Quoting: CD282
Russell isn't going to play above Jones and Barrie isn't going to play above Bear - based on their performances last season. I don't know much about Koekkoek but his numbers last year show better than Russell too.
I really like those additions though. I'd love to see Kahun signed for 2 years, however.
I'd love to see some sort of justification as to why Barrie shouldn't be playing above Bear: Barrie's had 20min a night plus for years and while Bear exceeded expectations last season, the results weren't the prettiest.
Assuming 3 powerplays and penalty kills per night (league averages) and the top PP unit sees all 6 minutes of icetime for the powerplay: Barrie still sees 14+ minutes of icetime per night. I don't think Bear
needs to be used on the PK (Nurse/Larsson and Russell/Jones are good enough pairings), so is the assumption that Nurse-Bear is a thing only because Bear should be looking at playing strictly 20 5v5 minutes per night? The second Bear gets any special teams time, the club should be looking at balancing his minutes with a Nurse-Barrie pairing: I'm disinterested in having 4 defenders playing over 21 minutes per night because the club elected to extend Russell for a year but feel that he's only a 16-minute man (14min 5v5, 2min PK). Nurse (20min 5v5, 4min PK), Bear (20min 5v5), Jones (18min 5v5, 2min PK), Larsson (16min 5v5, 4min PK), and Barrie (14min 5v5, 6min PP) already sees 5 guys pushing 20min per night without completely overworking the Nurse-Bear pairing.
But, as per usual, I'm either overthinking or underthinking the problem, and I'm never sure which.
I like the Kahun and Koekkoek signings because it means some other team doesn't have them. They're very functional depth pieces to have in a condensed season, and I think there's a case that Edmonton should need both. I'd beg Bear for a third year if that's his AAV. Klefbom's gone for the year no matter what: the team needs to move its ass a bit faster on getting him on LTIR before the season starts and to start offering a little more to the trio you've signed to ensure Edmonton goes into this season with as much quality on it's roster as possible. Wouldn't mind Hoffman for a year if he was interested.
Echoing the above sentiments of Jones > Russell, and if Koekkoek ends up playing more than ol' Cowboy, I like that bottom pair a hell of a lot more.
I think at this point a more likely return for Chiasson is going to be a 7th and an AHL player to keep the 50-man lists even for both clubs, possibly a small amount of retention on Edmonton's end. I'm fine with that: the goal at this point isn't cap space, but rather a roster spot. I'd inquire as to whether or not tagging on Wells ups the return any, if at all.
I would think RNH and Kahun might switch spots if the German connection works (this time) and I have nothing but grievances with your fourth line. Either Nygard-Khaira-Archibald or Khaira-Haas-Archibald. The Turris signing tipped off that the fourth line should be expected to eat the garbage minutes and matchups, and putting Neal on that line is nothing but hazardous. I'd rotate Kassian and Neal out based on the opponent and the hot stick once Zack finds himself demoted in favour of Puljujarvi. Until then, I'd be running the blender between the McDavid and Turris lines until something sticks on either line.
Ennis - McDavid - Kassian
Kahun - Turris - Puljujarvi
to start the season (Neal in for Kahun sometimes?). I think the club has to at least entertain a Neal-McDavid-Puljujarvi line at one point or another, and I think a Kahun-McDavid-Puljujarvi line would be nothing but firewagon fun. I still personally want to see what Nygard does alongside McDavid with more than 12 minutes.
I wouldn't be against the RNH-Draisaitl-Yamamoto line being the #1 line until whatever the McDavid line ends up being proves that it's come to play at evens.