Toggle sidebar

Proposal: Free agency edition Trade Rumours/Proposals [MOD - Stay on Topic] 5

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
frightenedinmatenum2 said:
They would need to take Forsberg for Peeke.

Stylistically, Peeke would be a fit with what the Senators need but he is not playing well. He has been scratched for most of the season. He has 2 years left after this season. No one is taking on his contract without the Blue Jackets taking back another contract with term.

Swapping Forsberg for Peeke would still be a risk because Peeke has 1 more year than Forsberg.

Otherwise, it's going to cost Columbus a 2nd+ to get rid of him without retention.
Click to expand...
Yep. This is how i see it too. I'm no expert on CBJ but i understand Peeke has slipped into negative value and has some real issues clearing the zone.

I'd still take the chance on him, but there's an argument that JBD or Kleven would pass him on the depth chart before his contract is up and we'd be wasting cap on a 3rd pair guy that the coach doesn't feel comforfable to play.

I'm not sure if CBJ will pay to get rid of him, but could be available for a token return i bet.
 
Burrowsaurus said:
Why does Columbus want Kubalik + for peeke
Click to expand...
My guess is that Peeke is under contract for 2 more years after this season, whereas Kubalik's contract ends this season. If they want another asset on top of Kubalik, I'm hoping that makes it easy for the Senators to walk away (maybe a 7th would be OK).
 
Burrowsaurus said:
Why does Columbus want Kubalik + for peeke
Click to expand...

If we offered Kubalik+ for Peeke, Columbus would drive the airport to Andrew Peeke.

Similar to if someone offered us an expiring contract of an ineffective player for Korpisalo. We'd be confused at first, then we'd accept it right away because the expiring contract will be off the books at the end of the season, Korpisalo won't.

Peeke has negative value. If he is bought out this summer, he will get a 1 year 1M type contract. He's signed for another 2 years after this season at 3M.

Even offering up something like Forsberg for Peeke would be a difficult trade to make for Ottawa, because they would have to take on an extra year of Peeke. In that scenario, Ottawa should probably get a 2nd or 3rd round pick from Columbus.
 
What would this team look like if we deal Tank, Norris, Brann, Kubalik, Giroux and chychrun before the deadline? (Assuming Norris plays lights out until the deadline, and Giroux moves entirely at his discretion with the clear message that we prefer he stays).

That's almost $30M in outgoing salary and i think the remaining core is still somewhat competitive going into next season.

Anyone game for a dramatic retool like this?

I feel like the assets gained could build a juggernaut in about 3-5 years.
 
dumbdick said:
What would this team look like if we deal Tank, Norris, Brann, Kubalik, Giroux and chychrun before the deadline? (Assuming Norris plays lights out until the deadline, and Giroux moves entirely at his discretion with the clear message that we prefer he stays).

That's almost $30M in outgoing salary and i think the remaining core is still somewhat competitive going into next season.

Anyone game for a dramatic retool like this?

I feel like the assets gained could build a juggernaut in about 3-5 years.
Click to expand...
This team needs Giroux
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xspyrit, NB613, DrEasy and 1 other person
They won't deal Giroux, unless he asked out. They want more veterans, not less. The reason Tarasenko is going is contract status.

Most trades we make probably see warm bodies on expiring contracts coming back because of the nature of how tight the cap is. Teams will want us to take their Kubalik type players, where they are redundant, there is no trade market for them, and they are in an expiring contract.
 
Larger risk but I would see if the Rangers would do goodrow for kubalik and Hamonic

We get an overpaid defensively responsible forward, however he has term. They get meh pieces but will save 2.5 million this offseason and have the option to buyout Hamonic for cheap
 
TheNewEra said:
Larger risk but I would see if the Rangers would do goodrow for kubalik and Hamonic

We get an overpaid defensively responsible forward, however he has term. They get meh pieces but will save 2.5 million this offseason and have the option to buyout Hamonic for cheap
Click to expand...

Unless they are in on Chychrun, and us taking back Goodrow is factored into the return, his contract has too much term for how overpaid he is.

I can't think of any reasonable swap of bad contracts that helps both sides and doesn't involve them or us retaining.

Something like Goodrow+Lafreniere+1st (approx. 6M) for Chychrun+Kubalik, with us retaining on Kubalik's expiring contract to make it cap in/cap out. Lafreniere would be unlikely to be on the table for Chychrun, even at his current status, but taking the Goodrow contract makes it happen.

Senscore said:
I'd rather not help Las Vegas. I'd rather help rival teams f*** over Las Vegas
Click to expand...

They probably feel the same way about the Senators.

The reality is that there are very few trade partners, and this is a different ownership and management group. They can't burn bridges. If Vegas meets our price for an asset and we refuse out of spite, there is no guarantee another team will meet the price.
 
frightenedinmatenum2 said:
They probably feel the same way about the Senators.

The reality is that there are very few trade partners, and this is a different ownership and management group. They can't burn bridges. If Vegas meets our price for an asset and we refuse out of spite, there is no guarantee another team will meet the price.
Click to expand...


They attempted to railroad this franchise because they had to work a little harder at circumventing the cap.

They could have at any point in the months they had Dadonov around ask about his contract situation or done their own diligence before the point of moving him but didn't, and managed to get Dorion on a technicality.

Don't get me wrong Dorion is a complete and total f***up for what he did, but the Dadonov issue passed through multiple milestones along the way in which the mistake should have been caught.

So f*** Las Vegas, if they want to run around to Gary to try and trump up the punishment then they should expect a few jabs thrown their way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Relapsing
Senscore said:
They attempted to railroad this franchise because they had to work a little harder at circumventing the cap.

They could have at any point in the months they had Dadonov around ask about his contract situation or done their own diligence before the point of moving him but didn't, and managed to get Dorion on a technicality.

Don't get me wrong Dorion is a complete and total f***up for what he did, but the Dadonov issue passed through multiple milestones along the way in which the mistake should have been caught.

So f*** Las Vegas, if they want to run around to Gary to try and trump up the punishment then they should expect a few jabs thrown their way.
Click to expand...
Why would it ever be caught or brought up?

They, and the NHL were told it wasn't filed correctly and thus void. Case closed.

The next time it would ever come up if it was in place was if he was being traded or a new list was being submitted, which happened when he was traded.

We aren't asking guys without a NTC for a trade list, Vegas the same

The milestone where it would have been caught was July 1st 2022, which never came because he was traded prior
 
BondraTime said:
Why would it ever be caught or brought up?

They, and the NHL were told it wasn't filed correctly and thus void. Case closed.

The next time it would ever come up if it was in place was if he was being traded or a new list was being submitted, which happened when he was traded.

We aren't asking guys without a NTC for a trade list, Vegas the same

The milestone where it would have been caught was July 1st 2022, which never came because he was traded prior
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the entire thing predicated on Dorion saying that the NTC "wasn't a problem" in the trade call?
 
Senscore said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the entire thing predicated on Dorion saying that the NTC "wasn't a problem" in the trade call?
Click to expand...
They were told it was not filed on time, thus void

It was proven legitimately hours after the trade that Dadonov's agent did in fact have it submitted on time.

Hence, the punishment the Sens faced, and the Knights and NHL completing a trade that was to their knowledge allowed, while not actually being legal.
 
frightenedinmatenum2 said:
Unless they are in on Chychrun, and us taking back Goodrow is factored into the return, his contract has too much term for how overpaid he is.

I can't think of any reasonable swap of bad contracts that helps both sides and doesn't involve them or us retaining.

Something like Goodrow+Lafreniere+1st (approx. 6M) for Chychrun+Kubalik, with us retaining on Kubalik's expiring contract to make it cap in/cap out. Lafreniere would be unlikely to be on the table for Chychrun, even at his current status, but taking the Goodrow contract makes it happen.
Click to expand...
I don't think they'd move Laf, but they might move Kakko who's been ass this year and can be cheap to extend. Then again, depending on what we trade Laf might be available (even if it looks like he's broken out).

Chychrun at half retained with Kubalik might get us Laf, but even if they just give us Goodrow and a draft pick for Kubalik and Hamonic, I'm down for that. Goodrow is just what we need in our bottom 6.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom