2014-15 Season Trade Rumours/Proposals thread vol. II

[BigBush*]

He'd be a fit there and we could take a prospect back. Have to add to get a Bennett return, but they have some nice pieces

Don't get your hopes up, we won't get nice pieces for Greening. Mid to Late round pick

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

I'd do this trade if we didn't have Michalek.

Michalek for Berglund straight up.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Well the little information we have is that Murray is looking for a player in return for Greening, not picks

JGP isn't going to be used as a winger and Puempel and Prince are staying in the AHL

I have no idea how you think Berglund wouldn't be an upgrade over Smith or Michalek or that getting another good solid vet might not help with roster flexibility

bergland in a small trade is good for us..if its for greenign then why not? problem is does the coach have the nads to sit michalek/ smith for him?
I think in the east he would do fine at wing or centre

 

[God Says No]

Well the little information we have is that Murray is looking for a player in return for Greening, not picks

Never heard that. What's your source?

JGP isn't going to be used as a winger and Puempel and Prince are staying in the AHL

Not sure what this has to do with anything.

I have no idea how you think Berglund wouldn't be an upgrade over Smith or Michalek or that getting another good solid vet might not help with roster flexibility

I never said Berglund wouldn't be an upgrade on Michalek. Actually if it was a Michalek - Berglund swap, it wouldn't be that bad. I do have an issue with Berglund pushing out Smith. I think Smith as a role player @ C in our lineup is better than Berglund playing 3rd line.

Like I already said, I find Berglund redundant. He'll never be a top 6 player. He needs skilled player playing with him to actually make him produce anything. Go check out the STL board. They have a discussion about him.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Never heard that. What's your source?

Garrioch in today's Sun

Not sure what this has to do with anything.

Why do you want to open up roster spots? I assumed it was to bring up people from the AHL

I never said Berglund wouldn't be an upgrade on Michalek. Actually if it was a Michalek - Berglund swap, it wouldn't be that bad. I do have an issue with Berglund pushing out Smith. I think Smith as a role player @ C in our lineup is better than Berglund playing 3rd line.

Like I already said, I find Berglund redundant. He'll never be a top 6 player. He needs skilled player playing with him to actually make him produce anything. Go check out the STL board. They have a discussion about him.

Smith isn't very good and we just signed Michalek

Berglund would be brought to play on the second line I think and he helps the left side which is very weak for us

 

[bert]

Garrioch in today's Sun



Why do you want to open up roster spots? I assumed it was to bring up people from the AHL



Smith isn't very good and we just signed Michalek

Berglund would be brought to play on the second line I think and he helps the left side which is very weak for us

With Hoffmans production the LW is good, center is where this team is weak. Regardless Berglund helps both spots. However why on earth would St Louis a team contending for the cup trade Berglund for Greening?

 

[God Says No]

Garrioch in today's Sun

Cool. Although not sure I would trust the big Gar.

Why do you want to open up roster spots? I assumed it was to bring up people from the AHL

Nope. We need the roster spot as it looks like Methot is close to returning. I'm assuming that's why all this trade talk has heated up lately.

Smith isn't very good and we just signed Michalek

Berglund would be brought to play on the second line I think and he helps the left side which is very weak for us

Actually Smith is very good when he plays his role. That is a 4th line C which plays physically. When people have more expectations of him when he flashes some nice offensive potential, then he gets slagged.

Berglund should not be used in a top 6 role. He's not dynamic enough for a role like that. I think you will be severely disappointed if those are your expectations. As mentioned, he's an excellent 3rd liner. We already have enough excellent 3rd liners. You do realize that Michalek has more points than Berglund right now, and both of his goals came from scoring off of deflection off his butt.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

With Hoffmans production the LW is good, center is where this team is weak. Regardless Berglund helps both spots. However why on earth would St Louis a team contending for the cup trade Berglund for Greening?

Save on cap space and get a decent bottom 6 player

 

[StefanW]

LeBrun reporting no real traction on potential Greening trade, other than Sens wanting to move him out.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Well that's a shame

 

[FireMelnyk]

Greening to waivers or trade Smith instead.

 

[StefanW]

Things can turn quickly with stuff like that.

It may end up being something like Greening plus a 4th in exchange for a 5th type of scenario to move him out without a bad contract coming back. Otherwise, we are likely to only be able to move him if we take on another bad contract. Best case scenario would be one with a shorter term, which I believe Bonk pointed out earlier in this thread.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Of course there's no traction, I highly doubt anyone wants him even for free.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Greening isn't that bad people

He just needs to play with good players

It would have taken a superstar to be good on a line with Smith and Neil last year, they were both horrible

 

[BonkTastic]

Greening isn't that

His trade value IS that bad.

Healthy scratch + that cap hit = very difficult contract to move out.

 

[TheNewEra]

Greening isn't that bad people

He just needs to play with good players

It would have taken a superstar to be good on a line with Smith and Neil last year, they were both horrible

see here is the thing though, if he isnt bad then how did he lose his spot to 3 guys who made the team out of training camp (the kid line) (maybe 2 depending on how you viewed stone)

its also about drive and wanting to stay in the lineup and i have only seen that from him in 1 game (vs the leafs) other wise in preseason and the other games he has been in he has been very meh, when we took lazar and hoffman out they responded by having very good games, he hasnt, **** even condras responded lol and thats saying something because condra has very limited offensive skill

 

[Do Make Say Think]

He's been beaten out by people who have more talent than him

It happens

He's still a decent bottom 6 player. He had ONE bad year people; let's not act like he's never been good.

He earned his contract on the back of a solid playoff performance, that's also an unfortunate side of the "what have you done lately" mentality that permeates pro-sports (just like how he's the worst player ever now after a bad year). At the time we were all fairly happy with the extension he got

 

[StefanW]

He's been beaten out by people who have more talent than him

It happens

He's still a decent bottom 6 player. He had ONE bad year people; let's not act like he's never been good.

The point to the discussion is trade value. Bottom 6 guy not in the lineup with bloated contract=tough to move/give away.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Agreed

I was mostly responding to our Yukon friend who said no one would want him for free

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

I'd keep Greening over Michalek. Yea, I said it. Michalek is better but not by an addition 1.5 or so mil. Greening also fits mold of bottom 6 player better and raises his game SOMEWHAT in the playoffs.

 

[Real Smart Sens Fan]

I'd keep Greening over Michalek. Yea, I said it. Michalek is better but not by an addition 1.5 or so mil. Greening also fits mold of bottom 6 player better and raises his game SOMEWHAT in the playoffs.

Lol, you say it ALL THE TIME. And it is cray-cray, all the same.

 

[BonkTastic]

Agreed

I was mostly responding to our Yukon friend who said no one would want him for free

A lot of teams already have a guy just like Greening on their roster, for far less money.

I can totally see a lot of teams passing on him, assuming they can't send a guy back our way to even out the money. In fact, there's a significant chunk of teams who CAN'T take on Greening for free, from a cap perspective.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Exactly but it's also why Greening+ for Berglund could make sense (since that what started this whole Greening convo ealier today)

Berglund is more expensive so the Blues would be happy with a lower salary and we could use someone who can play the left wing and centre

 

[BonkTastic]

Lol, you say it ALL THE TIME. And it is cray-cray, all the same.

Agreed, I take Michalek over Greening 20 out of 10 times.

The salary isn't even all that different over the next two years, either... Michalek is owed $8mil in actual salary over those two seasons, while Greening is owed ~$6mil in the same time period, because his salary escalates. We're getting the "bargain" Greening contract year this season, it goes nowhere but up after that.

I think Michalek is far more than "a million dollars per year better" than Greening is, plus Greening's spot on the roster (4th line/ pressbox bouncer) can go to someone making less than half of what he's being paid.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Lol, you say it ALL THE TIME. And it is cray-cray, all the same.

No it's not. I'm with RKL on this one. I thought greening was done. But when put wih semi talent he plays his role and isn't a liability. He was real good against jets and leafs. Better than Michalek. He's cheaper. Short and long term. And we know he's a bottom six and we know Maclean has no problems scratching him. He has a huge problem scratching Michalek. Which means less players get a shot. With greening we can rotate him in and out and get puempel and prince up here to get some reps. (I said get some reps. Please don't anyone quote this and tell me "prince and puempel aren't ready for full time NHL duty").