2020 Offseason

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

3 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

if we've learned anything, we aren't getting any 1st rounders for our players.  But ya, a 2nd rounder for Helm or Glenny would be fine.  Unless we could get a young RFA or something.  Referring to the other thread, how about one of them for Strome?

I don't really know what Chicago's needs are. Goalie? Maybe D? They seem to have a decent forward lineup even without Strome. They probably see Dach as the future 2C over Strome, which is likely why they don't wanna pay Strome the big contract he's likely to garner this year. Honestly their biggest need is probably unloading Seabrook. Would you take Strome + Seabrook for whatever?

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

It's gonna be mighty sad for Abby next year when he goes to the Griffs and only manages 30 pts

[LeftWinger 4,953]

4 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I don't really know what Chicago's needs are. Goalie? Maybe D? They seem to have a decent forward lineup even without Strome. They probably see Dach as the future 2C over Strome, which is likely why they don't wanna pay Strome the big contract he's likely to garner this year. Honestly their biggest need is probably unloading Seabrook. Would you take Strome + Seabrook for whatever?

Not sure I want Seabrook for our rebuild. Also not sure if his LTIR is a permanent one or not. If so, I'll take that 1st round pick from them too!

[marcaractac 3,963]

2 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I don't really know what Chicago's needs are. Goalie? Maybe D? They seem to have a decent forward lineup even without Strome. They probably see Dach as the future 2C over Strome, which is likely why they don't wanna pay Strome the big contract he's likely to garner this year. Honestly their biggest need is probably unloading Seabrook. Would you take Strome + Seabrook for whatever?

I'd take on Seabrook if it were the primary part of acquiring Strome. Chicago dumping that contract would be HUGE for them. Wings will suck for most of the remainder of his contract. If the team does somehow get good and his contract gets in the way, it'll be an easy buyout to swallow at that point. 

[Dabura 12,207]

22 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

No doubt adding an Oshie is a big add for this team. But that's always been my point with Zadina. It's a Oshie/Tatar/Nyquist/Hudler addition. It's not going to fix the team, and in fact it may end up delaying a rebuild. I want elite players, everyone else can burn for all i care.

I think Zadina has the potential to be better than Oshie/Tatar/Nyquist/Hudler. I don't think that's a stretch at this point in time. I know you're not crazy about his game, and I respect that, but, for me, there's a lot to like. I think he can be elite(ish).

Yes, Hughes is looking like he would've been the smarter pick. But time will tell.

Beyond Hughes, no 2018 hidden gems have emerged: https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2018e.html

We're in agreement about Zadina likely not being That Guy We Need; he's likely not going to be Pastrnak or Kucherov. ...Though, to be fair, Pastrnak and Kucherov have played with best-of-the-best players for most (all?) of their respective NHL careers, which has undoubtedly boosted them. In any case, I don't really hold anything against Zadina. He can only be the player he is. It's on the brain trust to fill the holes that need to be filled.

I agree that the top priority has to be finding A Legit Superstar and that wanking ourselves off to our current "core" is starting to feel kinda stupid. We have sort of a "core by default," i.e. they're the best we've got, so we imbue them with importance and potential that maybe they haven't quite earned. But, as with Zadina, I don't really hold our situation against them.

Hot take: Larkin is Toews without the Kane & Keith boost. Even with the Kane & Keith boost, Toews has cracked 70 points only twice in his career (76 in 2010-11, 81 in 2018-19). He's never hit 85 points. People can point to Toews's two-way play, which is fair, but I'd argue Larkin's underlying numbers point to him being a future Selke guy. People can point to Toews's intangible leadership qualities, but we all know he's a big baby.

Ryan O'Reilly's never put up big numbers, but damn if he hasn't established himself as one of the most valuable players in the league. I think Larkin can become the player O'Reilly is today -- but even if he does, Yzerman needs to be winning lots of picks and trades and free agent signings for us to have a team like the 2019 Blues within the next three years.

22 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

No doubt adding an Oshie is a big add for this team. But that's always been my point with Zadina. It's a Oshie/Tatar/Nyquist/Hudler addition. It's not going to fix the team, and in fact it may end up delaying a rebuild. I want elite players, everyone else can burn for all i care.

Consider me black-pilled

I think this team has deep seated problems. Reliance on Larkin/Mantha/Bertuzzi/Fabbri/Hronek is a crutch. Most of these players will only end up delaying the rebuild. Maybe a few of them survive and help return us to glory at a later date. But certainly not all of them will be here.

We need Crosby's/Mackinnon's/Eichels... not Larkin's and Manthas. And if trading helps us get there faster im for it. Timing does matter in my mind

I don't really understand the "crutch" argument. Would you really have Yzerman trade our best young roster guys? If we do that, we could be gutting organizational depth that we've built up over years. Having Lafreniere and no supporting cast isn't much/any better than having a lot of good-not-great guys who lack a superstar leader.

I think Yzerman has it right: We have some good young pieces, but it's not enough, and so we need to add, and we need a bunch of those adds to be big wins. I don't see why that has to take 10 years.

These days, Cup-winners are generally driven by players in their late 20s and early 30s. I'd like to see us winning some playoff games by the time Larkin is 27ish, which would be three or four years from now. I think that's a reasonable timeline.

[krsmith17 7,191]

3 hours ago, Dabura said:

I think Zadina has the potential to be better than Oshie/Tatar/Nyquist/Hudler. I don't think that's a stretch at this point in time. I know you're not crazy about his game, and I respect that, but, for me, there's a lot to like. I think he can be elite(ish).

Yes, Hughes is looking like he would've been the smarter pick. But time will tell.

Beyond Hughes, no 2018 hidden gems have emerged: https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2018e.html

We're in agreement about Zadina likely not being That Guy We Need; he's likely not going to be Pastrnak or Kucherov. ...Though, to be fair, Pastrnak and Kucherov have played with best-of-the-best players for most (all?) of their respective NHL careers, which has undoubtedly boosted them. In any case, I don't really hold anything against Zadina. He can only be the player he is. It's on the brain trust to fill the holes that need to be filled.

I agree that the top priority has to be finding A Legit Superstar and that wanking ourselves off to our current "core" is starting to feel kinda stupid. We have sort of a "core by default," i.e. they're the best we've got, so we imbue them with importance and potential that maybe they haven't quite earned. But, as with Zadina, I don't really hold our situation against them.

Hot take: Larkin is Toews without the Kane & Keith boost. Even with the Kane & Keith boost, Toews has cracked 70 points only twice in his career (76 in 2010-11, 81 in 2018-19). He's never hit 85 points. People can point to Toews's two-way play, which is fair, but I'd argue Larkin's underlying numbers point to him being a future Selke guy. People can point to Toews's intangible leadership qualities, but we all know he's a big baby.

Ryan O'Reilly's never put up big numbers, but damn if he hasn't established himself as one of the most valuable players in the league. I think Larkin can become the player O'Reilly is today -- but even if he does, Yzerman needs to be winning lots of picks and trades and free agent signings for us to have a team like the 2019 Blues within the next three years.

I don't really understand the "crutch" argument. Would you really have Yzerman trade our best young roster guys? If we do that, we could be gutting organizational depth that we've built up over years. Having Lafreniere and no supporting cast isn't much/any better than having a lot of good-not-great guys who lack a superstar leader.

I think Yzerman has it right: We have some good young pieces, but it's not enough, and so we need to add, and we need a bunch of those adds to be big wins. I don't see why that has to take 10 years.

These days, Cup-winners are generally driven by players in their late 20s and early 30s. I'd like to see us winning some playoff games by the time Larkin is 27ish, which would be three or four years from now. I think that's a reasonable timeline.

Completely 100% agree with all of this...

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

9 hours ago, Dabura said:

I think Zadina has the potential to be better than Oshie/Tatar/Nyquist/Hudler. I don't think that's a stretch at this point in time. I know you're not crazy about his game, and I respect that, but, for me, there's a lot to like. I think he can be elite(ish).

Yes, Hughes is looking like he would've been the smarter pick. But time will tell.

Beyond Hughes, no 2018 hidden gems have emerged: https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2018e.html

We're in agreement about Zadina likely not being That Guy We Need; he's likely not going to be Pastrnak or Kucherov. ...Though, to be fair, Pastrnak and Kucherov have played with best-of-the-best players for most (all?) of their respective NHL careers, which has undoubtedly boosted them. In any case, I don't really hold anything against Zadina. He can only be the player he is. It's on the brain trust to fill the holes that need to be filled.

I agree that the top priority has to be finding A Legit Superstar and that wanking ourselves off to our current "core" is starting to feel kinda stupid. We have sort of a "core by default," i.e. they're the best we've got, so we imbue them with importance and potential that maybe they haven't quite earned. But, as with Zadina, I don't really hold our situation against them.

Hot take: Larkin is Toews without the Kane & Keith boost. Even with the Kane & Keith boost, Toews has cracked 70 points only twice in his career (76 in 2010-11, 81 in 2018-19). He's never hit 85 points. People can point to Toews's two-way play, which is fair, but I'd argue Larkin's underlying numbers point to him being a future Selke guy. People can point to Toews's intangible leadership qualities, but we all know he's a big baby.

Ryan O'Reilly's never put up big numbers, but damn if he hasn't established himself as one of the most valuable players in the league. I think Larkin can become the player O'Reilly is today -- but even if he does, Yzerman needs to be winning lots of picks and trades and free agent signings for us to have a team like the 2019 Blues within the next three years.

I don't really understand the "crutch" argument. Would you really have Yzerman trade our best young roster guys? If we do that, we could be gutting organizational depth that we've built up over years. Having Lafreniere and no supporting cast isn't much/any better than having a lot of good-not-great guys who lack a superstar leader.

I think Yzerman has it right: We have some good young pieces, but it's not enough, and so we need to add, and we need a bunch of those adds to be big wins. I don't see why that has to take 10 years.

These days, Cup-winners are generally driven by players in their late 20s and early 30s. I'd like to see us winning some playoff games by the time Larkin is 27ish, which would be three or four years from now. I think that's a reasonable timeline.

Core by default is a good term. That's what it feels like.

I don't wanna build around an average core. I wanna wallow in the mud and the filth and feel all that good heavy soul crushing hurt until we draft a dynastic core.

I feel like I'm the guy in the bar who gets a call from his girl 6 drinks in. "OMG CRL R U AT THE BAR DRINKING AGAIN???". And you guys are all like "You should probably go home dude, sober up and work on your relationship. Amy's a nice girl"

My attitude is f*** Amy. She already caught me, I'm already in trouble, may as well have a few more rounds at this point and close the bar. I can get a new better Amy next weekend anyway if she decides to pack her bags.

Thats my bad analogy for: f*** it dude, we're already in the NHLs basement. May as well stick around and stack some quality players while we're here. If Mantha ends up running out on us while we're down here then f*** him too, we're getting better Mantha's in the next draft.

No doubt it's a fatalistic outlook, but it's also the quickest path to a dynasty in my book.

My worst fear is Mantha is Franzen 2.0. Larkin is Toews 2.0. Seider is Kronwall 2.0. Zadina is Oshie 2.0... and we sneak into the playoffs in 4 years with this completely average team and never accomplish anything to show for it. Like 2011-2016 all over again.

So far we've come out of these doldrums with two 6th overall picks. This year we will get something in 1-4. Frankly, even if we get Lafreniere, I don't think two 6ths and one 1st is a good enough haul for the pain we've already endured. Ideally I think we should be trying to come out of this trough with multiple top4 picks and supplementary 1st rounders as well.

Say Yzerman gets the wheels on the bus going next year and we're picking 6-10 again. The year after we're in the 6-10 range and so on, leading up to a 4th year playoff appearance. I don't think adding one Lafreniere is the way to do this. Exploit the tragedy and get multiple of these guys is what I say.

 

 

[krsmith17 7,191]

35 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Core by default is a good term. That's what it feels like.

I don't wanna build around an average core. I wanna wallow in the mud and the filth and feel all that good heavy soul crushing hurt until we draft a dynastic core.

I feel like I'm the guy in the bar who gets a call from his girl 6 drinks in. "OMG CRL R U AT THE BAR DRINKING AGAIN???". And you guys are all like "You should probably go home dude, sober up and work on your relationship. Amy's a nice girl"

My attitude is f*** Amy. She already caught me, I'm already in trouble, may as well have a few more rounds at this point and close the bar. I can get a new better Amy next weekend anyway if she decides to pack her bags.

Thats my bad analogy for: f*** it dude, we're already in the NHLs basement. May as well stick around and stack some quality players while we're here. If Mantha ends up running out on us while we're down here then f*** him too, we're getting better Mantha's in the next draft.

No doubt it's a fatalistic outlook, but it's also the quickest path to a dynasty in my book.

My worst fear is Mantha is Franzen 2.0. Larkin is Toews 2.0. Seider is Kronwall 2.0. Zadina is Oshie 2.0... and we sneak into the playoffs in 4 years with this completely average team and never accomplish anything to show for it. Like 2011-2016 all over again.

So far we've come out of these doldrums with two 6th overall picks. This year we will get something in 1-4. Frankly, even if we get Lafreniere, I don't think two 6ths and one 1st is a good enough haul for the pain we've already endured. Ideally I think we should be trying to come out of this trough with multiple top4 picks and supplementary 1st rounders as well.

Say Yzerman gets the wheels on the bus going next year and we're picking 6-10 again. The year after we're in the 6-10 range and so on, leading up to a 4th year playoff appearance. I don't think adding one Lafreniere is the way to do this. Exploit the tragedy and get multiple of these guys is what I say.

Completely 100% disagree with all of this...

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

4 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Completely 100% disagree with all of this...

Thanks for the substance

If you 100% disagree with me you must believe one or both of the following:

A. Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Fabbri, Hronek, Zadina, Seider - multiple of these players have serious superstar potential we haven't seen yet.

B. You're confident Yzerman will find multiple franchise superstars either in this draft, or future ones where we likely start to pick lower as we accelerate upwards.

For one I don't think any of our current core - besides maybe Seider - has superstar potential. And two, if we're talking about a playoff appearance in year 4, I do not believe that is enough time to acquire multiple superstars picking at varying points within the next few drafts. Some of our 1st rounders (per usual) are not gonna turn out to be the superstars we need them to be. Even when picking high.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

DARKNESS IMPRISONING ME
ALL THAT I SEE
ABSOLUTE HORROR

[mackel 679]

15 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Thanks for the substance

If you 100% disagree with me you must believe one or both of the following:

A. Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Fabbri, Hronek, Zadina, Seider - multiple of these players have serious superstar potential we haven't seen yet.

B. You're confident Yzerman will find multiple franchise superstars either in this draft, or future ones where we likely start to pick lower as we accelerate upwards.

 For one I don't think any of our current core - besides maybe Seider - has superstar potential. And two, if we're talking about a playoff appearance in year 4, I do not believe that is enough time to acquire multiple superstars picking at varying points within the next few drafts. Some of our 1st rounders (per usual) are not gonna turn out to be the superstars we need them to be. Even when picking high.

The BEST way to accelerate or rebuild would be wining the #1 overall pick and trading it to Ottawa for their combo of two picks between 2 and 4, if that materializes.  I'd also keep Montreal's number handy, because if their pick can be used on Askarov I'd be trading Mantha for that pick and a prospect/payer/pick.

IF you could walk away from this draft with 2 of Stutz, Rossi, Raymond, Drysdale, et all and Askarov that would be massive.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

8 minutes ago, mackel said:

The BEST way to accelerate or rebuild would be wining the #1 overall pick and trading it to Ottawa for their combo of two picks between 2 and 4, if that materializes.  I'd also keep Montreal's number handy, because if their pick can be used on Askarov I'd be trading Mantha for that pick and a prospect/payer/pick.

IF you could walk away from this draft with 2 of Stutz, Rossi, Raymond, Drysdale, et all and Askarov that would be massive.

In theory I agree and like the idea. We have a short window to reach critical mass on young talent before Yzerman rights the ship. The more we can get now the better.

However I'm not holding out for some blockbuster 1st overall trade, or any of the top10 picks moving for that matter. I give it a 99% chance it doesn't happen. It never does.

I think there's two practical paths forward: You like the core and slowly build around it. You don't like the core and you continue to run the ship against the rocks until you do like it.

Larkin - un-tradeable due to positional needs
Hronek - un-tradeable due to positional needs
Seider - too young to trade
Zadina - too young to trade (for now)
Fabbri - totally tradeable
Mantha - totally tradeable
Bertuzzi - I like too much to trade

HSJ was speculating just the other day that Mantha's contract will likely be 1 year or a long extension. If he gets the 1 year I could see him gone at some point soon. It would suck to lose a big bodied sniper like that, but if the haul is impressive f*** it I'm in. Not sure I'd do it for just Askarov and a prospect, I'd need more. Fabbri is Fabbri.

 

[kipwinger 8,522]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Thanks for the substance

If you 100% disagree with me you must believe one or both of the following:

A. Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Fabbri, Hronek, Zadina, Seider - multiple of these players have serious superstar potential we haven't seen yet.

B. You're confident Yzerman will find multiple franchise superstars either in this draft, or future ones where we likely start to pick lower as we accelerate upwards.

For one I don't think any of our current core - besides maybe Seider - has superstar potential. And two, if we're talking about a playoff appearance in year 4, I do not believe that is enough time to acquire multiple superstars picking at varying points within the next few drafts. Some of our 1st rounders (per usual) are not gonna turn out to be the superstars we need them to be. Even when picking high.

 

I agree with everything you're saying, but I don't agree with the prognosis.  We're drafting a legit #1 center this year. That's the outlook for Stutzle, Byfield, Rossi.  We're getting one of them for sure.  We're a lottery team next year (or close to it) and we take an offensive LD.  We're a lottery team the following year and take a power winger with hands (a Brady Tkachuk type). In a few years you've got something like this at the top of your team: 

Power Winger-Stutzle/Byfield/Rossi-Mantha

Bert-Larkin-Zadina

Veleno/Ras-Veleno/Ras-Fabbri/Berggren/Mastrosimone

 

New LD - Seider

McIsaac-Hronek

 

I think this looks pretty good.  Obviously a lot of this will depend on how these guys develop, but given what we need and given where we're drafting I'm expecting to fill our major holes in the next two drafts.

Edited April 7, 2020 by kipwinger

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Thanks for the substance

If you 100% disagree with me you must believe one or both of the following:

A. Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Fabbri, Hronek, Zadina, Seider - multiple of these players have serious superstar potential we haven't seen yet.

B. You're confident Yzerman will find multiple franchise superstars either in this draft, or future ones where we likely start to pick lower as we accelerate upwards.

For one I don't think any of our current core - besides maybe Seider - has superstar potential. And two, if we're talking about a playoff appearance in year 4, I do not believe that is enough time to acquire multiple superstars picking at varying points within the next few drafts. Some of our 1st rounders (per usual) are not gonna turn out to be the superstars we need them to be. Even when picking high.

Nah. It doesn't have to be one or the other. I believe we have some really good young players on the team, and coming up through the system. I don't believe any of them are truly good enough (yet), to be considered "the guys" you build your team around. That doesn't mean you can't build a team with them. Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Fabbri, Zadina, Hronek, Seider are all really good young players. Add in Veleno, Rasmussen, Cholowski, etc. and we have some really nice pieces going forward. None of them are elite (yet), and probably never will be. That doesn't mean you blow it up though... We should get an elite (maybe franchise) type player in this year's draft, and maybe another one in next year's draft. You add two elite players to what we already have, and in a few years time, this team is a perennial playoff team.

A lot still needs to go right, but I have faith that Yzerman, in time, can get us back into the playoffs and eventually a legit contender.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

13 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

 

I agree with everything you're saying, but I don't agree with the prognosis.  We're drafting a legit #1 center this year. That's the outlook for Stutzle, Byfield, Rossi.  We're getting one of them for sure.  We're a lottery team next year (or close to it) and we take an offensive LD.  We're a lottery team the following year and take a power winger with hands (a Brady Tkachuk type). In a few years you've got something like this at the top of your team: 

Power Winger-Stutzle/Byfield/Rossi-Mantha

Bert-Larkin-Zadina

Veleno/Ras-Veleno/Ras-Fabbri/Berggren/Mastrosimone

 

New LD - Seider

McIsaac-Hronek

 

I think this looks pretty good.  Obviously a lot of this will depend on how these guys develop, but given what we need and given where we're drafting I'm expecting to fill our major holes in the next two drafts.

I'm certainly operating from a "prepare for the worst" perspective. Like all it would take is for our Byfield/Rossi/Stutzle pick to only turn out to be a 2C to completely throw a wrench in that plan.

Your plan also has us drafting lottery picks in the next 3 drafts (I assume this to mean top15). Say in the next two drafts after this one we are picking in the 10-15 range. The chances of us pulling a Svechnikov or Sheahan kinda pick in that range is a real risk. Or just pulling an average 2nd line player.

We could reach that year 4 with a completely average playoff bubble team. Not bad enough to draft high anymore, not good enough to win a cup. That would be my primary fear, followed by decades of retooling the core till we become that lucky "anything can happen in the playoffs team"

I'd rather just tank even harder and build a glorious dynasty of multiple Lafrenieres

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

6 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I feel like I'm the guy in the bar who gets a call from his girl 6 drinks in. "OMG CRL R U AT THE BAR DRINKING AGAIN???". And you guys are all like "You should probably go home dude, sober up and work on your relationship. Amy's a nice girl"

My attitude is f*** Amy. She already caught me, I'm already in trouble, may as well have a few more rounds at this point and close the bar. I can get a new better Amy next weekend anyway if she decides to pack her bags.

How r u still single?

1 hour ago, mackel said:

The BEST way to accelerate or rebuild would be wining the #1 overall pick and trading it to Ottawa for their combo of two picks between 2 and 4, if that materializes.  I'd also keep Montreal's number handy, because if their pick can be used on Askarov I'd be trading Mantha for that pick and a prospect/payer/pick.

IF you could walk away from this draft with 2 of Stutz, Rossi, Raymond, Drysdale, et all and Askarov that would be massive.

Except Ottawa is in the same boat and wouldn't trade those picks for exactly the same reason.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

3 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Nah. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Didn't say it had to be

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

If you 100% disagree with me you must believe one or both of the following:

I don't want to build a team of non-elite players. Dynastic teams are built with elite ones.

Assuming that the next two drafts are going to completely fix this franchise is completely short-sighted IMO. Things rarely ever work out that nicely or concisely.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

5 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

How r u still single?

I have thing for hardcore *******

"Babe, the boys r going out drinking, do you care if I go?"

Her: "...no, it's fine"

*45 minutes later at the bar* Angry text from babe: "I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU CHOSE YOUR FRIENDS OVER ME AGAIN"

Classic Saturday night scenario

[LeftWinger 4,953]

would any of you trade Zadina for Bouchard or Dobson?  Especially if we win Lafrenier?  We are in need of a 3 or 4 higher end D and I would like Yzerman to acquire a young D.

(first one to mention Hague gets a NEG!  Virtually of course! LOL!)

seriously though, Hronek and Seider look like our future top 2 (for now,) but if we could trade for another top 3 guy (like Bouchard or Dobson) I do think that would help our D development out a ton!

I guess if we were to help Chicago out by assuming Seabrook's contract, I'd be fine if that got us Strome, but they would have to give me a 1st round pick in order for me to take that contract.  Also, Seabrook has 2 more years of a NMC that doesn't become a M-NTC until 2023, so if he were so kind to waive that NMC to come here (highly doubtful) we could always use him as a TDL chip for a contender in a couple of season's.  But wouldn't that tie our hands for having to protect him from Seattle because of the NMC? Not like we wouldn't want to protect him anyhow...

[LeftWinger 4,953]

so here's the question, you acquire Seabrook and Strome, now who do you protect in the expansion draft? Or should I say who gets exposed? Also, do you re-sign Gagner if you trade for Stome?

Strome, Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Rasmussen, 2 more (Fabbri, Timashov? or Gagner? Ehn? Svechnikov? Smith?)

Seabrook, Hronek, Lindstrom (or Cholowski?)

Bernier 

You could loose Glenny or Helm for nothing also.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

5 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

so here's the question, you acquire Seabrook and Strome, now who do you protect in the expansion draft? Or should I say who gets exposed? Also, do you re-sign Gagner if you trade for Stome?

Strome, Larkin, Mantha, Bertuzzi, Rasmussen, 2 more (Fabbri, Timashov? or Gagner? Ehn? Svechnikov? Smith?)

Seabrook, Hronek, Lindstrom (or Cholowski?)

Bernier 

You could loose Glenny or Helm for nothing also.

The looming expansion draft is just another reason to keep tanking this tank

[kipwinger 8,522]

Not only to I not want to keep tanking, I want to speed things up.  That's why I've I want Stutzle or Rossi this year.  They're both going to be top line centers, and they're both going to fast track to the NHL. I liked that Seider could jump straight to the AHL last year.  I want more of that. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I don't want to build a team of non-elite players. Dynastic teams are built with elite ones.

Assuming that the next two drafts are going to completely fix this franchise is completely short-sighted IMO. Things rarely ever work out that nicely or concisely.

We'll be adding elite players.

Assuming that trading away our best young players is going to somehow improve our team, is dumb... That rarely ever works...

Edmonton tanked hard for years. Where did that get them? Sure, they finally got a Draisaitl and McDavid, but they still haven't done anything notable (I do think they eventually will).

Edmonton also traded away high-end young players (Hall / Eberle), and have what to show for it?

[marcaractac 3,963]

3 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

We'll be adding elite players.

Assuming that trading away our best young players is going to somehow improve our team, is dumb... That rarely ever works...

Edmonton tanked hard for years. Where did that get them? Sure, they finally got a Draisaitl and McDavid, but they still haven't done anything notable (I do think they eventually will).

Edmonton also traded away high-end young players (Hall / Eberle), and have what to show for it?

 

[krsmith17 7,191]

2 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

Yup. Trade Larkin. Trade Mantha. We could use that extra $13M in cap space...