Senovision
Registered User
- May 23, 2011
- 2,914
- 1,969
I think they will make a trade for sure if this losing skid continues.
What kind of trade is anyone's guess.
What kind of trade is anyone's guess.
Last edited:
Proposal: Free agency edition Trade Rumours/Proposals [MOD - Stay on Topic] 5
- Thread starter AchtzehnBaby
- Start date
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 56,988
- 34,765
The question to me is why are we struggling,
Sanderson is a big part, from being our clear best Dman last year, to the worst +/- on the team this year, with 1 ES pt all year
Pinto is a big part of it, from close to a 60 pts pace last year, to a 22 pt pace this year.
Ullmark has been a big part, expected to be a top 10 goalie for us, has been an trainwreck.
I don't think we can solve any of that by making a trade. That doesn't mean we shouldn't make trades, just that a trade should not be aimed at solving the short term, rather it should have a longer term outlook.
Big Muddy
Registered User
- Dec 15, 2019
- 9,035
- 4,368
I’d have to wonder about that given that Staois seems to be methodical & patient (perhaps). He doesn’t seem prone to knee-jerk reactions imo.
Last edited:
Blotto71
Okay, maybe the worst is behind us...?
Too many passengers. Lack of ownership, urgency, accountability on the part of many players.
And maybe Justin Peter's isn't the best in class goalie coach we all thought he was.
frightenedinmatenum2
Registered User
I don't think acquiring Pinto is realistic. I don't see why the Sens trade him.
OK, his name was listed as one of the guys that could be moved. UHC really needs a C. Norris is too big a risk injury wise for that contract. Stutzle is untouchable so that left Pinto as a possible target / shake up.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 56,988
- 34,765
I don't know whether Justin Peters is a good goalie coach or not or who "we all thought he was", but I am pretty damn sure he isn't the reason for Ullmark's struggles.
For most of the season, on D, the issue has been the top pair. I think Sanderson is playing hurt, it's the most likely explanation for the rapid fall off in his game.
Up front, I think the trio of Pinto Greig and Giroux have been the most disappointing, I give Perron a pass for now given the context. Giroux is getting old so I understand that, I don't think Pinto or Greig lacking onsetship for their play though, I'm pretty sure they know they need to be better.
You are contradicting yourself in the same sentence.
Norris is a huge risk injury wise … so let’s trade another center. So we are then left with thin center depth and one of them is always injured.
It’s the opposite… we need to keep Pinto because if/when Norris gets injured at least he can step in and play top 6. His name was listed because there was a contract negotiation that apparently wasn’t going well. Now he’s under contract he’s not going anywhere.
Pinto moving is extremely unlikely.
If you want to shake things up he’s not the guy you move.
No contradiction. I am talking as a fan of the team trading for someone from Ottawa.
I would not want my team to trade for Norris. Contract is too big for too long given his production and injury history. So a possible target, as it has been discussed the Sens need to shake up their core, is to try and acquire Pinto.
If he is not available, that is understandable.
Any trade we make at this point of our timeline will be to improve the Ottawa Senators. The days of throw in a 2nd round pick and here's some spare parts are over.
If we're moving out center depth, pinto and Stu are pretty untouchable.
Does Norris have injury history? For sure.
That's why he'd be avail. Trading pinto just because, simply doesn't work for Ottawa.
Good luck in your search.
Where does this idea that Norris is untradeable come from? Is it strictly injury history? Cause there's nothing in his game that suggests he can't be traded for something of value. On pace for ~35 goals (T37 in the league in goals), defensively responsible, elite faceoff guy, top unit penalty killer...he's not racking up the assists but his most common linemates are struggling hard at even strength scoring (Giroux, Greig, Batherson).
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 56,988
- 34,765
Yeah, I think with the injury history you need at least one full season before alleviating the fear.
Maybe by the deadline teams will show interest again.
You could make an argument that we should use one of Greig or Pinto to go after a RD that we can pair with Sanderson because Zub has been bad for over a year now, and you can't trust him to stay healthy. Sanderson has never had a real top-4 partner. He's still young, it'd be nice to give him one. Find him a Methot.
Who that RD is? I have no idea, maybe there are none available. Or maybe the Islanders would be willing to deal Pulock for a local guy like Pinto. If you want to go younger, maybe the Rangers dangle Schneider for help down the middle. A less flashy name could be someone like Kesselring from Utah.
If you could swing something like that, it lets you move Zub down to the third pair and then can move on from him in the summer or early next season to potentially make room for Yakemchuk.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 56,988
- 34,765
Zub and Sanderson were fine as a pairing last year, even if there's room for improvement the issue with this season isn't Zub in the top 4.
Zub has been bad, and Sanderson has been bad. That pairing is certainly a reason for our play this season, IMO. Zub hasn't been good for a while, if we're being frank. This year, Sanderson has really struggled and Zub can't bail him out at all.
The problem we have is you can't really move Hamonic or JBD up, and Chabot finally looks good with a partner in Jensen and you don't want to mess that up.
So for 40 minutes a night, we're rolling out D-pairings that aren't playing well.
If a deal was available, I'd move on from Pinto or Greig for a steady RD. Build from the D out.
A 2024 version of Foligno for Methot.
