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

[frightenedinmatenum2]

It does, but it is revealing about Bell's and the team's long term perspective about Tyler Boucher.


I did NOT want Phaneuf. His contract was an albatross.

With what the Senators dumped, Phaneuf's contract wasn't an albatross. They dumped Cowen, Greening, and Michalek. Phaneuf's contract was also front-laoded. He was still perceived to be a top 4 defenseman in the NHL when the Seantors acquired him. There was a market to trade him, but the Leafs didn't want to retain. It wasn't one of those contracts that was completely unmovable.

Even when the Senators went to move on from him, there were multiple suitors. The Senators ended up dumping him on to the Kings for Gaborik, who I assume everybody involved knew would hang it up at the end of the season, pass go, and collect insured salary while LITRetired.

I get not liking Phaneuf as a player, but the contract was not an albatross. Did he have any real trade value? No, not without retaining and/or cap considerations. So the Sens got him for a 2nd, and the Kings got him for almost free - but if he was an albatross he probably would have retired a Leaf or a Senator.

With Melnyk's budget, the Phaneuf trade enabled the Senators to keep their window open. The top 4 was a major problem, and they had no way to get out of their multiple bad contracts and acquire someone to fix it. The Phaneuf trade was a very creative fix. I'm not saying he was perfect here, but he was a massive upgrade on Cowen or whoever we would have had in the alternative.

 

[Micklebot]

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.

You aren't going to find a trade with Van that
a) works with the cap
b) makes both teams feel like they improved or at the very least didn't get worse going into a playoff push, and
c) balances value.

They already picked up Chytil, so they likely aren't looking for a center anymore anyways. So realistically, Vancouver isn't a team we should be looking at right now. Hockey trades mid season are rare, more so with high priced players, and I doubt either team wants a futures package.

Maybe we could swap Norris for a winger that produces at a similar level, someone like Tyler Bertuzzi, and then balance out the value by adding something (2nd, 3rd, or b prospects?) to cover the difference. Not sure the Hawks have a need at center, Foligno is aging out, so maybe they would be open to picking up someone, i don't follow their needs so idk.

 

[Micklebot]

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.

I thought it was confirmed he was insured a while ago, but I can't find anything on it, but if it was uninsured, I think it's more likely than not that we'd have heard about it given the financial situation of the team prior to the sale.

 

[ottawagm]

I thought it was confirmed he was insured a while ago, but I can't find anything on it, but if it was uninsured, I think it's more likely than not that we'd have heard about it given the financial situation of the team prior to the sale.

I thought I read the league had some insurance so teams could include 2-3 players. That way an individual team contract didn't mean one team had to pay some high amount, as it was balanced across all the contracts in the pool. Then if you wanted insurance beyond those contracts you would have to get it yourself.

Edit: I couldn't find anything newer, but here is some info from a while ago:

NHL Insurance Plan Covers Player Contracts For Seven Years

The NHL's insurance plan insures player contracts for seven years, and "beyond that, if the player gets hurt, the team is on the hook for the full amount of his contract," according to Luke DeCock of the Raleigh NEWS & OBSERVER. As part of the plan, which the NHL purchases through New York-based...

www.sportsbusinessjournal.com

 

[PlayOn]

Apparently we’re interested in Boeser:

Cam Robinson's 2024-25 Trade Bait Big Board 2.0

With the NHL trade deadline less than a month away, Cam Robinson provides his top trade targets with sourced intel on expected returns and potential fits.

www.eliteprospects.com

Watch out for the New Jersey, Los Angelos, Detroit, and even Ottawa as potential landing spots should he be made available ahead of the deadline. Teams are definitely calling.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

Apparently we’re interested in Boeser:

Cam Robinson's 2024-25 Trade Bait Big Board 2.0

With the NHL trade deadline less than a month away, Cam Robinson provides his top trade targets with sourced intel on expected returns and potential fits.

www.eliteprospects.com

Watch out for the New Jersey, Los Angelos, Detroit, and even Ottawa as potential landing spots should he be made available ahead of the deadline. Teams are definitely calling.

Getting Boeser as a rental as part of the package is my overly optimistic prediction for a Norris trade.

My high prediction is Boeser+Soucy, my low prediction is Hoglander+Soucy.

He is worth a 1st at the deadline and it would be surprising if we gave up our 1st considering that we will lose one to the league this year or next year. Instead of a 1st, Ostapchuk might make sense from Vancouver's POV. He is an NHL ready centre who should be worth a 1st, and he has connections to the city from his time with the Vancouver Giants. I doubt anybody here would be happy with us giving up Ostapchuk in a package for Boeser, unless he came with an extension.

 

[HSF]

zero chance ottawa is going after Hoglander due to size imo

i think any potential norris deal would have been centered around Pettersson/JT Miller.

Can't see us trading for Boeser in a norris deal. Boeser is a pure rental who probably gets some picks back

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

zero chance ottawa is going after Hoglander due to size imo

i think any potential norris deal would have been centered around Pettersson/JT Miller.

Can't see us trading for Boeser in a norris deal. Boeser is a pure rental who probably gets some picks back

It's more that I think Vancouver would want to dump a contract or multiple contracts with term if we aren't retaining on Norris. Hoglander is their worst contract, and he is easy for them to fit into a trade for Norris because his cap hit this year is only 1M.

Boeser+Soucy+Hoglander is only 11M in cap. Norris and two warm bodies is 9.5M+. So Vancouver could hypothetically retain 1.5M on Boeser's expiring contract and make it cap in/cap out while moving 6.25M in bad cap next season, and 3M for the two seasons after that. If they are taking a massive contract with term, they may want to include pieces like that to offset what they are bringing back in.

If we want to get out of the Norris contract, I don't see why we wouldn't do Norris for Boeser as a rental. Assuming nobody else is offering us value for Norris, it gets us out of the contract, and in terms of fit it's an upgrade. I think that Norris right now may be the better player (ignoring contract), but we need a right handed forward who can score goals. Goal scoring is a big deficiency for us right now.

In a scenario where it's Boeser for Norris, we aren't just trading for Boeser, we're trading for long-term cap flexibility.

 

[PlayOn]

It's more that I think Vancouver would want to dump a contract or multiple contracts with term if we aren't retaining on Norris. Hoglander is their worst contract.

If we want to get out of the Norris contract, I don't see why we wouldn't do Norris for Boeser as a rental. Assuming nobody else is offering us value for Norris, it gets us out of the contract, and in terms of fit it's an upgrade. I think that Norris right now may be the better player (ignoring contract), but we need a right handed forward who can score goals. Goal scoring is a big deficiency for us right now.

In a scenario where it's Boeser for Norris, we aren't just trading for Boeser, we're trading for long-term cap flexibility.

I’m a bit skeptical that they would trade a core piece mid-season in the midst of this playoff push. It could be a bit demoralizing.

I also don’t love the idea of removing Norris’ speed and defensive prowess for Boeser. Not to mention his faceoff abilities which help us with possession. Then you’re a Pinto injury away from running into major issues imo.

Not saying they won’t do it, I can see the logic, but imo it would be dumb to move Norris mid-season and for a rental.

Edit: just as to add, if you’re Vancouver and willing to take on Norris’ contract and basically move no money out, this feels like a better summer trade. They can extract value out of Boeser now and if Ottawa is really committed to moving Norris, still get him in the summer. Obviously there is some risk there and it could hurt more short-term, but I think it’s a bad move for them too.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

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.

three way trade including Pittsburgh where we get

Rakell and/or Karlsson

Vancouver + Ottawa sends picks, cap dumps, and prospects to burgh.

 

[HSF]

It's more that I think Vancouver would want to dump a contract or multiple contracts with term if we aren't retaining on Norris. Hoglander is their worst contract.

If we want to get out of the Norris contract, I don't see why we wouldn't do Norris for Boeser as a rental. Assuming nobody else is offering us value for Norris, it gets us out of the contract, and in terms of fit it's an upgrade. I think that Norris right now may be the better player (ignoring contract), but we need a right handed forward who can score goals. Goal scoring is a big deficiency for us right now.

In a scenario where it's Boeser for Norris, we aren't just trading for Boeser, we're trading for long-term cap flexibility.

I suspect Norris has some value and is not a total cap dump if his injury isn't too bad. He has had a decent year. Norris is the type of move you make in the summer when there is a bigger pool of teams wanting to make changes. Trading him for Boeser mid season makes you weaker down the middle and you add a winger who is also has injury issues and could walk. I think Boeser is a tricky player to nail down in that I think he will ask for a lot of money based on numbers but I don't think many teams will want to take on the risk of the serious injuries he has had

It seems like a risky move to move center depth mid season when we want to make noise in the playoffs

 

[bicboi64]

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.

I don't think ottawa and vancouver are good trade partners anymore.

I think the best case would be us getting Boeser and Soucy for Norris. Boeser might price himself out of Vancouver (and will probably price himself out of Ottawa), but we get a season of a legit top 6 wingers and Soucy is Vancouver's cap dump. Vancouver would bank on Norris either being useful to them while healthy or LTIR him and sign FAs galore.

We'd be left weaker down the middle though unless Pinto and Ostapchuk make strides in their development and would probably have to overpay Boeser to keep him

 

[BigRig4]

Where is this OTT/VAN Norris rumour coming from?

 

[HoweHullOrr]

It does, but it is revealing about Bell's and the team's long term perspective about Tyler Boucher.


I did NOT want Phaneuf. His contract was an albatross.

OK, but not sure how this applies to my post. I may have missed something I suppose, but I didn’t think the discussion revolved around Phaneuf specifically.

 

[Joeyjoejoe]

JBD + Forsberg + Crookshank + 2nd rounder for Karlsson plus retention.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

With what the Senators dumped, Phaneuf's contract wasn't an albatross. They dumped Cowen, Greening, and Michalek. Phaneuf's contract was also front-laoded. He was still perceived to be a top 4 defenseman in the NHL when the Seantors acquired him. There was a market to trade him, but the Leafs didn't want to retain. It wasn't one of those contracts that was completely unmovable.

Even when the Senators went to move on from him, there were multiple suitors. The Senators ended up dumping him on to the Kings for Gaborik, who I assume everybody involved knew would hang it up at the end of the season, pass go, and collect insured salary while LITRetired.

I get not liking Phaneuf as a player, but the contract was not an albatross. Did he have any real trade value? No, not without retaining and/or cap considerations. So the Sens got him for a 2nd, and the Kings got him for almost free - but if he was an albatross he probably would have retired a Leaf or a Senator.

With Melnyk's budget, the Phaneuf trade enabled the Senators to keep their window open. The top 4 was a major problem, and they had no way to get out of their multiple bad contracts and acquire someone to fix it. The Phaneuf trade was a very creative fix. I'm not saying he was perfect here, but he was a massive upgrade on Cowen or whoever we would have had in the alternative.

The issue was more that they were trading today's short term problems for a long term problem. Phaneuf worked out short term, hard to argue that.

It's a lot like the Zaitsev deal, they just got someone with a year or 2 of good hockey before they were an albatross.

 

[GCK]

The issue was more that they were trading today's short term problems for a long term problem. Phaneuf worked out short term, hard to argue that.

It's a lot like the Zaitsev deal, they just got someone with a year or 2 of good hockey before they were an albatross.

With the Phaneuf deal we reduced actually dollars out the door which was a mandate.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Karlsson with 50% retention would only cost 7.17M in real salary owed over the next two seasons, despite having a 5M cap hit.

And if he was acquired at 50% retention after his 25/26 bonus is paid (presumably on July 1st) he'd only cost 5M in real salary over those two years.

If real money in vs. out is still a factor for this team given a strong USD and massive cap increases coming, it could make EK an attractive target, even if we don't really need him.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

Norris + Forsberg= 10 m out

Karlsson 5m + Rakell 5m = 10 m in

would be a coup. Rakell would be perfect to play with Stutzle and he can even play C in a pinch.

we go to contender status with that swap.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

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.

When do you think this trade has to occur:

1. This season before the deadline
2. At this year’s trade deadline
3. This summer.
4. Maybe even beyond this summer.
5. Either alternative #1 or #2, but basically as fast as possible.

 

[bicboi64]

Norris + Forsberg= 10 m out

Karlsson 5m + Rakell 5m = 10 m in

would be a coup. Rakell would be perfect to play with Stutzle and he can even play C in a pinch.

we go to contender status with that swap.

Penguins aren't retaining half of EK and then taking on Norris while giving us Rakell. Rakell can get them a 1st and A/B prospect. A 3rd team has to get involve an we don't exactly have assets that are valuable (JBD, Boucher, Ostapchuk, Halliday, etc.,) to Pitts or another team that would retain on EK

 

[Hale The Villain]

Penguins aren't retaining half of EK and then taking on Norris while giving us Rakell. Rakell can get them a 1st and A/B prospect. A 3rd team has to get involve an we don't exactly have assets that are valuable (JBD, Boucher, Ostapchuk, Halliday, etc.,) to Pitts or another team that would retain on EK

To get both EK fully retained and Rakell, we're talking about multiple 1st round picks in value.

Norris almost certainly doesn't have the value of a 1st given his contract and injury issues, so we'd have to include one of our next two 1sts (whichever isn't handed to Bettman) and more assets on top of that.

It's really not do-able for a team that already has basically no expendable young assets to trade.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

Penguins aren't retaining half of EK and then taking on Norris while giving us Rakell. Rakell can get them a 1st and A/B prospect. A 3rd team has to get involve an we don't exactly have assets that are valuable (JBD, Boucher, Ostapchuk, Halliday, etc.,) to Pitts or another team that would retain on EK

Why Vancouver would have to be involved. Vancouver seems to have a need and could value Norris enough + they can send cap dumps.

Norris goes to Vancouver and Ottawa and Vancouver together come up with enough assets to tempt Pittsburgh.

Ott first 1st + Ott/Van2nds + Halliday + Soucy + Hoglander + 1 or 2 good Vancouver prospects

 

[Hale The Villain]

Wait, does Ryan O'Reilly really have zero trade protection? Could have sworn he had a NTC.

Assuming Trotz is not going to throw in the towel and go full rebuild after going full "simple jack" this off-season, maybe Nashville would be interested in a Norris for O'Reilly swap.

Would basically be similar to the Norris/Schenn swap we were reportedly interested in last season.

We get a lot older and potentially worse over the next couple seasons but get out of Norris' potential long-term albatross contract. Also save 3.5M in cap and a lot more in salary.

May have to add to Norris to get O'Reilly, but that seems infinitely smarter than trading Norris for a bunch of lesser pieces at the deadline.

 

[bicboi64]

Wait, does Ryan O'Reilly really have zero trade protection? Could have sworn he had a NTC.

ROR wanted to sign in NSH and I think Trotz would only trade him to a place he actively wants to go to similar to how he did with McDonagh. Can't imagine ROR would want to come to Ottawa but if he did, that would be friggin awesome. We'd have to take back other cap from NSH though (would love Lauzon or LSchenn just for more hits from the blue line lol)