Speculation: Jets General Rumour, Trade, Free Agent and Waiver Speculation 15-16 Part XII

[Aavco Cup]

They got rid of Sharp, why bring it up again? Has Panarin's bonuses screwed them that much?

They will have a bonus overage of aprx $2.8M next year. Most of that is from Panarin maxing out his bonus of $2.575M

 

[Huffer]

Crawford is a fine goalie, but why would we add him and his $6M contract with Hellebucyk ready to go?

Helle hasn't proven himself over a full season yet, but if we added Crawford when would he even get the chance?

I guess the difference for next year would only be 2.1 million, but I think it only makes sense to me if they then roll with a Crawford / Helle combo until 2018 (when Comrie's contract is up), and then if Comrie is ready, move one of Crawford or Helle (preferably Crawford due to age and if Helle is the real deal).

 

[Aavco Cup]

Crawford is a fine goalie, but why would we add him and his $6M contract with Hellebucyk ready to go?

Helle hasn't proven himself over a full season yet, but if we added Crawford when would he even get the chance?

I guess the difference for next year would only be 2.1 million, but I think it only makes sense to me if they then roll with a Crawford / Helle combo until 2018 (when Comrie's contract is up), and then if Comrie is ready, move one of Crawford or Helle (preferably Crawford due to age and if Helle is the real deal).

It's all about getting rid of Pavelec. But it's unlikely Crawford waives to come to Winnipeg. Just fun to imagine Pavelec playing for the Blackhawks.

 

[Whileee]

It's all about getting rid of Pavelec. But it's unlikely Crawford waives to come to Winnipeg. Just fun to imagine Pavelec playing for the Blackhawks.

The Jets don't really have any burning need to rid themselves of Pavs' contract. He only has one year left and $3.9 million cap hit is no big deal for them.

 

[Huffer]

It's all about getting rid of Pavelec. But it's unlikely Crawford waives to come to Winnipeg. Just fun to imagine Pavelec playing for the Blackhawks.

Pavs only has 1 year left though. That's a steep price (adding 6 million for 4 more years, plus the "add" in the trade) to get rid of Pavs IMO.

I would like to see Pavs on the Hawks though.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Pavs only has 1 year left though. That's a steep price (adding 6 million for 4 more years, plus the "add" in the trade) to get rid of Pavs IMO.

I would like to see Pavs on the Hawks though.

Assuming Crawford's play doesn't drop off he would actually have some trade value, unlike Pav.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Crawford is a fine goalie, but why would we add him and his $6M contract with Hellebucyk ready to go?

Helle hasn't proven himself over a full season yet, but if we added Crawford when would he even get the chance?

I guess the difference for next year would only be 2.1 million, but I think it only makes sense to me if they then roll with a Crawford / Helle combo until 2018 (when Comrie's contract is up), and then if Comrie is ready, move one of Crawford or Helle (preferably Crawford due to age and if Helle is the real deal).

At 31 Crawford should be good for the remaining 4 years. He is what we hope Helle will be. I think if we get a chance at a goalie like that we have to take it. Run Crawford/Helle for a couple of years. If Helle is really pushing by then we can trade Crawford.

 

[tbcwpg]

Assuming Crawford's play doesn't drop off he would actually have some trade value, unlike Pav.

Would a $6 million dollar goalie have trade value? Would he have trade value in one year, when the Pavelec contract comes off, or in a few years when we've taken up $6mil in cap space in a time where the team has to pay rookies?

What if he does drop off? Moving Pavelec for Crawford is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Would a $6 million dollar goalie have trade value? Would he have trade value in one year, when the Pavelec contract comes off, or in a few years when we've taken up $6mil in cap space in a time where the team has to pay rookies?

What if he does drop off? Moving Pavelec for Crawford is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Crawford is worth his contract. Pavelec is below replacement level

 

[Gm0ney]

Crawford is worth his contract. Pavelec is below replacement level

I don't like that it helps out a division rival we should all want to see struggle and flounder. We send Pavelec over for Crawford and "there's you Panarin money, Blackhawks!" They'll bury Pavelec in the AHL for a year and have an extra $3M in cap space. Screw that! And forget adding anything to Pavelec - unless they want Stu, too.

And I'm not sure how a "modified" NMC will be treated for expansion purposes. If it means Crawford's got to be protected and therefore we need to expose Hellebuyck, this whole idea go to hell. An even better reason to let Chicago keep him...

 

[Aavco Cup]

I don't like that it helps out a division rival we should all want to see struggle and flounder. We send Pavelec over for Crawford and "there's you Panarin money, Blackhawks!" They'll bury Pavelec in the AHL for a year and have an extra $3M in cap space. Screw that! And forget adding anything to Pavelec - unless they want Stu, too.

And I'm not sure how a "modified" NMC will be treated for expansion purposes. If it means Crawford's got to be protected and therefore we need to expose Hellebuyck, this whole idea go to hell. An even better reason to let Chicago keep him...

It's like Myers (if it goes into effect). It's a NMC. Can't be waived or loaned but is not a full NTC. He supplies a list of teams he can be traded to.

I agree with your expansion draft thoughts.

 

[Koonta]

Pavelec for Crawford? Sign me up

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?blogger_id=128

I heard from a top (and different) source in February 2015 that the Hawks had reached out to the Oilers and Sabres on preliminary, very hush-hush conversations about Crawford. The idea was not to deal Crawford then, but rather to begin to gauge or gin up interest in him for last summer or this summer. This was before the Oil acquired Cam Talbott and the Sabres, Robin Lehner.

Last summer, I heard the Jets were ready to pull the trigger on an Ondrej Pavelec-plus deal for Crawford.

Again, the Hawks only had those discussions as a potential last resort if they could not move Patrick Sharp.

Teams I would watch with regard to Crawford: Buffalo, Winnipeg, Philadelphia, Toronto, Arizona, the Islanders and Ottawa.

Crawford has a limited NMC and I believe must submit a list of 8-10 teams he would accept a deal to if asked. I also would not rule out a lesser-paid veteran goalie coming back in a Crawford deal—such as Jaroslav Halak, Craig Anderson or Pavelec

To me this has BS all over it. I just don't buy it.

 

[Mathil8]

To me this has BS all over it. I just don't buy it.

Go figure. It's hockeybuzz. I don't get why people still post stuff from that website...

 

[Aavco Cup]

To me this has BS all over it. I just don't buy it.

It's hockeybuzz so it's likely just made up or was not a credible source, but they did report that rumour last summer

 

[cbcwpg]

To me this has BS all over it. I just don't buy it.

I don't buy any discussion about trades that involve Ondre Pavelec. The one requirement of a trade is that the team you are trading with actually wants what you are offering. Nobody "wants" Pavelec. Pavelec is "Goaltender Non Grata" . We just happen to be stuck with him.

 

[tbcwpg]

Crawford is worth his contract. Pavelec is below replacement level

Does his contract fit our team going forward? I don't think so. Obviously, he's a far better goalie than Pavelec, but I don't like that contract on this particular team given the position we're in and the goalie that is coming up.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I don't like that it helps out a division rival we should all want to see struggle and flounder. We send Pavelec over for Crawford and "there's you Panarin money, Blackhawks!" They'll bury Pavelec in the AHL for a year and have an extra $3M in cap space. Screw that! And forget adding anything to Pavelec - unless they want Stu, too.

And I'm not sure how a "modified" NMC will be treated for expansion purposes. If it means Crawford's got to be protected and therefore we need to expose Hellebuyck, this whole idea go to hell. An even better reason to let Chicago keep him...

Grant you the bolded! Damn expansion uncertainty is getting in the way of everything.

 

[Oilpeg]

Why bother trading Pavelec at all? He's only got one-year left and if Helle is ready to start next year, then Pav will be the backup. Simple. Maurice is not going to force feed Pavelec into the nets because he's expensive, he's not stupid, contrary to popular belief. Isn't the point of people wanting to get rid of Pavelec so that Hellebuyk will play? If you trade Pav for Crawford, then Helleybuyck is not playing. Having a young starter like Hellebuyck you need a veteran backup, that's Pavelec this year and who cares who it is next year.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Why bother trading Pavelec at all? He's only got one-year left and if Helle is ready to start next year, then Pav will be the backup. Simple. Maurice is not going to force feed Pavelec into the nets because he's expensive, he's not stupid, contrary to popular belief. Isn't the point of people wanting to get rid of Pavelec so that Hellebuyk will play? If you trade Pav for Crawford, then Helleybuyck is not playing. Having a young starter like Hellebuyck you need a veteran backup, that's Pavelec this year and who cares who it is next year.

If this deal existed - which it probably doesn't - getting rid of Pavelec would be strictly secondary. It would be about getting a proven top 10 goaltender who is still at his peak. Let Helle be the backup. If he can take the job away from Crawford in a year, or 2, or 3 great! Crawford probably still has trade value at that point. Worse comes to worst we have to retain a little salary to move him. If Helle can't take the job away we are covered.

2 possible flys in the ointment. 1) Expansion. 2) The add. What would it be?

 

[Oilpeg]

If this deal existed - which it probably doesn't - getting rid of Pavelec would be strictly secondary. It would be about getting a proven top 10 goaltender who is still at his peak. Let Helle be the backup. If he can take the job away from Crawford in a year, or 2, or 3 great! Crawford probably still has trade value at that point. Worse comes to worst we have to retain a little salary to move him. If Helle can't take the job away we are covered.

2 possible flys in the ointment. 1) Expansion. 2) The add. What would it be?

If Helle is able to take the job from Crawford, chances are that means that Crawford wouldn't be tradable anymore.

 

[Constable]

If Helle is able to take the job from Crawford, chances are that means that Crawford wouldn't be tradable anymore.

no, it means helle reaches the top-5 status we know he will (probably) reach

 

[KingBogo]

This talk about trading for Crawford makes no sense. He has a $6 M cap hit for 4 more years and we would then likely lose Helly in the expansion draft. We have gone this long with Pavs. He can either back up Helly next season or lead the charge for a 2nd tank for Patrick if things go off the rails. Either way he is gone for the 2017-18 season.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

This talk about trading for Crawford makes no sense. He has a $6 M cap hit for 4 more years and we would then likely lose Helly in the expansion draft. We have gone this long with Pavs. He can either back up Helly next season or lead the charge for a 2nd tank for Patrick if things go off the rails. Either way he is gone for the 2017-18 season.

Yup.

Makes no sense to make any sort of overtures for someone like Crawford. Pav is gone at the end of the season - let Helle (and potentially Comrie) vie for the starter position, and watch the FA / trade market for goaltending help that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. Goaltenders as good or better than Crawford can be had for less $$.

 

[BB88]

If this deal existed - which it probably doesn't - getting rid of Pavelec would be strictly secondary. It would be about getting a proven top 10 goaltender who is still at his peak. Let Helle be the backup. If he can take the job away from Crawford in a year, or 2, or 3 great! Crawford probably still has trade value at that point. Worse comes to worst we have to retain a little salary to move him. If Helle can't take the job away we are covered.

2 possible flys in the ointment. 1) Expansion. 2) The add. What would it be?

Found this from Columbus expansion thread awhile ago,
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/matt-murray-taking-franchise-label-fleury/

"An interesting aspect of the recent deal worked out by the NHL and NHL Players’ Association regarding expansion draft rules is that only players with a full no-movement clause will have to be protected by their team, according to a source."

If for some reason that rumour would be true it would be all about saving cap for Chicago, and not going after huge return most likely.
Panarin bonuses, Seabrook, Anisimov, Kruger have new contracts kicking in, the year after TT and Panarin need new contracts.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Found this from Columbus expansion thread awhile ago,
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/matt-murray-taking-franchise-label-fleury/

"An interesting aspect of the recent deal worked out by the NHL and NHL Players’ Association regarding expansion draft rules is that only players with a full no-movement clause will have to be protected by their team, according to a source."

If for some reason that rumour would be true it would be all about saving cap for Chicago, and not going after huge return most likely.
Panarin bonuses, Seabrook, Anisimov, Kruger have new contracts kicking in, the year after TT and Panarin need new contracts.

if that is true then even if the Jets chose to honour Myers NMC, they could leave him exposed in an expansion draft if they choose to. Only Enstrom and Buff have full NMC.