Trade rumours & armchair pipe dreams 19-20 Sponsored by SKYO

[Chef Boi RD]

Hey Doc, I think Doyle looks more like Barry Deley instead of Tom Hanks

[Strangelove]

Hey Doc, I think Doyle looks more like Barry Deley instead of Tom Hanks

Is that the Global News guy lol?

[Blob Mckenzie]

Hey Doc, I think Doyle looks more like Barry Deley instead of Tom Hanks. I shouldn’t talk. I resemble a meatball with four toothpicks coming out of it, grease and all. It sucks having legs like Edith Bunker and arms like Kermit the Frog

[Meds]

The future in NOW mutherfuckers.

Benning will be pushing his balls around in a wheelbarrow if he can close on that rumoured deal. I'm sure it'll include the complimentary 2nd rounder that always seems to be attached but what the hell...i want the canucks to win the fuckin cup already

Yeah.... no. The future is in the next 2-10 years. Some people have no patience for a rebuild. Let the bad contracts expire, and move forward with the kids.

I agree Blobcat, patience is key. However, if Benning can somehow replace Eriksson's and Sutter's cap hits with OEL and still find a way to bring back Tanev, then this is a solid move.

Ferland on LTIR and Baertschi in Utica.

Miller - Petey - Boeser
Pearson - Bo - Toffoli ($5M)
Hoglander - Gaudette - Leivo ($2M)
Roussel - Beagle - MacEwan ($1.5M)

OEL - Hughes
Edler - Myers
Benn - Tanev ($5M)
Rathbone

Demko
Backup ($3.5M)

Total: $80.3M

Problem is flexibility going forward with room for Petey and Hughes and Demko.

It's having to think beyond this season that makes this a bad trade. Benning would have to be getting Tanev, Leivo, and the backup, all on 1 year deals.

[Meds]

I’d have less problem with this potential deal if Vancouver could send Tyler Myers back the other way.

I tend to think that the upcoming season maybe Edler's last. Having OEL past Edler's time here is not a bad thing. His cap hit scares me and sets the bar moving forward. But if we move on from Edler or at least re-sign him to team friendly hits then we should be able to absorb this, but, at what cost.

Scary times. Benning obviously has the green light to go all in.

I agree. I think that if OEL lands in Vancouver then Edler only comes back on a Jordie Benn contract.....maybe a shade more.

[Meds]

I’d have less problem with this potential deal if Vancouver could send Tyler Myers back the other way.

I know he took a bunch of penalties in the playoffs, but there was a big difference in our net protection without Myers.

[Raging Fury]

I'm of the mind that, in life, having more options and flexibility is preferable to having less. This is true for hockey, both on the ice and off the ice.

Trading for an onerous contract like OEL's will definitely limit our options down the road. Yeah, we all like to offload bad contracts like Loui and Sutter because they handcuff us, but if that means taking back a huge anchor isn't that counter-intuitive?

The future is now, yes, but it's not yet our time. We should always look for opportunities to improve (see: JT Miller) but we need to safeguard spending all our ammo too quickly and ruin the good thing we have going. This year they boys overachieved, let's be honest with ourselves. There's still a lot of growing and team building to go to be seriously considered as a contender. Look no further than 1 province over to see how impatience can derail a team's trajectory.

Adding someone like OEL and his term should be the final touches to a championship caliber team, not a team that still has holes to patch after getting said player.

That, and I have more faith in Benning's team to develop talent to fill these holes than his ability to swing a franchise altering trade (though last year's ballsy trade has given me some confidence in this regard).

[Richardstroker69]

I'm of the mind that, in life, having more options and flexibility is preferable to having less. This is true for hockey, both on the ice and off the ice.

Trading for an onerous contract like OEL's will definitely limit our options down the road. Yeah, we all like to offload bad contracts like Loui and Sutter because they handcuff us, but if that means taking back a huge anchor isn't that counter-intuitive?

The future is now, yes, but it's not yet our time. We should always look for opportunities to improve (see: JT Miller) but we need to safeguard spending all our ammo too quickly and ruin the good thing we have going. This year they boys overachieved, let's be honest with ourselves. There's still a lot of growing and team building to go to be seriously considered as a contender. Look no further than 1 province over to see how impatience can derail a team's trajectory.

Adding someone like OEL and his term should be the final touches to a championship caliber team, not a team that still has holes to patch after getting said player.

That, and I have more faith in Benning's team to develop talent to fill these holes than his ability to swing a franchise altering trade (though last year's ballsy trade has given me some confidence in this regard).

Oel isn’t an anchor he’s a top pairing dman, a number 2/3 guy never comes available for cheap via trade. This will help cement the d core for 5 years. 45-50 minutes a night of having Hughes or oel on the ice is gonna be amazing for the team. This offseason benning is adding the final touches.

[Cousin Strawberry]

Fortune favours the bold.

We need top talent...top talent is thinking of falling into our lap. Hand wringing about tomorrow to the extent that you sacrifice today instead is not the path to glory.

Benning is going all in with his freshly polished wheelbarrow full of balls calling the shots.

[Blob Mckenzie]

I'm of the mind that, in life, having more options and flexibility is preferable to having less. This is true for hockey, both on the ice and off the ice.

Trading for an onerous contract like OEL's will definitely limit our options down the road. Yeah, we all like to offload bad contracts like Loui and Sutter because they handcuff us, but if that means taking back a huge anchor isn't that counter-intuitive?

The future is now, yes, but it's not yet our time. We should always look for opportunities to improve (see: JT Miller) but we need to safeguard spending all our ammo too quickly and ruin the good thing we have going. This year they boys overachieved, let's be honest with ourselves. There's still a lot of growing and team building to go to be seriously considered as a contender. Look no further than 1 province over to see how impatience can derail a team's trajectory.

Adding someone like OEL and his term should be the final touches to a championship caliber team, not a team that still has holes to patch after getting said player.

That, and I have more faith in Benning's team to develop talent to fill these holes than his ability to swing a franchise altering trade (though last year's ballsy trade has given me some confidence in this regard).

Great post. The team lacks depth and it was exposed big time against Vegas. Adding one very good D man without addressing the lack of bottom six capable players and defensive depth is a recipe for disaster.

Some folks don’t have the patience for a rebuild

[Strangelove]

Ferland on LTIR and Baertschi in Utica.

Miller - Petey - Boeser
Pearson - Bo - Toffoli ($5M)
Hoglander - Gaudette - Leivo ($2M)
Roussel - Beagle - MacEwan ($1.5M)

OEL - Hughes
Edler - Myers
Benn - Tanev ($5M)
Rathbone

Demko
Backup ($3.5M)

Total: $80.3M

Problem is flexibility going forward with room for Petey and Hughes and Demko.

It's having to think beyond this season that makes this a bad trade. Benning would have to be getting Tanev, Leivo, and the backup, all on 1 year deals.

Don't forget $15M of your projection comes off the books next summer (Pearson, Baer, Edler, Benn, Spooner)

... and that we'd be able to go up to $3.5M over the cap with Ferland on LTIR.

I don't see Leivo coming back and I doubt we re-sign Tanev if we trade for OEL.

Benn might get dumped, but the guys we should really be looking to dump are Roussel and Beagle.

(overpaid contracts that overlap Petey/Hughes next deals)

[Strangelove]

Fortune favours the bold.

We need top talent...top talent is thinking of falling into our lap. Hand wringing about tomorrow to the extent that you sacrifice today instead is not the path to glory.

Benning is going all in with his freshly polished wheelbarrow full of balls calling the shots.

YUP

[Raging Fury]

Here's an example of what I mean by limiting our options with acquiring OEL's contract.

Let's say the trade goes through and OEL plays well as a #2 Dman next year. Great, that's the best case scenario. Now it comes time to negotiate Huggy's extension. Huggy will say" I'm the #1 Dman on this team, I can't make less than the #2 guy". The best the team can do with the extension will be the same AAV as OEL's $8.25m.

Now, what if OEL is not on the team? Now Benning can at least try the flat cap angle and keeping-the-team-together angle to negotiate a more favorable AAV than $8.25m.

Ultimately, Huggy's extension may be more than OEL's cap hit, but that's not the point. The point is, with OEL on the team with this cap hit you take away Benning's shot (i.e. less options and flexibility) at negotiating a more favorable contract with one of the most important player. With OEL there, Benning would have no moral high ground, Huggy's agent and the NHLPA would never allow for a lower cap hit.

OEL may be a #2 Dman, but he can't be a #2 Dman making $8.25m on this team if we want this team to go anywhere.

The team will have to pay full value for the core players. For the supporting cast, we should take the Moneyball approach to become a strong contender year in and year out and have multiple shots at the grand prize.

[Meds]

Here's an example of what I mean by limiting our options with acquiring OEL's contract.

Let's say the trade goes through and OEL plays well as a #2 Dman next year. Great, that's the best case scenario. Now it comes time to negotiate Huggy's extension. Huggy will say" I'm the #1 Dman on this team, I can't make less than the #2 guy". The best the team can do with the extension will be the same AAV as OEL's $8.25m.

Now, what if OEL is not on the team? Now Benning can at least try the flat cap angle and keeping-the-team-together angle to negotiate a more favorable AAV than $8.25m.

Ultimately, Huggy's extension may be more than OEL's cap hit, but that's not the point. The point is, with OEL on the team with this cap hit you take away Benning's shot (i.e. less options and flexibility) at negotiating a more favorable contract with one of the most important player. With OEL there, Benning would have no moral high ground, Huggy's agent and the NHLPA would never allow for a lower cap hit.

OEL may be a #2 Dman, but he can't be a #2 Dman making $8.25m on this team if we want this team to go anywhere.

The team will have to pay full value for the core players. For the supporting cast, we should take the Moneyball approach to become a strong contender year in and year out and have multiple shots at the grand prize.

Yeah. The Moneyball approach. Billy Beane is still chasing that World Series Title almost 22 years later.

It's a good approach in baseball, but hockey as far too many variables.....and it really only works if you can spend to the max. The teams that won using that approach actually were well over the "cap" and paying luxury taxes thanks to deep pocketed owners. Can't go over like that in the NHL.

[Raging Fury]

Yeah. The Moneyball approach. Billy Beane is still chasing that World Series Title almost 22 years later.

It's a good approach in baseball, but hockey as far too many variables.....and it really only works if you can spend to the max. The teams that won using that approach actually were well over the "cap" and paying luxury taxes thanks to deep pocketed owners. Can't go over like that in the NHL.

Fine, would you like it better if I be a little more specific and say that we should get supporting players that out-perform their cap hit?

This is what I get for my attempt at brevity, I guess.