Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

14,290 posts in this topic

The problem with Simmonds is if we were to sign him to an extension, it will look ugly in a few years. Simmonds is severely underpaid at the moment for what he brings, he will look to get 5.5-6 on a long term deal. If anyone thinks the Neal deal is bad a Simmonds deal would be worse given how many miles are on his body 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

The problem with Simmonds is if we were to sign him to an extension, it will look ugly in a few years. Simmonds is severely underpaid at the moment for what he brings, he will look to get 5.5-6 on a long term deal. If anyone thinks the Neal deal is bad a Simmonds deal would be worse given how many miles are on his body 

 

I agree, and to add that to that there is no way the Flames could sign him, Tkachuk and a goalie without shipping a ton of money out. Would probably need to move out both Neal and Backlund to make it work. 

 

That's why I think he'd be a pure rental. There is no realistic shot at re singing him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I agree, and to add that to that there is no way the Flames could sign him, Tkachuk and a goalie without shipping a ton of money out. Would probably need to move out both Neal and Backlund to make it work. 

 

That's why I think he'd be a pure rental. There is no realistic shot at re singing him. 

 

Sadly, I don't see a starter available this summer.  There isn't a Bishop/Vasilevsky or Fleury/Murray situation where a youngster has clearly ousted a stud starter.  Plus, with the Bobrovsky rumor Calgary is not on his desired list, then there's no options to upgrade goaltending this summer.  Lastly, there's no expansion Draft that would force anyone's hand to move a goalie or risk losing one.  Teams could gladly hang onto two goalies.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

Who would be more expensive, Simmonds or Stone?  Cause I'd rather we Stone.

 

I doubt we can afford Stone.

He would fit like a glove here.

Just guessing, but we would need to move on from Bennett and trade Backlund (or Ryan) for a lesser player.

If that was the case, our top 6 would be deadly.

 

JH-Monahan-Stone

Tkachuk-Lindholm-Neal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Sadly, I don't see a starter available this summer.  There isn't a Bishop/Vasilevsky or Fleury/Murray situation where a youngster has clearly ousted a stud starter.  Plus, with the Bobrovsky rumor Calgary is not on his desired list, then there's no options to upgrade goaltending this summer.  Lastly, there's no expansion Draft that would force anyone's hand to move a goalie or risk losing one.  Teams could gladly hang onto two goalies.

 

 

Depends on your perspective I guess, but I would consider both Semyon Varlamov and Jimmy Howard as starter options and both are free agents. Assuming that injuries keep Varlamov's term short I actually have a fair bit of interest in him. 

 

Either way, what I meant more by that is someone has to get paid. Be it free agent, trade, or even Rittich keeping this up and being a starter the Flames don't have a goalie under contract for next year. So someone will have to get that spot and they'll cost some money as i'm assuming Gilles/Parsons is not going to be the tandem next year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I doubt we can afford Stone.

He would fit like a glove here.

Just guessing, but we would need to move on from Bennett and trade Backlund (or Ryan) for a lesser player.

If that was the case, our top 6 would be deadly.

 

JH-Monahan-Stone

Tkachuk-Lindholm-Neal

 

Ya agreed Stone is a great fit.

 

I would want to offer Neal if the Sens want a guy signed long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Ya agreed Stone is a great fit.

 

I would want to offer Neal if the Sens want a guy signed long term.

 

Oh, so you are talking about in-season.

You mentioned being expensive.

He's unlikely to re-sign in Ottawa, but they seem too stupid to trade him while he has value.

And, no, it makes no sense to trade Neal to them.

They want cheapo players and draft picks and prospects.

 

Maybe something along the line of Bennett + Kylington or Janko + 1st.

Doubt that's even close to value, but that's makes more sense to them than Neal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Oh, so you are talking about in-season.

You mentioned being expensive.

He's unlikely to re-sign in Ottawa, but they seem too stupid to trade him while he has value.

And, no, it makes no sense to trade Neal to them.

They want cheapo players and draft picks and prospects.

 

Maybe something along the line of Bennett + Kylington or Janko + 1st.

Doubt that's even close to value, but that's makes more sense to them than Neal.

 

I'm looking at it like no one wants to sign in Ottawa this summer so, if they can acquire a signed guy through trade then that gives them stability on the roster.  Neal isn't working out here and it would be smart for us to move him as quickly as possible.

 

He brings intangibles? Well we didn't see it in the Oilers game.  He was a passenger who didn't want to mix it up with anybody.  He wasn't in the middle of anything and just skated away from trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Depends on your perspective I guess, but I would consider both Semyon Varlamov and Jimmy Howard as starter options and both are free agents. Assuming that injuries keep Varlamov's term short I actually have a fair bit of interest in him. 

 

Either way, what I meant more by that is someone has to get paid. Be it free agent, trade, or even Rittich keeping this up and being a starter the Flames don't have a goalie under contract for next year. So someone will have to get that spot and they'll cost some money as i'm assuming Gilles/Parsons is not going to be the tandem next year. 

 

Ya I guess I don't consider Varlamov and Howard as clear starters.  They are both in that top 20-25 which, is barely okay and the separation between them and the top 30-35th best goalies in the league are not significant... Of which Smith is arguably part of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Ya I guess I don't consider Varlamov and Howard as clear starters.  They are both in that top 20-25 which, is barely okay and the separation between them and the top 30-35th best goalies in the league are not significant... Of which Smith is arguably part of.

 

And for me, outside of maybe the top 5-6 guys, the difference after that down to about 20-25 is equally as insignificant. I don't think getting one of those top 5 guys is going to be doable unless they develop their own.  

 

for the record I do not have interest in Howard either for age reasons. Probably would turn into another Hiller/Smith situation. I do think Varlamov is a starter and when healthy he sure plays like one. Health being the major concern so you need a 1b behind him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I'm looking at it like no one wants to sign in Ottawa this summer so, if they can acquire a signed guy through trade then that gives them stability on the roster.  Neal isn't working out here and it would be smart for us to move him as quickly as possible.

 

He brings intangibles? Well we didn't see it in the Oilers game.  He was a passenger who didn't want to mix it up with anybody.  He wasn't in the middle of anything and just skated away from trouble.

 

I'm saying, regardless of opinions of Neal, that he's not a player that makes any sense.

Hamonic or Brodie or Backlund or Bennett perhaps.

Not a 30 year old winger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018-11-12 at 4:17 PM, MAC331 said:

Tkachuk for Nylander is what gets it done not the peanuts you are throwing at it. LOL

No, that’s insane.  TML have 10 days to sign him or trade him before losing him for 5 years to the KHL.  In the end I think they’ll accept a good, young 3-4D.  They screwed up the signing but have no pressure since the team is doing so well.  Calgary could probably seal the deal with any of Hamonic, Anderson or Valimaki, if Cap was no issue and we were worried about scoring versus giving up a top pairing D(on many teams).  But the Flames are near top of the league in scoring so that’s not happening.  Might they accept something like Kylington and Klimchuk versus losing him to the KHL?

 

We have just over a week to find out.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty unlikely Nylander is going to sign a 5 year deal with the KHL. They won't lose him like that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, cross16 said:

It's pretty unlikely Nylander is going to sign a 5 year deal with the KHL. They won't lose him like that. 

Right.  It’s like we all know what he is going to do.  The best thing about Dec 1 is it ends the speculation and the Toronto writers will have to find something else to flog daily....

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, cross16 said:

It's pretty unlikely Nylander is going to sign a 5 year deal with the KHL. They won't lose him like that. 

 

If they don't sign him, what are his optins to play hockey and get paid?

Sitting for a year is a great strategy to bend the player to your will.

It absolutely ruins the relationship with the player.

 

But the player (and agent/family) will suggest a strategy to the player that 

1) gets him paid this year

2) does not lower his value just to pay the other stars

3) is a long term solution or cuts bait

 

Anyway, I only suggest trading for the player is the cost to obtain and the asking price from the player are reasonable.  In other words, it won't be us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, travel_dude said:

 

If they don't sign him, what are his optins to play hockey and get paid?

 

 

Probably go play in either Sweden or KHL. KHL obviously would pay him a fair bit more money. I just don't think he'll sign a deal that would prevent him from playing in the NHL next year. He'll play out the balance of the year and come back next year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

Probably go play in either Sweden or KHL. KHL obviously would pay him a fair bit more money. I just don't think he'll sign a deal that would prevent him from playing in the NHL next year. He'll play out the balance of the year and come back next year

 

That I agree with.  I though you were implying that he wouldn't sign overseas.

I just don't know there is any coming back to the Leafs if it happens.

Demand trade?

Sign OS to push the plan, knowing full well the team won't let him go for that.

The OS scenario is probably worse for Nylander, as it's so hard to construct one that works for the player and receiving team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

That I agree with.  I though you were implying that he wouldn't sign overseas.

I just don't know there is any coming back to the Leafs if it happens.

Demand trade?

Sign OS to push the plan, knowing full well the team won't let him go for that.

The OS scenario is probably worse for Nylander, as it's so hard to construct one that works for the player and receiving team.

 

no, what I meant was I don't think he would sign a 5 year deal. i didn't understand ccsberg's point about how the Leafs will lose him for 5 years. That would require a 5 year overseas deal and I just don't think that's going to happen. I think him playing there for the rest of the year is very much in play. 

 

I think things are different now people understand this is a business. 10 years ago, for sure there is no way I could see Nylander going back but even if he sits out the year I don't think it's impossible he comes back. Money and winning talk and if Leafs can (key word) offer him both I think they can work it out. Maybe not scenario A anymore but I don't think its impossible. 

 

Case in point in the NFL. LeVeon Bell has sat out the year and the team still wanted him back before his deadline. It's a business. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

no, what I meant was I don't think he would sign a 5 year deal. i didn't understand ccsberg's point about how the Leafs will lose him for 5 years. That would require a 5 year overseas deal and I just don't think that's going to happen. I think him playing there for the rest of the year is very much in play. 

 

I think things are different now people understand this is a business. 10 years ago, for sure there is no way I could see Nylander going back but even if he sits out the year I don't think it's impossible he comes back. Money and winning talk and if Leafs can (key word) offer him both I think they can work it out. Maybe not scenario A anymore but I don't think its impossible. 

 

Case in point in the NFL. LeVeon Bell has sat out the year and the team still wanted him back before his deadline. It's a business. 

 

Sure they can offer him money next year, but from the player's perspective he's lost out a years pay.  If they were offering $6m x 8 = $48m and he wouldn't sign for less than $7.5 x 8 = 60m, then how can they make that up in the cap world?  They can't offer more than $8m with the other guys waiting.

 

You are right that business is business, but next year has other issues.  Matthews and Marner both will get paid.  You sign either before Nylander, then how do you justify your numbers then?  Their best scenario is get the deal done and trade someone if they can't make it work.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

no, what I meant was I don't think he would sign a 5 year deal. i didn't understand ccsberg's point about how the Leafs will lose him for 5 years. That would require a 5 year overseas deal and I just don't think that's going to happen. I think him playing there for the rest of the year is very much in play. 

 

I think things are different now people understand this is a business. 10 years ago, for sure there is no way I could see Nylander going back but even if he sits out the year I don't think it's impossible he comes back. Money and winning talk and if Leafs can (key word) offer him both I think they can work it out. Maybe not scenario A anymore but I don't think its impossible. 

 

Case in point in the NFL. LeVeon Bell has sat out the year and the team still wanted him back before his deadline. It's a business. 

He’s a second generation NHLer so not like the typical player, whose dad knows well the ins and outs of the NHL “business”.  He’s also one who has played in the league and achieved a lot of success.   As of the end of last year he was arguably Toronto’s second best forward, yet fans and management seem to think him solidly third, and then management went out and signed Tavares for an exorbitant price while promising to keep the full team’s stars together as part of their sales pitch.  I wonder if they asked Nylander if he agreed beforehand?  Not likely.  Then they came out and made up this big story about “all the three stars would take a bit less” to make it happen, but failing to sign all three last summer and putting Nylander in the position as fall guy/stooge to sign first and hope the rest followed.  It is not surprising Nylander is holding out and likely PO’ed.  If TML were honest and fully serious they could sign all three right now and not take advantage of any one guy.  That is not happening.  As for Nylander’s ask, some think it exorbitant and give examples, while he can look at Draisaitl and make his own arguments.  I’m not sure why you believe he’d only sign KHL for only 1 year.  No one knows but if it goes past Dec 1st I’d suggest his Leaf days are over.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My prediction is, Nylander will sign with the Leafs in the 11th hour... And 59-minutes.

 

A 4-year deal with the Leafs at $5.5-mil-per.  The final year of which he will be paid $8-mil so Nylander goes into his 4th year with arbitration leverage and his next contract will surely be $8-mil-per.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The_People1 said:

My prediction is, Nylander will sign with the Leafs in the 11th hour... And 59-minutes.

 

A 4-year deal with the Leafs at $5.5-mil-per.  The final year of which he will be paid $8-mil so Nylander goes into his 4th year with arbitration leverage and his next contract will surely be $8-mil-per.

Not unreasonable thinking but why not make it 2 years?   TML got greedy and are now paying the price, and since it isn't hurting them they can force Nylander's hands.  Its an ugly situation all around.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I'm on the leafs side on this one.  We don't need another 8+ mil comparable for when Tkachuk is negotiating next summer...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ABC923 said:

Personally I'm on the leafs side on this one.  We don't need another 8+ mil comparable for when Tkachuk is negotiating next summer...

 

23 minutes ago, ABC923 said:

Personally I'm on the leafs side on this one.  We don't need another 8+ mil comparable for when Tkachuk is negotiating next summer...

I'm on your side as far as $8mm contracts go, but the Leafs still blew it how they handled Nylander.  As for Tkachuk, hopefully BT is talking with him already...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites