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

[Sens Rule]

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").

Except Michalek is better at scoring, passing, PK, PP and ES. Better at everything but skating in a skills competition and getting hits in fantasy stats.

I think Greening has been decent when he gets a chance to play this year too. And I get that Michalek is not consistent at scoring and gas been disappointing since his all-star season. And I understand that many didn't want him resigned. I probably would not have resigned him.

All of that said... Michalek is a far, far better player then Greening. Just far better. Better on a scoring line, better on a checking line. Better at everything important. And not by a little bit.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Agreed

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

Lol, I didn't mean they wouldn't have to pay him, I just meant that I don't think teams would take his contract even if they don't have to give up assets. He's fine as a player, I don't dispute that and if he were making 1 mil we wouldn't be having these conversations but the contract is what it is and he's been outplayed by 12-13 guys. At this point his contract dictates his trade value and I just can't imagine a team wanting an almost 3 million $ player for 3 more seasons that can't get in the lineup on a very average team.

 

[BonkTastic]

Five Greening trades for expiring contracts, with teams that make sense (for both parties), that I'd be totally fine with:

1) Greening to Colorado for Daniel Briere, straight up
(Avs get a smaller cap hit & salary this year, and a player who might play better under Roy. Briere, while having no gas left in the tank, also is mis-cast in his current role on the Avs, and Greening is a better fit for them in that kind of "Botom-6 guy with speed" role. We get an expiring contract and a "good veteran voice" who can teach the kids some... stuff - you know, "veteran things" - and not be too upset about being scratched, and we obviously let him walk at the end of the year)

2) Greening to New Jersey for Damien Brunner
(same explanation as above, with the caveat that Brunner is slightly better than Briere, but not the leader-type. Brunner looks done with the Devils, needs a change of scenery, and maybe the Devils want to swap a bad offensive player with little else to his game for a bad offensive player who can jam it up a bit?)

3) Greening to San Jose for Tyler Kennedy
(I think the Sharks are sick of Kennedy, and maybe they're looking for a different guy to play the same role? I don't know, it could happen. Kennedy looks like a shell of his former self, but he'd be a pressbox champ here, so whatever. We get an expiring contract, and the Sharks get... things. Intangible things. )

4) Greening to Florida for Tomas Kopecky
(This gets Florida a bit younger, and Greening screams "Dale Tallon Kind Of Guy" to me. Kopecky looks done as an NHLer, and Greening can better fill the role they are asking Kopecky to play right now. Kopecky becomes the QB of our post-game burrito spread before unceremoniously fading into the KHL next year.)

5) Greening to Winnipeg for Jim Slater
(Greening is an obvious upgrade to crap-tastic Jim Slater, but not sure if Winnipeg would be willing to up the payroll. It definitely improves their putrid 4th line, possibly the worst 4th line in hockey. Slater can be immediately waived, for all I care... he might look good on Bingo's 3rd line).

 

[Vesa Awesaka]

Five Greening trades for expiring contracts, with teams that make sense (for both parties), that I'd be totally fine with:

1) Greening to Colorado for Daniel Briere, straight up
(Avs get a smaller cap hit & salary this year, and a player who might play better under Roy. Briere, while having no gas left in the tank, also is mis-cast in his current role on the Avs, and Greening is a better fit for them in that kind of "Botom-6 guy with speed" role. We get an expiring contract and a "good veteran voice" who can teach the kids some... stuff - you know, "veteran things" - and not be too upset about being scratched, and we obviously let him walk at the end of the year)

2) Greening to New Jersey for Damien Brunner
(same explanation as above, with the caveat that Brunner is slightly better than Briere, but not the leader-type. Brunner looks done with the Devils, needs a change of scenery, and maybe the Devils want to swap a bad offensive player with little else to his game for a bad offensive player who can jam it up a bit?)

3) Greening to San Jose for Tyler Kennedy
(I think the Sharks are sick of Kennedy, and maybe they're looking for a different guy to play the same role? I don't know, it could happen. Kennedy looks like a shell of his former self, but he'd be a pressbox champ here, so whatever. We get an expiring contract, and the Sharks get... things. Intangible things. )

4) Greening to Florida for Tomas Kopecky
(This gets Florida a bit younger, and Greening screams "Dale Tallon Kind Of Guy" to me. Kopecky looks done as an NHLer, and Greening can better fill the role they are asking Kopecky to play right now. Kopecky becomes the QB of our post-game burrito spread before unceremoniously fading into the KHL next year.)

5) Greening to Winnipeg for Jim Slater
(Greening is an obvious upgrade to crap-tastic Jim Slater, but not sure if Winnipeg would be willing to up the payroll. It definitely improves their putrid 4th line, possibly the worst 4th line in hockey. Slater can be immediately waived, for all I care... he might look good on Bingo's 3rd line).

Isnt slater good at faceoffs?

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

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.

That's precisely the problem. Michalek isn't good enough for a top 6 contending team and at the same time he isn't bottom 6 player caliber unless he's on a line with 2 strong gritty forwards.

Greening at least has a role and exceeds in it when he steps up. Greening laid a hit on Subban in playoffs which rattled him and made him a non-factor rest of the way. Greening was also one of our best players vs Pitts.

When was Michalek ever a factor? Aside from the occasional "nice goal, Milo! Oh man hopefully we see.... wait why did you just miss that golden chance which we know you're capable of scoring...?"

The difference between Milo and Greening is this:

Michalek will get top 6 minutes during crucial moments in a game where we need a goal and he'll **** it up like usual(i.e. NYR game 7 missed half empty net with 5 minutes left while we were trailing 2-1). While Greening would be on the bench and someone more likely to score will be on the ice.

However, I've reiterated that both players shouldn't/wouldn't be on this team in their respected roles on a playoff team unless Michalek playing on a 3rd line for a team like LA.

Greening with Zibanejad and Ryan looked way more effective than Michalek ever has on that line. Even though Greening missed the net for 2 feet out.

I really hope a miracle happens over night or something but i just hate the way Michalek plays.

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").

Exactly. The only reason I can see Murray keeping Milo is as a warm body until Puempel ready while at same time giving Milo chance to prove he still has what it takes to be top 6..... somehow.

 

[Hale The Villain]

RKL is on point in regards to Michalek.

Guy can't finish, can't pass, can't handle the puck and doesn't win ANY puck battles. He doesn't hit, isn't great on the forecheck and doesn't impact the game in any positive way other than scoring, which he doesn't do much of unless he's getting fed by Spezza all game.

Still can't believed we re-signed him for as much as we did for as long as we did. Now he's a 4M placeholder that's blocking us from acquiring an actual top 6 LW, or giving a young potential top 6 kid like Puempel/Prince a shot at making their mark at the NHL level.

Just have to hope we can get rid of him this off-season ala Washington with Erat and Tampa with Purcell.

 

[BonkTastic]

That's precisely the problem. Michalek isn't good enough for a top 6 contending team and at the same time he isn't bottom 6 player caliber unless he's on a line with 2 strong gritty forwards.

Greening at least has a role and exceeds in it when he steps up. Greening laid a hit on Subban in playoffs which rattled him and made him a non-factor rest of the way. Greening was also one of our best players vs Pitts.

When was Michalek ever a factor? Aside from the occasional "nice goal, Milo! Oh man hopefully we see.... wait why did you just miss that golden chance which we know you're capable of scoring...?"

The difference between Milo and Greening is this:

Michalek will get top 6 minutes during crucial moments in a game where we need a goal and he'll **** it up like usual(i.e. NYR game 7 missed half empty net with 5 minutes left while we were trailing 2-1). While Greening would be on the bench and someone more likely to score will be on the ice.

However, I've reiterated that both players shouldn't/wouldn't be on this team in their respected roles on a playoff team unless Michalek playing on a 3rd line for a team like LA.

Greening with Zibanejad and Ryan looked way more effective than Michalek ever has on that line. Even though Greening missed the net for 2 feet out.

I really hope a miracle happens over night or something but i just hate the way Michalek plays.



Exactly. The only reason I can see Murray keeping Milo is as a warm body until Puempel ready while at same time giving Milo chance to prove he still has what it takes to be top 6..... somehow.

OK, so from what I can tell, what you're saying is NOT that you'd rather have Greening over Michalek, it's that you'd rather have NEITHER of them. That's an entirely different argument.

Saying that you want to keep Greening over Michalek assumes that you want to actually play Greening on the roster somewhere (which means Greening gets added somewhere in the top-4 lines, and Michalek gets subtracted, and that's it), which seems kind of... what's the opposite of a good idea? What ever that is. That.

Even without Michalek (as in: a hypothetical trade in which we sent Milan somewhere and don't take a contract back in return), there's not a single player currently on the Sens that I'd sit for Greening, even with one less player on the active roster. He's the 14th forward, and to be honest, there are guys I'd play on the Bingo team ahead of him. If it weren't for his one-way contract, he'd likely be the 16th or 17th forward.

If we're making fantasy roster moves here, I find it FAR more palatable to just push Michalek down to a permanent spot on the 3rd line, and that's the solution. Michalek on the 3rd line at $4mil in actual salary seems like a FAR better use of our money than Greening on the press box for $3mil.

Your complaint seems to be more about coaching and player usage than it is about the players themselves, which I suppose should not come as a shock in retrospect.

 

[BonkTastic]

doesn't impact the game in any positive way other than scoring, which he doesn't do much of unless he's getting fed by Spezza all game.

While I can definitely get on board with the idea that we're not getting $4mil worth of play out of Michalek, I can't really do anything here but say "let's agree to disagree", and be done with it, because I find this to be patently false to the point of ridiculousness.

 

[Hale The Villain]

I'd love to hear what Michalek is doing to help this hockey team right now.

Wouldn't surprise me in the least if Greening could have made more of an offensive impact up to this point, given Michalek's ice time and opportunities to produce.

 

[BonkTastic]

I'd love to hear what Michalek is doing to help this hockey team right now.

Still a good possession player, still a good defensive player. I've thought he's been more snake-bitten than bad this year, actually. He certainly hasn't been good, let's not make any mistakes or confuse my position on Michalek - he's been underwhelming compared to expectations for sure, but he CERTAINLY hasn't been so bad that replacing him with Colin Greening is a viable alternative.

Wouldn't surprise me in the least if Greening could have made more of an offensive impact up to this point, given Michalek's ice time and opportunities to produce.

Once again, agree to disagree.

Like I said, I'm on board with the sentiment that Michalek has not delivered up to the expectations his contract would denote, but I can't see almost any scenario in which anyone would honestly say in hindsight that Colin Greening was in any way, shape or form an improvement.

I'm not here to defend Michalek... I mean, outside of the "Michalek is a better player than Colin Greening" thing which, I think we can all admit, is a ridiculously low milestone to set for a player as far as achievement is concerned.

I mean, you yourself said that Michalek is useless without Spezza, and your solution to that issue is to replace him with the one guy on the active roster who is even more useless without Spezza? That's like saying "this oil we're pouring on the fire isn't extinguishing it, but I bet this gasoline would put it out!"

 

[BonkTastic]

Isnt slater good at faceoffs?

To me, it seems as though it's the only thing he's good at, and possibly the only reason he's even getting an NHL paycheque at this point.

 

[bacon25]

Five Greening trades for expiring contracts, with teams that make sense (for both parties), that I'd be totally fine with:

1) Greening to Colorado for Daniel Briere, straight up
(Avs get a smaller cap hit & salary this year, and a player who might play better under Roy. Briere, while having no gas left in the tank, also is mis-cast in his current role on the Avs, and Greening is a better fit for them in that kind of "Botom-6 guy with speed" role. We get an expiring contract and a "good veteran voice" who can teach the kids some... stuff - you know, "veteran things" - and not be too upset about being scratched, and we obviously let him walk at the end of the year)

2) Greening to New Jersey for Damien Brunner
(same explanation as above, with the caveat that Brunner is slightly better than Briere, but not the leader-type. Brunner looks done with the Devils, needs a change of scenery, and maybe the Devils want to swap a bad offensive player with little else to his game for a bad offensive player who can jam it up a bit?)

3) Greening to San Jose for Tyler Kennedy
(I think the Sharks are sick of Kennedy, and maybe they're looking for a different guy to play the same role? I don't know, it could happen. Kennedy looks like a shell of his former self, but he'd be a pressbox champ here, so whatever. We get an expiring contract, and the Sharks get... things. Intangible things. )

4) Greening to Florida for Tomas Kopecky
(This gets Florida a bit younger, and Greening screams "Dale Tallon Kind Of Guy" to me. Kopecky looks done as an NHLer, and Greening can better fill the role they are asking Kopecky to play right now. Kopecky becomes the QB of our post-game burrito spread before unceremoniously fading into the KHL next year.)

5) Greening to Winnipeg for Jim Slater
(Greening is an obvious upgrade to crap-tastic Jim Slater, but not sure if Winnipeg would be willing to up the payroll. It definitely improves their putrid 4th line, possibly the worst 4th line in hockey. Slater can be immediately waived, for all I care... he might look good on Bingo's 3rd line).

I have always been a fan of Briere, and Brunner could still have some potential left in him. I don't know if Greening would be enough though.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Except Michalek is better at scoring, passing, PK, PP and ES. Better at everything but skating in a skills competition and getting hits in fantasy stats.

I think Greening has been decent when he gets a chance to play this year too. And I get that Michalek is not consistent at scoring and gas been disappointing since his all-star season. And I understand that many didn't want him resigned. I probably would not have resigned him.

All of that said... Michalek is a far, far better player then Greening. Just far better. Better on a scoring line, better on a checking line. Better at everything important. And not by a little bit.

But you kinda skipped over everything i said about how greening can be better for us (a team thats OKAY NOT REBUILDING but growing... he allows more players to get some more reps.) ANd i honestly dont think that the difference between michalek and greening is worth points in the standings.. havign michalek in there doesnt give us any more points than greening.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Exactly. The only reason I can see Murray keeping Milo is as a warm body until Puempel ready while at same time giving Milo chance to prove he still has what it takes to be top 6..... somehow.

yep but with michalek thats a 3 year wait.. with greening we can get puempel up this year, next , and after that..

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Five Greening trades for expiring contracts, with teams that make sense (for both parties), that I'd be totally fine with:

1) Greening to Colorado for Daniel Briere, straight up
(Avs get a smaller cap hit & salary this year, and a player who might play better under Roy. Briere, while having no gas left in the tank, also is mis-cast in his current role on the Avs, and Greening is a better fit for them in that kind of "Botom-6 guy with speed" role. We get an expiring contract and a "good veteran voice" who can teach the kids some... stuff - you know, "veteran things" - and not be too upset about being scratched, and we obviously let him walk at the end of the year)

2) Greening to New Jersey for Damien Brunner
(same explanation as above, with the caveat that Brunner is slightly better than Briere, but not the leader-type. Brunner looks done with the Devils, needs a change of scenery, and maybe the Devils want to swap a bad offensive player with little else to his game for a bad offensive player who can jam it up a bit?)

3) Greening to San Jose for Tyler Kennedy
(I think the Sharks are sick of Kennedy, and maybe they're looking for a different guy to play the same role? I don't know, it could happen. Kennedy looks like a shell of his former self, but he'd be a pressbox champ here, so whatever. We get an expiring contract, and the Sharks get... things. Intangible things. )

4) Greening to Florida for Tomas Kopecky
(This gets Florida a bit younger, and Greening screams "Dale Tallon Kind Of Guy" to me. Kopecky looks done as an NHLer, and Greening can better fill the role they are asking Kopecky to play right now. Kopecky becomes the QB of our post-game burrito spread before unceremoniously fading into the KHL next year.)

5) Greening to Winnipeg for Jim Slater
(Greening is an obvious upgrade to crap-tastic Jim Slater, but not sure if Winnipeg would be willing to up the payroll. It definitely improves their putrid 4th line, possibly the worst 4th line in hockey. Slater can be immediately waived, for all I care... he might look good on Bingo's 3rd line).

Tyler kennedy is a good player... From what i have heard sharks fans like him... hes smart not gonan wow anyone.. i think hes condra with a tad more upside.

 

[TheNewEra]

ok montreal traded bourque for an expiring contract....why cant we trade greening again?

 

[Skid]

ok montreal traded bourque for an expiring contract....why cant we trade greening again?

Bourque is better than greening. That's why

 

[HavlatMach9]

ok montreal traded bourque for an expiring contract....why cant we trade greening again?

what's the difference between greening and bourque in the ducks management eyes?

 

[TheNewEra]

Bourque is better than greening. That's why

this season i would argue that he is barely better, bourque has 2 points this season and was given consistent top 6 minutes in montreal

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

OK, so from what I can tell, what you're saying is NOT that you'd rather have Greening over Michalek, it's that you'd rather have NEITHER of them. That's an entirely different argument.

Saying that you want to keep Greening over Michalek assumes that you want to actually play Greening on the roster somewhere (which means Greening gets added somewhere in the top-4 lines, and Michalek gets subtracted, and that's it), which seems kind of... what's the opposite of a good idea? What ever that is. That.

Even without Michalek (as in: a hypothetical trade in which we sent Milan somewhere and don't take a contract back in return), there's not a single player currently on the Sens that I'd sit for Greening, even with one less player on the active roster. He's the 14th forward, and to be honest, there are guys I'd play on the Bingo team ahead of him. If it weren't for his one-way contract, he'd likely be the 16th or 17th forward.

If we're making fantasy roster moves here, I find it FAR more palatable to just push Michalek down to a permanent spot on the 3rd line, and that's the solution. Michalek on the 3rd line at $4mil in actual salary seems like a FAR better use of our money than Greening on the press box for $3mil.

Your complaint seems to be more about coaching and player usage than it is about the players themselves, which I suppose should not come as a shock in retrospect.

Well you sorta got it.

1) I'd prefer neither

2) I hate how much Michalek is being used

3) I'd prefer Greening in this lineup over Michalek if he's gonna be used a lot and we gotta keep one.

 

[BonkTastic]

Tyler kennedy is a good player... From what i have heard sharks fans like him.

We must be talking to different Sharks fans, then.

 

[Quo]

what's the difference between greening and bourque in the ducks management eyes?

Extra year for Greening I guess would be one thing in Bourque's favour.

 

[The Waffler]

FWIW (which is nothing) I'm with BonkT on this one.

Greening reminds me of a Chris Neil-Lite these days...and I mean the Chris Neil once he stopped fighting. We already have a Chris Neil-lite in Chris Neil, so I don't see why we need two. Hell, I don't see how we need one.

That's my only argument.

 

[Six Assets]

I hate kennedy

 

[Real Smart Sens Fan]

I'd love to hear what Michalek is doing to help this hockey team right now.

Wouldn't surprise me in the least if Greening could have made more of an offensive impact up to this point, given Michalek's ice time and opportunities to produce.

Michalek is one of our best forecheckers, for one.