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

Cosmix

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 24, 2011
18,406
6,763
Ottawa
I think the blocking a trade to Detroit thing is that he had a NMC until July 1st that became a partial NTC on July 1st.

I think people are implying that because he knew Rangers and Detroit were talking, he deliberately put Detroit on his list when he had to submit it.
It would be best if people would stick to the "facts" and not paraphrase and imply (guess), resulting in irrational behaviours (anger).
 

The Devilish Buffoon

Registered User
Dec 24, 2018
12,603
11,339
IMO this is about getting value for a guy who will miss camp, start his year in the AHL and require waivers the following year (i.e he likely only has 1 training camp left before he needs to clear waivers)

Bourgault has an extra year of waiver eligibility and will have three camps to compete for a job before waivers become a factor
 
  • Like
Reactions: thinkwild

bicboi64

Registered User
Aug 13, 2020
4,999
3,169
Brampton
Sogaard is only getting games if one of Ullmark or Forsberg gets injured. Will be a good developmental opportunity for him and looking forward to seeing if he can make Forsberg expendable (assuming that doesn't hinder Ullmark's extension)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrEasy

The Devilish Buffoon

Registered User
Dec 24, 2018
12,603
11,339
Here is our backup goaltender in 2025-26; goodbye Forsberg!
I doubt we would run it back with Forsberg if we didnt think he could be a competent NHL goalie… something he has shown he can be far, far more than Sogaard has.

Forsberg will have an opportunity to show that he can get back to his previous level and if he does, we will do what we can to keep him around as backup
 

Golden_Jet

Registered User
Sep 21, 2005
24,805
12,558
I doubt we would run it back with Forsberg if we didnt think he could be a competent NHL goalie… something he has shown he can be far, far more than Sogaard has.

Forsberg will have an opportunity to show that he can get back to his previous level and if he does, we will do what we can to keep him around as backup
Ya and Soogard would need to clear waivers next year I think, so would likely be lost.
 

frightenedinmatenum2

Registered User
Sep 30, 2023
2,258
2,317
Orange County Prison

Senator Stanley

Registered User
Dec 11, 2003
8,029
2,396
Visit site
IMO this is about getting value for a guy who will miss camp, start his year in the AHL and require waivers the following year (i.e he likely only has 1 training camp left before he needs to clear waivers)

Bourgault has an extra year of waiver eligibility and will have three camps to compete for a job before waivers become a factor

Does he? Mind explaining? I would have thought he'd be waivers eligible going into the 2025-26 season, like Jarventie.
 

frightenedinmatenum2

Registered User
Sep 30, 2023
2,258
2,317
Orange County Prison
Ya and Soogard would need to clear waivers next year I think, so would likely be lost.

It is always possible that he clears next year because he will be on a 1-way contract. For a team to claim him, they need room for a backup goalie in the NHL. They also have to be fine with the idea of paying him 1-way money in the AHL if he doesn't stick and is not claimed by somebody else. During training camp, it is usually easier to pass teams through waivers because there simply aren't spots in the NHL and the amount of players on waivers is very high. Players are usually only claimed because of training camp injuries opening up a need like with Thomson on RHD.

Later in the season it is more difficult for a player to clear because teams have injuries, and there are significantly less players of each position waived.

Daccord is an example of a good young goalie who cleared. That apparently surprised Seattle.

I don't think this contract guarantees that he isn't being shopped. If anything, it might make him easier to trade if a team likes him. Now he is cost controlled for 2-years at league minimum.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
55,332
32,854
Does he? Mind explaining? I would have thought he'd be waivers eligible going into the 2025-26 season, like Jarventie.
Here's a snip from Cap friendly before it went dark, he has one more exempt season (this one), same as Jarventie.

1721062814276.png
 

Golden_Jet

Registered User
Sep 21, 2005
24,805
12,558
It is always possible that he clears next year because he will be on a 1-way contract. For a team to claim him, they need room for a backup goalie in the NHL. They also have to be fine with the idea of paying him 1-way money in the AHL if he doesn't stick and is not claimed by somebody else. During training camp, it is usually easier to pass teams through waivers because there simply aren't spots in the NHL and the amount of players on waivers is very high. Players are usually only claimed because of training camp injuries opening up a need like with Thomson on RHD.

Later in the season it is more difficult for a player to clear because teams have injuries, and there are significantly less players of each position waived.

Daccord is an example of a good young goalie who cleared. That apparently surprised Seattle.

I don't think this contract guarantees that he isn't being shopped. If anything, it might make him easier to trade if a team likes him. Now he is cost controlled for 2-years at league minimum.
Likely doesn’t sign without it. So just protecting the asset.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
55,332
32,854
Has anyone heard anything (facts or rumours) about a new site being created to replicate Capfriendly?
 

Sens of Anarchy

Registered User
Jul 9, 2013
66,510
51,746
I'll take that as a "No" lol
 

Sens of Anarchy

Registered User
Jul 9, 2013
66,510
51,746
Not the same level of detail. Hopefully one or both of them will start copying/replicating what Capfriendly provided. Might take some time to gear up for it.
I find Puck Pedia pretty good ... different interface but plenty of detail. CapWages has a similar look and feel to the basics.

For me its the data quality. CapFriendly was the boss. Their data was trusted. I am going with PuckPedia to take the reigns .. now you can look at the CapWages and CapSpace and Puckpedia and get 3 different answers to Cap space. The site called capspace has the Sens at Projected Cap Space: $-8,262,380; CapWages is $2,500,953 and Puckpedia is $1,909,285. So who do we trust? Oddly CapSpace makes no attempt to project a realistic roster and provide the Cap Space. CapWages also has us at 22/23 re the roster and PuckPedia at 21/23. CapWages managed to save capspace with an additional roster player.

Data is King. We need to be able to trust the data
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmix

frightenedinmatenum2

Registered User
Sep 30, 2023
2,258
2,317
Orange County Prison
I wonder if we trade Sogaard now that he is cost controlled? Something like Sogaard to the Kings for Kaliyev.

Kuemper will be almost 38 at the end of his contract. They don't have a goalie of the future that fits with that timeline. Sogaard's contract makes him a good fit there because it gives them 2 years to figure out if he can transition to the NHL and play for them. He is also cost controlled at league minimum.

They have multiple fringe backup goalies this year, so he would have to win the job or start in the AHL, and then become their backup or 1B goalie next year.

I doubt Sogaard has a lot of trade value. We have been tied to Kalieyev, who also likely doesn't have a lot of value. It seems like a fair change of scenery swap. If we intend to sign Ullmark, Sogaard is completely blocked here anyways (if he even puts it together).
 
  • Like
Reactions: bicboi64

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
55,332
32,854
I find Puck Pedia pretty good ... different interface but plenty of detail. CapWages has a similar look and feel to the basics.

For me its the data quality. CapFriendly was the boss. Their data was trusted. I am going with PuckPedia to take the reigns .. now you can look at the CapWages and CapSpace and Puckpedia and get 3 different answers to Cap space. The site called capspace has the Sens at Projected Cap Space: $-8,262,380; CapWages is $2,500,953 and Puckpedia is $1,909,285. So who do we trust? Oddly CapSpace makes no attempt to project a realistic roster and provide the Cap Space. CapWages also has us at 22/23 re the roster and PuckPedia at 21/23. CapWages managed to save capspace with an additional roster player.

Data is King. We need to be able to trust the data
At this time of year, it's tough. You have to make a decision on who is and isn't part of the projected roster.

Capwages for example, decided to fill out a 23 man roster with Roos, Gaudette and Hodgeson on the roster. Basically filling out the roster with the cheapest options

Puckpedia includes Crookshank and Kleven but only has a 21 man roster, perhaps making a judgement call on what the roster will likely look like.

Cap Spaces inexplicably has a 27 man roster with everyone under the sun...
 

PlayOn

Registered User
Jun 22, 2010
1,831
2,337
I wonder if we trade Sogaard now that he is cost controlled? Something like Sogaard to the Kings for Kaliyev.

Kuemper will be almost 38 at the end of his contract. They don't have a goalie of the future that fits with that timeline. Sogaard's contract makes him a good fit there because it gives them 2 years to figure out if he can transition to the NHL and play for them. He is also cost controlled at league minimum.

They have multiple fringe backup goalies this year, so he would have to win the job or start in the AHL, and then become their backup or 1B goalie next year.

I doubt Sogaard has a lot of trade value. We have been tied to Kalieyev, who also likely doesn't have a lot of value. It seems like a fair change of scenery swap. If we intend to sign Ullmark, Sogaard is completely blocked here anyways (if he even puts it together).
I don’t see how Sogaard is blocked by Ullmark. Being a back-up for your first 2-3 seasons in the NHL is reasonable and probably preferable. It allows him to develop without the pressure of being the #1. By the time he’s theoretically ready to take the reins, Ullmark would be 34-35 years old. Then he backs up Sogaard for the last ~2 years of his deal, or you move him if Sogaard is really THAT good by then.

If LA wants to give us Kaliyev for a mid pick, then sure. We don’t need him, I’d certainly rather keep Sogaard as if he does pan out it gives us a goalie post-Ullmark.

I have my doubts on Sogaard but Kaliyev is not the player I’m moving him for. It’s sort of a waste.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad