2018 Off-Season Trades / Signings / News

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

Will this gesture be enough to convince John to stay? 

IDK, but won't it be hilarious and so Islander-like if John decides to jet anyway after all these changes?

[amato 3,210]

9 minutes ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

Will this gesture be enough to convince John to stay? 

It definitely won’t hurt.. I do wonder what the hold up is. Maybe he just wants to talk to other teams then circle back like Stamkos did?

7 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

IDK, but won't it be hilarious and so Islander-like if John decides to jet anyway after all these changes?

Please this. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

Just now, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I believe you can speak with the player when the team grants permission. The conversation could be as simple as: "Erik we want you to re-up long-term around the ballpark of 9 million AAV, are we a team you'd be willing to commit to?" If there's any hesitation you don't do the deal.

I've heard of teams granting permission to speak with management / coaches while under contract, but never players. If a team wants negotiating rights with a player, their rights are usual traded in the offseason. But again, that doesn't guarantee both sides will strike a deal. The player can still opt to hit free agency. I could be wrong, but that's my understanding... Otherwise, wouldn't every team interested in Karlsson be trying to work out a handshake deal before any potential trade?

I also believe it will take more than $9M to lock Karlsson up long term. Unless he's going to a team that has a legit shot to win. I don't think we can provide that. At least not in the near future...

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

11 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I've heard of teams granting permission to speak with management / coaches while under contract, but never players. If a team wants negotiating rights with a player, their rights are usual traded in the offseason. But again, that doesn't guarantee both sides will strike a deal. The player can still opt to hit free agency. I could be wrong, but that's my understanding... Otherwise, wouldn't every team interested in Karlsson be trying to work out a handshake deal before any potential trade?

I also believe it will take more than $9M to lock Karlsson up long term. Unless he's going to a team that has a legit shot to win. I don't think we can provide that. At least not in the near future...

Unfortunately, I don't have the patience to dig through the CBA at the moment.

Yeah I think any team would and should want to speak with Karlsson before finalizing the trade. It is risky to a complete a trade of this size with a UFA period right around the corner. And if Ottawa wants the deal done, I'd think they'd allow it.

I don't remember a single player whose had their rights traded being anywhere near Karlsson level. Usually they're traded for a low level pick and the risk is fairly low. Which is probably why conversations never took place, like in the instance of Vanek and Wisniewski's rights being traded to the Isles, only to be shipped out again.

Karlsson is not UFA yet though, he can always be traded again, if necessary, if he refuses to re-up with the Wings.

Edited June 21, 2018 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[Buppy 1,720]

10 hours ago, SwedeLundin77 said:

So Ras deserves 1st kind minutes right out the gate? Funny how you s*** on one guy who had a solid first pro season but hurl a true rookie into 1st lime minutes. Not to mention tossing Bert on the 4th line after playing great hockey on the 1st this past season. Abby on the 2nd line? Hahaha, we don’t have Datsyuk for him to lean on anymore. At least I attempted to balance the lines somewhat. It’s garbage to work with in the first place, but yeesh. Yep, sooo pessimistic... that is usually your m.o.

10 hours ago, SwedeLundin77 said:

 Not afraid he can’t, never said I thought so. I just don’t prescribe to Blashill’s silly line juggling and crapping all over young guys while letting vets get away with everything. The reality is that Blash won’t roll four lines like that. In your scenario, AA, Svech, and Bert would get 8-10 minutes a night and that’s a joke for three offensively gifted youngster with lots of energy. Abdelkader should never see top 6 time. He’s a bottom 6 forward. I’d rather Svech learn while playing alongside Zetterberg than alongside AA who has proven that his work ethic is questionable at times. I get what you’re saying about Svech staying in the AHL another season, but find it funny you followed that up with having him in the lineup anyway.

You misunderstand. I'm not arguing that that is what should happen. I'm saying that's the kind of thing we should hope for out of the kids. We shouldn't be deliberately making the team worse just to give them an easy road. You say the roster is garbage, but you still traded away one of our best forwards and don't want to sign a 50p player just to shoehorn in a couple of rookies. If you think Svech is so good, why do you have to remove all his competition?

I don't think the lines would be given equal time, though if we had a good 4th line it would probably be more like 10-12 ES minutes. I would also see the lines as more fluid. I get it if you'd rather the lines just be set in stone, and if I were to go for that I'd probably change them a bit. Point is, I'm trying to fill the lineup with better players. If that includes the kids, great. But if they aren't better, they shouldn't be there. 

 

[krsmith17 7,191]

9 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Unfortunately, I don't have the patience to dig through the CBA at the moment.

Yeah I think any team would and should want to speak with Karlsson before finalizing the trade. It is risky to a complete a trade of this size with a UFA period right around the corner. And if Ottawa wants the deal done, I'd think they'd allow it.

I don't remember a single player whose had their rights traded being anywhere near Karlsson level. Usually they're traded for a low level pick and the risk is fairly low. Which is probably why conversations never took place, like in the instance of Vanek and Wisniewski's rights being traded to the Isles, only to be shipped out again.

Karlsson is not UFA yet though, he can always be traded again, if necessary, if he refuses to re-up with the Wings.

This is why I believe it will only be the teams that believe they're legit contenders that will be in on the Karlsson sweepstakes. I don't think it's just a matter of Ottawa allowing it though. I think it's against the CBA, and I'm too lazy to read through to figure it out too. Anyone with a better understanding on this want to chime in?

Those players' rights were traded in the summer they were a UFA though. I'm sure Dorion would accept a late round pick in return for Karlsson's negotiating rights if he were a UFA now, and knew he couldn't get a deal done. That's why he's trying to make a trade now. He knows next summer will be no different, and Karlsson won't re-sign in Ottawa.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

49 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

This is why I believe it will only be the teams that believe they're legit contenders that will be in on the Karlsson sweepstakes. I don't think it's just a matter of Ottawa allowing it though. I think it's against the CBA, and I'm too lazy to read through to figure it out too. Anyone with a better understanding on this want to chime in?

Those players' rights were traded in the summer they were a UFA though. I'm sure Dorion would accept a late round pick in return for Karlsson's negotiating rights if he were a UFA now, and knew he couldn't get a deal done. That's why he's trying to make a trade now. He knows next summer will be no different, and Karlsson won't re-sign in Ottawa.

And I agree, we are an outside option. But I will still hit my pipe and pray... Karlsson's become available very rarely

Oh I think if Karlsson was a pending UFA his rights could go for a 1st rounder... I have no evidence to support that notion though

[NerveDamage 4,176]

1 hour ago, amato said:

 

confirmed

 

and this is the Isles new logo

[NerveDamage 4,176]

4 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

 

Gotta photoshop Trotz' mug on the fisherman.

lol, that'll make him a gaye fish

 

Edited June 21, 2018 by NerveDamage

[Wheelchairsuperhero 1,453]

1 hour ago, F.Michael said:

With Trotz now apparently to be the NYI head coach - does this change anything with Tavares?

He seems like the kind of player who'd like to leave a lasting legacy with one team, and some good changes have been made. But who knows? It's the Isles after all.

[krsmith17 7,191]

Tavares will re-sign with the Islanders.

[Buppy 1,720]

8 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

What are you talking about? Did you even read what I said? I was basically agreeing with you, minus the part about Glendening being scratched... You actually think there's a remote possibility Blashill will healthy scratch Glendening? Not a chance.

Where did I say that any kid was better than Helm and Abdelkader, let alone "every kid in the system"?... I simply think Helm and Abdelkader, along with Glendening would be a great "shutdown line". That's why I suggested forming that 4th line, bot because I think Athanasiou, Bertuzzi, Svechnikov, Rasmussen, or whoever else are necessarily better than them. You don't think we have 12 better forwards than Glendening but yet you're suggesting we should scratch him? Okay...

Where did I say that Svechnikov couldn't jump ahead of Glendening? You're not making any sense...

I'm asking why you think there's no chance Glendening could be scratched. What is the logic behind that? Is it that he hasn't already been scratched? Glen is currently the 10th forward. If you think Svech is capable of jumping him, and presumably Ras could too, and we sign Vanek who was already above him last time...wouldn't that make him 13th, and thus a healthy scratch?

You over-value our prospects, and as a result you've developed this belief that they're being treated unfairly. They aren't. 

And to be clear, I said we haven't had 12 better forwards since he's been here. But maybe we could next year, so long as we're not afraid of some competition. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, F.Michael said:

With Trotz now apparently to be the NYI head coach - does this change anything with Tavares?

 

8 minutes ago, Wheelchairsuperhero said:

He seems like the kind of player who'd like to leave a lasting legacy with one team, and some good changes have been made. But who knows? It's the Isles after all.

 

4 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Tavares will re-sign with the Islanders.

 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

7 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

You figure he's gone this long - why not wait 'till the 1st of July to see what offers are on the table?

But I have to admit - these past 30 days - the NYI went from buffoonery to what appears to be a competent group that has every intention of making the playoffs.

Tavares has some serious decisions to make.

They're definitely making it hard for him.

I think he will probably Stamkos the league and re-sign last second.

[krsmith17 7,191]

39 minutes ago, Buppy said:

I'm asking why you think there's no chance Glendening could be scratched. What is the logic behind that? Is it that he hasn't already been scratched? Glen is currently the 10th forward. If you think Svech is capable of jumping him, and presumably Ras could too, and we sign Vanek who was already above him last time...wouldn't that make him 13th, and thus a healthy scratch?

You over-value our prospects, and as a result you've developed this belief that they're being treated unfairly. They aren't. 

And to be clear, I said we haven't had 12 better forwards since he's been here. But maybe we could next year, so long as we're not afraid of some competition. 

Glendening will not be healthy scratched. What makes you believe there's a chance that he would be? Glendening may be the 13th or even 14th best forward on the roster. He still wouldn't be healthy scratched.

I don't really believe I over-value our prospects. Sure, I may have over-valued some in the past, but for the most part, we get into these ridiculous debates because I think young players should be given a little more of an opportunity (longer leash), not because I think they're better than they are, but because we should be taking advantage of young, skilled players on ELC's. You disagree with that, and that's fine.

Which prospects have I recently "over-valued"? Svechnikov, the middle six winger? Turgeon, the 4th line center? Hicketts, the bottom pairing defenseman? If you're referring to Jurco. I still say he could have been a middle six winger, under the right circumstances. Unfortunately, he couldn't put it all together.

I don't think we live in a world where Glendening will be healthy scratched by Blashill or the Red Wings. You do, and that's fine. I like your proposed lines, and wish they could become a reality.

 

Edited June 21, 2018 by krsmith17

[kipwinger 8,496]

I like this:

Mantha-Z-Abby
Bert-Larkin-Svech
Frk-Neilsen-Vanek
Helm-AA-Ras

Glendening

 

Also, I traded Nyq+30th overall+2019 3rd for Edm's 2018 1st.  With that I take Wahlstrom at 6 and whatever top end defenseman is left at 10. Probably Dobson. 

Edited June 21, 2018 by kipwinger

[krsmith17 7,191]

46 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I like this:

Mantha-Z-Abby
Bert-Larkin-Svech
Frk-Neilsen-Vanek
Helm-AA-Ras

Glendening

Also, I traded Nyq+30th overall+2019 3rd for Edm's 2018 1st.  With that I take Wahlstrom at 6 and whatever top end defenseman is left at 10. Probably Dobson. 

I like the lines, but I don't think that would be close to enough for the 10th overall pick (even as dumb as Chiarelli is)...

I think at minimum we'd have to offer Athanasiou, 2018 1st round pick (VGK), 2019 2nd round pick (NYI), and even that would probably get turned down.

[amato 3,210]

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Tavares will re-sign with the Islanders.

sOuRsE?!?! 

 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

I am pretty sure that a team cannot contact a player who is under contract with another team. If they could, there would be no reason for a team to trade for the rights to a player. We have seen teams give up picks to acquire the rights to a player only to lose them in free agency anyway. That wouldn't happen if they could negotiate a deal ahead of time. Also, why would a team give permission for another team to speak with a player? I would rather make the interested team give me something to acquire the rights to a player that I knew was testing free agency anyway. Why let the interested team talk to the player ahead of time only to find out they can't extend him and give up nothing in return?

 

 

Edited June 22, 2018 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

I like this:

Mantha-Z-Abby
Bert-Larkin-Svech
Frk-Neilsen-Vanek
Helm-AA-Ras

Glendening

 

Also, I traded Nyq+30th overall+2019 3rd for Edm's 2018 1st.  With that I take Wahlstrom at 6 and whatever top end defenseman is left at 10. Probably Dobson. 

Some people will see these lines and hate them because Abby is on the top line and AA and Ras are on the 4th. Although I don't agree with your combos necessarily, I do agree with the idea of balancing out your lines. In order to do that you have to move scorers down the lineup and checking/defensive guys up it. I like having a balance of young and old players as well. I would do:

Bert-Larkin-Nyquist

Abby-Z-Mantha

Ras-Nielsen-Vanek

AA-Helm-Svech

[Dabura 12,206]

10 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I like the lines, but I don't think that would be close to enough for the 10th overall pick (even as dumb as Chiarelli is)...

I think at minimum we'd have to offer Athanasiou, 2018 1st round pick (VGK), 2019 2nd round pick (NYI), and even that would probably get turned down.

I'm guessing Chiarelli, pathologically self-sabotaging though he may be, is doing the logical thing here and fishing for a sexy impact player who can immediately and significantly improve their top-six forward group or their top-three/four defense group. I doubt Nyquist (on an expiring contract) or AA would quite fit that profile in the eyes of the Oilers Brass. We're probably talking about, like, Jeff Skinner or Justin Faulk.

We could throw picks at them, but anything outside of the top ten probably isn't going to interest them. Again, I've gotta think Chiarelli is hoping to engineer a dramatic turnaround that sees the Oilers looking like a contender straight out of the gate next season. The good people of Oilers Land have approximately zero appetite for anything resembling a(nother) rebuild. And Taylor Hall winning the Hart has them all staring daggers at the GM.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I disagree actually. I don't think Karlsson needs another phenomenal partner to be paired with him, he just needs a partner that compliments him. I firmly believe that player is Ericsson. Remember Karlsson/Methot... Methot was nothing to write home about alone, but together they were a fantastic pairing. Methot did the boring stay at home stuff that freed up Karlsson to wheel and deal. I very much think we can recreate that with Karlsson/Ericsson.

Ericsson - Karlssson -------- I think that's a legit first pairing in this league
Dekesyer - Daley ------------ Not a phenomenal 2nd pairing, but definitely not bad either.
Kronwall - Jensen ------------ Jensen's mobility paired with Kronwall's skills and immobility could be an underrated 3rd pair
Hicketts

A player like Karlsson would simply change the entire face of our defense.

I agree with this. Much like Lidstrom, his D partner needs 2 things: a stick and a pulse.

I just don't see any scenario that doesn't involve giving up #6 AND Larkin tho. Not worth it for a 27? year old IMO. Even one as elite as EK.

Edited June 22, 2018 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

30 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

I am pretty sure that a team cannot contact a player who is under contract with another team. If they could, there would be no reason for a team to trade for the rights to a player. We have seen teams give up picks to acquire the rights to a player only to lose them in free agency anyway. That wouldn't happen if they could negotiate a deal ahead of time. Also, why would a team give permission to speak for another team to speak with a player. I would rather make the interested team give me something to acquire the rights to a player that I knew was testing free agency anyway. Why let the interested team talk to the player ahead of time only to find out they can't extend him and give up nothing in return?

 

 

I didnt say teams could talk to any player under rival contract. I said I believe teams can talk to a player under rival contract with that rival teams permission. Why would a team allow such a thing? To offload said player and complete a deal. Why wouldnt't a team offer permission? Just like you said, in order to get something for a player that may be going UFA anyway.

If you want to dig through the CBA go for it, im not positive im correct. But right now youre misconstrewing my assertion.

[NerveDamage 4,176]

1 hour ago, amato said:

sOuRsE?!?! 

 

Lou's having a conference call with Trotz and Tavares

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

2 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I didnt say teams could talk to any player under rival contract. I said I believe teams can talk to a player under rival contract with that rival teams permission. Why would a team allow such a thing? To offload said player and complete a deal. Why wouldnt't a team offer permission? Just like you said, in order to get something for a player that may be going UFA anyway.

If you want to dig through the CBA go for it, im not positive im correct. But right now youre misconstrewing my assertion.

I don't know that I am right either. I wasn't trying to misconstrew you or anyone else. You and KRS were both discussing it. I wasn't trying to respond to anyone's post specifically or i would have quoted it. Just saying that If I was a Gm, I wouldn't let another team talk to one of my players, and why. Just my opinion. I certainly wouldn't do it if I was trying to re-sign the player. And even if I wasn't trying to re-sign them, I still wouldn't, especially if I thought they were wanting to test free agency. I certainly wouldn't mind unloading that contract to a team that doesn't know that tho. Which s why I would make them pay up first. I personally just can't see any scenario where it would benefit me to let another team talk to a player without getting something out of it.

Hope this helps:

https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/nhl-clarifies-rules-for-free-agent-interviews-contract-parameters-ok/