Joined: Feb. 2017
Posts: 1,930
Likes: 418
This is a tough one, it seems like a "grass is greener" type of situation. Miller and Carrick put up the same kind of numbers throughout their careers and appear to have the same type of usage at the NHL level. What justifies the addition of 3 prospects for the same player who is a couple of years older?
The Anaheim deal has some potential at least as a framework for a deal but is a heavy over payment. Rielly and Lindholm were the 5th and 6th picks respectively in the 2012 draft, and their values are very similar albeit in slightly different roles. Are either of them a #1 D? Not now and perhaps that is expecting too much. Lindholm may be the better player now and in the future but he does play on a better team with a better supporting cast and that can't be overlooked. It is a little early to anoint one or the other as the better player especially this year with both taking a slight step backwards.
Zaitsev has been a very pleasant surprise and in terms of value, is worth more than Manson and Larsson. The question with Manson is how well can he skate and how much better is he than Marchenko? Same question for Larsson and Nielsen? Nielsen appears to be developing into a much better player than his draft position suggests, at least on the offensive side of the puck.
Your D is definitely different but it doesn't appear any better, just bigger. Carrick = Miller, Rielly = Lindholm, Zaitsev & Nielsen > Manson & Larsson, add in the prospects and we're giving away players to be worse now and down the road.
Reply
CapFriendly
CapFriendly