[proposal] Would you trade Podkolzin as a sweetener IF......

[rawkdrummer]

Not a chance

[Provost]

Nope...  We need his cheap contract moving forward, so it only helps us a little short term and loses us a lot long term.

We can find another Toffoli if he chases the money.  We are better off walking away from Tanev, I love the guy but he has earned a good contract with significant term and we aren't in a spot to give it to him.  Not having the money to make a bad decision on him probably saves us a lot of heartache.  We can rebuild our defence next offseason taking on guys who would otherwise be exposed in the expansion draft.  We could literally protect no one of our existing players on defence and pick up three guys for cheap to protect who would all fit in our top 4 and each one of them would be an upgrade.

[kloubek]

Benning knows whether there is a likely possibility to getting rid of LE's contract. If the waive and AHL route is where it goes then so be it. Hopefully he decides to move on and help the team out and leave with some level of late-contract dignity. I don't believe in giving up top level talent as a sweetener and I don't think JB is keen on it either. Especially after losing Madden.

 

I was very surprised not to see Baer get picked up on waivers. Sad to see his stock so low - he needs another chance to prove himself and I feel the receiving team would be pleased to have picked him up for nothing. Of course there are concussion concerns. At least his contract isn't long.

 

Sutter has had his ups and downs and injuries, but I don't believe we would need to give up much to move him. While overpaid, as a shutdown guy he remains pretty good. I still believe Sutter could be the kind of guy to step it up in the playoffs. Sutter Beagle Motte is pretty much elite in the defensive role. (They should be given the combined salary).

 

Really though - somehow getting LE's contract off the books makes all the difference. He is the poster boy for lack of intensity while our team is trying to go the opposite direction. Such a shame what a failure the LE signing was and continues to be.

[qwijibo]

26 minutes ago, kloubek said:

Benning knows whether there is a likely possibility to getting rid of LE's contract. If the waive and AHL route is where it goes then so be it. Hopefully he decides to move on and help the team out and leave with some level of late-contract dignity. I don't believe in giving up top level talent as a sweetener and I don't think JB is keen on it either. Especially after losing Madden.

 

I was very surprised not to see Baer get picked up on waivers. Sad to see his stock so low - he needs another chance to prove himself and I feel the receiving team would be pleased to have picked him up for nothing. Of course there are concussion concerns. At least his contract isn't long.

 

Sutter has had his ups and downs and injuries, but I don't believe we would need to give up much to move him. While overpaid, as a shutdown guy he remains pretty good. I still believe Sutter could be the kind of guy to step it up in the playoffs. Sutter Beagle Motte is pretty much elite in the defensive role. (They should be given the combined salary).

 

Really though - somehow getting LE's contract off the books makes all the difference. He is the poster boy for lack of intensity while our team is trying to go the opposite direction. Such a shame what a failure the LE signing was and continues to be.

Players in the minors aren’t subject to escrow.  Eriksson would actually make substantially more money in Utica.  Not much of a deterrent 

[Chris12345]

1 hour ago, Provost said:

Nope...  We need his cheap contract moving forward, so it only helps us a little short term and loses us a lot long term.

We can find another Toffoli if he chases the money.  We are better off walking away from Tanev, I love the guy but he has earned a good contract with significant term and we aren't in a spot to give it to him.  Not having the money to make a bad decision on him probably saves us a lot of heartache.  We can rebuild our defence next offseason taking on guys who would otherwise be exposed in the expansion draft.  We could literally protect no one of our existing players on defence and pick up three guys for cheap to protect who would all fit in our top 4 and each one of them would be an upgrade.

I like it. I believe TT is overrated on here. No way I'd move Podkolzin to keep vets.

 

So...expansion draft. Could we legit not protect any D and 8 players? 2 Goalies lol!

[qwijibo]

13 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

I like it. I believe TT is overrated on here. No way I'd move Podkolzin to keep vets.

 

So...expansion draft. Could we legit not protect any D and 8 players? 2 Goalies lol!

Each team is required to expose a minimum of 2 eligible forwards, 1 eligible D and 1 eligible goalie. 

[Chris12345]

16 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

Each team is required to expose a minimum of 2 eligible forwards, 1 eligible D and 1 eligible goalie. 

Yea I was thinking about that....does that mean they could sign a third stringer and expose him?

[qwijibo]

3 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

Yea I was thinking about that....does that mean they could sign a third stringer and expose him?

Providing he met the requirement of being under contract and he played the required number of games.  Yes. Honestly though. It should t be a problem for most teams to meet the requirements of 5 eligible players. 

[Provost]

4 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

I like it. I believe TT is overrated on here. No way I'd move Podkolzin to keep vets.

 

So...expansion draft. Could we legit not protect any D and 8 players? 2 Goalies lol!

Well we can only protect one goalie no matter what option we take.

 

We could protect more forwards, but we also don’t have any extras we need to protect.  We would get far better value getting extra D to protect.  We could even trade them back away for assets after the expansion draft.

 

Edler is a UFA so doesn’t need to be protected.  Myers is a solid player but also a little overpaid, so not much danger in exposing him.  Juolevi could be left exposed because we would honestly probably be lucky for Seattle to take him instead of Demko.

 

If we could pick up 3 top 4 D to protect, then re-sign Edlerwe could have a really solid defence built in a single season to surround Hughes.

 

Buffalo will have to expose either Colin Miller or Ristolainen.  Either one is an upgrade on a decent contract.

 

Zadorov is probably surplus in Colorado and that would be an interesting pairing with Tryamkin.  Two Russian giants to shut down opponents... or split up, one with Hughes and one with Rafferty to balance out offence.

 

Madison Bowey could be available from Detroit.  Larsson from Edmonton.   Pysyk or Stralman from Florida.... that was just looking at the first few teams alphabetically and the list goes on of guys to try to create a new defence out of.

 

 

Edited June 25, 2020 by Provost

[Chris12345]

8 hours ago, Provost said:

Well we can only protect one goalie no matter what option we take.

 

We could protect more forwards, but we also don’t have any extras we need to protect.  We would get far better value getting extra D to protect.  We could even trade them back away for assets after the expansion draft.

 

Edler is a UFA so doesn’t need to be protected.  Myers is a solid player but also a little overpaid, so not much danger in exposing him.  Juolevi could be left exposed because we would honestly probably be lucky for Seattle to take him instead of Demko.

 

If we could pick up 3 top 4 D to protect, then re-sign Edlerwe could have a really solid defence built in a single season to surround Hughes.

 

Buffalo will have to expose either Colin Miller or Ristolainen.  Either one is an upgrade on a decent contract.

 

Zadorov is probably surplus in Colorado and that would be an interesting pairing with Tryamkin.  Two Russian giants to shut down opponents... or split up, one with Hughes and one with Rafferty to balance out offence.

 

Madison Bowey could be available from Detroit.  Larsson from Edmonton.   Pysyk or Stralman from Florida.... that was just looking at the first few teams alphabetically and the list goes on of guys to try to create a new defence out of.

 

 

Those are some interesting possibilities!

[Provost]

16 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

Those are some interesting possibilities!

That was just teams A through F

 

I am too lazy to go through all the teams, just trying to make the point about the decent quality of D that will be available for cheap.  Several top pairing guys will even be available because their respective teams might opt to protect younger, cheaper players.  Just like us, we could choose to protect Juolevi and leave Myers exposed.  Myers has been decent, but the risk of him being taken are low... and if he is, it means we didn’t lose Demko and we can replace Myers by spending the same amount of money on a new UFA.

 

Hughes-Ristolainen 

Edler-Bowey

Zadorov-Tryamkin

Rafferty-Stecher 

 

Not a shabby D, young good size, mix of offence and shutdown abilities.... and there are a dozen other teams with surplus D that can’t be protected that I haven’t looked at.

Edited June 25, 2020 by Provost

[Lazurus]

Still no!

Definitely not Markstrom, if they let him go then they save his salary and Demko, if they sign him then they will lose Demko. There have been other one season wonders in goal with other teams and Marky wants a NMC clause or at least NTC and an Eriksson type contract which makes a trade almost impossible without a clause.

 

Not to correct mistakes made by this GM,

 

Supposed to be rebuilding THROUGH the draft, not hoping to get to a middle of the road team, AGAIN. This team is not good enough yet as was shown even with Markstrom and Toffoli playing.

Edited June 25, 2020 by Lazurus

[IBatch]

On 6/23/2020 at 6:17 PM, luckylager said:

No. The potential long term benefit of a prospect like Podkolzin outweighs the short term cap relief of moving said players out.

Baer just needs to fit. He's useful and his contract isn't really that bad.

Eriksson will probably be waived next season (if there is one). I'm not an expert but I think that saves some cap. Maybe not? If he gets waived he might just retire.

Sutter will be injured a lot no matter what, so most of his cap hit will be LTIR'd. He just can't seem to stay healthy anymore.

Makes a lot more sense to trade Pearson - we’d actually get something in return (picks and or prospects) - it would be a enough to sign Markstrom/JV and play Ferland ... if he goes back on the LTIR then bring up Bear and if both are healthy then maybe Bear can be traded at the TDL too who knows.     Don’t re-sign Leivo (although he’s another option - Trade JV and sign Leivo) maybe replace Stetcher with Tree....or promote Rafferty and see how that goes.    That should be enough to pay for everyone.  It would suck to lose Pearson but are we really going to be able to keep both him and TT or either long term?  Not until Sutter, Roussel, Beagle, LE and Luongo are off the books permanently and cheaper options become realistically available...Podz might get a debut late next season... Lind is ready for a shot soon too, maybe when to start the season.    Those guys are gold - hate to lose Madden too but 100% understand the trade.   
 

Podz, Lind, Hoglander, OJ, Brisbois, Rafferty, Diepietro and maybe Woo plus one or two others we don’t have yet or come out of the woodwork (Rathbone) are going to be the players that keep this team working once the core guys are all on longer term contracts.   Next season is going to maybe cost us one of these guys as cap dump but not necessarily either.   Lots of money for Hughes and EP even with LE still around .... but only if we have McEwen and the above guys available to fill the veteran stop gaps for us.