[lebrun] Team Exec Says He Expects Rangers, Islanders to "Take a Run" at Patrik Laine

[Phil]

On Laine: ?I honestly think because of the ilk of the player, and the price, I got to believe it?ll be a three-way deal between the Jets, the agent and the team that gets him. They have to do a sign-and-trade, I think. I don?t see how Chevy will get the value that he wants and will feel that he should get, and we all know the media and the fans will scream no matter what he gets that he didn?t get enough, the team that gets him will want to make sure they got him locked in long term. And the kid and the agent will want to make sure they have the money and the location. I don?t know about Jersey, but I got to believe the Islanders and Rangers would be taking a run at him.??

 

https://theathletic.com/2300589/2021/01/04/lebrun-patrik-laine-pierre-luc-dubois-trade/

[Rangers]

Who goes the other way? Anisimov + what?

[ThirtyONE]

Huh? How? Why?

 

How many more wingers do we need?

[Pete]

Huh? How? Why?

 

How many more wingers do we need?

 

There are no RW on our roster who I wouldn't trade for Laine.

[Phil]

There are no RW on our roster who I wouldn't trade for Laine.

 

Same, but man, unless you're flipping Kakko (and how aren't you in this deal?), you're dangerously flirting with cap gridlock.

[jsm7302]

This is typical NY team in on the big name player. Can't imagine this is even in the thoughts and minds of our front office. Stacking the roster with big names isn't going to bring chemistry. This team has the building blocks with some good budding vet presence in the locker room. They need chemistry to develop not another big name.

[BrooksBurner]

While an RW of Laine's caliber would be great, doesn't he play the left dot on the PP? We are full up there. And isn't that his bread and better for a large chunk of his goal production?

 

I like Laine, but it's a no from me right now. Also assuming he comes in that 8-9 million dollar range.

[Keirik]

I do admit, it would be so NYR thing to do. Just say no for cap reasons and stay the course. Unless you say Trouba or Kreider the other way which cant/wont happen.

[Phil]

Kreider makes a lot of sense for them, honestly. He's such a Winnipeg player (think Scheifele, Wheeler, Connor, etc). And it alleviates the Rangers' issue of having too many LWs. The problem is, would he really waive his clause a year into his extension to go to the Jets? I doubt it. Trouba, there's just no way. He wanted out for years. He'd probably accept a trade to Arizona sooner than he would Winnipeg again.

[Pete]

Same, but man, unless you're flipping Kakko (and how aren't you in this deal?), you're dangerously flirting with cap gridlock.

 

I'd flip Kakko for him, sure.

[Kevin]

I'd flip Kakko for him, sure.

 

Wouldn't that make the cap situation worse? Kakko on his entry-level deal in exchange for a huge contract?

[Phil]

I'd flip Kakko for him, sure.

 

Same, but the cap crunch encroaches.

 

Wouldn't that make the cap situation worse? Kakko on his entry-level deal in exchange for a huge contract?

 

Yeah, things get tight fast, especially if you keep Zibanejad.

[Pete]

Wouldn't that make the cap situation worse? Kakko on his entry-level deal in exchange for a huge contract?

 

Yea, for sure. I was just talking about the amount of wingers from the original comment.

[BrooksBurner]

I would not trade Kakko for Laine. The contract status is too valuable, and Kakko may yet turn out to be as good or better.

[Phil]

I would not trade Kakko for Laine. The contract status is too valuable, and Kakko may yet turn out to be as good or better.

 

It's the contract value that matters here. Jeff Marek often says you are either selling hope or wins in this league. Well, Kakko is hope. Laine is wins. I'd take the latter every day.

[Keirik]

Kreider makes a lot of sense for them, honestly. He's such a Winnipeg player (think Scheifele, Wheeler, Connor, etc). And it alleviates the Rangers' issue of having too many LWs. The problem is, would he really waive his clause a year into his extension to go to the Jets? I doubt it. Trouba, there's just no way. He wanted out for years. He'd probably accept a trade to Arizona sooner than he would Winnipeg again.

Yeah, I don’t think it could happen. I just don’t see any other way. You’d have to move a big contract and probably a LW. Maybe you could get away with ADA

But even that would be rough. Laine has nearly a 7m cap hit going into an rfa year. They just can’t afford him unless you move on from a big piece and play hardball next offseason, making him disgruntled. That makes no sense either.

[Phil]

Yeah, I don’t think it could happen. I just don’t see any other way. You’d have to move a big contract and probably a LW. Maybe you could get away with ADA

But even that would be rough. Laine has nearly a 7m cap hit going into an rfa year. They just can’t afford him unless you move on from a big piece and play hardball next offseason, making him disgruntled. That makes no sense either.

 

I don't think that would work from Winnipeg's perspective. He's rapidly approaching UFA. Anyone they are getting back has to be someone they can hold onto for a while. That pretty much instantly rules out the Stromes, DeAngelos, and maybe even Georgiev's of the world. I feel like, from a hockey perspective, this screams Kreider. It's just a matter of whether he'd ever OK it. It's the type of deal that makes the most sense from both clubs' perspectives (salted and peppered to taste, of course).

[BrooksBurner]

It's the contract value that matters here. Jeff Marek often says you are either selling hope or wins in this league. Well, Kakko is hope. Laine is wins. I'd take the latter every day.

 

Then you should have wanted to trade Lafreniere for Brady Tkachuk.

[lefty9]

Love to have him ,but Laine is going to demand a significant raise from the 6.750 million he is making this season

[Phil]

Then you should have wanted to trade Lafreniere for Brady Tkachuk.

 

I said repeatedly it's something I'd have strongly considered, just not straight up. It would have had to have been 1 for Tkachuk, 3, and 5. I'd have had a very difficult time saying no to that.

[Slobberknocker]

isnt laine already being a bit of a pain in the ass? do we really want him? aside from the cap hit...

 

play the kids this year. this div is so tough we might not even sniff playoffs. plenty of time to make

a deal like this after the blueline / 4th line questions are answered.

 

happy new year to all.

[BrooksBurner]

I said repeatedly it's something I'd have strongly considered, just not straight up. It would have had to have been 1 for Tkachuk, 3, and 5. I'd have had a very difficult time saying no to that.

 

Well if Lafreniere represents hope, and Tkachuk represents wins, and you take wins over hope every day, why not straight up?

 

The point is there's obviously a huge gray area that you didn't include in that blanket statement.

[Pete]

Tkachuk doesn't represent wins. Lafreniere represents as many wins today as Tkachuk does.

[BrooksBurner]

Tkachuk doesn't represent wins. Lafreniere represents as many wins today as Tkachuk does.

 

That doesn't make any sense. Lafreniere hasn't played a single game. Tkachuk has had 2 productive years. You're missing the point.

[Phil]

Well if Lafreniere represents hope, and Tkachuk represents wins, and you take wins over hope every day, why not straight up?

 

The point is there's obviously a huge gray area that you didn't include in that blanket statement.

 

It wasn't designed to be a catch-all. It was specific to Kakko and Laine.