EagleShield Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 Lehtonen and Niemi both have NTCs and I would expect that neither would put Vancouver on their list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 On 5/14/2017 at 3:08 AM, EagleShield said: Lehtonen and Niemi both have NTCs and I would expect that neither would put Vancouver on their list. It's certainly possible but Van might be a better option than say LGK... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 On 2017-05-14 at 3:08 AM, EagleShield said: Lehtonen and Niemi both have NTCs and I would expect that neither would put Vancouver on their list. 5 minutes ago, J.R. said: It's certainly possible but Van might be a better option than say LGK... And how many other places than Vancouver and Vegas can you be a starter right now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Goalies don't really have the luxury of requesting to be dealt to a good team. If the team is good, chances are they don't need a starting goalie (Or one that's paid as such). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 3 minutes ago, Pears said: And how many other places than Vancouver and Vegas can you be a starter right now? There's a few but yup, it's not like there's a TON of options. And while we may not be super a competitive team right now, it's a nice city, nice building to play in, good owners etc. There's far worse places they could go to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Renaud Lavoie wrote in the Journal de Montreal that the first choice of the Stars was Scott Darling but that Nill was not willing to pay the 3rd round pick asked by Chicago. Is the concern ultimately not knowing if Darling would sign - he was always likely to cost less re he is not a proven starter unlike Bishop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 Dallas got the greenlight from ownership to buy out a goalie so they'll probably not want to give up a significant asset just to move one. LeBrun on RDS thinks they'll keep Lehtonen and if they can't find someone for Niemi they'll just buy him out because it's only one year left and the cost is minimal. https://sports.yahoo.com/news/stars-gm-defends-bishop-contract-checks-goalie-purge-options-171540852.html Quote “I’ve got two goalies that only have one year left. That’s intriguing for teams,” said Nill. “There are going to be other opportunities. This isn’t just about Vegas taking a goalie. I think there’s going to be other opportunities.” But if there isn’t another team that helps out Nill, he has a green light from ownership to help himself by buying out a goalie. “If necessary, yeah. I’m not worried about that. We’re in a great cap position,” said Nill of the Stars, who are projected to have over $15 million in cap space heading into the summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 14 minutes ago, mll said: Dallas got the greenlight from ownership to buy out a goalie so they'll probably not want to give up a significant asset just to move one. LeBrun on RDS thinks they'll keep Lehtonen and if they can't find someone for Niemi they'll just buy him out because it's only one year left and the cost is minimal. https://sports.yahoo.com/news/stars-gm-defends-bishop-contract-checks-goalie-purge-options-171540852.html Good news for their management (though who knows how much is gamesmanship). Sounds like they'd still prefer to go the trade route (obviously). What would you classify as 'significant asset'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 2 hours ago, J.R. said: Good news for their management (though who knows how much is gamesmanship). Sounds like they'd still prefer to go the trade route (obviously). What would you classify as 'significant asset'? Listening to LeBrun on RDS he made it sound like it would be a formality to buy him out. I think the return would be so marginal that it might not be worth it unless a team believes Niemi can be a viable backup. They seem to have the cap space and now they apparently have the cash. My guess is 6th round pick to just take him off their hands with maybe some salary retained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 11 minutes ago, mll said: Listening to LeBrun on RDS he made it sound like it would be a formality to buy him out. I think the return would be so marginal that it might not be worth it unless a team believes Niemi can be a viable backup. They seem to have the cap space and now they apparently have the cash. My guess is 6th round pick to just take him off their hands with maybe some salary retained. In Bishops interview he said he looks forward to playing along side of lehtonen, it appears that Niemi is going to be the guy on the out. I agree, it wouldn't make sense to pay anything significant, not for a contract that only had one year left on the deal. They already gave up a 4th (116th) for bishop, maybe they give up another 4th to have someone take him off their hands, at full salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 2 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: In Bishops interview he said he looks forward to playing along side of lehtonen, it appears that Niemi is going to be the guy on the out. I agree, it wouldn't make sense to pay anything significant, not for a contract that only had one year left on the deal. They already gave up a 4th (116th) for bishop, maybe they give up another 4th to have someone take him off their hands, at full salary. Maybe. Can you see any team being willing to take on Niemi's contract for a 4th round pick when they could just sign him as a UFA for likely less? I can't. Seems like a bad economy for $3.0+ million. I'd want a high 2nd minimum if I was a GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 1 minute ago, theminister said: Maybe. Can you see any team being willing to take on Niemi's contract for a 4th round pick when they could just sign him as a UFA for likely less? I can't. Seems like a bad economy for $3.0+ million. I'd want a high 2nd minimum if I was a GM. Ditto. 6th (or 4th) I just don't see as realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 On 5/15/2017 at 10:42 AM, Xbox said: Goalies don't really have the luxury of requesting to be dealt to a good team. If the team is good, chances are they don't need a starting goalie (Or one that's paid as such). If VAN cant reap the rewards of a cap dump, I hope they play hardball and screw DAL royally! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 55 minutes ago, theminister said: Maybe. Can you see any team being willing to take on Niemi's contract for a 4th round pick when they could just sign him as a UFA for likely less? I can't. Seems like a bad economy for $3.0+ million. I'd want a high 2nd minimum if I was a GM. They already got the green light for a buy out, so how much does a team with lots of cap space value a 1.5 cap hit savings? Probably not very high, I'd say right around a 4th round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 16 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said: If VAN cant reap the rewards of a cap dump, I hope they play hardball and screw DAL royally! We totally should. Really hoping we can make a Tanev for Drouin deal happen. We'll be happy to take that Callahan contract off their backs Wonder what Dallas could give VAN to take Niemi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 Just now, ForsbergTheGreat said: They already got the green light for a buy out, so how much does a team with lots of cap space value a 1.5 cap hit savings? Probably not very high, I'd say right around a 4th round pick. So there would be a disconnect between the value for the seller and the buyer. Hence, no sale. However, I believe that $3.0 mil is worth more to them than a 4th. Just my opinion. It's not about cap space, it's about actual dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 3 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: They already got the green light for a buy out, so how much does a team with lots of cap space value a 1.5 cap hit savings? Probably not very high, I'd say right around a 4th round pick. 1 minute ago, theminister said: So there would be a disconnect between the value for the seller and the buyer. Hence, no sale. However, I believe that $3.0 mil is worth more to them than a 4th. Just my opinion. It's not about cap space, it's about actual dollars. Cash strapped team paying a guy $3m to not play for them... I think they are prepared to buyout as a last resort but would clearly FAR prefer a trade and the 'we have ownership buyout approval' is merely an attempt to strengthen their bargaining position. I'd still say a trade is more likely than a buyout and it would have to be more than a 4th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 Just now, theminister said: So there would be a disconnect between the value for the seller and the buyer. Hence, no sale. However, I believe that $3.0 mil is worth more to them than a 4th. Just my opinion. It's not about cap space, it's about actual dollars. No sale an a buyout is imminent, If they were backed into a corner maybe they'd have to pay a higher value, but when they already came out saying they are ok with a buy out I don't see it, it's too low of a $ value, to give up any real value in a future asset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 Just now, J.R. said: Cash strapped team paying a guy $3m to not play for them... I think they are prepared to buyout as a last resort but would clearly FAR prefer a trade and the 'we have ownership buyout approval' is merely an attempt to strengthen their bargaining position. I'd still say a trade is more likely than a buyout and it would have to be more than a 4th. 3 million is chump change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 1 minute ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: 3 million is chump change. Not to a DAL team with an internal cap structure. They're not a 'have' team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.