Proposal: Trade Rumours/Proposals PART XXXXIX

[Burrowsaurus]

Damn klingberg may have been a nice fit after all. Know Dorion tried

 

[bert]

Each of those moves MIGHT be understandable in isolation but as a whole they missed the boat.

Giroux was exactly what this team needed.

Debrincat was a luxury which took up 9M of budget which should have been allocated to D and depth.

Joseph for Paul. I understood it until we overpaid Joseph, doesn’t make sense with 12M allocated to Joseph.

Trading Brown rather than keeping him as a Formenton hedge. The dollars committed to Debrincat and Giroux made it tough but again Debrincat was a luxury that seemed like overkill at the time. I’d argue having an unhappy player is not worth it.

Lots of supposition on how we view things. We don’t Paul’s ask, we weren’t at Brown’s exit interview, we don’t have the Formenton situation and we don’t know the exact budget. We do know that 9M could pay for a decent top 4 D and Brown.


I completely agree that Keefe AND staff are much better but our young forwards are pretty terrible defensively which usually improves with experience.

Ok and thats just the stuff for now. Ignoring how many deals he also got ripped off on. This is Pierre Dorions team. They have massive holes in it and he has had 6 years to build it. Theyre second last in the east. Its time to go.

 

[bert]

Hamonic will not sign here for $1M. Holden might but we should do better.

Holden is great in his role and what he makes. He doesnt make unforced errors can play both sides and is unreal in the room. He isnt soft either, blocks lots of shots finishes all his checks. He is absolutely not the problem with this team currently.

 

[Sun God Nika]

Ya Hamonic is a serviceable NHL dman who plays on the right side.

He is going to get around 2.5ish

 

[GCK]

Ok and thats just the stuff for now. Ignoring how many deals he also got ripped off on. This is Pierre Dorions team. They have massive holes in it and he has had 6 years to build it. Theyre second last in the east. Its time to go.

I don’t disagree at all. I just hate painting things with one brush.

Holden is great in his role and what he makes. He doesnt make unforced errors can play both sides and is unreal in the room. He isnt soft either, blocks lots of shots finishes all his checks. He is absolutely not the problem with this team currently.

Holden looks to have really lost a step from last year. The brain is the but the body isn’t IMO. Having said that, he isn’t a y to op 3 issue on the team right now.

 

[Pinto Bean]

For a playoff roster the defence would need to look something like:

Chabot-Zub
Sanderson-A legit top 4 RD
xxx*-Hamonic
Holden/JBD

* - Needs to be a Demelo level player type player. Someone who can fit in the top-4 when the inevitable injuries happens. Which is also why we need a truly competent #7.

Our defence as it is was has Zaitsev as a #7 who was obviously incompetent. Holden was playing above what he should be. Hamonic above what he should be. Brannstrom is a complete wildcard I dont even know what to say about him anymore.

Pretty much the entire defensive core was in over it's head. Poor Sanderson has been thrown into the fire but thankfully he is incredible and has managed exceptionally well.

This was probably the main reason why pretty much all sports books had the Sens very likely missing the playoffs. I truly think this defensive core needs not only a top-4 dman which is obvious but a surefire bottom pairing guy who is good enough to fit in the top-4 from time to time.

Getting these two things moves the other players to a situation more suited to their skill levels.

Unfortunately, these pieces don't grow on trees which is why I'm very for trading DeBrincat for defensive help. That being said, I doubt that happens so hopefully JBD can fill one of these roles next year.

 

[bashbros32]

Holden is great in his role and what he makes. He doesnt make unforced errors can play both sides and is unreal in the room. He isnt soft either, blocks lots of shots finishes all his checks. He is absolutely not the problem with this team currently.

I didn't see the rest of this conversation but your last sentence is becoming one of the most tiring on this page recently. It's not you, it's just that mentality.

"XXX isn't the problem"

No, but he isn't much of a solution either.

We can and absolutely should upgrade on him next year, I'd even still bring him back on a 1 year ~1M deal to be our number 7. This teams biggest need is the same thing that it was going into the draft, a top 4 RHD.

 

[sensens]

Interesting noise around the idea of Erik Karlsson being a potential target. Hard to know what kind of % retention would be required to even make that feasible on both sides... even at 40% retention, it would leave him at $6.9M AAV for the next 5 years.

Not sure how close this is, but something premised around...
TO SJ : Brannstrom, Zaitsev, 1st (2024), 2nd (2023)
TO OTT : Karlsson (40% Retention)

The upside is that the remaining actual $$$ on Karlsson's contract amounts to just $41M, which after 40% retention would be about $4.9M/yr in actual payment. But the fundamental question remains as to whether it would be positive move for the team.

 

[bert]

I didn't see the rest of this conversation but your last sentence is becoming one of the most tiring on this page recently. It's not you, it's just that mentality.

"XXX isn't the problem"

No, but he isn't much of a solution either.

We can and absolutely should upgrade on him next year, I'd even still bring him back on a 1 year ~1M deal to be our number 7. This teams biggest need is the same thing that it was going into the draft, a top 4 RHD.

He is a 7th D making 1.3 million who is plus player. Thats a good player he doesnt hurt you.

The teams biggest problem this year has been its best players outside of Tkachuk and Giroux. They havent been good. But as a fan no one wants to say this because they arent going anywhere. Easier to blame the coach or the 4th line or the 6th D man as they are in the fans eyes replaceable. Your best players win and lose you games.

Interesting noise around the idea of Erik Karlsson being a potential target. Hard to know what kind of % retention would be required to even make that feasible on both sides... even at 40% retention, it would leave him at $6.9M AAV for the next 5 years.

Not sure how close this is, but something premised around...
TO SJ : Brannstrom, Zaitsev, 1st (2024), 2nd (2023)
TO OTT : Karlsson (40% Retention)

The upside is that the remaining actual $$$ on Karlsson's contract amounts to just $41M, which after 40% retention would be about $4.9M/yr in actual payment. But the fundamental question remains as to whether it would be positive move for the team.

Absolutely would never do this. Its Tkachuks room now. Karlsson is clearly only trying when he wants something. He wants out. Whats he going to be like when he wants out here. This will cost the sens Zub or Debrincat too.

People are just going to have to be patient and let the young players develop. Changing the entire make up of a brand new team is not the way to go right now. They were 4-2 with a healthy lineup.

 

[Bileur]

Interesting noise around the idea of Erik Karlsson being a potential target. Hard to know what kind of % retention would be required to even make that feasible on both sides... even at 40% retention, it would leave him at $6.9M AAV for the next 5 years.
Not sure how close this is, but something premised around...
TO SJ : Brannstrom, Zaitsev, 1st (2024), 2nd (2023)
TO OTT : Karlsson (40% Retention)
The upside is that the remaining actual $$$ on Karlsson's contract amounts to just $41M, which after 40% retention would be about $4.9M/yr in actual payment. But the fundamental question remains as to whether it would be positive move for the team.

 

[Que]

EK posting the Allie tribute in the players tribune is interesting, to me anyways.

I think if we made a run at EK again we’re trading Joseph with Zaitsev to accommodate the cap internally. I suspect San Jose would retain less than 4, which fits our 8 million per max player internal budget.

I’d assume Brannstrom and a prospect like Grieg and Jarventie would be going back the other way.

It’s essentially the six assets in reverse, haha.

 

[bert]

EK posting the Allie tribute in the players tribune is interesting, to me anyways.

I think if we made a run at EK again we’re trading Joseph with Zaitsev to accommodate the cap internally. I suspect San Jose would retain less than 4, which fits our 8 million per max player internal budget.

I’d assume Brannstrom and a prospect like Grieg and Jarventie would be going back the other way.

It’s essentially the six assets in reverse, haha.

Id never do that. Why do people think they need to give up such prime assets for a guy that is a salary dump. Imagine how thin this forward group would be without Joseph and Grieg and the disruption of the room this type of move would have. Karlsson has been aweful outside of this year since he's been traded. His body is a mess.

 

[h2]

I'm actually curious to gauge how our fan base views the Paul-Joseph trade with the subsequent extensions signed by both players.

My view? I think the trade was bad. Players like Joseph are dime a dozen. Paul is unique on the other hand and has been utilized heavily by a team described as the closest thing to a modern dynasty we have.

Joseph lit it up in a small sample size and was given a long-term extension at the same money Nick Paul wanted from Ottawa.

Regardless of how Joseph did in his brief stint last season, you don't give bottom six players long-term deals with minimum sample size. Our management has a pretty bad history with doing that (especially with backup goalies).

I don't think the move is crippling, but it's a pretty bad move IMO. Curious to see if others view it the same.

 

[TheNewEra]

The time to trade for karlsson was in the offseason when we were trying to dump Murray

Now it doesn't make sense unless he comes stupidly cheap or with a lot of salary retained

 

[bert]

I'm actually curious to gauge how our fan base views the Paul-Joseph trade with the subsequent extensions signed by both players.

My view? I think the trade was bad. Players like Joseph are dime a dozen. Paul is unique on the other hand and has been utilized heavily by a team described as the closest thing to a modern dynasty we have.

Joseph lit it up in a small sample size and was given a long-term extension at the same money Nick Paul wanted from Ottawa.

Regardless of how Joseph did in his brief stint last season, you don't give bottom six players long-term deals with minimum sample size. Our management has a pretty bad history with doing that (especially with backup goalies).

I don't think the move is crippling, but it's a pretty bad move IMO. Curious to see if others view it the same.

Couldnt have said it any better myself. That along with dumping Brown for a late 2nd when they didnt know if Formenton could play really hurt this teams identity. They were hard to play against and now not so much. Imagine how much better they are with Paul and Brown over Kelly and Joseph.

 

[Hale The Villain]

The time to trade for karlsson was in the offseason when we were trying to dump Murray

Now it doesn't make sense unless he comes stupidly cheap or with a lot of salary retained

Yeah I thought there was a small possibility of a trade involving Karlsson with some slight retention for Murray, Zaitsev, MDZ, White, etc... in a similar framework to the Phaneuf trade years earlier (bad players on bad short-term deals for good player on bad long-term deal), but now it's much harder to justify for SJ to take on bad contracts or retain significant salary to dump the contract of a player who may be the front runner for the Norris right now.

Even with Karlsson's crazy start to the year there's no way I'm taking on that contract for free, let alone paying assets for the priviledge.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Karlsson was good last year before the injury too, its not just this year. It's looking to me like the last coaches system and Burns in the way may have impacted his offensive production at least and he may have figured out how to adapt to his current body's condition.

The predicted rapid decline of Stone, Duchene and Karlsson may have been a little premature imo and they have something to give, whatever that ends up being from here on out.

I think it warrants discussion at least and don't buy the whole disrupting the room stuff. He would know he's not coming in to be the top dog and people change.

If there's a hockey deal to be made and he keeps up his pace for the rest of the year, I wouldn't be opposed to looking in to it, but I file it under extremely unlikely either way.

 

[sxvnert]

Chabot Karlsson (50%)
Sanderson Zub
Hamonic JBD
Holden

Get it done Pierre.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Couldnt have said it any better myself. That along with dumping Brown for a late 2nd when they didnt know if Formenton could play really hurt this teams identity. They were hard to play against and now not so much. Imagine how much better they are with Paul and Brown over Kelly and Joseph.

Worth noting it would be more than twice as expensive of an option for this season at least.

 

[Silencio]

I'm actually curious to gauge how our fan base views the Paul-Joseph trade with the subsequent extensions signed by both players.

My view? I think the trade was bad. Players like Joseph are dime a dozen. Paul is unique on the other hand and has been utilized heavily by a team described as the closest thing to a modern dynasty we have.

Joseph lit it up in a small sample size and was given a long-term extension at the same money Nick Paul wanted from Ottawa.

Regardless of how Joseph did in his brief stint last season, you don't give bottom six players long-term deals with minimum sample size. Our management has a pretty bad history with doing that (especially with backup goalies).

I don't think the move is crippling, but it's a pretty bad move IMO. Curious to see if others view it the same.

Agreed, this is a trade I'm sure Dorion would want a do-over on. Only mitigating factor could be if Paul was giving management indications that he wanted to go to a playoff team and/or had no intention of re signing in Ottawa.

 

[Hale The Villain]

I'm actually curious to gauge how our fan base views the Paul-Joseph trade with the subsequent extensions signed by both players.

My view? I think the trade was bad. Players like Joseph are dime a dozen. Paul is unique on the other hand and has been utilized heavily by a team described as the closest thing to a modern dynasty we have.

Joseph lit it up in a small sample size and was given a long-term extension at the same money Nick Paul wanted from Ottawa.

Regardless of how Joseph did in his brief stint last season, you don't give bottom six players long-term deals with minimum sample size. Our management has a pretty bad history with doing that (especially with backup goalies).

I don't think the move is crippling, but it's a pretty bad move IMO. Curious to see if others view it the same.

I thought trading Paul was fine, if the intention was to replace him internally with Formenton/Greig and re-direct the savings towards the defense.

Re-signing Joseph to a 3M x 4YRs deal (pretty close to what Paul was apparently asking for) based on a 12 game sample size of higher production defeated the whole purpose of the trade in the first place.

 

[bert]

Worth noting it would be more than twice as expensive of an option for this season at least.

Its about 2.5 million more the team has plenty of cap space and with all the LTIR money they would be laughing. I think Dorion has done a very poor job of identifying the players that are actually good. Paul and Joseph are basically a wash.

I thought trading Paul was fine, if the intention was to replace him internally with Formenton/Greig and re-direct the savings towards the defense.

Re-signing Joseph to a 3M x 4YRs deal (pretty close to what Paul was apparently asking for) based on a 12 game sample size of higher production defeated the whole purpose of the trade in the first place.

He isnt that replaceable though thats the point. You need some vets, he is really hard to play against.

 

[Dionysus]

I'm actually curious to gauge how our fan base views the Paul-Joseph trade with the subsequent extensions signed by both players.

My view? I think the trade was bad. Players like Joseph are dime a dozen. Paul is unique on the other hand and has been utilized heavily by a team described as the closest thing to a modern dynasty we have.

Joseph lit it up in a small sample size and was given a long-term extension at the same money Nick Paul wanted from Ottawa.

Regardless of how Joseph did in his brief stint last season, you don't give bottom six players long-term deals with minimum sample size. Our management has a pretty bad history with doing that (especially with backup goalies).

I don't think the move is crippling, but it's a pretty bad move IMO. Curious to see if others view it the same.

Paul worked his ass off to make it to the NHL and played his role well. He seemed like a potential identity piece on the 3rd line in Ottawa.

Instead of building, management shipped him off in a lateral move, and payed pretty much the same money for a tweener type player in Joseph.

Would much prefer to have the defensive presence, size, and utility of Paul right now.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Its about 2.5 million more the team has plenty of cap space and with all the LTIR money they would be laughing. I think Dorion has done a very poor job of identifying the players that are actually good. Paul and Joseph are basically a wash.

I was referring to base salary for this year in the context of Leblanc saying there was an internal budget below the cap ceiling. Indications were that Brown was leaving after this season either way, so this year seems the most relevant to compare salaries. TBL also gave him a lot of years in their no tax state, so a contract in Ottawa probably comes a bit higher to get it shorter and compensate for taxes. This year, Paul/Brown make a combined $8.15mil compared to Kelly/Joseph's $3.25mil, so about $5mil difference.

Not even really weighing in here on my preference, just playing devils advocate a bit on the $'s and the ripple effect it would have had. I think going in that direction would have been fine, but it could also have meant no Talbot and Motte, or maybe even Debrincat.

 

[Cosmix]

Karlsson was good last year before the injury too, its not just this year. It's looking to me like the last coaches system and Burns in the way may have impacted his offensive production at least and he may have figured out how to adapt to his current body's condition.

The predicted rapid decline of Stone, Duchene and Karlsson may have been a little premature imo and they have something to give, whatever that ends up being from here on out.

I think it warrants discussion at least and don't buy the whole disrupting the room stuff. He would know he's not coming in to be the top dog and people change.

If there's a hockey deal to be made and he keeps up his pace for the rest of the year, I wouldn't be opposed to looking in to it, but I file it under extremely unlikely either way.

I don't think our GM could handle this psychologically.