GDT: 2022 Free Agent Frenzy - July 13 [11 AM CT]

[starsfan86]

I don't think it's likely either (the $9 million), but I also like to go high with at least 1 guy just to be conservative. I don't think both Oettinger and Robertson will total $13 million ... that just feels like a safe high bar.

I'm shocked the money worked which is why for fun I posted it.

That’s true. How do you get Burns at 4 million if you can only retain 25%?

 

[LT]

That’s true. How do you get Burns at 4 million if you can only retain 25%?

Another team retains the other 25% (ARZ or BUF).

It's technically possible to get him down to 2M, but that cost would likely be astronomical. I can only recall that happening for TDL acquisitions where the actual cap and money is considerably smaller.

 

[starsfan86]

Another team retains the other 25% (ARZ or BUF).

It's technically possible to get him down to 2M, but that cost would likely be astronomical. I can only recall that happening for TDL acquisitions where the actual cap and money is considerably smaller.

Oh ok that makes sense.

 

[BG44]

I can't see Nill running 5 guys with <100 career NHL games in the bottom 7. Realistically I feel like it's Burns or Malkin, with Burns being much more likely.

That's a good wood you rather .... Jim Nill is your GM this year so you must sign or trade for 1 geriatric NHLer. If I was forced to add a 35+ plus but I had free reign on the other roster spots I'd take Malkin over Burns ....

Robertson-Hintz-Bourque
Peterson-Malkin-Seguin
Olofsson-Johnston-Pavelski
Benn-Dellandrea-Glendening

Olofsson I think is going to surprise people this year. Dallas has had so much success with Swedes immediately transitioning to the NHL, and I could see him proving capable of being a solid Middle 6 option immediately. Plus he's not a traditional rookie. He's older and more experienced. He looked even better than Janmark or Peterson in their final year in the SHL. He's going to be an interesting signing I think. I like the idea of Johnston getting mentored by Pavelski but having a guy like Olofsson instead of Benn as well.

I then go sign Kulak as a free agent instead of trading for Burns.

 

[Satan]

I like Weegar but I wonder about the cost to acquire him + cost to sign him to a new contract would be.

I do think he offers a lot more stability on the blueline than say JK3 would've offered... but it's something to ponder over

 

[BG44]

I like Weegar but I wonder about the cost to acquire him + cost to sign him to a new contract would be.

I do think he offers a lot more stability on the blueline than say JK3 would've offered... but it's something to ponder over

That one would definitely feel like you're getting into high picks and/or prospects I'd imagine. I'd be pretty surprised honestly if you'd come out of that trade with all of Johnston, Stankoven, Bourque, and Harley. I imagine at least 1 would be a casualty. Harley is the obvious choice, but I think you actually need him down the lineup right now. Subbing Weegar for Harley is far from a lateral move, but I don't know that it makes you so much better that it's worth it. I think adding someone else while retaining Harley might be more beneficial for the team. I just don't see trading one of the Big Three for Weeger which is why I'm saying Harley.

 

[Troy McClure]

I can't see Nill running 5 guys with <100 career NHL games in the bottom 7. Realistically I feel like it's Burns or Malkin, with Burns being much more likely.

And it's not even Nill. When you look around the league, how many teams enter a season with more than two guys classified as rookies on the roster as every day players? Among the teams trying to compete, the answer is always none. Nill may want to give one or two kids a shot next season, but he's not giving three or four a roster spot.

 

[Kcb12345]

 

[Satan]

That one would definitely feel like you're getting into high picks and/or prospects I'd imagine. I'd be pretty surprised honestly if you'd come out of that trade with all of Johnston, Stankoven, Bourque, and Harley. I imagine at least 1 would be a casualty. Harley is the obvious choice, but I think you actually need him down the lineup right now. Subbing Weegar for Harley is far from a lateral move, but I don't know that it makes you so much better that it's worth it. I think adding someone else while retaining Harley might be more beneficial for the team. I just don't see trading one of the Big Three for Weeger which is why I'm saying Harley.

Ya I agree... we're talking like trading a member of the Big 3 + locking into an 8x8M contract

Not sure how it fits with 14, 91, 4..... And upcoming 21/29/24


Really interested to see how the cap magic works if Burns is added to the mix

 

[BG44]

What am I missing? Pierre never said that Burns is coming to Dallas. Even Friedman didn't say that people believed Burns would end up in Dallas. They both just said it was a possibility.

Ya I agree... we're talking like trading a member of the Big 3 + locking into an 8x8M contract

Not sure how it fits with 14, 91, 4..... And upcoming 21/29/24


Really interested to see how the cap magic works if Burns is added to the mix

I had to check his age, but he'll basically be 1 year younger than Klingberg when the new contract kicks in. I wonder if Dallas would even do 8 years with him given their new restraint with long-term deals.

 

[serp]

I only ever read and heard that if there was a trade to Dallas Burns would not object to it. Burns has a list of 3 teams he can be traded to without needing to get asked for permission. Stars are rumored to be one of the 3 teams on that list . I've never seen anything concrete that there actually is anything in the works right now

 

[Kcb12345]

What am I missing? Pierre never said that Burns is coming to Dallas. Even Friedman didn't say that people believed Burns would end up in Dallas. They both just said it was a possibility.

Yeah I was thinking that too. That's very different than saying Dallas is a possibility. Honestly I think it's more of a "IF he gets traded, the belief is it'll be to Dallas", he just sorta brushed over that cause he's more concerned with the Senators part of it of course

 

[BG44]

The most interesting man in hockey ...

 

[BG44]

LMAO .... his team gift for his 1,000th game was a fossilized Megaladon shark tooth and African antelope.

I don't want another 37-year-old defender, but damn this guy is cool.

 

[Satan]

LMAO .... his team gift for his 1,000th game was a fossilized Megaladon shark tooth and African antelope.

I don't want another 37-year-old defender, but damn this guy is cool.

Age is only a number

 

[BG44]

Age is only a number

Well, and if I'm not being an ageist punk, he's been extremely healthy and physical fitness is off the charts for him. In many ways, he's similar to Pavelski with regard to his commitment to taking care of himself.

It's just so much money, and trades to retain large percentages of salary are so rare. It'll be a master class in the cap if they are actually able to do it.

 

[Frozen Failure]

My only dig against him is really his age, but he's pretty much everything this team needs... talent and charisma. Especially the charisma. He's also been playing a lot of defensive minutes for SJS the last two years (dZs, not just top pair minutes). I dunno, a Miro-Burns/Lindell-Suter top 4 would be pretty solid until someone gets hurt.

 

[Zrhutch]

He really checks all the boxes they’d be looking for to replace Klingberg. I have no doubts Nill moves money in the deal too. I’m feeling some optimism. I don’t like it.

 

[Zapp]

He really checks all the boxes they’d be looking for to replace Klingberg. I have no doubts Nill moves money in the deal too. I’m feeling some optimism. I don’t like it.

You can guarantee at least one of the big 3 prospects are on the roster if you’re bringing in a d-man like that. Need to save money somewhere and sure as hell won’t be able to afford a top6 player from free agency

 

[starsfan86]

You can guarantee at least one of the big 3 prospects are on the roster if you’re bringing in a d-man like that. Need to save money somewhere and sure as hell won’t be able to afford a top6 player from free agency

I’m ok with that

 

[Zrhutch]

Yeah I think there’s reason to believe that Johnston is in their plans next year unless he bombs training camp. Both to save money and because they think he’s that guy pal, he’s that guy.

 

[Starry Knight]

You can guarantee at least one of the big 3 prospects are on the roster if you’re bringing in a d-man like that. Need to save money somewhere and sure as hell won’t be able to afford a top6 player from free agency

I'd be okay with Dellandrea and Damiani also taking on lower line roles in place of veterans as well. Saves money, shows you what you have in them, and offers the potential for something more out of the bottom 6 rather than bringing in low-ceiling veterans.

Next year is a great year to gamble IMO. If your young players work out and carry you to the playoffs, great! That's what we're hoping for with Johnston. If the team falls flat on their face trying, oh well, we get a higher pick in what is shaping up to be one of the best drafts in a long time.

 

[Zrhutch]

That’s gotta hurt

 

[Kipper 17]

That’s gotta hurt

If they are gonna sell everything of value and tank, it's a good year to do it. Connor vs Connor would really give a boost to the battle of Alberta.

It does seem like they are going to be forced to restart. Losing those 2 hurts so bad, how do you convince yourself that you can contend? You might as well tank.

 

[Troy McClure]

If they are gonna sell everything of value and tank, it's a good year to do it. Connor vs Connor would really give a boost to the battle of Alberta.

It does seem like they are going to be forced to restart. Losing those 2 hurts so bad, how do you convince yourself that you can contend? You might as well tank.

It's too late into the offseason to sell off enough pieces to be that bad.