Rumor: Rumors & Proposals thread: Vatanen gone as well

Status
Not open for further replies.

Raab

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
18,085
2,777
I have a very hard time believing anyone is going to take Despres or Stoner off of the Ducks hands.

I think it's Fowler they'll have to move now.

If David Clarkson can be moved, those two for sure can be moved. Have to remember as well that Depres was playing behind Fowler and Lindholm this year which is why his numbers dropped. Stoner only has a couple years left on his deal and ducks could retain salary if they had to.
 

Burnt Biscuits

Registered User
May 2, 2010
9,164
3,179
Frick. I wanted Vatanen so badly.

I'm not the least bit flustered by the Vatanen extension, he didn't come cheap which is the most important part. Ducks have an internal budget of $64-$65M from what I last read, which means they are presently $6.7 to $7.7M short of that mark, they have 8 Forwards signed, so they need to pick up 5 more forwards (one critical RFA to extend in Rakell here), and one critical d-man in Lindholm, then an extension for Andersen or pick-up a new goalie if he gets moved out. Ducks need to make something happen to alleviate their budget issues.
 

Raab

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
18,085
2,777
Shouldn't the NHLPA want to once in a while screw teams over with a low cap? Lots of nice easy money to be made with buyouts. Or does it all come out even in the wash anyways with how the players are paid?

Low cap means the UFA's don't get paid. Basically the way I heard it is that they're divided on wanting to raise the cap, but the UFA's this year are asking why they shouldn't get paid? Which is why they'll be raising it yet again.
 

Weitz

Registered User
Sep 23, 2014
2,786
1,162
Low cap means the UFA's don't get paid. Basically the way I heard it is that they're divided on wanting to raise the cap, but the UFA's this year are asking why they shouldn't get paid? Which is why they'll be raising it yet again.

They just end up paying more escrow. And will make less anyway.
 

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,579
29,244
Edmonton
If David Clarkson can be moved, those two for sure can be moved. Have to remember as well that Depres was playing behind Fowler and Lindholm this year which is why his numbers dropped. Stoner only has a couple years left on his deal and ducks could retain salary if they had to.

The Ducks aren't the Leafs. They have an internal budget and won't take the broken husk of a player just to weasel out from under the cap.

Despres is an OK defenceman. If they'll trade him at a loss they might be ok, but Lindholm is going to get paid.
 

doulos

Registered User
Oct 4, 2007
7,725
1,235
The trick is to stop talking about defensemen. ;)

Hamonic - no longer moving
Vatanen - signed
Barrie - no longer moving.
 

Zaddy

Registered User
Feb 8, 2013
13,058
5,850
Keep on pretending you know what discussions managers are having and who is available or for what cost.

Post it as fact too ;)

I think I got history on my side here, but either way don't you agree that Vatanen was one of the most realistic trade targets out there? Or do you truly believe young #1D like Lindholm and Faulk have been made available?
 

Raab

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
18,085
2,777
They just end up paying more escrow. And will make less anyway.

For this year yes, but when you're signing 7 year deals maybe the money comes up in year 3 and your escrow payments go down.
 

belair

Jay Woodcroft Unemployment Stance
Apr 9, 2010
38,636
21,830
Canada
Glad Vatanen's off the market. He was not what we needed on the back-end.

I wonder if Chia thinks the left side of the D is as set as we do.

Fowler can move the puck and QB a powerplay...

If we're gonna do that, why not just trade for J-mfing-J for a song? Columbus is probably just going to give him away anyways and I'd think Anaheim would make us pay the divisional tax for any deal regarding a defenseman.
 

McDrai

Registered User
Mar 29, 2009
24,182
18,787
The trick is to stop talking about defensemen. ;)

Hamonic - no longer moving
Vatanen - signed
Barrie - no longer moving.

Pretty much all of the dmen the Oilers were supposedly going to target are off the market. Yup I agree. Let's talk about plugs
 

Ranksu

Crotch Academy ftw
Sponsor
Apr 28, 2014
19,705
9,329
Lapland
Hmm who is the new target now?
Ryan Ellis?

161xk5.jpg
 

Raab

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
18,085
2,777
The Ducks aren't the Leafs. They have an internal budget and won't take the broken husk of a player just to weasel out from under the cap.

Despres is an OK defenceman. If they'll trade him at a loss they might be ok, but Lindholm is going to get paid.

Meh, I think they dump one or two of Bieksa, Depres, Stoner to keep Lindholm and Fowler. At least thats what I would try and do as a GM. I can't see Lindholm getting much more then 5M if he only signs for 3 or 4 years.
 

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,579
29,244
Edmonton
Interesting that I've seen a couple people on Twitter say this doesn't remove Vatanen from the trade market. He has a modified NTC in the last two years of his deal. Nothing before.
 

Pointteen

Registered User
Jun 9, 2008
8,021
1,667
New Brunswick
Glad Vatanen's off the market. He was not what we needed on the back-end.



If we're gonna do that, why not just trade for J-mfing-J for a song? Columbus is probably just going to give him away anyways and I'd think Anaheim would make us pay the divisional tax for any deal regarding a defenseman.

Only two years. Jerk Jernhsern and Hamonic would be some improvement.
 

Zaddy

Registered User
Feb 8, 2013
13,058
5,850
Well they do have Josi, Weber, and Ekholm. There could be a deal to be made

They don't have anyone that's even remotely qualified to play in the top4 outside of those guys and Ellis. Moving him creates a pretty big hole. Signed to a beauty of a deal too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad