Proposal: 2016-17 Trade Rumours and Proposals Thread Part X
- Thread starter DrunkUncleDenis
- Start date
- Status
BK201
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 10,815
- 308
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
- Jun 10, 2011
- 34,884
- 9,305
You have to take swings on the right players.
Did anyone stop to ask why teams like Edmonton, Colorado and St Louis have underachieved for years? Do you really want to give up premium assets for players on underachieving teams? Put all the stats and fancy draft swoon talk aside (speaking mostly about Landeskog here as the premier draft baby at the time), and ask why these core guys aren't lifting their teams out of the muck?
I like Landeskog a lot and think he'd be perfect for our team. But I'm sure there are other players around the league we could target that are just as valuable, if not more so.
Why isn't my karlson lifted us out of mediocrity? Would teams really want him?
I think that element is overstated. It's not as if they're poison. They're still really good hockey players.
Also. Human. It's not like they only know how to lose. It's ridiculous to even think about imagine applying that thinking to yourself.
Hall just got traded. Guess what. Was good. Is still good. And will continue to be good.
Well Colorado's depth is atrocious and they suck defensively, mainly because their group of d-men aren't very good. They haven't received very good goaltending this year, either. They also lost two of their best players [O'Reilly and Statsny] for very little immediate return. And from what I've heard, their coaching has been questionable. A guy like Landeskog obviously hasn't had a great year and he deserves some of the blame, but the issues in Colorado go far beyond their star players.
There are plenty of examples of players coming from bad situations and playing well, and helping their new teams achieve great success. Kessel is the most obvious one. Philly basically got tired of Richards and Carter, with Carter in particular having a bad playoff resume, but look what he became in LA. I also like to think Phaneuf has had a positive influence on our team despite coming from a terrible situation. In a lot of situations, a change of scenery is good for the players, and also not having to be 'the guy' can help.
So absolutely, finding the right players is key. But being on a bad or underachieving team shouldn't rule out players like Duchene and Landeskog.
Wallet Inspector
Registered User
- Jan 19, 2013
- 5,761
- 5,010
I honestly think that the Avs' coaching and bad defense(ie not being able to get the puck out of the defensive zone) is what is causing their forwards to underperform.
I think Duchene would do really well here.
I think Duchene would do really well here.
Cannot be stated enough times: Duchene is a 2 year rental and that needs to factor in his valuation.
We simply don't have the money to re-sign both Duchene and Turris to the 7M deals they will ask for when their contracts are up, which means we'll be forced to let one of them leave via free agency when their contracts are up (horrible asset management). Hell I'm not even sure we can afford to re-sign Turris and Brassard as it is. Even if we can, do we want to with Brown and White coming through the pipeline? Not to mention other young centers like Pageau, Lazar, Paul and Chlapik are likely in the organization's long-term plans.
Sacrificing our future for Duchene only makes sense if we're going to win a cup when he's here. As it stands right now that's a pipe dream. In order to get Duchene we'll have to strip some good pieces off the roster (Ceci/Chabot on D + a good forward) and will have 6M in cap space taken away that can't be used to better the roster in any other ways. Our defense will be weakened, likely to the point where it is no longer a strength, and our goaltending will still be questionable. It's a long-shot acquisition that in all likelihood would backfire tremendously.
Let's be honest guys, trading Zibanejad for Brassard pretty much ended all hope of acquiring a guy like Duchene. We already traded a great young player and a good pick for what was thought to be an upgrade at center. As much as I would like Duchene in a Sens uniform, we simply don't have the cap space or the expendable assets to get a deal done here.
We simply don't have the money to re-sign both Duchene and Turris to the 7M deals they will ask for when their contracts are up, which means we'll be forced to let one of them leave via free agency when their contracts are up (horrible asset management). Hell I'm not even sure we can afford to re-sign Turris and Brassard as it is. Even if we can, do we want to with Brown and White coming through the pipeline? Not to mention other young centers like Pageau, Lazar, Paul and Chlapik are likely in the organization's long-term plans.
Sacrificing our future for Duchene only makes sense if we're going to win a cup when he's here. As it stands right now that's a pipe dream. In order to get Duchene we'll have to strip some good pieces off the roster (Ceci/Chabot on D + a good forward) and will have 6M in cap space taken away that can't be used to better the roster in any other ways. Our defense will be weakened, likely to the point where it is no longer a strength, and our goaltending will still be questionable. It's a long-shot acquisition that in all likelihood would backfire tremendously.
Let's be honest guys, trading Zibanejad for Brassard pretty much ended all hope of acquiring a guy like Duchene. We already traded a great young player and a good pick for what was thought to be an upgrade at center. As much as I would like Duchene in a Sens uniform, we simply don't have the cap space or the expendable assets to get a deal done here.
I wouldn't mind Landeskog if the price was right, but by all accounts Colorado is asking for a huge package for him. Not worth the price for a ~55 point winger despite all his intangibles, physical, and defensive play.
Nobody is saying we shouldn't make a deal for a guy who we think will put us over the top. It's about balancing short and long term success.
Duchene as a marginal upgrade over Turris is not worth the huge hit to our future, especially given what we would likely give up (Chabot, 1st, roster player). Guys on their ELCs are huge for us given our budget, and we also don't have a second in the next two drafts which compounds the issue.
ReginKarlssonLehner
Let's Win It All
With Ceci at least we still got Chabot coming up. We do we got coming up to replace Dzingel? Unless Duchene plays wing for us?
Duchene-Brassard-Stone
Smith-Turris-Ryan
Hoffman-Pageau-Pyatt
?
aragorn
Do The Right Thing
- Aug 8, 2004
- 28,570
- 9,083
I doubt that is enough & then we need to replace Ceci a right shot defencemen & we don't have an NHL ready right shot defenceman in the organization to replace him. And what if LV takes Wideman than Ottawa would lose two right shot defencemen.
But who does he replace or whose job does he take in the top 6? If he plays centre then Pageau is forced down to the 4th line, if he plays LW then it's most likely that Dzingel is forced down to the 4th line or over to 3rd line RW which pushes Pyatt down to the 4th. Who gets scratched? Probably Lazar, I wonder how that effects his development?
Centres: Duschene 1, Turris 2, Brassard 3, Pageau 4, Lazar 5, Kelly 6
LW - Duschene 1, Hoffman 2, Smith 3, Dzingel 4, Pyatt 5,
RW - Stone 1, Ryan 2, Lazar 3, Neil 4
I agree.
Vesa Awesaka
#KeepTheSenate
- Jul 4, 2013
- 18,236
- 25
Avs coaching imo in the past has also inflated landeskogs and duchene offensive numbers too
Duchene - Turris - Stone
Hoffman - Brassard - Ryan
Smith - Pageau - Dzingle
Pyatt - Kelly - Lazar
Acqurirng a top six improves the depth tremendously
Hoffman - Brassard - Ryan
Smith - Pageau - Dzingle
Pyatt - Kelly - Lazar
Acqurirng a top six improves the depth tremendously
Tuna99
Registered User
- Sep 26, 2009
- 14,892
- 6,944
You look at the cap and you see what an extra 2-3 million this season alone could do at free agency. For a team like ottawa looking at the trade landscape, there might be a ton of good players available at the deadline for cheap, because every team will be trying to get rid of guys for mid round picks (Lazar, Wideman, Methot in our case) Ottawa if they are willing to spend draft assets could add a couple of good players and really build out the bottom 6 easily, and maybe for cheap. The abundance of exposed players on the fringe but still good players will be huge, and it will also decrease the value of the standard group that you'd expect to be deadline players - Iginla, Doan, Shattenkirk - might be an interesting time to fill out the lineup and let's see where we actually stand in the NHL playoffs.
Guys likes Eaves, Kulikov, Stafford, J. Nolan are all available and could probably be had for 3-7th round draft picks or mid grade prospects.
Guys likes Eaves, Kulikov, Stafford, J. Nolan are all available and could probably be had for 3-7th round draft picks or mid grade prospects.
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
- Jun 10, 2011
- 34,884
- 9,305
On paper, both Edmonton and Colorado should've been ahead of Ottawa for the last 3-4 years. But, they weren't. The underachieved compared to the talent on their roster. That's my point. Ottawa, meanwhile, is playing at or above expectations.
You have to ask yourself, why is the core group on a team like Colorado constantly underachieving? Multiple GMs, multiple coaches...same results. Maybe, when you look beyond the stats, some of these kids aren't quite the star material people think they are, and maybe, just maybe, they won't be The Piece to put a team like Ottawa over the top.
......so why pay/offer a kings ransom for them?
Colorado and Edmonton defense is atrocious... Oilers finally started to fix theirs
Bottom six too on both those franchises absolute garbage.
You can't win in this league if you only have top six forwards
Bottom six too on both those franchises absolute garbage.
You can't win in this league if you only have top six forwards
Switch Karlsson with Barrie or Sekera and this team looks a lot like Edmonton or Colorado
Edmonton is lucky they got McDavid or they'd still be a disaster
Edmonton is lucky they got McDavid or they'd still be a disaster
Zorf
Apparently I'm entitled?
- Jan 4, 2008
- 4,946
- 1,566
This is such garbage.
First. Alfredsson AGREED to that contract that paid him less in the final years but that came with the bonus of it being front loaded so he got paid more in the early years. This whole argument that he was owed something drives me nuts because he agreed to the damn contract.
Second, all Murray did was make an opening offer. That's negotiating. Was it a bad decision to try to save $500K on the franchise player? Maybe, but going into a negotiation and offering up exactly what the other person wants is stupid. You always try to get the best deal for both parties. Aflie and his agent not responding at all to the Sens is way too often overlooked. The whole situation was handled poorly by both sides.
Yeah agreed. But that blame isn't on rnh or hall for "underachieving". And they "only underachieve everywhere else the go".
Yeah seeeeeriously. He agreed to that last season because he himself admitted he thought he was going to retire and not even play it. Then he did and said "oh yeah I want x amount of dollars because I played for almost nothing in my final year of the deal" wonder if he had some extra bills to pay.
That situation is more on him and his agent than on Murray and melnyk. And I think I've made it clear I disagree with a lot of what Murray did here. But I can't blame him for the Alfie situation. Alfie through a hissy fit. That's it. Wasn't owed jack.
- Status
