Social Icons

twitterfacebookgoogle pluslinkedinrss feedemail

Pages

Hockey Challenge 2014

Recent Articles

1.13.2014

Jon's thoughts on the trade deadline moves and overall day

Here are my impressions of the two trades Seattle made near the deadline, and also a look at the disappointment the overall day brought me. 

I want to start this off by saying that I saw all the rumored trades we were a part off, the names being thrown around and all the trades we were (supposedly) close to completing.  But, I (and all of us fans) have ZERO knowledge of what the truth was.  So based on this, I will not speculate on any names of players, and why didn’t we go get XYZ. 

The two trades we did make:

I do not mind either of the trades Seattle made.  I think the trades did a great job of improving the team for this season, without sacrificing the young talent that we have.  However, I do not believe that either trade improved the team that significantly.   


Maxwell for Swenson and Holub 

Maxwell fills a roll at Center that the team has struggled with at times all season.  According to all accounts from Lethbridge, he is VERY popular with the staff, other players, and most of all the fans.  Everyone described how sad they were to see him go, and how much they were going to miss him.  Players said they learned so much from him.  This is the type of player every team wants and needs for any stretch and playoff run.  GM Farwell describes him as a player that can play both ends of the ice, and at the time of the trade was near the top of the Hurricanes scoring chart. 
With the acquisition of Maxwell, another forward was going to lose ice time.  Looking at the roster, if everyone moves down one slot, that meant most likely Seth Swenson.  In the article on MyNorthwest.com, Farwell says that Swenson was unhappy with his ice time and role on the team.  I don’t blame him one bit.  He is 20 years old, playing his last season in the league, and has the potential talent to play a bigger role, but in the eyes of me, has not shown it consistently.  He was a strong penalty killer, and will be missed for that.  But, that is also a roll that will give someone else the chance to show what the can do.  He was also reported to be a great person in the locker room (and I can attest to that from the many times I have talked to him).  But from the sounds of it Maxwell has leadership qualities that you replace by losing Swenson.
Holub had left the team, and it has been said that he had requested a trade.  I think that if he had not left the team, he would have had a big roll with all the injuries this season but an even bigger role next season.  Obviously, he was not willing to wait until then.  Just like Swenson, I don’t blame Holub for thinking and wanting that.  I think he went about it all wrong, but once you go down the path he did, there is no turning back.  So too me, no loss at all since he was not coming back to Seattle. 

Kozun for Myles and Douglas 

I see Kozun as an upgrade in net, but only because he is a year older with more experience in the league.  He has been playing in front of a terrible team in Kamloops all season (except versus Seattle), so I don’t look at his numbers at all. 

Of course with the trade for Kozan, one goalie needed to go.  In this case, it was Justin Myles.  This was even more a case of looking forward to next season when everyone expects Flodell to come in as the backup. What surprised me was that we swapped Myles out for an older goalie that is older but also has the same number of playoff minutes played as I do. 

GM Farwell once told me that to get talent, you must give up talent.  This appears to be the case with Douglas.  I think he has a lot of potential, but is a long term project.  I did not like him as a 15 year old in training camp.  But had to admit that as a 16 in training camp, he was improved.  I think the team made the correct decision in sending him down to play a larger roll at a lower level for last season.  He was not going to get much ice time as a 16 here.  Going into this training camp, you could tell that he had made even more progress, but it was not enough to break into a top 6 role.  Would he have been in the mix next season in Seattle had he not been traded? That's a good question.  This trade gives him a chance to play the remainder of this season virtually full time, and to progress with Kamloops.  So I see this as not much of a loss this season, but has the chance to be a loss the next couple. 
So overall, as I said at the top, not a lot of loss, with some positive gains. 

Overall Feelings

As much as I was ok with the two trades, I was very disappointed with the trade deadline as a whole.  It is not secret to anyone that had talked to me before what I believed Seattle should do (like it matters to the team).  I thought Seattle up front was ok once they got healthy.  In between the pipes, both goaltenders have proven capable.  The only thing I don’t think either has done is stolen a game (come close a couple times).  When either goalie has had issues, for the most part, it has been the defense in front of them.  So to me, the defense was the weakest spot. 

I thought with one open 20 spot (and a second with Swenson being gone), that was a perfect opportunity to go out and get a rock solid defensive defensemen.  There were rumored to be 2 or 3 out there that could have been available.  Personally, I probably would have overpaid to get one. 

As I said in a post back at the beginning of the season, I feel with this team, it is built to win now.  With this many 19 and 20's, they are bound to take a step back next season.  Swapping out an 18 year old goalie for a 19 got the team a little older.  Swapping out a 20 for a 19 got a little younger, but not much because of the level of experience.  So marginally improving for this season didn't go to the level I expected. 
Seattle really had the chance to put some ground between them and Everett and Spokane (and further from Tri) talent wise.  Both of those teams made smaller trades.  With the trades Seattle made, all I feel we did was stay equal.  With another move for a veteran player, I feel Seattle would have been in a rung above those two teams, and below Kelowna and Portland.  Now maybe everyone says that with the talent of those two teams, Seattle doesn't stand a chance anyways.  As we have seen, when this team is healthy and rolling lines, they are very hard to beat.  This season, Seattle had played virtually .500 against Kelowna, and well, not so much against Portland.  Add in Victoria whom Seattle has played very well against.  So there is nothing to say that with hard work, determination, and some luck, Seattle couldn't match up against any of these teams in a 7 game series.  So I say we should have built up, sacrificed some future for a better position this year. 

10 comments :

Marc S said...

I think sending the draft picks in both trades was a bit of an over pay, since we were sending two players in each trade for one.

I hope the 11 19 year olds really tear it up the rest of the season. That will be good for the team this season and also elevate their trade stock as much as possible for the offseason. Pretty much every trade made this year has taken a bite out of the future. Next year we stand to have 8 open roster spots from this year's roster

Mr Tell13 said...

I agree that our defense might be the weaker spot on the team, but if we look at our d-men lineup:

Hauf -Theodore
Henry-Smith
Wardley-Bear

Wolf

If we add a talented (lets say a good two way dmen) who's minutes do we drop ?

Anonymous said...

"If we add a talented (lets say a good two way dmen) who's minutes do we drop ?" Hauf.

Mr Tell13 said...

that's fine, but you will have to get him out on another trade.
Nobody would trade Myles bell (example) for Hauf + a 4th round

or you think that making a trade as easy as saying "hey let me give you Morrisey for Hauf, we good?"

And I did not realize that all of our woes on D revolved on Hauf...

Anonymous said...

Wow, talk about overreacting and putting words in someone's mouth. You stated that our defense might be the weaker spot on the team, and then proceeded to ask who's minutes would be reduced if a good 2-way dman were brought in. I simply stated that of the top 6, Hauf would be my choice for reduced ice time in such a scenario. I didn't conjure up unrealistic trades nor did I ever say that all of the team's defensive woes fell on Hauf. I made the mistake of thinking you wanted mature conversation.

You either have poor reading comprehension or are just looking for a fight. Either way I won't answer you going forward.

Mr Tell13 said...

yeah ok, answer by one word and then when you don't like the reply, whine. please.

now:
The problem with that idea (Hauf with less minutes) is that you can only go about it one way, drop him on 3rd pairing. (or else everyone gets less minutes exept for Theodore I gess.) So you would have this dmen playing only the likes of 5 minutes a game plaus maybe the PK. That would be ok if you (again in my opinion) if you are willing to sacrifice Bear's ice time too. the other guy on third pairing being Wardley, is cutting his minutes by himself well enough by taking penalties ...
So for me, you would have to trade him if you don't want to impact Bear's playing time too much. That would have been 2 trade to make to shore up the defense. So you would have to buy high for a quality guy to come in, and then sell low for Hauf to get the ice time...

Marc S said...

By the way the defense pairings seem to be:
Theodore - Smith
Hauf - Wardley
Henry - Bear

If you traded for another defenseman then I'd probably lower Wardley's minutes. I like Hauf, he is a lot more physical this year and still uses that 12 foot reach well. Wardley tends to go for the big hit in the neutral zone and miss a lot.

How much of the defensive woes have to do with the forwards. Are the defensemen trying to do too much to cover for tired forwards?

Kodi said...

I think we have too many defenders that have to join the rush.

Over the past month we have given up way too many breakaway chances because the defender skates in to make a play on goal and the forward is either in a transition or not currently in position to stop the opposing team if they steal the puck.

Is it nice to have a defender join in on the rush from time to time? Absolutely but it doesn't have to happen on every single play. and I think teams are seeing that on film.

Also I see a lot less players jumping in front of the puck this year to prevent the puck from even reaching the goal.

Mr Tell13 said...

Marc:
yeah, I think that Wardley probably could drop some minutes too. And yeah, he goes for th hit a bit too much.
Kodi:
I am starting to think the same way as you do. We have Theodore , Henry, Smith and Bear that can/could carry the puck and joins the play and I think that its starting to make the team a bit unbalanced.

You both brought in the point about the fwds hurting team defense and I think its spot on.
We are MUCH better than lets say 3-4 years ago but its not there yet. Its fine to have d-men jumping in and such, the the transition fwd NEEDS to pick up the position left open in that case and they are still missing that too many times.
(although it looks soo easy to do from my seat at the showare ...I don't know what the problem of theses guys is....)

Anonymous said...

Barzal reinjured?

WHL Scoreboard