All Purpose Trade/Roster Building Thread XIII - the 23 deadline approaches

[DaveG]

so yeah, good time to start off here.

again, I really like the idea of giving Necas a chance at 2C and making a move for Meier. Doing that would give us the chance to roll something like this in the playoffs:

Meier - Aho - Teravainen
Svech - Necas - Jarvis
Marty - Staal - Fast
Noesen - KK - Stepan/Stastny

Or there's MJBs idea from the trade board... and yeah, despite including Morrow, I kinda like this:

Would you prefer taking Kotkaniemi back and retaining on Meier this year instead of the retention on Couture? That way you have both retention spots next season, but you have to deal with Kotkaniemi’s salary.

So:

To Canes - Meier @50%, Couture

To Sharks - 1st, Morrow, Drury, Flyer’s 20024 2nd, Flyer’s 2023 3rd, Kotkaniemi

Click to read more...

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

If Necas had a shot at center this season we would have already seen him there. It’s fairly obvious Rod is trying to get KK or Stas there. If Necas had a chance we wouldn’t be just bouncing back and forth between the two.

I like couture but his deal is too long take on his full cap hit.

 

[MadeUpName]

I think Couture is Carolina's dark-horse addition this TDL. Meier added on top would be even better. Couture should be cheap without retention (2nd + B asset?) or expensive with retention (1st++). Both are options that Carolina could benefit from.

I like Seth Jarvis as Carolina's eventual 2C. Aho-Jarvis is not ideal for a top-6 for size but they both dig deep for smaller Centers. Supplement them with size on the wings and they can contend.

 

[CandyCanes]

I think Couture is Carolina's dark-horse addition this TDL. Meier added on top would be even better.

I like Seth Jarvis as Carolina's eventual 2C. Aho-Jarvis is not ideal for a top-6 for size but they both dig deep for smaller Centers. Supplement them with size on the wings and they can contend.

Did Jarvis play center in juniors at all? Always thought of him as a pure winger

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I think Couture is Carolina's dark-horse addition this TDL. Meier added on top would be even better. Couture should be cheap without retention (2nd + B asset?) or expensive with retention (1st++). Both are options that Carolina could benefit from.

I like Seth Jarvis as Carolina's eventual 2C. Aho-Jarvis is not ideal for a top-6 for size but they both dig deep for smaller Centers. Supplement them with size on the wings and they can contend.

There better be a max retention with Couture. He's going to be 34 in a month and there are 4 more years at $8M / year left on his deal.

 

[MadeUpName]

Did Jarvis play center in juniors at all? Always thought of him as a pure winger

He played plenty of Center. Jarvis's best year in the WHL with 98 points in 58 games he played C. He then played C and W in Portland and Chicago on-and-off.

I think Jarvis's Center transition would look very similar to Aho's. He plays a similar cerebral game combined with hard work.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

I don’t see Jarvis being anything more than a random in game center switch when nothing else is working

Couture’s deal is too long for him to a realistic add for us

 

[MadeUpName]

There better be a max retention with Couture. He's going to be 34 in a month and there are 4 more years at $8M / year left on his deal.

Retention is the value lever with Couture. Each team only gets 3 retention spots and SJ has Burns tied up for 3 years with one. So tying up Couture for 4 years with another would have to be a big sell. Especially when SJ may be looking to do the same with Karlsson.

I do think there is an interesting case for Couture @ 50% to Carolina for a 1st + Drury/Morrow/Nikishin.

SJ just sold Megna for a 4th to Seattle. Reading the tea-leaves it seems that they are interested in making deals sooner rather than later. Which may be smart given the tank benefits.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Retention is the value lever with Couture. Each team only gets 3 retention spots and SJ has Burns tied up for 3 years with one. So tying up Couture for 4 years with another would have to be a big sell. Especially when SJ may be looking to do the same with Karlsson.

I do think there is an interesting case for Couture @ 50% to Carolina for a 1st + Drury/Morrow/Nikishin.

Huge pass on giving up morrow or Nikishin with a first to get a 34 year old center

That is the opposite of a Hurricanes move

 

[MadeUpName]

Huge pass on giving up morrow or Nikishin with a first to get a 34 year old center

Just to be clear that would be the price for SJ retaining $16 million over 4 years which is a very large sum.

The upside for Couture is that he is an absolute beast in the Playoffs. 48 goals and 101 points in 116 Playoff games. He is a clutch player.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Just to be clear that would be the price for SJ retaining $16 million over 4 years which is a very large sum.

The upside for Couture is that he is an absolute beast in the Playoffs. 48 goals and 101 points in 116 Playoff games. He is a clutch.

Just to be clear, its still a no. He was a beast in the playoffs 5 years ago. Little chance that gap is little enough to have no effect.

We don’t make these moves for a reason

 

[chaz4hockey]

do think there is an interesting case for Couture @ 50% to Carolina for a 1st + Drury/Morrow/Nikishin.

That’s a lot of assets for an almost 34 yr old guy.

Some KK data:

 

[MadeUpName]

Just to be clear, its still a no.

We don’t make these moves for a reason

Just to be clear, I think it would be far more likely to see the original offer. Carolina can absorb Couture's full Cap.

Meier @50% + Couture for 1st + Morrow + Drury, Flyer’s 20024 2nd + Flyer’s 2023 3rd + Kotkaniemi (which is optional - KK can stay)

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Just to be clear, I think it would be far more likely to see the original offer. Carolina can absorb Couture's full Cap.

Meier @50% + Couture for 1st + Morrow + Drury, Flyer’s 20024 2nd + Flyer’s 2023 3rd + Kotkaniemi (which is optional - KK can stay)

There is less of a chance the original deal happens than we would pay all of that for 50% couture.

He is 34, with an 8 million cap hit. For more 4 years. 4. We wouldn’t even pay trocheck until he was 35 for less than 6. Now we are going to absorb Couture until he is 38 at 8? No chance

If SJ wants to rebuild and move Couture at 33% retained for a Burns esque return, sure. Then we do it. Little to no chance we pay premium assets for Couture with or without retention

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Canes didn’t value megna very much (no huge surprise). He went to Seattle for a 4th.

He was being carried by Karlsson’s ridiculous season

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Just to be clear, I think it would be far more likely to see the original offer. Carolina can absorb Couture's full Cap.

Given what you know about the Canes front office, do you think they are going to accept 34. year old Couture's "full cap" of $8m / year for 4 more years? I've learned to never say never about this front office, but that seem very contrary to how they've operated.

 

[WreckingCrew]

Just to be clear, I think it would be far more likely to see the original offer. Carolina can absorb Couture's full Cap.

Meier @50% + Couture for 1st + Morrow + Drury, Flyer’s 20024 2nd + Flyer’s 2023 3rd + Kotkaniemi (which is optional - KK can stay)

If we're taking unretained Couture, easily take Morrow out of the equation and probably the 2nd or 3rd...at that cap hit for 4 years it's a negative value contract in a cap crunch world. I always liked Couture but it's a no from me dawg

 

[bleedgreen]

I’m struggling with the why with Couture. He’s 33 with term, which is a lot different from 26ish Trocheck with a couple of years left.

Doesn’t seem like us. The argument for it is there isn’t a huge list of guys that fit the bill for 2C that we could get our hands on.

Four more years past this tho…..

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

I’m struggling with the why with Couture. He’s 33 with term, which is a lot different from 26ish Trocheck with a couple of years left.

Doesn’t seem like us. The argument for it is there isn’t a huge list of guys that fit the bill for 2C that we could get our hands on.

Four more years past this tho…..

By that definition, Brent Burns would have been very very not like us as a 37 year old with 3 years of term. 33 with 4 years of term take Couture to... 37...the same age as Burns is now.

 

[bleedgreen]

By that definition, Brent Burns would have been very very not like us as a 37 year old with 3 years of term. 33 with 4 years of term take Couture to... 37...the same age as Burns is now.

Burns is as temporary as they come. He could be like Rod‘s last year tomorrow or next year. Let’s not start making assumptions/comparisons and redefining what age means in todays game because of a few months of Burns doing well. Burns is a freak of nature who works excessively hard. 33/34 is the edge of the cliff for most players.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

Burns is as temporary as they come. He could be like Rod‘s last year tomorrow or next year. Let’s not start making assumptions/comparisons and redefining what age means in todays game because of a few months of Burns doing well. Burns is a freak of nature who works excessively hard. 33/34 is the edge of the cliff for most players.

You're misunderstanding my point. My specific point was that I'm pretty sure that every organization understands that life has exceptions to the rule sometimes, and when an exceptional over-35 player like Bergeron or Burns does show up (and they DO exist from time to time, especially in the age of modern sports medicine and conditioning), it is often a market inefficiency.

 

[bleedgreen]

You're misunderstanding my point. My specific point was that I'm pretty sure that every organization understands that life has exceptions to the rule sometimes, and when an exceptional over-35 player like Bergeron or Burns does show up (and they DO exist from time to time, especially in the age of modern sports medicine and conditioning), it is often a market inefficiency.

I think they take chances finding replacements. I think they would’ve preferred a younger replacement at RD but this was a price they couldn’t say no to so they took that chance. They prioritize the right deal maybe over the right player, and we’ll see in time the results.

I don’t assume they would do the same for Couture, and maintain it would be silly to assume we’d get a guy primed for years 33-37. If the price is right, yes we’re more likely but it’s hard to make that contract look worth the risk. You did draw a comparison from Couture to Burns, I’m just saying that doesn’t seem like a smart route.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

I think they take chances finding replacements. I think they would’ve preferred a younger replacement at RD but this was a price they couldn’t say no to so they took that chance. They prioritize the right deal maybe over the right player, and we’ll see in time the results.

I don’t assume they would do the same for Couture, and maintain it would be silly to assume we’d get a guy primed for years 33-37. If the price is right, yes we’re more likely but it’s hard to make that contract look worth the risk. You did draw a comparison from Couture to Burns, I’m just saying that doesn’t seem like a smart route.

I will say that if there are any positions where occasional swings like that makes sense at the right asset price, it's for two of the most coveted positions in the league, AKA. second-line center and top-pairing RH defenseman.

The bigger obstacle to a Couture trade IMO is more about the Sharks than the Hurricanes. They already are retaining Burns' contract for two more seasons after this, and they are only allowed to retain on two more players beyond him. Using yet another salary retainment slot on Couture leads to numerous complications for the next two trade deadlines for San Jose.

 

[whiskers]

do think there is an interesting case for Couture @ 50% to Carolina for a 1st + Drury/Morrow/Nikishin.

That’s a lot of assets for an almost 34 yr old guy.

Some KK data:

we have 2 stats guys lol

 

[Svechhammer]

Old ass Couture for roster players and we would be stuck with him at a high dollar value til he's 38?

Good God, no.

Our problem is a lack of top end scoring. Stop trying to shove bargain bin or expensive years past their prime vets on us. We aren't trading a KK or Jarvis for anything less than a top end player in the early stages of their prime.

Also, Jarvis as a 2C? What, do you just want us to get physically bullied down the middle for years on end, cause that's how that happens. He's a winger in the NHL, an undersized one at that who gets gets absolutely blown off the puck regularly with routine checks. He'd get physically dominated at C.