Proposal: Make a trade with Florida

[Ryuji Yamazaki]

I feel like Montreal would be a good fit for Reimer if Florida is in need to dump cap to make a run for Bobrovsky/Panarin.

Swapping our 1st round picks, or any prospects/picks would be of interest I believe

I can't see Montreal doing that, but obviously I'd do it as a Panthers fan.

 

[Yoshidas Island]

I can't see Montreal doing that, but obviously I'd do it as a Panthers fan.

I think it would be dependant on someone like Boldy, Podkolzin, Krebs (someone highly ranked) "dropping"

 

[Cogburn]

What would the cost of Hoffman be? Either shackled to Reimer or without.

How is Florida set for third line centers too?

 

[TheImpatientPanther]

What would the cost of Hoffman be? Either shackled to Reimer or without.

How is Florida set for third line centers too?

Cost to who?
Would probably be available as long as we sign Panarin.

In return, a 1 for 1 #3/4 RD like Faulk or Spurgeon for example.

If picks and prospects, probably a late 1st or 2nd + good prospect.

Hoffmans value would be reduced a fair bit if Reimer is attached but hopefully we use other means to rid us of Reimer.

As for 3Cs, one would assume its Borgstroms spot to lose.

 

[Cogburn]

Cost to who?
Would probably be available as long as we sign Panarin.

In return, a 1 for 1 #3/4 RD like Faulk or Spurgeon for example.

If picks and prospects, probably a late 1st or 2nd + good prospect.

Hoffmans value would be reduced a fair bit if Reimer is attached but hopefully we use other means to rid us of Reimer.

As for 3Cs, one would assume its Borgstroms spot to lose.

Sorry, I am a Canucks fan and seem to have it in my head that I am a well known Canucks homer. Arrogance on my part I suppose.

Panarin/Bobrovsky signing would kind of be the only reason that Hoffman would be traded after his season I'd imagine, and even then to maximize cap space.

Faulk or Spurgeon are guys on our list of wants as well. As far as a 3/4 guy, we have Tanev and Stetcher on the right side, which are definitely not on the same level. If there is a need for LHD, Hutton (RFA) is also available.

The futures package might be somewhat more doable. I was thinking along the lines of Juolevi and the 40th overall for Hoffman and Reimer, but I admittedly value Juolevi quite highly, even now. That would essentially clear up 8.5 million in cap space, a unit of measurement I will call one Russian. Is this even in the same ballpark?

If Borgstrom doesn't cut the mustard, I was thinking of including Sutter as a throw in, if the 3C was void that needed filling. Literally a throw in mind you.

 

[Beezeral]

Sorry, I am a Canucks fan and seem to have it in my head that I am a well known Canucks homer. Arrogance on my part I suppose.

Panarin/Bobrovsky signing would kind of be the only reason that Hoffman would be traded after his season I'd imagine, and even then to maximize cap space.

Faulk or Spurgeon are guys on our list of wants as well. As far as a 3/4 guy, we have Tanev and Stetcher on the right side, which are definitely not on the same level. If there is a need for LHD, Hutton (RFA) is also available.

The futures package might be somewhat more doable. I was thinking along the lines of Juolevi and the 40th overall for Hoffman and Reimer, but I admittedly value Juolevi quite highly, even now. That would essentially clear up 8.5 million in cap space, a unit of measurement I will call one Russian. Is this even in the same ballpark?

If Borgstrom doesn't cut the mustard, I was thinking of including Sutter as a throw in, if the 3C was void that needed filling. Literally a throw in mind you.

this is all pretty much trash when asking for Hoffman...

 

[Cogburn]

this is all pretty much trash when asking for Hoffman...

Fair enough. Your compatriot had asked for a good prospect and a late 1st/early 2nd, one of which we have, and I was asking to take Reimer as a cap dump (more of a condition of taking Hoffman, not affecting the value to me), but I'll re-calibrate. We don't have a Spurgeon/Faulk level player, and really Juolevi is our best prospect with Hughes, Pettersson and Demko more or less graduating.

 

[Beezeral]

Fair enough. Your compatriot had asked for a good prospect and a late 1st/early 2nd, one of which we have, and I was asking to take Reimer as a cap dump (more of a condition of taking Hoffman, not affecting the value to me), but I'll re-calibrate. We don't have a Spurgeon/Faulk level player, and really Juolevi is our best prospect with Hughes, Pettersson and Demko more or less graduating.

exactly. There really is no deal to be made for Hoffman.

 

[Cogburn]

exactly. There really is no deal to be made for Hoffman.

What about Vatrano then?

 

[pb1300]

Our 13th will be in play at the draft, and possibly additional picks and/or prospects/players. Tallon is going to try and add a Dman at the draft, so he can focus on the two pieces that we obviously know he is going after. I think you might even see them make a deal with Columbus, just so they can have the few extra days to negotiate.

 

[pb1300]

What about Vatrano then?

Vatrano is a no go. Young cost-controlled goal scorer that has a style that should work well with Trocheck. Dudes a north/south player with a good shot. No point moving him.

 

[Beezeral]

What about Vatrano then?

You aren't going to get good players when offering scraps.

 

[Cogburn]

You aren't going to get good players when offering scraps.

....well in all fairness, that exactly how you got both players. Vatrano was traded for a third, and Hoffman was acquired with a 7th round pick for a 2nd, a 4th and a 5th, and before that he was sent with a better prospect and a 5th round pick for a lesser prospect, a cap dump and a 6th.

I am not saying the players are worth that, or there weren't extenuating factors at play, but Florida has in fact paid scraps for these same players in the very recent past. Sometimes you buy at the right time.

 

[Cogburn]

Vatrano is a no go. Young cost-controlled goal scorer that has a style that should work well with Trocheck. Dudes a north/south player with a good shot. No point moving him.

He's seemed like a fine player in games I've seen him in, so I'm asking about guys that could be fits here. We need a top six RW and a top line LW, and either guy would fill one of those roles here. The problem seems to be we have nothing available except middle of the road assets and cap space.

 

[Beezeral]

....well in all fairness, that exactly how you got both players. Vatrano was traded for a third, and Hoffman was acquired with a 7th round pick for a 2nd, a 4th and a 5th, and before that he was sent with a better prospect and a 5th round pick for a lesser prospect, a cap dump and a 6th.

I am not saying the players are worth that, or there weren't extenuating factors at play, but Florida has in fact paid scraps for these same players in the very recent past. Sometimes you buy at the right time.

and you are trying to buy both players at the wrong time.

Last offseason Hoffman had off ice issues hanging over his head killing his value and two years ago Vatrano was a borderline NHLer who wasn't getting an opportunity with the Bruins. Both players have raised their value considerably since then. Your point is completely irrelevant.

 

[Cogburn]

and you are trying to buy both players at the wrong time.

Last offseason Hoffman had off ice issues hanging over his head killing his value and two years ago Vatrano was a borderline NHLer who wasn't getting an opportunity with the Bruins. Both players have raised their value considerably since then. Your point is completely irrelevant.

Not at all, I have asked about two players. I made on offer based on your fellows perimeters, which wasn't well received, and have tried to offer some insight into how I'm thinking, and you seem to be personally offended with each reply.

Neither player simply became good though. Florida did not trade junk for junk. They were good players with off ice issues and that wasn't able to crack a deep, deep line up. One of the factors I am considering is the need for both roster spots and cap space for the contract offers that are allegedly about to be given to two premiere free agents.

Not counting Tippett or Heiponiemi or other prospects, I make 6 top 6 players on Florida's roster. There are 4-6 forward spots, mostly cheaper bottom six role players, and 2-3 defenders, including a top four RHD, with just shy of 22 million in cap space. I am not implying any sort of cap trouble, but if Bobrovsky and Panarin and a RHD are all in consideration for free agent acquisition, it gets a little tighter. Those two factors are where I was trying to piece an offer together, one that doesn't add a superfluous roster player, doesn't add any considerable cap space, and clears places for these acquisitions. I fell short on the value evidently, but I don't see all of the Panthers top six being back if Panarin is added. That doesn't make my offer any better, but it is potentially the right time for another team to acquire a top six forward from Florida. Dadanov, Huberdeau, Barkov and Trocheck I thought were the favourites, based on their time with the Panthers, so I didn't extend my inquiry.

 

[Beezeral]

Not at all, I have asked about two players. I made on offer based on your fellows perimeters, which wasn't well received, and have tried to offer some insight into how I'm thinking, and you seem to be personally offended with each reply.

Neither player simply became good though. Florida did not trade junk for junk. They were good players with off ice issues and that wasn't able to crack a deep, deep line up. One of the factors I am considering is the need for both roster spots and cap space for the contract offers that are allegedly about to be given to two premiere free agents.

Not counting Tippett or Heiponiemi or other prospects, I make 6 top 6 players on Florida's roster. There are 4-6 forward spots, mostly cheaper bottom six role players, and 2-3 defenders, including a top four RHD, with just shy of 22 million in cap space. I am not implying any sort of cap trouble, but if Bobrovsky and Panarin and a RHD are all in consideration for free agent acquisition, it gets a little tighter. Those two factors are where I was trying to piece an offer together, one that doesn't add a superfluous roster player, doesn't add any considerable cap space, and clears places for these acquisitions. I fell short on the value evidently, but I don't see all of the Panthers top six being back if Panarin is added. That doesn't make my offer any better, but it is potentially the right time for another team to acquire a top six forward from Florida. Dadanov, Huberdeau, Barkov and Trocheck I thought were the favourites, based on their time with the Panthers, so I didn't extend my inquiry.

Not personally offended at all. Just letting you know that canucks bottom 6 talent isn’t going to get them a top 6 player.

 

[Cogburn]

Not personally offended at all. Just letting you know that canucks bottom 6 talent isn’t going to get them a top 6 player.

We are in total agreement then. We have no "talent" in our bottom six to speak of, anyway.

Ok, maybe Virtanen. But as mentioned, he is not going be the center piece, let alone 1-for-1, for a 70 point winger.

The only bottom six player I made mention of was Sutter, who was used in the same sentence as "throw in". And I think I said "throw in" a second time to emphasize that.