elmatus

Nothing like a 7th defenseman trade to get the rumour mill going!

I hope not. Trouba's fine and all, but Ghost is better. He's better offensively, and he has better possession and defensive metrics to boot. Not only that, but Ghost is on a better contract. Really the only thing Trouba does better than Ghost is hit things. That's fine and all, but we have no shortage of hitters already. What Ghost brings in terms of raw skill is much harder to replace. If Ghost is moved, my guess is it'll be for a 2C because Hayes refused to sign. I don't think it makes much sense to ship him out for another dman. We're almost guaranteed to get the bad end of the deal if we do that. I should note that I do like Trouba and would be fine with us getting him. I just think trading Ghost for him would be a mistake. If Fletch can get him some other way, I'm all for it. Mind you, I heard some rumours claiming he was asking upwards of 7M, which to me seems ridiculous.

Maybe. I'm really not sure he should though. The reality is Niskanen's play last year wasn't first pairing material. He had a pretty bad season defensively in fact. It's possible it was just an outlier of course, but it looks like Gudas was actually more effective defensively last season than Niskanen by a decent bit. Offensively Niskanen seems to have the edge though. He's a better handler and passer and he picks his shots quite well for a dman from what I've read. My honest guess is he won't be playing on the first pair for very long. If he does, it's a sign our young guns aren't progressing as well as we might like. He should probably be a second pairing guy at this point in his career. Overall though, I still don't think this trade is a big deal.

You're speaking as if Radko Gudas was a Norris candidate. I liked Radko well enough, but I hardly think losing him is much of a blow. He has a penchant for brain farts and getting out of position to try and make the highlight reel with a mid-ice hit. Let's not pretend he's more than what he is. Honestly, the difference between these two as far as how "good" they are is pretty marginal. They're different players for sure, with different styles, but I'd hesitate to say Niskanen is a worse player. He is older; I'll give you that. But his contract is fine for the player he is. They do have a different play style though. My guess is Niskanen's more traditional play is closer to what AV and co are looking for. So what's good about it? I honestly can't say for sure it is good. I don't think it's bad though. More to my point: I don't really think it matters a whole lot. They're both reasonably effective NHL defensemen. It's pretty meh as far as trades go.

Maybe, but WSH really wasn't a great PK team last season. Again, I'm not saying it's a bad acquisition at all, I just don't think it's the kind of trade that has a major impact on a team. I'm honestly not sure why anyone would. Niskanen has been a solid NHL dman his whole career, but I don't think anyone has ever regarded him as any kind of high impact player. He averages somewhere between 20-30 pts in a given year. He ranges smack in the middle around the 50 mark for possession metrics. If plus/minus is your thing, he's usually a plus. He's not the greatest PP quarterback, but then we don't really need him to be. He's not prone to taking penalties or making too many errors overall. At the same time, I'm not sure he's the guy you put on when you need a clutch performance to win you a game. He's fine. The trade is fine. But if you're asking me whether I think bringing in Niskanen constitutes a major change for the team, I'm afraid the answer is no. Is he better than Gudas? I don't know. Maybe? He's won the cup. I personally think that metric is overblown, but it's true of Niskanen anyway. Is he a good mentor-type for our young kids? I dunno. I've never met him. I hope so?

Honestly Niskanen is a great example of a player who always ended up playing for teams where he was asked to be 2nd fiddle because they had some other elite-level dman drawing all the attention. He strikes me as the kind of guy who goes out and does exactly what is asked of him. With Carlson around, the Caps didn't need him to be flashy. They needed him to shore up the back end, so he did. In Pittsburgh, he was generally set behind Letang and asked to fill a similar role. Then when Letang dropped for a season, Niskanen slotted right in and took his spot. Was he as good? No, but he was still better than average. He's a role player and can fill many holes. These are things coaches like for good reason. Now, do I think he'll be a huge upgrade over Gudas? Not really. I think they're both pretty good honestly. Different players though. It's entirely possible Niskanen is more in line with the type of defense our new coaching staff want to implement. Given how anemic our defense was last year, I'm not inclined to argue much with new defensive strategies. At the end of the day, I really don't think this trade makes a huge difference. Gudas vs Niskanen is not what will make this team sink or swim. They have other more important issues to iron out.

Honestly this trade isn't what's going to make a huge difference for us. It's mostly just tinkering around the edges. Neither Gudas nor Niskanen are game-breaking, and their effectiveness on the ice is probably a wash for the most part. I've liked both of them throughout the years. Overall, I would say this is a "meh" trade for me. I don't think it will matter much in grand scheme of things. If the coaching staff or Fletch prefer Niskanen for some reason I'm not aware of, then fine. Go for it.

All good stuff. The M-NTC with Seattle expac is the only part that bothers me some.

Gudas for Niskanen. That should solve Fletch's itch for a vet dman I would think. I like Niskanen, and his contract isn't too long or for too much. The only hiccup I can see is the M-NTC. I'm assuming that means he would need to be protected from Seattle, which all but guarantees we'll be losing a pretty good young blueliner imo, unless Fletch dangles someone more enticing somehow.

Yes.

I'm not sure how. The Loafs have exactly zero players signed right now, and I know nothing at all about Kardi.

Maybe, but the coaching staff has undergone a complete overhaul, and we'll be starting the season with a goalie that has very high potential for the first time in decades. That's not nothing. One thing I can say: This season will give us a better understanding of how important coaching is. If the team looks to be considerably improved compared to last year, it's entirely likely coaching will be the single biggest reason why.

I wonder if Marleau would consider a similar route to VLC and agree to retire early. His heart seems to be on the west coast, and a lot has been said about his desire to spend more time with family.

NAC, NBC, NCC...

Columbus is going to be a hot mess next year. Sure, they have fantastic young players in Dubois, Jones, and Werenski, but that's not enough to have so much of an impact. They do have a ton of cap space mind you. If money is the main factor for Hayes, he might opt for that route. Also, the Coyotes? I mean cmon. I call BS on this whole idea frankly. Those are two of the last teams I could see someone actually wanting to go to right now.

I think the predominant thought is they should make the playoffs. That said, this was the predominant thought last season, and they did not -- so here we are. Given their recent history, it's hard to bet on them either way. Having new coaching and goaltending helps, but the roster beyond that remains largely the same so far, which complicates things as far as predictions go. I'm going to say yes just because I think that's better than saying no. I think a less-biased and more realistic onlooker would probably consider them a bubble team though.

You know my love for Doughty runs deep, but his most recent contract is the very definition of albatross. There's no way that turns out as anything but a huge problem for some team down the line. That said, given we're in the process of throwing everything to the wall, I wonder what it would cost to get Seth Jones out of Columbus.

Part of the problem for me is one of availability. Vet dman like the type we would really want or need are not traded often. When they are, it's generally because they're no longer as effective as they used to be and their contracts have become a burden. So then you're trading for values that are generally intangible and difficult to gauge (e.g. "leadership qualities). So the first question I have is who fits the bill as the kind of dman that would benefit our team. To me, that person would need to be: 1) someone who at least was noticeably productive in his prime, and who hasn't dropped off a cliff since then 2) someone who won't cost a fortune for the next million years, and essentially force an eventual buyout (Weber) 3) someone who has some reputation for having leadership qualities (since that's the main thing Fletch seems to want) How many such vet dmen are there in this league? Well, not very many frankly. That's what makes it so difficult when we're wrestling with possibilities. Sure, we have a very good trade chip in Ghost, but Ghost is an elite level player in this league. If we trade him, we better be getting a fantastic return. It's hard to imagine a trade where losing Ghost for another dman who fits the description above doesn't end up in a net loss for us. As far as Gudas goes, I agree with others in that he's sort of the odd man out right now. He could be part of some sort of package deal if we do bring in a vet dman. Otherwise, my guess is we'll be keeping him until the deadline and basing our decision on whether or not we're playoff bound. Alone he doesn't have much value in a contract year.

My guess is no Subban trade would be considered without Ghost as a part of it. Honestly that's the one problem about it for me. I do like Subban, and I think he fits the veteran dman role better than anyone else we've mentioned around here. I'm just not sure it makes sense to trade a 26 year old offensive dman for a 30 year old offensive dman who is twice as expensive.

Giroux would like a word with you. I have to agree with @ruxpin about Duchene. I would also add his paycheck to the list of issues. He's going to get paid like a 1C, but frankly we already have a better 1C. So now we're paying a guy 9M per year for six year or something to play as our 2C, and we're stuck with him as he inevitably decides he's not terribly interested for four of those six years. Granted, the easy solution might be just to leave him unprotected and let Seattle take him, but that's too many ifs for me. Unlike some others here, I actually think Hayes is probably the best option for our needs. I mean, better options might exist if we're dealing Ghost in a trade, but as far as UFAs go, I actually prefer Hayes over Duchene personally. He'll be a good 3M cheaper for maybe 10pts less, and he doesn't forget how to play hockey when he's on defense. The only possible redeeming quality I would give Duchene is the potential for him to play as a winger. I know in international play, he's actually done quite well when he's got a great setup man or two and doesn't have many defensive responsibilities. He's got good speed and a good shot. If someone else can do the work, he can often finish the play. Duchene as a scoring winger with someone like Giroux interests me significantly more than Duchene as a centre. Subban on the other hand, I would actually be fine with, though it would depend on what it takes to get him. I'm not convinced losing Ghost to get Subban is much of an improvement.

It's possible. Snipers like Laine are often lazy on the front end. He wouldn't be the first. The good ones remain extremely valuable despite that though. And of course, Patrick hasn't exactly been lighting the world on fire either. He's been anemic on both sides of the puck. Laine scored more goals in his first two seasons than Patrick had points. The one thing I would say about Laine though is that he seems like a complete douche.

I guess I'm just not sure why that would be. Most of the pieces Hexy brought in were set and ready to take a big step forward by 2018-19. Signing JVR in the off season made it seem even more likely Hexy felt this team was ready to make some noise. Yeah, the goalie situation sucked, but I don't know that Hexy was going to wait for Hart honestly. Knowing Hex, he likely felt Hart was still 2-3 years out. I'm not saying the goal was to win the cup in 2018-19, but I do think last season was penciled in as the year this team had enough pieces in place to become very threatening. It's not just me either. The Flyers were a dark horse favourite by pundits everywhere prior to the season. By all accounts, they should have at the very least been good enough to comfortably get into the playoffs. Instead, they were basement dwellers for 2/3rd of the year. If we take Hart out of the equation, the 2018-19 and 2019-20 Flyers are almost the same roster really. I think Hexy felt Patrick would step up last season -- he didn't. I think he felt Provo would continue his meteoric trajectory -- he didn't. I think he felt TK would become a major scoring threat -- he didn't. I think he probably figured Sanheim was going to take the next step -- I would say he did actually. Add Giroux and Couts maintaining their level of play, which they largely did, and the recipe really was there to be a solid threat in 2018-19. The problem is those pieces didn't add up the way they were supposed to. Now, I'm with you all the way on the coaching problem and the goalie problem. Those were arguably the two biggest issues we had going into last season, and they both reared their ugly heads. 2019-20 with upgrades on both fronts offers at least some amount of hope. I only hope there aren't bigger issues related to core players at hand. That would be a lot harder to fix. I'm entering 2019-20 with cautious optimism. I would feel better if the team hadn't been the worst team in hockey for much of last season, but the fresh faces in key places do buoy my hopes somewhat.

Laine for Patrick eh? I would very likely pull the trigger there. While I do think Patrick will pick up, it seems very doubtful he'll ever have the scoring touch Laine does. Giroux feeding Laine pucks makes me pretty giddy...

I agree with virtually everything you said, except I think Hexy -- as well as most sensible people watching -- expected more out of the 2018-19 roster. The fact they were so bad for most of the season was definitely a black mark on Hexy's tenure. Don't get me wrong, I really quite liked Hexy. I liked his approach, his vision, his style. I would not have fired him. That said, the 2018-19 season needed to be better than it was. They had the vet talent in the top six, a supposed norris contender as a franchise dman, the top UFA signing of the summer, and enough up and comers in the Patricks, TKs, Sanheims, and Lindbloms to land on the top of many dark horse contender lists. Sure, they had questionable goaltending, but NHL history is filled with teams who have made playoff noise despite spotty goaltending. A good team finds a way to win. Is that all Hexy's fault? No. Hakstol was a train wreck for one, and it's entirely possible our core group of veterans just doesn't have what it takes no matter how many young talented players get tossed into the mix. Oh, and Elliott is nothing more than a back up (and possibly always has been just that...) Still, the 2018-19 needed to be better than it turned out to be. I really don't think we need to dig much deeper than that. 2018-19 was a big big year for the Hextall plan, and the team spent much of it in the basement. As much as I would have kept Hexy going for at least another season -- with the explicit caveat that he find a new coaching staff -- I also do understand why he was let go despite it all.

We could pretend for a moment the worst case scenario doesn't happen. Let's say Hayes does agree to sign. He gets 6M for four years or something. He becomes our 2C for much of next season and tallies a respectable 50 pts. All of that, and all Fletch needed to get him is a 5th rounder. I'd say that is both a very plausible scenario, and one that would make the Hayes acquisition look like a pretty smart one actually. Of course, I don't know that it'll happen, but it seems just as if not more likely than some of the other options we've tossed around here. Hayes is a reasonably good player. He's fine as a 2C who can hopefully push Patrick to make something of himself and eventually take the spot. He's not going to command a ton of money and end up overpaid like Duchene would have. At the moment, it looks like a decent gamble imo. Could it turn south? Yeah sure, but it's also very possible it won't.