Silly Season 2009: Free Agents and Trades--Who Goes Where?

I'm horrified of a Campbell for Heatley trade because of Campbell's term. I would think about it if he had 4 more years left, but 7? Can't do it.

SpezDispenser wrote:I'm horrified of a Campbell for Heatley trade because of Campbell's term. I would think about it if he had 4 more years left, but 7? Can't do it.

Spez, I would be very surprised if Mr Bryan Murray and Mr Dale Tallon consummated such a deal.

However, as we have seen in the wonderful and wacky world of hockey, anything is possible.

^Agreed. That is a key point to the contract and to the argument against that trade. That's why Bryan Murray bailed out on signing Campbell in the first place, no?

davetherave wrote:
Spez, I would be very surprised if Mr Bryan Murray and Mr Dale Tallon consummated such a deal.

However, as we have seen in the wonderful and wacky world of hockey, anything is possible.

I doubt it as well. Why would Chicago even bother when their forward core is so sexy.

beerandsens wrote:^Agreed. That is a key point to the contract and to the argument against that trade. That's why Bryan Murray bailed out on signing Campbell in the first place, no?

Yeah, apparently he wanted 4 or 5 years, not 8.

I doubt we'll be seeing many long term (7+) contracts this July 1. With the uncertainty about the economy and cap ceiling, GMS will be forced to be a little bit more prudent.

beerandsens wrote:^Agreed. That is a key point to the contract and to the argument against that trade. That's why Bryan Murray bailed out on signing Campbell in the first place, no?

Beer, I don't know the details of the discussions between Murray and Campbell, so I can't speak to that.

At the time, Bryan Campbell was, as I remember, a highly desired UFA.

Campbell had wanted to re-up with the Sabres but talks had broken down after some apparently contentious negotaition. I followed the story as it was reported over several months by NHL Radio, EJ Hradek providing regular updates.

The Sabres shipped Campbell to the Sharks and if memory serves me well, Campbell never felt comfortable there. Thus, he elected to test the market that summer--when the so-called PMD (Puck Moving Defenseman) was an extremely hot, and overvalued commodity.

The fact that Bryan Campbell got a windfall was a consequence of that demand.

Looking at Ottawa, Bryan Murray found himself in a situation where one of the NHL's rare consistent 50-goal scorers, in Dany Heatley, was entering the last year of his contract. Murray elected to make Heatley the highest paid player in the NHL, locking him into a contract that some have criticized as 'overpriced' and 'untradeable'.

If we look at the situation objectively for a moment, there is some logic to the possibility of the Hawks and Senators doing business.

Chicago can use an explosive scoring threat. They are excellent defensively, and offensively, but a 6'2" winger with a cruise missile for a shot would make them lethal. Heatley has been a mainstay of the Senators' strike force and is unquestionably, a player that upsets opponents' game plans.

Ottawa has problems with its transition game. Campbell is one of the best rushing defensemen in the National Hockey League. His presence gave a new dimension to the Hawks' attack this year. In the playoffs, Campbell was a force the Canucks could not counter.

So both teams could benefit from such a trade.

Both players have their critics, but there is something to be said for what they would bring to each team if such a deal were made.

Heatley would probably feel at ease in the young, dynamic atmosphere in Chicago with a coach like Quenneville who is very good at maximizing his personnel...and he goes to a Cup contender in the West.

Campbell would excel under Clouston, and he's an ex-Ottawa '67,so the fans could potentially embrace him. Campbell would have an instant positive impact and help make the Sens a playoff team. He is a true competitor.

There are pros and cons to this, but it's not beyond the possibility of happening.

Let's look at the numbers:

Heatley, 5 more years, $35MM, with the $4MM bonus perhaps being assumed by Ottawa.

Campbell, 7 more years (defensemen traditionally have more longevity than forwards), $49.98MM.

So they are each averaging out at about $7MM a year. Not a bad investment when you consider Hossa got paid 7,45.

Again, no one says this will happen. But there could be strong arguments made in this deal's favour.

Would never trade Heatley for Campbell. Even when he's at his worse, he's one of the leagues best snipers. Campbell is an average dman, and no where near Heatley's caliber.

Heatley wont be traded for a high paid player, it'll be a package. I guarantee it.

The Guy With The Mustache wrote:Would never trade Heatley for Campbell. Even when he's at his worse, he's one of the leagues best snipers. Campbell is an average dman, and no where near Heatley's caliber.

Heatley wont be traded for a high paid player, it'll be a package. I guarantee it.

Guarantee, eh?

Be careful about your predictions, Tukker. Your track record's a little shaky.

I don't understand why Campbell didn't feel comfortable is SJ. He had something silly like 20 points in 18 games there. He fit in like a glove from an outsider looking in.

SpezDispenser wrote:I don't understand why Campbell didn't feel comfortable is SJ. He had something silly like 20 points in 18 games there. He fit in like a glove from an outsider looking in.

SpezD, I am just relating what was reported by NHL Radio at the time, which was that Campbell's playoff performance was judged to be unsatisfactory by some in San Jose. Unfortunately, that is the only information I have, so I have to qualify that perspective for what it is, which is hearsay.

Tukker doesn't like Campbell because BC helped nuke his Nucks.

SpezD, BTW, thanks for bringing up the Lecavalier to Montreal scenario on the Habs thread.


With the Molsons now reclaiming the Canadiens, it will be interesting to see if they give Gainey and Martin a mandate to rebuild the club in the image of the Championship teams of days gone by.

That would suggest a move like Vinnie to Montreal--and I would say that he would be named team captain if it happens--becomes a fundamental part of such an equation.

I'm not a nucks fan by any means.

I could possibly be a proponent of a Campbell for Heatley trade only if there are other pieces include. There would have to be 1 young roster forward and a top draft pick included as far as I'm concerned to make this a move worth making.

ESPN explores the Heatley talk...and examines suggestions that the Sedins could go to Ottawa.

Canucks to swap Sedins for Heatley?
ESPN INSIDER, June 19, 2009

Dany Heatley | Senators | Interested: Oilers? Blackhawks? Sharks? Canucks? Wild? Canadiens? Blues?

Dany Heatley's hefty contract is making trade possibilities increasingly slim, according to The Ottawa Citizen.

While the disgruntled forward's list of preferred destinations is as of yet unknown, it is widely believed that the Edmonton Oilers, Calgary Flames and Vancouver Canucks all made the cut.

However, the Flames likely could not afford him under the cap and at least one agent believes the Oilers would be unwilling to give the Ottawa Senators anything resembling equal value in return.

That leaves the Canucks.

Only problem there is that the club could never afford to keep both Henrik Sedin, Daniel Sedin (unrestricted FAs as of July 1) and add Heatley. The question then becomes, would the Canucks prefer Heatley or the twins?

But even then, the 'Nucks may prefer to chase other free agent options like Martin Havlat, Marian Hossa or Marian Gaborik and structure contracts that would be more club-friendly than Heatley's albatross of a deal.

Beer, I don't know the details of the discussions between Murray and Campbell, so I can't speak to that.

I remember Garrioch or Brennan writing a lengthy article (which I have wasted the better part of an hour trying to find) that stated Murray offered Campbell slightly less term (6 years maybe?) and about 1 mil less per season on average. In that same article Murray stated that he couldn't commit any longer due to the Sens cap situation at the time and moving forward.

I don't recall if they had quotations on Murrays statement or if they were speaking on Murrays behalf, which would weaken the integrity of those already suspect writers. But that is what I was referring to and I'm thinking if we cared enough to dig it up that is what we'd find.

Either way, that alone doesn't mean it's a bad deal. I'll have to evaluate Campbell's performance over the next few years to see how good/bad that contract is.

I've already said my piece about potentially bringing the Sedin twins into the fold. It's a rarity, even in today's NHL, for a team to have four 80+ point players on their roster.

I'm not sure what kind of cap situation that puts us in, or if I'm particularly crazy about their demands for 12 year contracts each.

But it is an interesting scenario no less.

You could piece together 3 lines around these duos that look something like this:

player-Spezza-Alfredsson
player-Sedin-Sedin
player-Fisher-Foligno

I think though at this point, with cap considerations being what they are, that we might be better off spending that money on elite defensemen, eventhough there aren't many available, rather than on the twins.

Such a tough decision though...really hard to pass up on them considering they are very good on both sides of the puck.

12 YEARS?!?!