2020-21 Trade Rumors and Speculation

[Thorner]

9 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

Honestly, if you swapped Ehlers and Copp's position I'd be fine with it. (If Ehlers were a Center and Copp was a Winger) But to me a true 2C is far more worthy of throwing around a 1st than a high tier winger. 

Skilled yes, but softer than a baby's bottom.

You've lost me. The exact reason I like that configuration is because it would be HARD to play against. 

Copp, Larsson, Kahun, Cozens (counting him already for the sake of argument) are supposed to be difficult players to play against. Reinhart is responsible. I'm actively sacrificing a bit of raw skill (Monahan?) to solidify the C ice position with defensively sound players. 

Eichel, Copp, Larsson is a top 9 C spine nobody is going to have a fun time lining up against. I'd put Larsson and Copp out there against any team's top line and I'd play Eichel 60 if I could.  I understand we are sacrificing some raw offensive calories here, but the (imo reasonable) hope is that Ehlers and Reinhart provide enough legitimate, 1st line, offensive pop on line TWO to mitigate a bit of that offensive loss. I feel this is made possible by Cozens future projection.

Edited September 4, 2020 by Thorny

[thewookie1]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

You've lost me. The exact reason I like that configuration is because it would be HARD to play against. 

Copp, Larsson, Kahun, Cozens (counting him already for the sake of argument) are supposed to be difficult players to play against. Reinhart is responsible. 

I'm meaning physically hard to play against. Copp and Cozens would be the only guys willing to hit anyone.

 

Ok, using your idea I've formed a team but am at a loss at what else to do. Not to mention what the heck is Larsson going to want for his contract?

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by thewookie1

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

I'm meaning physically hard to play against. Copp and Cozens would be the only guys willing to hit anyone.

So that's 2 lines with suffocating defensive players (I don't care if Larry isn't actually flattening anyone, personally) (with each line having a "hitter") and another line who always has the puck anyways (Jack)?

 

[thewookie1]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

So that's 2 lines with suffocating defensive players (I don't care if Larry isn't actually flattening anyone, personally) (with each line having a "hitter") and another line who always has the puck anyways (Jack)?

 

The playoffs require you to at least have some players who will run others through walls when all else collapses.

[Thorner]

I guess I'm just not quite as focused on the raw talent upgrade to the centre ice position as some others. We've added some raw talent over the years - looking at, say, Skinner. The biggest thing lacking in the forward group is centre ice functionality. Positional functionality. We have been averse to adding players who actually play centre. It's really a simple thing.

I think *actual* centres, even if they are of the offensive-variety more typically associated with "3" Cs, are going to make a world of difference to this team. It'll facilitate our raw talent offensive wingers (Skinner, Ehlers?) providing the added offense we need. 

We know Skinner can score 30 WITHOUT Jack, and we've seen him do that with players much closer to Larsson and Copp than Eichel. 

What's being underestimated is how difficult that is to do with a centre who doesn't actually play centre. Johansson scores as many points as some of those other Cs Skinner potted his goals with yet Skinner couldn't produce this year. The difference? The positional functionality. 

5 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

The playoffs require you to at least have some players who will run others through walls when all else collapses.

I'm with you. Let's get there, and then we can isolate some variables. 

Edited September 4, 2020 by Thorny

[thewookie1]

12 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I guess I'm just not quite as focused on the raw talent upgrade to the centre ice position as some others. We've added some raw talent over the years - looking at, say, Skinner. The biggest thing lacking in the forward group is centre ice functionality. Positional functionality. We have been averse to adding players who actually play centre. It's really a simple thing.

I think *actual* centres, even if they are of the offensive-variety more typically associated with "3" Cs, are going to make a world of difference to this team. It'll facilitate our raw talent offensive wingers (Skinner, Ehlers?) providing the added offense we need. 

We know Skinner can score 30 WITHOUT Jack, and we've seen him do that with players much closer to Larsson and Copp than Eichel. 

What's being underestimated is how difficult that is to do with a centre who doesn't actually play centre. Johansson scores as many points as some of those other Cs Skinner potted his goals with yet Skinner couldn't produce this year. The difference? The positional functionality. 

I'm with you. Let's get there, and then we can isolate some variables. 

I'm thinking 

Alright here's what I came up with for now.

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1895879

[dudacek]

40 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I guess I'm just not quite as focused on the raw talent upgrade to the centre ice position as some others. We've added some raw talent over the years - looking at, say, Skinner. The biggest thing lacking in the forward group is centre ice functionality. Positional functionality. We have been averse to adding players who actually play centre. It's really a simple thing.

I think *actual* centres, even if they are of the offensive-variety more typically associated with "3" Cs, are going to make a world of difference to this team. It'll facilitate our raw talent offensive wingers (Skinner, Ehlers?) providing the added offense we need. 

We know Skinner can score 30 WITHOUT Jack, and we've seen him do that with players much closer to Larsson and Copp than Eichel. 

What's being underestimated is how difficult that is to do with a centre who doesn't actually play centre. Johansson scores as many points as some of those other Cs Skinner potted his goals with yet Skinner couldn't produce this year. The difference? The positional functionality. 

I'm with you. Let's get there, and then we can isolate some variables. 

I think you are on the right track with this. That's where a Copp or a Cirelli is so valuable and why I'd prefer Danault to Domi. They are complete players.

But I also think Larsson is part of the problem as well, because he is completely one-dimensional; You can't blind yourself to how bad he is offensively. He's like a run-stuffing linebacker who can't cover, useful as hell and you love the warrior mentality, but he's strictly a specialist. Monahan is meh against the run, but good enough to leave in there all three downs, and he is strong against the pass. (Mittelstadt is strictly a nickel back who is utterly useless in zone and can only cover man-to-man against small speedy receivers, but I digress.)

 

[Thorner]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think you are on the right track with this. That's where a Copp or a Cirelli is so valuable and why I'd prefer Danault to Domi. They are complete players.

But I also think Larsson is part of the problem as well, because he is completely one-dimensional; You can't blind yourself to how bad he is offensively. He's like a run-stuffing linebacker who can't cover, useful as hell and you love the warrior mentality, but he's strictly a specialist. Monahan is meh against the run, but good enough to leave in there all three downs, and he is strong against the pass. (Mittelstadt is strictly a nickel back who is utterly useless in zone and can only cover man-to-man against small speedy receivers, but I digress.)

 

A big part of the degree to which Larsson is one dimensional is intent. The ridiculously difficult matchups we saddle him with. It is unusual relative to other defensively focused players. A lot of the value Larsson can provide is invisible. He isn't providing the offence in and off himself, he's freeing up offensive opportunities for others. To a greater degree than other defensive players (offsetting his comparative lack of personal offense).

We are beginning to pigeonhole his value too much. We'd have a better idea of the OFFENSE he indirectly facilitates if we had players capable of taking advantage of those matchups he allows for.

I believe you to be a big "Risto is the only guy we had who could have done that" guy. It applies to Larsson. We are going to/have lost him before ever maximizing his value on a current roster. It's dumb. We did the same thing with ROR. It's not just players of his level that look a lot better once moved to a competent team. 

Our good players get Reputation Taxed on a nightly basis, due to the amount we are forced to rely on them above all others.

MVP level Eichel himself is MacKinnon if he's on the Avs. It's scary to think we haven't even really seen Full-Eichel, yet, either. 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Thorny

[Shootica]

If we actually get an Ehlers for Risto offer without considerable other assets added in, I don't think you can turn it down simply because we have a glut of LWs.  You take that trade now, and figure out how to make it work later.

That being said, I really don't think that's an offer that is or ever was on the table.

[Thorner]

55 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

I'm thinking 

Alright here's what I came up with for now.

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1895879

The first comment says the Jets wouldn't take the trade (my version), so, maybe I was even still UNDERSELLING it, by saying Risto, protected 1st, and Casey.

The roster there looks really good. Too good, apparently, based on that comment. (which actually doesn't matter, just sayin')

Edited September 5, 2020 by Thorny

[dudacek]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

A big part of the degree to which Larsson is one dimensional is intent. The ridiculously difficult matchups we saddle him with. It is unusual relative to other defensively focused players. A lot of the value Larsson can provide is invisible. He isn't providing the offence in and off himself, he's freeing up offensive opportunities for others. To a greater degree than other defensive players (offsetting his comparative lack of personal offense).

We are beginning to pigeonhole his value too much. We'd have a better idea of the OFFENSE he indirectly facilitates if we had players capable of taking advantage of those matchups he allows for.

I believe you to be a big "Risto is the only guy we had who could have done that" guy. It applies to Larsson. We are going to/have lost him before ever maximizing his value on a current roster. It's dumb. We did the same thing with ROR. It's not just players of his level that look a lot better once moved to a competent team. 

Our good players get Reputation Taxed on a nightly basis, due to the amount we are forced to rely on them above all others.

MVP level Eichel himself is MacKinnon if he's on the Avs. It's scary to think we haven't even really seen Full-Eichel, yet, either. 

I think I would have phrased it better as " Larsson is part of the problem as a 2/3C" As a 3/4C he's great, but he is only a stopper.

The difference between a Danault and a Larsson is Danault can provide offence while being used in Larsson's role. If I could put numbers on it purely for sake of the discussion, Larry is in 90th percentile of D and the 10th percentile of O, while Danault is in the 80th and the 60th and Domi is in the 40th and the 75th.

Full agreement on your main point. If Larsson brought his junkyard dog act to the Leafs, he would be the toast of Sportsnet, just like if Risto was the 2RD on Tampa in the bubble right now, HFBoards would be drooling all over him.

Players need to be put into the position to succeed.

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

I'm thinking 

Alright here's what I came up with for now.

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1895879

Those things are fun.

I think the value is there in the Jets trade, but I agree there is no way Winnipeg makes it, unless they are flipping Mittelstadt and the first for a 2C. And if that's the case, I'd keep Risto and trade Casey and the pick for that 2C myself.

[Thorner]

11 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think I would have phrased it better as " Larsson is part of the problem as a 2/3C" As a 3/4C he's great, but he is only a stopper.

The difference between a Danault and a Larsson is Danault can provide offence while being used in Larsson's role. If I could put numbers on it purely for sake of the discussion, Larry is in 90th percentile of D and the 10th percentile of O, while Danault is in the 80th and the 60th and Domi is in the 40th and the 75th.

Full agreement on your main point. If Larsson brought his junkyard dog act to the Leafs, he would be the toast of Sportsnet, just like if Risto was the 2RD on Tampa in the bubble right now, HFBoards would be drooling all over him.

Players need to be put into the position to succeed.

Full agreement here. 

- - - 

I'm trying lately to avoid the number designations in the bottom 6 as I'm trying to look at it more from the point of view of, the top 2 lines I expect to provide the required offense, and at the cost of not marooning our defensive efforts as a team. The bottom 2 lines, I'm needing them to amount to a net positive, as a combined unit. Ie - I'm seeing it often as one shut down line, and one cushy offensive matchups favoured line. It doesn't need to be done this way - it's just the way I'm kinda viewing our roster through the context of our personnel (I like to pretend we still have Larsson so I'm not crying all the time).

Larsson and a rookie Cozens is that yin-yang to me. Larsson as the hole where ALL offense goes to die, and Cozens as someone I definitely see succeeding in a cushy offense based role considering his instinctual defensive presence providing the little D he'd hopefully need (or so I've been told). 

7 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Those things are fun.

I think the value is there in the Jets trade, but I agree there is no way Winnipeg makes it, unless they are flipping Mittelstadt and the first for a 2C. And if that's the case, I'd keep Risto and trade Casey and the pick for that 2C myself.

I was dreaming that they'd feel financially committed to Little. The Jets are DEFINITELY a budget-conscious team. 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Thorny

[dudacek]

12 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I'm trying lately to avoid the number designations in the bottom 6 as I'm trying to look at it more from the point of view of, the top 2 lines I expect to provide the required offense, and at the cost of not marooning our defensive efforts as a team. The bottom 2 lines, I'm needing them to amount to a net positive, as a combined unit. Ie - I'm seeing it often as one shut down line, and one cushy offensive matchups favoured line. It doesn't need to be done this way - it's just the way I'm kinda viewing our roster through the context of our personnel (I like to pretend we still have Larsson so I'm not crying all the time).

This is one reason why I'm not buying into the idea of Ralph being locked in to certain roles and ways of deploying players, when everything I've heard he and Adams say since June is about having good players, but not the right mix of players.

It is very possible Ralph was deploying players in ways he'd rather not in an ideal world simply because he thought it was best with the players he had at hand. For all we know he doesn't like using Larsson the way he did, he just felt he had to given his other choices.

I am encouraged by the lip service to Ralph and Kevyn building the roster together based on a shared vision. I much prefer that to the traditional NHL top-down heirarchy. We'll see how that plays out in practice.

Edited September 5, 2020 by dudacek

[nfreeman]

38 minutes ago, Shootica said:

If we actually get an Ehlers for Risto offer without considerable other assets added in, I don't think you can turn it down simply because we have a glut of LWs.  You take that trade now, and figure out how to make it work later.

That being said, I really don't think that's an offer that is or ever was on the table.

First, welcome to the board!

Second, I agree on Risto for Ehlers and would be willing to include a good-but-not-premium asset -- ie Mittlestadt, Borgen, Samuelsson, Smith or a #2.

[Brawndo]

Risto and Davidsson to WPG for Ehlers and Appleton. If Botterill would have thrown in the. Second Round Pick that Chevy asked for it would have been done Last September.

[Thorner]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

This is one reason why I'm not buying into the idea of Ralph being locked in to certain roles and ways of deploying players, when everything I've heard he and Adams say since June is about having good players, but not the right mix of players.

It is very possible Ralph was deploying players in ways he'd rather not in an ideal world simply because he thought it was best with the players he had at hand. For all we know he doesn't like using Larsson the way he did, he just felt he had to given his other choices.

I am encouraged by the lip service to Ralph and Kevyn building the roster together based on a shared vision. I much prefer that to the traditional NHL top-down heirarchy. We'll see how that plays out in practice.

Can't that be read the other way, too? If we have good players, but not the right mix, perhaps he ARDENTLY supports pigeonholing players in roles, professes to needing those specific guys, and believes merely adding talent is not the answer. 

I'd rather a coach say "all I need is talent, I'll find a place for them and mold my system to the benefit of the group". 

Is it about putting together a puzzle, or reaching a talent tipping point? I lean more towards the latter. The laughable ridiculousness with this franchise is that, any reasonable person that says talent matters most would still take time to manage extremely basic components like having each specific position accounted for, and a variety of role functionality accounted for. 

Not this franchise. "But no, talent matters most you say? I guess we don't need centres, just talent, even if it's on the wing!" "I don't need LHD, I have plenty of talented righties!"

2 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Risto and Davidsson to WPG for Ehlers and Appleton. If Botterill would have thrown in the. Second Round Pick that Chevy asked for it would have been done Last September.

Botterdunce.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Thorny

[Thorner]

Ehlers is better than Risto (and more of a need) and Appleton is a better prospect than Davidsson. 

I refrain from calling Botterill hockey-stupid because it feels mean but it's such an objective truth at this point I'm finding it difficult to find a suitable replacement. He wasn't a bad GM he was among the worst this league has seen, to my memory. 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Thorny

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Can't that be read the other way, too? If we have good players, but not the right mix, perhaps he ARDENTLY supports pigeonholing players in roles, professes to needing those specific guys, and believes merely adding talent is not the answer. 

Absolutely. But I see the holes in the lineup and the reasoning behind his moves, so I'm leaning in the other direction. Like I said, we'll see how it plays out.

I'd rather a coach say "all I need is talent, I'll find a place for them and mold my system to the benefit of the group". 

Me too

Is it about putting together a puzzle, or reaching a talent tipping point? I lean more towards the latter. The laughable ridiculousness with this franchise is that, any reasonable person that says talent matters most would still take time to manage extremely basic components like having each specific position accounted for, and a variety of role functionality accounted for. 

It's both. I think we've been talent-low for so long it's sometimes hard to see the talent that is on this team for what it is and how much progress we could make by shifting a few puzzle pieces for a few that might be a better fit. 

 

[Thorner]

^You've got me there. I've been beaking about needing positional centres specifically over offensive talent so...

[PerreaultForever]

I would be reluctant to give up first round picks in any deal because I am far from convinced there is a deal that will guarantee a turn around and there is a much greater chance we will be even worse than this season. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

13 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Risto and Davidsson to WPG for Ehlers and Appleton. If Botterill would have thrown in the. Second Round Pick that Chevy asked for it would have been done Last September.

FIRE BOTTERILL!!

What a dink.  He has no clue.

[Marvin]

4 hours ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

FIRE BOTTERILL!!

What a dink.  He has no clue.

If that comment is true, then his reputation as a good GM should take a permanent hit -- but it's not happening.  That is such a good trade for the Sabres that could have helped offence, keep Pilut here, balance out the defence, and, ugh, I just want to cry.

[JohnC]

14 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

I would be reluctant to give up first round picks in any deal because I am far from convinced there is a deal that will guarantee a turn around and there is a much greater chance we will be even worse than this season. 

There is no one deal that will turn around this team. That degree of expectation is unrealistic. But a couple to three smart deals that address some obvious needs and better balance this roster can make a big difference. If I can get a legitimate second line winger or center in a deal that requires our first round pick in the package I would take it in a nanosecond. 

[dudacek]

16 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

I would be reluctant to give up first round picks in any deal because I am far from convinced there is a deal that will guarantee a turn around and there is a much greater chance we will be even worse than this season. 

That’s an interesting discussion.

Players whose track record indicates we should expect similar results from:

Eichel, Reinhart, Johansson, McCabe, Ristolainen, Lazar, Okposo

Players who may or may not have played above their heads last year:

Olofsson, Jokiharju

Players who had a down year based their track record:

Skinner, Montour, Miller, Hutton

Players who are inexperienced enough to be better next year:

Olofsson, Mittelstadt, Asplund, Thompson, Cozens, Kahun, Dahlin,Jokiharju, Ullmark

Free agents who may be difficult to replace

Larsson, Scandella

Free agents who should be fairly easy to replace or upgrade:

Sobotka, Sheary, Vesey, Girgensons, Simmonds, Frolik, Bogosian

Edited September 5, 2020 by dudacek