2016/2017 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

This:

But what does that mean. By Vegas agreeing to some sort of trade, the value they get in return has to be at least as good as one of the defencemen they could pick up from the Ducks.

[killer_carlson]

So Anaheim is keeping Bieksa?

That's a win for us.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

But what does that mean. By Vegas agreeing to some sort of trade, the value they get in return has to be at least as good as one of the defencemen they could pick up from the Ducks.

I dunno. It's going to be quite the off season.

To be a fly on the wall in these GM's offices.


Maybe Murray says to Mcphee, "we can buy out Bieksa, and we can trade Vatanen, then use a 7-3-1 and you get to pick one of our depth forwards, or we can save ourselves the buy out and just trade you Vatanen for a fair return"

[Vinny01]

What kind of pre-arranged scenario could the Ducks sell the VGK on that is better than them drafting Manson?

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

What kind of pre-arranged scenario could the Ducks sell the VGK on that is better than them drafting Manson?

"We have this trade lined up to ship out Manson/Vatanen/whoever, if you don't agree to a trade to not take Manson/Vatanen/whoever they will be gone, we will buyout Bieksa and you will be taking a depth forward"

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Weitz

"We have this trade lined up to ship out Manson/Vatanen/whoever, if you don't agree to a trade to not take Manson/Vatanen/whoever they will be gone, we will buyout Bieksa and you will be taking a depth forward"

Just like I said in the post above Vinnys

We can do a few things and then you get to pick from Shaw, Boll or Wagner.....OR we can just trade Vatanen to you for a fair return instead of the other team.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Ducks saved

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie

It's believed ANA has a pre-arranged deal in place with VGK so it isn't necessary to ask Kevin Bieksa to waive his NMC.

What the heck could they offer to avoid losing one of those D?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Maybe it's just me but I feel the fact that LV can make or agree to trades prior to the expansion draft is kind of silly. Kind of makes the draft a bit of a farce.

They have Duke, Shipachyov, their entry draft picks and their expansion draft selections. You want to further handcuff the team by not allowing them to make deals? Ha.

If both teams agree, what's the "harm"?

Originally Posted by Vinny01

What kind of pre-arranged scenario could the Ducks sell the VGK on that is better than them drafting Manson?

Roof-Daddy's already gave a scenario that makes sense for both teams.

Heck, the Knights second round draft pick to the Ducks for "future considerations" where the Ducks agree to leave Vatanen/Fowler/Manson available to be drafted as the future considerations probably works for everyone...

Maybe the Knights knew that the Ducks would have made Silfverberg available in a 8-1 scenario after buying out Beiksa, but the Ducks will be throwing a fifth round pick to the Knights if they agree to take Silfverberg regardless of who's available saving themselves from buying out Bieksa. There's a ton of options, just takes both teams to agree.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Weitz

"We have this trade lined up to ship out Manson/Vatanen/whoever, if you don't agree to a trade to not take Manson/Vatanen/whoever they will be gone, we will buyout Bieksa and you will be taking a depth forward"

Okay go ahead and do that. I will take a depth forward before I allow a divisional rival to remain dominant.

If the Ducks don't get Bieksa to waive they risk exposing 2 of their Dmen and would have to trade 2 of them or one belongs to the Knights. A first rounder wouldn't be enough. I would be looking at Montour or Theodore to not consider one of their exposed guys.

If the Ducks send the Knights Montour so they don't draft another D that makes sense

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Ducks saved

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie

It's believed ANA has a pre-arranged deal in place with VGK so it isn't necessary to ask Kevin Bieksa to waive his NMC.

If I'm McPhee that deal better be as good a deal as you would get for Vatanen on the open market. If not what's the point?

I can't really see someone threatening VGK that hey are going to trade players beforehand either. For what? To whom? A GM that doesn't know they are totally f'd in the expansion? Or a team that doesn't already have expansion protection issues? How many of those are around?

VGK have a great opportunity to totally fleece a whole lot of teams here.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I dunno. It's going to be quite the off season.

To be a fly on the wall in these GM's offices.


Maybe Murray says to Mcphee, "we can buy out Bieksa, and we can trade Vatanen, then use a 7-3-1 and you get to pick one of our depth forwards, or we can save ourselves the buy out and just trade you Vatanen for a fair return"

Bieksa buyout on a 35+ contract gives zero cap relief to a cap strapped Ducks team. I don't see how Vegas comes out looking better here. I would try and force the Ducks to move 2 of their Dmen and good luck getting fair market value.

It will be extremely interesting to see what deal is worked out between the teams

[ah123]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

What kind of pre-arranged scenario could the Ducks sell the VGK on that is better than them drafting Manson?

From the comments Treliving made, and other commentary in the media, it seems like there will be a lot of wingers, defencemen and goalies available.
My guess is that the Ducks are willing to give VGK a centre+pick for not selecting Manson. No idea what the Ducks have in their system, so this purely a guess

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

If the Ducks don't get Bieksa to waive they risk exposing 2 of their Dmen and would have to trade 2 of them or one belongs to the Knights. A first rounder wouldn't be enough. I would be looking at Montour or Theodore to not consider one of their exposed guys.

They can still buyout Bieksa.

All they would need to do is find a team to take Vatanen or Fowler, who they probably have discussed trading over the last year and would finally be willing to pull the trigger on the deal, and Vegas ends up with Cogliano....

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Weitz

"We have this trade lined up to ship out Manson/Vatanen/whoever, if you don't agree to a trade to not take Manson/Vatanen/whoever they will be gone, we will buyout Bieksa and you will be taking a depth forward"

I'd probably just let the Ducks get their team if I were Vegas.

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by ah123

From the comments Treliving made, and other commentary in the media, it seems like there will be a lot of wingers, defencemen and goalies available.
My guess is that the Ducks are willing to give VGK a centre+pick for not selecting Manson. No idea what the Ducks have in their system, so this purely a guess

To me you would take the least valuable dman they cannot protect, and his market value is what you take not to select him. That or you take him anyway and keep him or trade him yourself after the expansion draft.

[GioforPM]

If no deal is made, Vegas gets a choice of either Manson or Vatanen (in a 7-3-1) or in an 8-1 arrangement, whichever two of Vatanen, Manson, Rackell, or Silvferberg are left exposed. So Anaheim has to offer a deal to Vegas that is "you take player X, etc plus we'll give you a pick, prospect or another player. So the combo has to be pretty enticing. Is Cogliano plus a pick = Vatanen? I don't think so.

[Oling_Roachinen]

To Leafs:
Vatanen

To Ducks:
First Round Draft Pick or whatever is fair value

Ducks buyout Bieksa

Vegas:
Draft Cogliano from the Ducks (everyone better now protected)

The Leafs protect Reilly, Vatanen, Gardiner. Zaitsev is exempt. Vegas doesn't get any good defenseman from Toronto.

Or Vegas agrees to take Silfverberg, give something up for the ability to draft Vatanen/Fowler, or whatever the deal may be etc. etc. and end up in a far better situation.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

They can still buyout Bieksa.

All they would need to do is find a team to take Vatanen or Fowler, who they probably have discussed trading over the last year and would finally be willing to pull the trigger on the deal, and Vegas ends up with Cogliano....

But that team would have to have a protected slot for a defenceman. So, in other words, only two decent defencemen (or only 7 decent skaters in total). Carolina could swing it.

[Roof-Daddy]

I don't know why this is so hard for people to get.

1. Anaheim buys out Bieksa (or he agrees to waive)
2. Anaheim trades Vatanen to team A
3. Anaheim protects Fowler, Lindholm, Manson, Getzlaf, Perry, Rackell, Silfverberg, Vermette, Cogliano, Kelser, Gibson
4. Vegas gets to pick from Boll, Shaw, Wagner (yuck right?)

So Anaheim wanting to avoid asking Bieksa to waive or to buy him out says to Vegas, "we can trade YOU Vatanen instead of trading him to team A, then you get to have Vatanen instead of a depth forward"

[ah123]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

To Leafs:
Vatanen

To Ducks:
First Round Draft Pick or whatever is fair value

Ducks buyout Bieksa

Vegas:
Draft Cogliano from the Ducks (everyone better now protected)

The Leafs protect Reilly, Vatanen, Gardiner. Zaitsev is exempt. Vegas doesn't get any good defenseman from Toronto.

Or Vegas agrees to take Silfverberg, give something up for the ability to draft Vatanen/Fowler, or whatever the deal may be etc. etc. and end up in a far better situation.

A buyout is easy from a fan's perspective, but it has cap and real money implications that Ducks management/ownership might not want. IIRC, the Ducks are a budget team, plus they have two $10 million players on the roster, so they are walking a financial tight rope