Proposal: Trade Rumors and Proposals: Are You Out of Your Faulkin' Mind?

[lakai17]

Maybe don't make assumptions about people...

Werenski is a fantastic D prospect. As is Nurse. Klefbom, Davidson and Reinhart are all very young. Why not go out and get a guy who already is what Werenski will one day become?

Even if he's ready to play next year, we need someone with more experience next year.

Of course its unlikey, just one of my favoured d prospects today.

Hypothetically:

Chia acquires Werenski. This makes one of Nurse or Klefbom expendable. You would have to trade one due to a lot of inexperience.

Yes I am one that wants a top 2 or top 4 veteran defenceman today for mentoring purposes. To ice an actual NHL calibre defence now after witnessing a pathetic decade with this group.

 

[Young Lions*]

Chicago will decline once age catches up to guys like Keith and Seabrook. Nothing about their play this year suggested to me that they won’t be a contender with the cap room they have to work with under their core.

There's a handful of teams in the west every year that can be called contenders, but for the last few it's been LA and Chicago who were a cut above the pack. I don't see Chicago being able to retain the depth to be at that level even if they still have enough talent to wear the contender label along with teams like Anaheim, St. Louis, Nashville...

You make a good point about paying guys for what they’ve achieved but unfortunately that does not apply to a team in our position. Say we don’t win a playoff series in the next two years under McDavid’s ELC, is there any reason to not pay him what he will most likely deserve or should we make sure we hold at a 6-7M price point when negotiating a long term deal because he has yet to win anything?

Obviously you pay the man, but you also don't go out of your way to make moves that limit your chance of team success, which I think signing Stamkos at what I think he'd get would do. I should point out I'm not at all opposed to spending the money: for example, if the Habs decided to deal PK, I'd take his contract in a heartbeat because we simply don't have a player like that whereas we have plenty of skilled forwards already, even if they aren't at Stammers' level.

 

[BarDownBobo]

If Minnesota is looking for cap relief I'd be alright taking on Vanek's contract for 1 year. Put him on Mcdavids wing and drop Pouliot down to the 3rd line.

I've been thinking about this lately too. As long as the cost is cheap enough I'd be interested.

 

[s7ark]

I've been thinking about this lately too. As long as the cost is cheap enough I'd be interested.

Vanek and Pomm both have NMC and need to be protected for the expansion draft. I wouldn't take either in a trade. Not a chance. I expect the Wild will buy those guys out.

Yak + 32nd for Brodin gives the Wild 1.66M in savings. Not a lot but better than nothing.

 

[Spawn]

I've been thinking about this lately too. As long as the cost is cheap enough I'd be interested.

Vanek is a buyout candidate. I don't think he'd cost anything to acquire.

I kind of doubt we're going to have the cap space to add him for next season though and he's really shown a sharp decline the last couple of seasons. He reminds me of Heatley. An already slow skater has gotten slower and he just can't get to the scoring areas as well.

 

[Homesick]

Yes, the numbers game is a very fair argument against Stamkos. Trying to say that he is declining and might turn into Semin is nonsense. I know not you (hopefully), but my argument for Stammer is I'd rather have 20M tied up in two generational players/goal scorers than entertaining the idea of guys like RNH/Eberle or replacing them with your typical UFAs/expendable players like the Erickson's of the world to do the job good enough at a lower but still expensive cost.

I'm not a fan of comparing to other teams models as I think every team's players and situations make them unique but the obvious comparison is Chicago operating with Toews/Kane contracts. I think the most important thing to see in that situation is how they've installed that type of leadership and skill up top and how it helps them get the most out of role players and young guys coming in on their ELCs.

I know none of the matters without defense and the reason I don't like my comparison to Chicago is that we will never duplicate a Duncan Keith or even a Seabrook. Still, I see benefit in building around McD and SS while making everyone else expendable and not apart of the future. My guess is that it gives us more options.

McDavid/Stamkos > RNH/Eberle/Hall

McDavid/Stamkos will make those lessor known players brought in to fill the gaps better. RNH/Eberle/Hall while great players do not do that

 

[Homesick]

If Minnesota is looking for cap relief I'd be alright taking on Vanek's contract for 1 year. Put him on Mcdavids wing and drop Pouliot down to the 3rd line.

I'd rather have Maroon on McDavids line

 

[Musashi]

Obviously you pay the man, but you also don't go out of your way to make moves that limit your chance of team success, which I think signing Stamkos at what I think he'd get would do. I should point out I'm not at all opposed to spending the money: for example, if the Habs decided to deal PK, I'd take his contract in a heartbeat because we simply don't have a player like that whereas we have plenty of skilled forwards already, even if they aren't at Stammers' level.

I think signing a 26 year old generational goal scorer who could not be a better compliment to our other generational talent is much closer to the path of creating success, not the path that limits it.

I look at all the money we've handed out over the past several years that's been wasted trying to get the right pieces to fit and so much of it has been hit or miss. Even when we do it, the examples are far from perfect in Sekera and Pouliot.

So spend the extra dollars to bring in a guy who is a lock to bring elite talent and leadership here who at the same time makes the 12M we spend on RNH and Eberle completely expendable. They aren't the only expensive fat we can cut down while we take the next year or two to assess who fits and who doesn't before McD's next contract kicks in.

 

[Raab]

Vanek and Pomm both have NMC and need to be protected for the expansion draft. I wouldn't take either in a trade. Not a chance. I expect the Wild will buy those guys out.

Yak + 32nd for Brodin gives the Wild 1.66M in savings. Not a lot but better than nothing.

I can't see the league making teams protect guys in the final year of their deal NMC or not. We should know by the draft what the rules will be but I can't see it being that ridiculous. If you have a guy on a multi year deal with a NMC sure, but a guy in the final year of his deal can walk a month later if he doesn't want to sign with the team.

 

[Raab]

I'd rather have Maroon on McDavids line

You could put either Maroon or Vanek on RW.

 

[Raab]

Vanek is a buyout candidate. I don't think he'd cost anything to acquire.

I kind of doubt we're going to have the cap space to add him for next season though and he's really shown a sharp decline the last couple of seasons. He reminds me of Heatley. An already slow skater has gotten slower and he just can't get to the scoring areas as well.

What if we got say Vanek+Brodin and sent Fayne+Yakupov back in return? Thats the type of deal I'm thinking.

 

[Mr Positive]

What if we got say Vanek+Brodin and sent Fayne+Yakupov back in return? Thats the type of deal I'm thinking.

But if Chiarelli trade for Vanek everyone will say that Lowe still has input in hockey decisions.

 

[Jet Walters]

Eberle, Nurse, 2017 1st, for Subban (add swap of 4th and 9th picks if that isn't enough)

32nd overall for Shaw or Hansen

Yakupov for Petrovic (add mid round picks on either side)

Draft Dubois at 4 or a defenseman/Brown at 9

Sign Stamkos and whoever is cheaper out of Dale Weise/Troy Brouwer


Pouliot McDavid Stamkos
Hall Draisaitl Shaw/Hansen
Maroon RNH Brouwer/Weise
Hendricks Letestu Kassian/Pakarinen/Korpi

Sekera Subban
Davidson Klefbom
Reinhart Petrovic

Talbot
Chad Johnson

Around 70 million without ELC bonuses. Stamkos at 9. Might have to forego signing Weise/Brouwer and go a cheaper route there as McDavid/Drai/Reinhart will hit quite a few bonuses. Trade RNH and Pouliot the next year and have Dubois and Caggiula step in.

 

[Mcnotloilersfan]

Stamkos is not coming here. It makes no sense for us or him.

McDavid is going to be a big contract. We don't need 2 massive contracts up front. Chicago is going to suffer for it. If they hadn't won those cups, Toews' contract might be considered one of the worst in the league.

 

[Spawn]

What if we got say Vanek+Brodin and sent Fayne+Yakupov back in return? Thats the type of deal I'm thinking.

Sure. But why would the Wild do that? They'd just buy Vanek out and have a cap hit of 1.5M this upcoming season and 2.5M the next and if they wanted to trade Brodin trade him for something actually of value rather than a waiver player and a borderline bust.

 

[Up the Irons]

I've looked at the numbers.

Using your game range from above:
RNH : 19:28 per game
Henrik Sedin: 13:25 per game

The Sedins broke into the league on the 3rd line and played there for the first 4 years of their NHL career. Then they got a bump in ice time and offensive opportunity and their offensive production subsequently climbed. Once they were getting the type of minutes RNH has gotten from day one they were PPG+ players.

Ditto for Pavel Datsyuk. Broke onto a team that had 10 future hall of famers and was playing 13:30~ a night as a rookie. As his ice time and offensive opportunities increased so did his offensive production.

RNH broke into the league and for his entire career has been getting every single offensive opportunity with the teams best offensive players. There's no way for RNHs offensive time to increase. If anything, as McDavid and Draisaitl develop RNH will start seeing fewer and fewer offensive opportunities and more and more defensive responsibilities. That's not going to help his offensive production.

People take these exceptional situations with certain players and either don't look at the context or ignore it. And then go "see, it happened with player X, it will happen with RNH too." It doesn't work that way.

As for why I think a good #3 D is worth as much as a good #2C. I think there are fewer good defensemen in the league than there are good centermen. Just because someone plays the spot doesn't mean their suited for the spot. I think Ellis is a player who is suited for that #3 d spot.

good point, good post. the thing that is getting overlooked by people is that, in today's NHL, you need 4 good dmen that can play 20 mins, and about 4 more that are used for the bottom pairing/depth. You only need 2 top 6 Cs; a 3rd is a luxury (a very, very nice luxury, no doubt). As Spawn said: you can get a decent 3C and get by with him. Having a good 3D is both more difficult to do and more important to have.

Im not saying 'trade RNH for Ellis' as that, admitted is probably an overpayment. but, it's not as off as some are making it out to be. A quality 3D, that can put up points, is a very valuable and important player. And dreaming of the day when RNH is Datzyukian is... dreaming.

Im not even saying trade RNH. Id rather keep him, trade Ebs and move Drai to wing, at least for half a season, anyways.

but, your Dcorp is now the most important aspect of your team, so make it a bigger priority then C depth. sorry. one trumps the other.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

Sure. But why would the Wild do that? They'd just buy Vanek out and have a cap hit of 1.5M this upcoming season and 2.5M the next and if they wanted to trade Brodin trade him for something actually of value rather than a waiver player and a borderline bust.

Because they get rid of Vanek? They are planning to buy him out, they would probably welcome this trade.

 

[Mr Positive]

Because they get rid of Vanek? They are planning to buy him out, they would probably welcome this trade.

the problem there is that they had such an easy time signing Vanek because of how impressive their team and facilities were, and so he's in no mood to waive his NMC to go anywhere. That's where a good thing can become a bad thing.

It's like us and Sekera. I don't get why posters suggest trading him. He singled us out because he liked our city, team, and future so much, and so of course he signed for a little less and insisted on a NMC. He's not going anywhere for any reason. Although, I really like Sekera so I don't mind so much, but we have zero flexibility just like Minny and Vanek.

 

[Spawn]

Because they get rid of Vanek? They are planning to buy him out, they would probably welcome this trade.

Buyout cap hit of Vanek:
2016/17 - 1.5M
2017/18 - 2.5M

Mark Fayne caphit:
2016/17 - 3.625M
2017/18 - 3.625M

So the Wild lose cap space on just that swap alone. And Mark Fayne has proven that no one will take him for free. So it's not like there is value there for the Wild. And then they trade Brodin for Yakupov? Which not even the most ardent Oiler homer can think is a fair swap.

It's terrible for the Wild.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

Buyout cap hit of Vanek:
2016/17 - 1.5M
2017/18 - 2.5M

Mark Fayne caphit:
2016/17 - 3.625M
2017/18 - 3.625M

So the Wild lose cap space on just that swap alone. And Mark Fayne has proven that no one will take him for free. So it's not like there is value there for the Wild. And then they trade Brodin for Yakupov?

It's terrible for the Wild.

I guess. They might hate Vanek and the dead Cap space more then that, but either way.

 

[Jet Walters]

Because they get rid of Vanek? They are planning to buy him out, they would probably welcome this trade.

No, they would just buy out Vanek and save 4.5 million instead of taking on Yak and Fayne who make a combined 6 million. Brodin can be traded for futures or better players than Yak and Fayne if they are still up against the cap.

 

[Stud Muffin]

Let's sign Kovalchuk.

 

[McWeber]

Let's sign Kovalchuk.

Can Radulov play center?

 

[Stud Muffin]

Can Radulov play center?

McDavids Wingers

But honestly if Kovalchuk wanted to come back Chia should be all over that.

 

[s7ark]

I can't see the league making teams protect guys in the final year of their deal NMC or not. We should know by the draft what the rules will be but I can't see it being that ridiculous. If you have a guy on a multi year deal with a NMC sure, but a guy in the final year of his deal can walk a month later if he doesn't want to sign with the team.

They had to work out a deal with the NHLPA. There were reports a while back that they were treating expansion like waivers. If so, even if the expansion draft was 1 day before a contact with a NMC expired, a team would have to protect him. But maybe they can work something out. We don't know the expansion draft rules yet. Just a lot of rumour.