Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The NHL Thread

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Demographic Shift
    replied
    Demographic Shift wrote: View Post
    13 days till training camps begin to open up.
    Still not a peep out of all those RFAs.
    Wonder who blinks first.

    My guess is Boeser in Vancouver signs first.
    • Brayden Point.
    • Mikko Rantanen.
    • Matthew Tkachuk.
    • Brock Boeser.
    • Charlie McAvoy.
    • Kyle Connor.
    • Patrik Laine.
    • Zach Werenski
    • Travis Konecny
    OK and the log jam breaks a bit.. maybe more than a bit.
    First guy to sign is not Boesser... its Zach Werenski...

    Werenski is a young (22) puck moving defenseman with an outside chance for Norris consideration. He signs with a team ...Columbus ....that had cap space. Its for 3 year term at 5M per year.

    The Marner camp is now having a come to Jesus moment. Mitch is good. But not twice as good as a young puck mover in a league constantly looking for defensemen. And theres that Aho benchmark at 8 and the same for Keller in Arizona.

    Should be a fun few days to the weekend when camps begin to open.

    Leave a comment:


  • Demographic Shift
    replied
    13 days till training camps begin to open up.
    Still not a peep out of all those RFAs.
    Wonder who blinks first.

    My guess is Boeser in Vancouver signs first.
    • Brayden Point.
    • Mikko Rantanen.
    • Matthew Tkachuk.
    • Brock Boeser.
    • Charlie McAvoy.
    • Kyle Connor.
    • Patrik Laine.
    • Zach Werenski
    • Travis Konecny
    Last edited by Demographic Shift; Sat Aug 31, 2019, 01:56 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Demographic Shift
    replied
    Marner watch contiues with the pace of a turtle with a broken leg....
    Will any of the RFA's sign before camps open ?

    My bet is.... No

    Leave a comment:


  • Demographic Shift
    replied
    All Quiet on the Marner front as July merges into August.
    There will be no offer sheets forthcoming so its going to be the waiting game.
    Its not just Marner getting iced... heres who else is in the same lifeboat.
    • Brayden Point.
    • Mikko Rantanen.
    • Matthew Tkachuk.
    • Brock Boeser.
    • Charlie McAvoy.
    • Kyle Connor.
    • Patrik Laine.
    • Zach Werenski
    • Travis Konecny

    .

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Going into this off-season I would not have bet on the Leafs re-acquiring David Clarkson. But looking at the deal it's a pretty brilliant piece of cap maneuvering to give the Leafs a longer timeline in the Marner negotiations, as well as a rock solid negotiating tactic of their best offer coming before the season starts while maintaining the ability to match an offer sheet if Marner can find one at that point.

    Leave a comment:


  • Demographic Shift
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    I think Marner ends up taking a bridge deal for 2-3 years, and it comes in well under 10M. But that's a complete guess, hard to predict these agents...

    If you look closely at those rosters of champions, you'll find plenty of guys who had not been there before, and weren't thought of as anything more than meh before then - and only have that been-there solid reputation now because they were there for those championships.
    Yeah.. hard to get a read on the tea leaves on Marner right now.... Thats as good a guess as any.




    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Demographic Shift wrote: View Post

    To me the Blues had a lot of solid defensemen. If your going to make the run.. its a must have on the back end to have a shit tonne of guys who can either bring it up the ice or be cycle breakers down low... A 60 -40 split on skill vs muscle is ideal but you need guys who can do one or the other really well. And you need a lot of them.

    You can't hold up guys anymore when the puck gets chipped in. When the puck gets chipped in the F1 and F2 forecheckers can come full speed from the red line and they can lay some hellacious shots on the blue line corps. Speed x Mass = Ouch. You need a shit tonne of guys on the back end to make it through the year and the playoffs. You can live with a Holl or a Marincin or a Rosen during the regular season.. but when the playoffs come you need guys who have been there. You need the depth. Whoever skates the cup around the ice at the end.. has those guys... none of them are meh .. if they were.. they'd be watching like the rest of us.


    One last bet.... over under on Marners deal... 10M ...
    I am going to say over ...
    Whats your best guess...
    I think Marner ends up taking a bridge deal for 2-3 years, and it comes in well under 10M. But that's a complete guess, hard to predict these agents...

    If you look closely at those rosters of champions, you'll find plenty of guys who had not been there before, and weren't thought of as anything more than meh before then - and only have that been-there solid reputation now because they were there for those championships.

    Leave a comment:


  • Demographic Shift
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    Yeah, so basically all of those teams, with the exception of the Blues, had several solid defenders - and a bunch of depth defenders whose quality was totally meh or worse. Having quality defenders? Absolutely crucial, especially the top 4. Your 6/7 guys? Largely irrelevant.
    To me the Blues had a lot of solid defensemen. If your going to make the run.. its a must have on the back end to have a shit tonne of guys who can either bring it up the ice or be cycle breakers down low... A 60 -40 split on skill vs muscle is ideal but you need guys who can do one or the other really well. And you need a lot of them.

    You can't hold up guys anymore when the puck gets chipped in. When the puck gets chipped in the F1 and F2 forecheckers can come full speed from the red line and they can lay some hellacious shots on the blue line corps. Speed x Mass = Ouch. You need a shit tonne of guys on the back end to make it through the year and the playoffs. You can live with a Holl or a Marincin or a Rosen during the regular season.. but when the playoffs come you need guys who have been there. You need the depth. Whoever skates the cup around the ice at the end.. has those guys... none of them are meh .. if they were.. they'd be watching like the rest of us.


    One last bet.... over under on Marners deal... 10M ...
    I am going to say over ...
    Whats your best guess...
    Last edited by Demographic Shift; Wed Jul 17, 2019, 06:13 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Demographic Shift wrote: View Post

    Without defense in the playoffs you are nowhere...on this your dead ass wrong ..

    2019.. The Blues had a whack of defensemen led by Pieterangelo and Pareykdo and Boumiester... they went 7 or 8 deep.. They had guys to rush the puck and break the cycles...
    2018. The year of Ovie.. Washington had Carlson, Niskanen and Orlov.. last guy was Orpik and he was plus 17
    2017/16 - the Penguins.. they weren't as good as the Blues..but they still had Letang and Matta and Ian Cole....
    2015 /13/10 The Hawks even with Kane and Toews up front won it with Keith and Seabrook and Hjmarmalsson. Keith played 30 mins a game.
    2014 /12 The Kings with Doughty Voynov, Scuderi , Green Muzzin and Martinez wore teams down...

    Sorry Dan... again.. without defense your not going to win it or go on a deep run....
    Tampa flamed out last year.. co incidently with Hedman on the limp.... funny how that works ....
    Yeah, so basically all of those teams, with the exception of the Blues, had several solid defenders - and a bunch of depth defenders whose quality was totally meh or worse. Having quality defenders? Absolutely crucial, especially the top 4. Your 6/7 guys? Largely irrelevant.

    Leave a comment:


  • Demographic Shift
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    Tell that to... basically every Stanley Cup winner of the last decade. They all poured their resources into their forwards, had a few good defencemen, and otherwise made it work with depth pieces and call ups from the minors.

    Meanwhile, it's not our reasoning that differs re: the available cap, but our awareness.
    Without defense in the playoffs you are nowhere...on this your dead ass wrong ..

    2019.. The Blues had a whack of defensemen led by Pieterangelo and Pareykdo and Boumiester... they went 7 or 8 deep.. They had guys to rush the puck and break the cycles...
    2018. The year of Ovie.. Washington had Carlson, Niskanen and Orlov.. last guy was Orpik and he was plus 17
    2017/16 - the Penguins.. they weren't as good as the Blues..but they still had Letang and Matta and Ian Cole....
    2015 /13/10 The Hawks even with Kane and Toews up front won it with Keith and Seabrook and Hjmarmalsson. Keith played 30 mins a game.
    2014 /12 The Kings with Doughty Voynov, Scuderi , Green Muzzin and Martinez wore teams down...

    Sorry Dan... again.. without defense your not going to win it or go on a deep run....
    Tampa flamed out last year.. co incidently with Hedman on the limp.... funny how that works ....

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Demographic Shift wrote: View Post

    So distilled down to its base elements.. and after some really good back and forth....it appears we don't share the same reasoning as to why the Leafs are short on money to add to the blueline.
    Fair...

    But on the bolded... we will very likely die on opposite sides of the table on that one. You can never have enough defensemen if your going to make a Cup run.
    Tell that to... basically every Stanley Cup winner of the last decade. They all poured their resources into their forwards, had a few good defencemen, and otherwise made it work with depth pieces and call ups from the minors.

    Meanwhile, it's not our reasoning that differs re: the available cap, but our awareness.

    Leave a comment:


  • Demographic Shift
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    I agree, which is why it was super smart to offer Nylander the 7M over 7 so as to avoid such a mistake, considering it will prove to be a below market deal in a couple seasons.



    Have you looked closely at the Leafs' cap? I've pored over it for hours. I'm well aware how much money there is to go around. Nylander got a reasonable deal. And they have room to add low end veteran defencemen if they wanted to do so. They do not seem to want to do so. Any used roster spot costs money - paying the minimum or close to it to a rookie versus paying the minimum or close to it to a veteran does not impact the cap much at all. Now, if you are talking about getting a real valuable vet, say at 3-4M like Hainsey somehow got, yeah, less money for Nylander would help. But unless you are squeezing him down to, say, 4.5M, you still don't have enough extra flexibility to make that bigger defensive move. The 6M payday vs 7M really wouldn't have helped much at all, with the Marner unknown. Once he's nailed down, maybe we can fret over a million or so here or there, but right now the uncertainty on his deal is greater than that so it's all in the wash.

    The reason the depth on the back end takes a hit is because the Leafs have decided (smartly) that high end talent on the front end is far more important than depth on the back end, and have paid appropriately for that thus far (we'll see where Marner comes in). Depth on the back end of the variety you are describing, throwaway vet of some sort, is of zero actual value - a bad veteran defenceman is just as harmful to your team as a bad young defenceman. Dubas seems to know that, and also that if he wants to add that sort of veteran, they'll be available later on once the Marner dust has settled - and if it settles fast enough, and comes in low enough, there might be money for something more than that sort of veteran.
    So distilled down to its base elements.. and after some really good back and forth....it appears we don't share the same reasoning as to why the Leafs are short on money to add to the blueline.
    Fair...

    But on the bolded... we will very likely die on opposite sides of the table on that one. You can never have enough defensemen if your going to make a Cup run.
    Last edited by Demographic Shift; Mon Jul 15, 2019, 07:53 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Demographic Shift wrote: View Post

    Well there really are no winners if he sat the year out. .. Its like one of those when your drunk decisions that poll well in the moment .. but in the cold light of day .. look dumb. The Leafs lose a guy for a year who can play and Nylander loses a year and some serious cash he will never ever get back. Ever. Lose Lose.
    I agree, which is why it was super smart to offer Nylander the 7M over 7 so as to avoid such a mistake, considering it will prove to be a below market deal in a couple seasons.

    As for the depth point...
    There is only so much money to go around on a 20 man roster with a hard cap
    Nylander (good for him) got more than FMV.. .that has to be made up somewhere else when you are on a budget...
    Its getting made up on depth on the back end....
    Have you looked closely at the Leafs' cap? I've pored over it for hours. I'm well aware how much money there is to go around. Nylander got a reasonable deal. And they have room to add low end veteran defencemen if they wanted to do so. They do not seem to want to do so. Any used roster spot costs money - paying the minimum or close to it to a rookie versus paying the minimum or close to it to a veteran does not impact the cap much at all. Now, if you are talking about getting a real valuable vet, say at 3-4M like Hainsey somehow got, yeah, less money for Nylander would help. But unless you are squeezing him down to, say, 4.5M, you still don't have enough extra flexibility to make that bigger defensive move. The 6M payday vs 7M really wouldn't have helped much at all, with the Marner unknown. Once he's nailed down, maybe we can fret over a million or so here or there, but right now the uncertainty on his deal is greater than that so it's all in the wash.

    The reason the depth on the back end takes a hit is because the Leafs have decided (smartly) that high end talent on the front end is far more important than depth on the back end, and have paid appropriately for that thus far (we'll see where Marner comes in). Depth on the back end of the variety you are describing, throwaway vet of some sort, is of zero actual value - a bad veteran defenceman is just as harmful to your team as a bad young defenceman. Dubas seems to know that, and also that if he wants to add that sort of veteran, they'll be available later on once the Marner dust has settled - and if it settles fast enough, and comes in low enough, there might be money for something more than that sort of veteran.

    Leave a comment:


  • Demographic Shift
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post
    Oh the Leafs would far prefer to get Nylander at 7 for 7 than 6 for 6, nevermind that Nylander would have sat the year rather than signing 6 for 6.

    Again. If they want to sign some depth vet defenceman to be 7th guy, they can do that. Nylander and Marner both have zero impact on that.

    ​​​​​
    Well there really are no winners if he sat the year out. .. Its like one of those when your drunk decisions that poll well in the moment .. but in the cold light of day .. look dumb. The Leafs lose a guy for a year who can play and Nylander loses a year and some serious cash he will never ever get back. Ever. Lose Lose.

    As for the depth point...
    There is only so much money to go around on a 20 man roster with a hard cap
    Nylander (good for him) got more than FMV.. .that has to be made up somewhere else when you are on a budget...
    Its getting made up on depth on the back end....
    Last edited by Demographic Shift; Sun Jul 14, 2019, 05:27 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Oh the Leafs would far prefer to get Nylander at 7 for 7 than 6 for 6, nevermind that Nylander would have sat the year rather than signing 6 for 6.

    Again. If they want to sign some depth vet defenceman to be 7th guy, they can do that. Nylander and Marner both have zero impact on that.

    ​​​​​

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X