Figgy44
A toast of purple gato for the memories
- Dec 15, 2014
- 13,475
- 8,810
I think we'd have to pay more to be honest.
I think we can do it with a few excess prospects in the cupboard. Assuming Vegas wants Stajan, 2 prospects + Stajan to select Brouwer probably would work.
Vegas could have the guy they want, a guy they can use and extra prospects then if they took the guy they wanted or the prospects they wanted in the first place.
We'd acquire cap space as well as roster spots for a few prospects we'd not likely be able to use.
I'd rather not argue the specifics, but in general, I think Treliving could move a batch of B prospects to get Brouwer moved if needed. It seems like it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of how much.
Treliving seemed pretty certain that the expansion draft will help us out cap wise. Although logic may point to Vegas going young, I think value is going to be important for them as people have already mentioned.
The one Treliving interview makes it seem like he's got a pretty good read that Vegas will take Brouwer, Bouma or Stajan. Which may suggest a deal already in place to incentivize the move for Vegas.
Though I'd argue, against a pretty popular belief, that losing Stajan doesn't help us out near as much as people think. Bouma is ideally a 13th forward or 4th line winger. Brouwer is ideally a 3rd line winger. Stajan is still a very useful C, who can play up to the 3rd line. I'd rather pay 3.15 for 1 more year of a 3C, than 2.2M for 1 more year of a 13th forward, and would rather pay both than 4.5 for 3 more years of a 3rd line winger.
In order of preference for Vegas' pick from Calgary it would be - Brouwer, Bouma, Stajan.
I think Brouwer really has nowhere to go but up after a horrible year, but that contract will still hurt. Paying Vegas to take Brouwer would require Treliving to admit his mistake a year after handing out that contract, which not many GM's will do, but I do think of any of the 31 would, Tre is one of the most likely to.
If Treliving doesn't take the free out (essentially) to position this team for long term success by losing 3 years of an anchor, I'd say that would go down as his worst move to date, ahead of the Brouwer contract itself.
Agreed. I think Stajan is useful as a bottom 6 C. I think he can play as high as 2nd line as a winger as well.
Recall Trellving bought our Raymond after 1 season of 3.
1. That was cold and so damn honest.
2. We all thought buy outs and salary retention were impossible. He broke 1 of 2.
Agree on Brouwer > Bouma >> Stajan as our preferences to move cap.