Shootica

This just makes our handedness issue so glaring. It would be so beneficial to have a middle pairing lefty so this isn't Montour's main focus coming into the year.

I'm not too concerned with Risto's ice time moving forward, it will go down naturally as Dahlin starts to take the reigns as our top defenseman. This was our defense's 5v5 ice time per game last season. I could easily see both Risto and Dahlin hovering in the 16-16.5 min range this year, with Dahlin having more total TOI from being on PP1. Of course all that goes out the window if they make Risto and Dahlin a pairing. But I really haven't gotten the impression that Krueger wants to do that.

The good news on this front is that from what's being said, the 'taxi squad' that teams will be allowed to carry is likely going to effectively be an extension of the AHL team. Which gives teams the benefit of only paying AHL salaries, and would also mean those players would have to go through waivers. Of course, none of that is finalized.

I've been chewing on the Hanifin idea for some time now and I just can't find a trade that makes Calgary better. They have a really nice setup on their left side with Gio, Hanifin, and Valimaki. Two solid top 4 guys and a rookie with big potential. Gio looked like he was starting to finally hit the hill in his career last year, and the hope among their fans is that Valimaki or a combination of Valimaki and Hanifin will be ready to take over that top role relatively soon. If I'm a Flames fan, my hope would be that Gio - Hanifin - Valimaki gradually turns into Valimaki - Hanifin - Gio. And on their right side, Andersson and Tanev should have the top 4 locked up. The trade I could see them trying to make is to move one of their depth lefties, Kylington for one, for a similar caliber righty. But I don't think we have much to offer there within the cap. I think Hanifin is a very intriguing target for us, but barring an injury to Andersson or Tanev I just don't see a fit.

I don't see anything on his Twitter, where did he mention this? I don't think Murphy has the best reputation as an insider, but that Boston hockey circle is really well connected. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if he has good Intel on Hanifin.

I swear I saw a mock-up a year or two ago that looked pretty slick, but for the life of me I can't find it again. The last two jerseys they've done have been really good. I'm optimistic they can hit another homer here.

I'm completely speculating here, but my first thought would be be high level organizational vision and such. Keeping up on trends around the league in style of play, schemes, drafting and developing, etc. A research-based deeper dive into what makes up the org's hockey philosophy now and moving forward. I could see that being a valuable full-time position. But that's just my take on it. I have no idea what the Sabres have in mind for Mendola.

This is a move to meet expansion draft requirements. Each team has to leave at least one goalie unprotected in the expansion draft, and with Johansson a likely Group VI UFA next year, we could have been left without an eligible goalie to leave unprotected. Tokarski will now be that guy, and he's also not a half bad AHL netminder.

Good catch, for whatever reason I thought he was here longer than he actually was. That pretty much throws out the idea I had. On another note, isn't Jonas Johansson lined up to be a group 6 UFA next offseason?. I don't consider myself an expert at the CBA, but he seems to meet all the criteria as long as he plays less than 22 NHL games next season. In that case, we'd have nobody that can be left unprotected to meet the league's expansion draft rules. I think we need to sign a minor league goalie to a two year NHL contract, even if they spend all that time in the ECHL.

I think it's hard to argue that he doesn't have high end talent - he has the tools, it's the toolbox that's the question with him. I'm not saying that he'd jump in and be a top player in their prospect pool. My main point was that with Jankowski now in the fold there, I could see Arizona having internet in Mitts. Because we've seen time and time again that when hockey managers change organizations, they have a tendency to go out and acquire their old players and draft picks.

Another idea that I've been chewing on lately... I think Mittelstadt for Kuemper makes some sense as a trade framework. Maybe we throw in something else. The Yotes' seem destined to cut costs and rebuild, and Mitts would add some high end talent to their prospect pool. They brought in Ryan Jankowski in a top scouting position, and we all know how much these hockey guys are beholden to their past draft picks. There's a good chance that Jankowski is still a strong believer in Mitts. Of course, that's assuming we can clear the necessary cap space to make it work.

At face value, I'd absolutely swap Joker for Sergachev. But we wouldn't easily be able to fit him under the salary cap this year without moving someone of the Risto or Reinhart ilk. And I don't know if doing that benefits us long-term.

That's how I've been thinking it too for the most part, partially as insurance and partially just because I assume nobody would want him. But trading him might be the best route towards actually clearing the necessary cap space for a replacement.

You have a really good point. We do probably harp on it more than we need to around here. And I have a hard time pinning it down myself. Maybe it's because he isn't a flashy player, maybe it's just because of lofty expectations from a #2 pick. I think for me, I find myself asking that question because his play style leads me to think he could be that 'it' guy on a different line. Players like Skinner and Olofsson have skillsets that scream "complementary player". Reinhart is a lot more nuanced. I'd ideally like to see us run a more balanced lineup with three lines that have formidable scoring ability, and Reinhart's name comes to mind when I ask myself how we strengthen those middle six lines. And because we've never seen Reinhart play that sort of role, I'm just left wondering. I think he'd be great at it, I just want to see it happen. It's not a slight against him by any stretch.

If this team does actually look to improve in net, I wonder if we could dangle a late pick in front of Chicago for them to take Hutton. They have two younger goalies right now without a whole lot of NHL experience between them, both of whom would probably pass through waivers with no issue. They seem to be going down the 'tanking through bad goaltending path' and don't need him, but it could be smart to throw a vet in that goaltending room given just how inexperienced it is and how their season may go.

Yeah, but I'm pretty sure he played most of his minutes with Ryan O'Reilly that year. I don't think the argument is that he's bad without Jack specifically, it's whether he can be the line driver or if he's more of a complementary piece. I think this whole debate is silly because we don't have enough of a sample size to really judge. But you can't bring up 2018 without mentioning ROR.

My ears perked right up at that, but looking at their roster it's gotta be a cheaper 3rd pairing guy they're after. I don't see how you go out and give Tanev $4M a year if you don't see him as a top four guy.

I don't know, even with Cirelli their lineup looks considerably weaker than ours, and most people barely consider us a bubble playoff team.

Of course, in a compressed season the backup is likely going to get more use, not less. I understand what Marty's saying, but it's a real big question mark.

The offer sheet compensation at $7M is a 1st, a 2nd, and a 3rd, and both Detroit and Ottawa are lottery teams. That 1st is very likely to be a top 5 pick and could easily end up number 1 overall. Cirelli is a great player, but I don't know if he's worth an unprotected top 5 pick as well as a 2nd and 3rd. I don't think that offer sheets rarely happen because of some unwritten rule among GMs. I think they rarely happen because it is incredibly rare that a team with enough cap space to make the offer sheet is good enough to give up the draft picks without issue.

I don't mind the idea of bringing in a third goalie to challenge Hutton for the number 2 spot. I'd rather just flat out replace him, but that isn't a bad option either. There is a reasonable chance that Hutton comes in with his eye problems fixed and performs like the career .910 backup goalie he's been. It's just not a chance I'd like to gamble on with a compressed schedule. We've already seen an Ullmark injury completely derail the season once, I'd prefer not to roll those dice again.

I'd be shocked if this doesn't happen by the end of the day.

Oh I agree. And the market is even trickier for them because there's only a few teams that realistically are in the goalie market. Us, Carolina, and maybe Chicago but my gut says they're going to play the 'tank through lousy goaltending' game. Edmonton should but they probably are done there. I figure that they'll only move Kuemper if someone meets their asking price. Which I'd bet doesn't happen. They'll likely end up trading Raanta for next to nothing with whatever cap savings they can get. I think our best route here is to trade Miller to a third team beforehand.

If Cozens makes the team as expected, that gives us a 22 man roster with $2.602M in cap space. That also raises our potential performance bonuses to $4.338M.

I don't think this makes sense for Arizona. From what I've read, their goals for moving a goalie are to cut costs and gain draft picks. Miller doesn't really help them with either, and they have their own vet defensemen they're looking to trade. That's probably the sticking point with a Coyotes trade. They want to cut salary, and we don't have enough cap space to take on Raanta or Kuemper without sending salary back.