Ottawa trade rumours

Don't trade our first unless it's for a hell of a forward - on contract!

stempniaksen wrote:

cash wrote:I've been a Murray supporter, but that signing alone is cause for termination. If I'm in negotiations with that kid, it goes "you want a one way? gtfo of my office.... You want HOW much??? gtfo of my office.... You want TWO years? gtfo of my office.... Prove me you can play in this league first, on a one year, two way, minimum salary and then we'll talk about rewards."

It's up there with the Yashin, Dipietro, Redden, Drury, Gomez signings: Worst signing EVER!

If you're serious you're crazy.

If you're kidding then...good one.

Nothing at all wrong with his first paragraph, nothing IMO.

I think I know what he was getting at with his second train of thought. Cash says it like it is, I like his style.

Oglethorpe wrote:

hemlock wrote:Phoenix is coming off a long winning streak that was just broken. I can't see them making huge changes.

If we are going to take some older d-man like Aucoin (if Gonchar can't help, why would this Cussing clown be able to), we better be getting a Wolski type.

Wolski has been benched at least once already that I know of. Maybe there is something there.

Our D is one place that I wouldn't mind seeing a lateral talent move. I have said that Campoli is now redundant on our new blueline Gonchard, Karlsson, Kuba. Adding a more defensive Dman who can eat minutes and play somewhat physically would be a nice add.

Seriously, Hale could fill in a more solid version of Campoli with Carkner on his right. As far as I am concerned we can deal Lee+Campoli for something as little as cap room to make doghouse moves. Yes, a little of that is my draft pool GM talking (I took Campoli ) but, seriously, neither one of them is helping us in the short-term, and perhaps with two of them we could actually get a 2nd round pick.

Either that, or play our third pairing as forwards, insert Hale/Lee and sit out two forwards (one of whom should be married to a country superstar).

SpezDispenser wrote: Don't trade our first unless it's for a hell of a forward - on contract!

We may know tonight, in theory, who we are getting from Phoenix. According to one source I read online (not a personal source, I don't have any), the trade papers have already been submitted to the NHL, and needs to be approved by them. So this, again in theory, may mean that Phoenix, who plays tonight, will scratch whoever it is they are trading, to avoid that person getting injured. So we may find out soon enough.

Only injuries I know of in Phoenix are Turris and Sauer. Could be something to keep an eye out for

CockRoche wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:

cash wrote:I've been a Murray supporter, but that signing alone is cause for termination. If I'm in negotiations with that kid, it goes "you want a one way? gtfo of my office.... You want HOW much??? gtfo of my office.... You want TWO years? gtfo of my office.... Prove me you can play in this league first, on a one year, two way, minimum salary and then we'll talk about rewards."

It's up there with the Yashin, Dipietro, Redden, Drury, Gomez signings: Worst signing EVER!

If you're serious you're crazy.

If you're kidding then...good one.

Nothing at all wrong with his first paragraph, nothing IMO.

I think I know what he was getting at with his second train of thought. Cash says it like it is, I like his style.

Thanks

I was pretty serious about that second comment: In terms of organizational relevance, the signing doesn't even compare to those mentioned above. In terms of moronic structure, however, it is right there fighting for top spot.

I could see a Foligno + Campoli + 3rd for Penner, but I don't think we could fit it under the cap. That's a move I could totally see Murray working on, whether we agree or not (I'm starting to see the light).

SilverSevenSens is doing a DGB impersonation:

CockRoche wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:

cash wrote:I've been a Murray supporter, but that signing alone is cause for termination. If I'm in negotiations with that kid, it goes "you want a one way? gtfo of my office.... You want HOW much??? gtfo of my office.... You want TWO years? gtfo of my office.... Prove me you can play in this league first, on a one year, two way, minimum salary and then we'll talk about rewards."

It's up there with the Yashin, Dipietro, Redden, Drury, Gomez signings: Worst signing EVER!

If you're serious you're crazy.

If you're kidding then...good one.

Nothing at all wrong with his first paragraph, nothing IMO.

I think I know what he was getting at with his second train of thought. Cash says it like it is, I like his style.

There's a certain give an take involved with negotiations though and it was "time" to sit or get off the pot for Lee so it's easy to see how Lee's camp could push for a 1 way deal and Murray not wanting to walk away from Lee as a okay prospect at the time.

I have no problem with people who tell it like it is, it's when they stray and make absurd statements that bother me. I don't care if Lee liked to walk around and kick puppies, no contract with such minor implications (cap and play) could ever be considered one of the worst all time. What a stupid and ridiculous statement.

SpezDispenser wrote:I could see a Foligno + Campoli + 3rd for Penner, but I don't think we could fit it under the cap. That's a move I could totally see Murray working on, whether we agree or not (I'm starting to see the light).

Actually I think we could just fit it under the cap, now with the demotion of Lee. According to Capgeek, we currently have 1.058M in cap space. Add that to Foligno's 1.2M, Campoli's 1.4M, and now Lee's 875K, making for about 4.533M, to Penner's 4.25. Makes it close, but we can squeeze it in there.

It's not my style, but I laughed.

He did say if he was in negotiations that is how it would go though. I take it you don't want Cash to take over for Bryan Murray next week, I get that.

Meh.

stempniaksen wrote:

CockRoche wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:

cash wrote:I've been a Murray supporter, but that signing alone is cause for termination. If I'm in negotiations with that kid, it goes "you want a one way? gtfo of my office.... You want HOW much??? gtfo of my office.... You want TWO years? gtfo of my office.... Prove me you can play in this league first, on a one year, two way, minimum salary and then we'll talk about rewards."

It's up there with the Yashin, Dipietro, Redden, Drury, Gomez signings: Worst signing EVER!

If you're serious you're crazy.

If you're kidding then...good one.

Nothing at all wrong with his first paragraph, nothing IMO.

I think I know what he was getting at with his second train of thought. Cash says it like it is, I like his style.

There's a certain give an take involved with negotiations though and it was "time" to sit or get off the pot for Lee so it's easy to see how Lee's camp could push for a 1 way deal and Murray not wanting to walk away from Lee as a okay prospect at the time.

I have no problem with people who tell it like it is, it's when they stray and make absurd statements that bother me. I don't care if Lee liked to walk around and kick puppies, no contract with such minor implications (cap and play) could ever be considered one of the worst all time. What a stupid and ridiculous statement.

Did you miss my reply to the same post? I clearly state that the implications of the signing were irrelevant, but the structure of the contract was nonsense and totally confusion. You want a 1-way? Fine. One year. $500K. Not good enough? Sit down and shut up. We'll call you during the season, if we need you.

cash wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:

CockRoche wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:

cash wrote:I've been a Murray supporter, but that signing alone is cause for termination. If I'm in negotiations with that kid, it goes "you want a one way? gtfo of my office.... You want HOW much??? gtfo of my office.... You want TWO years? gtfo of my office.... Prove me you can play in this league first, on a one year, two way, minimum salary and then we'll talk about rewards."

It's up there with the Yashin, Dipietro, Redden, Drury, Gomez signings: Worst signing EVER!

If you're serious you're crazy.

If you're kidding then...good one.

Nothing at all wrong with his first paragraph, nothing IMO.

I think I know what he was getting at with his second train of thought. Cash says it like it is, I like his style.

There's a certain give an take involved with negotiations though and it was "time" to sit or get off the pot for Lee so it's easy to see how Lee's camp could push for a 1 way deal and Murray not wanting to walk away from Lee as a okay prospect at the time.

I have no problem with people who tell it like it is, it's when they stray and make absurd statements that bother me. I don't care if Lee liked to walk around and kick puppies, no contract with such minor implications (cap and play) could ever be considered one of the worst all time. What a stupid and ridiculous statement.

Did you miss my reply to the same post? I clearly state that the implications of the signing were irrelevant, but the structure of the contract was nonsense and totally confusion. You want a 1-way? Fine. One year. $500K. Not good enough? Sit down and shut up. We'll call you during the season, if we need you.

I think alienating the kid even more wouldn't necessarily be a step in the right direction, but clearly you would have taken a hard line stance.

Different strokes for different folks I suppose

cash wrote:

CockRoche wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:

cash wrote:I've been a Murray supporter, but that signing alone is cause for termination. If I'm in negotiations with that kid, it goes "you want a one way? gtfo of my office.... You want HOW much??? gtfo of my office.... You want TWO years? gtfo of my office.... Prove me you can play in this league first, on a one year, two way, minimum salary and then we'll talk about rewards."

It's up there with the Yashin, Dipietro, Redden, Drury, Gomez signings: Worst signing EVER!

If you're serious you're crazy.

If you're kidding then...good one.

Nothing at all wrong with his first paragraph, nothing IMO.

I think I know what he was getting at with his second train of thought. Cash says it like it is, I like his style.

Thanks

I was pretty serious about that second comment: In terms of organizational relevance, the signing doesn't even compare to those mentioned above. In terms of moronic structure, however, it is right there fighting for top spot.

I'm pretty sure that had Lee gone to arbitration in the summer it would have had to be a one-way contract based on NHL games played. Furthermore, I believe that the award would have been higher than his signed contract and low enough to not be eligible for walkaway rights.

cash wrote:I've been a Murray supporter, but that signing alone is cause for termination. If I'm in negotiations with that kid, it goes "you want a one way? gtfo of my office.... You want HOW much??? gtfo of my office.... You want TWO years? gtfo of my office.... Prove me you can play in this league first, on a one year, two way, minimum salary and then we'll talk about rewards."

It's up there with the Yashin, Dipietro, Redden, Drury, Gomez signings: Worst signing EVER!

So you're willing to write Murray off on that contract alone? That's a little extreme. Brian Lee has been a total failure, and that contract certainly made it impossible to move him. Hell, I don't think re-entry would even work.

But to write Murray off on that alone is a bit much.

Lee waived? why? the kid is going to be a monster 6 months from now. heck we could probably trade him for a guy like cammelleri or something. he;s the bomb!!! he's a 1st rounder! a sure thing!!!!

shabbs wrote:

cash wrote:I've been a Murray supporter, but that signing alone is cause for termination. If I'm in negotiations with that kid, it goes "you want a one way? gtfo of my office.... You want HOW much??? gtfo of my office.... You want TWO years? gtfo of my office.... Prove me you can play in this league first, on a one year, two way, minimum salary and then we'll talk about rewards."

It's up there with the Yashin, Dipietro, Redden, Drury, Gomez signings: Worst signing EVER!

So you're willing to write Murray off on that contract alone? That's a little extreme. Brian Lee has been a total failure, and that contract certainly made it impossible to move him. Hell, I don't think re-entry would even work.

But to write Murray off on that alone is a bit much.

I suppose there should have been some kind of sarcasm/blatant overstatement smiley put there, but I forgot tone of voice can't be heard through text.... Anyways, the contract is balls and was a strange decision when it happened. Most fans were shocked and so was I, and clearly it was a mistake.

Ogle: Lee had no arbitration rights.

And even if he had had that ability, Murray knew the character of the kid and would have known he could get strong-armed by an under-performing player; therefore he should have been packaged out of town at the deadline, not signed immediately after.

Don't understand that 2 year decision. Really don't get it.

seriously...it's got to be one or the other (2 way or 2 year).