Pre-VGK Draft Trades Thread

Let's use this as a general catch-all for the rumors and trades that will probably dominate the NHL news cycle over the next two-plus weeks.

 

--

 

:tweet: @frank_seravalli: #Hawks would allow VGK to take D Trevor van Riemsdyk in draft, on consideration that @GoldenKnights also take Marcus Kruger in trade. #TSN

 

:tweet: @frank_seravalli: @GoldenKnights Possible this is also flipped. VGK takes Kruger in consideration for also getting TvR. Either way, those two names have been linked to Vegas

 

:tweet: @frank_seravalli: @GoldenKnights #Hawks, of course, used similar tactic last summer moving Teuvo Teravainen to CAR in order to shed Bryan Bickell's contract.

 

?

 

:tweet: @PierreVLeBrun: Lots going on with Vegas. I also hear they might net a 1st RD pick from a team for taking on a bad contract? fun few weeks ahead twitter.com/frank_seravall?

Would you give up out first rounder for Staal and/or Girardi? For both I would say yes, for one no. Short term loss long term gain, especially with next years draft class apparently being deeper.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

For Staal, yes. Then buyout G.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Man it would hurt to give up another 1st rounder. I think Gorton has signaled that they really want to keep it this year.

Giving up the 1st for Staal and forcing them to take Holden/Klein istead of Fast/Oscar/Grabner.

 

It would end up being the 1st for Shattenkirk (pretty sure we sign him if we get rid of Staal's contract) and keeping Fast/Oscar/Grabner. I guess that is fine, but damn I have waited too long for us to finally draft 1st round again.

You'd still have to convince G or Staal to waive and go to LV which would seem unlikely, no?

Just give them the cold shoulder. Say its either Vegas or Hartford.

Giving up the 1st for Staal and forcing them to take Holden/Klein istead of Fast/Oscar/Grabner.

 

It would end up being the 1st for Shattenkirk (pretty sure we sign him if we get rid of Staal's contract) and keeping Fast/Oscar/Grabner. I guess that is fine, but damn I have waited too long for us to finally draft 1st round again.

 

Unfortunately when we do have a 1st round draft pick, its one of the weakest drafts in recent times, so it might not be the worst thing in the world to trade the first round pick if it relieves the Rangers of Girardi or Staal.

Just give them the cold shoulder. Say its either Vegas or Hartford.

 

That doesn't work anymore. The "Wade Redden rule" doesn't allow for it. If you buried Staal or Girardi (who can't even be waived in order to be re-assigned due to NMCs) you'd save, if I recall correctly, only $900K in cap relief. Meaning you'd be carrying $4M+ in dead cap room just to have them play in the AHL.

 

"Vegas or the Press box" works, though.

That doesn't work anymore. The "Wade Redden rule" doesn't allow for it. If you buried Staal or Girardi (who can't even be waived in order to be re-assigned due to NMCs) you'd save, if I recall correctly, only $900K in cap relief. Meaning you'd be carrying $4M+ in dead cap room just to have them play in the AHL.

 

"Vegas or the Press box" works, though.

 

Will be carrying 5M+ in dead cap room anyway.

 

But that was the point. Tell them that they have no future here and wont see the ice much. They can stay and handicap the franchise and ruining their hockey careers, or they can wave and go to a team where they will likely see a lot of ice time and they will do NYR a favor.

 

I really think getting rid of Staal and G is a huge step in the right direction for this organisation (and get in some good replacement ofcourse). So if giving up our 1st will make that happen, Im okey with it.

As the Vegas Golden Knights enter the league, another destination for bad contracts has appeared. Previously limited to places like Arizona and Toronto, the Golden Knights are likely to be involved in several transactions that help cap-troubled teams rid themselves of painful deals. Already it has been reported that Chicago may give up a young defenseman in order to move Marcus Kruger?s cap-hit, and Columbus may be in the same boat. On Sportsnet radio this morning, Elliotte Friedman mentioned that the Blue Jackets have been trying to get Vegas to take David Clarkson?s contract off their hands.

 

Injured players can?t be placed on LTIR until the season begins, meaning they have $5.25MM less room each summer in which to work. Also, though LTIR allows you to go over the salary cap any performance bonuses by entry-level players would be pushed to the next season like they will in Toronto this year.

 

If the cap were to remain flat this summer, the Blue Jackets would have just under $3MM to spend even though Alexander Wennberg and Josh Anderson (among others) need new deals as restricted free agents. Though you can go up to 10% over the cap at any point, it needs to be in order by the last day of training camp. Moving out Clarkson?s contract would seem imperative, and as Friedman says the Blue Jackets have been trying to figure out what ?sweetener? can they put in to make it palatable for Vegas. Again, Clarkson isn?t going to play this year or any other. He?s currently coaching high school hockey in Ohio. He?s not eligible for selection in the expansion draft, but that sweetener could come by Columbus exposing someone or something unexpected.

 

These are the ways Vegas will make their team competitive, not just selecting the aging-veterans or underperforming youngsters available in the draft. Their power comes in the idea of a blank ledger, one they can twist to their advantage over the coming months.

 

https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2017/06/columbus-clarkson-contract.html

Would you give up out first rounder for Staal and/or Girardi? For both I would say yes, for one no. Short term loss long term gain, especially with next years draft class apparently being deeper.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

I actually heard this is the Rangers trying to move Staal or G. I don't like it. We haven't had a first since Skjei, you don't cover up a mistake by making another.

?I think if you look at Vegas we believe they?re pretty far down the path ? if they don?t have a deal done with Pittsburgh already ? on Fleury,? said Friedman. ?Nick (Kypreos) has been on this one for awhile now and I think there?s a lot of truth to it.

 

?I?m very curious to see what they?re going to do ? I know there?s people who feel that they?ve had a lot of talk with Columbus? allowing Columbus to keep Korpisalo, and what that?ll do. What Columbus will do to allow that to happen.

 

?I?m pretty sure they?ve had a lot of talk with Anaheim about what they?ll do to help Anaheim and keep Anaheim from losing players that they don?t want to lose.

 

?And George McPhee, who was at the Combine on the weekend, he said he?s probably going to do a lot of that legwork today or tomorrow.

 

?I think it?ll be interesting. I wonder if one of his plans ? and this is just me wondering out loud ? is he said he will consider taking some contracts for some assets. I wonder if he?s going to try to accumulate picks to maybe move up. He?s 6. Does he want to get higher. And I think if you have picks, you can probably do that.?

 

https://www.fanragsports.com/news/friedman-shares-latest-golden-knights-trade-rumblings/

I'm hearing they're looking to take between 4-6 goaltenders, and using some for trade bait to other teams in need. Unless the Rangers cut a deal with Vegas, they're most likely taking Raanta. Vegas is looking at having a team made up mostly of #7 forwards and #4 Dmen. They'll use the goalies to trade for better players in order to be more competitive, as well as accumulating draft picks in those trades. As mentioned and discussed here before, they will also look to cut deals with teams to take player X + a pick, so teams can protect everyone they want while ridding their bad contracts.

It's a smart tactic. I wonder if a few clubs might even require their own guy a year from now, like Washington with Grubauer.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

It's a smart tactic. I wonder if a few clubs might even require their own guy a year from now, like Washington with Grubauer.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

Possibly, depending on the situation they're in within the next 1-2 seasons. Rumor around the league is that the Rangers do not want to lose Raanta, and will do what they can to keep him within reason. Not a comfy feeling after the year Lundqvist is coming off from. To paraphrase from a reliable source "Not exactly an elite year from him, and it's not going to be easy to get back to that status at his age"

Sure that makes a ton of sense. But if Vegas is dead set on taking numerous goalies it's going to be difficult to keep Raanta from them. They're going to have to work on a side deal pretty hard.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Right, then it becomes a question of what is fair. First thing's first .... Will anyone waive their clause ? Not just players from the Rangers, but from anywhere. Vegas also has to reach the cap floor, which won't be easy to do when you're adding 30 Oscar Lindbergs. That's another reason why I think they'll be more competitive than everyone anticipates them to be. I mean, it's also on them to get the right personnel on their opening roster.

I think the Rangers are in a good position. We must remember that Vegas can only take one guy. Right now both Raanta and Lindberg are prime targets, so the one protects the other in a way. To me, there are three options:

 

1) Compel Vegas to take Holden or even Klein, Staal or Girardi. This will come at a heavy price, but we keep both Raanta and Lindberg.

2) Off-load both Raanta and Lindberg. This will hurt, but bring in some draft picks. Vegas will then take a slightly less attractive piece like Grabner or Fast.

3) Do nothing. Vegas will most likely take Raanta or Lindberg, but we will keep the other (as well as Grabner and Fast) and that's that. We don't spend any more draft picks and we only lose one guy.

Is is really worth it to make a side deal to KEEP Raanta? What's the point? They have the Russian kid coming over soon and still have Hank playing 60+ games. Why give up picks or assets to keep a backup goalie? I don't get it. Seems short sighted.

Shestyorkin isn't coming for a few years. The Rangers are still in win-now mode with an aging core and especially an aging Lundqvist. We need a reliable backup to play and win most of their 20 games, and step in if that aging Hank gets hurt again. In two of the last three years, Henrik has gotten hurt and Talbot/Raanta have had to step in. That's why Raanta is important, as he's better than anyone on the free agent market and he's cost-controlled.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Shestyorkin isn't coming for a few years. The Rangers are still in win-now mode with an aging core and especially an aging Lundqvist. We need a reliable backup to play and win most of their 20 games, and step in if that aging Hank gets hurt again. In two of the last three years, Henrik has gotten hurt and Talbot/Raanta have had to step in. That's why Raanta is important, as he's better than anyone on the free agent market and he's cost-controlled.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

I guess I'm saying they shouldn't be in "win now" mode.

I guess I'm saying they shouldn't be in "win now" mode.

 

So we blow it up? Trade everyone? Garner picks, build a prospect cupboard? It'd start with moving Hank, and I don't think they're ready to or willing to. after that, it's Nash, Stepan, Zuccarello, Staal/G obviously, probably McDonagh as well.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

:tweet: @TSNBobMcKenzie

It's believed ANA has a pre-arranged deal in place with VGK so it isn't necessary to ask Kevin Bieksa to waive his NMC.

:tweet: @TSNBobMcKenzie

However it all shakes out, even that means a separate trade with another team, too, Ducks have zero intention of losing Josh Manson

Cool trade us Vatanen