Proposal: 2016 Trade Rumours and Proposals Thread Part VI

[YouGotAStuGoing]

If Detroit finally succumbs to the inevitable and decides to rebuild, perhaps the goaltender to target is Mrazek? He's 24 and still growing - took a nice step last year. If Detroit decides it's time to pull the plug he'd be a great acquisition.

2017 1st + White + Hogberg (assuming Dorion gets him signed and he comes to NA)?

If they do decide to rebuild, why would they trade a good young goalie who's still growing? Seems like the exact opposite thing from what they should do.

 

[Tuna99]

I would trade our first for Bishop depending on where we are at the deadline (along with a negotiated contract extension obviously)

Why not just sign Bishop this summer? Flip Andy to a team that needs solid goaltending for a season - like a Winnipeg or Edmonton.

 

[Micklebot]

I could totally see us doing Anderson for Fleury in the offseason.

There might be some other shenanigans involved in the trade, most likely us finding a way to get Pittsburgh to eat some of his salary, but it's totally something I'd see us doing. Fleury is exactly the kind of placeholder veteran goalie we would want to bridge us to Driedger/Hogberg - young enough that he's still got a lot left in the tank, but old enough that by the time one of our kids are hypothetically ready that it won't seem ridiculous for us to make the switch.

Yeah, I can see it. Not saying it's the best move we could make, but if we could convince Pittsburgh to eat a mil /mil and a half, it's absolutely a trade I could see this org making.

I we got Fleury for Anderson and Pit held on to 1.5 mil per, I'd be pretty happy. Not that I'm a huge Fleury fan, but he'd be a pretty good placeholder as you put it.

That said, the team might think Hammond is an adequate placeholder, so we might just let Anderson finish out his contract, then run with Hammond backed up by one of Dreidger/Hogberg/O'Connor.

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

If Detroit finally succumbs to the inevitable and decides to rebuild, perhaps the goaltender to target is Mrazek? He's 24 and still growing - took a nice step last year. If Detroit decides it's time to pull the plug he'd be a great acquisition.

2017 1st + White + Hogberg (assuming Dorion gets him signed and he comes to NA)?

I think that's an overpayment for Mrazek.

 

[BonkTastic]

If Detroit finally succumbs to the inevitable and decides to rebuild, perhaps the goaltender to target is Mrazek? He's 24 and still growing - took a nice step last year. If Detroit decides it's time to pull the plug he'd be a great acquisition.

2017 1st + White + Hogberg (assuming Dorion gets him signed and he comes to NA)?

Oh my god, no.

Mrazek isn't worth anything close to that. He's proven to be nothing but wildly inconsistent - great when he's on, and a sieve when he's not. I'm not willing to pay a huge premium like that for a guy who isn't a sure thing.

 

[TheNewEra]

A first plus a middle level spec is the most I do for mrazek for the reasons stated above, he has upside but should not return more than what Schneider got. In this scenario I'm assuming we are a playoff team and have a middle to late first

 

[bert]

If they do decide to rebuild, why would they trade a good young goalie who's still growing? Seems like the exact opposite thing from what they should do.

Yeah exactly... He is one of the few players they would probably hang on to along with Larkin.

 

[Blotto71]

I agree that it is an over payment, but jeepers! This is a tough board - just as likely to get flamed for offering too much as you are for too little!

To Mrazek's inconsistency, Detroit as a whole hasn't been terribly consistent (and so the inevitable rebuild, I think). Maybe he'd perform well in the system Boucher and co. are building?

As for Detroit not moving him because he's young, that was the purpose behind Hogberg being included - he could play behind Jimmy Howard who has this year and two more on his current deal (and let's be honest, he's unlikely to go anywhere - Vegas included).

Would 2017 1st + Hogberg be more in line with Mrazek's value? I think there's still another "+" given his age and the room he still has to improve (but I'm neither a scout nor a goalie expert).

 

[Beville]

would absolutely not trust this team with Hammond as #1 for any period of time.

Get Flower in, it shores up the keeping for a few years, let's any of the 3 develop really well and then they can come in and Flower settles into that back up role.

 

[Micklebot]

would absolutely not trust this team with Hammond as #1 for any period of time.

Get Flower in, it shores up the keeping for a few years, let's any of the 3 develop really well and then they can come in and Flower settles into that back up role.

I feel comfortable that Hammond could come in around league average in sv% if given the reins (910-915 range). That's certainly not ideal, but it costs us zero in terms of assets, gives us the opportunity to go after whatever UFA goalie is searching for work at the time, and opens up some budget room should he or one of the prospects surprise and be a goalie of the future.

I mean, ideally, I'd rather have a top 10 goalie in our ranks, but we aren't getting that with Fleury.

 

[Zorf]

Why overpay for Mrazek when Detroit would likely overpay for us to take Howard off their hands?

Howard isn't ideal by any stretch, and Detroit would probably have to retain salary for the Sens to be ok with the deal, but he'd cost almost no assets to acquire.

Plus, I think Howard is better than Hammond over the course of a season.

It could be something like what Detroit did to unload Datsyuk. Howard (salary retained) + asset (pick or prospect) for a crappier pick or prospect

thoughts?

edit: I assume the Sens would want them to retain salary, which would make the pick/prospect worse than what we would get if there was no salary retained...but...#budget

 

[TheNewEra]

Why overpay for Mrazek when Detroit would likely overpay for us to take Howard off their hands?

Howard isn't ideal by any stretch, and Detroit would probably have to retain salary for the Sens to be ok with the deal, but he'd cost almost no assets to acquire.

Plus, I think Howard is better than Hammond over the course of a season.

It could be something like what Detroit did to unload Datsyuk. Howard (salary retained) + asset (pick or prospect) for a crappier pick or prospect

thoughts?

edit: I assume the Sens would want them to retain salary, which would make the pick/prospect worse than what we would get if there was no salary retained...but...#budget

really depends on how much detroit is retaining, plus some of the young guys i wanted off the wings got claimed so i dont know.

 

[Neiler]

If you guys want a goalie for the future Columbus might be the place to go.

They've got Bob for a few years yet at 7.5M (he's going nowhere obviously), they've got Korpisalo in the minors who I believe may be their hope for after Bob, they've got Forsberg who is showing starter potential, and they have Dansk playing overseas who may or may not become something.

 

[Qward]

Mrazek is not going anywhere.
He is their future #1.

 

[SenatorsLegionary]

I could totally see us doing Anderson for Fleury in the offseason.

There might be some other shenanigans involved in the trade, most likely us finding a way to get Pittsburgh to eat some of his salary, but it's totally something I'd see us doing. Fleury is exactly the kind of placeholder veteran goalie we would want to bridge us to Driedger/Hogberg - young enough that he's still got a lot left in the tank, but old enough that by the time one of our kids are hypothetically ready that it won't seem ridiculous for us to make the switch.

Yeah, I can see it. Not saying it's the best move we could make, but if we could convince Pittsburgh to eat a mil /mil and a half, it's absolutely a trade I could see this org making.

I've seen you mention Driedger and Hogberg a few times now, what happened to Matt O'Connor? I have not been following his development much but I was under the impression that he was next in line...is there a reason you left him out?

Has he been leap-froged by both Driedger and Hogberg on the organizational depth chart in your eyes?

 

[Sens]

I'd try to get Janne Juvonen from the Preds for pennies.
I don't think the Sens should be paying premium for a goalie

 

[BonkTastic]

I've seen you mention Driedger and Hogberg a few times now, what happened to Matt O'Connor? I have not been following his development much but I was under the impression that he was next in line...is there a reason you left him out?

Has he been leap-froged by both Driedger and Hogberg on the organizational depth chart in your eyes?

Eh, my comments can be broadly interpreted as "Driedger/Hogberg/OConnor", I suppose... but IMO he's been leapfrogged by Driedger and Hogberg, yes.

 

[SenatorsLegionary]

Eh, my comments can be broadly interpreted as "Driedger/Hogberg/OConnor", I suppose... but IMO he's been leapfrogged by Driedger and Hogberg, yes.

Damn, that's pretty crazy considering management went out of their way to trade Lehner to open the door for O'Connor just over a year ago. I mean, it's still early and goalies can be tough to project, but I hold your opinion in pretty high regard and if it ends up being the case that O'Connor is surpassed by Driedger and Hogberg in the long-run, it's amazing how the the goaltending picture has changed after just one year.

Granted, we were able to get White out of this whole thing who looks like he will be a key piece, and Lehner may not be the stud goalie that we all thought he would be, however the rationale that motivated trading Lehner to bring in O'Connor seems really short-sighted when I look at it now. At the moment, it doesn't look like the moves will hurt us much, but if things played out a little differently it could've been a lot worse.

 

[TrueGrit]

Eh, my comments can be broadly interpreted as "Driedger/Hogberg/OConnor", I suppose... but IMO he's been leapfrogged by Driedger and Hogberg, yes.

Agreed, Hogberg looks the most promising, and I've been pleasantly surprised with Driedger's development. Hopefully O'Connor adjusts this year, but he is the oldest of the 3.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Damn, that's pretty crazy considering management went out of their way to trade Lehner to open the door for O'Connor just over a year ago. I mean, it's still early and goalies can be tough to project, but I hold your opinion in pretty high regard and if it ends up being the case that O'Connor is surpassed by Driedger and Hogberg in the long-run, it's amazing how the the goaltending picture has changed after just one year.

Granted, we were able to get White out of this whole thing who looks like he will be a key piece, and Lehner may not be the stud goalie that we all thought he would be, however the rationale that motivated trading Lehner to bring in O'Connor seems really short-sighted when I look at it now. At the moment, it doesn't look like the moves will hurt us much, but if things played out a little differently it could've been a lot worse.

I don't think trading Lehner was strictly because they brought in O'Connor. That was just one benefit of cutting bait on Lehner.

Hammond proved he could play in the NHL and as a UFA had leverage to command a 1 way deal, Ottawa was still confident in Anderson, and Lehner wasn't ready to start consistently on a team with playoff aspirations but also wasn't going to develop sitting on the bench behind Anderson. O'Connor was the cherry on top, but I don't think he was the reason they traded Lehner. It was a combination of different factors all coming together at the same time.

Driedger has leapfrogged O'Connor, but they both are waiver exempt for another two seasons so there's lots of time for O'Connor to improve. Sens fired their previous goalie coach. I'd give O'Connor another year in the AHL under a new goalie coach before completely writing him off.

 

[scheps]

Does methot have a no move or no trade clause?

 

[Micklebot]

I don't think trading Lehner was strictly because they brought in O'Connor. That was just one benefit of cutting bait on Lehner.

Hammond proved he could play in the NHL and as a UFA had leverage to command a 1 way deal, Ottawa was still confident in Anderson, and Lehner wasn't ready to start consistently on a team with playoff aspirations but also wasn't going to develop sitting on the bench behind Anderson. O'Connor was the cherry on top, but I don't think he was the reason they traded Lehner. It was a combination of different factors all coming together at the same time.

Driedger has leapfrogged O'Connor, but they both are waiver exempt for another two seasons so there's lots of time for O'Connor to improve. Sens fired their previous goalie coach. I'd give O'Connor another year in the AHL under a new goalie coach before completely writing him off.

Agreed. Lehner wasn't so much traded to make room for O'Conner, but rather O'Conner gave the team additional safety net needed to be willing to move on from Lehner. Having 3 prospects with NHL starter potential in the system is a great situation, and having all three look like they could be ready around the time Andy's contract ends is even better.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Does methot have a no move or no trade clause?

Doesn't have a NMC.

Has a Modified NTC (player submits list of 10 teams to which he cannot be traded)

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

would absolutely not trust this team with Hammond as #1 for any period of time.

Get Flower in, it shores up the keeping for a few years, let's any of the 3 develop really well and then they can come in and Flower settles into that back up role.

I feel comfortable that Hammond could come in around league average in sv% if given the reins (910-915 range). That's certainly not ideal, but it costs us zero in terms of assets, gives us the opportunity to go after whatever UFA goalie is searching for work at the time, and opens up some budget room should he or one of the prospects surprise and be a goalie of the future.

I mean, ideally, I'd rather have a top 10 goalie in our ranks, but we aren't getting that with Fleury.

Agreed. I actually believe in Hammond to do an average job at least.

 

[ekarlsson65]

Agreed. I actually believe in Hammond to do an average job at least.

Except for tonight, Holy.

Real talk though, whoever said Ceci was good just cancel your cable subscription now