Proposal: Trade Rumours/Proposals [MOD - Stay on Topic]

[HSF]

any new news on DBC?

Lots of people talking about him here

 

[Ice-Tray]

None of Pierre's trades, outside of Karlsson, are likely to have as big an impact on the organization as Murray trading Elliott.

Assen na yo!

One reclamation project for another was a small trade with little to lose.

It was a home run hcokey deal as Anderson ended up being the best case scenariI outcome.

It was not a big trade. Also, you can’t really say “none of Pierre‘s trades” and then proceed to eliminate the much bigger and more impactful trade from contention…. Lol

Anyways, you’ve moved the goal post as I was talking about not making big trades, and you’re argument now surrounds a small trade that had a huge lasting impact. Not the point I was making.

 

[PlayersLtd]

LOL. Do you think the Giroux trade was negotiated the day it was officially announced? I find it hard to believe that you actually believe that.

I get the idea of supporting the players and letting them know that management is behind them.

I just believe that patience is a key virtue in success. Knowing when to do things is really important and vital. If you'e ever read about the strategy in war, the smart generals only go into battle when they know they have the superior and overwhelming advantage. They wait until they do.

Given the age of our core, imho it was too early to start moving high 1st round picks. Snatch them up when the opportunity avails itself. So, this is the obvious "fodder" for criticism even if some don't want to acknowledge it.

Assuming that Debrincat won't sign here, it will be important If teams can approach Debrincat's camp to work out a new contract. Otherwise, I don't think the return will be that great (or equal to what we gave up) for a one-year, $9 m rental.

Time will tell and we hope for the best obviously.

You can't negotiate with a player before his contract is up without permission and I don't recall hearing that Giroux and his agent were granted this. He could have though and sure we might have had a good idea regardless...

Still that happened two weeks later and you have to strike while the iron is hot on July 1st so I think those two singings were pretty exclusive of each other. Giroux was a bonus I would say, a very nice one at that.

 

[PlayersLtd]

Agreed. One of the things I liked the least about Muckler and Murray was the inability to make big trades when we needed them.

Always little trades and signings, never the big deals or big fish that a team needs once and a while.

I respect that PD enjoys that aspect of the job and isn’t afraid to make a splash.

I’m big on signing DBC, I think he cements a top four that badly needs cement.

Exactly, thinking back to how this team operated under M&M we were never making any big upgrade trades or UFA splashes. It's nice to feel like a big market club with these types of moves finally. That's not to say you do it irresponsibly but I'd argue that ADC was toeing that line, aggressive move that was justifiable for the reasons I outlined above. Just sucks that we didn't make the playoffs so now it is easy to criticize.

For the record, I agree that it was a bit puzzling at the time and it wasn't an automatic homerun. But there were a few angles to it that made it an acceptable move at the end of the day and for us to bring in one of the most sought after commodities on the market was a hard move to criticize after everything we had been through. Again, we were selling hope and the dawn of a new era. I'm ok with that costing our 7th, the franchise needed that stuff.

 

[GCK]

Dorion had no clue whether he could sign DBC when he made that trade lol. A bunch of people said as much and recognized it for the short term gamble that it was.

It was a fun trade and the whole Summer of Pierre thing was kind of enjoyable but it wasn't some calculated move to get a core piece for the long run.

Dorion was trying to save his job. The Chychrun trade, despite what folks may think of the value, was the exact same thing (better in the sense that Chychrun is tied up for longer).

I don’t think the Debrincat and Chychrun trades are comparable. I fully expect Chychrun will re-sign next summer and it was a position of need.

 

[Sens Vader]

I’m gonna reserve my opinion on DBC until I see what we get back for him in a trade

I think we’re gonna make out just fine but I may be too optimistic

 

[Gil Gunderson]

Looks like this ownership saga is going to drag. I don’t really expect anything major happening anytime soon.

 

[Samsquanch]

Whatever turns your crank chief. Good luck Mr. Quixote.

Lmfao says the guy who randomly quoted me and tried to enlighten me with your patronizing words of advice that its "best to ignore fringe opinions".

Your hilariously ironic

 

[Mingus Dew]

I don’t think the Debrincat and Chychrun trades are comparable. I fully expect Chychrun will re-sign next summer and it was a position of need.

In the long term I think you’re right but I still think Dorion’s motivation for both trades was the same.

 

[Big Muddy]

Only 11 teams used 4 or more goalies in the reg season, average number of pts for a team using 4 or more 84.6 average for teams playing 3 or less goalies is 95 pts

Toronto, Vegas and Colorado are a bit of an outlier, they each used 5 goalies but put up ~110 pts each, Colorado being unique in that their starter was healthy and only their backups were rotating.

Goalie health is a big deal, going 7 deep is not normal, or something many teams would overcome.

I said three or four (or more specifically, 3rd and 4th string). And, I never said that it wasn't a factor.

What I actually did say given that the poster I was debating with talked about "intent" is that imho the intent of a trade should have been to get a good player with term (3+ years) on his contract.

Trees versus forest. That was the main point. The other points are tertiary or ancillary. I can see now that the tertiary points are a distraction and the main, important point is getting lost.

Wish I never said anything other than the Debrincat trade was great and worked out fantastically for us.

 

[Big Muddy]

Lmfao says the guy who randomly quoted me and tried to enlighten me with your patronizing words of advice that its "best to ignore fringe opinions".

Your hilariously ironic

If you want to get worked up about what one or two posters (or a handful) say, by all means, have at it. I agree, its your prerogative.

 

[Big Muddy]

Seems to be going in circles around you, that's for sure.

I'll use your frame of reference and terminology. If you want to talk about "intent", then imho the intent of a trade should have been to get a good player with term (3+ years) on his contract.

Given that you are down to petty & personal comments, were done here.

 

[Big Muddy]

I want to sign Debrincat too. He is an exciting offensive player who can shoot, shoots quickly and can score. We need that to be successful.

I do too. I also worry about our goaltending situation. Hopefully we can address both needs with our cap space. Depth in the bottom half of the roster I guess will be sacrificed. Can't have everything I guess.

 

[Micklebot]

I said three or four. And, I never said that it wasn't a factor.

What I actually did say given that the poster I was debating with talked about intent is that imho the intent of a trade should have been to get a good player with term (3+ years) on his contract.

Trees versus forest. That was the main point. The other points are tertiary or ancillary. I can see now that the tertiary points are a distraction and the main, important point is getting lost.

Wish I never said anything other than the Debrincat trade was great and worked out fantastically for us.

We went seven deep, the most in the NHL. The point is that teams using their 3rd or 4th guy a bit in the season is not the same as what happened here, it's apples and oranges. It's like saying most teams had an injury to a center so we should have just rolled with losing Norris all year. But which center was hurt, was it a 3rd or 4th liner, how long were they put? It's the dismissive nature of comparing false equivalents that I take issue with.

Wrt the DeBrincat trade being good or bad, imo that's really yet to be determined. If we trade him, the return will figure in to how the initial trade is judged, if we extend him, the contract will matter, everyone seems to be writing off the loses before we know what they are, there's value DeBrincat brought even if only for the one year, you can bet that trade helped the season ticket sales this offseason for example.

 

[Big Muddy]

You can't negotiate with a player before his contract is up without permission and I don't recall hearing that Giroux and his agent were granted this. He could have though and sure we might have had a good idea regardless...

Still that happened two weeks later and you have to strike while the iron is hot on July 1st so I think those two singings were pretty exclusive of each other. Giroux was a bonus I would say, a very nice one at that.

GMs talk to free agents before the Free Agency period begins, and have been doing so for years. This is why trades are announced within a few minutes of the Free Agency period beginning. I'm NOT disputing when the Giroux signing was "announced" just to make that clear. I am talking about when the discussions started.

 

[Big Muddy]

We went seven deep, the most in the NHL. The point is that teams using their 3rd or 4th guy a bit in the season is not the same as what happened here, it's apples and oranges. It's like saying most teams had an injury to a center so we should have just rolled with losing Norris all year. But which center was hurt, was it a 3rd or 4th liner, how long were they put? It's the dismissive nature of comparing false equivalents that I take issue with.

Wrt the DeBrincat trade being good or bad, imo that's really yet to be determined. If we trade him, the return will figure in to how the initial trade is judged, if we extend him, the contract will matter, everyone seems to be writing off the loses before we know what they are, there's value DeBrincat brought even if only for the one year, you can bet that trade helped the season ticket sales this offseason for example.

I used the term "3rd & 4th string" goalies specifically. So when a team uses it 3rd & 4th string goalies its because their 2 starters are injured &/or can't start.

I agree if Debrincat is traded then we need to see what the return is before we can come up with a final analysis I just would have preferred that we weren't in this position in the first place. IMHO, teams will need to speak to Debrincat's camp to see if a long-term contract can be worked out. I've said that many times in the past in here. Time will tell and I/we hope for the best.

That brings me back to the MAIN POINT, namely that IMHO we should have been trading for a player with TERM (3+ years) given that were still a young, inexperienced team that was still (final stages) rebuilding. This point is getting lost in the shuffle.

The rest of my points were tertiary or ancillary. I'm not trying to be dismissive of these other points. In fact, they were unnecessary and shouldn't have been mentioned as they are just distracting from the main point which is somehow getting lost.

 

[BankStreetParade]

I'll use your frame of reference and terminology. If you want to talk about "intent", then imho the intent of a trade should have been to get a good player with term (3+ years) on his contract.

Given that you are down to petty & personal comments, were done here.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[Big Muddy]

Stop embarrassing yourself.

LOL. Now there's irony.

 

[bert]

stutzle is better than bratt, when brady starts actually playing defense he should be better. but right now cmon. one player hurts the team on that front while the other is a positive, and they both produce the same...

Bratt is clearly better than DBC, Norris, Giroux, Batherson.

thinking he would be our 5th-6th best forward is pure hubris while the same roster spent one week in playoff contention.

He really isn't 'clearly better' . Have you been watching any hockey at all or just looking at advanced stats. He's been terrible in the playoffs. I get you're not into physical players but man oh man this take is awful.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

Pot kettle.

If Debrincat agreed to an extension before the trade at $8M AAV for a longer term such as 5 to 8 years, then it would have been a good trade. If Debrincat does not sign a long term deal and we cannot trade Debrincat for equivalent value, then it will have been a another bad Dorion trade.

Any team that pays him more than 6.5 will regret it. You don't win paying one dimensional non play drivers that are wingers that much money.

 

[Micklebot]

That brings me back to the MAIN POINT, namely that IMHO we should have been trading for a player with TERM (3+ years) given that were still a young, inexperienced team that was still (final stages) rebuilding. This point is getting lost in the shuffle.

And if we extend DeBrincat we have exactly that, no? If we can't extend him, maybe he gets traded for that.

People are getting ahead of themselves wrt the DeBrincat trade being a loss, let it play out, maybe he's a huge Weekend fan and gives us a team friendly deal so long as he gets backstage passes if new ownership includes Mr. Weekend...

 

[Micklebot]

Any team that pays him more than 6.5 will regret it. You don't win paying one dimensional non play drivers that are wingers that much money.

That's a pretty bold claim, DeBrincat is much better player than you're giving credit imo, every team in the league would love to have him at ~7.5.

 

[bert]

That's a pretty bold claim, DeBrincat is much better player than you're giving credit imo, every team in the league would love to have him at ~7.5.

I don't think so no. Not the way I'd build my team. We don't need to agree but I don't think you win in the playoffs paying players like him that much money. Build through the middle and the back end. If you are going to pay a winger 7+ they have to be hard to play against or need to be able to drive a line or be an elite two way player. Stone's, Reinhart, Tkachuks, Marchand, Nylander etc. Debrincat doesn't create enough and isn't a very good defensive player and doesn't have a great motor.

 

[Big Muddy]

And if we extend DeBrincat we have exactly that, no? If we can't extend him, maybe he gets traded for that.

People are getting ahead of themselves wrt the DeBrincat trade being a loss, let it play out, maybe he's a huge Weekend fan and gives us a team friendly deal so long as he gets backstage passes if new ownership includes Mr. Weekend...

That's too many steps that need to fall into place, and hence, would not be my preferred way of going about it. The risk is greater imho.

 

[BondraTime]

I don't think there are going to be many suitors for DBC at his asking price.

There will be lots of teams interested in the player, but I don't think there will be lots of teams interested at 8 million a year.

Think his market is going to be 2ish teams if he gets to UFA and searching for that type of money, if we're looking for a sign and trade I think it's extremely, extremely difficult to find an avanue. .

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

I don't think there are going to be many suitors for DBC at his asking price.

There will be lots of teams interested in the player, but I don't think there will be lots of teams interested at 8 million a year.

Think his market is going to be 2ish teams if he gets to UFA and searching for that type of money, if we're looking for a sign and trade I think it's extremely, extremely difficult to find an avanue. .

What if we trade futures for DeBrincat.. A year later what might happen?

I don't know who might be interested or how many. It makes sense that that 8+ alone will limit the number of teams, competition, and return,
Signing him here for that obviously takes money away from improving other areas that need to be addressed .
Qualifying him walks him to UFA where we might get something at the TDL where a team takes on the reduced cost for a run ; but it would weaken the Sens playoff aspirations.