|
|
Post by Polarice on Feb 3, 2010 7:18:08 GMT -5
The boys and I, were speculating some trades on or before the trade deadline that actually were realistic and made sense cap wise.
These were the 2 trades that were debated the most.
Trade 1a: Montreal = Kaberle
Toronto = 2010 1st round pick, 2011 3rd round pick.
Trade 1b : Montreal = Lecavalier
Tampa = Markov
I know trading Markov will hurt, but I think Kaberle could handle the power play. Especially if we have Vinny up front.
Bonus trade
Montreal = Whitney
Carolina = A. Kostitsyn
In turn we sign Whitney to a 2 year 6.5 million contract. (We would have to do this because its reported that he won't lift his no trade unless he signs a 2 to 3 year deal.)
So Our Lines would look like.
(57)Pouliot - (91)Gomez - (21)Gionta
(13)Cammalleri - (14)Plekanec - (16)Lecavalier
(32)Moen - (15)Metropolit - (23)Whitney
(47)Bergeron - (40)Lapierre - (52)Darche
Pacioretty, D'Agostini
(30)Kaberle- (20)O'Byrne
(44)Hamrlik - (6)Spacek
(75)Gill - (26)Gorges
Mara
(41)Halak
(31)Price
Not a bad line up going into the playoffs and next year...we have the cap space with Mara leaving and getting rid of Spacek. Also if we're able to sign Pleks for around 3.5 to 4 million.
Thoughts, suggestions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Feb 3, 2010 7:55:17 GMT -5
My first thought is that Vinny is a center ... putting him on the wing is not going to work, we need his size down the middle. I'm not sure if this works cap-wise either ... but I will run the numbers.  |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Feb 3, 2010 8:25:57 GMT -5
I'm not sure if you intended any of the trades to be rentals or not ... Trade 1a: Montreal = Kaberle Toronto = 2010 1st round pick, 2011 3rd round pick. Montreal adds 4.25 million to next year's cap .... and 0.893 to this year's cap. Montreal adds 1.98 million to next year's cap .... and 0.415 to this year's cap Montreal adds 0.300 to next year's cap and 0.063 to this year's cap. Whitney takes a pay cut??? He currently makes 3.55M. I know he is 37, but he is 60-70 point player that isn't showing signs of slowing down .... *************************************************** This year those trades are doable ... I think we have 2.3 million in cap space and these trades would eat up 1.3 million. The line-up above would cost us 56.8 million in cap space next year assuming the following: Pouliot signs for 1.5 milion ---- getting just a qualifying offer with how he is producing seems unlikely. Plekanec signs for the 4 million you suggested (gotta plan for worse case scenarios) Metropolit re-signs for the 1 million he currently makes Whitney re-signs for the 3.25 you suggest Bergeron as a forward is scraped and we use S.Kosty at 0.600 Lappiere re-signs for 1 million Darche re-signs at 0.6 Halak re-signs at 1 million Price re-signs at 2.2 million If we assume the cap to be 58 million .... we'd have 1.2 million available for two forwards (I didn't include Pacioretty or D'agostini and they currently cost 1.375M) and two defensemen to replace Mara and Spacek. If we assume those to be Subban and Weber that's another 1.7 million. Whitney would have to be a rental or we still have to let Pleky go .... |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Feb 3, 2010 8:45:18 GMT -5
Don't have a link but Bob McKenzie tweeted that the Bruins have let it be known the Michael Ryder is available. Anybody want him back?  |
|
|
|
Post by HABSINFL on Feb 3, 2010 8:49:54 GMT -5
Thanks but No Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 3, 2010 8:58:42 GMT -5
Don't have a link but Bob McKenzie tweeted that the Bruins have let it be known the Michael Ryder is available. wonder if Sutter wants to reunite him with Higigns? think the trade day frenzy has begun . . . and here I thought it would begin with Atlanta. |
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Feb 3, 2010 9:00:11 GMT -5
I'm not sure if you intended any of the trades to be rentals or not ... If we assume the cap to be 58 million .... we'd have 1.2 million available for two forwards (I didn't include Pacioretty or D'agostini and they currently cost 1.375M) and two defensemen to replace Mara and Spacek. If we assume those to be Subban and Weber that's another 1.7 million. Whitney would have to be a rental or we still have to let Pleky go .... I knew we'd be very close to next years cap....I know Whitney won't be a rental....he already stated that. I guess Pleky would have to go, freeing Vinny up to play center, and Whitney up to the second line. Still a good looking line up for next year. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 3, 2010 9:01:27 GMT -5
Don't have a link but Bob McKenzie tweeted that the Bruins have let it be known the Michael Ryder is available. wonder if Sutter wants to reunite him with Higigns? think the trade day frenzy has begun . . . and here I thought it would begin with Atlanta. Would they be interested in another Ryder? |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 3, 2010 9:14:25 GMT -5
I see a lot of 'ifs' in the original post that would need to happen.
First, Kaberle would have to wave his NTC. IF you assume he would to play in Montreal, he is as good offensively as Markov. I give the edge to Tomas in foot speed, but Markov gets the edge in defensive zone play. Both are UFA after next season, and we save $1.5 million in cap space. Then you have to ask if he'd re-sign. I'm not sure he does. I know Markov would (know being a strong word).
The ifs surrounding Lecavalier are well known. Even with all the stars aligning, I just can't get comfortable with that albatross of a contract. Do I think he'd rebound in Montreal? Yeah. I really do think he'd be rejuvenated. To do the deal I think I'd have to try and sell them Gomez. Sell them on the idea that in sending a large, but half the term, contract back means you'll want fewer/lesser additional assets in addition to Vinny. If I'm doing Markov for Lecavalier, I'm going to want picks. We're not taking that contract without getting some seriously good picks. If we sell them on Gomez, they get term back, but a lot less. They get a 'name' player. And, Scott can easily slide in behind Stamkos. Even if they accepted Scott as part of the deal, I'd want more than just Vinny in return.
Whitney's a solid point getter, but not all that responsible defensively. I'm not too keen on trading Akost straight up for him unless he signs an extension. Even then, I'm luke warm to the idea. Remember too, at his age if we chose to buy him out before the end of the deal it would still count against the cap. Overall, I think I'd prefer to stick with what we have.
I don't think we'd be able to play the qualifying game with all our RFAs for very long.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Feb 3, 2010 9:56:15 GMT -5
I don't think I do any of these trades. Well, maybe Andrei for Ray - but I'm not so sure about that. This trade improves our offensive production at the cost of some ability from the blueline back and cap space. Leaving aside arguments on the subject of affordability (I think tying up as much money as we'd have tied up in Vinny and Scott would hurt us badly when it came time to sign other players - we're already going to have a rough go of it with those we have now) I just don't see that as addressing our primary weakness - in zone play. Losing markov, even if we got a top notch offensive blueliner like Kaberle, would brutalize our already weak blueline.
The only benefit I can see out of this is getting some portions of the fanbase and media following to stop with the Lecavalier rumours. Sadly, I fear we'd just see rumours about other French-Canadian players pop up, like some twisted rumour hydra or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Feb 3, 2010 10:42:51 GMT -5
Trade Plekanec at the deadline, get us another first round pick that we might be able to peddle to Toronto instead of our own (which would presumably be a higher pick).
It's definitely a risky scenario. We'd have Gomez locked in at 7+ for 4 more seasons and Lecavalier locked in at 7.7+ for 10(!!) more seasons. Zero flexibility, if it doesn't work out or you're praying the cap increases quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Feb 3, 2010 11:03:13 GMT -5
Trade Plekanec at the deadline, get us another first round pick that we might be able to peddle to Toronto instead of our own (which would presumably be a higher pick). It's definitely a risky scenario. We'd have Gomez locked in at 7+ for 4 more seasons and Lecavalier locked in at 7.7+ for 10(!!) more seasons. Zero flexibility, if it doesn't work out or you're praying the cap increases quickly. I think I would keep Pleky for the playoffs and then try to sign him cheap, or just let him go. Same with Halak. I don't worry about the long contracts, it seems to be the trend these days. And besides between expansions and the new CBA, the cap will be near 70 million in the near future. |
|
|
|
Post by madhabber on Feb 3, 2010 12:35:51 GMT -5
These little trade scenarios are a very NYR way of building a team. Where does it get them. Same place we're at. No better than middle of the pack.
If you want a Stanley Cup contender, you have to look at the cup contenders today and how they got there. Pittsburgh, Washington, Chicago and San Jose. The first three sucked for a long time and accumulated top draft picks. They sold off assets they had for picks and prospects.
I see those moves that are suggested as lateral moves. In a cap world, you have to build with youth and not overpriced veterans with long expensive contracts that will just handcuff your team for the future so that all you can do is round out your team with cheap inexpensive players that can't play prominent roles.
We need to let Plekanec go. His value will never be greater. We need to rent out all UFAs to-be, and a few others if we are capable. Halak is a good option to trade also. If not at the deadline, then before the draft at the latest.
So what is the worst that will happen next year. We'll suck and be in line for another good building piece. I'd rather build with 18-19-20 year olds with growth potential than build with 27-35 year olds who won't give you any more than you've seen and half of them are on the decline anyways. I'd rather see a Tyler Seguin type in our lineup than Lecavalier. The cost of aquiring Lecavalier is prohibitive, while the cost of acquiring a good draft pick just mean you sucked for a while.
I don't want to go through this again for the next 5 years where we are basically hoping to fight for a playoff spot every year. I just want a Stanley Cup instead. Even if we don't make the playoffs for 4 of those 5 years. The cup will be worth it.
|
|
|
|
Post by HabSolute on Feb 3, 2010 13:25:14 GMT -5
Trade Plekanec at the deadline, get us another first round pick that we might be able to peddle to Toronto instead of our own (which would presumably be a higher pick). Who can we possibly want from the Leafs...? The only one I can think of would be Kaberle.... Pony is a FA this summer..... the rest is crap or newly acquired |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Feb 3, 2010 13:43:54 GMT -5
Trade Plekanec at the deadline, get us another first round pick that we might be able to peddle to Toronto instead of our own (which would presumably be a higher pick). Who can we possibly want from the Leafs...? The only one I can think of would be Kaberle.... Pony is a FA this summer..... the rest is crap or newly acquired In the original post, we trade our 1st pick in 2010 for Kaberle. I was proposing we trade Plekanec for a 1st pick at the deadline, then trade that pick for Kaberle instead of our own. |
|
|
|
Post by OopyDoopy on Feb 3, 2010 16:42:13 GMT -5
I would definitely not give up our first round pick this year to the leafs, no way do I help them out of the Kessel mess.
I can see the scenario of if we keep the pick we just miss the playoffs and are in 9th place, if we trade it we end up 27th over all and end up giving up a top 3 pick. I think the reward of a top 3 pick for this year out weights the reward of the player we would get for it, unless it's one of (insert usual suspect) and Kaberle is not that player to me.
I really hate the Whitney for A. Kostitsyn a 24 year old for a 37 year old UFA, plus again helping out Carolina, blah no thanks.
But Markov for Lecavalier I hate even more, why do we give up, IMO, the best player plus take on that cap hit? If they are trading him because a new owner wants to dump salary they are the ones that need to move him and they should suffer for it not us.
|
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Feb 3, 2010 23:47:28 GMT -5
Lecavalier is just not that good compared to what everyone seems to think, so I wouldn't trade Markov for him.
I don't really understand why Toronto wants to trade Kaberle; would 2 picks be enough?
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 4, 2010 6:16:29 GMT -5
Lecavalier is just not that good compared to what everyone seems to think, so I wouldn't trade Markov for him. I don't really understand why Toronto wants to trade Kaberle; would 2 picks be enough? Contrary to what Burke is saying in the media, Kaberle isn't a "Burke type of guy". He's not North American. Granted Burke picked the Sedins, but he likes his NA players. |
|
|
|
Post by Douper on Feb 4, 2010 14:16:00 GMT -5
Gainey made his pitch for Vinny last year, that boat has sailed as soon as he traded for Gomez. No way we can afford to have both. Only way we get Vinny is if we can get them to take Gomez. If Vinny really wanted to be a Hab he would have pulled a Kovalchuk a couple of years ago.
Kaberle would be nice but not at the cost that he would be at the deadline. In the summer he'll come much cheaper.
As for Akost for Whitney? I'd rather have the 24 year old.
I think Gainey should really think of the future and working to add depth to our organization. This is not the year for us to make rental moves or short term moves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 4, 2010 15:45:44 GMT -5
Gainey made his pitch for Vinny last year, that boat has sailed as soon as he traded for Gomez. No way we can afford to have both. Only way we get Vinny is if we can get them to take Gomez. If Vinny really wanted to be a Hab he would have pulled a Kovalchuk a couple of years ago. You have to wonder if Bettman will authorize a trade that sees the face of an American-based franchise leave for north of the border. Maybe two of those names might be Crosby and Lecavalier. I think one of the things that saved the Pittsburgh franchise was firstly drafting Crosby. Lemieux's direction changed after Crosby was acquired and I think he picked up some veteran experience very shortly after. Drafting Malkin and Staal didn't hurt either mind you. It's a tough scenario mind you. I was reading Bob MacKenzie's article on TSN yesterday and he suggested that the new TB ownership doesn't want Lecavalier's salary on the books if they are to take over. If that's the case and Lecavalier is moved, I think it might be to another US-based franchise. TB's attendance isn't the greatest from what I understand (I don't have the figures, so I'm only going on what I've read elsewhere), but even given that, what would happen if Lecavalier were to move out of TB? The Bolts would probably have to bring in a well-known, proven star in return. I don't know if Stamkos and St Louis would be enough to bring more people into the rink. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 4, 2010 15:57:57 GMT -5
I don't know if Stamkos and St Louis would be enough to bring more people into the rink. A Stanley Cup isn't enough to bring more people to the rink! things are so bad that if you go through a car was you get a pair of tickets to the game . . . probably 100's! |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Feb 4, 2010 16:27:38 GMT -5
Gainey made his pitch for Vinny last year, that boat has sailed as soon as he traded for Gomez. No way we can afford to have both. Only way we get Vinny is if we can get them to take Gomez. If Vinny really wanted to be a Hab he would have pulled a Kovalchuk a couple of years ago. You have to wonder if Bettman will authorize a trade that sees the face of an American-based franchise leave for north of the border. Maybe two of those names might be Crosby and Lecavalier. I think one of the things that saved the Pittsburgh franchise was firstly drafting Crosby. Lemieux's direction changed after Crosby was acquired and I think he picked up some veteran experience very shortly after. Bettman has no say on anything regarding trades. He can certainly encourage an owner or GM to do something, but he can't veto a deal unless the NHL is controlling the franchise like they are in TB or PHX. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Feb 4, 2010 16:51:59 GMT -5
Lecavalier is just not that good compared to what everyone seems to think, so I wouldn't trade Markov for him. I don't really understand why Toronto wants to trade Kaberle; would 2 picks be enough? Contrary to what Burke is saying in the media, Kaberle isn't a "Burke type of guy". He's not North American. Granted Burke picked the Sedins, but he likes his NA players. Burke is on record as saying that he will not ask Kaberle to waive his NTC. Does not mean he will not trade him if Kaberle comes to him I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 4, 2010 18:23:54 GMT -5
You have to wonder if Bettman will authorize a trade that sees the face of an American-based franchise leave for north of the border. Maybe two of those names might be Crosby and Lecavalier. I think one of the things that saved the Pittsburgh franchise was firstly drafting Crosby. Lemieux's direction changed after Crosby was acquired and I think he picked up some veteran experience very shortly after. Bettman has no say on anything regarding trades. He can certainly encourage an owner or GM to do something, but he can't veto a deal unless the NHL is controlling the franchise like they are in TB or PHX. I just worded that incorrectly. But, you're right, Red, Bettman does not have a the power of veto. However, I'd like to know just how much influence he actually has. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Feb 10, 2010 10:19:43 GMT -5
Wasn't sure where to put this but here's Mckenzie's take on the Habs goalie situation. He feels it's best resolved in the summer. Some interesting stuff in there about a tweet he received by someone who seems well connected. tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=309636 |
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Feb 10, 2010 10:57:53 GMT -5
Wasn't sure where to put this but here's Mckenzie's take on the Habs goalie situation. He feels it's best resolved in the summer. Some interesting stuff in there about a tweet he received by someone who seems well connected. tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=309636Interesting. Goalie trades at the deadline are always odd things. Turco is likely on his way out of Dallas since they acquire Lehtonen and if he is bound for Montreal (as the twit... err... tweet suggests) who is he replacing? Best guess if Halak. I simply don't see any chance of getting anywhere near value for Price at this point. He's got potential, but that's all he's got and deadline deals (and Bob points out) are all about results. Halak at least has results. But to who and for what? |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 10, 2010 11:08:44 GMT -5
I don't know if Stamkos and St Louis would be enough to bring more people into the rink. A Stanley Cup isn't enough to bring more people to the rink! things are so bad that if you go through a car was you get a pair of tickets to the game . . . probably 100's! Don Cherry and Brian Williams have a syndicated radio segment "Grapeline" which is aired twice a day here in Kingston. I wasn't sure if he was talking about TB because I missed that portion of the story, but he said when Canadian team wins the Cup it's a real big deal here. People are celebrating, they're pumped, Cup parade routes, etc. However, when (TB) won the Cup people left the place like they were exiting a movie theatre. Like I said, I don't know if he was talking about TB or not. I'll look for a livestream tonight and see if I can post it. As for moves, man ... I'm hoping Gauthier has a more aggressive approach than Gainey had. I heard Nick Kipryos suggest on Hockey Central that Gainey was too 'old school' for today's NHL. It was an interesting opinion. I really can't agree or disagree with it because I don't know the man. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 10, 2010 11:30:40 GMT -5
Don Cherry and Brian Williams have a syndicated radio segment "Grapeline" which is aired twice a day here in Kingston. I wasn't sure if he was talking about TB because I missed that portion of the story, but he said when Canadian team wins the Cup it's a real big deal here. People are celebrating, they're pumped, Cup parade routes, etc. However, when (TB) won the Cup people left the place like they were exiting a movie theatre. Like I said, I don't know if he was talking about TB or not. I'll look for a livestream tonight and see if I can post it. you remember correctly . . . it was TBay |
|
