PerreaultForever

This makes no sense. He will still be a UFA after the year is over, even if he does agree to be moved to a contender for a cup run at deadline. I doubt he'd care about that though, he already has a bunch of rings. He's only going to do what is right for him and his family. The only scenario where we give up anything bigger is IF by some miracle we are in the playoff hunt at the deadline. Then maybe. and only maybe.

That definitely makes sense to me. regarding Kane. Forsberg might, but I will be curious to see if Fiala gets anywhere near what you are projecting. I don't think he will.

Yes but if Kane says I want to end my career in Buffalo and I will only go to Buffalo, and then KA says we want Kane but we are quite happy to wait until the season is over and sign him as a UFA but we will give you a 2nd and Bjork if you want to do it now what can Chicago do? Absolutely nothing. The question might rest on whether either team (Buffalo or Chicago) is a playoff contender at the time. That changes it.

Oh my Jackie boy is either going to become a whole new person or Vegas will have serious issues. To quote: "You’ve got a high-end offensive player that hasn’t won and now he’s got to put the crest first. And I’m not saying he didn’t do that in Buffalo because I don’t know what happened there, but at the end of the day that will be the conversation". –Cassidy on TSN 1200

I could be wrong, but I thought you could renegotiate the final year of a deal if you were signing them to an extension. Maybe you can't any more, I'm no CBA expert.

So should we pay Kane 9 million? I'd be reluctant to go that high but maybe if the term was no more than 3 years. So we can Taylor Hall them and give up a 2nd rounder and Bjork? I'd definitely do that.

That's a very good question. My answer would be not yet. Cautiously optimistic perhaps. Risto trade was good. Eichel trade looks good. Reinhart deal to be determined. Goaltender so far totally botched. FA signings pretty much non existent or irrelevant. A lot rides on what he does this year. The scouting definitely remains to be seen. Power was a no brainer. Have to see how the rest pan out. In 2-3 years you can judge them properly. I want the same things as you. Definitely want to raise the bar and be a contender. A real contender. Both those teams built through the draft first. Colorado moved out some big names to bring in multiple picks. If the Eichel trade works out as well for us as the Duchene trade worked for them we will fare well. Can't waste those Vegas picks though. We hit on them we will. Remember Tampa almost lost Stamkos to Toronto (or maybe Buffalo?) but it was great or lucky drafting that got them where they are. We need to land our own version of Pointe and so so forth. Dream of all teams I guess. But first, we need a goalie(s)!!!!!!!!

That's true if it's an extension. I was thinking more along the lines of a renegotiation/extension. There are a number of ways this could play out. With the cap floor and all that I could see them looking at a renegotiation IF they were ready to extend but idk, these things can get complicated.

Avs may have blown their chance. Going to be tough to win a game 6 in Tampa and then a game 7, my money would be on Vasilevsky in that.

This is definitely true. You'd want to be able to sign him long term for a reasonable number. The question would be what his number would be.

There's a price here for waiting in terms of salary cap but not really in the eyes of ownership. You're saving 5 million or something on next year's salary remember so if you have to pay him an extra million a year over 5 years you're kind of even. idk, they will decide, but I imagine ownership will not hand out big contracts easily or quickly at this point.

lol, ya it's pretty impossible to scoop him. Can't count how many times I've thought I had "breaking news" and came here to find it already posted. This site is actually a very informative one, and a lot of that has to do with him.

But you also don't want to walk to the same place you walked with Jeff Skinner. You can start talks mid season if he's doing it again, but he hasn't proven anything yet imo.

Well let's keep it to specifics though. He didn't get along with Tortorella. That's not necessarily on him as Torts has a history with certain players and personalities. The Jets? I will ask again, if you were a younger player going into free agency and played in Winnipeg wouldn't you test free agency? I agree there might be a question or two on him BUT I'm also looking at him showing up to play for Team Canada and playing well (like Cozens) and guys who show up for that always go way up in my book. I mean look at team USA in that thing. Eichel and Matthews both could have been there but weren't. PLD was there. Means a lot.

Rumour has Bergeron signing with the Bruins. https://www.telegram.com/story/sports/pro/2022/06/23/captain-patrice-bergeron-expected-re-sign-boston-bruins-1-year-deal/7719727001/

One year does not a career make.

Not sure this makes him a loser, would you want to play in Winnipeg for your career if you could be paid big to go south? I wouldn't. He's definitely a me first guy, but if he said he'd love to play in Buffalo I'd be all for it.

Pretty much agree with everything Brawndo wrote above, the only thing I'd add is maybe the only other trade for Kane now option would involve multiple players and multiple picks for Kane AND DeBrincat. Something I'd spend time on the phone looking in to if I was KA. If he can convince Chicago we will keep sucking for several years maybe he can entice them with picks from '24, '25, '26.... which I'd be okay with if our cupboard gets sufficiently loaded full with this year and next.

I'd really like to see them sign Copp as well but why can't they do both? Olofsson out Kane in why not? Maybe add a conditional pick and/or Johnson IF we sign Kane to an extension. Johnson I'm not overly concerned with, but I'd be reluctant to let Portillo go unless they have a sense he isn't interested in signing or if they could convince Levi to sign. I'd hate to run the risk of trading one and then having the other not sign. I'd rather we had both and then had 3 young goalies fighting for the starting role until we have to trade one. The bottom line on hockey trades is are you a better team after the deal, and if we added Kane we'd be a better team. He may not be who he was, but he's still got several decent years in him I think and more hometown hero will just help with the rebuild idea.

Cooper claiming it was too many men on the ice. Maybe there was some uncertainty there and refs wanted to check with each other idk. https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/lightnings-cooper-says-avalanches-ot-winner-shouldnt-have-counted/

So I'm guessing Toronto fans are really regretting the Kadri deal at this point.

To reiterate about the 4th liner thing. That's where he was slotted prior to this season (even if people wanted to argue that the Girgs/Okposo/Larsson line wasn't 4th, it was) and pretty much everyone in their line projections or roster predictions for opening day has him with Girgs on a 4th line. But no real point arguing that. I agree with you on the extension and then that's the situation I don't want (but may get). It'll have an interim or temporary feel to it and it'll likely mean we're not making any bold moves to become a contender any time soon. It'll be pin steps forward and playoffs won't be in our future for several years yet. That may very well be the plan, but I personally don't think it's necessary. I think we can start winning NOW with a few additions and so I want a long term captain in there now.

A lie? I really don't think so. Adams is also all about building for the future and Tuch is the local guy that Adams brought in. Everything I saw from Tuch also spoke leader, even being one of the guys bringing RJ onto the ice on appreciation night. Giving Tuch the C enhances that idea about "guys who want to be here". Not saying Kyle doesn't, just saying Kyle is not the future. As for the 4th line objection, I'd say look over just about everyone's projections for next year's line up. Pretty much everybody has Kyle and Girgs on the 4th line. Neither one is the future of this hockey team. As for re-signing, that's a question of how much you think he has left. I'd rather move on than watch the struggling fade out like a Nick Foligno. A 2 year deal in a diminished role sure, no problem. A longer deal at mid to higher level money no thank you, that'll end up going bad.

ikr. If it helps, Bruins were my first team when I was a kid. Bobby Orr and all that. Matter of fact first game I ever watched was the St.Louis cup game with the flying through the air goal. How can you not love that? But the Sabres won me over after that with the French Connection when I could get the games on local tv from Buffalo. So the Bruins took the back seat. Only been a few years where it was a tough to watch playoff. For the most part there's been no decision to make, but when we make the playoffs again (sooner than later hopefully) and if we ever play Boston, it'll be Sabres for me. But otherwise ya, I know. Seemingly incompatible.

I've told you before, Bruins are my B team that I follow when the Sabres suck (so a lot in the last decade). The Ullmark Swayman thing is well documented. I do know what has gone on with the Sabres, and I know what Kyle wrote and said, I know all of it. I'm thinking ahead though. Projecting the team forward. Long term stability and a captain who is here long term. What happens if you give Kyle an extension. You name him captain and his play drops way off as he's too old and too slow and wants to but just can't. He's knocked right out of the starting line up by Quinn and Peterka and whoever else. So your captain, for all his heart and desire, is sitting in the press box in 2 years and you what? strip him of the C? Brian Gionta all over again. Not a scenario I want to see. Give it to the homeboy. Give it to Tuch. Let the team evolve and grow around that stable locked in piece who has already shown his leadership.