aGENT Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 10 minutes ago, Coryberg said: No cap space for that even if you could. It would have to be something like Garland + Punky Brewster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 (edited) 2 hours ago, Alflives said: Coyotes need to sell seats and have players the fans down there can be excited about. Crouse is a very good player. But he’s not selling any seats. Kuz Missile is an elite skilled offensive guy who fans will buy tickets to watch play. He’s cute as heck and has that fantastic personality the club can use to advertise their product too. There’s a lot more than just hockey as the focus in a place like Arizona when it comes to trades. Coyotes add. Nah, Kuzmenko hasn't even been that in Vancouver this season Crouse is a big toughish forward who can put up middle six production, he's been very good value for the Coyotes and his deal will likely age well Coyotes need to win to sell tickets, Crouse has been helping them do that this season Crouse also has term that takes him through the meat of his prime at a 4.3M cap hit and Kuzmenko has a 12-team NTC, doubt he waives for Arizona I get that you take an over the top Canucks approach, but moving Crouse does not make sense for the Coyotes If he were to ever be traded here it's because we'd be outbidding other teams that would have interest, and there would be other teams, it'd likely take an overpayment Edited January 7 by Coconuts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 22 minutes ago, Coconuts said: Nah, Kuzmenko hasn't even been that in Vancouver this season Crouse is a big toughish forward who can put up middle six production, he's been very good value for the Coyotes and his deal will likely age well Coyotes need to win to sell tickets, Crouse has been helping them do that this season Crouse also has term that takes him through the meat of his prime at a 4.3M cap hit and Kuzmenko has a 12-team NTC, doubt he waives for Arizona I get that you take an over the top Canucks approach, but moving Crouse does not make sense for the Coyotes If he were to ever be traded here it's because we'd be outbidding other teams that would have interest, and there would be other teams, it'd likely take an overpayment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophomore Jinx Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 9 hours ago, N4ZZY said: Guess it all depends on what Arizona would want in return right? Kuzmenko for Crouse, one for one? I think I do that deal. Kuz would have the potential to be a scoring machine in the desert, I think PA would sell Armstrong hard on that, and then proceed to pick his pocket for a 2nd rounder to add to Crouse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 2 hours ago, aGENT said: It would have to be something like Garland + Punky Brewster Could be a huge mistake to trade Garland right now seeing as he has been driving our most consistent line the past month or so. That trade would also log jam us a D. We would be scratching Soucy nightly. I also wonder what team is going to trade a 22-24 year old 2-3 dman? They would clearly not be in the contender stage as they would be trading for futures. On the other hand if they weren't a contender why would they trade a good young player away who would fit into a rebuild plan. I dont think a player fitting these criteria's even exists. But yes there is a pie in the sky scenario where Lekkerimäki, Willander and Brzustewicz would all be available (ie Bedard, Celebrini, Makar) it would just have to be an insane overpayment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinatcc Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 (edited) 1 hour ago, Sophomore Jinx said: Kuz would have the potential to be a scoring machine in the desert, I think PA would sell Armstrong hard on that, and then proceed to pick his pocket for a 2nd rounder to add to Crouse. Confused a but. Kuzmenko for Crouse and a 2nd - I don't think Arizona would do. Kuzmenko + a 2nd for Crouse - I think Arizona could get a better deal in the offseason if they really wanted to trade him. Also Arizona knows that Vancouver would want to get rid of his contract for a more productive player this season. I don't see Arizona doing this w/o adding a some sweeteners. Edited January 7 by iinatcc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Coryberg said: Could be a huge mistake to trade Garland right now seeing as he has been driving our most consistent line the past month or so. That trade would also log jam us a D. We would be scratching Soucy nightly. Doesn't have to be now, could be in the offseason...no log jam. Even now, it would likely be Juulsen sitting. Maybe alternating for some load management with Cole (who'd be playing now with Zadorov on the sideline anyway). Hoglander can take Garland's spot. 26 minutes ago, Coryberg said: I also wonder what team is going to trade a 22-24 year old 2-3 dman? They would clearly not be in the contender stage as they would be trading for futures. On the other hand if they weren't a contender why would they trade a good young player away who would fit into a rebuild plan. Same reason we got Hronek. 26 minutes ago, Coryberg said: I dont think a player fitting these criteria's even exists. Hronek exists. Maybe a guy like Zub shakes lose from OTT that's crowded with young D and D prospects. 26 minutes ago, Coryberg said: But yes there is a pie in the sky scenario where Lekkerimäki, Willander and Brzustewicz would all be available (ie Bedard, Celebrini, Makar) it would just have to be an insane overpayment. I don't really put Brzustewicz in the same category. One, there's no guarantee he's going to translate his skill to the NHL. I'm not opposed to selling high on that potential risk. Two, we don't really NEED his skill set with Hughes and Hronek already on the roster. Moving him for other needs makes a lot of sense. Edited January 7 by aGENT 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophomore Jinx Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 5 minutes ago, iinatcc said: Confused a but. Kuzmenko for Crouse and a 2nd - I don't think Arizona would do. Kuzmenko + a 2nd for Crouse - I think Arizona could get a better deal in the offseason if they really wanted to trade him. Also Arizona knows that Vancouver would want to get rid of his contract for a more productive player this season. I don't see Arizona doing this w/o adding a some sweeteners. It's all fantasy, spitballing, and conjecture at this point, regardless of any and all proposals and chatter here, right? But PA/JR have been the league wheelers and dealers so far this year, and if anyone can bring better value in a trade, I fully trust that they will be the ones to do it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 1 minute ago, aGENT said: Doesn't have to be now, could be in the offseason...no log jam. Even now, it would likely be Juulsen sitting. Maybe alternating for some load management with Cole (who'd be playing now with Zadorov on the sideline anyway). I was really uncertain about Juulsen, but he's really picked things up with all the playing time. IMO he can easily take over for what Myers brings. I really wonder what JR/PA might be cooking up in regards to Myers. Once big Z is back we can move him. I'd love to send Myers to TO but they have no picks or roster players we can use and/or don't have NTCs. 1 minute ago, aGENT said: I don't really put Brzustewicz in the same category. One, there's no guarantee he's going to translate his skill to the NHL. I'm not opposed to selling high on that potential risk. Two, we don't really NEED his skill set with Hughes and Hronek already on the roster. Moving him for other needs makes a lot of sense. this guy could be an intriguing sweetener for a deal. Maybe this is how we shake loose Zub? Myers + Brewski for Zub? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 41 minutes ago, aGENT said: Doesn't have to be now, could be in the offseason...no log jam. Even now, it would likely be Juulsen sitting. Maybe alternating for some load management with Cole (who'd be playing now with Zadorov on the sideline anyway). Hoglander can take Garland's spot. Same reason we got Hronek. Hronek exists. Maybe a guy like Zub shakes lose from OTT that's crowded with young D and D prospects. I don't really put Brzustewicz in the same category. One, there's no guarantee he's going to translate his skill to the NHL. I'm not opposed to selling high on that potential risk. Two, we don't really NEED his skill set with Hughes and Hronek already on the roster. Moving him for other needs makes a lot of sense. Offseason certainly makes a lot more sense. Hronek trade was a unicorn deal. Good luck finding a scenario like that again, Stevie Y decided to go full sell mode at the deadline and then full Benning in free agency. Strange scenario indeed. Zub is 28 years old, he definitely doesn't fit the 22-24 year old age group you suggested. Not sure how you would think we wouldn't need Brzustewicz's skill set. Hughes and Hronek are a fantastic pair but they play less than half a game each. We need other players too. Having 2 star dmen who can control the play would assure we had a gamebreaker on the ice for 45-50 minutes a night. That would be amazing. I'm hoping that PA can get away with signing Hronek to a deal with a limited NTC (or even just a 3-4 year deal) so that we have the option of moving him if Willander and Brzustewicz both hit. I would be more inclined to move our 2024 or 2025 1st round pick instead of our big 3 prospects as their timelines align better with our window (rather than a late 1st who won't show for 4-5 years at best) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 53 minutes ago, Bob Long said: this guy could be an intriguing sweetener for a deal. Maybe this is how we shake loose Zub? Myers + Brewski for Zub? Myers for zub is an upgrade.... but not that much. Definitely not worth losing out on a guy who is trending on such a crazy trajectory. Also Myers expiring contract is going to go to pay petey and Hroneks raises for next year. If you bring in Zubs 4.25 you can kiss Zadorov goodbye. Is he that much of an upgrade on Zadorov? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 12 minutes ago, Coryberg said: Offseason certainly makes a lot more sense. Hronek trade was a unicorn deal. Good luck finding a scenario like that again, Stevie Y decided to go full sell mode at the deadline and then full Benning in free agency. Strange scenario indeed. Zub is 28 years old, he definitely doesn't fit the 22-24 year old age group you suggested. Not sure how you would think we wouldn't need Brzustewicz's skill set. Hughes and Hronek are a fantastic pair but they play less than half a game each. We need other players too. Having 2 star dmen who can control the play would assure we had a gamebreaker on the ice for 45-50 minutes a night. That would be amazing. I'm hoping that PA can get away with signing Hronek to a deal with a limited NTC (or even just a 3-4 year deal) so that we have the option of moving him if Willander and Brzustewicz both hit. I would be more inclined to move our 2024 or 2025 1st round pick instead of our big 3 prospects as their timelines align better with our window (rather than a late 1st who won't show for 4-5 years at best) I'd split Hughes and Hronek if we got a legit #2-#3D. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 1 minute ago, aGENT said: I'd split Hughes and Hronek if we got a legit #2-#3D. Yup. Hughes and Hronek are both number One D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 4 minutes ago, aGENT said: I'd split Hughes and Hronek if we got a legit #2-#3D. Not sure that makes sense, they have great chemistry. You are taking hronek who is a great #2, making him a #3 so that you can put a #2-3 in as a #2? If we get a legit #2-3 they should be able to drive the 2nd pair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 3 minutes ago, Coryberg said: Not sure that makes sense, they have great chemistry. You are taking hronek who is a great #2, making him a #3 so that you can put a #2-3 in as a #2? If we get a legit #2-3 they should be able to drive the 2nd pair. We don't need, nor can we afford ($7m+) another "Hronek". You get a #2-3 like a prime aged Tanev, pair him with Hughes and let Hronek anchor the 2nd pair with Zadorov. Then you have the ability to put two pairs out with guys who can play +/- 25 minutes each of a 60 minute game. You can always put Hughes-Hronek back together situationally. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 55 minutes ago, Coryberg said: Myers for zub is an upgrade.... but not that much. Definitely not worth losing out on a guy who is trending on such a crazy trajectory. Also Myers expiring contract is going to go to pay petey and Hroneks raises for next year. If you bring in Zubs 4.25 you can kiss Zadorov goodbye. Is he that much of an upgrade on Zadorov? seems like a lot of folks around here are pretty high on Zub. Dunno how the cap all shakes tho. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screw Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 EP40 needs a finisher on his wing. This trade propos does nothing for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 (edited) 2 hours ago, aGENT said: We don't need, nor can we afford ($7m+) another "Hronek". You get a #2-3 like a prime aged Tanev, pair him with Hughes and let Hronek anchor the 2nd pair with Zadorov. Then you have the ability to put two pairs out with guys who can play +/- 25 minutes each of a 60 minute game. You can always put Hughes-Hronek back together situationally. So we aren't going to get a "legit" 2-3? Just a prime aged tanev 2-3? What happened to the 22-24 year old 2-3 that you are trading Brzustewicz for? Edited January 8 by Coryberg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bob Long said: seems like a lot of folks around here are pretty high on Zub. Dunno how the cap all shakes tho. He is a decent dman but by no means a difference maker. Basically a younger (but far from young) Ian cole. A solid #4 on a good team, his contract isn't horrible but by no means a bargain at 4.6 mil. Edited January 8 by Coryberg 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 55 minutes ago, Coryberg said: So we aren't going to get a "legit" 2-3? Just a prime aged tanev 2-3? What happened to the 22-24 year old 2-3 that you are trading Brzustewicz for? Was (is?) Tanev not a legit #2-3? He's just a different (defensive) D type than Hronek (2 way/offensive). They don't cost as much. I mean ideally, yeah you'd find a 23+/- "Zub" or "Tanev". I don't know, what happened to them? I'd happily move Brzustewicz for one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 (edited) 53 minutes ago, Coryberg said: He is a decent dman but by no means a difference maker. Basically a younger (but far from young) Ian cole. A solid #4 on a good team, his contract isn't horrible but by no means a bargain at 4.6 mil. You have to look at those charts in the context of the teams they're on. Edited January 8 by aGENT 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Lou Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 3 hours ago, aGENT said: We don't need, nor can we afford ($7m+) another "Hronek". You get a #2-3 like a prime aged Tanev, pair him with Hughes and let Hronek anchor the 2nd pair with Zadorov. Then you have the ability to put two pairs out with guys who can play +/- 25 minutes each of a 60 minute game. You can always put Hughes-Hronek back together situationally. Exactly this ^^^ Hughes n Hronek can play together as needed but when both command in the area of 7-8 each we need to spread the talent around. Hughes still needs a stay at home partner going forward with any free cap space created. There's some talent on the farm but how dynamic Quinn is we need to support him and Hronek best as possible. The rest will fall into place. Just IMHAO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 20 minutes ago, aGENT said: You have to look at those charts in the context of the teams they're on. The chart includes "teammates" that shows zub has had a worse set of teammates than 98% of people in the league (Cole at 47% so average). It also shows "competition" showing that Cole actually plays against better players. I can assure you that context of teams wasn't overlooked. I think that is why certain people on this board romanticize about Zub. They figure that Ottawa sucks and so zub must be way better than his numbers show. You have to remember that being on a bad team helps inflate defensive stats like D zone starts, hits and blocks because when other teams always have the puck there are more opportunities for blocks, hits and defensive zone draws. It's a 2 way street. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 Feel like we really need to teach people the definition of rumour. Some of these so-called rumours are just fan site speculation. This is like me posting a thread from the proposal section and saying "rumour." We get the better player, with better size, and a 2nd rounder? Yeah, if that was ever on the table we would have already taken it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 49 minutes ago, Coryberg said: The chart includes "teammates" that shows zub has had a worse set of teammates than 98% of people in the league (Cole at 47% so average). Yeah, this won't effect his play.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.