Proposal: Stars - Leafs
- Thread starter sxvnert
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Samuel Culper III
Mr. Woodhull...
Doesn't really make sense for the Stars. They take the larger cap hit for an offensive player they don't need who may be too injured to contribute and give up the better of their two goalies from a position of weakness. Toronto would have to add some incentive for them to actually do this.
Dallas had the league's best offense and bad goaltending with Niemi being more reliable than Lehtonen. They move Niemi they'll just have Lehtonen and they don't need a 5M+ forward when they're already offensively stacked. Especially not one like Lupul.
Dallas had the league's best offense and bad goaltending with Niemi being more reliable than Lehtonen. They move Niemi they'll just have Lehtonen and they don't need a 5M+ forward when they're already offensively stacked. Especially not one like Lupul.
Last edited:
Not very realistic as this leaves the Leafs with Niemi who they don't need. That's $10M tied up in the goal crease.
If by some unimaginable scenario Lupul started the season with the Leafs they would still get a serviceable player. I just don't see the benefit for Niemi. There are way, way cheaper options out there.
Leafs can and should retain on Lupul.
Would gleefully do something like Lupul 50% for Hemsky.
If by some unimaginable scenario Lupul started the season with the Leafs they would still get a serviceable player. I just don't see the benefit for Niemi. There are way, way cheaper options out there.
Leafs can and should retain on Lupul.
Would gleefully do something like Lupul 50% for Hemsky.
Poignant Discussion*
I tell it like it is
Halla
Registered User
- Jan 28, 2016
- 14,727
- 3,779
toronto needs to add to get a 4.5 mil backup goalie?
yeah ok
Niemi could still be a serviceable starter. Not a strong one, but decent. I do agree though, that Toronto doesn't need to add. No reason to go doing Dallas a favor by taking one of their goalies. I have no idea what that team was thinking.
Samuel Culper III
Mr. Woodhull...
Is Niemi Dallas' backup? Not the last time I checked. If Toronto wants to acquire Niemi to be their backup, they're asking Dallas to move their preferred starter (call it 1a/1b, whatever... Niemi is the better) for a terrible cap dump. If they don't want to add pick another backup. As others have mentioned, not sure why Toronto would want to pay so much for a back up, but don't expect Dallas to give up their best goalie for Lupul.
While I could see Niemi ending up a Leaf because we do need a backup this isn't the deal that does it
No we moved Betnier because he sucked Niemi doesn't suck and would actually give us 2 good goalies which we haven't Hard since Cujo and Scawb Sure Eddie came after Cujo but he always had garbage backups
Halla
Registered User
- Jan 28, 2016
- 14,727
- 3,779
their preferred goalie had a .905SV% on a cup contending team...Bernier who we just dumped had a .908SV% on the worst team in the league....Niemi is himself a terrible cap dump. we have absolutely no need for a 4.5 million backup, especially at the cost of moving another bad contract that we can easily LTIR
I like this trade for Dallas. By moving Niemi we could then trade for Bishop.
Is there anyway the leafs could take both Lethonen and Niemi?
That way with Bishop (6M) the stars just need to get backup
Is there anyway the leafs could take both Lethonen and Niemi?
That way with Bishop (6M) the stars just need to get backup
Mr Misty
The Irons Are Back!
- Feb 20, 2012
- 7,965
- 58
We're committed to having 2 starters, if we trade Niemi then we only have one. Nobody in free agency is capable of winning 25 games, we've already had a look at Enroth and decided he wasn't worth it otherwise we wouldn't have traded for Niemi in the first place.
Lupul's inability to stay healthy and higher cost makes this an easy pass.
Lupul's inability to stay healthy and higher cost makes this an easy pass.
Unspecified
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Apr 29, 2015
- 6,234
- 3,110
Dallas is not going to take back that kind of salary for a player who should be making $ 4 million less than he currently makes.
The Leafs just traded Bernier to get rid of an expensive backup goalie, so what is the point of this trade for them? They don't save that much in salary.
I think Lupul would absolutely be traded for significant savings in salary or term, but that's not the case here and I wouldn't expect any team to make such an offer until/unless Lupul shows he can be productive on the ice. And if that happens, Lupul will be worth more than this.
I also don't see a lot of a reason for the Stars to do this either.
I think Lupul would absolutely be traded for significant savings in salary or term, but that's not the case here and I wouldn't expect any team to make such an offer until/unless Lupul shows he can be productive on the ice. And if that happens, Lupul will be worth more than this.
I also don't see a lot of a reason for the Stars to do this either.
I don't think Lupul is gonna go on LTIR willingly. If he's healthy, he will be on the roster - it won't be a simple "Robidas" that everyone is talking about.
Unspecified
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Apr 29, 2015
- 6,234
- 3,110
You mean the guy who cannot string two healthy season in a row together? Or the guy who has put up a blistering 79 points in his last 170 games played? You really think that equates to being paid $5.250 million this next season and the following season?
So many issues here. We will ignore the argument that Niemi is better than Lehtonen, the point of the deal is to free up a slot to get a starter like Fleury or Bishop.
Toronto just gave up a 1 year expensive backup goalie, they will not get a more expensive one at twice the term. It makes no sense unless Dallas is desperate enough to add a huge piece to take on the contract (think at least twice the cost Chicago paid).
Dallas then has to be ok with transferring the bad contract from goal to wing. There was no real advantage to them other than freeing up the goalie spot for a future trade.
All in all it comes down to would Dallas move a 1st round pick or top prospect like Honka (or more) to dump the goalie just so they can pay top price to get a replacement starter from Pittsburgh or Tampa.
It won't happen, while I like the thought behind it this trade doesn't benefit everyone to do.
Toronto just gave up a 1 year expensive backup goalie, they will not get a more expensive one at twice the term. It makes no sense unless Dallas is desperate enough to add a huge piece to take on the contract (think at least twice the cost Chicago paid).
Dallas then has to be ok with transferring the bad contract from goal to wing. There was no real advantage to them other than freeing up the goalie spot for a future trade.
All in all it comes down to would Dallas move a 1st round pick or top prospect like Honka (or more) to dump the goalie just so they can pay top price to get a replacement starter from Pittsburgh or Tampa.
It won't happen, while I like the thought behind it this trade doesn't benefit everyone to do.
TrillMike
Registered User
7even
Offered and lost
If by good you mean incredibly average yeah. Neither Andersen nor Niemi could hold Cujo's jockstrap.
