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

[Micklebot]

JBD is disposable.

Bjugstad would be a great get.

We are going to have to find a way to move on from Perron. Giroux will be our Perron type player next year.

We need a Tuch type or Buchnevic or Bjorkstrand or two.

Norris - Stutzle - Buchnevich
Tkachuk - Pinto - Batherson
Greig - Bjugstad - Giroux
Cousins - Ostapchuk - Amadio

Buchnevich is signed for 8 mil next year, how on earth are you fitting that contract in, let alone acquiring him in the first place.

 

[UglyPuckling]

Buchnevich is signed for 8 mil next year, how on earth are you fitting that contract in, let alone acquiring him in the first place.

It seems like this thread has a fantasy focus for some/many. Salary cap can be disregarded in this realm.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

I see conversation cycling back to Erik Karlsson yet again. There’s obviously nostalgia at work here, but EK is not the same player he was when he played with the Senators. He hasn’t been particularly impressive in every game I’ve watched in the last 2 years, and he still gets paid a lot.

I lot of trade ideas that you see here wouldn’t be feasible because of the salary cap. These back of napkin roster & cap calculations are frequently flawed because they don’t include buy-out & retained salaries, and carry less than a 22/23 player roster. And, they often contain very optimistic assumptions of cap hits for UFA players and new contracts for our RFAs.

I don’t think offering players like Sogaard and/or JBD are going to return anything as well except maybe a 7D or 13F which amounts to negligible improvement.

For Karlsson to work, Pittsburgh either has to retain half and take back a player with term like Perron or Amadio. Zub would be another candidate if they are worried about his durability.

With that said, moving out the Zub contract because of injury issues would be ironic considering they'd be doing it to acquire Karlsson who with his age and injury history would be at risk of also missing games. They would also get worse doing that because they wouldn't have anyone to replace Zub's role. I'm certainly not advocating that trade.

If they are looking to move Norris, they could trade Norris for Karlsson (with some retention), or trade Norris to a third teamas a move to facilitate acquiring Karlsson. A Norris trade to a third team likely sees a lesser bad contract coming back to subsidize his cap hit for the acquiring team, and then Pittsburgh taking that incoming bad contract from Ottawa and retaining to subsidize Karlsson. I only bring up Norris, because his name has been in trade rumours over multiple seasons. I assume that there won't be a market to move out the cap hit of Norris without taking back negative value cap or retaining. Which is why a loose 3-way deal for Karlsson might make sense.

Karlsson is not that unrealistic. It's not on the same tier as bringing up JT Miller or other big stars. He is very clearly available for trade. He has ties to Ottawa, so he might waive his NMC. We also have a similar big negative value contract (Norris) that has been in trade rumours over the past two seasons. So it isn't as if the proposal is take 10M x 3Y and move out zero cap. I do think expecting Pittsburgh to retain half is unrealistic, but they may have to do something close to that to move him if the market doesn't materialize. The timing to make that kind of move does not feel right with the team rallying for a playoff spot.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

I see conversation cycling back to Erik Karlsson yet again. There’s obviously nostalgia at work here, but EK is not the same player he was when he played with the Senators. He hasn’t been particularly impressive in every game I’ve watched in the last 2 years, and he still gets paid a lot.

I lot of trade ideas that you see here wouldn’t be feasible because of the salary cap. These back of napkin roster & cap calculations are frequently flawed because they don’t include buy-out & retained salaries, and carry less than a 22/23 player roster. And, they often contain very optimistic assumptions of cap hits for UFA players and new contracts for our RFAs.

I don’t think offering players like Sogaard and/or JBD are going to return anything as well except maybe a 7D or 13F which amounts to negligible improvement.

We will be getting other teams’ sogaards and jbds. You’re hoping for them to just have some crazy development after they’re acquired.

I would swap jbd for a forward in the same spot

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

this team more than anything needs creativity, playmaking, passing.

you add that to strong skating tight defensive team and its a top tier team.

 

[aragorn]

I'd be down with Bjugstad, but there's no way Stutzle plays wing no matter how many times you try to make it happen, lol.

I'm also not sure we can make it work cap wise, 22 man roster would come out just over the cap, so no room for callups, we could send down Matinpalo, Gaudette or Ostapchuk.

He is making $2.1 mil, by the time the deal gets done more than half the season is done so he is probably owed 1 mil or less, JBD goes the other way, half his salary is about $.4K & I would waive Gregor who is also owed about $.4 mil. That should take care of it. Clearly all these guys have to be healthy before the trade is approved. If we can't afford Bjugstad how are we going to afford EK?

 

[PlayersLtd]

Keeping JBD would mean running with 8 D, or sending Matinpalo back down (I think he's been our 6th best D, but small sample). Cap wise I don't think we can make it work with 8 D,

It was under the assumption that he is out for the season (which I now realize it at odds with trading him for full value...!)

 

[ottawagm]

If Eric Karlsson is traded, I suspect it will be a team near the bottom of the league with a lot of cap space. That team will likely want a first round draft pick too.

I think Pittsburgh wants to rebuild and don’t want any long term bad contracts back.

I don't think Karlsson would accept a move to a bottom team, unless it's just so they can retain so Pitts doesn't have to.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

I don't think Karlsson would accept a move to a bottom team, unless it's just so they can retain so Pitts doesn't have to.

This is exactly why Pittsburgh is going to have a difficult time getting value for him. The value they get will be dumping whatever percentage of his contract they get away with not retaining on, any picks or prospects will just be gravy. I'd be shocked if they got a 1st for him, unless it's a scenario where they take back a really bad contract and the 1st is partly compensation for taking the cap dump, not just the return on Karlsson.

His contract is buyout proof and he has a NMC. He has an extensive injury history, up-and-down play, and he is signed until he is 37 years old. There is also no point in him waiving for anything short of a legitimate contender. Unlike with San Jose, who were basically an AHL team, the Penguins will always be competitive for a playoff spot with Crosby.

Ottawa is his adopted hometown, so it's logical to assume he might waive for Ottawa or maybe Montreal despite those teams not being clear cut contenders.

 

[UglyPuckling]

For Karlsson to work, Pittsburgh either has to retain half and take back a player with term like Perron or Amadio. Zub would be another candidate if they are worried about his durability.

With that said, moving out the Zub contract because of injury issues would be ironic considering they'd be doing it to acquire Karlsson who with his age and injury history would be at risk of also missing games. They would also get worse doing that because they wouldn't have anyone to replace Zub's role. I'm certainly not advocating that trade.

If they are looking to move Norris, they could trade Norris for Karlsson (with some retention), or trade Norris to a third teamas a move to facilitate acquiring Karlsson. A Norris trade to a third team likely sees a lesser bad contract coming back to subsidize his cap hit for the acquiring team, and then Pittsburgh taking that incoming bad contract from Ottawa and retaining to subsidize Karlsson. I only bring up Norris, because his name has been in trade rumours over multiple seasons. I assume that there won't be a market to move out the cap hit of Norris without taking back negative value cap or retaining. Which is why a loose 3-way deal for Karlsson might make sense.

Karlsson is not that unrealistic. It's not on the same tier as bringing up JT Miller or other big stars. He is very clearly available for trade. He has ties to Ottawa, so he might waive his NMC. We also have a similar big negative value contract (Norris) that has been in trade rumours over the past two seasons. So it isn't as if the proposal is take 10M x 3Y and move out zero cap. I do think expecting Pittsburgh to retain half is unrealistic, but they may have to do something close to that to move him if the market doesn't materialize. The timing to make that kind of move does not feel right with the team rallying for a playoff spot.

I didn’t closely study the bottom section of your post - mea culpa. I guess the central, main point of my post (to which you replied) is that I don’t see Karlsson as a logical or good trade target.

We have Yakemchuk joining the roster in a year or two, and Karlsson is just too expensive. While he’s still a good player, he’s just not good enough to jump through hoops to get him unless he’s very inexpensive and not much of substance goes the other way.

Lots of talk about moving Norris, but replacing him with something better (with the salary that is freed up) isn’t as automatic or easy as some people (with powerful easy buttons) think.

As for the trade talks about Norris, I may have missed something but the only source I’ve seen is from Bruce Garrioch who imo knows nothing & has no sources. Again, maybe I missed something. It doesn’t seem like Staois or any of his management team leak any info at all.

 

[Good in Osgoode]

I didn’t closely study the bottom section of your post - mea culpa. I guess the central, main point of my post (to which you replied) is that I don’t see Karlsson as a logical or good trade target.

We have Yakemchuk joining the roster in a year or two, and Karlsson is just too expensive. While he’s still a good player, he’s just not good enough to jump through hoops to get him unless he’s very inexpensive and not much of substance goes the other way.

As for the trade talks about Norris, I may have missed something but the only source I’ve seen is from Bruce Garrioch who imo knows nothing & has no sources. Again, maybe I missed something. It doesn’t seem like Staois or any of his management team leak any info at all.

Yeah, I am not expecting any big & flashy trades from Staois (like we used to see from Dorion).
Depending on where we sit at the trade deadline, I would expect a minor deal or two to provide some depth, if we are still in a playoff spot or in the hunt.

 

[bicboi64]

Karlsson is not that unrealistic. It's not on the same tier as bringing up JT Miller or other big stars. He is very clearly available for trade. He has ties to Ottawa, so he might waive his NMC. We also have a similar big negative value contract (Norris) that has been in trade rumours over the past two seasons. So it isn't as if the proposal is take 10M x 3Y and move out zero cap. I do think expecting Pittsburgh to retain half is unrealistic, but they may have to do something close to that to move him if the market doesn't materialize. The timing to make that kind of move does not feel right with the team rallying for a playoff spot.

Gotta disagree here. Norris' negative value is like $1-1.5 million at best. We got a solid 30g 2 way centre that isn't afraid to get dirty and can handle tough match ups. We already have two solid RDs, and our best defencemen are PP QBs. EK provides literally nothing for the team aside from better depth and if we're swapping Norris' cap space for depth, that's just bad roster construction.

At least with something like Norris for Miller, its about upgrade a significant position. Acquiring EK is about improving our 3RD which is why in terms of roster construction logic, EK is unrealistic. Only way EK makes sense is if he's costing like $4-5 million and that's where it becomes completely unrealistic because of the various hypotheticals that come up (other teams needing to step in to retain cap).

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

Gotta disagree here. Norris' negative value is like $1-1.5 million at best. We got a solid 30g 2 way centre that isn't afraid to get dirty and can handle tough match ups. We already have two solid RDs, and our best defencemen are PP QBs. EK provides literally nothing for the team aside from better depth and if we're swapping Norris' cap space for depth, that's just bad roster construction.

At least with something like Norris for Miller, its about upgrade a significant position. Acquiring EK is about improving our 3RD which is why in terms of roster construction logic, EK is unrealistic. Only way EK makes sense is if he's costing like $4-5 million and that's where it becomes completely unrealistic because of the various hypotheticals that come up (other teams needing to step in to retain cap).

I think the term is the bigger issue with Norris than his cap hit. He has 5.5 years remaining, and his real money AAV is above his cap hit, he makes 9.5M in real money this year and the following two years.

I don't think his cap hit is that bad on paper, which is part of why he might be able to be traded at all. The cap next year is rumoured to go up to almost 100M since HRR exceeded expectations and the COVID escrow is paid back.

Term is an issue because of his injury history. Real money is an issue, because a team with the cap flexibility to add him is more likely to be a rebuilding or budget team who might be turned off by paying him 9.5M to be their 2C more than they would by the 8M cap hit.

I think that Staios came into last year with the idea that they needed to re-tool the roster. Look at how aggressively he moved players in/out last year despite us not having much cap flexibility. We need to move cap w/term out to re-tool the roster, and Norris ends up being the odd man out.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

Buchnevich is signed for 8 mil next year, how on earth are you fitting that contract in, let alone acquiring him in the first place.

DAMN, I forgot and thought it was like 5 mil.

Bjorkstrand retained it is loool (where da assets from, God only knows).

 

[bicboi64]

I think the term is the bigger issue with Norris than his cap hit. He has 5.5 years remaining, and his real money AAV is above his cap hit, he makes 9.5M in real money this year and the following two years.

I don't think his cap hit is that bad on paper, which is part of why he might be able to be traded at all. The cap next year is rumoured to go up to almost 100M since HRR exceeded expectations and the COVID escrow is paid back.

Term is an issue because of his injury history. Real money is an issue, because a team with the cap flexibility to add him is more likely to be a rebuilding or budget team who might be turned off by paying him 9.5M to be their 2C more than they would by the 8M cap hit.

I think that Staios came into last year with the idea that they needed to re-tool the roster. Look at how aggressively he moved players in/out last year despite us not having much cap flexibility. We need to move cap w/term out to re-tool the roster, and Norris ends up being the odd man out.

I think if Norris is going to a rebuilding/retooling team, they'll be fine with the term if their primary goal is to get rid of crappy contracts they currently have. Might be easier for them to deal with Norris weaving in and out of the lineup/LTIR and give prospects a chance instead of having to spend so much cap on someone like EK. Plus if the team is going into a rebuild, Norris's term is less of an issue. But then there's a factor of teams that won't be okay with spending that much actual salary on Norris if he's not healthy.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

Frankly, I'd go full throttle on Peterka.

Conditional 1st+Ellinas and Crookshank

I'd even shake things up and do:

3rd team: Norris/Batherson

Ottawa: Peterka

Buffalo: 1sts+prospects from 3rd team

 

[HSF]

Bunting or Crouse are two guys I would go for to play with Stuztle

Crouse is a good buy low option

 

[bicboi64]

Bunting or Crouse are two guys I would go for to play with Stuztle

Crouse is a good buy low option

I wonder what it would take to get Crouse or Macelli (Crouse to play with Stu or Macelli to play with Norris/Pinto).

Utah has many pieces that could benefit Ottawa (Crouse, Macelli,Bjugstad, etc.,).