[Discussion] Arizona/OEL

[Kobayashi Maru]

3 minutes ago, oldnews said:

so..what you're saying....is....

For example:

Give Zona a prospect or pick to take on LE (or Gaudette to Ottawa to take on LE, or whatever)....but for 'future considerations' instead of OEL.

And then sign Pietrangelo instead?

It's an interesting comparable alternative outcome - but do those dance partners line up with us?

Is that preferable?

I wonder what the actual marketplace will be, even for a UFA like AP.....is Zona hypothetically couldn't even dump an OEL for a prospect/pick to a couple relatively competitive teams, one (Boston) that would appear a pretty good and readily workable fit...then what will AP be able to command on the market?

If a player like Ekman-larsson's market value tanks that dramatically - what is a Nylander worth on the open market?  What are the Leafs' 11 milllion forwards worth in a cap crash?

I definitely agree that AP would be a slightly better fit as an RD at likely the same contract amount, but I think the chances he selects us out of all the teams is much much lower.  Likely doesn't factor in but I doubt he would join the team that beat him in the playoffs.  Either way OEL is of similar calibre and clearly wants to come here.  That factors into this situation a great deal.

[Junkyard Dog]

6 minutes ago, oldnews said:

so..what you're saying....is....

For example:

Give Zona a prospect or pick to take on LE (or Gaudette to Ottawa to take on LE, or whatever)....but for 'future considerations' instead of OEL.

And then sign Pietrangelo instead?

It's an interesting comparable alternative outcome - but do those dance partners line up with us?

Is that preferable?

I wonder what the actual marketplace will be, even for a UFA like AP.....is Zona hypothetically couldn't even dump an OEL for a prospect/pick to a couple relatively competitive teams, one (Boston) that would appear a pretty good and readily workable fit...then what will AP be able to command on the market?

If a player like Ekman-larsson's market value tanks that dramatically - what is a Nylander worth on the open market?  What are the Leafs' 11 milllion forwards worth in a cap crash?

 

2 minutes ago, cyacry said:

Petrangelo is UFA though, so there will for sure be more competition in signing him over trading for OEL (since rumour is he will only waive for two teams). 

 

1 minute ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

I definitely agree that AP would be a slightly better fit as an RD at likely the same contract amount, but I think the chances he selects us out of all the teams is much much lower.  Likely doesn't factor in but I doubt he would join the team that beat him in the playoffs.  Either way OEL is of similar calibre and clearly wants to come here.  That factors into this situation a great deal.

Only issue with Pietro is you're looking at 10+ million long term. Gonna be a bidding war to get him and he'd have to want to come here.

 

Then you'd have to move out cap, even more so than you would with OEL and with OEL you're already sending 1-2 of the contracts you want to get rid of back.

 

OEL's also worth 60 cents on the dollar due to wanting to play for us.

 

Arizona also has Raanta we could use if Markstrom walks.

[Kobayashi Maru]

16 minutes ago, tas said:

...you know that's not how rhyming works, right? it's important to me that you know that. 

Haha, I know.  It was a late Friday afternoon stretch.....

 

Key point is Risto being the right fit vs the ineligible rhyme though....

Edited October 3, 2020 by Kobayashi Maru

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

Yeah it's definitely close.  I think Kessel still has value with his contract, Stepan negative value and Hjalmarson neutral value.  Either way I fully agree that if this actually helps in moving LE then you have to consider that it would likely require a 1st or Jake to move him separately.  I think if the Canucks are the only negotiators they can find a deal that works for both situations.  Could be a game changer for the Nucks.

yeah - where  a team like Ottawa might not entertain, or be in a financial position to eat cap no matter the sweetener - we have one here that is relatively forced to...

however, what if in this climate, Eriksson being unconditionally waived translates into an agreement to terminate in the end....(only works I suppose if there is actual hockey...and perhaps an AHL season, or we lose that potential leverage...)

I hope they have a mathematician on board than can adjust all these factors simultaneously for them....

but if we can both add E-l to the lineup and subtract LE, without a great deal of asset cost in the process.....that's hard to walk away from...particularly if a few of our key players also  become invested - want him here - etc...

[Kobayashi Maru]

Has anybody else had that sinking feeling that this deal only works financially if Eriksson is included and Eriksson is still not willing to waive.....gulp

 

On a more positive note, maybe Benning's statement around not having to retain on Eriksson actually had to do with the fact that they are close on this deal.

 

So many feelings........  

[Junkyard Dog]

1 minute ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

Has anybody else had that sinking feeling that this deal only works financially if Eriksson is included and Eriksson is still not willing to waive.....gulp

 

On a more positive note, maybe Benning's statement around not having to retain on Eriksson actually had to do with the fact that they are close on this deal.

 

So many feelings........  

It wouldn't be the end of the world if Eriksson wasn't included. It would just mean JB will have to be just as busy as he is this off-season next one to clear cap space.

 

If Eriksson isn't included than Sutter and one of Baer/Benn should be.

 

I definitely want Eriksson in the deal though.

[rekker]

3 minutes ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

Has anybody else had that sinking feeling that this deal only works financially if Eriksson is included and Eriksson is still not willing to waive.....gulp

 

On a more positive note, maybe Benning's statement around not having to retain on Eriksson actually had to do with the fact that they are close on this deal.

 

So many feelings........  

If a deal is made and LE refuses to waive it would start a riot that makes 2011 look like a hobo's hot dog fire. 

[oldnews]

I wonder what the chronology of his list was?

 

It sounds like (reading Friedman's account of it?)  it may have been just Boston -  and they worked on it and it didn't pan out...?

And then Vancouver was added - after that door somewhat closed...?

If that's the case - as opposed to a list of two  - a one and then the other.....then I might read the team's leverage in the situation a bit differently.

I imagine Arizona would still seek to go back and forth to try to leverage a little bit - but if it was more of a one-at-time negotiation, it may be more difficult for them to play that card, if Boston did in fact resolve to pass.

[GB5]

20 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

 

 

Why do people continue to look upon his age and contract length as a negative ? you have a caphit that won't increase during the next seven years on a player who will be a reliable and top tier dman very realistically by the time his contract expires. He plays less hard minutes then players like Tanev and Edler, his playing style is that in which he will have more years left or gas in the tank when he reaches Edler's age. Yes the caphit is high, but tell me how often you get a chance to obtain a top tier dman in the NHL ? Could prove a very good addition two fold - Hughes has less opposition pressure on him and OEL maybe in a touch of a lesser role could increase his production not to mention make the PP 1 or 2 very dangerous.

 

You always take a risk on trade, you really try to make it work when a top dman is available and its publicly known he wants to play on your club.

 

When his contract is up he will be 36, he is not old because he is not 23 yrs old in a video game.

I guess it is individual preference. For me it would take less than that to land Pietrangelo for probably less term and Pietrangelo is a player that has a right handed shot and has an element that we do not currently have. He also will not cost us a player, prospect and likely a pick.

 

Truth be told though, we currently cannot afford either one of them unless something else happens so it is a mute point altogether.

[Junkyard Dog]

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

I wonder what the chronology of his list was?

 

It sounds like (reading Friedman's account of it?)  it may have been just Boston -  and they worked on it and it didn't pan out...?

And then Vancouver was added - after that door somewhat closed...?

If that's the case - as opposed to a list of two  - a one and then the other.....then I might read the team's leverage in the situation a bit differently.

I imagine Arizona would still seek to go back and forth to try to leverage a little bit - but if it was more of a one-at-time negotiation, it may be more difficult for them to play that card, if Boston did in fact resolve to pass.

 

[oldnews]

3 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

 

that might help to explain why there's a hold up on deals here.....

 

(although that's in general the case around the entire league for some reason...)

[oldnews]

16 minutes ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

Has anybody else had that sinking feeling that this deal only works financially if Eriksson is included and Eriksson is still not willing to waive.....gulp

 

On a more positive note, maybe Benning's statement around not having to retain on Eriksson actually had to do with the fact that they are close on this deal.

 

So many feelings........  

I think he had to submit a list of 15 before the season - and again this offseason before next...iirc.

so he might have no say if he put Arizona on that list of 15.

and otherwise he'd have to be relatively crazy to disagree - it's that or possibly unconditional waivers and the need to terminate if he wants to play....aside from those, maybe there's a 3rd option, if Ottawa is in a state to value assets more than cash....would that be preferable to Arizona?  Would Detroit be if Yzerman were receptive (that's the only team that seems to have indicated a willingness to trade cap dumps accepted for young assets/picks.....

[Millerdraft]

Does anyone else look at his restrictive choices of just Boston and Vancouver and wonder if that was a strategic choice because he doesn’t really want to go anywhere?  Neither of those teams have a 1st rounder to offer in this year’s draft and what does Arizona really need after the combine tampering penalty fiasco?  1st round picks.  Even more so heading into a full on rebuild (which a trading of OEL would fully indicate is the direction).

 

I don’t know, it’s just a thought. 

[erkayloomeh]

If LE holds up any sort of trade like this and is still playing here next year he will be booed every time he steps on the ice 

[JM_]

22 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I wonder what the chronology of his list was?

 

It sounds like (reading Friedman's account of it?)  it may have been just Boston -  and they worked on it and it didn't pan out...?

And then Vancouver was added - after that door somewhat closed...?

If that's the case - as opposed to a list of two  - a one and then the other.....then I might read the team's leverage in the situation a bit differently.

I imagine Arizona would still seek to go back and forth to try to leverage a little bit - but if it was more of a one-at-time negotiation, it may be more difficult for them to play that card, if Boston did in fact resolve to pass.

they did make Krug a decent offer... maybe that is close to a signing. They were supposed to have traded his rights days ago.

[NHL97OneTimer]

I admit I'm quite naive about how effective OEL is.  I know he's good, but is he that good that we'd take on THAT contract?!!!  I get losing LE's contract would be great but that's only for 2 years.  Would OEL strap us for even more years?!!!  Would love to hear that he's worth it, but this write-up concerns me:  https://www.si.com/hockey/news/when-did-oel-become-the-second-coming-of-nicklas-lidstrom.  

 

 

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, erkayloomeh said:

If LE holds up any sort of trade like this and is still playing here next year he will be booed every time he steps on the ice 

and thats just from the guys on the bench. 

[Western Red]

Warming to this idea, didn't think I would.

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, Millerdraft said:

Does anyone else look at his restrictive choices of just Boston and Vancouver and wonder if that was a strategic choice because he doesn’t really want to go anywhere?  Neither of those teams have a 1st rounder to offer in this year’s draft and what does Arizona really need after the combine tampering penalty fiasco?  1st round picks.  Even more so heading into a full on rebuild (which a trading of OEL would fully indicate is the direction).

 

I don’t know, it’s just a thought. 

the right prospect is worth every bit as much as a 1st round pick (from teams that finished where Van and Boston did) - so I don't see that as a factor (personally I think the draft plus years of players that are not immediate NHL talents is a positive thing to be able to assess - reduces the risk if anything....

 

I would read this list as coming from a player that just re-signed with them, made a long term commitment and is now being asked to accept essentially a reneg.

I don't read it as an attempt to preclude a move at all.

[Millerdraft]

5 minutes ago, erkayloomeh said:

If LE holds up any sort of trade like this and is still playing here next year he will be booed every time he steps on the ice 

JP Barry likely wouldn’t stand up publicly for Eriksson were he to enforce his NMC after all he’s done to try and help move him.  I can’t see Barry being unable to talk Eriksson out of such a move, especially since Eriksson would likely pay less income tax in Arizona and therefore earn more than staying in Van.