6 points back of 8th on trade deadline day ( we have some games in hand as well)
Speculation: 2019-20 Trade thread (NOT Tank Talk)
- Thread starter Ducks DVM
- Start date
- Status
bsu
"I have no idea what I am doing" -Pat VerBleak
- Sep 27, 2017
- 28,539
- 29,291
I don't care about win loss column at all this season, all I care about is development.
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 23,223
- 16,867
mightyquack
eggplant and jade or bust
- Apr 28, 2010
- 26,450
- 5,226
Use the ignore function instead of having dumb arguments in every thread.
Use the ignore function instead of having dumb arguments in every thread.
Use the ignore function instead of having dumb arguments in every thread.
Use the ignore function instead of having dumb arguments in every thread.
Use the ignore function instead of having dumb arguments in every thread.
Use the ignore function instead of having dumb arguments in every thread.
Use the ignore function instead of having dumb arguments in every thread.
Use the ignore function instead of having dumb arguments in every thread.
Use the ignore function instead of having dumb arguments in every thread.
I think we would want a first. According to ryan Whitney that was too rich for you guys just yet.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
It would have to be a first or perhaps an equivalent prospect such as Studnicka. The Ducks have a large amount of dead money on the books already with the Perry buyout and uninsured portion of Kesler's deal. There's just no way I can see Murray being able to sell ownership on taking more unless he can convince them that the return is well worth it.
neelynugs
Registered User
- Feb 27, 2002
- 35,476
- 10,027
i doubt sweeney would move studnicka. anyone else could probably be had. good thing about
backes from a $ standpoint is it's mostly a cap hit versus actual money. his salary is only $1M
this year, and $4M next year ($3M + 1M bonus on july 1). probably a lost cause, i assume they are
just gonna ride this out til the deal ends. sweeney hates giving up assets.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
Perhaps the trade could be made into more of a hockey trade, with the Bruins "overpaying" for one (or more) of the Ducks rentals, in order to also shed Backes. I think both Grant and Deslauriers could help beef up your bottom six for example.
Or maybe the Bruins decide they are willing to go far beyond other offers for someone like Kase or Rakell if it means they can also shed Backes.
Either way, I'd say a 1st seems like fair value heading the Ducks way for the inclusion of Backes.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 40,675
- 36,351
I think it makes sense... and if kase was available....maybe something around... i dont think were really openly shopping him tho.
Kase
For
Backes
1st
Prospect or 2 depending on quality
Kinda fixs 2 of bostons needs, get rid of backes and add an offensive punch.
neelynugs
Registered User
- Feb 27, 2002
- 35,476
- 10,027
i was thinking the same, it makes sense for b's to overpay to get rid of backes if they
are getting something of need in return. we usually don't see that type of creativity
in actual trades though, so probably unlikely. but love the way you guys are thinking.
personally i'd do it in a heartbeat - the b's won't have many more kicks at the can
with the aging core. i'd even take eaves and any other contracts that we could LTIR
or bury in the minors.
Seems to me that if we're sending Kase back there, we need a roster player in return, like Clifton. It should cost them a 1st just to unload Backes; that would mean you're trading Kase for a prospect or 2? No thanks.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 40,675
- 36,351
I mean it could be a roster player or a 2nd, or whatever. And really it depends on the prospects bruins have a few prospects that would be dressed for us.
Idk that kase is on the table.... so i didnt get too in depth.
Kases value to me right now is prob a 2nd + prospect(b range).... but i think we could try and play it out and see if his value can rise.
Personally, I think Sweeney is gambling that Backes will retire. He doesn’t want to pay what other GMs will want to take on the contract; so send him down to Providence. If he doesn’t report, he can terminate the contract; if he goes, then he gets about $1M of cap relief he can fill with someone on an ELC. And if he retires, then Sweeney gets it all. Still some time to see what Backes decides to do.
Moving kase only makes sense if we can upgrade the d-core. As a thrown in on anything else for picks or whatever would be a waste.
Randy Butternubs
Registered User
Hello, me again (a Pens fan). I don't think this would be "tank" discussion, but if it is please move it to that thread.
Pens GM Jim Rutherford made it sound like he's will to trade their 1st rounder this season to get a top 6 forward. I believe I previously asked about the availability of Rakell and the answer was "it depends". Would either of Silfverberg or Kase (in addition to Rakell) be available for the Penguins 1st rounder in addition to, say, Calen Addison (RHD prospect), and extras?
Pens GM Jim Rutherford made it sound like he's will to trade their 1st rounder this season to get a top 6 forward. I believe I previously asked about the availability of Rakell and the answer was "it depends". Would either of Silfverberg or Kase (in addition to Rakell) be available for the Penguins 1st rounder in addition to, say, Calen Addison (RHD prospect), and extras?
- Sep 21, 2018
- 3,753
- 5,899
Silfverberg most likely won't be moved. Management really likes him and he has a modified NTC.
Kase was previously rumored in a trade to Carolina for Faulk, so I could see him being moved, but probably in more of a "hockey deal" instead of for prospects/picks. That said, I would imagine the Ducks would be very interested in Addison and a Penguins 1st rounder. Just not sure both would be enough for Rakell and Kase.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
The price you've suggested (Addison +1st + "extras") might be in the right ballpark for Rakell, but are you asking if we'd include Silfverberg or Kase with Rakell? That would be an extremely wishful proposal.
Other than Getzlaf with his NMC, and the top ELC guys, Silfverberg has to be the least likely forward to be moved. It's imperative to keep some veteran insulation at the top of the lineup, regardless of the direction we're taking. With so many young pieces we need guys who can play against other teams top lines.
It's hard to exactly pinpoint Kase's value, everyone knows he has the upside to be much better than he's shown this season. It may not make sense to move him right now unless the trade brings back a piece that fills a need. B prospects and depth pieces are from being more interesting than what Kase can bring moving forward.
Randy Butternubs
Registered User
Thanks both of you.
To clarify, I meant only one of Rakell, Silfverberg, or Kase being traded to the Pens.
To clarify, I meant only one of Rakell, Silfverberg, or Kase being traded to the Pens.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 40,675
- 36,351
Id say as far as availability goes
Kase >> Rakell > Silf
but there is prob a pretty decent size cap between kase and rakell, in terms of availability.
I do think Kase will have a lot of calls from teams like the penguins, bruins, oilers, islanders and avalanche
Of course Kase has to be more "available" than the other two, but the demand for him is less since he's injury prone. I do think we should trade silf before rakell due to age.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 40,675
- 36,351
Id somewhat disagree … I think their will be a lot of people asking about kase… but they may be trying to buy a bit lower than wed like, due to the injuries.
Sean Garrity
Quack Quack Quack!
I agree with this. I think you hit the nail on the head in terms of an “argument” that an opposing GM would make. I can’t imagine Kase holds enough value to make any trade worth of for the Ducks.
anezthes
Registered User
- Mar 20, 2014
- 4,482
- 2,548
Kase isn't worth that package, Rakell is worth significantly more (think quality > quantity), Silfver isn't moving. IMO, YMMV.
- Status
