaps you've forgotten, but back then we called the base "the rotten core."

No that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about in 2015 and 2016 when Murray gutted the team of the talent they drafted. Trading picks and young players. That is the base I am speaking of and why we suck now. We didn't add enough talent and instead traded it away because we were impatient and it is the exact process people are now suggesting. 

[Doohicksie]

Okay... so you're saying they didn't just take it down to the studs but also removed structural members.

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

No that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about in 2015 and 2016 when Murray gutted the team of the talent they drafted. Trading picks and young players. That is the base I am speaking of and why we suck now. We didn't add enough talent and instead traded it away because we were impatient and it is the exact process people are now suggesting. 

It’s not the exact same process because our centrepiece franchise C isn’t a rookie anymore. 

This is the time to ship off our current JT Compher or Nikita Zadorov or Grigorenko for our new ROR. The timing that was once wrong for such a move is now right. The context matters here. 

Edited January 14, 2020 by Thorny
Obvious disclaimer of: “if such trade is so available.”

[Thorner]

The Skinner contract is one I keep thinking about cause it’s definitely a win now type deal. It’s massive money for UFA years and he’ll be exiting his prime before the back half if it starts. Can we really afford to wait to compete with that deal hanging there? Is that deal in fact a sign Botterill was actually under the impression the roster he assembled coming into the season was good enough to make the playoffs? That he wasn’t punting anything at all? 

Questions...questions that need answering. 

[Stoner]

Of course, while we're waiting for the planets and stars and stuff to align perfectly for a Cup run in Buffalo, all anyone is asking for from Botterill is a freakin' playoff berth. People would take a heroic run to ninth at this point. Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[tom webster]

3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

No that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about in 2015 and 2016 when Murray gutted the team of the talent they drafted. Trading picks and young players. That is the base I am speaking of and why we suck now. We didn't add enough talent and instead traded it away because we were impatient and it is the exact process people are now suggesting. 

Except that if TM was here they would have a true 2C and a starting goalie and according to your other thread they would be playoff contenders and trending up which is also how I see it so we kinda agree except you think what TM did was gut the team and I see it as he was moving JAG’s until he found the right pieces.

[shrader]

14 hours ago, tom webster said:

Except that if TM was here they would have a true 2C and a starting goalie and according to your other thread they would be playoff contenders and trending up which is also how I see it so we kinda agree except you think what TM did was gut the team and I see it as he was moving JAG’s until he found the right pieces.

JAG probably a generous label for the defensemen he brought in.  To me, that was his ultimate sin here, he placed nearly zero value on the blue line.

[Kruppstahl]

Here's a good photo of Hutton, Eichel, and Frolik.

I think this proves convincingly that Folik is, in fact, invisible.  

?

 

[tom webster]

1 hour ago, Kruppstahl said:

Here's a good photo of Hutton, Eichel, and Frolik.

I think this proves convincingly that Folik is, in fact, invisible.  

?

 

Now that’s funny

[darksabre]

Welp, this trade turned out to be stupid. 2 points and a -3 through 15 games for a player with a $4.3 mil cap hit.

Maybe the Cap Genius should have just kept the damn 4th round pick and the cap space, eh?

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Welp, this trade turned out to be stupid. 2 points and a -3 through 15 games for a player with a $4.3 mil cap hit.

Maybe the Cap Genius should have just kept the damn 4th round pick and the cap space, eh?

No man he needed the PK help and so Frolic was the "best" option. This gm is clueless. 

[Randall Flagg]

I forgot he cost that kind of money. We gave value for Frolik and didn't get any retention from them? 

[darksabre]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

I forgot he cost that kind of money. We gave value for Frolik and didn't get any retention from them? 

Nope.

Cap Genius *waves hands provocatively*

[DarthEbriate]

On 1/14/2020 at 12:29 PM, Thorny said:

Questions...questions that need answering. 

But you've only just...  wait. Wait! That's not my idiom. Worlds are colliding!

Wait, wait! Let me explain!

38 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Nope.

Cap Genius *waves hands provocatively*

I'm still playing my JBot card from a couple days ago: "I moved Moulson, and got out of Bogo's contract, and out of Berglund's contract." Cap genius hat, reattached! Huzzah! ?

[dudacek]

41 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I forgot he cost that kind of money. We gave value for Frolik and didn't get any retention from them? 

How about the cap hit of $5.2 million we took for two years and 23 goals from Conor Sheary?

[Randall Flagg]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

How about the cap hit of $5.2 million we took for two years and 23 goals from Conor Sheary?

Not to mention actually USING Hunwick for some reason ?

[DarthEbriate]

6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

How about the cap hit of $5.2 million we took for two years and 23 goals from Conor Sheary?

But it stayed a 4th instead of a 3rd because he didn't hit the goals pace. So... we... won?

[darksabre]

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

How about the cap hit of $5.2 million we took for two years and 23 goals from Conor Sheary?

How about the 8.275 mil of nothing in exchange for Ryan O'Reilly's "costly" 7.5mil?

[TrueBlueGED]

47 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Nope.

Cap Genius *waves hands provocatively*

Maybe it's semantics since they're related, but I don't think cap management is the problem. The problem is talent evaluation. Botterill legitimately thinks the forwards he acquires are good when they are not. 

[darksabre]

Just now, TrueBlueGED said:

Maybe it's semantics since they're related, but I don't think cap management is the problem. The problem is talent evaluation. Botterill legitimately thinks the forwards he acquires are good when they are not. 

That's part of cap management though. Being able to identify value contracts is like THE thing he was brought here to do. And he has done NOTHING of the sort.

[TrueBlueGED]

8 minutes ago, dudacek said:

How about the cap hit of $5.2 million we took for two years and 23 goals from Conor Sheary?

Sheary is probably Botterill's third-best forward acquisition. Take that as you will. 

2 minutes ago, darksabre said:

How about the 8.275 mil of nothing in exchange for Ryan O'Reilly's "costly" 7.5mil?

I remember the days of you defending the O'Reilly trade because of cap space. And here we are using that space on a bunch of zeroes. 

[darksabre]

Just now, TrueBlueGED said:

Sheary is probably Botterill's third-best forward acquisition. Take that as you will. 

I remember the days of you defending the O'Reilly trade because of cap space. And here we are using that space on a bunch of zeroes. 

I was trying to find a good spin for it that aligned with the Concept of Jason Botterill, alas...