Confirmed with Link: Sens acquire Callahan + pick for Condon + pick

Status
Not open for further replies.

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
Right, because using cash to acquire assets for your professional sports franchise is "flushing money down the toilet". Carolina done ****ed up big time flushing $6m down the toilet to acquire a 1st in what's projected to be one of the strongest drafts in recent memory.

News flash: don't own a ****ing NHL team if you don't want to spend cash to acquire assets to win.

News flash: every single team values money,
another news flash: Carolina spent real dollars and real cap space so taking on that contract was worth a hell of a lot more then a LTIR contract.
News flash: They took a real cap hit and real money from us.
News flash: people can own what they want and it’s not up to you, saying “don’t own a NHL team” means nothing.
I am sure old EM will look at what he has in life then look at what you have and say “thanks tips I don’t need your advice”
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
God forbid we expect them to operate like a real NHL franchise and not the butt end of the joke they currently are.

We're led to believe it's normal that Ottawa is circumventing the cap floor harder than any other team in history. It's not, this is Melnyk, this is not normal whatsoever to have your GM spend his summer trying to get as far below the floor as possible at the expense of trying to improve now or in the future.

Oh please explain how getting rid of that goalie hurt the team.
Tampa probably heard we were stuck with a goalie that had a negative value and came up with a deal that helped both teams.
It’s a nothing trade, it hurt nothing, it means nothing and yes paying that contract is flushing money down the toilet.
You people are crying because someone isn’t throwing away money for no reason on nothing.
Its weak and ridiculous
 

GrantLemons

Church of FYOUS
Feb 3, 2013
1,997
1,584
Ottawa, ON
Oh please explain how getting rid of that goalie hurt the team.
Tampa probably heard we were stuck with a goalie that had a negative value and came up with a deal that helped both teams.
It’s a nothing trade, it hurt nothing, it means nothing and yes paying that contract is flushing money down the toilet.
You people are crying because someone isn’t throwing away money for no reason on nothing.
Its weak and ridiculous

It didn't, but a well run franchise uses the leverage of taking Callahan's contract to acquire assets, to help the team win, to increase revenues, to make money. The Ottawa Senators use that leverage to put $3m in Eugene's pocket.

Are people not allowed to be upset that the team is seemingly more focused on saving money than building a winning team?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RaMai and Cosmix

RaMai

Registered User
Mar 6, 2011
476
167
Canada
Oh please explain how getting rid of that goalie hurt the team.
Tampa probably heard we were stuck with a goalie that had a negative value and came up with a deal that helped both teams.
It’s a nothing trade, it hurt nothing, it means nothing and yes paying that contract is flushing money down the toilet.
You people are crying because someone isn’t throwing away money for no reason on nothing.
Its weak and ridiculous
The nothing is the problem dude, this is the time of the year where franchises adjust their plans for short- and long-term success.
Ottawa's summer is more like the search for where could we save a buck.
Nothing since the "Rebuild" announcement indicates it is anything else as simply cost cutting.
 

GrantLemons

Church of FYOUS
Feb 3, 2013
1,997
1,584
Ottawa, ON
The nothing is the problem dude, this is the time of the year where franchises adjust their plans for short- and long-term success.
Ottawa's summer is more like the search for where could we save a buck.
Nothing since the "Rebuild" announcement indicates it is anything else as simply cost cutting.

According to him spending cash to acquire assets to help the team win is "wasting money" or "flushing money down the toilet".

He'd make an excellent addition to the front office.
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
It didn't, but a well run franchise uses the leverage of taking Callahan's contract to acquire assets, to help the team win, to increase revenues, to make money. The Ottawa Senators use that leverage to put $3m in Eugene's pocket.

Are people not allowed to be upset that the team is seemingly more focused on saving money than building a winning team?

Cool do you think they would have gave us 20 first round picks?
How about 40 of them? Do you think there is a chance they wanted less restrictions when making moves this summer and didn’t have to move the contract.
if teams wanted real assets they just keep the contract and do the extra paper work moving the LTIR around. It wasn’t a move they had to make.
 

Sens

Registered User
Jan 7, 2016
6,086
2,550
It didn't, but a well run franchise uses the leverage of taking Callahan's contract to acquire assets, to help the team win, to increase revenues, to make money. The Ottawa Senators use that leverage to put $3m in Eugene's pocket.

Are people not allowed to be upset that the team is seemingly more focused on saving money than building a winning team?

How anyone can get excited by this deal because a Melnyk gets to save a few bucks is beyond me
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
According to him spending cash to acquire assets to help the team win is "wasting money" or "flushing money down the toilet".

He'd make an excellent addition to the front office.

No paying that goalie is a waste of money. Please explain how it isn’t.
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
Because it would have allowed us to extract a quality asset from Tampa.

Do I really have to explain this?

They could do the paper work and use the LTIR to squeez everyone in.
It isn’t a Toronto situation where they had to get a real cap hit off the books, they are not forced to give up anything.
What’s to say they make the trade if they have to give up future assets?
Your acting like it’s a fact the sens lost something, that’s not the case at all.
Prove they would have moved the contract at the cost you want?

What you have to explain is why your made up story is a real thing.

Can’t Tampa just say, “no thanks we will just put him on the reserves”
 

RaMai

Registered User
Mar 6, 2011
476
167
Canada
They could do the paper work and use the LTIR to squeez everyone in.
It isn’t a Toronto situation where they had to get a real cap hit off the books, they are not forced to give up anything.
What’s to say they make the trade if they have to give up future assets?
Your acting like it’s a fact the sens lost something, that’s not the case at all.
Prove they would have moved the contract at the cost you want?

What you have to explain is why your made up story is a real thing.

Can’t Tampa just say, “no thanks we will just put him on the reserves”
You have to PROOF that Tampa would have said this...exactly the same, unrealistic scenario, you would like to see proof for. All you are doing is shit disturbing, there is no need for this...EM and PD are doing plenty of it on their own.
 

GrantLemons

Church of FYOUS
Feb 3, 2013
1,997
1,584
Ottawa, ON
They could do the paper work and use the LTIR to squeez everyone in.
It isn’t a Toronto situation where they had to get a real cap hit off the books, they are not forced to give up anything.
What’s to say they make the trade if they have to give up future assets?
Your acting like it’s a fact the sens lost something, that’s not the case at all.
Prove they would have moved the contract at the cost you want?

What you have to explain is why your made up story is a real thing.

Can’t Tampa just say, “no thanks we will just put him on the reserves”

There's a video posted in this thread where Tampa's GM explains very in-depth as to why having actual cap space as opposed to LTIR cap was extremely beneficial to them, as well as doing the trade before the season began. You may want to check that out, because an NHL GM can explain it much better than I can.

I'm acting like the Sens lost something because well, they did. They lost out on an asset they surely would have received if they took Callahan's contract straight up. Are you going to dispute that now as well?
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
You have to PROOF that Tampa would have said this...exactly the same, unrealistic scenario, you would like to see proof for. All you are doing is **** disturbing, there is no need for this...EM and PD are doing plenty of it on their own.

Oh so you don’t think think the sens would have asked for more?
They did the answer was no.
I would assume Tampa values it’s draft picks as much as you do why wouldn’t they?

The sens could have refused the deal sure and what’s the benifit?
They get stuck with a contract they don’t want and a player they won’t use. Big win
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
There's a video posted in this thread where Tampa's GM explains very in-depth as to why having actual cap space as opposed to LTIR cap was extremely beneficial to them, as well as doing the trade before the season began. You may want to check that out, because an NHL GM can explain it much better than I can.

I'm acting like the Sens lost something because well, they did. They lost out on an asset they surely would have received if they took Callahan's contract straight up. Are you going to dispute that now as well?

And if they didn’t want to give up an asset? You can’t force them too. Your still making up something that isn’t there, how do you not understand this?
There isn’t another team in the NHL with a contact they don’t want that could make the same deal with Tampa if we wanted more?
I doubt it’s as black and white as your thinking
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,838
31,048
The Sens moved a 158ish pick for a 152ish pick so that Melnyk. can save Condon salary

That’s the deal... that’s what happened

The only person that benefited was Melnyk from this deal.

It's not the deal that's the problem. It doesn't hurt the team.

In a vacuum, there really isn't anything to complain about, but the trade didn't happen in a vacuum.

It happened in an environment where the team has been criticized for putting cost cutting ahead of the on ice product,

It comes in an environment where Ruszkowski said:
"The sole focus right now is to get those UFA’s re-signed. If, for the sake argument, Stone was not to stay, I would encourage people not to look at that as the final straw but look at that as opportunity in the context of the rebuild"

It comes in an environment where Dorion said:
"We’re having discussions … we’re having a multiple discussions, A great position that we’re in right now is our flexibility with our cap space. “We’ve alluded to that multiple times by saying that our flexibility with certain cap space allows us to take on a certain contract, possibly a guy that can help our culture, possibly a quality veteran, but at the same time we also get something that’s going to help our hockey team. Whether that’s a high pick, a really good young prospect, there are multiple avenues to look at. That’s something else we have to analyze and to help our team moving forward.”

So to frame the discussion around whether it would have been a waste to pay Condon, whether the trade has some minor benefits to the team or whether it's acceptable to be upset about the team saving some cash by making this deal is either being obtuse or deliberately confrontational.
 

RaMai

Registered User
Mar 6, 2011
476
167
Canada
Oh so you don’t think think the sens would have asked for more?
They did the answer was no.
I would assume Tampa values it’s draft picks as much as you do why wouldn’t they?

The sens could have refused the deal sure and what’s the benifit?
They get stuck with a contract they don’t want and a player they won’t use. Big win
So you don't have any proof, all other posters just have to accept that your opinions are right and ours are wrong?
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
So you don't have any proof, all other posters just have to accept that your opinions are right and ours are wrong?

Yes we got what Tampa would give us. That’s the proof
Can you say there is no other team in the NHL that would have traded the same type of contract and player to Tampa?
Why are you all acting like we are the only team in the nhl and Tampa has zero options other than giving the sens the moon?

The other opinions have zero thought put into them, I am sorry but pretending we are the only team to deal with and we had Tampa bent over the rail is not really based on reality
 

RaMai

Registered User
Mar 6, 2011
476
167
Canada
And if they didn’t want to give up an asset? You can’t force them too. Your still making up something that isn’t there, how do you not understand this?
There isn’t another team in the NHL with a contact they don’t want that could make the same deal with Tampa if we wanted more?
I doubt it’s as black and white as your thinking
That is clearly one of the problems this franchise has, everyone knows in what financial situation (or lack of) they are and they know PD's track record.
What are others doing if they don't like a deal? Wait for it...they refuse!
What does Ottawa? They still take the crappy deal and throw in a pick for good measure.
Who is to blame when the whole league shows sympathy for us having to tolerate a moron owner and incompetent management?
 

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,037
4,319
Yes we got what Tampa would give us. That’s the proof
Can you say there is no other team in the NHL that would have traded the same type of contract and player to Tampa?
Why are you all acting like we are the only team in the nhl and Tampa has zero options other than giving the sens the moon?

The other opinions have zero thought put into them, I am sorry but pretending we are the only team to deal with and we had Tampa bent over the rail is not really based on reality

Can you at least admit that there was a potential scenario where the Tampa Bay Lightning would consider paying more (in the way of assets) to move Callahan if they didn't have to take any salary back?
 

RaMai

Registered User
Mar 6, 2011
476
167
Canada
Yes we got what Tampa would give us. That’s the proof
Can you say there is no other team in the NHL that would have traded the same type of contract and player to Tampa?
Why are you all acting like we are the only team in the nhl and Tampa has zero options other than giving the sens the moon?

The other opinions have zero thought put into them, I am sorry but pretending we are the only team to deal with and we had Tampa bent over the rail is not really based on reality
Nobody said anything like that. What people are pointing out is that even with a nothing deal like this the Sens show their true intention...save money for EM. But it seems you are not getting it, so I'm out of this discussion.
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
That is clearly one of the problems this franchise has, everyone knows in what financial situation (or lack of) they are and they know PD's track record.
What are others doing if they don't like a deal? Wait for it...they refuse!
What does Ottawa? They still take the crappy deal and throw in a pick for good measure.
Who is to blame when the whole league shows sympathy for us having to tolerate a moron owner and incompetent management?

Hey here’s the deal you can save some money or sit on a player , but we have options, it’s up to you yes or no....

Please explain the benifit to saying no
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad