[Trade] Coyotes trade Lyubushkin and Dzingel to Leafs for Nick Ritchie and conditional pick

[GioforPM]

$2.3 in, $1.3 out

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

The 2nd being in 2025 is odd in most cases. That is still 4 drafts away. Plus most 2nd rounders take an additional 3 years to play in the NHL.

But when you consider that the Coyotes look to have 3 first rounders and 5 2nd rounders in the 2022 draft, and 3 2nd rounders in the 2024 draft. Pushing picks to later drafts make sense. Can only have so many developing at one time.

Not sure what the Leafs had to give away either. They’ve done a few deals.

[dissentowner]

The league will never allow the Coyotes to move anyhow.

[Jay Random]

From the article you linked:

‘Forcing an owner to sell is tricky but possible. In 2009, the then-Phoenix Coyotes went through a bankruptcy period and then subsequent sale. That situation revealed a clause in the NHL by-laws that would allow the NHL Board of Governors to force a sale of a team.’

Accompanied by a link, not to the NHL bylaws, but to a Globe and Mail article that has since been relocated or taken offline – the link is dead.

So we have one reporter two years ago saying that another reporter said something 13 years ago, with no confirmation.

Meanwhile, Melnyk still owns the Sens, despite the reporter's suggestion that he could be forced out. If there is a clause that would let the BoG force an owner to sell, it has never been used – and more important, it has never been adjudicated in court.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Not sure what the Leafs had to give away either. They’ve done a few deals.

They had all their 2nd rounders from 2022 onward before this trade.

A pick in 2025 is an easy price to pay for getting 2 depth pieces and dumping Ritchie's salary next season.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

From the article you linked:

‘Forcing an owner to sell is tricky but possible. In 2009, the then-Phoenix Coyotes went through a bankruptcy period and then subsequent sale. That situation revealed a clause in the NHL by-laws that would allow the NHL Board of Governors to force a sale of a team.’

Accompanied by a link, not to the NHL bylaws, but to a Globe and Mail article that has since been relocated or taken offline – the link is dead.

So we have one reporter two years ago saying that another reporter said something 13 years ago, with no confirmation.

Meanwhile, Melnyk still owns the Sens, despite the reporter's suggestion that he could be forced out. If there is a clause that would let the BoG force an owner to sell, it has never been used – and more important, it has never been adjudicated in court.

Fine, whatever, we will say you are right because it doesn't matter, if the Yotes drew no fans, had all bad contracts, and no arena the NHL would still insist in keeping them in Arizona. Oh wait. ..

[Jay Random]

The NHL insists on keeping every team where it is, unless there is no owner willing to have a team there. The original Jets, the Nordiques, Whalers, and Thrashers all moved because no one would buy those teams without moving them.

As long as some chump is willing to pay his own money to keep the Coyotes in Arizona, there they will stay.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The NHL insists on keeping every team where it is, unless there is no owner willing to have a team there. The original Jets, the Nordiques, Whalers, and Thrashers all moved because no one would buy those teams without moving them.

As long as some chump is willing to pay his own money to keep the Coyotes in Arizona, there they will stay.

Correct although without an arena deal, presumably they will run out of chumps one day.

[FlamesAddiction]

It's crazy what they are doing.

They have 13 UFAs and 6 RFAs for next season. Nineteen of their players do not have contracts. Meanwhile, they have 8 picks in the first two rounds.

It's almost like they are preparing to sell the team and are trying to increase the value by limiting liabilities (contracts) and stocking up on assets (picks). Although having OEL's retained salary on the books doesn't help.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It's crazy what they are doing.

They have 13 UFAs and 6 RFAs for next season. Nineteen of their players do not have contracts. Meanwhile, they have 8 picks in the first two rounds.

It's almost like they are preparing to sell the team and are trying to increase the value by limiting liabilities (contracts) and stocking up on assets (picks). Although having OEL's retained salary on the books doesn't help.

They just got rid of two guys without contracts for next season and added a guy with one...

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It's almost like they are preparing to sell the team and are trying to increase the value by limiting liabilities (contracts) and stocking up on assets (picks). Although having OEL's retained salary on the books doesn't help.

You may be right. I think it's more likely at this point that Meruelo wants to cut costs to the bone until he has a new arena to play in. Picks don't have salaries. If he can ice a team with a cap-minimum payroll, and pick up a few players whose cash salaries are less than their cap hit, he can minimize the bleeding from playing in a tiny college arena.

If he hammers out a deal for an arena in Tempe, he's in clover. If not, he has minimal liabilities going forward, and then I imagine he'll sell the team for relocation. It would basically be an expansion team with a carload of extra draft picks, which would be an attractive proposition for a certain kind of buyer.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

From the article you linked:

‘Forcing an owner to sell is tricky but possible. In 2009, the then-Phoenix Coyotes went through a bankruptcy period and then subsequent sale. That situation revealed a clause in the NHL by-laws that would allow the NHL Board of Governors to force a sale of a team.’

Accompanied by a link, not to the NHL bylaws, but to a Globe and Mail article that has since been relocated or taken offline – the link is dead.

So we have one reporter two years ago saying that another reporter said something 13 years ago, with no confirmation.

Meanwhile, Melnyk still owns the Sens, despite the reporter's suggestion that he could be forced out. If there is a clause that would let the BoG force an owner to sell, it has never been used – and more important, it has never been adjudicated in court.

Don’t the coyotes have one of two state sponsored gambling licenses in the NHL? They aren’t going anywhere ever.

[Reggie Dunlop]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1495247200296882176

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Don’t the coyotes have one of two state sponsored gambling licenses in the NHL? They aren’t going anywhere ever.

They still need an arena to play in. ASU is a stopgap at best.

[Geeoff]

You could argue this is almost a hockey trade for Arizona. Ritchie was decent until this year.

[GioforPM]

Toronto has to shed a little salary to fit the two.

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I'm not sure why such a relatively meaningless deal like this is the impetus to rehash this same tired Coyotes discussion in yet another thread. Can we not just discuss the on-ice ramifications of this specific trade?

It's a relatively meaningless trade, I bet you can have both discussions easily in this thread.

[savemedrzaius]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Toronto has to shed a little salary to fit the two.

Liljegren probably goes down to the AHL for a bit.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Toronto has to shed a little salary to fit the two.

Will dzingel play for the Leafs or will they send him to the AHL?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Will dzingel play for the Leafs or will they send him to the AHL?

I think he plays and they send down someone who can clear waivers.