HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Arizona Coyotes
Notices

2013 NHL Draft (draft day chat link in Post 887)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-17-2013, 06:18 PM
  #651
XX
... Waiting
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 48th State
Country: United States
Posts: 27,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
I know, we've been on contrary positions on this subject. :-/ But what if we can get Carolina to take Michalek instead of Gormley? Friedman did say they are looking for Top 4 D with term and experience. And Daple and Peters may not have much trade value right now, but those kind of low-risk throw ins can easily surprise and overperform.
There isn't a D man in our system or on our roster that would replace the loss of Michalek. You make the team significantly worse by trading him.

XX is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 06:24 PM
  #652
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
There isn't a D man in our system or on our roster that would replace the loss of Michalek. You make the team significantly worse by trading him.
I'm a Z fan too but somehow we managed to do just fine without Michalek for two years with Morris, Klesla, and Aucoin... Morris rebounded this year and Stone looks ready for Top 4 duty.

If we want to have a legit shot at drafting a franchise center this year, we're probably going to have to move one of Yandle, Gormley, Rundblad, or Michalek. None of those are a particularly easy choice to part with.

IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 06:35 PM
  #653
XX
... Waiting
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 48th State
Country: United States
Posts: 27,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
If we want to have a legit shot at drafting a franchise center this year, we're probably going to have to move one of Yandle, Gormley, Rundblad, or Michalek. None of those are a particularly easy choice to part with.
If your team identity is built around gritty defensive play, you don't jettison those types of players. We missed Aucoin and Rozi bad this year. That's a lot of experience that came off the back end, and a lot of leadership lost with Aucoin. Yandle can be traded, so long as we get a scoring forward in return.

I think it's crazy to even contemplate moving your minute munching #2 (that is holding your young Norris contenders hand) to move up in the draft. 5, Skinner, + for Yandle and 12 is way, way more reasonable.

XX is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 07:20 PM
  #654
Sinurgy
Embrace Passion
 
Sinurgy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 7,410
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
5, Skinner, + for Yandle and 12 is way, way more reasonable.
I hope you're just making a point here and not honestly suggesting this would be a good trade.

Sinurgy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 07:44 PM
  #655
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
If your team identity is built around gritty defensive play, you don't jettison those types of players. We missed Aucoin and Rozi bad this year. That's a lot of experience that came off the back end, and a lot of leadership lost with Aucoin. Yandle can be traded, so long as we get a scoring forward in return.

I think it's crazy to even contemplate moving your minute munching #2 (that is holding your young Norris contenders hand) to move up in the draft. 5, Skinner, + for Yandle and 12 is way, way more reasonable.
Well you and I obviously disagree on our valuation of Yandle. Yandle is easily our best offensive player who hasn't missed a single game in the past 4 seasons. Without him our PP this season is dead last. And Gormley/Rundblad/OEL have yet to prove they can even match his offensive productivity. I think it's even crazier to consider moving a two-time All Star ahead of Michalek to move up in the draft. Yes, our team identity is gritty defensive play, but our team needs all the offensive talent it can get as well - we need both grit and skill to get even remotely close to the Grail.

Moving Yandle for anything less than consistently proven scoring forwards screws our offense for a couple of seasons. And trading him more or less straight up for someone injury-prone like Skinner is very risky - the difference between 5 and 12 certainly doesn't make up for that at all. I'd much rather take that theoretical offer from Philly for Couts + Read + 1st + 2nd over Skinner and the 5th.

IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 07:53 PM
  #656
hbk
Registered User
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
Well you and I obviously disagree on our valuation of Yandle. Yandle is easily our best offensive player who hasn't missed a single game in the past 4 seasons. Without him our PP this season is dead last. And Gormley/Rundblad/OEL have yet to prove they can even match his offensive productivity. I think it's even crazier to consider moving a two-time All Star ahead of Michalek to move up in the draft. Yes, our team identity is gritty defensive play, but our team needs all the offensive talent it can get as well - we need both grit and skill to get even remotely close to the Grail.

Moving Yandle for anything less than consistently proven scoring forwards screws our offense for a couple of seasons. And trading him more or less straight up for someone injury-prone like Skinner is very risky - the difference between 5 and 12 certainly doesn't make up for that at all. I'd much rather take that theoretical offer from Philly for Couts + Read + 1st + 2nd over Skinner and the 5th.
At 5 you are looking at a potential star forward. It's that type of draft. You will get a very good forward at 12 but they are certainly a notch or two below what you could get at 5.

hbk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 08:21 PM
  #657
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
At 5 you are looking at a potential star forward. It's that type of draft. You will get a very good forward at 12 but they are certainly a notch or two below what you could get at 5.
Yes, obviously I'm an advocate for a move to 5, the question is whom should be the pound of flesh we offer up. In the case of Yandle for Skinner + 5th, Barkov and Lindholm, no matter how great they are, are not going to play for us next season for one reason or another (e.g. Tippett not playing rookies, military committments, etc), and knowing Tippett, probably won't even see NHL ice time until near the end of year 2 at the earliest.

So basically it's Yandle for Skinner for at least 1.5 seasons. Skinner despite his obvious scoring talent also has legitimate injury concerns and his PPG has regressed each season since his rookie year despite playing with better talent at forward than we have. Whereas we know exactly what we're getting with Yandle - a very durable, elite PMD with leadership (he doesn't wear an A for no reason) good for 40-50 points minimum each season. Skinner can maybe get back to form and stay healthy, but right now it's equally likely he doesn't develop chemistry with our forwards and/or he gets injured again.

Skinner + the 5th is simply not good enough of a return for Yandle. Again, I'm all ears on proposals we should make, but I'll just let it be known that Yandle (and OEL) is the last d-man of ours I'd consider sacrificing to move up, and for good reason.

IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 08:34 PM
  #658
hbk
Registered User
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
Yes, obviously I'm an advocate for a move to 5, the question is whom should be the pound of flesh we offer up. In the case of Yandle for Skinner + 5th, Barkov and Lindholm, no matter how great they are, are not going to play for us next season for one reason or another (e.g. Tippett not playing rookies, military committments, etc), and knowing Tippett, probably won't even see NHL ice time until near the end of year 2 at the earliest.

So basically it's Yandle for Skinner for at least 1.5 seasons. Skinner despite his obvious scoring talent also has legitimate injury concerns and his PPG has regressed each season since his rookie year despite playing with better talent at forward than we have. Whereas we know exactly what we're getting with Yandle - a very durable, elite PMD with leadership (he doesn't wear an A for no reason) good for 40-50 points minimum each season. Skinner can maybe get back to form and stay healthy, but right now it's equally likely he doesn't develop chemistry with our forwards and/or he gets injured again.

Skinner + the 5th is simply not good enough of a return for Yandle. Again, I'm all ears on proposals we should make, but I'll just let it be known that Yandle (and OEL) is the last d-man of ours I'd consider sacrificing to move up, and for good reason.

I know one scouting service that gives the top 5 "franchise player" status.

Yandle as good as he is will never be a franchise d man and if you think 3 years of Yandle exceeds 7 years with a franchise forward then I will respectfully disagree.

On Skinner. I factored the injury history into the equation with my proposal. Nope not a fan of the length of his deal but I'm willing to take the leap of faith that We haven't seen the best of Skinner just yet. He is still a legitimate first line talent.


Last edited by hbk: 06-17-2013 at 08:39 PM.
hbk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 08:42 PM
  #659
AndrewYotes
Registered User
 
AndrewYotes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 1,802
vCash: 500
I used to be an advocate for trading Yandle, but his numbers the last four years speak for themselves. He is one of the top offensive defensemen in the NHL, is a leader on the team and brings offensive to an offensively starved club. He's easily top 5 or top 3 in the whole NHL, and is consistent about it. His defense gaffes annoy me, but still.

I'm not entirely against trading Yandle, but I feel the return has to be a legitimate playmaking elite center. Even looking at the rumors Coots-Read deal, Read is old, Coots is defensively great but not offensively lethal. We already have a shutdown D-man in Hanzal, we don't need another, we need a constant scoring thread. I'm only for moving Yandle if such a threat is coming back the other way.

AndrewYotes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 09:09 PM
  #660
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
I know one scouting service that gives the top 5 "franchise player" status.

Yandle as good as he is will never be a franchise d man and if you think 3 years of Yandle exceeds 7 years with a franchise forward then I will respectfully disagree.
The #5's since 2000:

2000: Raffi Torres
2001: R.J. Umberger
2002: Scottie Upshall
2003: Ryan Getzlaf
2004: Wojtek Wolski
2005: Gilbert Brule
2006: Phil Kessel
2007: Karl Alzner
2008: Luke Schenn
2009: Brayden Schenn
2010: Nino Neidereitter
2011: Ryan Strome
2012: Morgan Reilly

The only two legit franchise forwards I see are Getzlaf and Kessel. Jury is still out on Schenn and Nino, and Strome. In any case, even the #5 is not a sure thing.

IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 09:11 PM
  #661
Sinurgy
Embrace Passion
 
Sinurgy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 7,410
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
At 5 you are looking at a potential star forward. It's that type of draft. You will get a very good forward at 12 but they are certainly a notch or two below what you could get at 5.
That's the keyword.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
I know one scouting service that gives the top 5 "franchise player" status.
I also know of a few scouting services that felt Kyle Turris should've went #1 overall instead of Patrick Kane. It's also worth noting that at #5, you're franchise player will not be your choice so you either have to hope that scouting service was %100 accurate or that 1 of the 4 teams ahead of you made the wrong selection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
Yandle as good as he is will never be a franchise d man and if you think 3 years of Yandle exceeds 7 years with a franchise forward then I will respectfully disagree.
The problem with that statement is that not only are you assuming the player will become a franchise forward, you're also assuming the player is a stud right out of the gate.

Sinurgy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 09:18 PM
  #662
hbk
Registered User
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
The #5's since 2000:

2000: Raffi Torres
2001: R.J. Umberger
2002: Scottie Upshall
2003: Ryan Getzlaf
2004: Wojtek Wolski
2005: Gilbert Brule
2006: Phil Kessel
2007: Karl Alzner
2008: Luke Schenn
2009: Brayden Schenn
2010: Nino Neidereitter
2011: Ryan Strome
2012: Morgan Reilly

The only two legit franchise forwards I see are Getzlaf and Kessel. Jury is still out on Schenn and Nino, and Strome. In any case, even the #5 is not a sure thing.
I'd encourage you to read up on the drafts. 2013 is more similar to 2003 than it is 2002.

Here's the names you need to discuss:

Jones - franchise D man
MacKinnon -star Center; I think he's better than Tavares who was a finalist for MVP
Drouin - draws comparisons to Patrick Kane and Denis Savard
Barkov - I recall Teemu Selanne fell his draft year because of military service. Jets didn't regret that decision. speaking of 2003 draft though Barkov is compared to Getzlaf
Nichushkin - comparisons to Marian Hossa
Monahan - Ron Francis style top line center

I only want Maloney to make moves which strengthen the long-term competitiveness. A franchise /star forward is what this organization needs. If we could extract that along with a great young player like Skinner for our 1st and Yandle it's a move I personally would be willing to make.

hbk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 09:25 PM
  #663
hbk
Registered User
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinurgy View Post
That's the keyword.


I also know of a few scouting services that felt Kyle Turris should've went #1 overall instead of Patrick Kane. It's also worth noting that at #5, you're franchise player will not be your choice so you either have to hope that scouting service was %100 accurate or that 1 of the 4 teams ahead of you made the wrong selection.


The problem with that statement is that not only are you assuming the player will become a franchise forward, you're also assuming the player is a stud right out of the gate.
I'm making a lot of strong statements about this draft. I've done my homework. Hell, I even went to the Memorial Cup this year (6 of the top 15 players in this draft played in that tournament). I'm a big believer in this draft. I make zero apologies for it. I suggested a skinner + 5 because it gives us two long-term assets at the expense of 3 years of Yandle and our 12th (which is also still a strong pick but a notch or two at minimum below what I feel we would get at 5).

I also say minimum 7 years as I suspect we would be willing/able to sign a 2nd contract that extended into UFA years (similar to what we did with OEL and Yandle). As for Yandle, I'm not sold that given our ownership issues that he would be willing to re-up with the franchise again without exploring UFA status. He could be looking at a home run contract from a team like the Flyers who seem to have no problem overpaying for a UFA. Can we compete with a multi year contract that is much higher than what we are currently paying Yandle? I don't think we can or will for that matter.


Last edited by hbk: 06-17-2013 at 10:00 PM.
hbk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 09:41 PM
  #664
DesertDawg
Registered User
 
DesertDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Superstition Mts
Posts: 4,566
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
Barkov and Lindholm, no matter how great they are, are not going to play for us next season for one reason or another (e.g. Tippett not playing rookies, military committments, etc), and knowing Tippett, probably won't even see NHL ice time until near the end of year 2 at the earliest.
If Barkov gets drafted by the Coyotes, he will play next season on the Coyotes. I do not believe his "military obligation would keep him from coming over to North America. Coach Tippet may limit his special teams ice time, but Barkov has too much talent and is physically mature enough to play. I would suspect that he would be on the "3rd line" to start the season paired with Korpikoski.

DesertDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 10:12 PM
  #665
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
I'd encourage you to read up on the drafts. 2013 is more similar to 2003 than it is 2002.

Here's the names you need to discuss:

Jones - franchise D man
MacKinnon -star Center; I think he's better than Tavares who was a finalist for MVP
Drouin - draws comparisons to Patrick Kane and Denis Savard
Barkov - I recall Teemu Selanne fell his draft year because of military service. Jets didn't regret that decision. speaking of 2003 draft though Barkov is compared to Getzlaf
Nichushkin - comparisons to Marian Hossa
Monahan - Ron Francis style top line center

I only want Maloney to make moves which strengthen the long-term competitiveness. A franchise /star forward is what this organization needs. If we could extract that along with a great young player like Skinner for our 1st and Yandle it's a move I personally would be willing to make.
Yeah, I've read up quite a bit on this draft and watched player on tape too, thanks. We can't obviously make the comparison to 2003 yet until like 5 years from now. Both classes top heavy with talent, but no one knows how the guys who go in the 2nd round this year will pan out.

I obviously agree that this year Maloney should do all that he can to land a franchise forward. But I'm also pathologically risk-averse; star potential can flame out in the NHL, no matter how promising that potential is. Hence, I'm much more comfortable with trading potential for potential (Gormley) than with trading someone who's in his prime/essential to our offense (Yandle) for potential. And I think moving up to draft a franchise forward can be done through the former path - in fact, based on what Maloney has repeatedly said about moving Yandle, it's probably going to be the path he'll take.

IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 10:21 PM
  #666
hbk
Registered User
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
Yeah, I've read up quite a bit on this draft, thanks. We can't obviously make the comparison to 2003 yet until like 5 years from now. Both classes top heavy with talent, but no one knows how the guys who go in the 2nd round this year will pan out. And comparisons are just comparisons.

I obviously agree that this year Maloney should do all that he can to land a franchise forward. But I'm also pathologically risk-averse; star potential can flame out in the NHL, no matter how promising that potential is. Hence, I'm much more comfortable with trading potential for potential (Gormley) than with trading someone who's in his prime/essential to our offense (Yandle) for potential. And I think moving up to draft a franchise forward can be done through the former path - in fact, based on what Maloney has repeatedly said about moving Yandle, it's probably going to be the path he'll take.
That's why I included a deal with Skinner; who at face value meets many of the qualities that Maloney says he's looking for.

My question with Yandle remains the same. In 3 years can you or would you justify paying the going rate for a UFA d man? Are you prepared to anty up $6-7 Million per season in 3 years for Yandle? I don't believe we are to be honest. The three years we have on the current deal are great. Yandle is a great D man. He finished 12th for the Norris ahead of Markov, Pieterangelo, Bfyugulein (easy for you to spell), Hamhuis, Green, Timonen, Girardi, and even Streit. I certainly am not advocating giving him away but I do admit targeting Skinner ahead of other candidates on Carolina due to his history of injuries and his contract. I will say this though. I don't imagine Carolina being willing to move Skinner in this type of deal unless they had a concern about Skinner (similar to my concern about being able to re-sign Yandle).

I will also restate my long time concern about icing a lineup which includes both Rundblad and Yandle. It's not a recipe for success. Not enough puck and having two offensive minded guys will force Tippett to play one or both of these players in situations he would normally prefer to play someone else. I strongly believe we would be better suited to hold onto Gormely and deal Rundblad (who I believe is one of this organizations most skilled players) as I believe Gormely will be a #2 every situation D man in this league.

Edit: Just looked up Skinner's remaining salary. I had hoped they had averaged in instead of going for the straight $6 M across the board. That's pricy.... that's likely why I included McBain as well in my original proposal.


Last edited by hbk: 06-17-2013 at 10:35 PM.
hbk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 10:45 PM
  #667
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
That's why I included a deal with Skinner; who at face value meets many of the qualities that Maloney says he's looking for.

My question with Yandle remains the same. In 3 years can you or would you justify paying the going rate for a UFA d man? Are you prepared to anty up $6-7 Million per season in 3 years for Yandle? I don't believe we are to be honest. The three years we have on the current deal are great. Yandle is a great D man. He finished 12th for the Norris ahead of Markov, Pieterangelo, Bfyugulein (easy for you to spell), Hamhuis, Green, Timonen, Girardi, and even Streit. I certainly am not advocating giving him away but I do admit targeting Skinner ahead of other candidates on Carolina due to his history of injuries and his contract. I will say this though. I don't imagine Carolina being willing to move Skinner in this type of deal unless they had a concern about Skinner (similar to my concern about being able to re-sign Yandle).

I will also restate my long time concern about icing a lineup which includes both Rundblad and Yandle. It's not a recipe for success. Not enough puck and having two offensive minded guys will force Tippett to play one or both of these players in situations he would normally prefer to play someone else. I strongly believe we would be better suited to hold onto Gormely and deal Rundblad (who I believe is one of this organizations most skilled players) as I believe Gormely will be a #2 every situation D man in this league.

Edit: Just looked up Skinner's remaining salary. I had hoped they had averaged in instead of going for the straight $6 M across the board. That's pricy....
We don't know what Yandle's going to ask for in three 3 seasons; what I do know was that he resigned to a pretty team friendly long-term contract 2 years ago in the face of uncertainty. In three years, where he easily could be our next Captain and ownership might be settled, Yandle might be feeling magnanimous and take a hometown discount. Or of course he could follow the money. The thing is, though, we aren't really going to improve our financials by dealing him for Skinner either, as you just noted.

I agree that we shouldn't both have Yandle and Rundblad, and that we should deal Rundblad first over both Yandle and Gormley. But I do believe Tippett does need to give Rundblad significant playing time next season to improve his trade value; right now it isn't that good. And with Stone exceeding expectations, really the only way to force that would be to deal either Morris or Michalek, not an easy proposition to make (unless you want to move Stone).

IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 10:52 PM
  #668
nooch
Registered User
 
nooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 188
vCash: 500
I still think moving Rundblad to forward would be a great option. Let play point on the power play. Playing defense for his career should keep him solid as a 2- way forward. And you could play him at D in a pinch.

nooch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 10:52 PM
  #669
hbk
Registered User
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
We don't know what Yandle's going to ask for in three 3 seasons; what I do know was that he resigned to a pretty team friendly long-term contract 2 years ago in the face of uncertainty. In three years, where he easily could be our next Captain and ownership might be settled, Yandle might be feeling magnanimous and take a hometown discount. Or of course he could follow the money. The thing is, though, we aren't really going to improve our financials by dealing him for Skinner either, as you just noted.

I agree that we shouldn't both have Yandle and Rundblad, and that we should deal Rundblad first over both Yandle and Gormley. But I do believe Tippett does need to give Rundblad significant playing time next season to improve his trade value; right now it isn't that good. And with Stone exceeding expectations, really the only way to force that would be to deal either Morris or Michalek, not an easy proposition to make (unless you want to move Stone).
I could see one of Morris or Klesla being dealt at the draft. Michalek I think they like and will try to keep him long-term. I'm not hesitant to not moving one of Morris/Klesla until the deadline either as that would provide us with a very handsome return and free up space for Rundblad and/or Gormely.

Stone didn't really overachieve. I watched a great deal of AHL hockey earlier this year and he was hands down our top guy down there and deserved the call up. I think his development is what might force Maloney's hand on moving Klesla for immediate help at forward this summer. Hemsky? We would be targetting those organizations that would be willing to downgrade on skill to ensure long-term cap flexibility. Might be a good card to play. I trust Maloney here. I still don't mind the 2 * 2nd rounders

hbk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 10:54 PM
  #670
hbk
Registered User
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nooch View Post
I still think moving Rundblad to forward would be a great option. Let play point on the power play. Playing defense for his career should keep him solid as a 2- way forward. And you could play him at D in a pinch.
This isn't something that you do to be honest. This is an invitation to ask for a trade or seriously investigate playing in the KHL or at the very least return to the Swedish Elite League where you were the MVP playing Defense.

hbk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 11:05 PM
  #671
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
I could see one of Morris or Klesla being dealt at the draft. Michalek I think they like and will try to keep him long-term. I'm not hesitant to not moving one of Morris/Klesla until the deadline either as that would provide us with a very handsome return and free up space for Rundblad and/or Gormely.

Stone didn't really overachieve. I watched a great deal of AHL hockey earlier this year and he was hands down our top guy down there and deserved the call up. I think his development is what might force Maloney's hand on moving Klesla for immediate help at forward this summer. Hemsky? We would be targetting those organizations that would be willing to downgrade on skill to ensure long-term cap flexibility. Might be a good card to play. I trust Maloney here. I still don't mind the 2 * 2nd rounders
I meant Stone has overachieved relative to his draft projections: immobile defender who won't make it past bottom pairing duty. I think he can be a very solid Top 4 physical TWD and the heir apparent to Morris - maybe will never be as good of a skater, but Stone will probably end up being a bit more reliable in his own end and not prone to as many bad penalties too.

Klesla is definitely the odd man out, though I'd flip him for Neuvirth (and Caps HFers have embraced that deal) and fill one of our holes in net with an affordable, young + talented option that fits in with Burke's preferences at goaltender. Morris can probably fetch a 2nd rounder at the deadline.

IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2013, 11:31 PM
  #672
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 41,464
vCash: 500
Wait, are people getting upset about the idea of trading Yandle all by himself for Skinner AND the 5th overall in this draft? I'd do that. I wouldn't propose it on the main board, though, because I'd be laughed off the Internet.

rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2013, 03:09 AM
  #673
Sinurgy
Embrace Passion
 
Sinurgy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 7,410
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
Wait, are people getting upset about the idea of trading Yandle all by himself for Skinner AND the 5th overall in this draft? I'd do that. I wouldn't propose it on the main board, though, because I'd be laughed off the Internet.
No it was not Yandle by himself, it also included the Coyotes #12 pick. So basically Yandle for Skinner and moving up 7 spots in the draft.

Sinurgy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2013, 09:49 AM
  #674
RemoAZ
Stugots
 
RemoAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Glendale, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 2,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
Well you and I obviously disagree on our valuation of Yandle. Yandle is easily our best offensive player who hasn't missed a single game in the past 4 seasons. Without him our PP this season is dead last. And Gormley/Rundblad/OEL have yet to prove they can even match his offensive productivity. I think it's even crazier to consider moving a two-time All Star ahead of Michalek to move up in the draft. Yes, our team identity is gritty defensive play, but our team needs all the offensive talent it can get as well - we need both grit and skill to get even remotely close to the Grail.

Moving Yandle for anything less than consistently proven scoring forwards screws our offense for a couple of seasons. And trading him more or less straight up for someone injury-prone like Skinner is very risky - the difference between 5 and 12 certainly doesn't make up for that at all. I'd much rather take that theoretical offer from Philly for Couts + Read + 1st + 2nd over Skinner and the 5th.
I agree. I don't think Z is worth taking up $4 mil in cap space. I'd like to see Stone and Rundblad taking two of the right hand shot dmen spots this season. Then use that $4 mil to upgrade a forward spot on offense. Stone, Morris, Yandle and OEL in the top 4 works and you still have plenty of talent to fill the last two spots.

RemoAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2013, 12:20 AM
  #675
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,529
vCash: 500
According to the Denver Post, apparently Sakic and the Avs are actually leaning with forward for the first, likely MacKinnon though Barkov is a darkhorse candidate they're enamored with as well. I think it's just a gambit to get Florida to trade up and give Colorado an extra pick, but in either case, interesting stuff. Next few weeks should be plenty exciting.

EDIT: Okay, apparently it is not a smokescreen. Sakic called the Denver Post and explicitly said they're not drafting Jones.


Last edited by IPreferPi: 06-19-2013 at 03:39 PM.
IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:19 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.