Question for you guys... what would you want for Colton Sceviour ?
not much reason to trade a guy on minimum salary.
How about you take Gonchar too and we can start talking?
Question for you guys... what would you want for Colton Sceviour ?
Does Dallas need help on the blueline? I know Robidas is gone, and looking over your D (while admitting I'm not hugely knowledgeable about your D) it seems a little thin...
He's fit in perfectly for Dallas and is close to league minimum. Those pieces are invaluable and tough to give up when you're playing near the cap. Dallas will be with Eakin and Dillon eventually signed.
He's a Rich Peverley starter kit IMO, and there's no one behind him that's close to pushing him out. You'd essentially have to come up with a player that has a similar cap hit but is a better fit for Dallas, and I just can't think of a scenario where that happens.
Many Dallas fans would agree with you, but management does not. They're committed at this point to allowing Nemeth, Oleksiak, Klingberg, and Jokipakka earn a spot on the team. That's why the only move they made on D this summer was to buyout Rome.
Check back in a few weeks if those four fail to impress, but IMO one or two of them will easily meet or exceed Nill's expectations and prove him right for not making any moves.
Would you consider a young depth D (who's NHL ready) for him? Someone like Bortuzzo or Samuelsson. I know neither are sexy names, both both are on cheap comparable contracts and are NHL players (or in Sammy's case looked good when he was up last year).
I saw your edit, but Samuelsson is one guy I was wondering what PIT would do with him since he'll require waivers.
Hopefully he'll clear so you can have him for depth.
His approach changed in the mid-1990s, when he served as head coach and general manager in the IHL, when he had to justify his payroll decisions. He was searching for a new way to evaluate the game, to understand "exactly what was happening on the ice."
"I'll give you an example," he said. "We had a player that was supposed to be a great, shut-down defenseman. He was supposedly the be-all, end-all of defensemen. But when you did a 10-game analysis of him, you found out he was defending all the time because he can't move the puck.
"Then we had another guy, who supposedly couldn't defend a lick. Well, he was defending only 20 percent of the time because he's making good plays out of our end. He may not be the strongest defender, but he's only doing it 20 percent of the time. So the equation works out better the other way. I ended up trading the other defenseman."