2020 Trade Deadline Thread (aka Veleno vs Rasmussen vs Fabbri vs Zadina)

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

Yzerman, like Holland, is not a magician. He can't make trades appear out of nowhere. There has to be interest from other teams. 

And no, he shouldnt just trade players for whatever he can get. This isnt a "Going Out of Business" Sale. Assets have value, and if he isn't getting a decent return, he shouldn't just trade them just for the h*** of it.

Makes you wonder: after 2 different GM's aren't able to get decent returns for our scraps, that maybe , just maybe, LGW.com is being a little too demanding and need to lower their expectations.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

6 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

This is 3-5 years to make the playoffs, 6-8 years minimum to be a cup contender.  10+ years to win a cup.  Mark my words.

2015: "3-5 years of retooling and we'll be back"

*no meaningful improvement*

2016: "okay 3-5 years of tanking and we'll be in good shape"

*no meaningful improvement*

2017: "haha just 3-5 more years"

*no meaningful improvement*

2018: "Okay NOW it'll seriously be just 3-5 more years"

*no meaningful improvement*

2019: "Boy we finished that season off strong at the end there, this team is gonna be good in 3-5 years"

*complete fall off the deep end*

You: "3-5 seasons and we should be good"

[e_prime 1,936]

6 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Disagree.

Holland acquired Green for what is most likely going to be a 4th rounder. Green should have gotten an unconditional 2020 3rd round pick.

He also acquired AA without giving up a 1st, and unloaded Sam Gagner's contract in the process.

I think Holland did very well actually.

Green is a shell of his former self.  An unconditional 3rd round pick would have been a generous gift.

Sam Gagne's contract is expiring there was nothing to unload.  

 AA isn't going to be an easy re-signing.

[e_prime 1,936]

6 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Yzerman, like Holland, is not a magician. He can't make trades appear out of nowhere. There has to be interest from other teams. 

And no, he shouldnt just trade players for whatever he can get. This isnt a "Going Out of Business" Sale. Assets have value, and if he isn't getting a decent return, he shouldn't just trade them just for the h*** of it.

Makes you wonder: after 2 different GM's aren't able to get decent returns for our scraps, that maybe , just maybe, LGW.com is being a little too demanding and need to lower their expectations.

Right?  It's not as if saying their names over and over... Helm, Bernier, Glendennnning, etc. is going to make a trade appear.

 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

3 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Yzerman, like Holland, is not a magician. He can't make trades appear out of nowhere. There has to be interest from other teams. 

And no, he shouldnt just trade players for whatever he can get. This isnt a "Going Out of Business" Sale. Assets have value, and if he isn't getting a decent return, he shouldn't just trade them just for the h*** of it.

Makes you wonder: after 2 different GM's aren't able to get decent returns for our scraps, that maybe , just maybe, LGW.com is being a little too demanding and need to lower their expectations.

I don't think Yzerman is a magician, but I think some fans are placing that level of hope in him. A 2-3 season turnaround would certainly be magical. I don't see it happening though, and Yzerman has given no indicators that he's got a rabbit in his hat where that could happen. In fact he's spent most of his face to face time with the media so far pumping the brakes and trying to squash any hype. He spent most of the season just throwing doo doo at the walls in trades, hoping some minor transaction might pay off.

There is no miracle coming. There is no grand yzer-plan. He's gonna slow roll this team and slog through drafts for the next decade.

 

[AtlantaHotWings 983]

NHL tonight talking about AA paraphrasing 

      He's a straight line burner but his defense is non-existent. He won't go chase the puck down. He might do better with a change of scenery. 

Did I expect better YES!!

Do I realize we are effectively trying to decide between selling our stuff at a garage sale . Or giving away to Goodwill either way it's still garbage.

If people won't buy your stuff what do you do?

[LeftWinger 4,951]

On 2/24/2020 at 5:03 PM, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Disagree.

Holland acquired Green for what is most likely going to be a 4th rounder. Green should have gotten an unconditional 2020 3rd round pick.

He also acquired AA without giving up a 1st, and unloaded Sam Gagner's contract in the process.

I think Holland did very well actually.

Their 2020 3rd round pick disappears when/if James Neal comes back and scores only 2 more goals. The pick was already a conditional pick in the Lucic deal.

 

Edited January 7, 2021 by LeftWinger

[_SP_ 129]

Sorry, but older UFAs are virtually worthless and therefore not considered "assets" to a rebuilding team. I don't care if it was for a 2024 conditional 7th round pick, Daley and Biega should have been moved if there was even the slightest bit of interest. Especially since Lindstrom was sent down; there aren't any young defensemen around for them to be role models for and they're off the team in two months!

Disappointed those guys didn't get moved. Why expiring contracts are still on the team is mindboggling.

[greenrebellion 415]

54 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Sure, at this rate. But if so, then why not trade Mantha and Bert for 1st round picks?  Since neither of them work with that timeline?  or Larkin for that matter?

Because this is a business too, you want to become competitive as soon as possible to maintain the fan base.  You also don't want to build a culture of losing.  I mean really, did people want us to ship off Bert/Larkin/Mantha this deadline?  And finish last in the standings for the next 5 seasons.  NO

53 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

You can trade high-value players and get high-value picks in return. Yzerman didn't do this.
You can weaponize your cap and collect overpaid contracts in exchange for picks. Yzerman didn't do this.

What did Yzerman do? He sold low on an RFA and got a middling return for a washed up old Dman.

It's not exactly impressive.

If this is the way we will be rebuilding, we will be at this for quite a while.

Can't do your first point, see comment above.  Just because we have cap space, doesn't mean other teams want to trade picks or prospects to alleviate themselves of bad contracts.  Do you realize that A LOT of teams have cap space at the deadline and there weren't any straight 1st round picks or valuable prospects traded to dump contracts.  Teams would rather buyout a player or just eat his contract unless it becomes absolutely necessary to make a dramatic move...but these types of moves are RARE.  It takes two to tango.

50 minutes ago, nyqvististhefuture said:

Definetly pissed we havent been taking bad contracts to get extra assets

 

 

 

Helm,filppula,glendening,nemeth,bernier ... our trade bait next deadline when we’ll inevitably be near the bottom again .... meanwhile rangers,sens popping off 1sts ... we’re gonna suck for a long time unless guys like soderblom explode and pan out

Again, I am so sick and tired of this "why didn't we take bad contracts" line.  These types of moves are not made because teams only move picks or high value prospects in extremely desperate situations.  These are rare trades.  I'm certain that if a GM showed interest in giving Yzerman a first if he takes a bad contract, he would have done it in a second.  But so would a lot of other teams.

[AtlantaHotWings 983]

1 hour ago, nyqvististhefuture said:

Thats just nonsense talk , hes fired at the end of the season and replaced with gallant

Watching the presser now and at 20:17 ...."as of right now I dont plan to make a change read into that what you want"

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Gotta believe a change behind the bench will have a distinct affect 

 

[_SP_ 129]

30 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

 

Again, I am so sick and tired of this "why didn't we take bad contracts" line.  These types of moves are not made because teams only move picks or high value prospects in extremely desperate situations.  These are rare trades.  I'm certain that if a GM showed interest in giving Yzerman a first if he takes a bad contract, he would have done it in a second.  But so would a lot of other teams.

Then take a second! Or a third! The contract is a pittance compared to value. You are talking about buying a draft pick. It is the single most efficient use of resources. 

Edited February 24, 2020 by _SP_

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

28 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

Because this is a business too, you want to become competitive as soon as possible to maintain the fan base.  You also don't want to build a culture of losing.  I mean really, did people want us to ship off Bert/Larkin/Mantha this deadline?  And finish last in the standings for the next 5 seasons.  NO

>implying we don't already have a culture of losing

29 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

Can't do your first point, see comment above.  Just because we have cap space, doesn't mean other teams want to trade picks or prospects to alleviate themselves of bad contracts.  Do you realize that A LOT of teams have cap space at the deadline and there weren't any straight 1st round picks or valuable prospects traded to dump contracts.  Teams would rather buyout a player or just eat his contract unless it becomes absolutely necessary to make a dramatic move...but these types of moves are RARE.  It takes two to tango.

Again, I am so sick and tired of this "why didn't we take bad contracts" line.  These types of moves are not made because teams only move picks or high value prospects in extremely desperate situations.  These are rare trades.  I'm certain that if a GM showed interest in giving Yzerman a first if he takes a bad contract, he would have done it in a second.  But so would a lot of other teams.

You absolutely can do the first point. Yzerman just didn't. Personally, if the right deal pops up I'd be absolutely okay with trading ANY of our so-called core players. Not one of them is talented to the point of being untouchable. And I would like to acquire untouchable level players.

Cap dumps for picks literally happen multiple times every year. I don't know what you're talking about. It literally just happened with the Backes contract.

 

[greenrebellion 415]

2 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

>implying we don't already have a culture of losing

You absolutely can do the first point. Yzerman just didn't. Personally, if the right deal pops up I'd be absolutely okay with trading ANY of our so-called core players. Not one of them is talented to the point of being untouchable. And I would like to acquire untouchable level players.

Cap dumps for picks literally happen multiple times every year. I don't know what you're talking about. It literally just happened with the Backes contract.

 

The trade was for Kase, they didn't give up a first round pick to get rid of Backes.

13 minutes ago, _SP_ said:

Then take a second! Or a third! The contract is a pittance compared to value. You are talking about buying a draft pick. It is the single most efficient use of resources. 

This is a business folks, there is a price to taking on millions of dollars and it sure as heck isn't a third round pick.

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

44 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

Because this is a business too, you want to become competitive as soon as possible to maintain the fan base.  You also don't want to build a culture of losing.  I mean really, did people want us to ship off Bert/Larkin/Mantha this deadline?  And finish last in the standings for the next 5 seasons.  NO

Can't do your first point, see comment above.  Just because we have cap space, doesn't mean other teams want to trade picks or prospects to alleviate themselves of bad contracts.  Do you realize that A LOT of teams have cap space at the deadline and there weren't any straight 1st round picks or valuable prospects traded to dump contracts.  Teams would rather buyout a player or just eat his contract unless it becomes absolutely necessary to make a dramatic move...but these types of moves are RARE.  It takes two to tango.

Again, I am so sick and tired of this "why didn't we take bad contracts" line.  These types of moves are not made because teams only move picks or high value prospects in extremely desperate situations.  These are rare trades.  I'm certain that if a GM showed interest in giving Yzerman a first if he takes a bad contract, he would have done it in a second.  But so would a lot of other teams.

Dude I dont know whats going on but dubas got a 5th for taking lehner eating salary and easing a salary ... yzerman never gets in on any of these deals, for all we know with attendance  down mahbe chris illitch doesnt want us to waste more $ , we have cap space but we dont use it to get assets , makes no sense 

8 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

>implying we don't already have a culture of losing

You absolutely can do the first point. Yzerman just didn't. Personally, if the right deal pops up I'd be absolutely okay with trading ANY of our so-called core players. Not one of them is talented to the point of being untouchable. And I would like to acquire untouchable level players.

Cap dumps for picks literally happen multiple times every year. I don't know what you're talking about. It literally just happened with the Backes contract.

 

Leafs just got a 5th for lehner in the vegas deal for doing f*** all ,we had  cap space and havent taken advantage of it

[kipwinger 8,521]

44 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

Because this is a business too, you want to become competitive as soon as possible to maintain the fan base.  You also don't want to build a culture of losing.  I mean really, did people want us to ship off Bert/Larkin/Mantha this deadline?  And finish last in the standings for the next 5 seasons.  NO

Can't do your first point, see comment above.  Just because we have cap space, doesn't mean other teams want to trade picks or prospects to alleviate themselves of bad contracts.  Do you realize that A LOT of teams have cap space at the deadline and there weren't any straight 1st round picks or valuable prospects traded to dump contracts.  Teams would rather buyout a player or just eat his contract unless it becomes absolutely necessary to make a dramatic move...but these types of moves are RARE.  It takes two to tango.

Again, I am so sick and tired of this "why didn't we take bad contracts" line.  These types of moves are not made because teams only move picks or high value prospects in extremely desperate situations.  These are rare trades.  I'm certain that if a GM showed interest in giving Yzerman a first if he takes a bad contract, he would have done it in a second.  But so would a lot of other teams.

How does hanging on to our most valuable trade chips help us become competitive as soon as possible? Especially when those guys have shown that collectively they can't win?  You suggested earlier that WITH those guys we're looking at 3-5 years before we're competitive anyway. 

You have to try and find ways to accelerate your rebuild IF you're going to hang on to those guys.  Conversely, if you're ok with the rebuild taking 10 more years to pay off then you might as well trade them now and get a jump start. 

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

6 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

The trade was for Kase, they didn't give up a first round pick to get rid of Backes.

You think theyd have done the deal if backes wasnt included? Wasnt just kase for backes ... f***en bruins even threw in a 2nd rd prospect . Deal was done to get rid of cap space

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, greenrebellion said:

The trade was for Kase, they didn't give up a first round pick to get rid of Backes.

Correct. The trade was for Kase... and also for the contract of David Backes, whom Boston needed to Dump. Not a pure cap-dump for picks okay, but a contract dump of an overpaid player all the same.

Before Backes it was Callahan and Marleau less than a year ago. There will probably be more when the cap crunch comes in July. These trades happen every year, usually multiple of them. So I still don't know what you're on about.

[greenrebellion 415]

We didn't have a Kase to move, my point is that Yzerman would have done the deal if the opportunity presented itself.  Bruins didn't come to us with the Backes move because they were looking for a winger and dealt with both Backes and acquiring the winger in the same move.

Could Boston have broken it up and shipped Backes to Yzerman and separately acquired Kase to the Ducks?  Maybe, its more of a transaction of convenience, it is very rare that teams are just running around looking to dump a contract in a pure prospect/pick for bloated contract trade.  Sure it happens, but it happens rarely and there are 30 other teams in the league.  Yzerman isn't going to get all of them, heck...even if he "performs average" the average probably would be him getting in on one once every 10 years.

[kipwinger 8,521]

35 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

We didn't have a Kase to move, my point is that Yzerman would have done the deal if the opportunity presented itself.  Bruins didn't come to us with the Backes move because they were looking for a winger and dealt with both Backes and acquiring the winger in the same move.

Could Boston have broken it up and shipped Backes to Yzerman and separately acquired Kase to the Ducks?  Maybe, its more of a transaction of convenience, it is very rare that teams are just running around looking to dump a contract in a pure prospect/pick for bloated contract trade.  Sure it happens, but it happens rarely and there are 30 other teams in the league.  Yzerman isn't going to get all of them, heck...even if he "performs average" the average probably would be him getting in on one once every 10 years.

I hear this every year, and I don't agree.  Every GM has tolerances.  More or less risk that they're willing to assume. A conservative GM makes fewer moves with the same roster as a risk taker, in theory.  Some GMs would never, ever, ever, trade a 70 point player (Holland).  Some would trade them for Tyler Seguin (Nill).  Some would trade them for Adam Larsson (Chiarelli).  Seems like Yzerman, so far, has very low risk tolerances. He even said today in his presser that every player has some kind of value at the deadline, and yet he only made two deals.

The fact that he didn't trade a Glendening, Helm, Bernier, or Fabbri DOES NOT mean that there was no market for them. It could mean a few other things too. Maybe the market was weak and they have more value to your team. Maybe you're scared to trade a better than average player. Maybe you weren't willing to pair them with a prospect or pick to get a more valuable asset.  I don't know the story with Yzerman, but I do know that pairing Barclay Goodrow with a 3rd round pick was worth a 1st rounder today. What's Fabbri and a 2nd get you? Glendening and a decent prospect? 

Edited February 25, 2020 by kipwinger

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

26 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

We didn't have a Kase to move, my point is that Yzerman would have done the deal if the opportunity presented itself.  Bruins didn't come to us with the Backes move because they were looking for a winger and dealt with both Backes and acquiring the winger in the same move.

Could Boston have broken it up and shipped Backes to Yzerman and separately acquired Kase to the Ducks?  Maybe, its more of a transaction of convenience, it is very rare that teams are just running around looking to dump a contract in a pure prospect/pick for bloated contract trade.  Sure it happens, but it happens rarely and there are 30 other teams in the league.  Yzerman isn't going to get all of them, heck...even if he "performs average" the average probably would be him getting in on one once every 10 years.

That's quite a few presumptions

29 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

We didn't have a Kase to move

Incorrect. We did have a young winger to move: Athanasiou. We also had Fabbri, Mantha, Bertuzzi who are all on expiring contracts and could be moved.

30 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

my point is that Yzerman would have done the deal if the opportunity presented itself.

You don't know that in the slightest

31 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

Bruins didn't come to us with the Backes move

You also don't know that

32 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

because they were looking for a winger and dealt with both Backes and acquiring the winger in the same move.

Why would they limit themselves to one move? And if they did, how does that benefit them at all?

33 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

 it is very rare that teams are just running around looking to dump a contract in a pure prospect/pick for bloated contract trade.  Sure it happens, but it happens rarely and there are 30 other teams in the league.  Yzerman isn't going to get all of them, heck...even if he "performs average" the average probably would be him getting in on one once every 10 years.

Keep beating this drum, but again, no, they are not "very rare". They happen multiple times a season every season.

[greenrebellion 415]

There are not multiple pure roster dumps for picks/prospects per year.  They hardly ever happen.  You've cited zero examples that weren't part of a larger deal.

If Boston was interested in AA, they would have traded for AA.  They wanted Kase.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

2 hours ago, e_prime said:

Green is a shell of his former self.  An unconditional 3rd round pick would have been a generous gift.

Sam Gagne's contract is expiring there was nothing to unload.  

 AA isn't going to be an easy re-signing.

Green is still a 3rd pair offensive RHD on a good team. He had already regressed last season and was still worth a 1st rounder. I don't think that he became that much worse this season that he was now only worth a 4th. A guy like Green on the left point on the PP or on offensive zone faceoffs, and playing regularly as a 5th Dman would certainly be an asset, and worth more than a 4th IMO.

AA is going to the best possible scenario for him and he knows it. He won't be as hard of a sign as people think. Plus, he's an RFA with little leverage and Holland has signed him before. I don't see that as an issue.

[_SP_ 129]

1 hour ago, greenrebellion said:

The trade was for Kase, they didn't give up a first round pick to get rid of Backes.

This is a business folks, there is a price to taking on millions of dollars and it sure as heck isn't a third round pick.

Point being, the deals were beatable.

And if the cost of an asset was a player, pick, money, or combination, I would think money alone would be the best. Because, guess what? The player costs money either way. The floor and ceiling are not far apart. Especially when the ROI could be ticket prices, merchandise, advertising, etc. Which comes from the PLAYER.

[freshy 181]

Stevie did what he could with what he has to work with, which is bottom of the league garbage. AA was never going to factor into our long term plans. It's a shame, because he does have that offensive flair. He doesn't have the attitude that is needed though. That is the thing I trust most about the Captain. He is a winner, and he knows what it takes to win. He is getting a feel for the players and their attitudes like he mentioned in his presser. AA may go to Edmonton & light it up next to McDavid. So what? By all accounts his attitude is s*** and putting up offensive numbers will only take you so far. Just look at Taylor Hall or  look at when Stevie himself was putting up big numbers. We couldn't win s*** back then. 

Trust in his plan. The guy has only been on the job for 10 months for chrisake. He was a major reason for the turn around of this franchise back in the 80's and he will get us back to where we need to be. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

36 minutes ago, greenrebellion said:

There are not multiple pure roster dumps for picks/prospects per year.  They hardly ever happen.

2020:

• Brodziak + pick (EDM) for Green (DET)
• Backes + prospect + pick (BOS) for Kase (ANA)

2019:

• Callahan + pick (TBL) for Condon + pick (OTT)
• Clarkson + pick (VGK) for Sparks (TOR)
• Marleau + pick + pick (TOR) for pick (CAR)

2018:

• Hossa + Oesterle + Vinastroza + pick (CHI) for Kruger + Entwhisle + Maletta + Campbell + pick (ARI)
• Gaborik + Shore (LA) for Phaneuf + Thompson (OTT)

2017:

• Clarkson + pick + pick (TOR) for considerations (VGK)

2016:

• Bolland + Crouse (FLA) for pick + pick (ARI)
• Datsyuk + pick (DET) for Vitale + pick +pick (ARI)
• Bickell + Tervainen (CAR) for pick + pick (CHI)
• Savard + pick (FLA) for Black + Thompson (NJD)
• Phaneuf + Frattin + Rupert + Donaghey + Bailey (TOR) for Cowen + Michalek + Lindberg + Greening + pick (OTT)

1 hour ago, greenrebellion said:

You've cited zero examples that weren't part of a larger deal.

? I don't care at all if the deal is large and complicated or small and simple.

1 hour ago, greenrebellion said:

If Boston was interested in AA, they would have traded for AA.  They wanted Kase.

You don't know that Kase was their first choice at all fella