TSN releases first trade deadline board

[yave1964]

With this shortened season and the mad dash until the deadline this years trade deadline is April 12th, six weeks away. TSN released their first deadline trade bait list today...

 (tsn.ca)

 

A couple of thoughts.

 

DeAngelo is on the list good luck getting someone to take this tool off their hands.

 

Ekholm is listed as the plumb of the deadline, I still am not certain the Preds have interest in dealing him.

 

  It looks to be a very weak deadline crop with David Savard, a very serviceable but hardly gamebreaking player listed at number 2. 

 

  The two Staal's are in the top 15, it would be cool if Carolina added them reuniting them with their brother for the playoffs.

 

 Taylor Hall, Montour, Staal all available from Buffalo who are expected to have a firesale. 

 

 

[ruxpin]

Not really much to see here, huh?  I'm sure the board will have additions by the time we get to the deadline, but right now kind of meh.

 

From a a Flyers perspective, they've been involved in Ekholm rumors, but in some ways I'd prefer Savard.  Player vs. Player, it's Ekholm all day every day for me.  But Savard would be cheaper in terms of what is going out, we wouldn't be saddled with his contact next year, and he's a right handed shot so could slide next to Provorov better.  Not a fan of him on the top pair, but it's not horrible.

 

I'd prefer Montour. Luckily, with Buffalo I'd just have to dangle someone stupid and they'll go for it.

 

In general perspective, the GM trading for DeAngelo or Hall are simply idiots.  You could possibly get a temporary glimmer from Hall while he plays for a contact but if anyone was paying attention to Arizona last year, if they give up anything significant for the experiment they should not be in their position.

 

The list was so pedestrian that I'd have to go back a look at the list again to comment.   Maybe some depth options, though.

[OccamsRazor]

35 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

I'd prefer Savard.

 

Savard would be a good addition too.

 

And right hand shot and should cost less seing as he is a true rental and his contract is up after this year.

 

So I wonder what he would cost?

 

And some decent salary needs to go back the other way since he is pricier.

 

Would they take Gus back and a prospect and a conditional pick?

 

Conditions would be on how far they go or the chance they resign him. Something like that but I imagine they wouldn't want to trade him to a hated rivial.

[ruxpin]

7 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Savard would be a good addition too.

 

And right hand shot and should cost less seing as he is a true rental and his contract is up after this year.

 

So I wonder what he would cost?

 

And some decent salary needs to go back the other way since he is pricier.

 

Would they take Gus back and a prospect and a conditional pick?

 

Conditions would be on how far they go or the chance they resign him. Something like that but I imagine they wouldn't want to trade him to a hated rivial.

I like your conditions.

 

Yeah, usually I would say, "Ghost won't do it,"  but since this is Buffalo I'd say go for it 

 

Ghost + a 4th that becomes a 3rd if we make it to the finals (or semis).  You could possibly do 3rd to a 2nd, I suppose.

 

I'm not ordinarily in a rush to toss away draft picks, but I'm not that bullish on this year's draft, so do what you have to do.   The only problem with doing Ghost is I wouldn't mind keeping him to expose to Seattle.

 

I wonder if Gus instead and make the pick condition contingent upon whether Buffalo is able to sign with them.   Or do a sign & trade.  Or something.

[OccamsRazor]

48 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

Yeah, usually I would say, "Ghost won't do it,"  but since this is Buffalo I'd say go for it 

 

Buffalo who are you going for from them?

 

Montour?

 

I thought we said Blue Jackets Savard?

[ruxpin]

51 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Buffalo who are you going for from them?

 

Montour?

 

I thought we said Blue Jackets Savard?

 LOL!   He is!

 

Yeah, on Buffalo I'd consider Montour.

 

Okay, so Blue Jackets.     That changes the algebra on Savard, right?    First, they obviously won't go for Gus.  I don't think so, anyway.   If they will, jump on it.  Same offer as I errantly said when I was drunk and had Buffalo in my mind.   But you're right that it might take Ghost, which I'm fine with if but for the expansion draft.   But what the heck, go with it.

 

Seems to me that Columbus should probably do whatever it can to get either young centers and/or picks.  But if they're willing to go with D for younger D, I'm fine to move any of Gus, Ghost, or Hagg (who I actually like more than most, but he is still and always will be 3rd pair/7th defenseman here).

[OccamsRazor]

26 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

I'm fine to move any of Gus, Ghost, or Hagg (who I actually like more than most, but he is still and always will be 3rd pair/7th defenseman here).

 

I prefer Gus just because he is the one I like the least.

 

But if they prefer Ghost or Hagg we can work something out. Just find a good vet to help out before it is too late.

[mojo1917]

7 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

I prefer Gus just because he is the one I like the least.

Maybe just waive Gus?

Or trade him somewhere else as a total salary dump, a 6th in the 2025 draft?

 

@ruxpin

It depends who we're getting back as to who i'm willing to give up. 

I don't want to send a guy that turns into Justin Williams for two years of Danny Markov or Mike Rathje again.

So I'm willing to give up less actual hockey players for Eckholm even though I think he's sorely needed.

I don't think he signs an extension here,  I don't know if he's going to be protected... so many variables with regard to that guy.

So if it's Montour, I'm game to trade a young forward and other blue chip prospects. If Montour can be signed and become a medium/long term part of the defense corps then it's worth it.

 

I'm not interested in Savard at all, maybe that's dumb, has he won anything? does he have anything going for his game other than being right handed? My exposure to him has been limited and mostly, "Wow what a dirty ****, I hope Simmonds kills him"...

 

I am hoping for a Marc Recchi- Eric Dejardins /John LeClair type deal. If we're giving up a quality young guy I'm hoping a team cornerstone comes back. 

It seems like the team is at a tipping point. I don't mind caution being taken to make sure it's the right direction.

 

 

[ruxpin]

1 hour ago, mojo1917 said:

Maybe just waive Gus?

Or trade him somewhere else as a total salary dump, a 6th in the 2025 draft?

 

@ruxpin

It depends who we're getting back as to who i'm willing to give up. 

I don't want to send a guy that turns into Justin Williams for two years of Danny Markov or Mike Rathje again.

So I'm willing to give up less actual hockey players for Eckholm even though I think he's sorely needed.

I don't think he signs an extension here,  I don't know if he's going to be protected... so many variables with regard to that guy.

So if it's Montour, I'm game to trade a young forward and other blue chip prospects. If Montour can be signed and become a medium/long term part of the defense corps then it's worth it.

 

I'm not interested in Savard at all, maybe that's dumb, has he won anything? does he have anything going for his game other than being right handed? My exposure to him has been limited and mostly, "Wow what a dirty ****, I hope Simmonds kills him"...

 

I am hoping for a Marc Recchi- Eric Dejardins /John LeClair type deal. If we're giving up a quality young guy I'm hoping a team cornerstone comes back. 

It seems like the team is at a tipping point. I don't mind caution being taken to make sure it's the right direction.

 

 

I agree with you in the way you frame it, but I think I view the team with rosier glasses.  I actually think we're simply stabilizing the defense away from being a threat.  

 

But I'm really not in favor of blowing huge holes in the roster to do it. Certainly not Sanheim. And, really, not someone like Patrick or even Laughton or some of the others.

 

I don't really like even talking about Frost in an Ekholm deal. Like you, when we wade into trading such names, I want looking term. And in the case of either Ekholm or Savard, I don't want either one to resign.  I like Savard for Ghost or Gus, in particular, because he can potentially slot into the top two pairs and provide some stability.  I don't need start power there. I just want someone to help stabilize for the rest of this season until we can be a little more sensible this summer than signing the Gus-du-jour (which was ridiculous on its face).

 

By the way, I like your "trade Gus for a 6th" idea if it could be pulled off. The receiving GM should be fired same day.

 

I'm okay with Ghost and a conditional pick in a lousy draft for Savard.  It'll take a forward for Ekholm.  I keep targeting Raffl and a pick because it's age for age.  The downside is Raffl fills a role and fills it well.  But so would Eckholm.  So, conditional pick again and base it either on how far we go or whether they resign Raffl.  Want to throw Ghost into that, I'm fine with that too.  I'm really tired of his mindnumbing passes and inexplicable positioning in the defensive zone.  If some other team wants to rehabilitate him, they're welcome to it.

 

Anyway, yeah, I don't want a repeat of the past trades you mentioned.