Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part XV: Trading up or down? - Mod Warning post #450

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
EK had 53 assists last year on a team that was a complete cluster****
Plus I forgot he is a righty.
No assurances of resigning but if he wants to be in a great city he can get by with 6 x 7million
 
effen said:
hayes 5-5.5, names/spooner 3.5-4.5 is 9-10 off the bat. if they trade ryan/karlsson @ 14 but retain some of ryan. its not +10 and -14, its +12 and -12

theyre trying to not pay anyone until they can get an arena built. boedkker has a higher cap hit than actual dollar amount paid out, thats why he got targeted

even if they 'save' 2M thats not a good return for erik freakin karlsson
Click to expand...

Take Ryans whole salary then flip him by retaining. Hayes Name and spoon are all rfa ..the sens go to arb with them to lower salary's and term goes to 1 year.
 
RGY said:
Hayes would be part of package going back to Ottawa imo.

Hayes, late 1st, 3rd, Spooner/Nam

for

EK, Ryan (money retained)

Flip Ryan.

Trade for Hagelin with money retained

Sign JT.
Click to expand...

Tavares is not happening. I’m fairly certain that I heard that Tavares is only going to allow five teams to meet with him next week and the Rangers are not among those teams.
 
RGY said:
For the Senators yes. If you break down that trade it looks like this:

Skjei (due for a raise) and a late 1st for EK. As long as EK re-signs this is an easy win.

Ryan + 2nd round pick for nothing; we are getting a 2nd to take on the salary. One thing I would change is making the 2nd rounder a 1st and/or Ottawa eating some salary.
Click to expand...
As long as EK re-signs.. I’m not losing assets trading for a Star player rental in the middle of a rebuild. EK seriously wants to compete. I don’t think we compete enough next year for anyone in his position to want to sign long term
 
I would hate to see the Rangers trade for EK at this point in time. There's nothing wrong with that tactic in general, but given our circumstance of being semi committed to a rebuild it would just undo the progress we made in the past few months of gathering assets for a fresh new window.

Getting EK just cements us in the cycle of perpetual mediocrity that we're all too familiar with. We finally have a bunch of new assets and prospects as well as a new coach and recently appointed GM. We have a great opportunity to really start fresh and have a new window. Ugh I don't want to see us lose any assets here.

If the strategy here is to trade for EK now so he can be a veteran guy for our new window, I think it's simply too much to wager on his commitment to us. He could easily walk in a year. Too much to gamble on imo. Especially when you look at his underperformance, health and inevitable contract raise. Way too many variables to rest on hope at the expense of our assets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lays and Holden the Stick
Vinny DeAngelo said:
As long as EK re-signs.. I’m not losing assets trading for a Star player rental in the middle of a rebuild. EK seriously wants to compete. I don’t think we compete enough next year for anyone in his position to want to sign long term
Click to expand...

Great thing about the NHL is that there are 10 teams every year with a chance to compete for the Cup. Add to that cap space,assets needed to trade for EK etc. I love Brady but if its him and the 28th pick you have to do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown
cheech70 said:
Great thing about the NHL is that there are 10 teams every year with a chance to compete for the Cup. Add to that cap space,assets needed to trade for EK etc. I love Brady but if its him and the 28th pick you have to do it.
Click to expand...
Adding 1 offensive piece and taking away a defensive one from a shot defensive team isn’t the recipe to compete
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom