Proposal: Rickard Rakell + Boston 1st for pick 7/8 + cap dump

[KickHisAssZegrass]

Sounds like fair trade. Would Montreal's 9th do the trick? Including Alzner.

Yeah I think Montreal makes a lot of sense as well. Rakell needs to be in a hockey centric environment to get his best every night. IMO he's kind of been on cruise control since the Ducks stopped competing.

 

[Rowley Birkin]

Now what do you do with that cap space? Buffalo isn't a desirable destination for free agents and you just traded the best asset the team has to potentially get a #2 center for a 2nd line winger. The Sabres have much bigger problems than Kyle Okposo. 2nd line RW isn't at the top of the list of things to fix. Pretty easy pass for me.

The late first and/or the added cap flexibility could be used to help acquire 2C.

Hell - having Rakell on the team might make losing Reinhart in a 2c trade more feasible?

Rakell is a useful player who would surely contribute in a top 6 role. The fact that he makes less than Okposo who we would be freeing ourselves from in the process is an added bonus.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

Rakell is a good player, be he ain’t take Boston from the bottom of the draft to the top. Not even close.

 

[lwvs84]

Henrique might be available as a 2C as well, that would be the Ducks top 2 point producers last season (including top goal scorer).

 

[Djp]

The problem with Rakell is he can't be the guy on the line. He is a good complimentary top line winger. The Ducks don't have another top line player. At this point in his career, Getzlaf is "just" a very good second line center, Henrique is a good 2C, Steel is a 3C. Rakell is the only top line player the Ducks have so defenses can focus in on him. Rakell is at his best when there is someone else that takes the attention and he can use his skills and hands away from the focus of the D. He may have been just above a 40 point player, but he's second on the team in points (1 point back in 6 less games). He isn't Pat Kane or Ovi, he can't carry a team's offense, but if you were paying for a guy that could carry a top line and is making under $4 mil, you're paying a HELL of a lot more than a top 10 pick. Now I'm not saying that Buffalo or NJ should make the trade, but he's worth more than a late 1st and a mediocre prospect like others have suggested (especially when dealt with another late 1st and taking back a cap dump and/or retaining).

I was just looking at Rakell alone..he’s a player that at the deadline likely gets a playoff team 1st and a prospect ( not in the teams top 3-5).

Boston 1st likely 25-31 really doesn’t add much to it.

How often have you seen teams trade say a 23rd and say a 27th for a pick 11-13? It hasn’t happened for a reason. There is a big drop off. Players drafted in the top 12-14 tend to be solid players making up your top 6 forwards or tap pair Dman. P,Ayers drafted in mid 20s at best are 3rd liners or 3-4 Dman.

It’s rare you see a true quantity for quality deals when none of the p,Ayers have less than 2 yrs of team control.

 

[7even]

Dicky Rakes is a great player

 

[Djp]

With retention you think Rakell returns less than Zucker and Coleman? Very much agree to disagree

I said he would get a playoff team 1st and a B prospect if traded at the deadline with 1+ yrs left.

Sucker had 3+ yrs left so big difference there than a rental. Minnesota wasn’t retaining so they took a contract back,

Nathan Foote is a B prospect. Players drafted 24+ in the 1st round have less than 50% chance of playing 200+ Nhl games. Tampa was desperate for players cheap under term.

 

[Djp]

The late first and/or the added cap flexibility could be used to help acquire 2C.

Hell - having Rakell on the team might make losing Reinhart in a 2c trade more feasible?

Rakell is a useful player who would surely contribute in a top 6 role. The fact that he makes less than Okposo who we would be freeing ourselves from in the process is an added bonus.

Okposo has a friendly buy out in the final year. Buffalo could trade him st 50% and teams would take him.

Rakell has just 2 yrs left and I think he isn’t a driver on a line but can do well with other good players.

Why waste an 8OA for 2 yrs st $4M player.. the late 1st has less than a 50% chance of being anything of note as an NHL player.

Do a Reinhart for 2C trade first . Then I’d draft a winger at 8OA to replace him.

 

[Gliff]

Rakell has a ton of value, but not to teams drafting that high.

His value is in his contract and to teams like Edmonton and Pittsburg it is huge.

 

[Halla]

I cant imagine NJ or Buf giving up 7 or 8 for Rakell coming off back to back sub 20g/45pt seasons

 

[is the answer jesus]

The late first and/or the added cap flexibility could be used to help acquire 2C.

Hell - having Rakell on the team might make losing Reinhart in a 2c trade more feasible?

Rakell is a useful player who would surely contribute in a top 6 role. The fact that he makes less than Okposo who we would be freeing ourselves from in the process is an added bonus.

I don't think having Rakell in the fold would make Reinhart any more expendable. Reinhart is the clearly superior player at this point. Maybe you find a taker for a late 1st for a good player on a team in cap trouble or maybe you find a much better player for the 8th pick from a team in cap trouble. The appeal of this deal would in theory be to rid ourselves of Okposo, but while that would be nice it isn't a huge need for this team. Dangle the 8th and whatever else is necessary for a player and you are far more likely to get a player that moves this team in a meaningful way and if that deal isn't out there use the pick. There will be a good player available there and having that player on an ELC a couple years from now and that'll be the cap savings you're looking for.

 

[LuckyDucky]

it would have to be a hell of a cap dump. if the blackhawks end up with the 9th or 10th pick then

rakell+boston first for seabrook+9th/10th overall

In one of the past drafts there was a rumor going around that the blackhawks were willing to add to seabrook to get rid of him. This might work for both teams. Seabrook has 4 years left and if blackhawks cover the bonus ducks would only need to pay him 16.5 million over 4 years. Blackhawks get rid of one of their worst contracts to speed up their retool

So the Ducks take the far worse player, a player whose cap hit is double Rakell’s, to move up 20 spots (at the most). Awful.

 

[Perennial]

it would have to be a hell of a cap dump. if the blackhawks end up with the 9th or 10th pick then

rakell+boston first for seabrook+9th/10th overall

In one of the past drafts there was a rumor going around that the blackhawks were willing to add to seabrook to get rid of him. This might work for both teams. Seabrook has 4 years left and if blackhawks cover the bonus ducks would only need to pay him 16.5 million over 4 years. Blackhawks get rid of one of their worst contracts to speed up their retool

Exactly what I was thinking...

 

[lwvs84]

I was just looking at Rakell alone..he’s a player that at the deadline likely gets a playoff team 1st and a prospect ( not in the teams top 3-5).

Boston 1st likely 25-31 really doesn’t add much to it.

How often have you seen teams trade say a 23rd and say a 27th for a pick 11-13? It hasn’t happened for a reason. There is a big drop off. Players drafted in the top 12-14 tend to be solid players making up your top 6 forwards or tap pair Dman. P,Ayers drafted in mid 20s at best are 3rd liners or 3-4 Dman.

It’s rare you see a true quantity for quality deals when none of the p,Ayers have less than 2 yrs of team control.

So a guy that finishes second on his team in points, was a 30+ goal scorer when the team actually had offense, and makes less than $4 mil for 2 playoff runs is worth a pick that doesn't add much value (likely in that 25-31 range that you said doesn't add much) and a middling/dime a dozen prospect that Anaheim already has a ton of (if it's a playoff team, chances are a prospect not in their top 3-5 is going to be mediocre at best, a long shot to make an impact more likely)? Rakell is worth more than a pair of future 3rd liners. Heck, Kase just got a slightly worse return than that (late 1st, non top-5 prospect, and a cap dump) and the value difference between Kase and Rakell is pretty big (Kase tends to put up about 50% of what Rakell does). Ask any Boston fan, if they could have kept Backes or dumped him off elsewhere and gotten Rakell for a 1st and prospect instead of Kase, every one of them would do it.

 

[TheNewEra]

So the Ducks take the far worse player, a player whose cap hit is double Rakell’s, to move up 20 spots (at the most). Awful.

Did you miss the thread title? I just suggested a team that would likely do the type of trade op suggested

 

[TBF1972]

new jersey has zero need to dump a contract.

 

[TBF1972]

I love Rakell, but I can't trade 7OA for him.

That said, you're completely missing the point by marketing Rakell to non-playoff teams with cap space for days. Rakell's production significantly outpaces how much he is paid, so the Ducks would be much better off auctioning him to cap-strapped contenders.

If they put 50% retention on the table, the return will be absurd. Rakell at ~$1.9M for two years would be the best value contract in the league, by far. Teams pay handsomely for that. Look at Coleman. A ~$1.9M Rakell would return even more than that.

the problem is, he wants to add a second top 8 draft pick or a specific prospects, he expects to be available at #8.
the devils have zero need to dump a contract. subban despite being overpaid would be missed in the lineup. zajac is a heart and soul player and his contract is up next season. schneider at 6 million is probably the only piece, which makes sense to get rid off. but his contract also runs only 2 more seasons. he was already demoted to the AHL before. so he doesn't prohibit anything, what the team wants to do. the player nj can draft at 7 aligns age wise better with hischier and hughes than rakell. the op doesn't make sense for the deivls.

 

[Rowley Birkin]

I don't think having Rakell in the fold would make Reinhart any more expendable. Reinhart is the clearly superior player at this point. Maybe you find a taker for a late 1st for a good player on a team in cap trouble or maybe you find a much better player for the 8th pick from a team in cap trouble. The appeal of this deal would in theory be to rid ourselves of Okposo, but while that would be nice it isn't a huge need for this team. Dangle the 8th and whatever else is necessary for a player and you are far more likely to get a player that moves this team in a meaningful way and if that deal isn't out there use the pick. There will be a good player available there and having that player on an ELC a couple years from now and that'll be the cap savings you're looking for.

I think you are doing Rakell a dis-service. He's a very useful complimentary player who would probably put up similar point totals to Reinhart if he was stapled to Eichel.

If you believe that 8OV can be used to acquire a player like Cirelli then I see where you are coming from. But I'm certain it won't happen. Using TB as an example - they will more than likely find a way to resign their guys. Its wishful thinking on your part imo.

In terms of acquiring a 2C - I don't actually see that much difference in value between 8OV or 20-sonething OV. Obviously other teams would covet 8OV more but the dynamic of these type of trades are not centered on the value of a particular pick. Its normally a team needing cap space, or simply a team wanting to get younger. Good players get traded for late 1st round picks all the time.

Ultimately I see the upgrade of Okposo - > Rakell, plus the 2.2m saving in cap as being FAR more valuable to the Sabres than the comparative value of the two picks.

I'm also not worried about the hit rate of a late 1st compared to the hit rate of 8OV - since in this scenario I'm likely moving the Boston pick anyway. Besides - the last two Sabres picks @ 8OV look like busts...

This trade would be far more beneficial to the Sabres than the majority of crap I see thrown around on these forums....

 

[Djp]

So a guy that finishes second on his team in points, was a 30+ goal scorer when the team actually had offense, and makes less than $4 mil for 2 playoff runs is worth a pick that doesn't add much value (likely in that 25-31 range that you said doesn't add much) and a middling/dime a dozen prospect that Anaheim already has a ton of (if it's a playoff team, chances are a prospect not in their top 3-5 is going to be mediocre at best, a long shot to make an impact more likely)? Rakell is worth more than a pair of future 3rd liners. Heck, Kase just got a slightly worse return than that (late 1st, non top-5 prospect, and a cap dump) and the value difference between Kase and Rakell is pretty big (Kase tends to put up about 50% of what Rakell does). Ask any Boston fan, if they could have kept Backes or dumped him off elsewhere and gotten Rakell for a 1st and prospect instead of Kase, every one of them would do it.

Rakell goal production fell in half the last two seasons. drop the 30+ goal score stuff.

Kase is 3 yrs years younger thus can grow some

The last two seasons they are around equal in point production. When compared to salary earned its different.


The Boston pick is likely in the 25-31 range which is late in the first

Sure you can trade Rakell to more of a playoff bubble team for a protected 1st and maybe if everything goes right the team is around 14-17 range but it just as easily could have been 23-30.

thats what happened whith the ROR trade pick. If the blues didnt make the cup semis the pick would have been 19 instead of 31. That is a big value differemce. historically you have a far better shot of getting an impact player at 19 than at 31.

 

[Djp]

I think you are doing Rakell a dis-service. He's a very useful complimentary player who would probably put up similar point totals to Reinhart if he was stapled to Eichel.

In terms of acquiring a 2C - I don't actually see that much difference in value between 8OV or 20-sonething OV. Obviously other teams would covet 8OV more but the dynamic of these type of trades are not centered on the value of a particular pick. Its normally a team needing cap space, or simply a team wanting to get younger. Good players get traded for late 1st round picks all the time.

Ultimately I see the upgrade of Okposo - > Rakell, plus the 2.2m saving in cap as being FAR more valuable to the Sabres than the comparative value of the two picks.

This trade would be far more beneficial to the Sabres than the majority of crap I see thrown around on these forums....

If buffalo put Okposo next t Eichel he can put up more points, He can also play PP so he doesnt totally suck, he is just overpaid.

Buffalo isnt in that kind of cap hell to move his salry and give up a huge value difference in a pick 25-31 vs 8oa.

there is a very huge difference with picks 6-12 vs picks 25-31

saying Rakell gets a 1st at the deadline is not a disservice---he is just not good enough to justify trading a top 10 pick given his age and recent production. How many teams year in and out trade 1sts. Only o1-2 on average at deadline trades for rentals or 1+ rentals. 1sts are usually given up for players with more team control or if they are one year away from UFA there was some discussion on extension talks pre trade

 

[lwvs84]

Rakell goal production fell in half the last two seasons. drop the 30+ goal score stuff.

Kase is 3 yrs years younger thus can grow some

The last two seasons they are around equal in point production. When compared to salary earned its different.


The Boston pick is likely in the 25-31 range which is late in the first

Sure you can trade Rakell to more of a playoff bubble team for a protected 1st and maybe if everything goes right the team is around 14-17 range but it just as easily could have been 23-30.

thats what happened whith the ROR trade pick. If the blues didnt make the cup semis the pick would have been 19 instead of 31. That is a big value differemce. historically you have a far better shot of getting an impact player at 19 than at 31.

His goal scoring fell because there are NO OTHER TOP LINE FORWARDS ON THE TEAM. The defenses can focus on him because the only other player to focus on is a 35 year old Getzlaf. Tell me another team in the league that is as starved for top end players, I bet there isn't a team in the league that would trade their best forward for the Ducks best forward. You take any other complimentary forward from a team, make him the best player and his production drops. If your argument is that Buffalo or NJ shouldn't deal the pick for him, that's fine. But if it's he's worth a late 1st and a nothing prospect, he's worth much more. The original trade was for this draft, so 2 years of Rakell at under $4 mil (full training camp, season, playoffs), so we know where the picks will be by the time of the trade. He may not be worth a top 10 pick (even in a vacuum) but he's worth more than a late pick too. I'd say he's more of a mid 1st.

 

[Rowley Birkin]

If buffalo put Okposo next t Eichel he can put up more points, He can also play PP so he doesnt totally suck, he is just overpaid.

Buffalo isnt in that kind of cap hell to move his salry and give up a huge value difference in a pick 25-31 vs 8oa.

there is a very huge difference with picks 6-12 vs picks 25-31

saying Rakell gets a 1st at the deadline is not a disservice---he is just not good enough to justify trading a top 10 pick given his age and recent production. How many teams year in and out trade 1sts. Only o1-2 on average at deadline trades for rentals or 1+ rentals. 1sts are usually given up for players with more team control or if they are one year away from UFA there was some discussion on extension talks pre trade

You're completely missing the point.

Firstly - re doing Rakell a dis-service - I was quoting @is the answer jesus - not you

At this point Rakell is FAR more effective in a top 6 role than Okposo. Sure - for now Okposo is still an effective checking line/possession player & belongs in the NHL - but he's not close to being a top 6 player any more. Rakell is.

Buffalo is already in a strong position cap wise. Making this deal would ensure we are in an even stronger position. How is that a negative? Cap is going to be an even more powerful commodity over the next 2-3 years...

There is not a huge difference in value between 8ov & 20 something in the context I am talking about. You are looking at the value in a vacuum not reality.

Don't look at it as simply trading a 1st for Rakell. Look at it as trading back in the 1st to A) improve the top 6 & B) to allow further cap flexibility. We then parley that later first into the elusive 2C using the increased cap leverage as currency.

Or - say we still can't find the long term solution at 2C. Having that extra 2.2m in space would allow us more room to overpay for a short term solution. Or allow us to sign a strong 3C

Unless you're hell bent on using 8ov on a particular player - who won't contribute for the next few years even if we select the right guy - Nylander/Mitts prove its easy to select the wrong guy - I don't see how this trade doesn't make the Sabres better in the short or medium term.

 

[LuckyDucky]

Did you miss the thread title? I just suggested a team that would likely do the type of trade op suggested

Didn’t miss it. What I did miss was any sort of logic behind trading a top 6 forward on a good contract and a late first round pick for the 9th or 10th pick saddled with Seabrook (and his arguably worst contract in hockey).

 

[is the answer jesus]

I think you are doing Rakell a dis-service. He's a very useful complimentary player who would probably put up similar point totals to Reinhart if he was stapled to Eichel.

If you believe that 8OV can be used to acquire a player like Cirelli then I see where you are coming from. But I'm certain it won't happen. Using TB as an example - they will more than likely find a way to resign their guys. Its wishful thinking on your part imo.

In terms of acquiring a 2C - I don't actually see that much difference in value between 8OV or 20-sonething OV. Obviously other teams would covet 8OV more but the dynamic of these type of trades are not centered on the value of a particular pick. Its normally a team needing cap space, or simply a team wanting to get younger. Good players get traded for late 1st round picks all the time.

Ultimately I see the upgrade of Okposo - > Rakell, plus the 2.2m saving in cap as being FAR more valuable to the Sabres than the comparative value of the two picks.

I'm also not worried about the hit rate of a late 1st compared to the hit rate of 8OV - since in this scenario I'm likely moving the Boston pick anyway. Besides - the last two Sabres picks @ 8OV look like busts...

This trade would be far more beneficial to the Sabres than the majority of crap I see thrown around on these forums....

I don't think I'm doing Rakell a disservice, he's a good player on a good contract, but as you said he's a complimentary player and you shouldn't be trading a top 10 pick for a complimentary player or even 2 complimentary players. Cirelli is obviously the pipe dream and you aren't getting a player of that ilk for a late 1st rounder and middling prospects, which is what we'll be left with after you move the 8th overall pick. It doesn't have to be Cirelli, but that's the type of guy I want to target. In your scenario you're happy with getting 2 depth pieces and extra cap space. I want one higher end piece and if that deal isn't there I'm fine using that pick to get a player that should be a game changer on an ELC that will also be exempt from the expansion draft. Just different philosophies on team building I guess. This team needs depth, but I'm not moving a pick like that for depth.

 

[Rowley Birkin]

I don't think I'm doing Rakell a disservice, he's a good player on a good contract, but as you said he's a complimentary player and you shouldn't be trading a top 10 pick for a complimentary player or even 2 complimentary players. Cirelli is obviously the pipe dream and you aren't getting a player of that ilk for a late 1st rounder and middling prospects, which is what we'll be left with after you move the 8th overall pick. It doesn't have to be Cirelli, but that's the type of guy I want to target. In your scenario you're happy with getting 2 depth pieces and extra cap space. I want one higher end piece and if that deal isn't there I'm fine using that pick to get a player that should be a game changer on an ELC that will also be exempt from the expansion draft. Just different philosophies on team building I guess. This team needs depth, but I'm not moving a pick like that for depth.

You're not getting Cirelli for any pick. You're going to get him by being able to take back a big contract. Far more likely that TB is able to move one or more of those contracts to teams said players are willing to waive for though - making room to resign Cirelli/Serg in the process. TB will try everything they can & trading one of these RFAs will be a last resort. To the point where the pick they get is close to meaningless.

We got ROR for a late 1st. We got Skinner for a 2nd. These type of deal never require an early pick.

In reality - you are honestly not getting a much different player by trading away 8 than you are by trading away 20. You need to curb your expectations I think... Otherwise you are going to end up disappointed. Nobody is trading away a superstar for 8ov any more than they would for 20ov.

My scenario is realistic while yours seems wildly optimistic.

Reinhart is essentially a complimentary player who most of us want to keep around - so don't take anything away from Rakell here. He'd be a very welcome addition.

We can use 8ov & HOPE to get a game breaking talent in 3 years if we are lucky. Or we could end up with Nylander/Mitts 3.0. Right now I'm all in on moving that pick to get to the damn playoffs.