JayDangles Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 14 minutes ago, Darius said: This is a good point Colorado - a possible direct competitor in the playoffs- needs a center too....this move check mates them out of the best one available. Exactly. It will force them to either scrape the bottom of the barrel, or overpay for someone like Monahan. Montreal will be in a position of power negotiating because there aren't many other options available. There are just so many positive angles to this trade 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandmaster Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) 6 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: So, if we fail to win a Cup, do you think that will have been a good deal? Yes. Nothing is guaranteed. The Cup is the hardest trophy to win in all sports. We also took the best centre off the market from other teams like Colorado. Edited February 1 by Grandmaster 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, HKSR said: Yes because it gave this team the best chance possible to win a Cup. The Cup is never guaranteed. A lot of things need to go right even when on paper, the team looks unbeatable. Ask the Bruins about that. The loss of assets: Kuzmenko - CLEARLY in the doghouse with the coach, and seemingly couldn't break out of it. At 27 years old, unlikely that would change. Hunter B - as I mentioned in another post, he's likely closer to a late 1st rounder or maybe even 2nd rounder in terms of value (I can explain more if you need me to). 1st - a late 1st. Jurmo and a 4th are throw ins. They don't move the needle at all. I think these are optimistic takes....as is the idea that we can re-sign EL at a reasonable price. As I said before, I hope I'm wrong and all of you are right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rekker Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, kilgore said: Steep price. Too bad they couldn't have got a package deal that included Tanev. Now THAT Tanev is worth a second minimum. Maybe a first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 1 hour ago, aGENT said: I believe it. He's a good player, has been since people complained about getting him and OEL in the infamous trade. But again, he's a $4.95m luxury we can't afford on the 3rd line next year if we hope to maintain/improve our top 6 / top 4. Hoglander can do and/or develop in to a lot of what Garland does, for 1/4 of the cap. Will the 3rd line be as good as this year? Probably not, particularly given they're all basically having career years and are due for some level of regression, Garland or not. But it will likely still be close enough AND allow for a better top 6 / top 4...which is better for the overall team. Good player. Can't afford to keep him on the 3rd line. And he's an ill fit in our top 6. 100%. It's so obvious if you take a look at the numbers. You can't just keep every player because you like them. If you understand simple math the cap says someone at around $5 mil or more needs to go to in order to ice a 23 man roster. Like you said Garland is a luxury and clearly the most obvious choice. I mean you could move Miller, Petey, or Boeser as well but that wouldn't be smart in order to keep a $5 million 3rd liner. I alluded to this in another post and you touch on it here but it's also unlikely the same role is available next year due to other roster decisions, and regression/not playing lights out. Sometimes the smartest thing to do is get ahead of the curve and not rest on keeping something the same for yesterday's sakes. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) Lot of Flames fans really like this deal, which means it's probably fair. Takes futures from us, gives them pieces, hopefully helps us knock out Edmonton. That's kinda the sense I'm getting. The consensus from other NHL fans is that this is a good deal for both sides. Though Habs fans are particularly thrilled as it drives up the price for Monahan. Edited February 1 by Coconuts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayDangles Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 1 hour ago, RupertKBD said: Yeah, I get it. There's a lot to like about him as a player, but as I've pointed out multiple times, he's a pending UFA and as such, I think we gave up too much for him. The market dictates the price sometimes. If other teams (conference rivals) would have paid the exact same or more for him, then its not really an overpayment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kilgore Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 I am comfortable with JR's strategy of having TOO many UFAs. If it was Benning, I'd be quaking in my boots knowing he'd let go the most valuable players and sign the duds to overpriced contracts. But with this team, I trust they will use this plethora of players as a positive. LIke a UFA training camp to see who earns a new contract. Proof will be how this season plays out. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 This trade doesn't happen without Bruce going so hard to recruit Kuzmenko Bruce there it is 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, JayDangles said: The market dictates the price sometimes. If other teams (conference rivals) would have paid the exact same or more for him, then its not really an overpayment I don't know what other teams would have paid for him, so I can't really answer this, other than to say that I would not have made this deal. We'll know in a couple of years whether I was right or wrong about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kettlevalley Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 8 hours ago, Alflives said: why overpay? very late first Kuz negative value and another year at 5.5 HB is nothing special Jurmo is a guy we weee going to let go after this season. In return for this mess we got a top six C/W who is Selke level. Big win. Because it's a lot of assets for a guy who is probably just a rental. I hope not just a rental but...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, kilgore said: I am comfortable with JR's strategy of having TOO many UFAs. If it was Benning, I'd be quaking in my boots knowing he'd let go the most valuable players and sign the duds to overpriced contracts. But with this team, I trust they will use this plethora of players as a positive. LIke a UFA training camp to see who earns a new contract. Proof will be how this season plays out. Yes. Won't be able to keep them all, but trust management to keep the best value ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 8 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: I think these are optimistic takes....as is the idea that we can re-sign EL at a reasonable price. As I said before, I hope I'm wrong and all of you are right. I'm not sure what else you were expecting from this transaction though? Kuzmenko + Hunter B + 1st is not gonna land you a 2C of this calibre with term remaining on the contract. In fact, a 2C with term remaining on their contract likely wouldn't be traded in the first place. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 10 minutes ago, Rekker said: Tanev is worth a second minimum. Maybe a first. With retention, he's worth a 1st. That's probably why we couldn't get him in this deal. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rekker Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 Just now, kettlevalley said: Because it's a lot of assets for a guy who is probably just a rental. I hope not just a rental but...... Way too hung up on the late first. Kuz worth little, the prospects are long shots. They are shots, but long shots. We kept Will, Lekk, Pods, Hogs and gained a defensive right side Selke type who doesn't wilt. Imagine how much pressure this takes off JT with defensive responsibilities. A lot of assets? Maybe, but more quantity than quality. I'm pumped. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) 1 hour ago, HKSR said: That's your opinion when all the stats (advanced or not) go against what you're saying. Obviously there is no way for me to convince you if you simply ignore statistics and numbers, so I'm out. They don't go against what I'm saying. I'm not arguing that Garland sucks and is playing poorly. It's literally not an argument I'm making. I'm not "ignoring" anything. Does Garland play in our top 6? Does Mikheyev? Is $4.95m a lot of cap for a 3rd line player? Could we use that cap in our top 6 / top 4 next year? Does using that cap on better players than Garland move the needle more than keeping Garland? How much do we lose by swapping Garland for Hoglander and adding/keeping better players in our top 6 / top 4? 1 hour ago, Coconuts said: I think there's a good chance only one member of that third line is a Canuck next season. The cost of success is players getting paid, Joshua and Blueger will get some pretty sizeable raises imo. Joshua makes less than 1M, he could probably get 3 if he keeps it up. Blueger should get close to that too (about a 1M raise), both could potentially get more if teams want to pony up. One of many reasons I hope we explore a Bjugstad trade. Good enough to play a complementary role in our top 6 this year, good size, 2 way play, another RH'd C option...and should Blueger go on to greener $$$ pastures this summer, he's under contract for another year at $2.1m and could slide right in to a 3C role. Edited February 1 by aGENT 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemon Face Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, HKSR said: I'm not sure what else you were expecting from this transaction though? Kuzmenko + Hunter B + 1st is not gonna land you a 2C of this calibre with term remaining on the contract. In fact, a 2C with term remaining on their contract likely wouldn't be traded in the first place. Lekaramaki,EP,Wilander,Podz and Ratty are real assets.They are still with us.I dont know where this complaining coming from? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 49 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: So, the rumours about Calgary wanting a 1st for Tanev are true? There are a lot of people in on Tanev. So I think Calgary is pretty set on their ask for him. I am still trying to figure out how we even make that work roster wise. I feel like Myers and Hronek are mainstays by virtue of being right handed. Huggy is a mainstay. Zadarov feels pretty set. Are we scratching one of Soucy or Cole for Tanev, when we are healthy? I doubt Calgary would want either of them back in a deal. Cole and Tanev would be one hell of a shut down pair though. As close to Hammer and Bieksa as we've been since we had them. But with Soucy sidelined for 5-6 weeks I guess they want Tanev cause even when Soucy gets back who knows if someone else goes down. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Unlike Garland, Mik can play in the top 6 and is needed. If anything, we need a second Mik-like player so we have a speedy, complementary, 2 way guy with size on BOTH top 6 lines. (A guy which likely requires some of Garland's cap.) He's not going anywhere. Again, nobody is arguing that he (or the line) aren't performing (though again, career years due for regression). You can post all the stats you like, it entirely misses the point. If PA can somehow miraculously give raises to Petey, Hronek, Blueger, Joshua, Lafferty, Zadorov, DeSmith and Lindholm (or replace him), replace expiring Myers with a Tanev or similar, while retaining Garland...great. I don't see it. You can state the point a hundred times in a row and he still won't get it or acknowledge it. Trust me I tried yesterday until I just had to walk away. One thing should be easy to see though ... $5 mil on the third line is inefficient in terms of allocated spending, and for a team that's been cap strapped for years it should jump out as problematic, or simply a luxury we can't or will struggle to afford. Edited February 1 by Gawdzukes 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Lou Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Grandmaster said: We dropped Kuzy’s cap this and next year and got a player that levels us up for a Cup run. So yeah, if he does walk, so be it How we did this with a 32OA pick and a 3/4 prospect is beyond me. Kuzy was either benched or scratched a lot of the games and the whole NHL knew it. How's it the 32OA pick? Did I miss a Stanley Cup win in my sleep? I'm as excited as the next guy but can we not jinx the team. Edited February 1 by Bobby Lou Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 4 minutes ago, HKSR said: I'm not sure what else you were expecting from this transaction though? Kuzmenko + Hunter B + 1st is not gonna land you a 2C of this calibre with term remaining on the contract. In fact, a 2C with term remaining on their contract likely wouldn't be traded in the first place. I wasn't "expecting" anything. I thought I was clear: I wouldn't have made this deal, if I was PA. I know everyone thinks were not going to miss anything we've given up, but I disagree. I thought we already agreed to do so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, JeremyCuddles said: I feel like Myers and Hronek are mainstays by virtue of being right handed. 3 hours ago, aGENT said: Depends on what other plans we have. Move Myers and you gain assets and cap space. Use some of those assets and cap to acquire Tanev and you clear $1.5m, upgrade the D, and when you add that to the ~$2m we already have... Now you have ~$3.5m to add another player (a gritty winger, Bjugstad etc). Tanev + Bjugstad/gritty winger >>> Myers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemon Face Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, Bobby Lou said: How's it rhe 32OA pick? Did I miss a Stanley Cup win in my sleep? I'm as excited as the next guy but can we not jinx the team. He just came from future.Show some respect 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 1 minute ago, RupertKBD said: I wasn't "expecting" anything. I thought I was clear: I wouldn't have made this deal, if I was PA. I know everyone thinks were not going to miss anything we've given up, but I disagree. I thought we already agreed to do so? So your opinion is we should have just stayed as we are with utilizing Suter as our 2C for the playoffs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Posted by Jaimito,
Official Trade Announcement
Recommended by Roger Neilsons Towel
10 reactions
Go to this post
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.