Fro
Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
yeah...to get him, its gonna hurt...just gotta ask if Cam's output will stack up to what Kane's will...
2014 Trade Deadline Thread (All General Deadline Talk/Proposals/Blog Rumors in here)
- Thread starter Mcnotloilersfan
- Start date
- Status
yeah...to get him, its gonna hurt...just gotta ask if Cam's output will stack up to what Kane's will...
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Problem is right now the comparison is a "head thing." Makes it damn difficult to project.
You think I'm suggesting this is some kind of "garbage out" scheme I've got going here? Not sure where you get the idea this is "easy."
Tallinder and Ott each offer, potentially (please keep in mind I said I'm not sure I'm on board with this myself), something the CBJ may already have but not have enough of.
Last edited:
Xoggz22
Registered User
If the plan is to build "Brick by Brick" then, in my opinion, we're talking about a long term plan to manage assets for long lived success. That's not sending young players, prospects and picks for rentals. I just don't see the CBJ giving up anything of significance for a rental.
If we're moving assets like Cam, Erixon, Golo, Savard, Prout, picks, I think it's for a younger player that can have impact now and in the future. Bring in someone under contract or a RFA to re-sign. I like all these guys but if the FO thinks they can land a higher end asset to be a big long term piece, move them. I won't profess to be any type of scout or talent evaluator but the ones in the NHL are generally pretty good. If they think E. Kane, Gudbranson, Kulikov or someone of that ilk is worth moving assets for because they offer a long term, higher end option than any of the pieces being moved then I support it.
In my opinion the CBJ guys I listed are all likely solid NHL players and can help teams win but I don't see any of them as difference makers game in and game out. Cam may be the closest to having ability to impact a game (ie. take over a game) but I don't see it as something consistent. He's going to be a very nice player and I'd love for him to be on the CBJ but using a solid asset like that to get a high end potential guy would be OK with me.
Now that being said, I don't think on ice talent is the only standard to judge an impact player by. Locker room, off ice, attitude and system fit also needs to play in the equation. If we can't get a better long term piece than move a fringe prospect and/or lower end pick for a #6/7 d-man with playoff experience to help with this year only. I don't move assets of significance for a rental. Not this year, not right now.
I would, however, ask the Panthers if they are serious about moving Gudbranson for a good package. I think he would be a very good fit in Columbus short and long term. Just isn't the playoff warrior we might be looking for to help this young team this year.
If we're moving assets like Cam, Erixon, Golo, Savard, Prout, picks, I think it's for a younger player that can have impact now and in the future. Bring in someone under contract or a RFA to re-sign. I like all these guys but if the FO thinks they can land a higher end asset to be a big long term piece, move them. I won't profess to be any type of scout or talent evaluator but the ones in the NHL are generally pretty good. If they think E. Kane, Gudbranson, Kulikov or someone of that ilk is worth moving assets for because they offer a long term, higher end option than any of the pieces being moved then I support it.
In my opinion the CBJ guys I listed are all likely solid NHL players and can help teams win but I don't see any of them as difference makers game in and game out. Cam may be the closest to having ability to impact a game (ie. take over a game) but I don't see it as something consistent. He's going to be a very nice player and I'd love for him to be on the CBJ but using a solid asset like that to get a high end potential guy would be OK with me.
Now that being said, I don't think on ice talent is the only standard to judge an impact player by. Locker room, off ice, attitude and system fit also needs to play in the equation. If we can't get a better long term piece than move a fringe prospect and/or lower end pick for a #6/7 d-man with playoff experience to help with this year only. I don't move assets of significance for a rental. Not this year, not right now.
I would, however, ask the Panthers if they are serious about moving Gudbranson for a good package. I think he would be a very good fit in Columbus short and long term. Just isn't the playoff warrior we might be looking for to help this young team this year.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
I agree. But...
Is it possible that one of JD's "bricks" is less literal and more esoteric? Is it possible that one brick is "a playoff appearance with the best chance to advance"? Now, what players that involves - maybe the ones the team already has - is open to debate. I'm just bringing up the possibility that JD views what some people would call "loading up for a playoff run" as more something like "setting my young players up to see what a playoff run feels like."
CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,701
- 26,750
Im not trading cam++ for Kane. Kane is a whole bunch of maybe and character questions to boot. Nty
Xoggz22
Registered User
There would be some value to that. Question is what do you have to mortgage to do that? I don't think JD is the guy that moves what I would consider a significant asset for a rental just to do that. I also think JK is aggressive but not silly. He gambled on Gabby with 3 assets last year. Brass appears to be a 40-45 pt player that doesn't have it in all three zones or the faceoff dot, Moore who looks like a solid NHL player - maybe top 3/4 and Dorsett who was easily the most expendable. Gabby had(has?) a chance to be a difference maker where as the others don't (my opinion only). I think that was a reasonable option to try for. I can see another move similar to that but with longer term and a little younger.
I'd like a small add to push this team to not only make the playoffs but help the young players realize how to win in them too. I just don't want to see a significant asset moved to acquire a short term player at this point.
Of all of the guys we could trade, Cam is one guy I WOULDN'T trade. I just don't see why we would trade a young player who has proven he can score goals.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
I'm with you. My "proposal" was 1st 2014 + Erixon/Savard/Golo + Chaput-type (need to move 2 contracts in my 2 players in scenario).
How many of those assets are "significant"? I guess a case could be made for "all 3." I also think a reasonable case could be made for "1".
Kane is younger than Cam and already has a 30 goal season. The maybe is in the character questions, not in his game.
I'm not huge into the idea of moving him, it's just that 1) He's 24, not that young, and not likely to go to another level, 2) not a top line scorer which is what we'd have to get if we move him.
Incidentally.. I just checked and Cam is on pace for 26 goals this year, exactly as I predicted in the preseason. Yeah I don't want to trade him either, unless its Kane or ROR coming back.
Last edited:
That's too nice of a package, I would never trade potential stars for depth players, unless its your only go for the cup year. Also if you just need a Delisle type to dump a contract, Chaput is too good for that. Go with Dalton Smith or Lukas Sedlak (there's actually much lower prospects than that we can move).
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Was going for a combination of contract + value. Also note "Chaput-TYPE." FWIW. I get what you're saying.
CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,701
- 26,750
Rangers have reportedly traded Ryan Callahan
Darren Dreger @DarrenDreger 1m
Developing story, NYR grant permission to at least 1 team who has already talked with Callahan's agent. More on Sportscentre. #TSN
Darren Dreger @DarrenDreger 1m
Developing story, NYR grant permission to at least 1 team who has already talked with Callahan's agent. More on Sportscentre. #TSN
CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,701
- 26,750
Can't talk extensions without permission, and the only way to sign extensions is if they're on their team.
I think this is just NYR looking for a sign and trade deal. Team2 talks to Callahan's agent to get a deal, and if they reach one NYR will then sign it and trade him.
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,087
- 535
Personally I'm not a fan of Callahan. He's 28, has peaked, and is basically Antoine Vermette on the wing.
But with permission, another team can certainly get an idea of what an extension would cost in term and in salary, which would allow trade talks to either progress or grind to a halt.
It's possible this goes nowhere.
But with permission, another team can certainly get an idea of what an extension would cost in term and in salary, which would allow trade talks to either progress or grind to a halt.
It's possible this goes nowhere.
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,087
- 535
Sign-and-trades aren't allowed in the CBA. It would likely have to be Callahan for close to nothing, with a bunch of conditional pieces that would be triggered upon the extension being signed so no one's left holding the bag.
Could that be structured so that its just like a sign and trade? I.e. the same exact package only in different order.
When Antoine Vermette is ever remotely considered for the role of captain of anything other than a church softball league team, let me know.
I just would trade other players before him. BTW, 24 is young to me.
Nowadays most snipers are in their primes at that age.
Xoggz22
Registered User
A team can grant access to the agent to discuss a new deal that would be feasible in the event the team can reach a trade agreement. This is permitted provided the players current team grants access. It doesn't mean a trade is in place but it would improve the chances of a trade happening.
No deal in place, but could be if a contract structure could be agreed to. It's possible the pieces are in place but not without agreement on a contract. I don't think this indicates a trade has already occurred at all. Just greasing the skids....
CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,701
- 26,750
According to Pierre LeBrun the Canucks are ready to call it a year and build for next year. Only UNT would be the Sedin's. Anybody of interest?
John Davidson was just on MSG at intermission of NYR-NYI. Said emphatically no rental deals for us this year. Guess that closes the Ott discussion (thankfully).
- Status
