Trades and Potential Trades

We gotta vet our sources for hockey information. That's especially true if it's "reports" about potential trades during the Feb. silly-season leading up to the deadline.

For instance, unless it's the superlative Olean Times Herald, one should always take a firm contrarian stance on anything coming from the so-called Buffalo media.

The Hockey Writers is another glorified chat board. I take most of the posts with a big dose of salt. However there's a posting today that is plausible and interesting about the hockey team from Boston.

First, there are interesting corollaries between BOS & VGK. Both teams entered the season with modest postseason aspirations. Both had accumulated a bevy of young assets, and were constructed for future rather than immediate success.

Both teams are now legitimate SC contenders. They could, probably should, be buyers in Feb. But neither should mortgage the future that they're primed for success.

Forget Kane going to Boston (unless Bot caves, which won't happen). T. Vanek could be a good pick up, but Grabner has speed and may be better if they can get him for a conditional pick and second tier prospect.

 

What is hilarious is that I read seven web sites on hockey rumors every day. Hockey writers and hockey buzz have to be the worstest of drivel. IMO

 

This from HNIC, Nash and Grabner, up for rental grabs.

 

Many teams that are jockeying for playoff seeding would rather rent a player than take on the headache of fitting a player under the cap.

That's why rentals are hyped so much. These trades usually happen just before the deadline because the player's prorated salary is at its nadir. Essentially, every single pending UFA will be discussed in someone's trade rumor report.

We can all become "sport's journalists". The formula is this easy: list the pending UFA's in inverse order of how bad their current team is.

You're brilliant if you list Evander Kane in a hot trade rumor. (He will get traded because they're not negotiating. To which team is anybodies guess.)

 

Only playoff teams will want Kane, playoff teams won't land you a top#16 pick. A roster player that peaks the sabres interest would work against the trading teams playoff hopes, making them weaker.

The HNIC crew all agreed that botts has to come down from his asking price. A first and a third, plus a prospect would be my guess for kane.

Still no goals since dec.22.

 

Who knows what Bots is asking for Kane?

I have a hint. GM Botterill knows. Other GM's have a good idea. The rest of us are guessing and surmising.

It is preposterous to suggest he expects a top-16 pick. He knows the value that teams have given for rentals (if a first is involved, it almost always protected in some fashion. For example when the NYI included a first in the Vanek trade - which turned out to be #5 - it was top-10 protected. The Islanders kept the pick and drafted Dal Colle.) Teams trade for rentals for expected postseason results. Non playoff contenders know they'll get zero postseason results so they do not make rental trades. If they do, they hedge by protecting the pick. The whole notion is so f#<€!ng preposterous!

On the other hand, past trades do point to what Buffalo should expect. (And it's much greater than your assigned value.) Kane is a heluva player, and top-six F's with speed, physicality, and who can pot the puck are very hard to find. They'll pay him 1/6 of his current salary (Buffalo will retain 50%) and every team can make that work. (Far fewer can fit his salary under their cap starting in July.)

What was the return for Ladd? For Vermette? Let alone for Vanek?

Stop citing insipid sources that claim Botterill expects a top-16 pick.

 

Well, you certainly have come way up since we started to discuss a Kane trade.

 

We don't know what botts wants, but Elliotte friedman knows, he's on the inside.

 

It would also help fans if they properly interpreted what an "insider" "reports" as the cost for a trade.

Break down the four pieces Bots is to be purportedly asking for.
1) A 2018 first round pick.
2) An NHL prospect.
These are the two that clearly benefit the Sabres. They're also reasonable, even modest, compared to comparable trades.
3) A conditional pick. This gives Buffalo a fair return in the event that EK signs with the new team. It reduces the cost if he does not.
4) An NHL player. It astounds me that this is assumed to be an asset to Buffalo. Many vet players move as pieces in a trade to help the old team make a trade work from a fiscal perspective. More often than not, the team moving the roster player is the one insisting on his inclusion.

Do you think for a moment that TM insisted on getting D. Legwand in the R. Lehner trade?

Points 3 & 4 are either to benefit the other team, or are matters that make the trade feasible.

Elliotte is not a true insider. He's credible and piped-in, but not an insider.

 

I'm talking in relative terms when I say a roster player, a reference to botts dealing from a side of strength.

The hockey media is all inter-connected, it's a small circle that's in constant communication. EF knows all the gms, and they easily relay details of any trade demands from any team. It's not top seceret classified governnent info here, once one guy has the goods they all have them.

 

Yeah. But it is spun.

It is more often than not misinterpreted.

 

The official report by Pierre LeBrun stated that botts was seeking a 1st, prospect and conditional pick.

The following day, Darren Dreger reported that botts is also seeking a roster player.

This was the asking price as of Jan.12.

 

Ottawa finds a way out of Phaneuf's contract. He and Thompson heading to LA. Gaborik and Shore go to the Sens.

 

I really didn't see horsehead getting any love, I like Shore from what I've seen from him. Gaborik is KHL fodder.

 

Bad trade for both teams IMO. Horsehead gets paid in Washington's instead of loonies. Gaborik will injure his groin soon.

 

Fanoof goes goes galloping off to the LA sunset, I'm sure elisha's happy.

 

If theres a way to grab Ryan McDonagh from NYR the Leafs and Bruins have to make a hard push. He would improve both teams dramatically I think.
For the Bruins I still think they're a little thin on D, or the kind of D you need in the playoffs anyway, and McDonagh certainly fills that. A LHD that plays top 4 and in every scenario and seems like the kind of player that would fit in the Bruins room well to boot. 2 years left on a team friendly deal.
Obviously all comes down to cost.

Rick Nash could help but i'll take a pass.

 

leafs are gunning for mike green, nash will cost a first plus a prospect.

 

I'd take McDonagh over Greene. Based upon what, I don't know, lol. I just like the way he is playing this season.