Yup. And we should still try to do this, esp with the crazy draft we have coming up.
What can we sell though?
- Travis Moen could be worth a 2nd, at best, and there are rumours he isn't happy here.
- Bourque would have been worth something but he may be out for the season.
- Plekanec is the linchpin for our offense, not tradeable in the given situation.
- Maybe Desharnais if both Galchenyuk and Eller step up, but I'd rather convert him to wing.
On the bright side Tomas Kaberle had 2 assists tonight, went +3, and played 12:36. Looks like Therrien managed his minutes, but if so, there is no reason he should not be able to land a Zidlicky-like return.
I had several arguments in the OP of my surgical tanking thread. To reassess:
- We're not getting a top-5 pick unless we trade with Calgary
- We're unlikely to get another 1st rounder
- We are clearing cap space for the 2013 UFA season, which I predicted would be fantastic.
- We're letting some of our prospects in future. We signed a 6th/7th D (Bouillon) rather than rush Tinordi or Beaulieu to "help us win now", which is good.
Yup. And we should still try to do this, esp with the crazy draft we have coming up.
just a question of who/what we sell...
there is value, long-term development-wise, of the team not only making the playoffs, but winning in the playoffs, even if we don't make it all the way to the cup.
I'd be more than supportive of MB leveraging some depth guys into additional top-90 picks, with the goal in mind of building a "war chest" of picks to move up in the first round or add another first round pick leading into the draft.
BUT, they'd have to be very careful not to muck up the locker room chemistry in doing so.
guys like Moen, Armstrong & Bouillion all may very well be reasonably replaced internally and/or minimally missed on the ice, but how much impact to they have in the room and how much would their departure negatively impact the environment this season needs to be weighed in.
another 3rd or even 2nd round pick wouldn't be worth self-sabotaging the team chemistry heading into the stretch run/playoffs, even if none of those guys figure promimently in the long-term plans.
Kaberle, maybe bourque, because of their contract ramifications (and to a degree, that neither are likely big influencers behind the scenes) are the prime candidates imo, but their contracts also likely mean we wouldn't be getting deadline premiums for them.
Ryder might very well be the best trade chip to dangle, and I could certainly see him be dealt come deadline if someone is crazy enough to put first+ offer on the table for him (or maybe even just a first if he doesn't manage to make himself a strong contributor before the deadline).
- Travis Moen could be worth a 2nd, at best, and there are rumours he isn't happy here.
- Bourque would have been worth something but he may be out for the season.
- Plekanec is the linchpin for our offense, not tradeable in the given situation.
- Maybe Desharnais if both Galchenyuk and Eller step up, but I'd rather convert him to wing.
On the bright side Tomas Kaberle had 2 assists tonight, went +3, and played 12:36. Looks like Therrien managed his minutes, but if so, there is no reason he should not be able to land a Zidlicky-like return.
- Travis Moen could be worth a 2nd, at best, and there are rumours he isn't happy here.
- Bourque would have been worth something but he may be out for the season.
- Plekanec is the linchpin for our offense, not tradeable in the given situation.
- Maybe Desharnais if both Galchenyuk and Eller step up, but I'd rather convert him to wing.
On the bright side Tomas Kaberle had 2 assists tonight, went +3, and played 12:36. Looks like Therrien managed his minutes, but if so, there is no reason he should not be able to land a Zidlicky-like return.
I had several arguments in the OP of my surgical tanking thread. To reassess:
- We're not getting a top-5 pick unless we trade with Calgary
- We're unlikely to get another 1st rounder
- We are clearing cap space for the 2013 UFA season, which I predicted would be fantastic.
- We're letting some of our prospects in future. We signed a 6th/7th D (Bouillon) rather than rush Tinordi or Beaulieu to "help us win now", which is good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time
just a question of who/what we sell...
there is value, long-term development-wise, of the team not only making the playoffs, but winning in the playoffs, even if we don't make it all the way to the cup.
I'd be more than supportive of MB leveraging some depth guys into additional top-90 picks, with the goal in mind of building a "war chest" of picks to move up in the first round or add another first round pick leading into the draft.
BUT, they'd have to be very careful not to muck up the locker room chemistry in doing so.
guys like Moen, Armstrong & Bouillion all may very well be reasonably replaced internally and/or minimally missed on the ice, but how much impact to they have in the room and how much would their departure negatively impact the environment this season needs to be weighed in.
another 3rd or even 2nd round pick wouldn't be worth self-sabotaging the team chemistry heading into the stretch run/playoffs, even if none of those guys figure promimently in the long-term plans.
Kaberle, maybe bourque, because of their contract ramifications (and to a degree, that neither are likely big influencers behind the scenes) are the prime candidates imo, but their contracts also likely mean we wouldn't be getting deadline premiums for them.
Ryder might very well be the best trade chip to dangle, and I could certainly see him be dealt come deadline if someone is crazy enough to put first+ offer on the table for him (or maybe even just a first if he doesn't manage to make himself a strong contributor before the deadline).
Only player with real value is Markov. Other vets could be packaged with him but that's pretty much all we've got to deal with now. And yes, if he'd waive his NTC I'd definitely be looking to see what I could get for him. NY, Calgary, Philly... all those teams would love to have him and I'd love to get Calgary's 1st. Too bad we didn't do it last year when we had the chance.
Edit: MT is right, Ryder could be worth something but he'd better start scoring soon.
Only player with real value is Markov. Other vets could be packaged with him but that's pretty much all we've got to deal with now. And yes, if he'd waive his NTC I'd definitely be looking to see what I could get for him. NY, Calgary, Philly... all those teams would love to have him and I'd love to get Calgary's 1st. Too bad we didn't do it last year when we had the chance.
Edit: MT is right, Ryder could be worth something but he'd better start scoring soon.
it would have to be a damn good return...
while he's clearly not the full Markov of old, and probably won't get back there ever, he's still really really effective.
and while he's not seemingly the big vocal leader type, how much better this organization plays when he is in the lineup, now as much as before his injuries, it's a strong enough link that it has to be considered.
trading him before the deadline for futures would be a very big negative emotional hit to the group, messing with their confidence short term and even with the "no excuses" mantra, a very tough sell for the coach/organization in terms of building a commitment to excellence.
The return would have to be so good that we'd be crazy to say no... and what lottery destined team is going to give up that top-5 likely pick for a guy with a bum knee and one more year on his contract? even Feaster isn't that dumb.
- Travis Moen could be worth a 2nd, at best, and there are rumours he isn't happy here.
- Bourque would have been worth something but he may be out for the season.
- Plekanec is the linchpin for our offense, not tradeable in the given situation.
- Maybe Desharnais if both Galchenyuk and Eller step up, but I'd rather convert him to wing.
On the bright side Tomas Kaberle had 2 assists tonight, went +3, and played 12:36. Looks like Therrien managed his minutes, but if so, there is no reason he should not be able to land a Zidlicky-like return.
I had several arguments in the OP of my surgical tanking thread. To reassess:
- We're not getting a top-5 pick unless we trade with Calgary
- We're unlikely to get another 1st rounder
- We are clearing cap space for the 2013 UFA season, which I predicted would be fantastic.
- We're letting some of our prospects in future. We signed a 6th/7th D (Bouillon) rather than rush Tinordi or Beaulieu to "help us win now", which is good.
- Travis Moen could be worth a 2nd, at best, and there are rumours he isn't happy here.
- Bourque would have been worth something but he may be out for the season.
- Plekanec is the linchpin for our offense, not tradeable in the given situation.
- Maybe Desharnais if both Galchenyuk and Eller step up, but I'd rather convert him to wing.
On the bright side Tomas Kaberle had 2 assists tonight, went +3, and played 12:36. Looks like Therrien managed his minutes, but if so, there is no reason he should not be able to land a Zidlicky-like return.
I had several arguments in the OP of my surgical tanking thread. To reassess:
- We're not getting a top-5 pick unless we trade with Calgary
- We're unlikely to get another 1st rounder
- We are clearing cap space for the 2013 UFA season, which I predicted would be fantastic.
- We're letting some of our prospects in future. We signed a 6th/7th D (Bouillon) rather than rush Tinordi or Beaulieu to "help us win now", which is good.
while he's clearly not the full Markov of old, and probably won't get back there ever, he's still really really effective.
and while he's not seemingly the big vocal leader type, how much better this organization plays when he is in the lineup, now as much as before his injuries, it's a strong enough link that it has to be considered.
trading him before the deadline for futures would be a very big negative emotional hit to the group, messing with their confidence short term and even with the "no excuses" mantra, a very tough sell for the coach/organization in terms of building a commitment to excellence.
The return would have to be so good that we'd be crazy to say no... and what lottery destined team is going to give up that top-5 likely pick for a guy with a bum knee and one more year on his contract? even Feaster isn't that dumb.
I think it sends a positive message...
You say to the group, this is YOUR team now. We believe in you. We wouldn't have done this if we didn't think you could win.
In three years Galchenyuk will be 22, Subban will be 26, Max will be 25, Price will be 28... that team should have a pretty good shot at winning something. And if we can add one more piece to help that group now then I think it's worth it.
You say to the group, this is YOUR team now. We believe in you.
In three years Galchenyuk will be 22, Subban will be 26, Max will be 25, Price will be 28... that team should have a pretty good shot at winning something. And if we can add one more piece to help that group now then I think it's worth it.
You say to the group, this is YOUR team now. We believe in you. We wouldn't have done this if we didn't think you could win.
In three years Galchenyuk will be 22, Subban will be 26, Max will be 25, Price will be 28... that team should have a pretty good shot at winning something. And if we can add one more piece to help that group now then I think it's worth it.
doesn't work that way... even though Gainey tried that spin back in 08 when he wiffed on hossa...
when a guy is well liked AND is a very good player, the team's identity includes him and identity takes time to build. very very hard to rebuild a positive team identity in a few weeks, let alone trying to do so while clearly playing with sub-par talent.
injuries and trades happen all the time, so the group will obviously move on, and there is no guarantee that keeping him the team will go deep in the playoffs anyways... but odds-wise, imo the risk is pretty large so the reward had better be massive.
doesn't work that way... even though Gainey tried that spin back in 08 when he wiffed on hossa...
when a guy is well liked AND is a very good player, the team's identity includes him and identity takes time to build. very very hard to rebuild a positive team identity in a few weeks, let alone trying to do so while clearly playing with sub-par talent.
injuries and trades happen all the time, so the group will obviously move on, and there is no guarantee that keeping him the team will go deep in the playoffs anyways... but odds-wise, imo the risk is pretty large so the reward had better be massive.
You're still only thinking about THIS season... take a longer term view. Even if you're right and it messes us up... so what? It's worth it if we get a player who can be help us for the next decade.
Losing Markov isn't going to send us back to the stone age. Hell, we might lose him anyway if that knee goes away.
You're still only thinking about THIS season... take a longer term view. Even if you're right and it messes us up... so what? It's worth it if we get a player who can be help us for the next decade.
Losing Markov isn't going to send us back to the stone age. Hell, we might lose him anyway if that knee goes away.
it's not just "this" season...
it's the direct impact this season and next, which also includes the impact Markov's presence and the teams results will have on a roster that right now has several key young players who should be integral parts of any future success.
There is no guarantee that whatever pick(s) we would end up getting for Markov will turn into successful players. there is risk involved.
I'm firmly supportive of management making decisions that contribute to a long-term vision of sustained success.
but that is not a simple equation of "trade veteran for draft pick + time = success for a decade".
it's a balancing act, and with the knowledge the team/organization has today, they have to weigh out the potential costs/potential benefits (and both are just that, "potential"), and then act on their "best guess" for overall success.
I think you underestimate both the potential benefits and costs of removing a player of Markov's impact from a team that is
A- enjoying immediate success
B- has several key young players in place who have little/no taste of playing for a successful NHL team and/or playoff run (Pacioretty, Eller, Diaz, Gally, Galch, Emelin have a COMBINED 7 NHL playoff games... Subban & Price have 21 & 26...)
This team with Markov is far more likely to advance past the first round then without him, let alone making a deeper run.
again, no guarantee that keeping markov = 2nd round or better, but I'm sure you'd agree that the odds go up significantly... and then there's next year.
these are factors that weigh on the "don't trade Markov" side, and should not be ignored/dismissed so casually.
none of this is to say that you don't trade Markov no matter what, just that the return has to be of the "can't say no" variety, as opposed to "best offer we could find".
what lottery bound team is going to give up a chance at one of this year's "can't miss" top-prospects for 1 season of Markov?
it's the direct impact this season and next, which also includes the impact Markov's presence and the teams results will have on a roster that right now has several key young players who should be integral parts of any future success.
There is no guarantee that whatever pick(s) we would end up getting for Markov will turn into successful players. there is risk involved.
I'm firmly supportive of management making decisions that contribute to a long-term vision of sustained success.
but that is not a simple equation of "trade veteran for draft pick + time = success for a decade".
it's a balancing act, and with the knowledge the team/organization has today, they have to weigh out the potential costs/potential benefits (and both are just that, "potential"), and then act on their "best guess" for overall success.
I think you underestimate both the potential benefits and costs of removing a player of Markov's impact from a team that is
A- enjoying immediate success
B- has several key young players in place who have little/no taste of playing for a successful NHL team and/or playoff run (Pacioretty, Eller, Diaz, Gally, Galch, Emelin have a COMBINED 7 NHL playoff games... Subban & Price have 21 & 26...)
This team with Markov is far more likely to advance past the first round then without him, let alone making a deeper run.
again, no guarantee that keeping markov = 2nd round or better, but I'm sure you'd agree that the odds go up significantly... and then there's next year.
these are factors that weigh on the "don't trade Markov" side, and should not be ignored/dismissed so casually.
none of this is to say that you don't trade Markov no matter what, just that the return has to be of the "can't say no" variety, as opposed to "best offer we could find".
what lottery bound team is going to give up a chance at one of this year's "can't miss" top-prospects for 1 season of Markov?
Well... how about Calgary? I'm sorry but in this draft I'd definitely take their first for Markov.
If we don't get it... no worries. I'm fine to keep him. But I'd be knocking on doors finding out what I could get, that's all I'm saying dude.
Only player with real value is Markov. Other vets could be packaged with him but that's pretty much all we've got to deal with now. And yes, if he'd waive his NTC I'd definitely be looking to see what I could get for him. NY, Calgary, Philly... all those teams would love to have him and I'd love to get Calgary's 1st. Too bad we didn't do it last year when we had the chance.
Edit: MT is right, Ryder could be worth something but he'd better start scoring soon.
Wouldn't trade Markov unless we get a Craig Rivet type trade.
Well... how about Calgary? I'm sorry but in this draft I'd definitely take their first for Markov.
If we don't get it... no worries. I'm fine to keep him. But I'd be knocking on doors finding out what I could get, that's all I'm saying dude.
a- would NOT make that trade today, because Markov would definitely help them finish higher, and right now they are only 5 pts out with 3 games in hand.
b- why on earth would they make that trade later/at the deadline, if it was clear they were headed for the lottery
c- markov doesn't really fit their needs (he'd help any team, obviously, but to be worth trading away big future assets, i don't see the fit for them with JBo, Brodie, Wideman already in place).
a very likely top-5 pick, at the deadline... hard to pass up
a likely 5-10 pick, at the deadline... other team would have to add
any trade before the deadline that doesn't involve Columbus... it would have to be a first +++
I agree. It has to be a strong offer or forget about it.
Exactly, if we can land a Rivet type deal take it. Gorges and Pacioretty are key parts to our team while Rivet been out of league for years. Plus, be removing Markov's 5.75 for extra cap room this summer.
Wouldn't trade Markov unless we get a Craig Rivet type trade.
a rivet-type deal wouldn't even be close to enough...
people need to remember that Gorges has far exceeded expectations from the time we got our hands on him, and that before MaxPac was picked, Esposito, Macmillan, Blum, Plante, Gillies, Ellerby, Hamill, Hickey, Cherapanov and Riley Nash all had their names called up...
as good as Timmins is, how much do you want to bet that at least 1 of those players was rated higher on his draft sheet!!!
the glorious rivet trade could easily have ended up with us getting:
Esposito - Wishart (was their 1st pick the previous year, obviously much more highly prized by them at the time than Gorges... wouldn't have included him for Rivet unless Gainey had really "fleeced" them at the time... ahhh hindsight)
point being that a depth defensive dman (who was an undrafted free agent signing) and a first pick in the bottom half of a draft (2007 was a pretty deep first round, even with 12-13 top6/top4 NHLers coming out of it, despite that nasty list of "misses" above) is not something to be viewed as a great return for an established talent/contributor like markov.
that type of deal for Markov would be a complete fail unless we got extremmely lucky as we did with how the rivet trade turned out
