Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cobra
The value may not be bad, but what team is trading a #1 centre for that package?
|
It would have to be one of the teams that are loaded on Cs and need a top pair RD immediately. There are a few of them now: Sharks, Ducks, Sabres (lol), Stars, and to a lesser degree the Red Wings, Hurricanes, and Mammoth.
With the C depth that each of these teams have they are either going to be putting a guy who could be a #1/2C on the third line or pushing them to the wing. If you believe the rumours around McTavish, these guys actually are not a fan of being forced to play wing because the organization created a logjam at C.
Just as an example, Celebrini has locked down the #1C position on the Sharks and last season they were trying to establish Smith as the #2C. Throwing Misa into the mix means you now have three guys for two spots and someone is going to have to yield. (Smith would be the obvious choice as he was playing on the wing already)
Whichever one of these guys is not your #1C or your #2C is expendable and should be moved for whatever package addresses the gaps in your depth chart. In the case of the Sharks, they not only have Celebrini, Smith, and Misa but they also have Bystedt running the clock on his ELC and no room on the Sharks depth chart for him.
Side note: Cap considerations will also become a problem for these teams. Kaprizov just signed for $17M. McDavid is probably going to get $18-20M? The Sharks are going to have 6 or 7 star players? That is going to be very unlikely to keep everyone and with so many of them being forwards they will quickly start having problems around not having any money for their D group.
Most people here understand the theory: Draft BPA and then get ready to trade from positions of strength to address positions of weakness. In practice though, the GMs seem to get scared of trading away one of their young star players and would rather just hope that having 3-4 top 6 centres makes up for not having a well built D group.