Trades and UFA’s - Trade Deadline Edition

[ToneDog]

Sorry, explain to me again why we’re remotely interested in a sometime healthy scratch D man on an absolute dogshit team to help solidify a cup run?

LOL. I'll give you the answer I received when I asked similar question on Dec 7, 2023:

Which is the problem right? When you only desire established brand names, you end up with high cap hits, and high acquisition costs.

Beyond this observation that he hasn't played much recently, have you actually watched this player over the past few years, or know anything about him?

Bunting was a 25 year old forward we obtained from Arizona, one of the worst teams in the league, and he barely got in the lineup.. only 21 games, and the rest he got sent back to the AHL. Clearly he wasn't good enough for one of the poorer teams in the league right? I mean, he probably would be useless for us, right?

Next topic, will be complaints about how we let go of Marchment, Verhaeghe, Moore… who weren’t good enough at the time.

 

[WTFMAN99]

Not by a long shot……..


At the price he’d cost, well worth the gamble imo, and he’s not the only blue collar guy out there that could help, two steady non flashy guys could solidify the D, and give better options that Gio, Brodie both of which shouldn’t be playing on the D next year……..

Peeke just isn't that good, I believe 5 goals against short handed in only 29 minutes short handed.

Rielly-X
X-Liljegren
Benoit-McCabe

Looks like the skeleton right now for defense.

McCabe could jump to 2nd pair LD if necessary.

 

[rumman]

Peeke just isn't that good, I believe 5 goals against short handed in only 29 minutes short handed.

Rielly-X
X-Liljegren
Benoit-McCabe

Looks like the skeleton right now for defense.

McCabe could jump to 2nd pair LD if necessary.

I agree on what you suggest here, but think Peeke is a cheap solution that can work, there are others that could work too, but Peeke will be the cheapest option imo…….

 

[DarkKnight]

LOL. I'll give you the answer I received when I asked similar question on Dec 7, 2023:

Which is the problem right? When you only desire established brand names, you end up with high cap hits, and high acquisition costs.

Beyond this observation that he hasn't played much recently, have you actually watched this player over the past few years, or know anything about him?

Bunting was a 25 year old forward we obtained from Arizona, one of the worst teams in the league, and he barely got in the lineup.. only 21 games, and the rest he got sent back to the AHL. Clearly he wasn't good enough for one of the poorer teams in the league right? I mean, he probably would be useless for us, right?

Next topic, will be complaints about how we let go of Marchment, Verhaeghe, Moore… who weren’t good enough at the time.

He's been a healthy scratch since. It's fine to say he's 25, but I'd like to see some progress, instead of regression.

 

[ToneDog]

He's been a healthy scratch since. It's fine to say he's 25, but I'd like to see some progress, instead of regression.

If this team thinks it is a serious contender, you need to shoot much higher at the TDL. The offseason is when you roll the dice on a Peeke.

 

[Fogelhund]

It seems I have to type this every few days. Gavrikov and Peeke were tremendous defensively, though when Columbus went downhill, both of their stats took a hit. Gavrikov moved to LA, and they've loved him there.

Peeke stayed, they got terrible goaltending (0.891), inconsistent partners, bad team, and his play suffered. He played over 21 minutes a game.. up to 27 minutes in a game, heavy D zone starts. This is last year.... Too heavily depended on defensively, too young, without any support.

Then Columbus went out an added to their D core, now have 5 NHL RD, and Peeke was odd man out, as much by contracts as anything..

To me, it looks like a confidence in his game issue. He's had no significant injuries to slow him down or derail him. At 23 he was a mobile, physical, biggish RD, that was an up and coming defensive stalwart... he was really good... but at 25 he's washed?

Change in scenery, and his career probably gets back on track. But at $2.75, that's a tough gamble, though I suspect the actual cost in assets won't be much.

Peeke when he was on, would be a great acquisition for our team. This last year... hmmm. I'm not mad if we acquire for a cheap asset... lower round draft pick... B/C prospect. It's still a gamble, but it could work out very well.

@ChuckWoods Agreed?

 

[DarkKnight]

If this team thinks it is a serious contender, you need to shoot much higher at the TDL. The offseason is when you roll the dice on a Peeke.

Exactly, he doesn't move the needle at all, in fact he's a big risk.

 

[TheDoldrums]

If you don't want to spend a big asset, get Alexandre Carrier like I've been saying. Yes, he's not big but he's a RHD and pretty good at hockey, simple as that.

 

[arso40]

Exactly, he doesn't move the needle at all, in fact he's a big risk.

i argue against not moving the needle at the very worst hes a top 6 dman and when hes played for clb hes played the right side on every pair and not cause of injury just cause the coach is a weirdo ive also seen him play his offside he definitely moves the needle if youve watched him play how much in such a short time of adjusting is the main thing but at the very worst hes a top 6 dman he would beat a couple guys in our line up currently thats for sure

 

[rumman]

i argue against not moving the needle at the very worst hes a top 6 dman and when hes played for clb hes played the right side on every pair and not cause of injury just cause the coach is a weirdo ive also seen him play his offside he definitely moves the needle if youve watched him play how much in such a short time of adjusting is the main thing but at the very worst hes a top 6 dman he would beat a couple guys in our line up currently thats for sure

Peeke just like Peche isn’t sexy enough for Leaf Nation……..

 

[arso40]

Peeke just like Peche isn’t sexy enough for Leaf Nation……..

i love em but sexy players like rielly and willy we dont need anymore of

whoever made the bunting reference thumbs up

 

[jaric1862]

Peeke is a no… way too big of a gamble. If we acquire him and he continues playing like he is right now (7/8 dman), then we’re stuck with 2.75mil in dead cap hit for the next two years.

 

[ULF_55]

If you don't want to spend a big asset, get Alexandre Carrier like I've been saying. Yes, he's not big but he's a RHD and pretty good at hockey, simple as that.

Nashville is right there in the Wild Card race.

They are playing Carrier and Fabbro.

They aren't playing RD Barrie. Now he had returned from injury but who knows.

Barrie or Villeneuve/Niemela?

 

[arso40]

Peeke is a no… way too big of a gamble. If we acquire him and he continues playing like he is right now (7/8 dman), then we’re stuck with 2.75mil in dead cap hit for the next two years.

have you paid attention to the reports??? they are more than willing to eat salary and their tryna get out of the contract so he wouldnt cost us much in terms of draft capital or cap hit. Do you guys pay attention to whats going on or just whats going on in the forum?

 

[Judas Tavares]

Imagine if the Stars had traded Wyatt Johnston (23rd overall in 2021) and Logan Stankoven (47th overall in 2021) cause "they wouldn't be able to help their team for 5 years."

 

[TMLAM34]

If you don't want to spend a big asset, get Alexandre Carrier like I've been saying. Yes, he's not big but he's a RHD and pretty good at hockey, simple as that.

This next week might determine what Nashville does. Carrier would be a solid addition. My only concern with that is, Brodie has looked a lot better playing the left side, so you already have Brodie - Liljegren and Benoit - McCabe and Carrier doesn’t really fit next to Rielly. Moving forward with Brodie out of the picture, I do like the idea of Carrier though. My bottom four would be McCabe - Carrier and Benoit - Liljegren.

 

[ChazzMichaelMichaels]

Imagine if the Stars had traded Wyatt Johnston (23rd overall in 2021) and Logan Stankoven (47th overall in 2021) cause "they wouldn't be able to help their team for 5 years."

I don't necessarily disagree with you but this goes both ways.

Imagine Tampa Bay didn't end up trading for Mcdonagh and JT Miller cause they didn't want to give up Libor Hajek, Vlad Namestnikov, Brett Howden, 1st rounder (Nils Lundvist), 2nd rounder (Karl Henriksson).

I think if you went through most trades where a team is giving up picks after 20th overall the history would lean friendlier towards the team acquiring the impact player over the picks.

Ofcourse this is still worthwhile for selling teams cause asset management is important and getting something of value back for an asset instead of that asset leaving for nothing ... Even if whatever you're getting back for that asset has a higher chance of ending up being not much.

 

[jaric1862]

have you paid attention to the reports??? they are more than willing to eat salary and their tryna get out of the contract so he wouldnt cost us much in terms of draft capital or cap hit. Do you guys pay attention to whats going on or just whats going on in the forum?

I haven’t seen a credible insider report this.

 

[arso40]

I don't necessarily disagree with you but this goes both ways.

Imagine Tampa Bay didn't end up trading for Mcdonagh and JT Miller cause they didn't want to give up Libor Hajek, Vlad Namestnikov, Brett Howden, 1st rounder (Nils Lundvist), 2nd rounder (Karl Henriksson).

I think if you went through most trades where a team is giving up picks after 20th overall the history would lean friendlier towards the team acquiring the impact player over the picks.

Ofcourse this is still worthwhile for selling teams cause asset management is important and getting something of value back for an asset instead of that asset leaving for nothing ... Even if whatever you're getting back for that asset has a higher chance of ending up being not much.

half those assets became nothing and in vlads case that was traded from a position of strength

I haven’t seen a credible insider report this.

i guess..... whos to say whos credible right, its opinion based i just know ive heard it a few times add to the fact they wanted to buy him out it just sort of makes sense

 

[nuck]

Nashville is right there in the Wild Card race.

They are playing Carrier and Fabbro.

They aren't playing RD Barrie. Now he had returned from injury but who knows.

Barrie or Villeneuve/Niemela?

I would say that probably doesn't affect Carrier's availability. They were scratching for a wild card spot when his name first came up. Even Philly who are now in 3rd. You are either an own rental club or you aren't although there would probably be a different tipping point in the value they would take if they were definitely out.

If clubs think they hold the golden ticket with their UFAs there could need to be some soul searching by Shanatre as to what value might be too painful. I am fairly certain the Prez will tell Tre to open the wallet rather than go into a playoff hoping Topi will save them. and no way Barrie is coming back. I don't think Treliving has tunnel vision on Tanev which is good. Tik tok!

 

[Punch Drunk Loov]

Can someone describe Carrier to me? I know nothing of him and am just picturing the Vegas Carrier only a RD.

 

[DarkKnight]

Maybe Peeke is the "cheapest" option because he isn't worth much, kind of makes sense.

 

[nuck]

I don't necessarily disagree with you but this goes both ways.

Imagine Tampa Bay didn't end up trading for Mcdonagh and JT Miller cause they didn't want to give up Libor Hajek, Vlad Namestnikov, Brett Howden, 1st rounder (Nils Lundvist), 2nd rounder (Karl Henriksson).

I think if you went through most trades where a team is giving up picks after 20th overall the history would lean friendlier towards the team acquiring the impact player over the picks.

Ofcourse this is still worthwhile for selling teams cause asset management is important and getting something of value back for an asset instead of that asset leaving for nothing ... Even if whatever you're getting back for that asset has a higher chance of ending up being not much.

^ Dallas lost 2 games last year in OT to the Knights. They were that close and their big add was Domi for what will be a late 2nd. I am glad for them they kept Stankoven but they might have been a Mavrik Bourque away from a Cup. Its a game of inches and we know in Leafland that keeping your young stars is not always a direct path to becoming a champion.

 

[Fogelhund]

Maybe Peeke is the "cheapest" option because he isn't worth much, kind of makes sense.

Schenn was a cheap option....

Can someone describe Carrier to me? I know nothing of him and am just picturing the Vegas Carrier only a RD.

Decent all around D man, good offensively, and defensively, not necessarily great at either... but good player. 5'11" 174 lbs.

If you are starting from scratch, he's a guy who's attractive. When your main need is a defense first, mobile, large, physical partner for Rielly... I really don't think this is what we need at all.

 

[nuck]

Can someone describe Carrier to me? I know nothing of him and am just picturing the Vegas Carrier only a RD.

Heavy D zone starts, blocks shots and kills penalties. He doesn't avoid contact like Mo but he is small.

Per Seravalli

Carrier burst onto the scene two seasons ago under coach John Hynes. Carrier racked up 30 points in his first full NHL season, earning a nod on the NHL All-Rookie team next to Moritz Seider. What’s happened since? Carrier was injured for the bulk of last year, sitting out for two separate four-to-six week stints. That led to a one-year, $2.5 million contract on July 1 as an RFA, but his ice time under Andrew Brunette is down nearly three minutes from two years back.

Scouting Report
If you’re looking for a trade comp, one NHL pro scout referred Carrier as “a poor man’s Jared Spurgeon,” for comparison, which sounds like a knock but isn’t. They are roughly the same size – and Carrier has a few of the same steadying dynamics as the Minnesota Wild captain that would make him attractive at the trade deadline.

In fact, steady is one of the perfect words used to describe Carrier. He plays a simple game. Carrier handles the puck well above average for a defenseman on breakouts, committing the 18th fewest giveaways in the defensive zone among all defensemen with 40 games played this season.

His mobility and backwards skating are fluid and he can move laterally, east and west across the rink, with ease. Carrier relies on his hockey intelligence to scan the ice. He doesn’t necessarily shut down the rush early, but he is in the top tier among denying the rush after it enters the zone, playing well in between the dots.