UPDATE: DONE DEAL Working on a serious rumour: Auld to Dallas

SensFan71 wrote:in Ekuian fashion, SpezzD will keep us posted with quick hits during the day.

:^^^^: That's all I got for now. I'll wait for the real rumour guys like SensChirp to sniff out any further details.

SpezDispenser wrote:That makes me sad. Auld's worth more than a 6th if that's true. Such a solid goalie, such a great teammate. Oh well...

You're happy if a 6th rounder becomes an AHL goalie.

asq2 wrote:
You're happy if a 6th rounder becomes an AHL goalie.

Yeah, not sure why we'd want to trade Auld for such a low pick, but I assume teams aren't exactly beating the door down for him.

SpezDispenser wrote:

asq2 wrote:
You're happy if a 6th rounder becomes an AHL goalie.

Yeah, not sure why we'd want to trade Auld for such a low pick, but I assume teams aren't exactly beating the door down for him.

Again, there are tonnes of potential backup UFA goalies available right now. Getting Auld out and Elliott in are more important than any return, honestly -- and getting the deal done at all in the midst of UFA season, with all those other goalies out there, would be an accomplishment in itself.

rooneypoo wrote:
Again, there are tonnes of potential backup UFA goalies available right now. Getting Auld out and Elliott in are more important than any return, honestly -- and getting the deal done at all in the midst of UFA season, with all those other goalies out there, would be an accomplishment in itself.

Is Auld a little more of a special case though? He's a good, solid goaltender, who could easily start for a team, he's on a 1-year, cap friendly deal.

Is this a different scenario, or should Murray just be looking to dump him like you say, to get Elliott into the fold as quick as possible.

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:
Again, there are tonnes of potential backup UFA goalies available right now. Getting Auld out and Elliott in are more important than any return, honestly -- and getting the deal done at all in the midst of UFA season, with all those other goalies out there, would be an accomplishment in itself.

Is Auld a little more of a special case though? He's a good, solid goaltender, who could easily start for a team, he's on a 1-year, cap friendly deal.

Is this a different scenario, or should Murray just be looking to dump him like you say, to get Elliott into the fold as quick as possible.

As I've said, I definitely think Auld is a tradeable asset -- good team guy, decent goalie, good deal -- but it's a buyer's market right now. A GM looking for a backup goalie has a lot of options, starting with a long list of UFAs he can acquire for nothing.

Is Auld and his current that much better than you'd get with one of those guys? I dunno.

Priority #1 should just be to ship him out. You didn't give up any assets to acquire him, so whatever. He's a good guy and a good teammate, but we need to address our cap situation and make room for Elliott. Moving Auld -- even for only a 6th -- is a start.

rooneypoo wrote:
As I've said, I definitely think Auld is a tradeable asset -- good team guy, decent goalie, good deal -- but it's a buyer's market right now. A GM looking for a backup goalie has a lot of options, starting with a long list of UFAs he can acquire for nothing.

Is Auld and his current that much better than you'd get with one of those guys? I dunno.

Priority #1 should just be to ship him out. You didn't give up any assets to acquire him, so whatever. He's a good guy and a good teammate, but we need to address our cap situation and make room for Elliott. Moving Auld -- even for only a 6th -- is a start.

I have no idea why the Canucks for example, went after Raycroft, when Auld would've been their perfect backup, but yes, I agree, let's clean up this cluttered roster a little.

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:
Again, there are tonnes of potential backup UFA goalies available right now. Getting Auld out and Elliott in are more important than any return, honestly -- and getting the deal done at all in the midst of UFA season, with all those other goalies out there, would be an accomplishment in itself.

Is Auld a little more of a special case though? He's a good, solid goaltender, who could easily start for a team, he's on a 1-year, cap friendly deal.

Is this a different scenario, or should Murray just be looking to dump him like you say, to get Elliott into the fold as quick as possible.

we wish he was a special case, but in reality, no not really, sure he's a team first guy, low salary, but other GM's will see this as doing us a favour and will low ball us incredibly.

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:
As I've said, I definitely think Auld is a tradeable asset -- good team guy, decent goalie, good deal -- but it's a buyer's market right now. A GM looking for a backup goalie has a lot of options, starting with a long list of UFAs he can acquire for nothing.

Is Auld and his current that much better than you'd get with one of those guys? I dunno.

Priority #1 should just be to ship him out. You didn't give up any assets to acquire him, so whatever. He's a good guy and a good teammate, but we need to address our cap situation and make room for Elliott. Moving Auld -- even for only a 6th -- is a start.

I have no idea why the Canucks for example, went after Raycroft, when Auld would've been their perfect backup, but yes, I agree, let's clean up this cluttered roster a little.

Probably because 1) Auld basically got chased out of VAN and 2) they gave absolutely nothing up to sign Raycroft.

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:
As I've said, I definitely think Auld is a tradeable asset -- good team guy, decent goalie, good deal -- but it's a buyer's market right now. A GM looking for a backup goalie has a lot of options, starting with a long list of UFAs he can acquire for nothing.

Is Auld and his current that much better than you'd get with one of those guys? I dunno.

Priority #1 should just be to ship him out. You didn't give up any assets to acquire him, so whatever. He's a good guy and a good teammate, but we need to address our cap situation and make room for Elliott. Moving Auld -- even for only a 6th -- is a start.

I have no idea why the Canucks for example, went after Raycroft, when Auld would've been their perfect backup, but yes, I agree, let's clean up this cluttered roster a little.

Probably because 1) Auld basically got chased out of VAN and 2) they gave absolutely nothing up to sign Raycroft.

Yeah, I realized that after I wrote it. Auld's been around...Dung.

I have a feeling this Dallas deal will solve all of our current problems.

SeawaySensFan wrote:I have a feeling this Dallas deal will solve all of our current problems.

Yeah? So Heatley, Kelly, Schubert, Smith and Auld to Dallas for Neal, Benn, 1st rounder, Eriksson.

SpezDispenser wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I have a feeling this Dallas deal will solve all of our current problems.

Yeah? So Heatley, Kelly, Schubert, Smith and Auld to Dallas for Neal, Benn, 1st rounder, Eriksson.

remove Kelly and I think we have a deal, and if the price of Kelly being removed is that 1st rounder, then do it up.

SpezDispenser wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I have a feeling this Dallas deal will solve all of our current problems.

Yeah? So Heatley, Kelly, Schubert, Smith and Auld to Dallas for Neal, Benn, 1st rounder, Eriksson.

Something like that. I'm thinking more of doing a deal with Dallas that would free up some cash to do something with SJS.

Maybe Kelly, Schubert, Smith and Auld for Eriksson, Grossman and a 2nd? We'd be giving up a lot of bodies but shedding some excess.

Essentially it would be Kelly for Eriksson.

SeawaySensFan wrote:
Something like that. I'm thinking more of doing a deal with Dallas that would free up some cash to do something with SJS.

Maybe Kelly, Schubert, Smith and Auld for Eriksson, Grossman and a 2nd? We'd be giving up a lot of bodies but shedding some excess.

Essentially it would be Kelly for Eriksson.

If you could get that deal to go through, you'd be GM of the Year.

Kelly has a good reputation in the league and Schubert is a decent player, I don't care what Booboo thinks. It's not like we'd be offering garbage and Eriksson is on the last year of a deal, after all.

SeawaySensFan wrote:Kelly has a good reputation in the league and Schubert is a decent player, I don't care what Booboo thinks. It's not like we'd be offering garbage and Eriksson is on the last year of a deal, after all.

Me love Eriksson long time. An RFA after this to boot.

nothing from Sens Chirp on this yet, but he could be working/playing softball again, nothing from Ek either, which is only good because that means it definitely could be valid, if Ek reports at anything other than E5 (meaning he stole it from TSN), then I know it won't happen.