Proposal: Three-way trade benefitting all 3 teams?

[Carolinas Identity*]

What happened!?

he slept in and missed practice the next day and the team suspended him one game for it

 

[bernmeister]

Uh, pass from Winnipeg.

Good try but the Jets are building a young team designed to compete together in the future. No way do they give up a 22 y/o d-man in exchange for a 27 y/o - given the current age of the balance of their D group. They aren't looking to get older.

Maukkis thought it was good.
factor in McD sweet contract

 

[Tripod]

To Philly:
Brad Marchand

To Boston:
Jaden Schwartz

To StL:
Wayne Simmonds

Philly is not trading 3 years of Simmonds at 3.975 million for 1 of Marchand at 4.5.

 

[Oddbob]

I enjoy this game but am generally terrible at it.

--------------------------------



RW Ryan Callahan
D Matt Dumba




G Jimmy Howard
D Jason Garrison




RW Jason Pominville
D Jonathan Ericsson
Detroit's 2nd round pick in 2017

As a Wings fan, yes PLEASE! No way Minnesota gives up Dumba for Howard and/or Garrison though!

 

[Viqsi]

To Montreal: Scott Hartnell, Jarome Iginla,
To Columbus: Thomas Plekanec, Paul Byron
To Colorado: Sven Andrighetto, Dillon Heatherington

Jackets downgrade on the roster for one useless forward and a redundant C we don't need - thus taking up all roster spots and making it impossible to call up NHL-ready guys like Bjorkstrand and Anderson - and end up utterly, irretrievably, impossibly ruined capwise for this year and next. We do this and we're absolutely 100% assured of losing Wennberg unless the cap jumps by, like, $7m or something, and stand a fair chance of losing Murray and Jenner and Atkinson as well.

No way in hell. Not even briefly considered.

 

[TML1967]

As a Toronto fan, I think Toronto should be giving up a bit more to close this deal. I understand they're trading the best skater, but Pouliot and Nichushkin are pieces I'd take a chance on.

Id agree, id add one of the bubble prospects.

Pit:
In: JVR + Pierre Engvall
Out: Fleury, Pouliot

Dal:
In: Fleury + Tobias Lindberg
Out: Nichuskin, Lehtonen

Tor:
In: Pouliot, Nichuskin, Lehtonon + 3rd round pick from Dallas
Out: JVR + Tobias Lindberg + Pierre Engvall

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

Jackets downgrade on the roster for one useless forward and a redundant C we don't need - thus taking up all roster spots and making it impossible to call up NHL-ready guys like Bjorkstrand and Anderson - and end up utterly, irretrievably, impossibly ruined capwise for this year and next. We do this and we're absolutely 100% assured of losing Wennberg unless the cap jumps by, like, $7m or something, and stand a fair chance of losing Murray and Jenner and Atkinson as well.

No way in hell. Not even briefly considered.

Plekanec easily has more value than Hartnell, be real. Please point me to where the Jackets downgrade on their roster. You're throwing this big a fit over adding 2mil a year for 2 years to the cap? No way would this trade make it 100% certain of losing anyone, besides Hartnell is signed an extra year at 5 mil per after Plek's contract expires, how is that not a cap concern?

This thread is also completely pointless, no sense getting your panties in a bunch.

 

[Maukkis]

To Winnipeg:
Cam Fowler
Nick Ritchie
Kasperi Kapanen

To Anaheim:
James van Riemsdyk
Josh Morrissey

To Toronto:
Jacob Trouba


Ducks give: Fowler & Ritchie
Ducks get: JVR & Morrissey

Jets give: Trouba & Morrissey
Jets get: Fowler, Kapanen & Ritchie

Leafs give: JVR & Kapanen
Leafs get: Trouba

Rielly or Lindholm comes back if Trouba goes. I don't need to be told that Trouba is worse than both of them, a "yes" or a "no" will suffice.

In other words, a shocking proposal for Winnipeg.

To MIN: Spooner + BOS 1st
To WPG: Brodin + prospect from Boston to be haggled over
To BOS: Trouba

Why does Trouba have to be in the deal? Pretty sure you could just trade with Minnesota. But anyway, that plus could be... McAvoy and Carlo. We have no reason to downgrade from Trouba.

Maukkis thought it was good.
factor in McD sweet contract

There are pros and cons, but it's more of a "can't say no" situation. Everyone just sees the situation differently.

 

[Viqsi]

Plekanec easily has more value than Hartnell, be real.

Bull. Hartnell has consistently produced more than Plekanec (see p/60) for the last three years. His possession numbers are also significantly better (yes, I know Plekanec is really good at that - Hartnell's just better). He's just as effective defensively, he has a better track record as a mentor for young players, and he's paid significantly less. And they're all of six months apart in age. The only things Plekanec has in his favor are the lack of an NMC (which we don't care about at this point) and the ability to take faceoffs, although he's currently drawing at 49.8% and we have more than a few guys who can do better.

Want charts? I have charts:
[collapse="havesomecharts"]
Points Per 60 comparison:

HERO comparison:

[/collapse]

You're throwing this big a fit over adding 2mil a year for 2 years to the cap?

We'd start having issues with half a mil to a mil of additional cap space, let alone two to four times that.

No way would this trade make it 100% certain of losing anyone

After this trade and adding Werenski to the defense, the amount of cap space we have would be below the NHL minimum salary. If the cap stays flat next year, we potentially go into negatives because of the Tyutin buyout (presuming we end up having to retain someone at the same rate as Campbell presently is at). Meanwhile, Wennberg is an RFA, poised for a breakout season, and due for a raise next year because that's when his RFA contract expires. And we're out of useful cap-saving buyouts. How do you imagine that going?

besides Hartnell is signed an extra year at 5 mil per after Plek's contract expires, how is that not a cap concern?

$4.75 mil. And partly the fact that Hartnell's still a useful player, partly that Jack Johnson, Dalton Prout, and the Boll buyout are all gone at that point.

This thread is also completely pointless, no sense getting your panties in a bunch.

...says the guy trying to defend an indefensible proposal.