PlayOn
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2010
- 1,834
- 2,339
I’m not sure either, that’s just what has been said. We’ll see if it’s true or not.I'm not sure how trading 7 for 12 would impact an Ullmark acquisition, unless we're flipping 12 to Boston, which wouldn't be great.
If it's a "let's trade 7 for 12 and dump Korpisalo on them because we need to get rid of him to go after Ullmark", that'd be even worse.
Just buy him out. The penalty isn't very punitive. It even adds cap space this year!
7 to 12 is a fairly big leap, IMO. It'd be one thing to swap with Calgary at 9, for example, if you know who they want and have a good idea who the team at 8 wants.
But a lot can happen between 7 and 12.
The problem we have isn't so much prospect depth. We have lots of guys who project to be 3rd or 4th line NHLers. The problem is outside of Stutzle, Tkachuk and Sanderson, we don't have elite talent. And after being so bad for so long, it's crazy that we only have 3 guys. We need another one, and we have a better chance at getting one at 7 than at 12.
Maybe there’s a guy from Philly that Boston wants. Maybe it’s the cost of dumping Korpisalo. Maybe it’s a large deal with a lot of cap being exchanged that allows us more flexibility in what is currently a tight situation.
I’m not FOR trading down, I’d rather not. But I don’t agree that it shouldn’t be an option if it helps us fix the team. The reason this whole thing is such a mess is because there are no perfect solutions. We’re going to be sacrificing something somewhere no matter what, Staios just has to be good at understanding what risks are worth it vs not.