Weekes: Senators willing to trade high pick or prospect to dump Nikita Zaitsev's contract

[mouser]

I think a 2nd will get rid of Zaitsev contract.
A 1st and 2nd , [ The one they were going to waste ] and Zaitsev could return a player/prospect they have an eye on.

If Zaitsev was traded today I think it would take at least two 2nds of value to move him.

 

[Michoulicious]

If Zaitsev was traded today I think it would take at least two 2nds of value to move him.

2 x 2nd or a late 1st is pretty close.

 

[uncleben]

Doesn't make sense to me
They're not in a win now mode
Just play him out one more season and keep your assets

 

[mouser]

2 x 2nd or a late 1st is pretty close.

Yup, depending on the position of the 2nds.

But it’s looking unlikely Ottawa will have a late 1st this next draft.

 

[Michoulicious]

Yup, depending on the position of the 2nds.

But it’s looking unlikely Ottawa will have a late 1st this next draft.

Yeah, but they could certainly trade 2024 1st to dump Zaitsev and then use the more valuable 2023 1st in a package for Chychrun.

 

[cheesymc]

Ducks should be jumping on this.

Zaitsev and Ostapchuk/Kleven
For
Shattenkirk/Kulikov/Silfverberg (50% retained)

Ducks need some size

 

[mouser]

Yeah, but they could certainly trade 2024 1st to dump Zaitsev and then use the more valuable 2023 1st in a package for Chychrun.

On a similar note, Ottawa could just send the 2024 1st to Arizona to take Zaitsev in the trade. Even if Zaitsev has AZ on his NTC list, Ottawa and Arizona could agree that AZ would claim Zaitsev off waivers.

 

[Michoulicious]

On a similar note, Ottawa could just send the 2024 1st to Arizona to take Zaitsev in the trade. Even if Zaitsev has AZ on his NTC list, Ottawa and Arizona could agree that AZ would claim Zaitsev off waivers.

That would give an AWFUL reputation to both Ottawa and Arizona to collude this way to get around a player NTC. Pretty sure the players union would be all over that.

Especially if it is written in the trade formally.

 

[Seras]

But the Oilers are a playoff team that is needing cap to try and win now. The Sens aren’t in the same situation.

I mean the cap price and savings are the same, if they want to move him the cost will be X, otherwise keep him and save the assets

 

[mouser]

That would give an AWFUL reputation to both Ottawa and Arizona to collude this way to get around a player NTC. Pretty sure the players union would be all over that.

Especially if it is written in the trade formally.

We already know no team is going to claim Zaitsev off waivers without compensation.

Too bad Zaitsev didn’t get a no Waivers partial NMC included in his contract.

 

[Mr Positive]

Don’t see Ottawa moving a first to unload Zaitsev

Idk Weekes has been one of the best insiders out there and this wasn't presented as just his opinion.

Although it might mean that this is part of a bigger move or string of moves

 

[Michoulicious]

We already know no team is going to claim Zaitsev off waivers without compensation.

Too bad Zaitsev didn’t get a no Waivers partial NMC included in his contract.

I'd argue that if you compensate another team to pick a player off waiver, it is a de facto trade. Would be interesting to see how parties react.

 

[Maurice of Orange]

Nobody wants Zaitsev, Ottawa tried moving him in the summer with no takers.
It’s probably going to take a 1st and prospect just to dump Zaitsev.

Ottawa would be better off burying Zaitsev in the minors for the rest of the season and then buying out the remaining year on his deal in the summer.

 

[Mrfenn92]

Idk Weekes has been one of the best insiders out there and this wasn't presented as just his opinion.

Although it might mean that this is part of a bigger move or string of moves

I mean yeah they could. I just don’t see them moving a first to unload him. But hell I’ve been wrong before.

 

[Mr Positive]

Sens are not a cap team.

And DeBrincat will cost a lot more than 6.5 millions next year. Shane Pinto off ELC as well. Zaitsev must go to get Chychrun AND keep DeBrincat, even if they become 100% a cap team.

Like all budget teams, they will spend up to the cap if they have enough certainty that the team will be great. They will cheap out when they feel the product will be bad. They will likely start spending soon, as this new core matures

 

[oilers4life]

Friedman has hinted many times on 32 thoughts or Marek's radio show that Myers doesn't want to go to OTT and may have already blocked a trade using his NTC.

wonder if it has to do with hamonic i do remember reports of players really hating the guy

 

[Mr Positive]

That would give an AWFUL reputation to both Ottawa and Arizona to collude this way to get around a player NTC. Pretty sure the players union would be all over that.

Especially if it is written in the trade formally.

No team would collude in this way. Also teams and players don't collude to circumvent the cap by abusing LTIR. It just seems that way to us. Or else, why would the Wild have suffered that huge penalty on the Suter and Parise buyouts?

Has this waiver claim collusion ever happened? I'm guessing not. It's a pipe dream. The league would probably nix the move

 

[Michoulicious]

No team would collude in this way. Also teams and players don't collude to circumvent the cap by abusing LTIR. It just seems that way to us. Or else, why would the Wild have suffered that huge penalty on the Suter and Parise buyouts?

Has this waiver claim collusion ever happened? I'm guessing not. It's a pipe dream. The league would probably nix the move

Here teams would collude to abuse a player and circumvent the NTC he negociated in his contract. Players would not let that happen, that would set a dangerous precedent.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

No team would collude in this way. Also teams and players don't collude to circumvent the cap by abusing LTIR. It just seems that way to us. Or else, why would the Wild have suffered that huge penalty on the Suter and Parise buyouts?

Has this waiver claim collusion ever happened? I'm guessing not. It's a pipe dream. The league would probably nix the move

The threat of it has been used previously. The Bolts threatened waivers when they wanted to move Dan Boyle to the Sharks.

 

[Akrapovince]

The no trade clause is the issue insofar as he can't be traded to any of the 10 teams on his no trade clause list without him expressly waiving that clause.

You seem to think it's not an obstacle at all, because if the Sens try to move him to one of those teams, and he refuses, the Sens can say "either waive it or we'll send you to the AHL".

If sending Zaitsev to the AHL like you want the Sens to threaten to do would solve the problem they're trying to solve (whatever that may be), they would simply do that first without trading him along with a high pick or good prospect. Because why would they pay one of those to move him when simply waiving him would solve the issue the Sens are trying to solve by trading him?

Waiving him and sending him to the AHL, therefore, doesn't solve the problem. Therefore, threatening to do so if he doesn't waive his NTC would be an empty threat, because ultimately they would still need to trade him because waiving him didn't solve the problem.

That's why they need to attach the pick and/or prospect to get the deal done.

So yes, the value required to move him is an obstacle, but you also need to work around his NTC to find a team willing to take him, and that he's willing to go to.

What?

Sending him down in a vacuum doesn’t do anything, because there is no other option. Obviously sending him down when there isn’t an imminent trade in place isn’t going to help anything.

If we send him down, he will just go down. Nothing gets solved.

If he has the option between going down, or waiving to go to a team in which we have a trade in place with a pick and prospect, he will choose to leave. Regardless of what team that is, if the alternative is going to the AHL.

Pretty simple.

No one said sending him down would solve the issue or do what the Sens are trying to do.

Sending him down to play in the AHL would solve the trade clause issue. Not the value.

 

[Michoulicious]

The threat of it has been used previously. The Bolts threatened waivers when they wanted to move Dan Boyle to the Sharks.

You can threaten waiver, but here the thing is we know nobody would take Zaitsev for free so he'd clear and stay on Ottawa's books.

The idea is to collude with another team that is on Zaitsev NTC giving them assets for them to pick him off waivers. That is basically a trade disguised as a waiver claim. To me this would be certainly rejected by the players association and they would fight hard over that.

 

[Mr Positive]

The threat of it has been used previously. The Bolts threatened waivers when they wanted to move Dan Boyle to the Sharks.

Putting someone on waivers or even threatening to do so is okay

It's entirely different to put a player on waivers and then pay a team to take him.

They'd have to hide the payout like a criminal, in some dishonestly lopsided side deal

 

[Legion34]

Why tho?
There are no trades to be had this year that make them a playoff team

Next year he is owed 2 million

Why not hold on until July 2?
Maybe even a late buyout of there is arb?

 

[mouser]

The threat of it has been used previously. The Bolts threatened waivers when they wanted to move Dan Boyle to the Sharks.

There was another situation with a player whose name escapes me.

If I recall correctly the player was traded to St Louis with the handshake condition that the original team would submit a waiver claim if the Blues later waived the player—which did happen.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

You can threaten waiver, but here the thing is we know nobody would take Zaitsev for free so he'd clear and stay on Ottawa's books.

The idea is to collude with another team that is on Zaitsev NTC giving them assets for them to pick him off waivers. That is basically a trade disguised as a waiver claim. To me this would be certainly rejected by the players association and they would fight hard over that.

Putting someone on waivers or even threatening to do so is okay

It's entirely different to put a player on waivers and then pay a team to take him.

They'd have to hide the payout like a criminal, in some dishonestly lopsided side deal

I don’t see how any impartial arbitrator is going to see it as anything but a valid loophole within the system. Future consideration moves happen for taking someone in the expansion draft. I’m sure there’s been similar moves when they had the waiver draft.