2020/2021 Trade Speculation and Rumours

[Geeoff]

I don't hate the idea of bringing back Rittich. He's a cool dude and a decent back-up who can get hot, plus I think he's gonna take a haircut on his pay

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by dammage79

My guess is the bring someone in. A reliable veteran.

Yup I could see a guy like Riemer being signed

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

If Reinhart can get that unsigned you have to think Monahan is worth much more than people around here are pitching.

I don’t understand why? Reinhart is looking to sign a 6-8 year deal and just scored 25 goals in 53 games. Monahan is coming off 2.5 years of down play with 2 years left on a deal where he needs to do a lot better to justify his salary.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I don't hate the idea of bringing back Rittich. He's a cool dude and a decent back-up who can get hot, plus I think he's gonna take a haircut on his pay

I could definitely see a reunion with Rittich as a possibility.

[dammage79]

Really? I for one think Ritter might be a tad sour at how the last two years went for him in CGY.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Really? I for one think Ritter might be a tad sour at how the last two years went for him in CGY.

I feel like he was sincere when he said he didn’t want to be moved. I also think his experience in Toronto was less than ideal so I could see him being open to returning to the team that gave him a chance.

[powderjunkie]

[Cheap] Backup market is kinda tough, most guys available will be seeking a platoon.

Not really sure who I'd target (Brossoit? Dubnyk?), but we probably want to keep it under $2M.

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/f...ll/goalies/ufa

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Man the 9th overall pick for an unsigned Reinhart feels like a lot.

I like the player but I'm not sure I'm moving a top 10 pick for him without a contract. Even knowing it's a bit of a weaker draft.

Being unsigned is largely irrelevant. It’s not like he’s a UFA. He can sign a long term deal as part of the trade.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Really? I for one think Ritter might be a tad sour at how the last two years went for him in CGY.

Don't know why he'd be sour since Calgary gave him more than he deserved. He turned out just okay, so if he came back at a reduced salary, then maybe. But if he won't take it. Goodbye.

[Barca]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

DiPietro?

Reinhart would a perfect fit. As long as he comes in signed long term to a hometown discount. :

Hoglander - Petey - Boeser
Pearson - Horvat - Reinhart
Roussel - Miller - Podkolzin
Motte - Graovac - MacEwen

[bax]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

It's actually quite strategic in nature.



Don't be such a drama queen. No one is turning their back on anyone. The intent is to get more depth in the lineup by making a one-for-two deal. Yes, the $9M qualifying offer plays a big role in the decision of who to move, but I would be open to trading Gaudreau in a similar deal and keeping Tkachuk. The intent is to get better by adding more top six depth.



Says more about Tkachuk than anything. If all it took was a puck flip and his team telling him to act like an adult to ruin his season, that is a player you don't want on your team. That spells headcase. If that is really what sent him in a downward spiral, get him the #### out of town ASAP. The team will be better off without that type of drama.



No one has turned on anyone. Get over it. Players are fungible assets in today's pro sports, just like teams are fungible to the players. Don't get too attached to any player because they seldom have any loyalty to you or the team you cheer for. They will change jerseys if the money is right.



You mean like when Treliving traded Hamilton and spare parts for Lindholm and Hanifin? Two lesser players that turned out to be superior team players and gave the team more depth? Yeah, that was a dumb deal.



The reality of the NHL is depth trumps super stars. Vegas is a team without superstar players, but they have depth that grinds you into the ground. Calgary should be emulating that model, not chasing the unicorns like they do in Edmonton. Money puck is real and it is effective. Give me two guys that will put up 50-60 points versus a single guy who puts up 70-80 for similar money, and I'll have better results. That's the bottom line. Results.

Man, you can’t say Vegas is built on depth and don’t have any superstar players. They are at the top of the league for star players. By a ton of models (Byron Bader’s model is the first that comes to mind) they had 6 players play at a “star” level this season. Fleury, Stone, Pietrangelo, Theodore, Pacioretty, and Marchessault.

They didn’t finish second in the league because of having Ryan Reaves and Keegan Kolesar on their roster. To say they don’t have stars is ridiculous.

Quality for quantity trades rarely work out. You can’t just look at point totals and say “look at the depth!” Remember when the flames went out and acquired a bunch of former 20 goal guys? Stains, Hagman, Jokinen, Tanguay, etc?

Depth is important but having star players is far more important (and more difficult to acquire)

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Would probably come down to if they want to make a hockey trade (Tkachuk) or a futures trade (3rd overall). But at 3rd overall they aren't likely to get a franchise or even 1st line player in this year's draft. A good player, but not a game changing piece.

Friedman has commented that the Sabres feel they have an advantage in how thoroughly they’ve scouted the top of this draft. If they get the Duck’s #3OA, they’ll be able to come away from the draft with Powers and whichever one of Beniers, Guenther, or Eklund they like best. That’s going to have a lot more value to them than whoever they can get with the 8th (LA), 15th (NYR) or 21st (MIN) picks. Even in this draft, the #3OA pick is a huge asset.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Being unsigned is largely irrelevant. It’s not like he’s a UFA. He can sign a long term deal as part of the trade.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think where it can be relevant is if the player can turn the trade negotiations into an asset for him during the contract negotiation.

Vancouver will have just given up a 9th overall pick for him, that could give Reinhart a pretty good position in the trade negotiations.

I do feel like this happened a bit with Anderson and Montreal. Anderson saw how much Montreal coveted him in the trade, and was able to turn that into a contract that was really good for him.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by bax

Man, you can’t say Vegas is built on depth and don’t have any superstar players. They are at the top of the league for star players. By a ton of models (Byron Bader’s model is the first that comes to mind) they had 6 players play at a “star” level this season. Fleury, Stone, Pietrangelo, Theodore, Pacioretty, and Marchessault.

They didn’t finish second in the league because of having Ryan Reaves and Keegan Kolesar on their roster. To say they don’t have stars is ridiculous.

Quality for quantity trades rarely work out. You can’t just look at point totals and say “look at the depth!” Remember when the flames went out and acquired a bunch of former 20 goal guys? Stains, Hagman, Jokinen, Tanguay, etc?

Depth is important but having star players is far more important (and more difficult to acquire)

Without the depth the VGK establishing out of the draft they don't have the success to become a destination spot for these "star" players. I mean, you must be really dense to think that the on ice success of the GK wasn't the thing that drew the "stars" to Vegas, and the success was not a result of the depth the NHL expansion draft allowed the GKs to develop out of the gate. Without the player depth the VGK had right out of the gate, it would have been an expansion graveyard and no one in their right mind would have accepted a trade there, or signed there as a free agent. It was the organizational depth afforded out of the gate that made the VGK a success, nothing more. Without all those quality players and draft picks given to them by teams wanting to protect assets, that team would have been the Washington Capitals all over again. The $500M expansion fee made it possible for quality players to be available and the GKs a formidable squad right out of the gate.

[SuperMatt18]

Honestly if Florida just lets Vegas take Alex Petrovic instead of sending Smith and Marchessault there to protect him then Vegas probably doesn't have any of that year 1 success, and probably don't have Pietrangelo or Stone.

That was 2/3 of their top line that first season, and really they shouldn't have had either of those guys.

[bax]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

You have your opinion, I have mine. my opinion is Stone would have took the exact same contract in Calgary but Brad had his ridiculous Gio cap then.

Anyway, water under the bridge now, let's see who gets Eichel and what it costs. Eichel is a once in a GM's lifetime chance to get a potential generational superstar center.

Let's see how he handles it!

You’re off on this one. Pierre Lebrun even reported Stone was only willing to sign in Vegas. It’s also likely the reason why they didn’t get a first round pick

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I think where it can be relevant is if the player can turn the trade negotiations into an asset for him during the contract negotiation.

Vancouver will have just given up a 9th overall pick for him, that could give Reinhart a pretty good position in the trade negotiations.

I do feel like this happened a bit with Anderson and Montreal. Anderson saw how much Montreal coveted him in the trade, and was able to turn that into a contract that was really good for him.

I feel like any team making that trade will need to have an idea of the type of contract Reinhart is looking for and if he is interested in playing there. I don’t think Treliving makes his big RFA trades without knowing where he needed to be and that Hamilton, Lindholm, and Hanifin wanted/willing to sign here long term. I think that is a reason he wasn’t able to close the Anderson deal. Anderson said he was either going big money max term or 1 year walk to UFA deal. The Habs were willing to make the move.

[saillias]

If anyone listened to the Fan 960 discussions about Rittich this year and around the trade deadline. Or even his interviews after being traded. Basically he had aspirations to be a #1 here but once we signed Markstrom, he felt his time here was over . His direct quote was something like "I want to play for a team that believes in me"

[bax]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Without the depth the VGK establishing out of the draft they don't have the success to become a destination spot for these "star" players. I mean, you must be really dense to think that the on ice success of the GK wasn't the thing that drew the "stars" to Vegas, and the success was not a result of the depth the NHL expansion draft allowed the GKs to develop out of the gate. Without the player depth the VGK had right out of the gate, it would have been an expansion graveyard and no one in their right mind would have accepted a trade there, or signed there as a free agent. It was the organizational depth afforded out of the gate that made the VGK a success, nothing more. Without all those quality players and draft picks given to them by teams wanting to protect assets, that team would have been the Washington Capitals all over again. The $500M expansion fee made it possible for quality players to be available and the GKs a formidable squad right out of the gate.

I haven’t gone back at looked at prospecting reports from their first season, but I would have to assume Theodore, Fleury, Marchessault, and Karlsson all played at a start level that season.

I just don’t see your argument here. The key to build up a team is to get a bunch of great depth players so that stars will want to sign eventually?

Obviously you have to be a good team to draw talent. To use your terminology I just think it’s very dense to trade legitimate star players that we have for depth in the hope that the depth will draw in different star players

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by bax

I haven’t gone back at looked at prospecting reports from their first season, but I would have to assume Theodore, Fleury, Marchessault, and Karlsson all played at a start level that season.

I just don’t see your argument here. The key to build up a team is to get a bunch of great depth players so that stars will want to sign eventually?

Obviously you have to be a good team to draw talent. To use your terminology I just think it’s very dense to trade legitimate star players that we have for depth in the hope that the depth will draw in different star players

Any team could have had Fleury for the same deal Vegas got, for free along with a 2nd pick. Only Vegas took them up on that offer. Fleury wasn’t looking that good at that time.

Karlsson was a third liner who blossomed with increased ice time.

Marchessault was considered a pretty good player but due a big raise which Florida was reluctant to pay. Reilly Smith looked more like a cap dump to most. Theodore was a good prospect for sure.

These players were not universally though of star players. Vegas did a spectacular job of identifying players who they thought could be modded into a cohesive team and, if given the opportunity,could improve.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk