Toggle sidebar

Speculation: 2024-2025 General Discussion III: No pressure JBB!

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
I really doubt we go for someone like Palmieri unless we're targeting another big fish in the off-season, not enough quality free agents to be using assets for rentals
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zwui21
Sky04 said:
What does it matter, he's not sourcing it - just expanding on Severalli's thoughts.

Pretty well laid out article on pro's / con's.
thehockeywriters.com

Tampa Bay Lightning Trade Deadline Target: Kyle Palmieri - The Hockey Writers Tampa Bay Lightning Latest News, Analysis & More

Kyle Palmieri has been rumored a good fit for the Tampa Bay Lightning in recent weeks. What would he cost in a trade for the Lightning?
thehockeywriters.com thehockeywriters.com
Click to expand...
I suppose then I should dial back on the running jokes. Because, apparently, this is another post that went right over your head.
 
Sky04 said:
Apparently all you have to offer in these threads, continue.
Click to expand...
IMG_7447.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: VinikToWinIt and LTIR Trickery
The usual rumor suspects have indicated that BriseBois is ready to "go for it", and JBB himself gave off vibes that he is prepared to make big moves and pay a price to do so. Who knows if it will materialize, but I don't see him going for rentals unless the cost is dirt cheap.

Speaking for myself, I know players like Foerster have been mentioned and I thought at first there is zero chance he goes anywhere. But there is a player with skill, some size, RH shot, good draft pedigree and upside...could see that being our next Hagel trade if we do it. Now is a good time to capitalize on players with RFA rights, term, and/or good cap hits. The next 2-3 summers will be insane with contracts in UFA.
 
While he's not at the top of who I'd hope they acquire, Palmieri fits well at 2RW or perhaps 3RW for this season. If all he's going to be is a rental though, I wouldn't give up more than a 2nd+4th/lower level prospect+cap going back if needed. No higher level prospects in the organization nor any 1sts should be offered. I'd still prefer one of Bjorkstrand/McCann/Boeser for the 2RW spot, both now and for the next 3 or 4 years, but if more of a rental is what JBB is looking at for the role this run, Palmieri isn't a bad fit.
 
Last edited:
JTBF81 said:
While he's not at the top of who I'd hope they acquire, Palmieri fits well at 2RW or perhaps 3RW for this season. If all he's going to be is a rental though, I wouldn't give up more than a 2nd+4th/lower level prospect+cap going back if needed. No higher level prospects in the organization nor any 1sts should be offered. I'd still prefer one of Bjorkstrand/McCann/Boeser for the 2RW spot, both now and for the next 3 or 4 years, but if more of a rental is what JBB is looking at for the role this run, Palmieri isn't a bad fit.
Click to expand...
I would take Palmieri short term over over Boeser and Bjorkstrand, even though I can do without all of the above. Just a better fit, people might think that's crazy. More than 1 year, then it's a different story. McCann is a different ballgame and has a little pizzazz to him, but I don't see the necessity to bring him in at a high price. I have a feeling this deadline will have some curveballs.
 
JTBF81 said:
While he's not at the top of who I'd hope they acquire, Palmieri fits well at 2RW or perhaps 3RW for this season. If all he's going to be is a rental though, I wouldn't give up more than a 2nd+4th/lower level prospect+cap going back if needed. No higher level prospects in the organization nor any 1sts should be offered. I'd still prefer one of Bjorkstrand/McCann/Boeser for the 2RW spot, both now and for the next 3 or 4 years, but if more of a rental is what JBB is looking at for the role this run, Palmieri isn't a bad fit.
Click to expand...
Sheary would have to go back in any trade with Palmieri. I don't like Palmeiri as a fit personally, but if it gets Sheary off the team, so be it.

bov said:
I would take Palmieri short term over over Boeser and Bjorkstrand, even though I can do without all of the above. Just a better fit, people might think that's crazy. More than 1 year, then it's a different story. McCann is a different ballgame and has a little pizzazz to him, but I don't see the necessity to bring him in at a high price. I have a feeling this deadline will have some curveballs.
Click to expand...
Bjorkstrand is a good fit for the top 9 lines. He might not be the greatest defensively, but he adds scoring depth, is on the younger side and has an extra year on his contract to see if it all meshes. A lot lower risk with Bjorkstrand + his contract. McCann is the most ideal fit obviously, but his price tag is probably through the roof. McCann would fit pretty much anywhere on the Top 9 and excel, his play style is exactly our play style. I honestly don't think there is an overall potential target available better than him. Its just, I don't think we have anything that Seattle would want for McCann.

I do also think there are going to be some out of right field trades. Especially already seeing the Rantanen trade come out of nowhere, there is probably some players available that we haven't even thought of.
 
Felonious Python said:
It's sort of interesting that there's been very little NHL news/rumors during the 4 Nations.
Click to expand...
The GM's probably took a break. I'm willing to bet almost all of the guys not involved in 4 nations had at least a 3 day weekend. It's hard to imagine this was not everyone's last chance at any real time off again until probably the end of July
 
AlwaysSunnyInTampa said:
The GM's probably took a break. I'm willing to bet almost all of the guys not involved in 4 nations had at least a 3 day weekend. It's hard to imagine this was not everyone's last chance at any real time off again until probably the end of July
Click to expand...
GM is one of those 7 days a week type jobs. The days 'off' are actually a good time to really watch some tape on potential trade targets.

I don't doubt that the league has put a lid on any news. They do the same during the SCF, but there's at least murmurs of a rumbling.
 
Felonious Python said:
GM is one of those 7 days a week type jobs. The days 'off' are actually a good time to really watch some tape on potential trade targets.

I don't doubt that the league has put a lid on any news. They do the same during the SCF, but there's at least murmurs of a rumbling.
Click to expand...
You're probably right. But I have to imagine that is case for every GM in the league on whatever day their team isn't playing. That or another tedious office meeting with the hockey ops guys about who they're scouting next at the pro or amateur level. Or a sit-down with their head coach and AHL coach with how the season is going and how the GM can make it better.
 
DistantThunderRep said:
Sheary would have to go back in any trade with Palmieri. I don't like Palmeiri as a fit personally, but if it gets Sheary off the team, so be it.


Bjorkstrand is a good fit for the top 9 lines. He might not be the greatest defensively, but he adds scoring depth, is on the younger side and has an extra year on his contract to see if it all meshes. A lot lower risk with Bjorkstrand + his contract. McCann is the most ideal fit obviously, but his price tag is probably through the roof. McCann would fit pretty much anywhere on the Top 9 and excel, his play style is exactly our play style. I honestly don't think there is an overall potential target available better than him. Its just, I don't think we have anything that Seattle would want for McCann.

I do also think there are going to be some out of right field trades. Especially already seeing the Rantanen trade come out of nowhere, there is probably some players available that we haven't even thought of.
Click to expand...
If Palmieri came with 50% retention, Sheary wouldn't have to go back. It would be nice, but not a deal breaker. His m-ntc also could be an issue.
 
Bjorkstrand remains the best target imo. He will cost a 1st+a decent prospect+roster player or mid roundpick, but the extra year is important. McCann isn't realistic because of what it's going to likely take for Francis to move him. I'd also rather not pay the equivalent of multiple 1sts in value to try and pry a Foerster or Cuylle; yes, it worked well once, but that's a big gamble on players like that. If Tampa is going to pay a high price for a youngish player whose team has no real reason to trade, Fabian Zetterlund would be my target (among those who might be in the realm of possibility).
 
Palmerei is outscoring Bjorkstrand, the cost of another year plus rentention is definitely not worth it when the rental option is just as good or better and a fraction of the price.
 
Sky04 said:
Palmerei is outscoring Bjorkstrand, the cost of another year plus rentention is definitely not worth it when the rental option is just as good or better and a fraction of the price.
Click to expand...
The difference isn't anything major in terms if scoring, Bjorkstrand is 5 years younger, and is likely to have more of a long term impact on the team. If JBB has to pay a future 1st instead of a 2nd and a slightly better prospect for 4 or 5 years of Bjorkstrand's remaining prime (which also likely coincides with Tampa's remaining window) vs 1 or 2 good years of Palmieri (if he even was to re-sign), I'll take Bjorkstrand.
 
JTBF81 said:
The difference isn't anything major in terms if scoring, Bjorkstrand is 5 years younger, and is likely to have more of a long term impact on the team. If JBB has to pay a future 1st instead of a 2nd and a slightly better prospect for 4 or 5 years of Bjorkstrand's remaining prime (which also likely coincides with Tampa's remaining window) vs 1 or 2 good years of Palmieri (if he even was to re-sign), I'll take Bjorkstrand.
Click to expand...

If the cost is close then sure but it's not going to be with 50% retention for 2 years...don't think we need to be dumping all those futures for a 30 year old either when the rental is just as good, if you're going to throw all those assets then get a younger player.
 
Last edited:
Sky04 said:
If the cost is close then sure but it's not going to be with 50% retention for 2 years...don't think we need to be dumping all those futures for a 30 year old either when the rental is just as good, if you're going to throw all those assets then get a younger player.
Click to expand...
Right, but many of the younger players are likely to be even more expensive to obtain than Bjorkstrand. They may pan out to be at that level or better a la Hagel, but they know what they'd have in Bjorkstrand or a similar player. There are a few younger guys I'd pay up for, like Zetterlund, but with most of them, there's alot of risk with that kind of deal.
 
Neither one of these guys is such a good fit that you simply don’t just make the better deal. I do think a lot of good points are being made though, JBB has to consider the free agent market and our asset pool beyond this year, and position ourselves to use that cap space now.

Anything like a 1st being traded has to give us some certainty beyond this year IMO
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tampa22, Hoek and Zwui21
When you spend 4 good years blowing 3 to 5 assets for 1 player per trade, you eventually end up needing like 4 more players. Blowing a bunch of assets for some 30 year old likely isn't keeping our window open nor is it going to be getting us over the hump. We're gonna be right back in the same spot in 2 years. At some point JFBB needs to consider biting the bullet and sending for a Cernak or Cirelli out for quality replacements like we did with Sergachev. We use the cap space for someone who is actually going to be effective as a free agent or just as a roster player we traded for
 
Rschmitz said:
Neither one of these guys is such a good fit that you simply don’t just make the better deal. I do think a lot of good points are being made though, JBB has to consider the free agent market and our asset pool beyond this year, and position ourselves to use that cap space now.

Anything like a 1st being traded has to give us some certainty beyond this year IMO
Click to expand...

What makes you say that? Both are strong ES players who can score while being right handed shots, not sure what your definition of "good fit" is but they check a lot of boxes, I'm not saying Palmerei is our #1 choice but not going to be mad if he's the rental we get for a ~2nd.
 
Sky04 said:
What makes you say that? Both are strong ES players who can score while being right handed shots, not sure what your definition of "good fit" is but they check a lot of boxes, I'm not saying Palmerei is our #1 choice but not going to be mad if he's the rental we get for a ~2nd.
Click to expand...

They're fine, Bjorkstrand is probably the best of the players who are available for trade. I wouldn't get into a bidding war to make the trade work is what I mean, if Seattle wants a kings random you move on to the Isles, if there is an insane ask for Palmeri you move on to someone else. An ideal fit you can overpay for, like Tuch etc. who have cost certainty...size...etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoek and Stammertime91
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom