Proposal: Trade Rumours/Proposals 2019-20 PART X

[aragorn]

I wouldn't look to trade for the 1st OA, however, if LA wanted to move down to 3rd or 5th than PD should certainly listen especially if it doesn't cost as much. For example, if LA really wanted a guy like Drysdale than I would certainly give them the 5th OA, Brannstrom & a 2nd rd pick to move 5th to 2nd & take both Byfield & Stutzle.

However, given how long Doughty & Kopitar are still going to be part of their organization it's much more likely they stay & take Stutzle or Byfield. I still doubt there will be any trades in the top 5 or even the top 10.

Click to read more...

 

[Hale The Villain]

Much muchhhh rather Jarry at a lesser cost.

I have no interest in giving up a 1st for a goalie with an injury history, declining play and that needs to be paid based off of his prior achievements on a great team.

No thanks.

Jarry was better this season but was nowhere near as good over his junior or AHL career.

This is the only year going all the way back to Murray's 18YR old season in junior where his save percentage has been below .900.

Murray is only 26. He's the same age as Hogberg and a year older than Jarry. He should have plenty of years ahead of him as a #1 goalie.

 

[JD1]

The thing is, fair value is not getting that pick. It would have to be unfair value. Value so big that the Rangers would be stupid not to take it. Those deals you offered aren’t it.

my take is you have that reversed..... I think the ONLY reason the rangers might move that pick is if for whatever reason they'd rather someone other than Laf or rather have a bucket of goodies. It'd end up a game of chicken, but would you pay top dollar for something that someone is trying to sell?

That said, I don't think the Rangers move the pick

 

[JD1]

A package that would fill our needs would be either Laf or the overpayment of an offer. An underpayment fills zero needs. The Rangers also don’t need to use this asset to fill their needs. At all. And I think maybe that’s the disconnect here. The Rangers have stockpiling assets and picks for years now. They have an additional pick in this draft as well. So not only do they not need to trade the 1st overall in general, they certainly don’t need to trade it to fill needs which they can do elsewhere.

It would be wishful thinking if I thought they were gonna trade that pick, but they won’t be because A)they want to draft Laf and 2)no team would want to trade what it would cost. The Rangers are gonna pick at one and the Senators will pick 3+5.

so you're just kinda wasting time in here then? trying to stir things up ?

 

[KnuckChuckinTkachuk]

Jarry was better this season but was nowhere near as good over his junior or AHL career.

This is the only year going all the way back to Murray's 18YR old season in junior where his save percentage has been below .900.

Murray is only 26. He's the same age as Hogberg and a year older than Jarry. He should have plenty of years ahead of him as a #1 goalie.

But again, he has an injury history, has never played 50+ games in a season, has declining stats and needs a new contract (was paid 3,75mil).

I don't feel like paying a goalie 6+ mil a year long-term because he won 2 cups (one of those runs he played 50% and Fleury the other 50%) on a very good Peguins team with HoF talent... There's nothing to suggest that he would be some amazing #1 goalie in front of a young Ottawa team.

Why not just sign Lehner, who has Vezina like stats for the last 3 years, without having to give up a 1st/asset?

 

[BankStreetParade]

Are we going to continue pretending to litigate this dumbass hypothetical trade for 1OA for the rest of 2020? Or can we come back to reality, realize that no one on this forum knows what the asking price or offer would be from either side and talk about something else? There's a lot of other things that we can talk about, can we please move on?

 

[Sweatred]

I really couldn’t care less about LAF... I’d rather focus on paying less to get BY and Stutzle... or even securing Byfield and Raymond/Drysdale.

 

[Hale The Villain]

But again, he has an injury history, has never played 50+ games in a season, has declining stats and needs a new contract (was paid 3,75mil).

I don't feel like paying a goalie 6+ mil a year long-term because he won 2 cups (one of those runs he played 50% and Fleury the other 50%) on a very good Peguins team with HoF talent... There's nothing to suggest that he would be some amazing #1 goalie in front of a young Ottawa team.

Why not just sign Lehner, who has Vezina like stats for the last 3 years, without having to give up a 1st/asset?

There are some concerns no doubt. If he didn't have an injury history and had a great year instead of a bad one he'd be getting paid 7M+ on a long-term deal and would be Penguin for a very long time.

We'd be buying low on Murray (in both assets and salary) in the hopes that he can stay healthy and turn things around. IMO it's worth doing, as I'm not too optimistic about the Sens having a true #1 goalie in the pipeline right now.

I'd be down to sign Lehner instead at a cost of zero assets, but I don't know if he'd be willing to come back. I think he'll re-sign in Vegas.

 

[KnuckChuckinTkachuk]

There are some concerns no doubt. If he didn't have an injury history and had a great year instead of a bad one he'd be getting paid 7M+ on a long-term deal and would be Penguin for a very long time.

We'd be buying low on Murray (in both assets and salary) in the hopes that he can stay healthy and turn things around. IMO it's worth doing, as I'm not too optimistic about the Sens having a true #1 goalie in the pipeline right now.

I'd be down to sign Lehner instead at a cost of zero assets, but I don't know if he'd be willing to come back. I think he'll re-sign in Vegas.

I still think giving up a late 1st/early 2nd is too much for Murray given that he needs a new contract and has been struggling recently. Like I much rather roll out Nilsson/Hogberg while Daccord improves in Belleville rather than giving up some value for Murray.

I think Lehner is looking for job security and to be paid fairly. He might not have left on the best terms but everyone aside from Melnyk/Dorion are gone and its a fresh group in Ottawa, somewhere he is familiar with. I agree Vegas should resign him but they have to move Fleury first.

 

[RAFI BOMB]

This hits nothing on our list. There is no way in hell you're getting that pick without at least 3+5, and likely even that isn't enough.

The last time the 1st overall pick was traded was in 2003. The Florida Panthers traded 1st overall and 73rd overall to the Pittsburgh Penguins for 3rd overall, 55th overall and Mikael Samuelsson.

You Rangers fans are living in a fantasy land if you think 1st overall is worth 3 + 5, let alone 3+5 +.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

The last time the 1st overall pick was traded was in 2003. The Florida Panthers traded 1st overall and 73rd overall to the Pittsburgh Penguins for 3rd overall, 55th overall and Mikael Samuelsson.

You Rangers fans are living in a fantasy land if you think 1st overall is worth 3 + 5, let alone 3+5 +.

And you're living in a fantasy land if you think you're ever getting that pick then. This isn't 2003 and the Rangers aren't any of those teams.

 

[StoicSensFan]

It's nice of Jeff Gorton to bless us with his presence.

 

[RAFI BOMB]

And you're living in a fantasy land if you think you're ever getting that pick then. This isn't 2003 and the Rangers aren't any of those teams.

I guess we will see then. The Sens definitely have the assets to make a compelling offer and your GM will decide whether he values the offer more than the pick. Saying this isn't 2003 and the Rangers aren't those teams is irrelevant, the point of that trade is to offer a more reasonable benchmark for what the actual value is. It is easy for fans to have lofty expectations of the value of assets but the reality is that they often get traded for a lot less than people think. Even if you look around the league at many of the trades that have occurred in the recent years, there are multiple examples of players/assets traded in which people thought the return would be much higher than what it ended up being.

Also your response isn't really saying much. I provided some facts that discredited the claim that 1st overall was worth 3+5+. The evidence suggests that isn't close to what the value of a 1st overall pick actually is. I said Rangers fans are living in a fantasy land if they think 1st is worth 3+5 because there is no evidence to support that valuation. Your response is that I am living in a fantasy land if I think the Sens are getting that pick then. Implying that 1st overall is actually worth 3+5+. Given there is no basis for that and you haven't provided any evidence supporting that claim as a valid valuation it sounds like you would like to keep your fantasy and don't want to let things like facts and reality get in the way.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

I guess we will see then. The Sens definitely have the assets to make a compelling offer and your GM will decide whether he values the offer more than the pick. Saying this isn't 2003 and the Rangers aren't those teams is irrelevant, the point of that trade is to offer a more reasonable benchmark for what the actual value is. It is easy for fans to have lofty expectations of the value of assets but the reality is that they often get traded for a lot less than people think. Even if you look around the league at many of the trades that have occurred in the recent years, there are multiple examples of players/assets traded in which people thought the return would be much higher than what it ended up being.

Also your response isn't really saying much. I provided some facts that discredited the claim that 1st overall was worth 3+5+. The evidence suggests that isn't close to what the value of a 1st overall pick actually is. I said Rangers fans are living in a fantasy land if they think 1st is worth 3+5 because there is no evidence to support that valuation. Your response is that I am living in a fantasy land if I think the Sens are getting that pick then. Implying that 1st overall is actually worth 3+5+. Given there is no basis for that and you haven't provided any evidence supporting that claim as a valid valuation it sounds like you would like to keep your fantasy and don't want to let things like facts and reality get in the way.

Yeah ya see things don't exist in a vacuum. Just because that cost that much in 2003 to those teams doesn't translate to us. We won't be trading that pick for anything less than an overpayment. In fact, we won't be trading that pick at all. You guys will get great players at 3 and 5. I would focus on that at this point because the chances of your team completing a trade for #1 are extremely, extremely low.

 

[BondraTime]

Yeah ya see things don't exist in a vacuum. Just because that cost that much in 2003 to those teams doesn't translate to us. We won't be trading that pick for anything less than an overpayment. In fact, we won't be trading that pick at all. You guys will get great players at 3 and 5. I would focus on that at this point because the chances of your team completing a trade for #1 are extremely, extremely low.

We don’t think we are, nor do we want to, trade those picks for 1st, so it’s really a moot point. We know we aren’t trading for 1st, and we know it wouldn’t be for those assets if we were. We know the Rangers will pick Lafreniere, all we have now is waiting on who we pick at 3 and 5.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

We don’t think we are, nor do we want to, trade those picks for 1st, so it’s really a moot point. We know we aren’t trading for 1st, and we know it wouldn’t be for those assets if we were. We know the Rangers will pick Lafreniere, all we have now is waiting on who we pick at 3 and 5.

Wish you guys nothing but luck with those picks. Seriously. You'll get two amazing prospects with those picks.

 

[TheNewEra]

i want to trade with pittsburgh, seems like they are desperate enough to do stupid things

 

[RAFI BOMB]

Yeah ya see things don't exist in a vacuum. Just because that cost that much in 2003 to those teams doesn't translate to us. We won't be trading that pick for anything less than an overpayment. In fact, we won't be trading that pick at all. You guys will get great players at 3 and 5. I would focus on that at this point because the chances of your team completing a trade for #1 are extremely, extremely low.

Well that is a different claim. There is the market value for such a trade to occur and then there is the willingness of the participants of the trade. There are always assets that teams are simply unwilling to trade no matter what the offer is. I am not sure what the willingness is from the Rangers management to part with the pick. I understand that Rangers fans don't want to trade it but sometimes GM's end up doing things that the fans don't like for a myriad of reasons. There is a lot that goes on behind the scenes which can make it very complicated and can result in fans becoming frustrated and upset. As Sens fans we have gotten very used to that frustration and disappointment so that influences my response to you here. It is a good thing to be prepared for the possibility of being disappointed so that if it happens you aren't so blindsided by it.

Maybe your GM is completely committed to drafting Lafreniere and won't pass on him no matter what. But maybe he also likes other prospects near the top of the draft, maybe he thinks the gap between them isn't so big and maybe if he can get that other prospect plus something to close the gap plus a sweetener then maybe he makes that deal. Maybe there are other organizational needs that he would like to fix and maybe if those could be fixed via trade maybe that also influences things. Take for example a pure hypothetical such as your GM wanting to address goaltending. Maybe he sees Askarov in this draft and thinks he is a can't miss goalie and would be a core piece to a championship caliber team. Maybe he thinks Askarov will go top ten and doesn't want to risk losing him. Maybe he wouldn't take him at 1, or maybe even top 3 but he would take him top 5. He might try a few offers to get the pick from the Sens but then realize the Sens want 1st overall. Then he would have to decide who he values more Lafreniere or Askarov. If he decides that the goalie is the more valuable asset in the long run then maybe he consider parting with 1st overall for 5th overall ++. He would realize their is a gap in value so he would want a good return and he would also want to save face with the fans so he would look to get some big adds to make that deal work.

The point of the above hypothetical is that sometimes that is how this thing works. If your GM thinks another prospect in this draft will be the key piece to your organization would you rather he draft that prospect at 1st overall or trade the pick to where that prospect likely will go and then get a solid add on top?

 

[Stuzchuk]

i want to trade with Pittsburgh, seems like they are desperate enough to do stupid things

what do you want to target? their 2022 1st rnd pick?

they dont have much left and their prospect pool is pretty depleted

 

[Peptic Balcers]

what do you want to target? their 2022 1st rnd pick?

they dont have much left and their prospect pool is pretty depleted

that could be a nice pick

 

[Ser Grogu]

what do you want to target? their 2022 1st rnd pick?

they dont have much left and their prospect pool is pretty depleted

Wright
Stutzle/Byfield
Brown
Norris

 

[TheBloodyNine]

Well that is a different claim. There is the market value for such a trade to occur and then there is the willingness of the participants of the trade. There are always assets that teams are simply unwilling to trade no matter what the offer is. I am not sure what the willingness is from the Rangers management to part with the pick. I understand that Rangers fans don't want to trade it but sometimes GM's end up doing things that the fans don't like for a myriad of reasons. There is a lot that goes on behind the scenes which can make it very complicated and can result in fans becoming frustrated and upset. As Sens fans we have gotten very used to that frustration and disappointment so that influences my response to you here. It is a good thing to be prepared for the possibility of being disappointed so that if it happens you aren't so blindsided by it.

Maybe your GM is completely committed to drafting Lafreniere and won't pass on him no matter what. But maybe he also likes other prospects near the top of the draft, maybe he thinks the gap between them isn't so big and maybe if he can get that other prospect plus something to close the gap plus a sweetener then maybe he makes that deal. Maybe there are other organizational needs that he would like to fix and maybe if those could be fixed via trade maybe that also influences things. Take for example a pure hypothetical such as your GM wanting to address goaltending. Maybe he sees Askarov in this draft and thinks he is a can't miss goalie and would be a core piece to a championship caliber team. Maybe he thinks Askarov will go top ten and doesn't want to risk losing him. Maybe he wouldn't take him at 1, or maybe even top 3 but he would take him top 5. He might try a few offers to get the pick from the Sens but then realize the Sens want 1st overall. Then he would have to decide who he values more Lafreniere or Askarov. If he decides that the goalie is the more valuable asset in the long run then maybe he consider parting with 1st overall for 5th overall ++. He would realize their is a gap in value so he would want a good return and he would also want to save face with the fans so he would look to get some big adds to make that deal work.

The point of the above hypothetical is that sometimes that is how this thing works. If your GM thinks another prospect in this draft will be the key piece to your organization would you rather he draft that prospect at 1st overall or trade the pick to where that prospect likely will go and then get a solid add on top?

The prospect he thinks will be a key piece in our organization is Alexis Lafrienre

 

[Polar Bear]

The last time the 1st overall pick was traded was in 2003. The Florida Panthers traded 1st overall and 73rd overall to the Pittsburgh Penguins for 3rd overall, 55th overall and Mikael Samuelsson.

You Rangers fans are living in a fantasy land if you think 1st overall is worth 3 + 5, let alone 3+5 +.

Not going to get into the whole value aspect of the argument with the other Rangers fan, but this is just a bad comparison. This is pre-salary cap era and a TOTALLY different NHL. There is a reason the 1st pick has not been dealt during the salary cap period. The cost for the pick would not even closely resemble what occurred pre-salary cap.

 

[bicboi64]

Not going to get into the whole value aspect of the argument with the other Rangers fan, but this is just a bad comparison. This is pre-salary cap era and a TOTALLY different NHL. There is a reason the 1st pick has not been dealt during the salary cap period. The cost for the pick would not even closely resemble what occurred pre-salary cap.

100% agree with this. To have an elite top 6 forward that is cost controlled changes the dimensions of this whole conversation. I feel the cap era makes it impossible to even put a value on the 1st overall pick. By the time someone like Laf needs a new contract, the NYR might be able to move on from guys like Zibby, Panarin, Kreider, etc... and do another quick rebuild.

 

[RAFI BOMB]

Not going to get into the whole value aspect of the argument with the other Rangers fan, but this is just a bad comparison. This is pre-salary cap era and a TOTALLY different NHL. There is a reason the 1st pick has not been dealt during the salary cap period. The cost for the pick would not even closely resemble what occurred pre-salary cap.

I very much doubt that. There would be a disparity but it would likely be much smaller than you suggest.

From an interview with Craig Button;
Should the Sens trade for Lafrenière? Ft. Craig Button

To first get a sense of how this draft stacks up compared to recent years, I asked him how Lafrenière ranks compared to recent first overall picks.

“Going back 10 years, we’ve put Lafrenière behind the three M’s, McDavid, MacKinnon and Matthews. For first overalls, he falls into that next category of player. I think he’s the best player in the draft but he’s not McDavid, he’s not Crosby, but I think he’s a star player,” said Button.

Comparing Lafrenière to the rest of the field Button said, “with three and five, you’re getting high quality players. That means a first line player, whether that’s a center or a winger, a number one defenseman in either Drysdale or Sanderson, and if you want a goalie Askarov is a number one franchise goalie in my view. Any of the top prospects in that range, [the Sens] are getting a high quality top line player.”

Button said, there is no gap in quality of Lafrenière compared to the combination of players the Sens will be able to select at three and five, “you’re getting two high quality players instead of one, three and five is way better than having first. I’d absolutely consider having three and five more valuable than first, it’s not Mario Lemieux or Connor McDavid or Sidney Crosby.”

When asked if he would make the move of trading three and five for first overall if he was GM of the Senators he said there was no way, and emphasized someone would have to vastly overpay for those two picks if he was to even consider it.