dudacek Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 IMO, being a 1st round pick is the only reason he is a topic in the first place. Same exact results but drafted in the 2nd and 3rd I doubt he gets much mention at all. You are right that the early push to the NHL has skewed expectations. Realistically we are looking at a player that is at least 2-3 years away from being NHL ready if ever. I respectfully disagree on that one. Baptiste or Bailey scores at a 70-point pace next year as rookie Amerks and this board will be drooling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 I respectfully disagree on that one. Baptiste or Bailey scores at a 70-point pace next year as rookie Amerks and this board will be drooling. And it will be the first time either will get any serious run on this board. Grigorenko has been a hot topic for some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 And it will be the first time either will get any serious run on this board. Grigorenko has been a hot topic for some time. Bailey and Baptiste have already gotten serious run on this board amongst those that discuss prospects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Bailey and Baptiste have already gotten serious run on this board amongst those that discuss prospects. They have been subjects within a topic. Grigorenko is a topic all of his own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) The ironic thing is Grigo is exactly the type of player Murray says he is trying to acquire — 20-24, yet to emerge, but potentially ready to step in to a larger role. I wonder if he could be used as chip to get a goalie. The price for an unproven goalie seems to be around a 2nd-rounder, which is also a reasonable value for Grigorenko (exhibit A being the Sven Baertschi trade) I've seen Grigo for Markstrom somewhere. For Lack? Lehner? Jones? **** Here's another paranoid theory (I really like it over here at Team Storm Cloud): If Edmonton is bidding against Buffalo for, say, Lack, and Buffalo is offering Grigorenko, wouldn't it be a good idea for Chiarelli to float a Grigo KHL rumour to make his offer seem more enticing than Murray's? Also, reports out of Edmonton are suggesting Cam Talbot to Oilers for pick 16. Way too much, IMO. It looks more like something any GM selling a goalie might float in order to inflate the market. Too many goalies and not enough jobs at the moment. Lots of gamesmanship going on. It will be interesting to see where the carousel stops. Interesting take on the goalie market from an Edmonton perspective. http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2015/06/13/edmonton-oilers-said-to-be-thinking-about-moving-16th-overall-pick-for-new-york-rangers-goalie-cam-talbot-huh/ Edited June 14, 2015 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 #16 for Talbot would be insane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 http://nypost.com/2015/06/13/its-time-bettman-ends-nhls-arizona-money-pit-experiment/ Larry Brooks of the NYP dropped some trade stuff in there. Roundup: - Rangers and Yotes talked Doan at the deadline and he wonders if they could resurrect those talks. - Cam Talbot is a safe bet to be traded by or at the draft. - Marty St. Louis will NOT be back in NY (at least not with the Rangers). - Patrick Elias will be back in New Jersey. - Dan Boyle won't retire or demand a trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 The ironic thing is Grigo is exactly the type of player Murray says he is trying to acquire — 20-24, yet to emerge, but potentially ready to step in to a larger role. I wonder if he could be used as chip to get a goalie. The price for an unproven goalie seems to be around a 2nd-rounder, which is also a reasonable value for Grigorenko (exhibit A being the Sven Baertschi trade) I've seen Grigo for Markstrom somewhere. For Lack? Lehner? Jones? **** Here's another paranoid theory (I really like it over here at Team Storm Cloud): If Edmonton is bidding against Buffalo for, say, Lack, and Buffalo is offering Grigorenko, wouldn't it be a good idea for Chiarelli to float a Grigo KHL rumour to make his offer seem more enticing than Murray's? Also, reports out of Edmonton are suggesting Cam Talbot to Oilers for pick 16. Way too much, IMO. It looks more like something any GM selling a goalie might float in order to inflate the market. Too many goalies and not enough jobs at the moment. Lots of gamesmanship going on. It will be interesting to see where the carousel stops. Interesting take on the goalie market from an Edmonton perspective. http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2015/06/13/edmonton-oilers-said-to-be-thinking-about-moving-16th-overall-pick-for-new-york-rangers-goalie-cam-talbot-huh/ The Canucks are apparently asking for a second for lack. Why offer them a first in Grigs ? If its some sort of bidding war I get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 The Canucks are apparently asking for a second for lack. Why offer them a first in Grigs ? If its some sort of bidding war I get it. Grigorenko isn't a first. He WAS. He's an actual player now. They're valued differently based on how they produce and grow after they're drafted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Grigorenko isn't a first. He WAS. He's an actual player now. They're valued differently based on how they produce and grow after they're drafted. Got it. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 The ironic thing is Grigo is exactly the type of player Murray says he is trying to acquire — 20-24, yet to emerge, but potentially ready to step in to a larger role. I wonder if he could be used as chip to get a goalie. The price for an unproven goalie seems to be around a 2nd-rounder, which is also a reasonable value for Grigorenko (exhibit A being the Sven Baertschi trade) I've seen Grigo for Markstrom somewhere. For Lack? Lehner? Jones? **** Here's another paranoid theory (I really like it over here at Team Storm Cloud): If Edmonton is bidding against Buffalo for, say, Lack, and Buffalo is offering Grigorenko, wouldn't it be a good idea for Chiarelli to float a Grigo KHL rumour to make his offer seem more enticing than Murray's? Also, reports out of Edmonton are suggesting Cam Talbot to Oilers for pick 16. Way too much, IMO. It looks more like something any GM selling a goalie might float in order to inflate the market. Too many goalies and not enough jobs at the moment. Lots of gamesmanship going on. It will be interesting to see where the carousel stops. Interesting take on the goalie market from an Edmonton perspective. http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2015/06/13/edmonton-oilers-said-to-be-thinking-about-moving-16th-overall-pick-for-new-york-rangers-goalie-cam-talbot-huh/ Grigorenko is not what TM is looking for. Big, fast and hard to play against is what he wants. Grigs only gets 1 out of 3. And Grigorenko is exactly what Edmonton doesn't need as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Grigorenko is not what TM is looking for. Big, fast and hard to play against is what he wants. Grigs only gets 1 out of 3. And Grigorenko is exactly what Edmonton doesn't need as well. Not disagreeing on the original point, but he never suggested that Grigorenko to Edmonton could be a thing. He was saying that there could be a bidding war going on between Buffalo and Edmonton for the services of other goalies. If that were the case there might be a chance the Chiarelli floats a rumor about Grigorenko if Buffalo was using him as a key piece in their bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Not disagreeing on the original point, but he never suggested that Grigorenko to Edmonton could be a thing. He was saying that there could be a bidding war going on between Buffalo and Edmonton for the services of other goalies. If that were the case there might be a chance the Chiarelli floats a rumor about Grigorenko if Buffalo was using him as a key piece in their bid. Sorry about that. Trying to do three things at once and missed that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 I posted something on Grigo/Mantha a few months back, but that was mostly to chill pill those who were touting Mantha as the Second Coming. There are a ton of statistical similarities even going back to junior, not to mention both are big with great hands, average skating and questionable compete. If both sides have soured on their prospects, there could be a trade possibility in there. I was definitely one of those posters calling for a huge package to get Mantha. In retrospect he's definitely not worth what I was prepared to trade for him, but I still think we should acquire him, especially given our lack of skill/depth on RW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Grigorenko isn't a first. He WAS. He's an actual player now. They're valued differently based on how they produce and grow after they're drafted. That said, I think it would make a ton of sense for Vancouver to acquire him. Their only center after Sedin is Horvat, and they're heading to a rebuild whether they want to admit it or not. I think I'd do Grigorenko for Lack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 That said, I think it would make a ton of sense for Vancouver to acquire him. Their only center after Sedin is Horvat, and they're heading to a rebuild whether they want to admit it or not. I think I'd do Grigorenko for Lack. I wonder if they'd want that Cody Hodgson fella. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Malooga Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Regarding Grigorenko vs. Mantha...who were they playing with and on what lines? Grigo had another first round pick with him at the beginning in Armia, and they were first liners, right? Was Mantha playing with equally talented linemates, and/or was he on the first or third lines? That could be a big difference between their stats, no? (As for the Cam Talbot to Edmonton rumor...I saw an Oilers fan suggest #16 for Talbot and Yandle! LMFAO.) I've never been this excited for an NHL offseason in my entire life...praying we end up with ROR, Toffoli or Saad. (I won't stop either. Lol.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Regarding Grigorenko vs. Mantha...who were they playing with and on what lines? Grigo had another first round pick with him at the beginning in Armia, and they were first liners, right? Was Mantha playing with equally talented linemates, and/or was he on the first or third lines? That could be a big difference between their stats, no? (As for the Cam Talbot to Edmonton rumor...I saw an Oilers fan suggest #16 for Talbot and Yandle! LMFAO.) I've never been this excited for an NHL offseason in my entire life...praying we end up with ROR, Toffoli or Saad. (I won't stop either. Lol.) On linemates - it's a fair point, but I can't find anything reliable that talks about Mantha's AHL linemates. The AHL does not report time on ice, either. On the Edmonton rumor: Talbot for 16 would be terrible. Talbot and Yandle for 16, Yakupov and another prospect? Maybe worth talking about since the NYP has already speculated that it's not guarantee Yandle isn't dealt with one year left on his deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rakish Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) As far as Mantha's linemates, I went through a few handful of box scores, it seemed that Athanasiou shared many of his plus/minus, but the wide variation between Mantha's and Athanasiou's seasonal +- tells you they didn't play together consistently. There were points shared with most of the other forwards. I saw one power play point, but for the number of box scores I looked at, wasn't a lot, which indicates to me he wasn't getting a lot of power play time. Edited June 14, 2015 by rakish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Not sure if this is updated. @JasonPHT: Per @TSNBobMcKenzie, Kessel's OK-to-trade list: BOS, CHI, LA. MIN, MON, NYR, PHI, PIT. As in, a bunch of teams with nearly zero cap space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Malooga Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) On linemates - it's a fair point, but I can't find anything reliable that talks about Mantha's AHL linemates. The AHL does not report time on ice, either. On the Edmonton rumor: Talbot for 16 would be terrible. Talbot and Yandle for 16, Yakupov and another prospect? Maybe worth talking about since the NYP has already speculated that it's not guarantee Yandle isn't dealt with one year left on his deal. I figured that's why it wasn't brought up, very hard to find that information without watching the games. The Edmonton thing just made me laugh. Like you said, Talbot for 16 is hilarious, Talbot AND Yandle for 16...that's just delusional. I just saw something where a couple people think Murray will make a run at Dougie Hamilton. (It was based off a quote though from Friedman.) And at 28 years old, I don't care much for Talbot...especially for picks 21 OR 31, based on half a season as a backup. Edited June 14, 2015 by Bob Malooga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 Not sure if this is updated. @JasonPHT: Per @TSNBobMcKenzie, Kessel's OK-to-trade list: BOS, CHI, LA. MIN, MON, NYR, PHI, PIT. As in, a bunch of teams with nearly zero cap space. Sucks for the Leafs that Washington isn't on that list, they're rumored to want a winger. With that list though, my guess would be NYR. If Yandle and Talbot are traded, they have $18.7 million in cap space, not to mention the space freed up by whomever they trade to the Leafs, which I imagine won't be too much seeing as Toronto probably wants picks/prospects. They still have to sign RFA's Hagelin, Miller, and Stepan, with Hagelin likely being let go if Kessel comes in. so they aren't exactly cap-strapped. Hell, with that space they could afford Malkin, especially if they trade the desired D-men back to the Pens. So, how about a 3-team trade, where the major pieces moving are Malkin to NYR, Hornqvist to NYR, Kessel to Pitt, Yandle and Girardi to Pitt, and then throw in a boat load of picks/prospects switching hands. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 I think that is the list that was reported at the deadline. It may be updated. But these lists mean next to nothing these days. The teams ask and often receive permission to send them elsewhere. So, how about a 3-team trade, where the major pieces moving are Malkin to NYR, Hornqvist to NYR, Kessel to Pitt, Yandle and Girardi to Pitt, and then throw in a boat load of picks/prospects switching hands. Thoughts? What is Toronto getting? The boatload of picks and prospects? They must all be coming from NY if NY is getting Malkin and Horqvist for Girardi and Yandle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 I think that is the list that was reported at the deadline. It may be updated. But these lists mean next to nothing these days. The teams ask and often receive permission to send them elsewhere. What is Toronto getting? The boatload of picks and prospects? They must all be coming from NY if NY is getting Malkin and Horqvist for Girardi and Yandle. So what else could you trade to Pitt from NYR to balance it out and make it so Pitt has to send some picks/prospects to Toronto as well? What if Kunitz goes to Toronto, Phanuef to Pitt, and Matta to Toronto? Jesus, I just realized that we have $27 million in cap space. Make it rain GMTM, make it rain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 So what else could you trade to Pitt from NYR to balance it out and make it so Pitt has to send some picks/prospects to Toronto as well? What if Kunitz goes to Toronto, Phanuef to Pitt, and Matta to Toronto? It's getting a bit too big now. Pittsburgh is getting destroyed by giving up Malkin (top ten player), Hornqvist (top six winger) and Maatta (Risto-level prospect) while landing Girardi (solid top-pairing dman), Yandle (solid top-four guy with one year left) and Phaneuf (top four guy with a monstrous contract). Something like: NYR get: Malkin, PIT pick or prospect (not a 1st or top prospect) PIT gets: Kessel, Girardi, Yandle, TOR 2nd TOR gets: Hornqvist, Kunitz, 1st from NYR, NYR prospect 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.