Rumor: Trade Rumors/Proposals/Free Agents 2017-2018

[Duncstar]

Yea I'm not sure why people are so fascinated with him.

Its fairly obvious... we need a top 4 D. Only real names mentioned this year are his and Faulk and they have both been bad, yet both had a good last year.

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

Get RNH , don't move Hoffman to do it. Thing is Sens move a piece they create a hole .. they have no depth

RNH doesn't fill a hole though. He's just another redundant and expensive non core piece.

 

[megalomania]

Both Duchene and RNH can play LW, Duchene more so than RNH. Duchene is arguably better at LW than he is at C.

Sure they could, but how is it smart to trade your 1st line LW for a 2nd line C, then using the 1st line C you already had as a LW and your new 2nd line C on the 1st line -> your center depth is worse than before and you lost your best goal scorer in the process.

Our prospect center depth means nothing until they actually develop to that point. At which time, we could trade RNH for futures, or help in a different position. Unless we get really lucky, there's no prospect in our system that projects to be an NHL 2C next year.

I agree that prospect depth means little in terms of contributing soon. However, the Sens as they currently are have depth problems at C, but even more so on D, and also questionable goaltending. They're strongest on the wings but it's not like they're overflowing with quality - if they trade away one of their best wingers they immediately have depth problems on whatever side they traded away from. In this situation I'd much rather use trades to add to a position where there's insufficient depth AND few quality prospects (D in particular) than to the one position where you at least have promising prospects. This is of course assuming they rebuild or retool - if they try to compete next year adding RNH would make more sense.

Not acquiring RNH leaves our center depth just as bad if not worse than trading Hoffman leaves our LW depth.

Meh I'd rather have Pageau as the 2nd line center than Dzingel as the 1st line LW and Smith/Paajarvi/who-tf as 2nd line LW. Of course you can use Ryan as LW but that leaves your RW depth as Stone and nobody except hopefully White.

With RNH, we get a player signed for 3 more seasons versus just 2 more seasons. With Hoffman signed at only two more seasons, which if we cannot extend him amounts to only 1 more season since there is no way this team will be in a position to give up on the 1st round pick they'd get for Hoffman in a trade and let him walk for nothing.

If we were a run n' gun team, I wouldn't do that trade. I think Hoffman thrives in that kind of system. With our current coach, assuming Boucher is staying, RNH is a lot more useful of a player to have. Hoffman hasn't been as good under Boucher as he (maybe ironically if they didn't like each other) was under Cameron, so I think RNH could replace a good chunk of Hoffman's production while giving us versatility down the middle and being a stronger overall two way player. He is also signed to what is a more favourable contract for us (3 years @ 6M vs 2 years @ 5.65M), and given the type of offers we heard of for Hoffman at the TDL (Kyrou+2nd) RNH probably has a similar value in futures if it ever comes down to having to sell him off like we've apparently at least explored with Hoffman.

With that said, guys like Bob McKenzie and Bruce Garrioch are playing down this potential trade, so the good news for anybody who doesn't like it is that it might not be likely to happen.

These are all reasonable arguments. I guess I still hope that Boucher won't be back. I also just generally dislike the idea of trading for a lesser version of Turris less than a year after trading him away. On the other hand many (including myself) have for years been thinking that Turris would be ideal as a 2nd line center so Duchene-RNH wouldn't be bad all in all. Still I believe the Sens have much more urgent needs both short-term and long-term.

 

[SpezzaNoLookDropPass]

Tom Pyatt for Barclay Goodrow

 

[cgf]

So what do you guys think Melnyk is going to be looking for if he does have Dorion trade EK? From where I'm sitting I have a tough time seeing him accepting a full rebuild even without EK, given that we have your 1st and the trouble he's had selling season tickets for next year. With all of your young forwards who are getting close, if not already ready...White, Brown, Formenton, Batherson...you've already got the new wave of forwards coming in to rejuvenate the team and make you "younger, faster" like Sakic did for us with Jost, Compher, Kerfoot, Nieto, & Andrighetto. So am I wrong to think Melnyk is really banking on you guys doing what we did this season after the Duchene trade; especially with your improved play of late?

If so, can your blueliners make enough progress to get the job done next season without EK, even if the forward core kills it and you get a season of good-Anderson? Chabot should make a lot of progress, Ceci probably won't have one of his worst seasons, and I don't know enough about Harpur or Claesson to judge what they can reasonably be expected to provide next year, but what's you guys' feeling on this? Is that enough talent to at least be passable if all 4 lines are working and the goaltending can bail out their mistakes-of-youth?

Or am I wrong to think Melnyk will refuse to pull the plug and ship out everyone he isn't sure to lockdown like Duchene, Hoffman, EK, etc.?


Not trying to be a dick and pry on your board; just want Dutchy to have a more enjoyable post-Colorado career than ROR has, and so am curious about what you guys think the plan is...especially since I still can't believe that Melnyk would ok trading EK before seeing if that forward youth and an offseason for Anderson & EK to re-charge their batteries, wouldn't get you back into the playoff mix.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

So what do you guys think Melnyk is going to be looking for if he does have Dorion trade EK? From where I'm sitting I have a tough time seeing him accepting a full rebuild even without EK, given that we have your 1st and the trouble he's had selling season tickets for next year. With all of your young forwards who are getting close, if not already ready...White, Brown, Formenton, Batherson...you've already got the new wave of forwards coming in to rejuvenate the team and make you "younger, faster" like Sakic did for us with Jost, Compher, Kerfoot, Nieto, & Andrighetto. So am I wrong to think Melnyk is really banking on you guys doing what we did this season after the Duchene trade; especially with your improved play of late?

If so, can your blueliners make enough progress to get the job done next season without EK, even if the forward core kills it and you get a season of good-Anderson? Chabot should make a lot of progress, Ceci probably won't have one of his worst seasons, and I don't know enough about Harpur or Claesson to judge what they can reasonably be expected to provide next year, but what's you guys' feeling on this? Is that enough talent to at least be passable if all 4 lines are working and the goaltending can bail out their mistakes-of-youth?

Or am I wrong to think Melnyk will refuse to pull the plug and ship out everyone he isn't sure to lockdown like Duchene, Hoffman, EK, etc.?


Not trying to be a dick and pry on your board; just want Dutchy to have a more enjoyable post-Colorado career than ROR has, and so am curious about what you guys think the plan is...especially since I still can't believe that Melnyk would ok trading EK before seeing if that forward youth and an offseason for Anderson & EK to re-charge their batteries, wouldn't get you back into the playoff mix.

-We're rumoured to be looking for something in the range of two 1sts, one or two prospects, and a young NHL player in exchange for Karlsson and a team taking on Ryan's contract. I think management will use an Erik Karlsson trade to hit the reset button both by clearing a significant portion of bad money (Ryan), and by adding in 3-5 top level pieces in our system via what Karlsson returns.

-Elliott Friedman was talking as if VGK offer at the deadline was something like two 1sts, an unnamed conditional pick (maybe a 1st?), and a top prospect for Karlsson+Ryan, but OTT turned it down due to wanting a more "hockey" oriented deal. My perception of this, is that we want at least one sure thing in the trade. Going back to what Bob McKenzie has said, teams aren't just going to get Karlsson for "magic beans".

-I don't think we're doing a "Full" rebuild, in a sense that I don't think we're completely tearing the team down. I think we'll try to get Stone+Duchene to buy into having it be their team and sign long term extensions. We'll then surround them with the youth currently in our system, and whoever we gain with our projected top 5 pick, and from the Erik Karlsson trade.

-Regarding the Sens banking on a quick turn around like COL. Whether or not Karlsson is kept, I think that is going to be a selling point to Stone+Duchene and to the fan base. That even know we are taking "one step back to take two forward", the NHL is a league with a lot of parity, and with guys like the ones you named, we could be back in the thick of things as a possible playoff team in 1-2 years. Whether people think that's entirely possible is a different story, but I think that's how it'd be sold to players and fans.

-I think our current core (including Karlsson) could turn around and have a good season after this one, but we have a 68M budget and loads of bad money on the books so we're at a cross roads where if Karlsson actually is unwilling to take a discount, we probably can't re-sign him and remain competitive. Ryan, Gaborik, Phaneuf retention, etc. Just too much bad money with a low player salary budget. If we were an 80M cap team, we'd be more than fine even with that bad money.

-Ultimately, I don't think people will ever get over trading Karlsson (if it happens), but if we do, I think we'll be in a position to build a solid team and Duchene will be just fine. I don't think we'll ever be a perpetual contender with our budget, but I think we can build a pesky playoff bubble team. I know that doesn't sound too exciting, but it is what it is.

 

[Karl Prime]

I think that if Ryan is traded with Karlsson, a lot of fans won't be happy because trading EK will be seen as a move to shed salary and not a move to return lots of assets and set us up well for the present and future.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

I think that if Ryan is traded with Karlsson, a lot of fans won't be happy because trading EK will be seen as a move to shed salary and not a move to return lots of assets and set us up well for the present and future.

Fans won't be happy regardless with a Karlsson trade, so it's an opportunity to do what needs to be done.

We're going to get a lot of assets anyways. If Friedman was correct, we were potentially getting up to three 1sts (assuming that conditional pick could become a 1st) and a "top prospect" for Karlsson+Ryan as a backbone of a deal with VGK at the deadline, and we turned it down for not being enough.

Including Ryan is smart if executed right. It allows us to extort more value out of Karlsson because there is probably a ceiling on what any individual team will give up in terms of picks+prospects+players. It adds a unique asset that can be thrown into the mix to up the overall value of our return.

Our motivation for trading Karlsson obviously shouldn't just be to move Ryan's contract, but if we are going to trade Karlsson for other reasons, we have a unique opportunity to exploit his value and dump 7.5M per season in bad salary while probably not hurting the return all that badly so long as we bluff our way to actively negotiating with teams who cannot take Ryan and then use that to drive up the "discounted" price for teams who can.

 

[Joider]

Fans won't be happy regardless with a Karlsson trade, so it's an opportunity to do what needs to be done.

We're going to get a lot of assets anyways. If Friedman was correct, we were potentially getting up to three 1sts (assuming that conditional pick could become a 1st) and a "top prospect" for Karlsson+Ryan as a backbone of a deal with VGK at the deadline, and we turned it down for not being enough.

Including Ryan is smart if executed right. It allows us to extort more value out of Karlsson because there is probably a ceiling on what any individual team will give up in terms of picks+prospects+players. It adds a unique asset that can be thrown into the mix to up the overall value of our return.

Our motivation for trading Karlsson obviously shouldn't just be to move Ryan's contract, but if we are going to trade Karlsson for other reasons, we have a unique opportunity to exploit his value and dump 7.5M per season in bad salary while probably not hurting the return all that badly so long as we bluff our way to actively negotiating with teams who cannot take Ryan and then use that to drive up the "discounted" price for teams who can.

Even though I think there's a slight lack of evidence for the 68 million budget, it's all been interpreted somewhat out of context from interviews; it seems more and more apparent that it exists. I'm just wondering why Melynk was willing to pay for the team before and not now. We were surely over our 68 mil budget sometime during our prime years with Spezza and Alfie, why the sudden extreme cheapness?

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Even though I think there's a slight lack of evidence for the 68 million budget, it's all been interpreted somewhat out of context from interviews; it seems more and more apparent that it exists. I'm just wondering why Melynk was willing to pay for the team before and not now. We were surely over our 68 mil budget sometime during our prime years with Spezza and Alfie, why the sudden extreme cheapness?

I don't know why you'd consider there to be a lack of evidence about the budget. Melnyk himself has corroborated that we have a 68M at least two times to my knowledge. Most recently, he did it at the Heritage classic. Not to mention, all the salaries+cap are public via capfriendly.

Secondly, we were spending during that era. That is because our budget at the time was based around us needing a specific amount of playoff hockey in order to turn a profit. Around 2012ish, the player salary budget was lowered in order to allow the team to turn a profit without playoffs.

Now, this doesn't necessarily mean that we have turned a profit every year without playoffs since then. I have no idea if that is the case. But that was how it was all explained publicly at the time, and the info is still available in archived news articles online.

How do you think the player salary budget has been taken out of context? It seems pretty straight forward to me, we are allowed to spend up to 68M on players each season.

 

[Joider]

I don't know why you'd consider there to be a lack of evidence about the budget. Melnyk himself has corroborated that we have a 68M at least two times to my knowledge. Most recently, he did it at the Heritage classic. Not to mention, all the salaries+cap are public via capfriendly.

Secondly, we were spending during that era. That is because our budget at the time was based around us needing a specific amount of playoff hockey in order to turn a profit. Around 2012ish, the player salary budget was lowered in order to allow the team to turn a profit without playoffs.

Now, this doesn't necessarily mean that we have turned a profit every year without playoffs since then. I have no idea if that is the case. But that was how it was all explained publicly at the time, and the info is still available in archived news articles online.

How do you think the player salary budget has been taken out of context? It seems pretty straight forward to me, we are allowed to spend up to 68M on players each season.

Most of the instances mentioning the 68M budget are incidents where someone says "we spend 68 million on players." In fact, Melynk said exactly that during the heritage classic like you mentioned. Not that we spend up to 68 million, but we are currently spending 68 million. The thing is if I went to a store, bought a candy bar, and said I spent 2 dollars on that candy bar, that doesn't mean my budget for a candy bar was 2 dollars.

All that being said, however, with the recent developments surrounding the team I find it more likely than not that there is a budget, and 68 million is the most accurate figure we have to go on. I probably didn't write my post very well, but I'm definitely not trying to defend Melynk for his lack of spending. I was just genuinely curious why it seemed he turned a sudden corner, and your examples do make sense.

 

[cgf]

-We're rumoured to be looking for something in the range of two 1sts, one or two prospects, and a young NHL player in exchange for Karlsson and a team taking on Ryan's contract. I think management will use an Erik Karlsson trade to hit the reset button both by clearing a significant portion of bad money (Ryan), and by adding in 3-5 top level pieces in our system via what Karlsson returns.

-Elliott Friedman was talking as if VGK offer at the deadline was something like two 1sts, an unnamed conditional pick (maybe a 1st?), and a top prospect for Karlsson+Ryan, but OTT turned it down due to wanting a more "hockey" oriented deal. My perception of this, is that we want at least one sure thing in the trade. Going back to what Bob McKenzie has said, teams aren't just going to get Karlsson for "magic beans".

-I don't think we're doing a "Full" rebuild, in a sense that I don't think we're completely tearing the team down. I think we'll try to get Stone+Duchene to buy into having it be their team and sign long term extensions. We'll then surround them with the youth currently in our system, and whoever we gain with our projected top 5 pick, and from the Erik Karlsson trade.

-Regarding the Sens banking on a quick turn around like COL. Whether or not Karlsson is kept, I think that is going to be a selling point to Stone+Duchene and to the fan base. That even know we are taking "one step back to take two forward", the NHL is a league with a lot of parity, and with guys like the ones you named, we could be back in the thick of things as a possible playoff team in 1-2 years. Whether people think that's entirely possible is a different story, but I think that's how it'd be sold to players and fans.

-I think our current core (including Karlsson) could turn around and have a good season after this one, but we have a 68M budget and loads of bad money on the books so we're at a cross roads where if Karlsson actually is unwilling to take a discount, we probably can't re-sign him and remain competitive. Ryan, Gaborik, Phaneuf retention, etc. Just too much bad money with a low player salary budget. If we were an 80M cap team, we'd be more than fine even with that bad money.

-Ultimately, I don't think people will ever get over trading Karlsson (if it happens), but if we do, I think we'll be in a position to build a solid team and Duchene will be just fine. I don't think we'll ever be a perpetual contender with our budget, but I think we can build a pesky playoff bubble team. I know that doesn't sound too exciting, but it is what it is.

What caliber of prospects and NHLer do you think they're looking for/going to get? And as for the more sure-fire piece, do you think they're looking for an NHL forward...so that you're not dependent on as many of your young forwards making the jump all at once...or an NHL dman who could backfill some of what you'd lose without EK?

Now I don't think we're at the right stage to trade for someone like EK, but if you were getting your 1st back from colorado, Edmonton's 2019 1st, and dumping Ryan; would Timmins + a young NHLer like Kerfoot / Andrighetto / Compher & a conditional pick be along the lines of what you're thinking they'd want? Or is that too futures heavy like the Vegas offer? If they're looking for more of a "hockey" trade than that, what about Barrie (with heavy retention), & those picks?

 

[Sensung]

Fans won't be happy regardless with a Karlsson trade, so it's an opportunity to do what needs to be done.

The fan reaction will be significantly different if they turn a hockey deal into a $ deal by adding Ryan.

We're going to get a lot of assets anyways. If Friedman was correct, we were potentially getting up to three 1sts (assuming that conditional pick could become a 1st) and a "top prospect" for Karlsson+Ryan as a backbone of a deal with VGK at the deadline, and we turned it down for not being enough.

Including Ryan is smart if executed right. It allows us to extort more value out of Karlsson because there is probably a ceiling on what any individual team will give up in terms of picks+prospects+players. It adds a unique asset that can be thrown into the mix to up the overall value of our return.

Our motivation for trading Karlsson obviously shouldn't just be to move Ryan's contract, but if we are going to trade Karlsson for other reasons, we have a unique opportunity to exploit his value and dump 7.5M per season in bad salary while probably not hurting the return all that badly so long as we bluff our way to actively negotiating with teams who cannot take Ryan and then use that to drive up the "discounted" price for teams who can.

I respect your postings in general, but that is some terrible logic all based on the faulty premise "that there is a ceiling" on the return. For a generational Dman in his prime, teams will pay a massive amount of assets (present and future) for a signed EK. If the Sens are going to tank until we hit Lebreton, then having extra future assets from the deal and Ryan's contract to get to the cap floor make way more sense as a plan.

Diminishing that return by adding a salary dump is one of the worst ideas I have ever seen and I frankly can't believe anyone not on Melnyk's payroll would support that stupidity.

It will also be the rallying cry for the #Melnykout movement to switch into high gear.

 

[Brannstorm]

I am very glad we did not trade EK at the deadline.

I can just imagine the bidding war that would occur if Karlsson isn't signed to a new contract.

The longer it goes the more anticipation, we should spend most of our time scouting other teams top prospects and low prospects everybody to pick a ridiculous return.

Because Dorion hasn't seemed to miss with 1st or 2nd round picks in the last few years. If he talks as much to other teams as people say he does and if he is as good a scout as his resume would say.... Then this would be like a lifelong dream to pick and choose all of the gems from other teams and then leave it up to chance in a bidding war knowing we will be flush whomever we deal with.

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

I am very glad we did not trade EK at the deadline.

I can just imagine the bidding war that would occur if Karlsson isn't signed to a new contract.

The longer it goes the more anticipation, we should spend most of our time scouting other teams top prospects and low prospects everybody to pick a ridiculous return.

Because Dorion hasn't seemed to miss with 1st or 2nd round picks in the last few years. If he talks as much to other teams as people say he does and if he is as good a scout as his resume would say.... Then this would be like a lifelong dream to pick and choose all of the gems from other teams and then leave it up to chance in a bidding war knowing we will be flush whomever we deal with.

If you include Ryan in a deal with Karlssons it quickly becomes a nightmare

 

[Brannstorm]

If you include Ryan in a deal with Karlssons it quickly becomes a nightmare

I agree, it takes so much ground away from Pierre D in negotiations, because it is so subjective to another team on how big a problem ryan's contract is and/or how valuable he actually could be in the future.

I mean a perfect deal could be in place but we would have to fall 5 deals down to get ryan out, I don't think anyone likes the idea of that. If we aren't signing Karlsson we can handle Ryan for a little while longer. I hope.

 

[Duncstar]

They will likely be seperate because we will loose too much firepower if we loose both Ryan and Karlsson right away.

I expect a mid season trade of Ryan (25% retained) to a team like SJS, for a exchange of picks (give them our second for their third, or 4th).

Heres what I'd bank money on:

Karlsson to Vegas for 1st, 2nd, Glass, Alex Tuch, and M. Subban. (Fills LW, backup and 2C needs)

Pageau + Smith to Oilers for Klefbom (Fills 4D)

Hoffman to Calgary for R. Andersson + Sam Bennet (young promising nhl ready D + 3rd line struggling 1st rnd pick).

Ryan 2019 deadline trade to SJS at 25% retained + our 2nd for their 3rd.

Condon for Arizonas 5th round pick.

Then you start the season with Chilapik and White, and either call up Brown midseason ala Chabot OR wait till 2019-20. Formenton will likely be similar if not a year behind.

Not a bad young team.

 

[Karl Prime]

They will likely be seperate because we will loose too much firepower if we loose both Ryan and Karlsson right away.

I expect a mid season trade of Ryan (25% retained) to a team like SJS, for a exchange of picks (give them our second for their third, or 4th).

Heres what I'd bank money on:

Karlsson to Vegas for 1st, 2nd, Glass, Alex Tuch, and M. Subban. (Fills LW, backup and 2C needs)

Pageau + Smith to Oilers for Klefbom (Fills 4D)

Hoffman to Calgary for R. Andersson + Sam Bennet (young promising nhl ready D + 3rd line struggling 1st rnd pick).

Ryan 2019 deadline trade to SJS at 25% retained + our 2nd for their 3rd.

Condon for Arizonas 5th round pick.

Then you start the season with Chilapik and White, and either call up Brown midseason ala Chabot OR wait till 2019-20. Formenton will likely be similar if not a year behind.

Not a bad young team.

So that team would look like....

Tuch-Duchene-Dzingel
Chlapik-Brown-Stone
Bennett-Glass-White
Paul-McCormick-Pyatt

Chabot-Ceci
Klefbom-Andersson
Boro-Wideman/Harpur

 

[Do Make Say Think]

I think they tried the Ryan and Karlsson deal and didn't like the return so they backed off. I am not sure the market of teams interested in Karlsson and Ryan will get much bigger in the summer.

Melnyk and Dorion know they can't get anything less than a stellar return if they trade Karlsson, I am not too worried about this scenario but it's just my gut.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

The fan reaction will be significantly different if they turn a hockey deal into a $ deal by adding Ryan.



I respect your postings in general, but that is some terrible logic all based on the faulty premise "that there is a ceiling" on the return. For a generational Dman in his prime, teams will pay a massive amount of assets (present and future) for a signed EK. If the Sens are going to tank until we hit Lebreton, then having extra future assets from the deal and Ryan's contract to get to the cap floor make way more sense as a plan.

Diminishing that return by adding a salary dump is one of the worst ideas I have ever seen and I frankly can't believe anyone not on Melnyk's payroll would support that stupidity.

It will also be the rallying cry for the #Melnykout movement to switch into high gear.

I don't think it's terrible logic to assume that there is a ceiling on what teams can comfortably give up in terms of picks+players. In the past, teams were able to include money in trades, that helped get over this ceiling. Teams can no longer directly include money. Ryan is an indirect way of accomplishing that.

A team won't want to strip their current roster for Karlsson if they are giving up 2-3 first round picks. They also will not want to strip their prospect pool entirely because they'll likely need ELC talent to fill holes if they intend to add Karlsson who'll most likely require a 10.5-12.5 salary. There needs to be a balance for whoever acquires Karlsson that lets them responsibly go forward and build a winning team.

This is why I think there's a ceiling on what we can expect in terms of players/picks/prospects. Adding in Ryan creates an opportunity for us to put in a fourth type of asset to extract added value on top of whatever that ceiling is.

Sure, there's apparently a "discounted" price for a team that takes Ryan, but what does that discount constitute, and is it more valuable than dumping 30M of what is effectively dead salary over four seasons?

 

[Duncstar]

So that team would look like....

Tuch-Duchene-Dzingel
Chlapik-Brown-Stone
Bennett-Glass-White
Paul-McCormick-Pyatt

Chabot-Ceci
Klefbom-Andersson
Boro-Wideman/Harpur

Your pretty close. I had

Tuch-Duchene-Dzingel
White-Glass-Stone
Puljarvi-Bennet-Chalapik
McCormick-Pyatt-Burrows

Defense was spot on

Brown comes in on 3rd line and Bennet moves to LW. Don't want Brown with Stone yet if his skating hasn't improved or it will be a slow line

 

[Bileur]

Your pretty close. I had

Tuch-Duchene-Dzingel
White-Glass-Stone
Puljarvi-Bennet-Chalapik
McCormick-Pyatt-Burrows

Defense was spot on

Brown comes in on 3rd line and Bennet moves to LW. Don't want Brown with Stone yet if his skating hasn't improved or it will be a slow line

Lottery team for sure, then we likely lose Duchene and Stone to UFA next summer.

 

[BondraTime]

Lottery team for sure, then we likely lose Duchene and Stone to UFA next summer.

Yeah, that's a god awful team

 

[Duncstar]

Lol this team is already a lottery team. Its not like another team is going to just make us better now...

 

[Sensung]

I don't think it's terrible logic to assume that there is a ceiling on what...

Ryan is overpaid by 2.5 per season, so on reality, you are tanking EK's value for 10M is "savings" for a team that is no where near the cap.

And in what universe is limiting the market to teams that can handle adding 17.5-20M in cap a good idea (EK +Ryan). You want as large a group of bidders as possible!

Of course, this ignores limiting the market even further by adding Ryan's no trade list on top of EK's.

In short, the position is idiotic.

Teams that want to win in the next few years will trade an established player or 2, a couple of high end prospects, and multiple years of first round draft picks for a generational D man in his prime signed to a long term deal.

Adding Ryan to the deal is indefensible unless $ are the ONLY consideration.