Also - yeah, it totally sucks losing Lindberg for nothing, but the Rangers fared better than a lot of other teams, IMO. FL/NAS definitely fared worse. I'd argue any team that gave up a first to protect someone fared worse even if that was the right move for that franchise.
MAB, I think there are some weird rules related to buyouts that may have played a role in Girardi being bought out now instead of in the second window. I'm a bit unclear on it, though.
Yeah I think it's this but I'm not 100% sure either.
If our FO wasn't able to distinguish how much of a liability Holden was in our zone, I think we have some serious evaluation issues up top.
If it's true that we could have simply waited on Girardi and arranged our protection slots differently to produce a more favorable outcome, I'll be pissed. I'm just not totally clear on all the ins and outs of the expansion draft rules, etc.
It was my understanding that we basically had to protect Holden the way it was structured or we'd lose a slot and it would be just as crappy but I could be wrong.
Yes, we needed to protect 3 defenseman. But the only reason to let Girardi walk now as a free agent versus doing it later this summer, was to free up that third slot for someone actually worth protecting tonight.
Instead we chose to lose Lindberg for nothing instead of working a trade of one of our 7 protected forwards (or Lindberg himself plus maybe another forward) for a 3rd D-man worth protecting. We essentially wasted a protection slot. And Dumba apparently could have been had for a late first round pick (since he was left unprotected and Vegas took fairly minimal compensation in return to not draft him).
I think you're conflating two issues. We lost Lindberg because there were only two options: (1) bribe LVK, and the bribe prices were high -- were you willing to trade a #1 to protect our guys, if that's what it took? And (2) Lose one of Raanta, Fast, Lindberg, or Grabner.
Once we set down the path where we werent trading all 4, and I think that was unrealistic, it doesnt really matter that we're losing "Lindberg" for nothing. If not him, then "Raanta" for nothing or "Grabner" for nothing. The defensive slot becomes irrelevant, unless one of these 4 is extra valuable compared to the other (and I dont think any one of them is way above the others). So getting a Dumba for that slot is a bit of a red herring. It doesnt save us from losing one of these guys.
Lots of teams lost good players, and many others did the bribe. This was by design -- a more pro-expansion XD format was negotiated as part of getting a higher expansion fee. There was criticism of the last round of XDs setting up those teams so poorly that it cost them revenue.
More i think about it the more its bullshit. There are too many get out of jail free cards with some of these veteran contracts. why should a LTIR get a team off the hook anymore than a player that all of a sudden sucks and the team wants to send him down or cut him?? Both may or may not have been predictable, but it makes no sense that one gets you out of jail and the other doesnt. Injuries are part of the sport - you should think about that before offering 10 year deals (ask Islander fans - Dipietro)
They should probably consider limiting the length on contracts moving forward. Its pretty obvious both Hossa and the Hawks aren't motivated to get him back quickly on the ice. And the timing coming right before tonight's draft and ahead of free agency seems too convenient too.
Im not fully versed in the LTIR rules but they're not a get out of jail free card, so I may be wrong here. Having a player on LTIR, especially over many seasons, isnt like not having that player count at all. The player counts against you day 1 of the season. You can replace him on the roster with a player with a similar cap hit. So if Hossa makes $5 million, on day 2 you can LTIR Hossa and acquire another player who makes $5 million or less to replace Hossa. But at the beginning of the next season Hossa is back on your cap, so the guy you get better be gone or you have to find another $5 million in room to keep him.
If you dont replace Hossa on day 2, you dont start accruing cap room. That is, if you wait until the middle of the season to replace Hossa, you cant get a $10 million in player in his place -- you still only get a $5 million player (ie someone owed $2.5 the rest of the way). LTIR relief doesnt add to the cap or accrue to the next season.
It's not as helpful as it looks like, and it's largely worthless for guys who are only out a few months.
Yes, we needed to protect 3 defenseman. But the only reason to let Girardi walk now as a free agent versus doing it later this summer, was to free up that third slot for someone actually worth protecting tonight.
Instead we chose to lose Lindberg for nothing instead of working a trade of one of our 7 protected forwards (or Lindberg himself plus maybe another forward) for a 3rd D-man worth protecting. We essentially wasted a protection slot. And Dumba apparently could have been had for a late first round pick (since he was left unprotected and Vegas took fairly minimal compensation in return to not draft him).
I think you're conflating two issues. We lost Lindberg because there were only two options: (1) bribe LVK, and the bribe prices were high -- were you willing to trade a #1 to protect our guys, if that's what it took? And (2) Lose one of Raanta, Fast, Lindberg, or Grabner.
Once we set down the path where we werent trading all 4, and I think that was unrealistic, it doesnt really matter that we're losing "Lindberg" for nothing. If not him, then "Raanta" for nothing or "Grabner" for nothing. The defensive slot becomes irrelevant, unless one of these 4 is extra valuable compared to the other (and I dont think any one of them is way above the others). So getting a Dumba for that slot is a bit of a red herring. It doesnt save us from losing one of these guys.
I get what you are saying, but given age and go forward contracts (Raanta and Grabner if they continue to play well only have one year left on our roster, certainly at their current comps), I valued Lindberg and Fast a lot more than those two. Especially Grabner - he scored a lot of goals for us last year, but he stunk in certain other areas especially possession numbers and I'm not sure those goals are sustainable.
Really sucks to have gone into this with 9 good forwards and 2 good D (one good D + Staal who we had to protect) -- really disappointed we couldn't have traded one of those forwards to use that 3rd D slot an actually good player. And if we could have only traded one of them, then fine I guess Fast still gets exposed... and he's out through December so my guess Raanta would have been the one taken.
the one player exposed I least wanted to see moved.
Separately, I'm perplexed about Ottawa leaving Methot unprotected: I thought in the series against NYR and in the Conf'. Finals, Methot was the Sens' 2nd best d-man, can skate, can hit, good positionally.
Did I say it sucks losing Oscar?
"If our FO wasn't able to distinguish how much of a liability Holden was in our zone, I think we have some serious evaluation issues up top."
There's been strong suspicion about that around here, maybe it's not only, or even primarily, AV. naahhh
every time I see a Denna Lang interview. The scariest thing about my kids playing and my coaching.
they're starting to put "warning tracks" around the municipal rinks in Mass. abut 3 feet off the boards I believe. Not sure if it will change anything, but it can't hurt.
every time I see a Denna Lang interview. The scariest thing about my kids playing and my coaching.
they're starting to put "warning tracks" around the municipal rinks in Mass. abut 3 feet off the boards I believe. Not sure if it will change anything, but it can't hurt.
I hear you. Every time my guys step on the ice, a small corner of my mind flashes to Travis Roy.
every time I see a Denna Lang interview. The scariest thing about my kids playing and my coaching.
they're starting to put "warning tracks" around the municipal rinks in Mass. abut 3 feet off the boards I believe. Not sure if it will change anything, but it can't hurt.
I hear you. Every time my guys step on the ice, a small corner of my mind flashes to Travis Roy.
here is an images of what they call the "look up line" and kids are coached, if you see orange "look up"
every time I see a Denna Lang interview. The scariest thing about my kids playing and my coaching.
they're starting to put "warning tracks" around the municipal rinks in Mass. abut 3 feet off the boards I believe. Not sure if it will change anything, but it can't hurt.
that's pretty smart. the game is SO fast, even at that age.
every time I see a Denna Lang interview. The scariest thing about my kids playing and my coaching.
they're starting to put "warning tracks" around the municipal rinks in Mass. abut 3 feet off the boards I believe. Not sure if it will change anything, but it can't hurt.
I hear you. Every time my guys step on the ice, a small corner of my mind flashes to Travis Roy.
here is an images of what they call the "look up line" and kids are coached, if you see orange "look up"
you can't miss it. it's still very fast, but that's a start.
they value the pieces they had to hold onto more than a 15th pick in this draft and a 2nd.. they lose cap space in Grabovski and get to keep the guys they wanted.
the 1st round pick was to take Berubie
the 2nd round pick was to take Grabovski off their hands
I'm neutral for now.. depends how they spend the $5M saved
My only "issue" is with the 2019 2nd. Otherwise, Vegas helped us with the Grabbo contract, and they allowed us to keep the pieces intact that'll obviously be on the move in trades over the next couple of days.
My only "issue" is with the 2019 2nd. Otherwise, Vegas helped us with the Grabbo contract, and they allowed us to keep the pieces intact that'll obviously be on the move in trades over the next couple of days.
I don't have an issue with the 2nd round pick, depending on what's next.
If there's an issue to be had, it would be with Snow's inability to prepare a roster better for this day.
Duchene better be an Islanders at 8:01am tomorrow, lol
That clears up some JT and Duchene/Galchenyuk money. However, the crazy protected list still makes no sense if you were going to trade anyway. It's like they wanted Mcphee to have more leverage.
they value the pieces they had to hold onto more than a 15th pick in this draft and a 2nd.. they lose cap space in Grabovski and get to keep the guys they wanted.
the 1st round pick was to take Berubie
the 2nd round pick was to take Grabovski off their hands
I'm neutral for now.. depends how they spend the $5M saved
Fully admit contracts and to an extent roster building is an blind spot I have.
But why give a first to take a no-name goalie?
Unless you mean give up a first so they don't take someone else?
and then a 2nd for salary cap relief.
I get the second to take the salary cap guy, but not the first to take the goalie.
Since they can only take 1 player to me it would have made sense to say we'll trade you a 2nd round pick you take Grabbo.
otherwise FU take Hamonic or de Haan or anyone else on that roster. None of those guys IMO are irreplaceable.
Not an Islanders roster expert, but after the guys they protect the rest of the players should be replaceable.
RE: Duchene better be an Islanders at 8:01am tomorrow, lol
they value the pieces they had to hold onto more than a 15th pick in this draft and a 2nd.. they lose cap space in Grabovski and get to keep the guys they wanted.
the 1st round pick was to take Berubie
the 2nd round pick was to take Grabovski off their hands
I'm neutral for now.. depends how they spend the $5M saved
Fully admit contracts and to an extent roster building is an blind spot I have.
But why give a first to take a no-name goalie?
Unless you mean give up a first so they don't take someone else?
and then a 2nd for salary cap relief.
I get the second to take the salary cap guy, but not the first to take the goalie.
Since they can only take 1 player to me it would have made sense to say we'll trade you a 2nd round pick you take Grabbo.
otherwise FU take Hamonic or de Haan or anyone else on that roster. None of those guys IMO are irreplaceable.
Not an Islanders roster expert, but after the guys they protect the rest of the players should be replaceable.
I get that, PJ. And I never thought of it like that.
Was Grabovski eligible for the draft? I didn't study the list too closely. Because of his health, was he able to be drafted??
The 1st for Berube to me indicates only that a bigger trade is in the works and they were afraid Vegas was going to take one of the pieces of that trade. As many have said, Hamonic and de Haan, while good players, are replaceable. I think they gave them a first to keep them for a bigger maneuver.
And if that's the case, we really are going to be doing a boom or bust act for the next year or two, because whomever we would trade for in a potential trade would likely also requires picks and/or prospects along with an NHL player or two.
The 1st for Berube to me indicates only that a bigger trade is in the works and they were afraid Vegas was going to take one of the pieces of that trade. As many have said, Hamonic and de Haan, while good players, are replaceable. I think they gave them a first to keep them for a bigger maneuver.
And if that's the case, we really are going to be doing a boom or bust act for the next year or two, because whomever we would trade for in a potential trade would likely also requires picks and/or prospects along with an NHL player or two.
there's no question that Hamonic or de haan will be dealt..and probably nelson or strome (maybe all 4?)
Garth kept assets and cleared space. I get it.
But to PJs point, why didn't they just trade a #1 or #2 for them to pick Grabovski?
I'd also like to hear how this happened.
BTW, as follow up to overnight tweet storm, both Jonathan Marchessault and Rielly Smith of FLA have been informed they're bound for VGK.
Yeah I think it's this but I'm not 100% sure either.
If our FO wasn't able to distinguish how much of a liability Holden was in our zone, I think we have some serious evaluation issues up top.
If it's true that we could have simply waited on Girardi and arranged our protection slots differently to produce a more favorable outcome, I'll be pissed. I'm just not totally clear on all the ins and outs of the expansion draft rules, etc.
It was my understanding that we basically had to protect Holden the way it was structured or we'd lose a slot and it would be just as crappy but I could be wrong.
Yes, we needed to protect 3 defenseman. But the only reason to let Girardi walk now as a free agent versus doing it later this summer, was to free up that third slot for someone actually worth protecting tonight.
Instead we chose to lose Lindberg for nothing instead of working a trade of one of our 7 protected forwards (or Lindberg himself plus maybe another forward) for a 3rd D-man worth protecting. We essentially wasted a protection slot. And Dumba apparently could have been had for a late first round pick (since he was left unprotected and Vegas took fairly minimal compensation in return to not draft him).
I think you're conflating two issues. We lost Lindberg because there were only two options: (1) bribe LVK, and the bribe prices were high -- were you willing to trade a #1 to protect our guys, if that's what it took? And (2) Lose one of Raanta, Fast, Lindberg, or Grabner.
Once we set down the path where we werent trading all 4, and I think that was unrealistic, it doesnt really matter that we're losing "Lindberg" for nothing. If not him, then "Raanta" for nothing or "Grabner" for nothing. The defensive slot becomes irrelevant, unless one of these 4 is extra valuable compared to the other (and I dont think any one of them is way above the others). So getting a Dumba for that slot is a bit of a red herring. It doesnt save us from losing one of these guys.
Lots of teams lost good players, and many others did the bribe. This was by design -- a more pro-expansion XD format was negotiated as part of getting a higher expansion fee. There was criticism of the last round of XDs setting up those teams so poorly that it cost them revenue.
I say no. Too many mental lapses, and his peak moments on the wing were too promising.
Jordan Weal someone I'd look at in UFA if Stepan gets moved and Hayes slides to 2C.
Losing Lindberg isn't what I'd have liked, but that's the type of player you lose in an ED, can't shed too many tears.
I'm don't advocate trading Stepan at any cost, but I wouldn't let the loss of a Lindberg stop me from making a Stepan move if the FO has conviction.
More i think about it the more its bullshit. There are too many get out of jail free cards with some of these veteran contracts. why should a LTIR get a team off the hook anymore than a player that all of a sudden sucks and the team wants to send him down or cut him?? Both may or may not have been predictable, but it makes no sense that one gets you out of jail and the other doesnt. Injuries are part of the sport - you should think about that before offering 10 year deals (ask Islander fans - Dipietro)
They should probably consider limiting the length on contracts moving forward. Its pretty obvious both Hossa and the Hawks aren't motivated to get him back quickly on the ice. And the timing coming right before tonight's draft and ahead of free agency seems too convenient too.
Im not fully versed in the LTIR rules but they're not a get out of jail free card, so I may be wrong here. Having a player on LTIR, especially over many seasons, isnt like not having that player count at all. The player counts against you day 1 of the season. You can replace him on the roster with a player with a similar cap hit. So if Hossa makes $5 million, on day 2 you can LTIR Hossa and acquire another player who makes $5 million or less to replace Hossa. But at the beginning of the next season Hossa is back on your cap, so the guy you get better be gone or you have to find another $5 million in room to keep him.
If you dont replace Hossa on day 2, you dont start accruing cap room. That is, if you wait until the middle of the season to replace Hossa, you cant get a $10 million in player in his place -- you still only get a $5 million player (ie someone owed $2.5 the rest of the way). LTIR relief doesnt add to the cap or accrue to the next season.
It's not as helpful as it looks like, and it's largely worthless for guys who are only out a few months.
Kathryn Tappen, however...yum.
(Still think it's good)
Arthur Staple @StapeNewsday
6m
#Isles Vegas pick/trade will be revealed in the second batch of picks announced.
Quote:
Yes, we needed to protect 3 defenseman. But the only reason to let Girardi walk now as a free agent versus doing it later this summer, was to free up that third slot for someone actually worth protecting tonight.
Instead we chose to lose Lindberg for nothing instead of working a trade of one of our 7 protected forwards (or Lindberg himself plus maybe another forward) for a 3rd D-man worth protecting. We essentially wasted a protection slot. And Dumba apparently could have been had for a late first round pick (since he was left unprotected and Vegas took fairly minimal compensation in return to not draft him).
I think you're conflating two issues. We lost Lindberg because there were only two options: (1) bribe LVK, and the bribe prices were high -- were you willing to trade a #1 to protect our guys, if that's what it took? And (2) Lose one of Raanta, Fast, Lindberg, or Grabner.
Once we set down the path where we werent trading all 4, and I think that was unrealistic, it doesnt really matter that we're losing "Lindberg" for nothing. If not him, then "Raanta" for nothing or "Grabner" for nothing. The defensive slot becomes irrelevant, unless one of these 4 is extra valuable compared to the other (and I dont think any one of them is way above the others). So getting a Dumba for that slot is a bit of a red herring. It doesnt save us from losing one of these guys.
I get what you are saying, but given age and go forward contracts (Raanta and Grabner if they continue to play well only have one year left on our roster, certainly at their current comps), I valued Lindberg and Fast a lot more than those two. Especially Grabner - he scored a lot of goals for us last year, but he stunk in certain other areas especially possession numbers and I'm not sure those goals are sustainable.
Really sucks to have gone into this with 9 good forwards and 2 good D (one good D + Staal who we had to protect) -- really disappointed we couldn't have traded one of those forwards to use that 3rd D slot an actually good player. And if we could have only traded one of them, then fine I guess Fast still gets exposed... and he's out through December so my guess Raanta would have been the one taken.
role model player for all the kids I coach.
Insane that Cosby was 10th in Selke voting too.
Separately, I'm perplexed about Ottawa leaving Methot unprotected: I thought in the series against NYR and in the Conf'. Finals, Methot was the Sens' 2nd best d-man, can skate, can hit, good positionally.
Did I say it sucks losing Oscar?
"If our FO wasn't able to distinguish how much of a liability Holden was in our zone, I think we have some serious evaluation issues up top."
There's been strong suspicion about that around here, maybe it's not only, or even primarily, AV. naahhh
I think it was a cap dump. Smith is getting 5 million per
I'm trying to figure it out. I just can't. It's not computing or making any sense.
Quote:
Can someone explain the Panthers rationale? I am baffled by what they did here.
I think it was a cap dump. Smith is getting 5 million per
I get that part.. but why not trade them a better pick and have them select Smith?? That way you don't lose a 30 goal scorer.
The whole thing is bizarre.
I wonder if Brendan Smith follows his brother....something to watch for
Quote:
In comment 13506862 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
Can someone explain the Panthers rationale? I am baffled by what they did here.
I think it was a cap dump. Smith is getting 5 million per
I get that part.. but why not trade them a better pick and have them select Smith?? That way you don't lose a 30 goal scorer.
The whole thing is bizarre.
Good question. Beats me. That I'm not sure about.
Quote:
In comment 13506865 Anakim said:
Quote:
In comment 13506862 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
Can someone explain the Panthers rationale? I am baffled by what they did here.
I think it was a cap dump. Smith is getting 5 million per
I get that part.. but why not trade them a better pick and have them select Smith?? That way you don't lose a 30 goal scorer.
The whole thing is bizarre.
Good question. Beats me. That I'm not sure about.
it was a mistake. LV gave up a 4th round pick for Smith.. makes more sense now.
Quote:
In comment 13506867 feelflows said:
Quote:
In comment 13506865 Anakim said:
Quote:
In comment 13506862 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
Can someone explain the Panthers rationale? I am baffled by what they did here.
I think it was a cap dump. Smith is getting 5 million per
I get that part.. but why not trade them a better pick and have them select Smith?? That way you don't lose a 30 goal scorer.
The whole thing is bizarre.
Good question. Beats me. That I'm not sure about.
it was a mistake. LV gave up a 4th round pick for Smith.. makes more sense now.
Okay, that makes more sense. I was like.. what the fuck is going on here?
they're starting to put "warning tracks" around the municipal rinks in Mass. abut 3 feet off the boards I believe. Not sure if it will change anything, but it can't hurt.
they're starting to put "warning tracks" around the municipal rinks in Mass. abut 3 feet off the boards I believe. Not sure if it will change anything, but it can't hurt.
Quote:
every time I see a Denna Lang interview. The scariest thing about my kids playing and my coaching.
they're starting to put "warning tracks" around the municipal rinks in Mass. abut 3 feet off the boards I believe. Not sure if it will change anything, but it can't hurt.
I hear you. Every time my guys step on the ice, a small corner of my mind flashes to Travis Roy.
here is an images of what they call the "look up line" and kids are coached, if you see orange "look up"
they're starting to put "warning tracks" around the municipal rinks in Mass. abut 3 feet off the boards I believe. Not sure if it will change anything, but it can't hurt.
that's pretty smart. the game is SO fast, even at that age.
Quote:
In comment 13506880 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
every time I see a Denna Lang interview. The scariest thing about my kids playing and my coaching.
they're starting to put "warning tracks" around the municipal rinks in Mass. abut 3 feet off the boards I believe. Not sure if it will change anything, but it can't hurt.
I hear you. Every time my guys step on the ice, a small corner of my mind flashes to Travis Roy.
here is an images of what they call the "look up line" and kids are coached, if you see orange "look up"
you can't miss it. it's still very fast, but that's a start.
Matthews was a no-brainer though.
Lemieux only gets 10 NHL favors per blowjob.. that would've been 11.
meh.. it still makes sense.
they value the pieces they had to hold onto more than a 15th pick in this draft and a 2nd.. they lose cap space in Grabovski and get to keep the guys they wanted.
the 1st round pick was to take Berubie
the 2nd round pick was to take Grabovski off their hands
I'm neutral for now.. depends how they spend the $5M saved
Quote:
Islanders.
My only "issue" is with the 2019 2nd. Otherwise, Vegas helped us with the Grabbo contract, and they allowed us to keep the pieces intact that'll obviously be on the move in trades over the next couple of days.
I don't have an issue with the 2nd round pick, depending on what's next.
If there's an issue to be had, it would be with Snow's inability to prepare a roster better for this day.
Maybe Garth just wants to keep the same team minus the 3rd goalie? Gotta keep the super best friends together at all costs.
Quote:
Islanders.
meh.. it still makes sense.
they value the pieces they had to hold onto more than a 15th pick in this draft and a 2nd.. they lose cap space in Grabovski and get to keep the guys they wanted.
the 1st round pick was to take Berubie
the 2nd round pick was to take Grabovski off their hands
I'm neutral for now.. depends how they spend the $5M saved
Fully admit contracts and to an extent roster building is an blind spot I have.
But why give a first to take a no-name goalie?
Unless you mean give up a first so they don't take someone else?
and then a 2nd for salary cap relief.
I get the second to take the salary cap guy, but not the first to take the goalie.
Since they can only take 1 player to me it would have made sense to say we'll trade you a 2nd round pick you take Grabbo.
otherwise FU take Hamonic or de Haan or anyone else on that roster. None of those guys IMO are irreplaceable.
Not an Islanders roster expert, but after the guys they protect the rest of the players should be replaceable.
we don't much of anything.. we will soon.
Hamonic
de haan
Pulock
Strome
Nelson
These are the guys that needed to be protected that were in danger of being exposed. I think that those guys are worth the #1 pick.
The question is the $5M in savings with Grabovski. Is that worth a 2? It could be.
Quote:
In comment 13506900 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
Islanders.
meh.. it still makes sense.
they value the pieces they had to hold onto more than a 15th pick in this draft and a 2nd.. they lose cap space in Grabovski and get to keep the guys they wanted.
the 1st round pick was to take Berubie
the 2nd round pick was to take Grabovski off their hands
I'm neutral for now.. depends how they spend the $5M saved
Fully admit contracts and to an extent roster building is an blind spot I have.
But why give a first to take a no-name goalie?
Unless you mean give up a first so they don't take someone else?
and then a 2nd for salary cap relief.
I get the second to take the salary cap guy, but not the first to take the goalie.
Since they can only take 1 player to me it would have made sense to say we'll trade you a 2nd round pick you take Grabbo.
otherwise FU take Hamonic or de Haan or anyone else on that roster. None of those guys IMO are irreplaceable.
Not an Islanders roster expert, but after the guys they protect the rest of the players should be replaceable.
I get that, PJ. And I never thought of it like that.
Was Grabovski eligible for the draft? I didn't study the list too closely. Because of his health, was he able to be drafted??
And if that's the case, we really are going to be doing a boom or bust act for the next year or two, because whomever we would trade for in a potential trade would likely also requires picks and/or prospects along with an NHL player or two.
And if that's the case, we really are going to be doing a boom or bust act for the next year or two, because whomever we would trade for in a potential trade would likely also requires picks and/or prospects along with an NHL player or two.
there's no question that Hamonic or de haan will be dealt..and probably nelson or strome (maybe all 4?)
Garth kept assets and cleared space. I get it.
But to PJs point, why didn't they just trade a #1 or #2 for them to pick Grabovski?