Smoke about to turn to fire? Sens/Columbus talking turkey

asq2 wrote:A deal I'd be OK with is:

Vermette, Kuba, Gerber for Russell, Leclaire, first.

Leclaire for Gerber is even, or perhaps even a victory for the BJs. Gerber's worse, but less injury prone and his money comes off the books at season's end.

Kuba is worth the first+

Vermette + the left-over of Kuba's value + the left-over (if any) of Gerber's value is worth Russell.

I'd say you need to add a little more because based on past history of Kuba could get you a pick and a prospect. Heck if SJ was willing to offer Carle and a 1st or Phillie offer Carter and a 1st for Redden I suspect you could get similar.

Vermette could fetch a decent player and pick as well from the right team. I suspect Edmonton maybe interested as they need a player who can win face off's and play the PK. He also adds a scoring touch when on his game and a fresh start is what he may need.

I agree that Gerber and Leclaire may be close to balancing each other out if nothing more than because of the contracts.

asq2 wrote:A deal I'd be OK with is:

Vermette, Kuba, Gerber for Russell, Leclaire, first.

Leclaire for Gerber is even, or perhaps even a victory for the BJs. Gerber's worse, but less injury prone and his money comes off the books at season's end.

Kuba is worth the first+

Vermette + the left-over of Kuba's value + the left-over (if any) of Gerber's value is worth Russell.

Somehow, from the opposing viewpoint, I don't think Leclaire for Gerber is fair. I think most BJ fans would say that Leclaire is worth much more than Gerber even considering the injuries.

I would do this trade however, because it involves a way to get rid of Gerber. Otherwise we are waiving him for nothing more than likely.

We are about to get a backup goalie off the books, and we are going to take on another one??? Murray would be an absolute fool to get Leclaire in a trade!! They have Elliott who IS ready and is playing well.

Elliott has won everywhere he has been, it wont be any different in Ottawa. Despite whether you want the team to lose or not, Elliott will be better than a 500 goalie in the NHL as well.

Im all for wheeling and dealing, not for Leclaire, the guy we have now is better, younger, cheaper, and home grown.

hemlock wrote:

asq2 wrote:A deal I'd be OK with is:

Vermette, Kuba, Gerber for Russell, Leclaire, first.

Leclaire for Gerber is even, or perhaps even a victory for the BJs. Gerber's worse, but less injury prone and his money comes off the books at season's end.

Kuba is worth the first+

Vermette + the left-over of Kuba's value + the left-over (if any) of Gerber's value is worth Russell.

Somehow, from the opposing viewpoint, I don't think Leclaire for Gerber is fair. I think most BJ fans would say that Leclaire is worth much more than Gerber even considering the injuries.

I would do this trade however, because it involves a way to get rid of Gerber. Otherwise we are waiving him for nothing more than likely.

Fair enough but Leclaire also only had one good season and personally hasn't proven he is a consistent #1. At this stage getting rid of Gerber is not a hard thing to do. Moving him to the minors is the easiest way to go if Elliott is kept up. His salary is more manageable down there and his work ethic could rub off on the other goalies. There is an expensive upside to sending him down.

asq2 wrote:A deal I'd be OK with is:

Vermette, Kuba, Gerber for Russell, Leclaire, first.

Leclaire for Gerber is even, or perhaps even a victory for the BJs. Gerber's worse, but less injury prone and his money comes off the books at season's end.

Kuba is worth the first+

Vermette + the left-over of Kuba's value + the left-over (if any) of Gerber's value is worth Russell.

The importance of cap space in the coming years makes me fear this kind of move. Not to mention that Leclaire is like Lehtonen. Brilliant some nights, injured the others.

hemlock wrote:

asq2 wrote:A deal I'd be OK with is:

Vermette, Kuba, Gerber for Russell, Leclaire, first.

Leclaire for Gerber is even, or perhaps even a victory for the BJs. Gerber's worse, but less injury prone and his money comes off the books at season's end.

Kuba is worth the first+

Vermette + the left-over of Kuba's value + the left-over (if any) of Gerber's value is worth Russell.

Somehow, from the opposing viewpoint, I don't think Leclaire for Gerber is fair. I think most BJ fans would say that Leclaire is worth much more than Gerber even considering the injuries.

I would do this trade however, because it involves a way to get rid of Gerber. Otherwise we are waiving him for nothing more than likely.

Leclaire is their back-up goalie behind Mason.

Leclaire is injury prone.

Leclaire has only had one good season (so has Gerber).

Leclaire is signed long-term to an expensive contract.

Gerber comes off the books at the end of the season.

The BJs need money for Nash, Voracek, Filatov, Brassard, Mason.

Also, marketing-wise, would you rather have:



or

I want Levlaire no where near the Sens, I would be extremely upset if they brought him here for a 7th rounder. Bringing in Leclaire would just put us back into a 3 goalie system next year, with a big, long exspensive contract that everyone will regret.

LOL at Asq's pictures. Hahhaa.

asq2 wrote:

hemlock wrote:

asq2 wrote:A deal I'd be OK with is:

Vermette, Kuba, Gerber for Russell, Leclaire, first.

Leclaire for Gerber is even, or perhaps even a victory for the BJs. Gerber's worse, but less injury prone and his money comes off the books at season's end.

Kuba is worth the first+

Vermette + the left-over of Kuba's value + the left-over (if any) of Gerber's value is worth Russell.

Somehow, from the opposing viewpoint, I don't think Leclaire for Gerber is fair. I think most BJ fans would say that Leclaire is worth much more than Gerber even considering the injuries.

I would do this trade however, because it involves a way to get rid of Gerber. Otherwise we are waiving him for nothing more than likely.

Leclaire is their back-up goalie behind Mason.

Leclaire is injury prone.

Leclaire has only had one good season (so has Gerber).

Leclaire is signed long-term to an expensive contract.

Gerber comes off the books at the end of the season.

The BJs need money for Nash, Voracek, Filatov, Brassard, Mason.

Also, marketing-wise, would you rather have:



or

The 1970's called. They want their Gerber picture back

Like N4L mentioned, I don't want to carry a long contract like Leclaire's. We are finally going to be free of Gerber soon, lining us up perfectly for an Auld/Elliott tandem next season.

I'd rather use that money in other areas, such as taking a run at J-Bo if he's available.

Yeah, don't know about J-Bo to be honest. If we're gonna start to solidify our D next year, we need to look for contracts with a couple of years minimum left on them - at around 4.5-5 million.

J-Bo will command massive coin - even if no team in the league can sustain his cap hit (except the crappy ones).

504Heater wrote:Yeah, don't know about J-Bo to be honest. If we're gonna start to solidify our D next year, we need to look for contracts with a couple of years minimum left on them - at around 4.5-5 million.

J-Bo will command massive coin - even if no team in the league can sustain his cap hit (except the crappy ones).

And he may not be available. But if we can go with a tandem of Auld and Elliot for under $2 next season, that really helps us in other areas. That reason alone is enough to not want Leclaire.

hemlock wrote:
And he may not be available. But if we can go with a tandem of Auld and Elliot for under $2 next season, that really helps us in other areas. That reason alone is enough to not want Leclaire.

Oh for sure. I want one Diddle awesome D-man. I just have no idea where we're gonna get it from right now.

504Heater wrote:

hemlock wrote:
And he may not be available. But if we can go with a tandem of Auld and Elliot for under $2 next season, that really helps us in other areas. That reason alone is enough to not want Leclaire.

Oh for sure. I want one Diddle awesome D-man. I just have no idea where we're gonna get it from right now.

Well if the only option is paying $7 on the open market, I'll wait until we've developed our own in Karlsson, Wiercioch and possibly Hedman/Cowen

hemlock wrote:

504Heater wrote:

hemlock wrote:
And he may not be available. But if we can go with a tandem of Auld and Elliot for under $2 next season, that really helps us in other areas. That reason alone is enough to not want Leclaire.

Oh for sure. I want one Diddle awesome D-man. I just have no idea where we're gonna get it from right now.

Well if the only option is paying $7 on the open market, I'll wait until we've developed our own in Karlsson, Wiercioch and possibly Hedman/Cowen

If we're playing Elliot and Auld, I'll also pay the $7M. We'll have it: it'll mean $32M in four forwards, J-Bo, and two goalies - leaves $18-24 for 14-15 players. It's tight, but workable, with the right rookie contracts in place. Or with Fisher and/or Vermette and/or Kelly gone.

As things stand now, (assuming stable cap, and stable salary for Elliot), we have about $11.6M available for next year for salaries, acquisitions, trade "space" and the $1.5M injury "buffer". With Elliot in the lineup, we'll be short one D (Kuba is UFA), and two forwards (Neil and McAmmond).

Oh, I'm all for not getting Leclaire.

I'll happily just do Vermette + Kuba for Russell and a 1st.

3 firsts in this draft. :D Hopefully SJ's and Columbus' could be used to move up though.

asq2 wrote:Oh, I'm all for not getting Leclaire.

I'll happily just do Vermette + Kuba for Russell and a 1st.

3 firsts in this draft. :D Hopefully SJ's and Columbus' could be used to move up though.

I find myself increasing jealous of teams like LA, Chicago, and Columbus. It seems like a lifetime ago that we had a team like those ones full of young guys and unlimited optimism.

hemlock wrote:

asq2 wrote:Oh, I'm all for not getting Leclaire.

I'll happily just do Vermette + Kuba for Russell and a 1st.

3 firsts in this draft. :D Hopefully SJ's and Columbus' could be used to move up though.

I find myself increasing jealous of teams like LA, Chicago, and Columbus. It seems like a lifetime ago that we had a team like those ones full of young guys and unlimited optimism.

Those teams were also brutally bad for the better part of a decade.

PKC wrote:

hemlock wrote:

asq2 wrote:Oh, I'm all for not getting Leclaire.

I'll happily just do Vermette + Kuba for Russell and a 1st.

3 firsts in this draft. :D Hopefully SJ's and Columbus' could be used to move up though.

I find myself increasing jealous of teams like LA, Chicago, and Columbus. It seems like a lifetime ago that we had a team like those ones full of young guys and unlimited optimism.

Those teams were also brutally bad for the better part of a decade.

This seems to be a trend in the NHL though... teams that have good young talent enjoy success and rise to the top of the NHL. While at the top, they are not able to get great draft pics. Eventually, they can't hold on to all of their assets due to the cap and rising salaries from their talent. Players leave for bigger pay days, the team has gaps that are hard to fill, struggles and then sinks to the bottom of the league where they are able to get good draft picks, acquire good young talent and begin another wave of improvement and rising to the top.

Lather, rinse and repeat...

The only team that seems to be immune to this is the Wings.