Let's Debate Lightning Moves, Not Drink the Kool-Aid

By Mark Pukalo

There is a certain phrase that I had never used before last month, when describing more than a minor issue, since Steve Yzerman took over as general manager for the Tampa Bay Lightning in 2010.

“I totally disagree with that decision.”

Trading a young, successful goalie (Dustin Tokarski) for a journeyman (Cedrick Desjardins) annoyed me and allowing Richard Panik to be lost for nothing on waivers when there were other options was also disappointing. Re-signing B.J. Crombeen and giving Erik Condra three years didn’t seem worth it to me either. There have been a few decisions in the first round of the draft you could question and I might have tried to figure out a way to keep Guy Boucher as well, but that would have been difficult.

Those moves are all relatively insignificant, though. We don’t always get what we want as fans and, with all the decisions a GM has to make, he can’t be perfect. Yzerman has made some absolutely amazing deals to build the Lightning into a Stanley Cup contender. He gets an A through the end of the 2016-17 season.

The Lightning GM has built quite a lot of room for error. It is easy to just say “he knows what he is doing” and go along with everything he does - like many are right now. It’s logical, because there’s little evidence to show where he has damaged the team. He knows what good hockey looks like. The Lightning will be competitive and, if a particular 19-year-old Russian defenseman becomes a star, they will probably be better than that.

That doesn’t mean a loyal Bolts fan can’t be concerned. While people sometimes go overboard with emotional exaggerated responses on twitter - me included - the basic fact is we all have our opinions. That means one thing. We care. Some are more informed than others. Some include a lot of thought and guard against personal leanings most of the time. There shouldn't be anything wrong with that.

Few have seriously come out publicly against the decisions made by Yzerman during this offseason, for a number of reasons. Some truly believe he is on the right track and needed to make some of the moves while others are just going along with them lazily without looking at the big picture. We have a good hockey market in Tampa Bay, with intelligent fans - except for the few out there that still don’t appreciate the talent of Victor Hedman. There should be a lot of different opinions. Aside from bashing a current or traded player unfairly like we have seen lately, all sides should be heard. We may not want to become Toronto or Montreal, but debate is good.

Differing opinions about the GM’s moves should be embraced and talked about honestly. There shouldn’t be one narrative. ... or else. That’s what the best hockey markets look like.

It’s no surprise I was against the Jonathan Drouin trade. It wasn't because Mikhail Sergachev can’t be a good defenseman. You just don’t trade a player with Drouin’s special talent at 22 years old. But I’m more surprised at the direction Yzerman has taken the team in the last month with many other moves. While Sergachev could cure some ills if he develops quickly, in my opinion the Lightning have gotten a little older and slower over the last month. If healthy and many things fall into a place, they can still be a playoff team. But I’m not sure they are better, unless many of their young players make a major leap forward.

The Drouin trade was not about the cap. It wasn’t about the expansion draft. It was a choice. I have worked on a scenario that would have kept him around and makes the Lightning a better team going forward, in my opinion. You can judge.

The trade to assure Vegas took Jason Garrison in the expansion draft was strong and I’m not sure the Golden Knights would have asked for more if Drouin had to be protected over Vladislav Namestnikov. If another pick was needed, fine. If Vegas wanted Vladdy, another deal could be made to send him to Sin City.

I would not have qualified defenseman Andrej Sustr. If the big Czech wanted to stay around as a seventh or eighth defenseman for a season to try and move up, I may have offered $1 million and he would likely walk. Sustr has had plenty of time to show he is worth almost $2 million. In my opinion, he hasn't come close.

Once that move was made, I would work the phones to see what the interest was in Tyler Johnson and Namestnikov. Brayden Point is a better bet long term as a No. 2 center. Plenty of groundwork was likely done to see what young defensemen were available. I’m not sure Winnipeg was willing to trade Jacob Trouba anymore and they are probably looking for defense help in return anyway. The focus had to be on Anaheim (Sami Vatenen, Brandon Montour), Minnesota (Matt Dumba) and Vancouver (Chris Tanev).

There’s no doubt in my mind Minnesota wanted Drouin. But I’m not sure a deal couldn’t have been made without him. Anaheim certainly could use some speed up front and Vancouver as well. In my model, I trade Johnson near his home in Spokane to the Canucks for a couple future picks and a prospect - perhaps forward Jake Virtanen. Then, I overpay for Matt Dumba from Minnesota - perhaps dishing the Wild the versatile but inconsistent Namestnikov (who could replace Erik Haula) and their choice of young forwards Adam Erne, Mathieu Joseph, Dennis Yan or Mitchell Stephens along with a high pick or a defense prospect (Matt Spencer?). I can’t imagine that deal not being better for Minnesota than the one they worked with Buffalo for Marco Scandella. You have to make it worth their while, if Drouin is not part of the deal. There is some talk about Dumba not being a great listener, but he’s young. You work with him. You could also offer a similar deal to Anaheim with Johnson instead of Vladdy for Vatanen.

My defense would now include combos of Hedman-Jake Dotchin, Slater Koekkoek-Anton Stralman, Braydon Coburn-Dumba. Bringing in a veteran seventh defenseman, perhaps to push Koekkoek on the left side (John-Michael Liles, Fedor Tyutin, Jyrki Jokipakka, Eric Gelinas, someone else?), wouldn’t cost all that much and there will be about $4 million in cap space left at the end to adjust if one of the top six guys get hurt. You have Erik Cernak, Dominik Masin, Libor Hajek and Ben Thomas coming and the solid draft pick of versatile Callan Foote gives you even more depth on the blue line. 

When I first heard that the Lightning were interested in Daniel Girardi, I thought it sounded great. They could sign the bought-out righty D man for about $1 million or so to replace Sustr. Then, soon after, Sustr was re-signed. I like Girardi. I covered the Hartford Wolf Pack a little when he broke in. I just don’t like him at $3 million per for two years. You wonder how many teams in the league were offering anywhere near that much, but there are some defense-starved organizations in the league. I have to ask, though, when has the signing of a discarded, bought-out player for more than $1 million or so ever worked out?

The Bolts have depth up front, but I will need to find a few short-term fixes to allow the young players to develop in my model. The big swing could have been to take a chance at catching Lightning in a bottle with Nial Yakupov or convincing Vegas to trade Jonathan Marchessault back to the Bay, but I’m fine with Chris Kunitz for one year. I’m not wild about him because he seems to be declining after scoring just nine goals last season and two in the playoffs, but if Drouin is there (at six years, $5.5 million or a little more) he may work as a heady left wing with Steven Stamkos and the former Halifax Moosehead. With Namestnikov and Johnson gone, I need someone to fill the hole as third-line center and it is an obvious choice - Brian Boyle. New Jersey did not have to go three years to sign Boyle to a reasonable $2.75 million deal and that fits for me. Boyle loved it here and I’d find it hard to believe if he wouldn’t have come back for slightly less than what Ray Shero offered. It’s interesting that Boyle was one of the main supporters of Drouin, isn't it?

Yzerman seems to have an affinity for Namestnikov, who has had chance after chance. Vladdy is not without talent and he flashes it brightly at times, but anyone who watched him last season would be lying if they did not see a drop off in his play when he scored 12 goals fewer than Panik (22) and struggled defensively. You can argue that coach Jon Cooper moved him around too much, but his effort was lacking many nights. The same with Johnson, who was great some games and invisible a lot of others. Matt Carle may end up being Yzerman’s worst contract - although it would be hard to be against it at the time - but giving Johnson a seven-year deal with what he has done the last two injury-prone seasons (33 goals combined) baffles me. Johnson is a talented player. No doubt. I just don’t think he is a long-term answer. The argument that the structure of his contract makes Johnny tradeable after four years or something is laughable at best. Ondrej Palat does more and you can project he is going to be just as valuable five years (or seven) down the road. That was a good contract.

With Kunitz, Boyle and perhaps Erne if he survives the trades, you have some flexibility up front in my model. You have also allowed room for future center candidates Anthony Cirelli and Brett Howden to develop and then jump in for Boyle in a year or two. If Boyle’s cranky back acts up you have Yanni Gourde, Cedric Paquette, Matt Peca and others to sub in the short term and if a third-line center is needed for the playoffs there will be cap room available. I originally thought about a four-year, $16.4 million contract for third-line center Nick Bonino, but you wouldn't want to block top-notch prospects like Cirelli and Howden.

Here would be my lines to start the season: Kunitz-Stamkos-Drouin, Palat-Brayden Point-Nikita Kucherov, Alex Killorn-Boyle-Ryan Callahan, Gourde-Paquette-J.T. Brown. You could also put Gourde at center and move Boyle to the wing or the fourth line at times. Erne or another reasonably-priced free agent could push for time or sub for Callahan, if he does not come back 100 percent.

Ultimately, I would have chosen Drouin over Johnson and subbed Gourde into Namestnikov's No. 1 swing role, then added veteran leadership like Kunitz and Boyle. I am going for a quicker fix on defense with Dumba (or Vatanen, Tanev) over Sergachev, which is a slight risk. I might also be losing a prime prospect like Joseph or Stephens, but you have to give up something good to improve now.

The debate on my model is how much would be needed for the new contracts of Dumba in 2018-19 and Kucherov, along with Point, in 19-20. But Kunitz perhaps moves out after next season in favor of a younger, cheaper player while Coburn and Boyle are out after two years with Callahan moving toward the end or a possible buyout. Things change, you adjust. You would have Stamkos, Hedman, Drouin and Palat, along with Killorn, wrapped up long term as your core. Killorn deserves another column, because I think fans and talk-show hosts have been very unfair to him for a few disappointing months to end his career-high season (19 goals) in 2016-17.

I could be totally wrong. In some ways, I hope I am. Sergachev could become a superstar quickly and make everyone forget how good and entertaining Drouin is. But, until then, we can debate whether my roster is better than the one the Lightning will start 2017-18 with.

Let’s discuss. Let’s disagree, respectfully. Let’s talk pucks all summer. Please, though, let’s not always just drink the Kool-Aid.