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

[bicboi64]

The Giroux’s are about to have another baby doubt they want to leave but can Ottawa make it work financially?

Hoping he has twins/triplets (assuming that makes it easier to stay in Ottawa because there's family and roots here)

https://x.com/i/web/status/1814740060408791178

Ver nice... Definitely worth that price tag

Solid depth signing for Vancouver, but Sprong is probably one of the worst liabilities in his own end. He can score 15+ goals, but he's so bad defensively that teams are probably avoiding him unless absolutely necessary.

He's had back to back 40+ point seasons and should be able to get a $1.5+ million deal but just goes to show how he can't outscore his deficiencies.

 

[bicboi64]

The issue with Hossa was the 39M salary cap.

Hossa for Heatley was a cap trade because Heatley was an RFA who was going to be cost controlled at a lower cap hit. 1.5M doesn't sound like a big difference, but when you consider the cap ceiling that's like the difference between an 11.XXM player and an 8.XXM player now. It wasn't a hockey trade in that they were only moving Hossa just because Heatley was available. They were moving Hossa because they couldn't fit him under the salary cap, and Heatley would cost less.

You're probably looking at trading Alfredsson or something to keep Hossa. There weren't a lot of options because even if they found a way to sell off 2-3 core pieces for pennies on the dollar to afford Hossa's salary over Heatley.

The reality is, there was no real right answer. The Senators were screwed with the timing of the lockout and salary cap. The early salary cap was very restrictive, and it isn't as if player contracts were signed with some sort of established norm about how each player should fit into the salary cap. Look at our projected 2004-2005 roster, and consider the status of each player (RFA, UFA, etc), if this was anytime between 2010-2024, a franchise would not have an issue keeping most of that core together under the cap.

The cold hard truth is that if Hossa took a 2-3 year discount to keep the core together, the Senators could have more than made it up to him on his next contract because at that point the salary cap rose, and GMs figured out how to circumvent it with back diving contracts. I don't believe players should feel compelled to take discounts, but the Senators were not being unreasonable. They had little control over the situation and had to figure out how to keep as much of the core together as possible under a very restrictive salary cap that they never planned for when they signed their original contracts.

This is why I can stomach the Heatley Hossa trade.

I was too young to remember the details but Heatley gave us cost a cost controlled asset, but I guess the question is at what larger cost?

It was a snake move to sign Hossa and then trade him, it pissed off Chara, and that only have us 3 years of elite teams with Heater and Redden.

Full credit to Heatley, he wasn't a passenger and earned every penny of his extension and is a key reason why we got to the finals. Redden's decline was very unexpected. Dude was a top 15 defender in the league who turned to a mediocre 3rd pairing guy on the Rags.

 

[Sensinitis]

Hoss and chara would have done the same. And they both stayed elite for another decade.

Heatley and redden did not. In 3 years redden was finished and heatley was bitching about wanting out. And that was that.

Hindsight is always 20/20

At the time it wasn't an awful move, but looking back it looks way worse than it was.

 

[BondraTime]

Hossa trade, outside of trading away my favorite Sen of alltime, was awful because it destroyed the reputation among players around the league by throwing Hossa under the bus with the sign and trade, Chara most importantly

You aren't going to see trades like that where you deal in bad faith for a contract with term and trade the guy away immediately without letting them know your plans

Heatley was an incredible scorer, and no doubt got more accolades and attention, but the extra 18 goals and 16 points he scored over Hossa in the first 2 years where Heatley was a star definitely doesn't account for everything else Hossa would have brought playing with Alfredsson and Spezza, should we have played him on his strong side. He was playing close to 3 minutes a night SH from 2005-2008, was a matchup nightmare for other teams best players, strong as an ox. Guy was everything you want in a hockey player.

 

[Loach]

This is why I can stomach the Heatley Hossa trade.

I was too young to remember the details but Heatley gave us cost a cost controlled asset, but I guess the question is at what larger cost?

It was a snake move to sign Hossa and then trade him, it pissed off Chara, and that only have us 3 years of elite teams with Heater and Redden.

Full credit to Heatley, he wasn't a passenger and earned every penny of his extension and is a key reason why we got to the finals. Redden's decline was very unexpected. Dude was a top 15 defender in the league who turned to a mediocre 3rd pairing guy on the Rags.

Didn't Heatley sign for 7.5m a year later compared to the 6m that Hossa signed for?

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Hindsight is always 20/20

At the time it wasn't an awful move, but looking back it looks way worse than it was.

GMs and other people in positions of power get judged in 20/20. They are judged for their foresight.

 

[Cosmix]

Would have is a hope or an opinion & hope is not a strategy or a fact.

Again would have is not a fact, it's an opinion or hope The fact is that Heatley helped this team get to the Stanley Cup & nobody else who has worn a Sens jersey has had back to back 50 goal seasons. FACT.

We should not forget that Chara went to Boston for more $$$ than Ottawa was offering to him.

 

[Golden_Jet]

We should not forget that Chara went to Boston for more $$$ than Ottawa was offering to him.

Ya Sens tried to keep both Redden and Chara, for 6-6.5 each, but that ship sailed with the Hossa trade.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

This is why I can stomach the Heatley Hossa trade.

I was too young to remember the details but Heatley gave us cost a cost controlled asset, but I guess the question is at what larger cost?

It was a snake move to sign Hossa and then trade him, it pissed off Chara, and that only have us 3 years of elite teams with Heater and Redden.

Full credit to Heatley, he wasn't a passenger and earned every penny of his extension and is a key reason why we got to the finals. Redden's decline was very unexpected. Dude was a top 15 defender in the league who turned to a mediocre 3rd pairing guy on the Rags.

People talk about the Hossa trade like it was a strategic choice based on hockey, and not a trade forced by the salary cap.

You also have to keep in mind that Atlanta took Greg De Vries as a cap dump along with Hossa. We were in cap hell and Hossa did not want to work with the team. Which I am not blaming him for, it's his responsibility to advocate for his rights not to manage our hockey team. But that's the reality of the situation. He wanted top dollar, and we didn't have cap space.

Hossa wanted more than Alfredsson. That was his right, but they couldn't keep him under the restrictive salary cap. If you combine De Vries and Hossa's cap, Heatley's cap hit in year 1 was almost half of the cap that they moved out in that trade.

The only way to keep Hossa would have been to give up on being a contender and do a very risky re-tool to move out money. Or to do something like Alfredsson+De Vries for Heatley.

Even then, if you look at Hossa's history and the trajectory of our team, he is probably gone to a contender when his contract is up and we are on the downswing.

If we managed to keep Chara, maybe that changes things, but that also is not guaranteed under the salary cap.

The salary cap really screwed the timing of our build. If we built that equivalent team 3-4 years later, we keep most of our stars. The early years of the salary cap were difficult because there weren't any strategies or norms developed around the cap, and none of those contracts were signed with the idea of fitting them under a 39M-50M salary cap.

 

[Golden_Jet]

People talk about the Hossa trade like it was a strategic choice based on hockey, and not a trade forced by the salary cap.

You also have to keep in mind that Atlanta took Greg De Vries as a cap dump along with Hossa. We were in cap hell and Hossa did not want to work with the team. Which I am not blaming him for, it's his responsibility to advocate for his rights not to manage our hockey team. But that's the reality of the situation. He wanted top dollar, and we didn't have cap space.

Hossa wanted more than Alfredsson. That was his right, but they couldn't keep him under the restrictive salary cap. If you combine De Vries and Hossa's cap, Heatley's cap hit in year 1 was almost half of the cap that they moved out in that trade.

The only way to keep Hossa would have been to give up on being a contender and do a very risky re-tool to move out money. Or to do something like Alfredsson+De Vries for Heatley.

Even then, if you look at Hossa's history and the trajectory of our team, he is probably gone to a contender when his contract is up and we are on the downswing.

If we managed to keep Chara, maybe that changes things, but that also is not guaranteed under the salary cap.

The salary cap really screwed the timing of our build. If we built that equivalent team 3-4 years later, we keep most of our stars. The early years of the salary cap were difficult because there weren't any strategies or norms developed around the cap, and none of those contracts were signed with the idea of fitting them under a 39M-50M salary cap.

The 6 year deal, could have kept him a Sen until 2008. To late now unfortunately.

 

[Cosmix]

Ya Sens tried to keep both Redden and Chara, for 6-6.5 each, but that ship sailed with the Hossa trade.

It sailed with the $7+M contract Boston offered Chara. Ottawa could not afford that salary plus the other players salaries on its roster at the time.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

People talk about the Hossa trade like it was a strategic choice based on hockey, and not a trade forced by the salary cap.

You also have to keep in mind that Atlanta took Greg De Vries as a cap dump along with Hossa. We were in cap hell and Hossa did not want to work with the team. Which I am not blaming him for, it's his responsibility to advocate for his rights not to manage our hockey team. But that's the reality of the situation. He wanted top dollar, and we didn't have cap space.

Hossa wanted more than Alfredsson. That was his right, but they couldn't keep him under the restrictive salary cap. If you combine De Vries and Hossa's cap, Heatley's cap hit in year 1 was almost half of the cap that they moved out in that trade.

The only way to keep Hossa would have been to give up on being a contender and do a very risky re-tool to move out money. Or to do something like Alfredsson+De Vries for Heatley.

Even then, if you look at Hossa's history and the trajectory of our team, he is probably gone to a contender when his contract is up and we are on the downswing.

If we managed to keep Chara, maybe that changes things, but that also is not guaranteed under the salary cap.

The salary cap really screwed the timing of our build. If we built that equivalent team 3-4 years later, we keep most of our stars. The early years of the salary cap were difficult because there weren't any strategies or norms developed around the cap, and none of those contracts were signed with the idea of fitting them under a 39M-50M salary cap.

We signed heatley to a then massive contract not long after acquiring him lol. Hossa wanted 6.5. And we…signed him. There was no salary cap disaster. We signed him to the three year deal. There were about 100 things to be done other than trading away arguably your best forward.

Like Hossa said in negotiations to Muckler. if he was North American he would have been signed to the contract a long time ago.

Muckler (RIP) was not swift.

That’s like not signing stutzle cuz “oh we will be tight to the cap if we sign him”. You sign your stars. Especially when that star is A. A star. B his best friend is the best defence man on the team and about to become one of the best shutdown d men to ever play the game

 

[Wallet Inspector]

Do we actually know for a fact that Chara left due to the Hossa trade? I thought that was just a rumour.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

We signed heatley to a then massive contract not long after acquiring him lol. Hossa wanted 6.5. And we…signed him. There was no salary cap disaster. We signed him to the three year deal. There were about 100 things to be done other than trading away arguably your best forward.

Like Hossa said in negotiations to Muckler. if he was North American he would have been signed to the contract a long time ago.

Muckler (RIP) was not swift.

That’s like not signing stutzle cuz “oh we will be tight to the cap if we sign him”. You sign your stars. Especially when that star is A. A star. B his best friend is the best defence man on the team and about to become one of the best shutdown d men to ever play the game

Heatley signed for 3.5M x 3. Hossa signed for 5M x 3. That doesn't seem like a big difference, but the salary cap was only 39M. It would be like 8.XXM vs 11.XXM now. Additionally, Atlanta took De Vries as a cap dump. It's difficult to find accurate info on historical cap hits now, but if I recall he as somewhere around the mid 2M mark. So along with replacing De Vries with a warm body, they likely cleared almost 10 percent of the cap in that transaction.

There wasn't a realistic way to keep him short of re-tooling, which using hindsight and looking at how he chased cups for a few years after leaving Atlanta probably means he would leave anyways. Or, we would have probably had to trade Alfredsson+De Vries. Which is someone says keeping Hossa is better than keeping Alfredsson, that's fine, but it's not a scenario where there was an easy pain free way to keep Hossa at top money.

It's difficult to armchair GM everything and give a big list of what they possibly could have done because while you can find each individual cap hit by digging through google, there isn't a cap friendly type layout of the team and the entire league.

Here is an article that references their cap situation: Senators gain cap room, new image in Hossa trade

Had they not made the trade, they would have not had enough room to run a full roster. I am unsure about the structure of Spezza's contract at the time, but I assume his performance bonuses and also being able to add players in season at the trade deadline was going to be a consideration. Lastly, it wasn't just about the 2005-2006 season. They had multiple raises to give out over the following 2 seasons.

Heatley was damaged goods at that point, so for him and Spezza to mesh so well and his career to get back on track for a few years, it worked out about as well as it possibly could have. They got a few good years out of Heatley, and they (unintentionally) dumped him to a different team right before the second contract they gave him became an albatross.

Ultimately, other than my suggestion that we move Alfredsson instead of Hossa, nobody has made a realistic suggestion about how they could have kept Hossa without tearing the team apart and re-tooling. They were in a very difficult cap situation. They were one of the teams who were hurt the most in the short term by the timing of the salary cap.

 

[Micklebot]

Do we actually know for a fact that Chara left due to the Hossa trade? I thought that was just a rumour.

there are so many rumours about it, I think York still insists Chara wanted to be captain, and that's why he left. who knows...

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

Do we actually know for a fact that Chara left due to the Hossa trade? I thought that was just a rumour.

Must have certainly contributed.

If Hossa was on that team he is likely petitioning Chara to stay and Chara has more reasons to stay.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

there are so many rumours about it, I think York still insists Chara wanted to be captain, and that's why he left. who knows...

Heatley signed for 3.5M x 3. Hossa signed for 5M x 3. That doesn't seem like a big difference, but the salary cap was only 39M. It would be like 8.XXM vs 11.XXM now. Additionally, Atlanta took De Vries as a cap dump. It's difficult to find accurate info on historical cap hits now, but if I recall he as somewhere around the mid 2M mark. So along with replacing De Vries with a warm body, they likely cleared almost 10 percent of the cap in that transaction.

There wasn't a realistic way to keep him short of re-tooling, which using hindsight and looking at how he chased cups for a few years after leaving Atlanta probably means he would leave anyways. Or, we would have probably had to trade Alfredsson+De Vries. Which is someone says keeping Hossa is better than keeping Alfredsson, that's fine, but it's not a scenario where there was an easy pain free way to keep Hossa at top money.

It's difficult to armchair GM everything and give a big list of what they possibly could have done because while you can find each individual cap hit by digging through google, there isn't a cap friendly type layout of the team and the entire league.

Here is an article that references their cap situation: Senators gain cap room, new image in Hossa trade

Had they not made the trade, they would have not had enough room to run a full roster. I am unsure about the structure of Spezza's contract at the time, but I assume his performance bonuses and also being able to add players in season at the trade deadline was going to be a consideration. Lastly, it wasn't just about the 2005-2006 season. They had multiple raises to give out over the following 2 seasons.

Heatley was damaged goods at that point, so for him and Spezza to mesh so well and his career to get back on track for a few years, it worked out about as well as it possibly could have. They got a few good years out of Heatley, and they (unintentionally) dumped him to a different team right before the second contract they gave him became an albatross.

Ultimately, other than my suggestion that we move Alfredsson instead of Hossa, nobody has made a realistic suggestion about how they could have kept Hossa without tearing the team apart and re-tooling. They were in a very difficult cap situation. They were one of the teams who were hurt the most in the short term by the timing of the salary cap.

Lots of teams come close to the cap. They usually get out of it by not trading one of their best.

2 extra million lol…. You’re saying they couldn’t find 2 million somewhere to move? Cmon. Teams do this ALL. THE. TIME

We were right against the cap just late year. We didn’t trade stutzle. Or tkatchuk

Do we actually know for a fact that Chara left due to the Hossa trade? I thought that was just a rumour.

The negotiations were incredibly difficult with Muckler because of that. And then Muckler signed redden to big deal (so much for cap trouble) which only further pissed off chara. Chara is undeniably a prick. But treating his best friend like trash was never going to go down well.

He alledgedly did want to be captain but again… sounded like he was making these demands out of spite. If Hossa was there long term. Many say chara would have been as well. They both did really like it here.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

It sailed with the $7+M contract Boston offered Chara. Ottawa could not afford that salary plus the other players salaries on its roster at the time.

Well yeah when you give redden 6.5 harder to give chara that extra mil. And chara was not signing for Ottawa by the time Boston offered him that. He was gone

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

Do we actually know for a fact that Chara left due to the Hossa trade? I thought that was just a rumour.

Our A-GM went to a big market franchise and gave him a close to max contract and the keys to that franchise. They made him one of the highest paid players in the league. Chiarelli was technically not hired until a few weeks after Chara was signed. He was apparently not allowed to advise on Senators players, but who realistically believes that tampering doesn't happen in the league?

While we did give Redden a large salary, we couldn't give him term because we had so many contracts rolling over and raises to give out.

The Hossa thing could have been a factor, but becoming a franchise player of a major franchise was likely a bigger factor.

Chara also had a history of contract disputes. He almost was made to sit out a season for the Islanders, and that was part of what led to his trade to Ottawa originally. So this is a guy who rightfully has a history of strongly advocating for himself. He was clearly going to get what he was worth.

In a perfect world, they would have kept Chara and Hossa and it would have completely transformed the franchise that otherwise had a major decline during that period. But there were clearly a lot of other things at play, mostly related to the timing of a very restrictive salary cap.

 

[Micklebot]

Lots of teams come close to the cap. They usually get out of it by not trading one of their best.

We were right against the cap just late year.

This is a bit revisionist, Heatley was very highly regarded and at the time seen as the better player, he was younger too.

We traded a very good player for another very good player who was younger, and cheaper.

It didn't work out with Heatley wanting out after just a couple years and health really impacting his career, but we weren't downgrading when we made that trade,

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

Lots of teams come close to the cap. They usually get out of it by not trading one of their best.

We were right against the cap just late year. We didn’t trade stutzle. Or tkatchuk


The negotiations were incredibly difficult with Muckler because of that. And then Muckler signed redden to big deal (so much for cap trouble) which only further pissed off chara. Chara is undeniably a prick. But treating his best friend like trash was never going to go down well.

He alledgedly did want to be captain but again… sounded like he was making these demands out of spite. If Hossa was there long term. Many say chara would have been as well. They both did really like it here.

Redden didn't get term, that had to be a big factor because the Senators had to project forward and they had multiple players who would require raises.

If I recall, the selling point was take 1 year deals and keep the contending team together for 1 more year, not sign here and be a franchise cornerstone. Boston gave Chara one of the biggest contracts in the league and made him the man in Boston.

The Redden contract and the Chara contract are not an apples to apples comparison even if the cap hits are reasonably close.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

This is a bit revisionist, Heatley was very highly regarded and at the time seen as the better player, he was younger too.

We traded a very good player for another very good player who was younger, and cheaper.

It didn't work out with Heatley wanting out after just a couple years and health really impacting his career, but we weren't downgrading when we made that trade,

If you want to argue that they were viewed similarly at the time or heatley even better. Fine.

I was debating that it was some shrewd cap move.

History has proven that trade crippling to the franchise.

Hossa was still a two way horse as that time. Muckler chose the one dimensional scorer over the overall better player and charts best friend. He made the wrong move.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Heatley signed for 3.5M x 3. Hossa signed for 5M x 3. That doesn't seem like a big difference, but the salary cap was only 39M.

Heater was 4.5 x 3
Hoss was 6 x 3

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Redden didn't get term, that had to be a big factor because the Senators had to project forward and they had multiple players who would require raises.

If I recall, the selling point was take 1 year deals and keep the contending team together for 1 more year, not sign here and be a franchise cornerstone. Boston gave Chara one of the biggest contracts in the league and made him the man in Boston.

The Redden contract and the Chara contract are not an apples to apples comparison even if the cap hits are reasonably close.

But that time chara was not signing hhere.

So it doesn’t really matter to compare their contracts.

Whatever moves were made were the wrong ones. Clearly.

Heater was 4.5 x 3
Hoss was 6 x 3

Just can’t find anywhere else on the roster to skim 1.5. Impossible.

But big raise for heater and redden a year later? Sure

What need to be accepted is that Muckler really didn’t like Hossa all that much and may have been biased against him because he was European. Hossa said as much himself

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

This is a bit revisionist, Heatley was very highly regarded and at the time seen as the better player, he was younger too.

We traded a very good player for another very good player who was younger, and cheaper.

It didn't work out with Heatley wanting out after just a couple years and health really impacting his career, but we weren't downgrading when we made that trade,

Heatley was seen as damaged goods at the time because of the physical/psychological aspects of the car accident. Since returning from the accident, he had played very poorly in the NHL and in major tournaments. Prior to the car crash, he was seen as a high end blue chip player who likely was worth more than almost everybody on our team, except Hossa.

Hossa was seen as a top-tier MVP candidate. Trading him for Heatley as Heatley was at the time on paper is a ridiculous deal to make. Atlanta fleeced Ottawa because of the cap situation.

With that said, it ended up working out fine for Ottawa because Heatley bounced back and had great chemistry with Spezza. They would have been better with Hossa, but it became as close to a lateral move as they were going to make, that is before considering the cap benefits of Heatley being paid less than Hossa and also dumping De Vries.

Heater was 4.5 x 3
Hoss was 6 x 3

Thank you for the revision.

The point still stands, just relative to those numbers. 1.5M difference (plus dumping DeVries) was substantial at that time considering how low the cap was.