Proposal: Trade Rumours/Proposals PART XXXXII

[JD1]

Having two rings in the past does not mean you're capable of winning another one in the future. That's pretty silly to say.

Erik Karlsson has won 2 Norris trophies. I don't think anyone would say he's capable of winning another one based on the player he is today.

Murray has been "transitioning" styles since the 19/20 season. At some point, you are who you are.

He's at best a platoon goalie, and at this stage of his career, should be a back-up who can come in 25-30 times. He's not capable of playing 50+ regular season and then 20+ playoff games.

And let's call a spade a spade, his inability to stay healthy is in large part his own fault. Kevin Weekes said it the other day. He should have put on 10-15 pounds over the course of the last few years and focused on transforming his body. He does not have the physical strength or stamina to handle a starter's workload.

Murray is 28. He's had a run of bad luck. Nothing he's injured is career defining. They've all been small injuries that set him back the moment he looks good to go.

I agree Karlsson won two trophies and won'twin another. But let's call a spade a spade. The difference between us is I said 4 years ago it was time to move on because Karlsson's downfall was inevitable due to injury related decline. He wasn't the player in his last year here that won the Norris trophies. On the other hand, you've acknowledged a few times recently that you were wrong about your stance in 2018.

So let's not take a stance again where you're right and I'm wrong. I said it's about probability. I didn't say he would. I said if his health issues were clearly behind him, he may.

Murray btw is younger than Forsberg and younger than Andy was when he arrived in ottawa.

 

[Loach]

Murray is 28. He's had a run of bad luck. Nothing he's injured is career defining. They've all been small injuries that set him back the moment he looks good to go.

I agree Karlsson won two trophies and won'twin another. But let's call a spade a spade. The difference between us is I said 4 years ago it was time to move on because Karlsson's downfall was inevitable due to injury related decline. He wasn't the player in his last year here that won the Norris trophies. On the other hand, you've acknowledged a few times recently that you were wrong about your stance in 2018.

So let's not take a stance again where you're right and I'm wrong. I said it's about probability. I didn't say he would. I said if his health issues were clearly behind him, he may.

Murray btw is younger than Forsberg and younger than Andy was when he arrived in ottawa.

Murray played 13 regular season games / 21 playoff in 2016 and 49 rsg / 11 po in 2017. That's not very many games. I get what you guys are talking about, but it seems like it was lightning in a bottle type scenario. Maybe if he gets put in a similar position he can do it again. Not sure that is something you can plan on though.

 

[SensHulk]

At huberdeau's age, i wouldn't consider that contract a win.

Relative to Johnny gaudreau who is the same age, I.e. 29? I don’t think it matters much 5 years from now if the flames can manage to win a cup in their immediate window here

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Relative to Johnny gaudreau who is the same age, I.e. 29? I don’t think it matters much 5 years from now if the flames can manage to win a cup in their immediate window here

GM's almost never live out these contracts either, so they likely care little about too many years on deals like these. Their other option was to burn it to the ground and rebuild, but as we saw here that means throwing away half a decade, which their owners may not have been on board for either way, nor does it guarantee success.

 

[SensHulk]

GM's almost never live out these contracts either, so they likely care little about too many years on deals like these. Their other option was to burn it to the ground and rebuild, but as we saw here that means throwing away half a decade, which their owners may not have been on board for either way, nor does it guarantee success.

Yup, I think the still have a really good team. My point was they turned a real shitty situation that could have potentially sent them in a long rebuild into further opening their window of opportunity (and they didn’t sacrifice anything they weren’t already going to lose, I.e. Tkachuk)

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Yup, I think the still have a really good team. My point was they turned a real shitty situation that could have potentially sent them in a long rebuild into further opening their window of opportunity (and they didn’t sacrifice anything they weren’t already going to lose, I.e. Tkachuk)

They're a better team this year than they were last year imo and I see them as a cup contender. That comes with a cost unfortunately, like some of these deals potentially looking bad on the back half, but its the same choice I would have made based on the options available and the financial commitments they already had.

Rebuilding sucks. It's necessary sometimes and it's nice now that it's finally turning the corner, but it really really f***ing sucks in the mean time.

 

[JD1]

Murray played 13 regular season games / 21 playoff in 2016 and 49 rsg / 11 po in 2017. That's not very many games. I get what you guys are talking about, but it seems like it was lightning in a bottle type scenario. Maybe if he gets put in a similar position he can do it again. Not sure that is something you can plan on though.

Murray spent most of 2016 in the minors. So in addition to the 13 and 21, he played 31 in the AHL. The following year he was splitting time with Fleury, got in 49 and Fleury started the playoffs. Murray took over after Fleury got blown out in our rink. I was at that game.

 

[JD1]

Relative to Johnny gaudreau who is the same age, I.e. 29? I don’t think it matters much 5 years from now if the flames can manage to win a cup in their immediate window here

I'm not sure I'd of signed Gaudreau either. New school NHL is what PD did, locking up players coming off ELCs. That's been happening a lot around the league. Old school is these long term deals locking up what statistics clearly show are the down years.

Calgary did well given their situation. But probably shouldn't have let it get to that.

We've got 4 guys locked up long term. Who knows if any of them will be worthy of another 7 or 8 year deal.

They're a better team this year than they were last year imo and I see them as a cup contender. That comes with a cost unfortunately, like some of these deals potentially looking bad on the back half, but its the same choice I would have made based on the options available and the financial commitments they already had.

Rebuilding sucks. It's necessary sometimes and it's nice now that it's finally turning the corner, but it really really f***ing sucks in the mean time.

Rebuilding does suck. It sucks bad. A lot of guys as far back as 2011 said it needed to happen but there was a lot of grouchiness getting through it

 

[Loach]

Murray spent most of 2016 in the minors. So in addition to the 13 and 21, he played 31 in the AHL. The following year he was splitting time with Fleury, got in 49 and Fleury started the playoffs. Murray took over after Fleury got blown out in our rink. I was at that game.

So you get what I'm saying. Lol. Lightning in a bottle.

 

[TheNewEra]

Leevi Merilainen and 2nd round pick for Roy

I would do this fairly easily so that's fine with me

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Rebuilding does suck. It sucks bad. A lot of guys as far back as 2011 said it needed to happen but there was a lot of grouchiness getting through it

Ya its no fun for sure, but can be necessary at times if the owner can stomach it. It starts to ramp up for diehards with prospects of interest, but the first couple years are pretty dire. Do you mean grouchiness through the 2011 half rebuild that it needed to be more like the 2018 rebuild with 100% tear down?

 

[Ice-Tray]

GM's almost never live out these contracts either, so they likely care little about too many years on deals like these. Their other option was to burn it to the ground and rebuild, but as we saw here that means throwing away half a decade, which their owners may not have been on board for either way, nor does it guarantee success.

That’s one way to look at it for sure, but there is another.

First, we didn’t really throw “half a decade” away.

We had a surprise bottom finish, followed by a season where guys wanted out, like Calgary just experienced, then we went 3 straight seasons of bottom dwelling rebuild years. We could have done what Calgary did and make those trades to refresh and keep going, but instead we chose futures. At best you could argue that we chose to bottom out and sell off for 3 years. The situations were kinda different in that way I think.

Having a successful rebuild that could put you in a great place for the next 10 years is hardly what I would call “throwing away” regardless.

I personally have enjoyed watching our core get assembled and develop during this rebuild, it makes the next phase all the more enjoyable for paying my fan dues along the way! I know I’m not alone here

Regardless, Calgary ownership killed any idea of rebuilding, so it really wasn’t an option for them, kudos for replacing players how they did, but I’d prefer a well planned out cycle of compete and rebuild, as we’ve been that mediocre team on life support for long enough to know it doesn’t work.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

That’s one way to look at it for sure, but there is another.

First, we didn’t really throw “half a decade” away.

We had a surprise bottom finish, followed by a season where guys wanted out, like Calgary just experienced, then we went 3 straight seasons of bottom dwelling rebuild years. We could have done what Calgary did and make those trades to refresh and keep going, but instead we chose futures. At best you could argue that we chose to bottom out and sell off for 3 years. The situations were kinda different in that way I think.

Having a successful rebuild that could put you in a great place for the next 10 years is hardly what I would call “throwing away” regardless.

I personally have enjoyed watching our core get assembled and develop during this rebuild, it makes the next phase all the more enjoyable for paying my fan dues along the way! I know I’m not alone here

Regardless, Calgary ownership killed any idea of rebuilding, so it really wasn’t an option for them, kudos for replacing players how they did, but I’d prefer a well planned out cycle of compete and rebuild, as we’ve been that mediocre team on life support for long enough to know it doesn’t work.

It was a 5 year process, but I don't need to beat a dead horse debate or tell you your perception is wrong.

When I say throw away, I mean turning away the casuals and any outside interest. Of course the few diehards are still around with varying degrees of interest, but there's no doubt that your attendance and fan interest is going to crater and every game for years in a row has no importance thus no drama and little in the way of excitement. Add in a half empty barn every night and it compounds the poor atmosphere for those that do still go. Following prospects and development is fun and all, but it pales in comparison to excitement of having a competitive team playing meaningful games.

I get it. I see the reasoning for a scorched earth rebuild, but I also don't think it has to be considered the only way forward and there is definitely an element of essentially throwing away however many seasons as it takes for the majority of your fanbase. I can see why that's a no for some owners even if it means you don't ever sniff the cup. In Calgary's spot, they've done that but also given themselves an opportunity to contend, however long that lasts, and that's worth something imo. I say good job to Brad, even if there's substantial risk involved.

 

[TheNewEra]

canucks just paid a 2nd to dump dickinson

yeah the cost to dump zaistev is going to be bad

 

[h2]

canucks just paid a 2nd to dump dickinson

yeah the cost to dump zaistev is going to be bad

Just bury the scrub in Belleville. We don't need the cap space this year anyway.

 

[IranCondraAffair]

canucks just paid a 2nd to dump dickinson

yeah the cost to dump zaistev is going to be bad

Yes and No. How much gas they will have left in the tank, injury status, their salary, their cap hit, their position, etc.. all still matter in dumps. At a certain point, it is mostly about money, not the cap hit that dictates the cost of a dump. Zaitsev is only owed about 500K more than Dickensen. So, for me, I see this as, overall not too bad of a comparable. A 2024 second is not overly expensive. Hell, it is downright reasonable given that future picks are usually valued less than current ones.

That said, Zaitsev has a higher cap hit and a signing bonus that makes it harder to buy him out. IIDK what kind of value Riley Stillman had, but it will likely cost us a 2023 2nd if we dump Zaitsev and we won't be getting much of anything back.

 

[JD1]

Ya its no fun for sure, but can be necessary at times if the owner can stomach it. It starts to ramp up for diehards with prospects of interest, but the first couple years are pretty dire. Do you mean grouchiness through the 2011 half rebuild that it needed to be more like the 2018 rebuild with 100% tear down?

No, I meant even though guys had been saying it was needed for a long time, it was hard to go through

 

[GCK]

canucks just paid a 2nd to dump dickinson

yeah the cost to dump zaistev is going to be bad

Dickerson owed 6M over 2 years. Player 22 owed 7M over 2 years.

 

[DJB]

canucks just paid a 2nd to dump dickinson

yeah the cost to dump zaistev is going to be bad

My guess is that he will likely go on waivers before we try to dump him with an asset.

Melnyk being gone makes this a possibility instead of always paying to get rid of guys

 

[TheNewEra]

Dickerson owed 6M over 2 years. Player 22 owed 7M over 2 years.

Yes and No. How much gas they will have left in the tank, injury status, their salary, their cap hit, their position, etc.. all still matter in dumps. At a certain point, it is mostly about money, not the cap hit that dictates the cost of a dump. Zaitsev is only owed about 500K more than Dickensen. So, for me, I see this as, overall not too bad of a comparable. A 2024 second is not overly expensive. Hell, it is downright reasonable given that future picks are usually valued less than current ones.

That said, Zaitsev has a higher cap hit and a signing bonus that makes it harder to buy him out. IIDK what kind of value Riley Stillman had, but it will likely cost us a 2023 2nd if we dump Zaitsev and we won't be getting much of anything back.

I could be wrong but for most teams that cap hit is more of a factor then actual salary. If its actual salary then maybe its a 2nd and a 4th since Zaistev makes a bit more.

However if its by cap hit then there are 6 teams right now that can take on zaistev's cap in full and if the price is based off cap hit then it would be double dickinson's at least imo

 

[Union2017]

For whatever it's worth, I don't think Murray is capable of being a starting number 1 goalie. He might be a good backup, like he was with Pens

 

[Ice-Tray]

It was a 5 year process, but I don't need to beat a dead horse debate or tell you your perception is wrong.

When I say throw away, I mean turning away the casuals and any outside interest. Of course the few diehards are still around with varying degrees of interest, but there's no doubt that your attendance and fan interest is going to crater and every game for years in a row has no importance thus no drama and little in the way of excitement. Add in a half empty barn every night and it compounds the poor atmosphere for those that do still go. Following prospects and development is fun and all, but it pales in comparison to excitement of having a competitive team playing meaningful games.

I get it. I see the reasoning for a scorched earth rebuild, but I also don't think it has to be considered the only way forward and there is definitely an element of essentially throwing away however many seasons as it takes for the majority of your fanbase. I can see why that's a no for some owners even if it means you don't ever sniff the cup. In Calgary's spot, they've done that but also given themselves an opportunity to contend, however long that lasts, and that's worth something imo. I say good job to Brad, even if there's substantial risk involved.

I agree with much of it, I didn’t know “throwing away” to you meant casuals fans waiting out the rebuild doing other stuff, all good.

Again I agree with your second point. We got to the same point Calgary just did when we had to trade Stone and Duchene and EK. Their disappointment was a playoff loss, ours was falling off a cliff after ECF. The difference in my opinion was that they still had some good players that could keep their window open if the could make the right trades, and they had an ownership that refused to rebuild. For us, we were losing all of our best players outside of Chabot, didn’t have the money available to replace the lost talent with talent, and an owner who wanted a scorched earth, money saving rebuild.

I think we did really well with our situation so far, and I think Calgary did really well in their situation so far. Different avenues available for sure, you just have to do well at it. In my opinion though, at some point you have to tear it down and gather top draft picks if you want to be dominant again for a long stretch.

As for the process, it was 5 years of sucking, but only 4 of them were part of any process, as one was a complete blindside. Of those 4 years 1.5 years were the year down, and the rest was the build up with overlap in year two.

Not actually that long to wait for what has been built so far in my opinion. Sucks to wait for sure, but truly, in terms of having to wait for playoffs, and watching a sucking team, Sens fans are nowhere close to a league sob story. We’ve always had it pretty good compared to the true NHL misery in fact.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Yes and No. How much gas they will have left in the tank, injury status, their salary, their cap hit, their position, etc.. all still matter in dumps. At a certain point, it is mostly about money, not the cap hit that dictates the cost of a dump. Zaitsev is only owed about 500K more than Dickensen. So, for me, I see this as, overall not too bad of a comparable. A 2024 second is not overly expensive. Hell, it is downright reasonable given that future picks are usually valued less than current ones.

That said, Zaitsev has a higher cap hit and a signing bonus that makes it harder to buy him out. IIDK what kind of value Riley Stillman had, but it will likely cost us a 2023 2nd if we dump Zaitsev and we won't be getting much of anything back.

We can always trade him after paying his bonus next summer. Some team will like that cash savings to cap hit for their cap floor team. We don’t need to trade him right now, so no need to move an asset really.

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

Sens fans are nowhere close to a league sob story. We’ve always had it pretty good compared to the true NHL misery in fact.

There's a lot in your post that's a matter of opinion and that many would disagree with, but this is just flat out incorrect. The Sens were widely considered to be among the league's most mismanaged teams while Melnyk was here.

I get your shtick, and I totally understand wanting to keep things upbeat and positive. It's largely a good thing and, with tons of optimism around the team I'm sure you won't be alone on that front. But let's not go re-writing history here.

 

[Ice-Tray]

There's a lot in your post that's a matter of opinion and that many would disagree with, but this is just flat out incorrect. The Sens were widely considered to be among the league's most mismanaged teams while Melnyk was here.

I get your shtick, and I totally understand wanting to keep things upbeat and positive. It's largely a good thing and, with tons of optimism around the team I'm sure you won't be alone on that front. But let's not go re-writing history here.

Sorry, but I’m not wrong.

Dude, “mismanaged” (to which I think you mean poor ownership) does not even come close to the suffering that has gone in the league. While we were ‘mismanaged’ we still got to enjoy regular playoff appearances, including two of the most epic runs the franchise has ever gone on, followed by a stunning rebuild that has the entire fanbase excited ( and all of that was in the span of a decade where some think we had the saddest story in the league!).

You simply cannot compare that to over a decade of futility, that other teams have undergone, or endless cycles of mediocrity.

It’s easy to throw my option away as a schtik, but in truth I’m just not playing victim here. The owner sucked and we had no money, kind like always really as a Sens fan. This franchise has had managers that have been able to work wonders given how handicapped we are.

It looks like we have money to spend, and that is a new thing not seen since EM first arrived and the cap was like 30-40 million.

We’ve had a few tough years, but we don’t know what having it bad is like as a franchise, one only has to look at our playoff appearances and performances since we came back to see that we’re no sob story.