Should the Senators trade Norris to get a replacement for Zub?

[mianjo]

MSN

Click to read more...

 

[lancepitlick]

I wouldn't make a panic move to cover a roster spot for a season where they are likely not making the playoffs. If it helps the team now and in the future, that's a different story.

I don't see anyone wanting Norris, with his contract and injury history, unless they are sending a boat anchor back to Ottawa. Would you rather have a boat anchor 3rd/4th RD or a boat anchor #2C?

Realistically the Sens would probably trade Norris for nothing to get him off the books.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

According to many on here, Norris won’t fetch much. So, not seeing how we get a quality RD with Norris as the trade bait IF this is true.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

They're 9-11-1.

If they do make a move, I hope it's more with the future in mind than salvaging this season.

 

[PlayOn]

I think if Norris goes you have to get a C back for him. And it will be an older vet. Maybe you can also get a dman, but you can’t trade Norris without “replacing” him while Pinto is struggling and Greig clearly doesn’t work in the top 6 at this stage.

Then let’s say Pinto gets hurt, you’re basically in the same position you are with the defence now where you need to search for a centre.

I don’t see the point of a Norris trade based on the perception of his value. I probably like the player more than most but I’d rather just overpay him than dump him for a 34 year old on his last legs.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

I wouldn't make a panic move to cover a roster spot for a season where they are likely not making the playoffs. If it helps the team now and in the future, that's a different story.

I don't see anyone wanting Norris, with his contract and injury history, unless they are sending a boat anchor back to Ottawa. Would you rather have a boat anchor 3rd/4th RD or a boat anchor #2C?

Realistically the Sens would probably trade Norris for nothing to get him off the books.

I don't think it is a panic move. It's already been reported that they were shopping Norris last year prior to his injury.

In all likelihood, they don't see him as part of the core moving forward. The team's current record expedited moving him.

Teams who might have been interested in him last year probably needed to see that he could play without getting hurt. He is on pace for 30 goals while playing the toughest minutes of all Senators Cs, winning almost 60 percent of faceoffs, and being leaned on heavily by Green. Whether he has passed the eye test during those minutes is up for debate, but I could see how his current performance on paper might give a rival GM some confidence that if they acquire him they are buying low on a very useful player.

If we trade Norris, I don't think we will get back an equivalent player. I think it will be a 2 for 1 type deal where we move him for two veterans who are signed to 3M-5M type contracts and fill the 3C+4/5D type role. People will be underwhelmed with the return, but it will be just as much about helping fix the depth and change the room in the short term as it will be about getting out of that Norris contract long-term.

I don't think it will just be a D coming back, because if they trade Norris they decimate the center depth. Pinto and Greig both haven't got going this season and an injury to either one of them puts us in a tough position depth wise. We would go from having great center depth to being 1 injury away from being paper thin after Stutzle (unless Greig or Pinto get going).

 

[lancepitlick]

I guess my point is that, if you are trading Norris mainly to fill in for a hurt Zub, you are likely taking on a 3-5 year contract. Is it worth it to take that on because one player is going to miss 30 games? To me the answer is no unless it's a trade you would have contemplated regardless of Zub's current injury status.

Making short term panic moves is how you end up with Zaitsev, Norris' current contract and ADC/Chychrun/Zbad etc. the list goes on.

If this team can't win without Artem Zub for 35 games and making some moves around the margins, they are already screwed.

Even with Zub (some of the time at least) the team is 27th. If they finish 24th or 30th it makes no difference.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

I guess my point is that, if you are trading Norris mainly to fill in for a hurt Zub, you are likely taking on a 3-5 year contract. Is it worth it to take that on because one player is going to miss 30 games? To me the answer is no unless it's a trade you would have contemplated regardless of Zub's current injury status.

Making short term panic moves is how you end up with Zaitsev, Norris' current contract and ADC/Chychrun/Zbad etc. the list goes on.

If this team can't win without Artem Zub for 35 games and making some moves around the margins, they are already screwed.

Eh. Being a bad GM is how you end up with Zaitsev. It didn't seem like it was a case of throwing caution to the wind for a typical panic move, I think they thought he'd play well in Ottawa for the life of his contract that came with the seal of approval from his new coaching hire.

 

[OD99]

We are 1-0 with JBD filling in for Zub.

Zub hasn't been good this season and since he returned from his concussion, I have questioned if he isn't having lingering issues (not that he isn't cleared to play safely). His decision making has been way off and his touch with the puck had disappeared.

Going back to the game against the Canucks, Norris still played well and I would expect him to score on his chance at the end of the 2nd period most of the time. That would have made it 3-2 going into the 3rd and who knows.

He also had a great chance midway through the 3rd last night. He is getting chances and we know he can score. He is down my list of guys to trade - he is far more valuable than a lot of people give him credit for. Faceoffs, D coverage (yes he had a blunder last night, but credit to the Flame that quickly jumped on him and he was only in the position to make the blunder because he made a great defensive play in the 1st place), skating, scoring, etc...he is a 200' player and we need more like him.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

I would look at it. If we can find the right partner.. which to me would be one that has a need at center and has a RD we would like to acquire at a reasonable price.

Both Cs and RDs are the coveted pieces ... I think this would have to be with a team that thinks a middle 6 C can help put them over the top or a team that is struggling and looking to find a missing piece. Norris might have some allure as a 1 C with a couple struggling teams

Finding a diamond in the rough is really hard to do .. I think especially so when it comes to RDs, our need, and there is no point getting one that is unproven

 

[Good in Osgoode]

I think if Norris goes you have to get a C back for him. And it will be an older vet. Maybe you can also get a dman, but you can’t trade Norris without “replacing” him while Pinto is struggling and Greig clearly doesn’t work in the top 6 at this stage.

Then let’s say Pinto gets hurt, you’re basically in the same position you are with the defence now where you need to search for a centre.

I don’t see the point of a Norris trade based on the perception of his value. I probably like the player more than most but I’d rather just overpay him than dump him for a 34 year old on his last legs.

Just curious if this last part is in reference to Brayden Schenn or just a general comment?
The reason I ask is that there was an earlier mention of Staois considering a potential trade of Norris for Schenn.

The description would fit Schenn in terms of his age, being a C and being on his last legs, despite having 3 years left at $6.5m/season.
Think I would prefer as well to stick with Norris as compared to Schenn, in this scenario.

 

[PlayOn]

Just curious if this last part is in reference to Brayden Schenn or just a general comment?
The reason I ask is that there was an earlier mention of Staois considering a potential trade of Norris for Schenn.

The description would fit Schenn in terms of his age, being a C and being on his last legs, despite having 3 years left at $6.5m/season.
Think I would prefer as well to stick with Norris as compared to Schenn, in this scenario.

Yeah that, or even looking at the PLD for Kuemper trade last year if not actually specifically Schenn. LA basically dumped him to get a cheaper contract on a struggling goalie. I can’t imagine we’d get much more than that for Norris.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

We are 1-0 with JBD filling in for Zub.

Zub hasn't been good this season and since he returned from his concussion, I have questioned if he isn't having lingering issues (not that he isn't cleared to play safely). His decision making has been way off and his touch with the puck had disappeared.

Going back to the game against the Canucks, Norris still played well and I would expect him to score on his chance at the end of the 2nd period most of the time. That would have made it 3-2 going into the 3rd and who knows.

He also had a great chance midway through the 3rd last night. He is getting chances and we know he can score. He is down my list of guys to trade - he is far more valuable than a lot of people give him credit for. Faceoffs, D coverage (yes he had a blunder last night, but credit to the Flame that quickly jumped on him and he was only in the position to make the blunder because he made a great defensive play in the 1st place), skating, scoring, etc...he is a 200' player and we need more like him.

JBD didn't fill in for Zub. He played 10 minutes and Zub's minutes were mostly taken by the other top D.

I agree with you in theory about what Norris brings, but I think there are multiple factors at play, like the risk of re-injury, the lack of cap flexibility that Dorion left the team with, and the perceived need to shake up the core.

I don't think a Norris trade will be about getting back the better players on paper. But I think it will be one of those trades where you have to look at the big picture. I guarantee you it will be the type of return that will have people laughing at the Senators, but the value will partly be getting out of the contract.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

Last night we saw a side to Norris of the type of player he can be.

I don't wanna give up on Norris yet.

 

[SensFactor]

I like Norris too and would not trade him for a temporary stopgap on defense. If I'm Staois, I'm looking for a 5-6 dman for a pick that you can flip out at the trade deadline if need be.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

Unless it's guy who is a rock solid top 4RD in his twenties, then no. Norris is playing well for the most part and will likely improve as he gets further removed from his surgery.

I don't think we're getting a really good RD for him so to this likely doesn't make sense.

 

[bicboi64]

I'd love to trade Norris for a package that gets us a #4 RD but not sure if that's even available. We'd have to take back some more salary to make it work with whomever we're trading with.

Maybe Columbus for Severson & Kuraly? Pulock in NYI? Ruuta/Ceci & an expiring contract like Kunin, Sturm or Granlund? Parayko or Faulk (Armstrong is not averse to any risks)?

 

[Xspyrit]

lol without Norris, we're 2 Top-6 forwards short and 3 Top-9 forwards short (until Perron rebounds). Just can't let that happen.

The problem was designed this off-season :

0 injury : 2 of Kleven/Hamonic/JBD play

1 injury : 3 of Kleven/Hamonic/JBD play

We don't have any cap space or good prospect, we are screwed because how this team has been managed for years. Need several guys to play above their talent level or Stutzle and Sanderson to be massive elite players ASAP

 

[Knave]

No. Not unless it's prime Erik Karlsson or something.

 

[Blotto71]

Yes. The Sens should absolutely deal Norris if there is a fair offer to be had, especially if it's a #4 (or better) RD. Stutzle - Pinto - Ostapchuk - Greig down the middle isn't sexy, but you can't get something for nothing.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

You don't trade a 30 goal two way center for a complimentary defenseman. Norris is a guy who can make an impact in a game, and if you are making a hockey trade then you want to get back a player who can make an impact in a game.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Not sure if moving Norris is the answer, seems to be more confident in the shoulder, after getting the same surgeon Tank used for his third one.

I would consider moving Zub in the off season, with the concussions he’s had.

 

[OD99]

JBD didn't fill in for Zub. He played 10 minutes and Zub's minutes were mostly taken by the other top D

Yes, I was being tongue in cheek with my comment. The idea is that with Jensen taking on extra minutes and JBD/Hamonic having to split time, we still managed to salvage a win.

.I agree with you in theory about what Norris brings, but I think there are multiple factors at play, like the risk of re-injury, the lack of cap flexibility that Dorion left the team with, and the perceived need to shake up the core.

I am less concerned about another injury and more concerned that he is quite easily, and by a wide margin, our 2nd best C. He is our #1 defensive C and if he has a minor uptick in his offensive production, he will be worth his money. That contract will get better and better over the life of it.

I don't think a Norris trade will be about getting back the better players on paper. But I think it will be one of those trades where you have to look at the big picture. I guarantee you it will be the type of return that will have people laughing at the Senators, but the value will partly be getting out of the contract.

I would rather not sell for pennies on the dollar unless we are hard pressed to do it, and I don't think we are in that position yet, especially with Yak coming as quickly as mid season next year.

 

[DueDiligence]

You can move Norris for a RHD if it also allows you to get a mid priced centre in the same or another deal. getting rid of Norris's $8 million cap opens up some possibilities

 

[Burrowsaurus]

We are 1-0 with JBD filling in for Zub.

Zub hasn't been good this season and since he returned from his concussion, I have questioned if he isn't having lingering issues (not that he isn't cleared to play safely). His decision making has been way off and his touch with the puck had disappeared.

Going back to the game against the Canucks, Norris still played well and I would expect him to score on his chance at the end of the 2nd period most of the time. That would have made it 3-2 going into the 3rd and who knows.

He also had a great chance midway through the 3rd last night. He is getting chances and we know he can score. He is down my list of guys to trade - he is far more valuable than a lot of people give him credit for. Faceoffs, D coverage (yes he had a blunder last night, but credit to the Flame that quickly jumped on him and he was only in the position to make the blunder because he made a great defensive play in the 1st place), skating, scoring, etc...he is a 200' player and we need more like him.

Why would you expect him to score on those chances? He had another one against Calgary that he put softly into Wolf’s pads. The guy is not a pure goal scorer. He can score when he is set up he has very good accuracy when one timing the puck he puts it places you wouldn’t expect. But one on one with goal.? He gets out dueled

You can move Norris for a RHD if it also allows you to get a mid priced centre in the same or another deal. getting rid of Norris's $8 million cap opens up some possibilities

Doesn’t open up as many possibilities as you think because we have no prospects or picks to move for that other center.