Speculation: 2017-2018 Trade Rumors Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pennaduck

Registered User
Aug 17, 2016
738
264
Pennsylvania
We def have the assets to go after anyone wed like really, its more on the lines of is it worth the risk to go all in.

Just curious, but what assets? prospects and picks? Because I don't see Murray trading Vatanen or Montour while Fowler is out for up to 6 more weeks. I don't see him moving a 1st after not having a 1st last season. If you are talking prospect pool, I agree we could part with one or two for a big deal. Murray isn't really proactive about moving prospects for roster players though.
 

Exit Dose

Registered User
Jul 2, 2011
29,203
3,336
Georgia
I think it depends on the cost we did spend a 1st on a winger last season. I don't think we can afford to sit and wait for the rest of the pacific to heat up. Still have awhile before Kesler comes back, rakell just looks so much better on the wing than he does at center. Were pretty lucky to be in the position in the standings right now.
That is just absurd. If anything they should be worried about us, seeing as we're waiting for players to come back.
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
40,527
36,065
Just curious, but what assets? prospects and picks? Because I don't see Murray trading Vatanen or Montour while Fowler is out for up to 6 more weeks. I don't see him moving a 1st after not having a 1st last season. If you are talking prospect pool, I agree we could part with one or two for a big deal. Murray isn't really proactive about moving prospects for roster players though.

I don't think wed consider moving vatanen till seasons over at the earliest, for the reason you listed(unless it was a blockbuster style trade). While its unlikely we move a 1st, its still a possibility and 2nds still hold decent value . I agree about murray and the prospect pool but its a weird situation with the injury bug going around this year, which could potentially change his thought process a little bit.

Other thing is the west is pretty wide open, making a move for a 2/3 c, when healthy makes our line up a lot stronger for a playoff run.
 

Pennaduck

Registered User
Aug 17, 2016
738
264
Pennsylvania
I don't think wed consider moving vatanen till seasons over at the earliest, for the reason you listed(unless it was a blockbuster style trade). While its unlikely we move a 1st, its still a possibility and 2nds still hold decent value . I agree about murray and the prospect pool but its a weird situation with the injury bug going around this year, which could potentially change his thought process a little bit.

Other thing is the west is pretty wide open, making a move for a 2/3 c, when healthy makes our line up a lot stronger for a playoff run.

You get no argument from me here. I just think Murray is very conservative when it comes to making deals involving pieces that are actually of high value. I could see him flipping a 2nd at the deadline for a 2/3 C but I don't see those deals happening right now since the season just started.
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
40,527
36,065
You get no argument from me here. I just think Murray is very conservative when it comes to making deals involving pieces that are actually of high value. I could see him flipping a 2nd at the deadline for a 2/3 C but I don't see those deals happening right now since the season just started.
Yea sometimes a little too conservative imo, but I also tend to agree with the end of your statement and I think the team has bought him some time to stay patient by staying in the wildcard/middle of the pack(also helps that teams like Calgary/Edmonton/sharks have started off slowly, and the teams at the top of the pacific most likely wont be there at the end canucks/knights(kings to a lesser extent tho I think they are a lot better then people thought coming into the season).
 

Dr Johnny Fever

Eggplant and Teal
Apr 11, 2012
21,423
5,836
Lower Left Coast
At the risk of stating the obvious, I'm very concerned that Kesler's surgery in combination with his age could see him comeback a notch below what we've come to expect from him. As long as the recovery is taking, as well as Bob's unwillingness to even talk about it, is not a good sign IMO. Serious hip injuries/surgeries have derailed top athletes before.
 

DavidBL

Registered User
Jul 25, 2012
5,966
3,915
Orange, CA
I think another thing we have to consider is tagging. The Ducks might not be able to add a large salary with term till we move a long term deal. With both Fowler and Manson extensions already affecting our tagging space. Adding Duchene would significantly cut into what space we have left after adding essentially 5.6 mill to next years cap with the extensions. This limits BMs ability to resign in season Montour, Ritchie, Kase, Wagner, and Cogs. Now most of those guys are RFA so we could wait till the summer to resign them but Cogs would be hard to find space for. We only have about 15.8 mill in tagging space and subtract 5.8 from the raises for Manson and Fowler. That least roughly 10 mill to add long term salary in the form of extensions and added players. If we keep Vats this year and added Duchene we would essentially have to wait till we moved Vats before we could resign our RFA's/Cogs. That could hurt Vats value a bit as teams would know we would have to move him to make room. Though that might be the case anyway. Ideally for me, I would include Ritchie in the deal for Duchene. That reduces the number of players we have to resign and he can be replaced in system by Jones or Fiore. You move Vats at the draft which adds 4.8 mill to the 4 left in tagging space after getting Duchene to resign Cogs. We then work on the RFA's after July 1st when the cap goes up. Even with that I think BM would ask for retention on Duchene. It would still be tight to get replacement players in that space. The other option of course is to let Cogs walk in FA which I'm not a huge fan of doing.
 

AngelDuck

Rak 'em up
Jun 16, 2012
23,201
16,828
I could see Buffalo panicking and trading Sam Reinhart or something. They just look horrible year after year
 
Aug 11, 2011
28,358
22,253
Am Yisrael Chai
At the risk of stating the obvious, I'm very concerned that Kesler's surgery in combination with his age could see him comeback a notch below what we've come to expect from him. As long as the recovery is taking, as well as Bob's unwillingness to even talk about it, is not a good sign IMO. Serious hip injuries/surgeries have derailed top athletes before.
Is there some indication that his recovery is behind schedule? We're not even close to the point that they said to expect him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AngelDuck

AngelDuck

Rak 'em up
Jun 16, 2012
23,201
16,828
Yeah, there's never really been any chance that Kesler is going to come back before New Years. That injury is a way longer rehabilitation process for a hockey player than Lindholm/Vatanen's shoulder problems
 

Dr Johnny Fever

Eggplant and Teal
Apr 11, 2012
21,423
5,836
Lower Left Coast
Is there some indication that his recovery is behind schedule? We're not even close to the point that they said to expect him.

Well, near the beginning of the season Bob told the public he wouldn't even speculate on when Kes might return so it's hard to say he's behind or ahead. But most "routine" injuries have some pretty definitive timetables. Even for our team we've heard about Fowler's knee injuries and timetables. And even Hampus and Sami we got "ahead of schedule" comments a couple of times. IIRC, he had the surgery shortly after the season ended. We've heard nothing at all. Not even if he's skating on his own or how the recovery is going. Even for our team that seems a little bit more cryptic than usual.
 
Aug 11, 2011
28,358
22,253
Am Yisrael Chai
Well, near the beginning of the season Bob told the public he wouldn't even speculate on when Kes might return so it's hard to say he's behind or ahead. But most "routine" injuries have some pretty definitive timetables. Even for our team we've heard about Fowler's knee injuries and timetables. And even Hampus and Sami we got "ahead of schedule" comments a couple of times. IIRC, he had the surgery shortly after the season ended. We've heard nothing at all. Not even if he's skating on his own or how the recovery is going. Even for our team that seems a little bit more cryptic than usual.
Has anyone even asked him since then?
 
Jul 29, 2003
31,640
5,338
Saskatoon
Visit site
I think another thing we have to consider is tagging. The Ducks might not be able to add a large salary with term till we move a long term deal. With both Fowler and Manson extensions already affecting our tagging space. Adding Duchene would significantly cut into what space we have left after adding essentially 5.6 mill to next years cap with the extensions. This limits BMs ability to resign in season Montour, Ritchie, Kase, Wagner, and Cogs. Now most of those guys are RFA so we could wait till the summer to resign them but Cogs would be hard to find space for. We only have about 15.8 mill in tagging space and subtract 5.8 from the raises for Manson and Fowler. That least roughly 10 mill to add long term salary in the form of extensions and added players. If we keep Vats this year and added Duchene we would essentially have to wait till we moved Vats before we could resign our RFA's/Cogs. That could hurt Vats value a bit as teams would know we would have to move him to make room. Though that might be the case anyway. Ideally for me, I would include Ritchie in the deal for Duchene. That reduces the number of players we have to resign and he can be replaced in system by Jones or Fiore. You move Vats at the draft which adds 4.8 mill to the 4 left in tagging space after getting Duchene to resign Cogs. We then work on the RFA's after July 1st when the cap goes up. Even with that I think BM would ask for retention on Duchene. It would still be tight to get replacement players in that space. The other option of course is to let Cogs walk in FA which I'm not a huge fan of doing.

I think you're double counting, the Fowler and Manson extensions are already built into that tagging number. Realistically I don't think that'd be much of a problem, good chance none of the RFAs are signed before July 1 and if a guy like Duchene came in, I'm guessing it would be in a way that doesn't significantly affect that tagging number.
 

DavidBL

Registered User
Jul 25, 2012
5,966
3,915
Orange, CA
I think you're double counting, the Fowler and Manson extensions are already built into that tagging number. Realistically I don't think that'd be much of a problem, good chance none of the RFAs are signed before July 1 and if a guy like Duchene came in, I'm guessing it would be in a way that doesn't significantly affect that tagging number.
I guess the easier thing to do was just look at our cap space left next season for next season on capfriendly. I had just added the expiring contracts and subtracted the raises but there was some rounding. according to capfriendly we have 13.9 mill with a 13 man roster. Call it 14. remove 6 for Duchene and you have 8 to sign/resign 9 players including Montour and Kase. That being said it would appear that tagging really isn't an issue. Just likely overall cap space.
 

Dr Johnny Fever

Eggplant and Teal
Apr 11, 2012
21,423
5,836
Lower Left Coast
Why would he if nothing had changed?
Because he’s never told us any kind of status but we are now a month further down the recovery road?

Maybe he comes back and wins the Conn Smythe. I don’t know. I just don’t get all the secrecy about his situation in conjunction with it being a long recovery. I don’t read anything positive into that.
 

duckpuck

Registered User
Sponsor
Jul 10, 2007
2,494
2,570
I think another thing we have to consider is tagging. The Ducks might not be able to add a large salary with term till we move a long term deal. With both Fowler and Manson extensions already affecting our tagging space. Adding Duchene would significantly cut into what space we have left after adding essentially 5.6 mill to next years cap with the extensions. This limits BMs ability to resign in season Montour, Ritchie, Kase, Wagner, and Cogs. Now most of those guys are RFA so we could wait till the summer to resign them but Cogs would be hard to find space for. We only have about 15.8 mill in tagging space and subtract 5.8 from the raises for Manson and Fowler. That least roughly 10 mill to add long term salary in the form of extensions and added players. If we keep Vats this year and added Duchene we would essentially have to wait till we moved Vats before we could resign our RFA's/Cogs. That could hurt Vats value a bit as teams would know we would have to move him to make room. Though that might be the case anyway. Ideally for me, I would include Ritchie in the deal for Duchene. That reduces the number of players we have to resign and he can be replaced in system by Jones or Fiore. You move Vats at the draft which adds 4.8 mill to the 4 left in tagging space after getting Duchene to resign Cogs. We then work on the RFA's after July 1st when the cap goes up. Even with that I think BM would ask for retention on Duchene. It would still be tight to get replacement players in that space. The other option of course is to let Cogs walk in FA which I'm not a huge fan of doing.

I'll stick by my prior assertion - it is very unlikely the ducks can afford to bring back Cogliano and given his age, they shouldn't really stretch to do so. Currently the ducks have about $65M in salary committed to 2017-18. With the remaining money, they need to re-sign RFAs (Kossila, Ritchie, Kase, Montour, and maybe Shaw), and resign or replace replace Wagner, Vermette and a few other bottom six forwards. My guess is Montour gets a longer term deal (like Rakell Manson and Lindholm) while the other RFAs get bridge deals. You can do the math, but even with a trade (maybe Vats) there's not much left for Cogliano - probably not enough to pay him what he currently earns ($3M). And no doubt he'll want at least that, with term.

I think now is the time for the ducks to consider trading for an elite cost controlled forward (preferably a center). Getlzaf, Kesler, and Perry are set for steep declines. Even if you think Steel eventually steps in to fill the gap, they need to find more young talent if they want to keep their defensive core and Gibson together for the next 3-5 years. Someone like Sam Bennett (not saying he's available) would be ideal. Duchene or RNH would be a play for now (not averse to that), but they don't fit in with the ducks long term because I don't think the ducks can afford to re-sign them (unless Kesler retires due to injury). I don't think Edmonton would trade RNH to the ducks unless the ducks massively overpay.

The price will be high, but I'd love to see the ducks aggressively pursue a young center even if it means giving up Larsson/Vats and a first round pick (or some other hefty combination of assets). I think now is the time to bolster the lineup (a young center who can be a 2/3 now and more later) and hedge for the future.
 

bsu

"I have no idea what I am doing" -Pat VerBleak
Sep 27, 2017
28,539
29,291
Cogs is probably gone for sure, Ritchie doesn't deserve anything he has scored some goals but not playing with Getzlaf he is a glorified 4th liner
 

DavidBL

Registered User
Jul 25, 2012
5,966
3,915
Orange, CA
Ritchie is a definite bridge candidate.

2 yrs. 1.25 1st 1.5 2nd. Something like that?
I'd actually make him part of any deal for a new player. He still has draft pedigree and is young. We also have 2 similar style players in our system with no where to put them with Cogs and Rakell down the left side. Maximize on Ritchies value and give guys like Fiore or Jones an opportunity. That being said I am admittedly not a big Ritchie fan. I'm not sure he has the hockey IQ to play in this league.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dracom
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad