Proposal: TOR-ANA (or) CGY

[dracom]

I meant it serious.
Ducks are already in big cap trouble with expensive contracts Perry and Kesler(who should get better though). And Gibson, Montour and Kase will earn hefty hefty rises this and next offseason. We already will likely struggle to keep a player like Silfverberg, and not because we don`t like him but because we will soon not be able to afford him. Taking on a bigger contract for Ritchie who will not earn too much of a rise is very silly in our case.

I don't agree. Brown seems like another Cogs type of player, and I rather this team have more of him than of Ritchies. Ritchie next contract I don't see being less than Brown's current deal either. If offered that trade, I take it in a heartbeat.

 

[firstemperor]

I'd do the Bennett deal, not the Ducks deal. Flames are good partners for the Leafs if they can get around the framework of both of their needs.

Biggest need for the Flames in my eyes, is team speed, scoring, young RW with upside.

Biggest need for the Leafs is RHD depth, and Bennett is a good buy-low option (if he is available as a buy-low option) for Babcock.

Framework would need to revolve around Kapanen/Brown and any other internal prospects that Flames would want for one of, Andersson/Bennett.

It would be a mistake for either team to sell off young assets for older upgrades, which I've heard fans of both teams call for. That means going after a "proven older, non-cost controlled RW for the Flames" or a Mark Stone/Brodie type for the Leafs....I'd debate this further as to why, but this is the gist of my take.

 

[I am Canadian]

Brown is a super reliable, local Toronto guy that Babcock loves.

He's not worth as much as those two but I see no reason why they would move him.

 

[Skobel24]

I'd rather just keep Bennett and continue to develop him as a winger. He'd likely do just as well, if not better, in the Flames top 6. I like Brown, but not at the expense of Bennett.

 

[WTFMAN99]

No. 21 year olds have more potential than 24 year olds.

Essentially if Bennett totally stalls out for the next three years then the value is even. Until then Bennett has far more value.

No but then Brown will be 27 and Bennett will be 24, and 24 year olds have more potential then 27 year olds

 

[Magic Man]

You want defensive help so you offer Brown for Bennett?

Haha, I thought you would have wanted Stone. That would have made more sense.

Bennett trade isn't remotely tempting.

We have enough bottom pairing defenders. Stone is a little pricey for what he provides.

 

[DJJones]

We have enough bottom pairing defenders. Stone is a little pricey for what he provides.

Worth every penny imo. Guys an animal. Just fantastic in the corners and in front of the net. If only he could hit the net with his shot haha.

He'd be second pairing on most teams in the league

 

[Drew311]

The game is moving away from players like Ritchie. No way I move Brown for him.

 

[eternalbedhead]

Not sure if we could cram Brown in on the right side without relegating him or someone else to the 4th line, but I'd do it in a vacuum. I really like Brown, and while I'd hesitate to give up on Ritchie so soon, perhaps a change in scenery would be best for him.

(insert obligatory Don Cherry joke here)

 

[WTFMAN99]

Thread got a bit more mileage then I had expected. Overall, it has been one of the better discussions on these boards, pretty great input RE: Yes/No and with good explanations on why you're leaning that way versus the typical responses you can get on here.

ANA/CGY fans