Post your defenceman trade proposals here

[GASabresIUFAN]

Falk and 3rd to Pitt for Dumoulin.

[Two or less]

If i'm Botterill, i try to work out a deal with his good friend Fletcher in Minnesota for Jonas Brodin. Not sure what it'd cost but if we get in a serious bidding war, i don't think anyone could match our offer of the 8th overall pick (assuming they are protecting Spurgeon and Dumba).

 

Someone also mentioned trying to trade for Josh Manson, which i love the idea as well. Big and heavy d-men with a playoff run on his resume and a former captain on multiple teams. Not sure what it'd cost to get him out of the Ducks but like someone said something has got to give there.

 

Lastly, i call Pittsburgh and ask them for "bust" Derrick Pouliot. Former top-10 draft pick just needs a change of cities maybe? Is still young but it doesn't seem like Pittsburgh has much of a future for him. Assuming the cost to trade for him isn't too much, i get him for Rochester and start developing him along with Guhle and Nelson as my "next up" d-men group.

 

McCabe - Risto

Brodin - Manson

Antipin - Bogosian

 

 

In AHL...

Guhle - Nelson

Austin - Pouliot

Stephens - xx

Edited May 12, 2017 by Briere48

[GASabresIUFAN]

Isn't JBot likely one of the guys that thinks Pouliot is a bust?

[LGR4GM]

Julius Honka and Kari Lehtonen and #39 overall FOR #54 overall, Linus Ullmark, and Hudson Fasching.

Edited May 13, 2017 by LGR4GM

[Huckleberry]

Wouldn't surprise me if Kulikov is vegas bound.

[BuffaloBorn]

one of fasching, baptiste, bailey, Bogosian with some $ retained and 2018 first/ possibly combined with 2019 first round pick. that should fetch a good player.

[Huckleberry]

Bogo for eberle 

[GASabresIUFAN]

Jack Johnson to Buf for a 2nd this year and a 4th next year plus Falk.

CBJ needs cap space because they have to re-sign RFA Wennberg (59 pts) and they are already at 70+ mill for next season. They also won't want to lose Johnson to LV for nothing, but he is their only logical D to expose.

 

Trade him to us for picks and Falk, allows then get decent value for a 29 year old D with 1 yr left on his contract, saves then 4+ mill and Falk gives them a qualified D to expose.

 

Johnson would be a solid 2nd pair LD, who would be a placeholder for a year until Guhle is ready, but one you could re-sign if he plays well.

[dudacek]

Give them more for Ryan Murray, who will be more expensive than Johnson in a year.

Johnson is Bogo-esque (at least the Winnipeg version of Bogo) in that he has better tools than toolbox and will not be worth his salary.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Give them more for Ryan Murray, who will be more expensive than Johnson in a year.

Johnson is Bogo-esque (at least the Winnipeg version of Bogo) in that he has better tools than toolbox and will not be worth his salary.

The goal here is a stop gap of a quality player for one season to allow Guhle to develop in the AHL. All we need him to do is play solidly for one year and then walk unless he plays really well.

 

Murray would be great, but I don't he is available. Vatanen is a more likely long-term pickup.

Edited May 15, 2017 by GASabresFan

[dudacek]

The goal here is a stop gap of a quality player for one season to allow Guhle to develop in the AHL. All we need him to do is play solidly for one year and then walk unless he plays really well.

Murray would be great, but I don't he is available. Vatanen is a more likely long-term pickup.

I don't get it. If that is your plan, aren't you basically making the Kulikov trade all over again?

You ripped Murray to shreds on that one, but it's a similar price for a similar player with a similar contract.

[GASabresIUFAN]

I don't get it. If that is your plan, aren't you basically making the Kulikov trade all over again?

You ripped Murray to shreds on that one, but it's a similar price for a similar player with a similar contract.

Admittedly there are some similarities on paper and the biggest difference maybe necessity.

 

The Kulikov deal was trading a cheap top 6 defender with good possession stats for a barely superior player (with worse possession stats) at 4 times the price because he was a LD at a time when we didn't have the cap space. That money should have been spent to build depth.

 

The Johnson deal is a necessity to fill a 2nd pairing gap, created by Kulikov's and Bogo's failures. Johnson is a superior player to both Bogo and Kulikov, who because of expansion, likely can be had without sacrificing a top 6 defender. We also have the cap space to afford both Johnson and a legit vet or 2. The other major difference is timing and organizational depth. With Kulikov, we had no depth if he stunk. Our depth were a couple of AAAA players and no real prospects. Now if Johnson fails, we'll have Guhle, hopefully Antipin and likely a vet or 2.

Edited May 16, 2017 by GASabresFan

[dudacek]

I don't know...

I hear you about timing and how Pysyk helps now in a way that a 2nd rounder doesn't, but to my mind Bogo and Kulikov were as good or better than Johnson before they were traded to Buffalo,

I can also see Murray saying about Nelson and Franson and Falk and Fedun what you're saying about Guhle and Antipin and "likely a vet or two". I'd disagree with Murray on that one.

 

To me it comes down to believing in the guy you are acquiring.

Last summer I would have taken Kulikov over Johnson without hesitation. I thought he was what we needed.

I would have been wrong, but I still would blame that mostly on the bench door.

Edited May 16, 2017 by dudacek

[Thorny]

The goal here is a stop gap of a quality player for one season to allow Guhle to develop in the AHL. All we need him to do is play solidly for one year and then walk unless he plays really well.

Murray would be great, but I don't he is available. Vatanen is a more likely long-term pickup.

I don't think we should be looking for a stop gap at all. Who are the Dmen we can reasonably pencil in for the left side, medium-to-long term? We only have two. McCabe, and Guhle, if we are lucky. On the right side, we have Ristolainen, maybe Antipin, and Bogosian (if we aren't lucky).

 

There is certainly space on the left side for a long term solution, if it can be acquired.

[GASabresIUFAN]

I don't know...

I can also see Murray saying about Nelson and Franson and Falk and Fedun what you're saying about Guhle and Antipin and "likely a vet or two". I'd disagree with Murray on that one.

And we know what a great judge of pro talent GMTM turned out to be.

 

My preferred option here is to get a Vatanen, or Brodin etc.. but the price might not be what JBot is willing to pay. I also still like the idea of Dumoulin as a bargain 4. However, I think based on who is available in expansion Johnson is a very realistic option.

 

As to Kulikov, he is a guy whose game I never liked so I'll accept that I was baised against him. That said he played to my expectations. Bogo on the other hand, I hadn't watched him much after he left town (Atlanta), but his long-term injury history was a major concern when acquired. Given that history is it really a surprise how he has performed? I will have to disagree that either player was ever in the class of Johnson. Johnson has had two 30 pt seasons and 2 40 pt seasons, Torts has actually helped him become better defensively. Bogo had one 30 pt season 7 seasons ago and Kulikov has never had one.

[GASabresIUFAN]

I don't think we should be looking for a stop gap at all. Who are the Dmen we can reasonably pencil in for the left side, medium-to-long term? We only have two. McCabe, and Guhle, if we are lucky. On the right side, we have Ristolainen, maybe Antipin, and Bogosian (if we aren't lucky).

There is certainly space on the left side for a long term solution, if it can be acquired.

Love the new avatar.

 

As I said in the post you quoted, I think Vatanen is a better long-term solution, but I think JBot is going to look at all options and probably won't part with the assets necessary to get Vatanen or Brodin. The nice thing about Johnson, as an UFA after next season, is that if he plays well he can be re-signed for a few years.

 

Also you really only need a strong top 4, as long as you have serviceable depth. If Guhle, McCabe, Risto and Antipin can eat up 22 minutes a night the 3rd pairing is less important and will rotate over time in order to afford to pay the top 4.

[Thorny]

Love the new avatar.

As I said in the post you quoted, I think Vatanen is a better long-term solution, but I think JBot is going to look at all options and probably won't part with the assets necessary to get Vatanen or Brodin. The nice thing about Johnson, as an UFA after next season, is that if he plays well he can be re-signed for a few years.

Also you really only need a strong top 4, as long as you have serviceable depth. If Guhle, McCabe, Risto and Antipin can eat up 22 minutes a night the 3rd pairing is less important and will rotate over time in order to afford to pay the top 4.

To the first bolded, cheers! :beer:

 

The second, that's key. I like how Guhle has looked so far, but I would be much more comfortable only counting on him for a top 6 role going forward, given how little he's proven at the pro level, and bringing in a legit young top 4 guy like Brodin, assuming the price isn't outrageous.

 

To me, it's reasonably likely we are going to need to add from the outside in order to get that solid top 4 guy. Add in the fact that that's almost certainly the only way we'll get that guy in a timely fashion, and I'm willing to put together a decent packge to bring in our man.

 

And I'm hoping JBot is able to find a price that's fair in his eyes.

[dudacek]

Here's a creative trade born of an idle mind, but I think it helps each team:

 

* Buffalo trades both second rounders to Columbus for Ryan Murray.

* Vegas agrees to select predetermined players from Buffalo and Columbus in the expansion draft; say Tyler Ennis and Scott Hartnell (if he waives)

* Vegas trades a good defenceman from the draft (Scandella, Dehaan etc.) to the Sabres for Evander Kane.

 

Columbus loses Murray, but they can afford a defenceman. They get free from Hartnell, create space to sign Atkinson, Jenner, Karlsson and Johnson, avoid losing a good player in expansion and get two 2nds for their trouble.

 

Buffalo loses the best player in the deal, but they fix their defence and dump a bad contract. They can afford to pay two seconds.

 

Vegas takes on a couple big contracts, but they get a player, who will be far and away their best forward and is young enough to build with or flip for futures. Ennis and Hartnell should play in their top six and they can afford the salaries which don't carry big term.

 

I think all three teams are better off making that deal.

Edited May 16, 2017 by dudacek

[Thorny]

Here's a creative trade born of an idle mind, but I think it helps each team:

* Buffalo trades both second rounders to Columbus for Ryan Murray.

* Vegas agrees to select predetermined players from Buffalo and Columbus in the expansion draft; say Tyler Ennis and Scott Hartnell (if he waives)

* Vegas trades a good defenceman from the draft (Scandella, Dehaan etc.) to the Sabres for Evander Kane.

Columbus loses Murray, but they can afford a defenceman. They get free from Hartnell, create space to sign Atkinson, Jenner, Karlsson and Johnson, avoid losing a good player in expansion and get two 2nds for their trouble.

Buffalo loses the best player in the deal, but they fix their defence and dump a bad contract. They can afford to pay two seconds.

Vegas takes on a couple big contracts, but they get a player, who will be far and away their best forward and is young enough to build with or flip for futures. Ennis and Hartnell should play in their top six and they can afford the salaries which don't carry big term.

I think all three teams are better off making that deal.

I like it.

[French Collection]

Here's a creative trade born of an idle mind, but I think it helps each team:

* Buffalo trades both second rounders to Columbus for Ryan Murray.

* Vegas agrees to select predetermined players from Buffalo and Columbus in the expansion draft; say Tyler Ennis and Scott Hartnell (if he waives)

* Vegas trades a good defenceman from the draft (Scandella, Dehaan etc.) to the Sabres for Evander Kane.

Columbus loses Murray, but they can afford a defenceman. They get free from Hartnell, create space to sign Atkinson, Jenner, Karlsson and Johnson, avoid losing a good player in expansion and get two 2nds for their trouble.

Buffalo loses the best player in the deal, but they fix their defence and dump a bad contract. They can afford to pay two seconds.

Vegas takes on a couple big contracts, but they get a player, who will be far and away their best forward and is young enough to build with or flip for futures. Ennis and Hartnell should play in their top six and they can afford the salaries which don't carry big term.

I think all three teams are better off making that deal.

That is creative!

Forward it to JBot.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Interesting.... So...

 

The Sabres get Murray and Scandella 

CBJ gets 2 2nds

LV get Kane, Hartnell and Ennis.  

 

What is LV's incentive to take Hartnell and Ennis, just Kane?  I think they'll require at least a pick or two from each team to take on the bad contracts.  

[dudacek]

What is LV's incentive to take Hartnell and Ennis, just Kane? I think they'll require at least a pick or two from each team to take on the bad contracts.

 

I guess it comes down to your opinion of Kane, but I think that's a pretty good incentive for a team that no cap issues. McPhee is going to be defence rich and forward poor and he will never get a player the calibre of Evander in the expansion draft.

 

Hartnell has two years at $4.75 cap hit per, but just $7.5 total salary.

Ennis has two years at $4.6 per but $7.2 total salary (and he might be McPhee's best pick from the Sabres anyway.)

Those kind of contracts are made for Vegas.

Edited May 16, 2017 by dudacek

[Guest]

I guess it comes down to your opinion of Kane, but I think that's a pretty good incentive for a team that no cap issues. McPhee is going to be defence rich and forward poor and he will never get a player the calibre of Evander in the expansion draft.

 

Hartnell has two years at $4.75 cap hit per, but just $7.5 total salary.

Ennis has two years at $4.6 per but $7.2 total salary (and he might be McPhee's best pick from the Sabres anyway.)

Those kind of contracts are made for Vegas.

Don't necessarily disagree, but if I were LV's GM, I'd make sure I'd get an extra asset for every big contract I take on.

[MattPie]

If you break it down, I'm not sure it works:

- Kane to LV for Scandella to BUF

- Murray to BUF for 2 2nds to CBJ

- LV gets Ennis as a straight up expansion draft pick

- LV gets Hartnell essentially as an expansion draft pick.

 

Do the first two trades make sense?

[3putt]

dudacek you are wasting your talent here you should be blogging. Then gms would make such deals because they had become mainstream in the hockey media.  Hint hint.