Toggle sidebar

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

frightenedinmatenum2 said:
I think VAN wants Norris just like we wanted Phaneuf.

They are going to take advantage of a limited market and we are not going to get back a piece anywhere close to what Norris brings when he isn't hurt and is playing at the top of his game.

I think that if it's true that the Senators have shopped him on and off since last TDL, that they don't want the liability of the contract. Whether right or wrong, I could see them thinking that by bringing in 2-3 NHL players for Norris that they give the team a better chance to win and also pass on the liability of his term to someone else.

Hoglander has neutral or negative value, but in all likelihood, so does Norris, that's the point. VAN will want to dump some term and money to subsidize taking Norris.
Click to expand...
I think it's the “better chance to win” is the hard part. There might be a tendency to oversimplify and gloss over that part. Sounds simple enough, but much harder to accomplish in reality.
 
frightenedinmatenum2 said:
9.5M salary with term, multiple shoulder injuries.

If a GM takes on that contract and he gets significantly hurt after, that's a fireable offense from some owners.
Click to expand...
GMs do worse things July 1 every year. Anyone can get hurt any time. If his shoulder holds up all year then I'm sure we can get a better deal, even if it's just for better picks at the draft, which would let us sign better fits rather than taking on bad cap dumps.
 
HoweHullOrr said:
Hard post to read, but I wouldn’t put Pinto & Grieg into the same category. Grieg in my mind is not a good, viable top 6 center option based on what he has shown thus far.
Click to expand...
Yeah my bad posted that late night, but I am not talking about this season only. Norris trade this season would make us worse anyways. For Grieg yeah Pinto is the better play right now obviously , but he played less games Pinto has more experience even with his past injury.I think Grieg still hasn't found his game in the NHL but he is close to it and showed us some flashes us of the player he could be : Hard working two player with an edge and skill. Pinto is bigger and has better skill set for a center .

But Grieg is faster goes hard to the net every time , his front net presence only getting better, he like to play the pest and not afraid of getting the heat or physical play. I think we are going to be lucky to have both on this team cause they will just improve, like Stu and even Norris.

A lot of guys here think they are what they are already lmao. these guys are young we see plenty of player improving after 25 years old in the NHL with experience and hard work.
Also playing for a team that wins more than lose help a lot to get better, playing playoff hockey help the player to greed for more from himself to reach success etc.

Am with you guys if Norris don't play for a long period of time this season we should try to trade him in off-season. But if he comes back and get 25-30 goals while being a impact player on the team to get us to playoff .Don't see why we should trade him , since he probably improve with a mostly healthy season. His contract is maybe bad right now but with the incoming raise on the cap he would be fine to have. 2C are already paid 8M or more so right now.
 
Hale The Villain said:
One Norris trade option I'd be exploring if I were Staios is Utah

They have a ton of depth at LW but no solution now or long-term at 2C.

Would try to work out a deal based around Maccelli+Crouse for Norris+something.

That's assuming they are comfortable with Greig at center long-term.
Click to expand...
I'd have love to see a playmaker like Maccelli on Norris' wing, but think he'd succeed on Pinto's wing too. I'd do Norris for Maccelli + Crouse with other depth picks/prospects being moved to make it more even cap wise.
 
I guess its understandable to want to mitigate the risk of Norriss's shoulder injuries. But if he is back to a normal hockey player now, no more likely to get injured than any other, then i wouldnt want to be selling him at distressed prices.

If the fear came to pass and his shoulder blew out ending his career, we could manage risk by selling him cheap now or put him on ltir then and get a similar player and salary. I prefer the latter method of managing that risk i think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmix and DrEasy
thinkwild said:
I guess its understandable to want to mitigate the risk of Norriss's shoulder injuries. But if he is back to a normal hockey player now, no more likely to get injured than any other, then i wouldnt want to be selling him at distressed prices.

If the fear came to pass and his shoulder blew out ending his career, we could manage risk by selling him cheap now or put him on ltir then and get a similar player and salary. I prefer the latter method of managing that risk i think.
Click to expand...

They still have to pay him in real dollars on LTIR. I don't think a legitimate source has said whether his contract is insured or not, whether the shoulder is a pre-existing condition, and if insured what percentage is the team still on the hook for if he either misses significant time in a future season or in a worst case scenario LTIRetires after another shoulder surgery.

There has already been a lot of discussion about the rising cap vs the falling Canadian dollar and how it might influence the choices made by teams. A team doesn't need to be a MelnykBucks team to have concerns over salary relative to the player. This wouldn't be us not wanting to pay a franchise player top money, this would be us moving a player that we project to maybe be our 5th or 6th best forward next year who is making superstar money in real dollars and has legitimate durability concerns.

Norris makes 9.5/9.5/9.5/8.75 over the next four seasons, and whether you think Pinto or Greig would be a downgrade at 2C, I think it's close enough that it makes moving Norris more palatable. It wouldn't surprise me if the Greig extension was partly insurance against moving Norris, because once we move Norris, Greig's position of leverage would have increased. Having Greig cap controlled makes it a bit easier to move on from Norris.
 
Last edited:
I get it is possible the Sens moves on from Norris because they are financially conscious (rising salary cap, weak CAD). Fact remains that Norris is a good hockey player and with a rising cap, there has to be a team out there with the financial means to accommodate the salary. Let's hold onto him for a bit longer. I definitely hope that if the Sens decide to trade Norris, it's got to be for a better return than Soucy, Hoglander, VAN 2nd. A deal based around Maccelli + Crouse sounds a lot more appealing to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrEasy, Volt and Blotto71
As much as it sucks to bring up money in vs. money out after new ownership is in place, we're still a team with an internal budget that cares about actual salary owed to players, not just cap hit.

It's not as much of an issue now, but with the cap potentially increasing by 25 million over the next 3 years, we're going to have to make some difficult decisions on players with backloaded contracts like Norris and Chabot.

Yeah Norris and Chabot have been valuable for us this year (particularly Chabot), but they'll make a combined 19.5M for both 2025/26 and 2026/27 in actual salary. Wouldn't shock me if either is dealt down the road for more cost-effective talent.

That new arena cannot come soon enough. We're not going to be able to compete with the rich teams in the league pretty soon unless we have a downtown arena and all the financial benefits that will come with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinjaSens
ottawagm said:
You're going to get scored on. They need to improve their 5-5 scoring to offset the goals that will happen when you are a #1D, especially when playing with Hamonic.
Click to expand...
Of course the opposition will score some goals at ES. Of course the team needs to improve its ES scoring. When your #1 D is at -15, it shows that he is not playing well at ES. Sanderson needs to improve his play; he seems to be playing better in recent games. Yes, playing with Hamonic against others teams' best lines does not help.

Net: Sanderson must improve his play and the coaches must give him a better D partner than Hamonic.

The other players with a high negative +/- value must also improve their ES play, or be replaced. Yes easy to say but not easy to do.

GCK said:
We still would have needed a winger in place of Perron during UFA. They aren’t free.
Click to expand...
Yes we would need to sign another winger as a UFA than Perron. No one said UFA signing are free; they just cost $$ not player assets nor draft picks. Perhaps we might have spend some draft picks to acquire a better player than Perron.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HSF and ottawagm
For people who have a more optimistic view of the value of Norris, assume he is on the block, and he is going to get dealt to VAN, what are your expectations?

I see criticism of the idea that we will trade him basically to get out of the contract and add short-term depth, which is fine - there is absolutely nothing wrong with criticizing an idea. But I haven't seen many proposals about what people might realistically expect from Vancouver in return for taking Norris.

So I am curious to see what people would expect.
 
Oscar The Grouch said:
This sounds like you're describing a 9 year old hockey player.
Click to expand...
It does, but it is revealing about Bell's and the team's long term perspective about Tyler Boucher.

HoweHullOrr said:
I think it's the “better chance to win” is the hard part. There might be a tendency to oversimplify and gloss over that part. Sounds simple enough, but much harder to accomplish in reality.
Click to expand...
I did NOT want Phaneuf. His contract was an albatross.
 
frightenedinmatenum2 said:
They still have to pay him in real dollars on LTIR. I don't think a legitimate source has said whether his contract is insured or not, whether the shoulder is a pre-existing condition, and if insured what percentage is the team still on the hook for if he either misses significant time in a future season or in a worst case scenario LTIRetires after another shoulder surgery.

There has already been a lot of discussion about the rising cap vs the falling Canadian dollar and how it might influence the choices made by teams. A team doesn't need to be a MelnykBucks team to have concerns over salary relative to the player. This wouldn't be us not wanting to pay a franchise player top money, this would be us moving a player that we project to maybe be our 5th or 6th best forward next year who is making superstar money in real dollars and has legitimate durability concerns.

Norris makes 9.5/9.5/9.5/8.75 over the next four seasons, and whether you think Pinto or Greig would be a downgrade at 2C, I think it's close enough that it makes moving Norris more palatable. It wouldn't surprise me if the Greig extension was partly insurance against moving Norris, because once we move Norris, Greig's position of leverage would have increased. Having Greig cap controlled makes it a bit easier to move on from Norris.
Click to expand...
Given when he signed and when he was injured, relative to when other big ticket players were signed, I would be completely shocked if he’s uninsured. Even with no injury history, it would be very unusual for him to be uninsured.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom