What does it take to get Nash?

What do you think it would take to get Nash in a trade? What are the pieces going both ways?

Not what you'd want it to be but what would it realistically be.

If I was Columbus I'd ask for Lehner, Zibanejad/Silfverberg, Foligno + 1st.

Take it or leave it.

I would take that as a Sens fan. Later zibby.

What about a package that includes methot?

DirtDiddler wrote:I would take that as a Sens fan. Later zibby.

What about a package that includes methot?

Lehner is a major sticking point for me. I'd pass. Methot could probably be involved in that, not sure what extra you'd have to pay, but at that point you've given a fair package for sure.

SpezDispenser wrote:If I was Columbus I'd ask for Lehner, Zibanejad/Silfverberg, Foligno + 1st.

Take it or leave it.

I'll do any of our prospects except Lehner.

Michallica wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:If I was Columbus I'd ask for Lehner, Zibanejad/Silfverberg, Foligno + 1st.

Take it or leave it.

I'll do any of our prospects except Lehner.

For Nash?

My personal opinion is that I wouldn't let Silfverberg, Noesen or Lehner go. The rest are up for grabs I guess.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Michallica wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:If I was Columbus I'd ask for Lehner, Zibanejad/Silfverberg, Foligno + 1st.

Take it or leave it.

I'll do any of our prospects except Lehner.

For Nash?

My personal opinion is that I wouldn't let Silfverberg, Noesen or Lehner go. The rest are up for grabs I guess.

It's the exact same answer for me. Although I'm not convinced on how good Silfverberg will be or at least that there won't be an adjusting period for him I'd like for the sens to hold on to him.

I think Zib anyways has a lot of value in other organizations eyes. Just the fact that he'd be included might mean that we might be able to put Bishop in there. But maybe that's wishful thinking on my part.

SpezDispenser wrote:
My personal opinion is that I wouldn't let Silfverberg, Noesen or Lehner go. The rest are up for grabs I guess.

That's my feeling as well.

I still think Nash should go for a roster player (ie. Michalek), top prospect and a 1st. Columbus asking for more because Nash is worth more to them and they want to hit a home run. We'd be doing them a favor taking that salary on.

Flo The Action wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

Michallica wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:If I was Columbus I'd ask for Lehner, Zibanejad/Silfverberg, Foligno + 1st.

Take it or leave it.

I'll do any of our prospects except Lehner.

For Nash?

My personal opinion is that I wouldn't let Silfverberg, Noesen or Lehner go. The rest are up for grabs I guess.

It's the exact same answer for me. Although I'm not convinced on how good Silfverberg will be or at least that there won't be an adjusting period for him I'd like for the sens to hold on to him.

I think Zib anyways has a lot of value in other organizations eyes. Just the fact that he'd be included might mean that we might be able to put Bishop in there. But maybe that's wishful thinking on my part.

Yeah, I would feel the same way. Zibanejad has a ton of value in hockey circles IMO. Top 5 consensus prospect, basically everywhere, big, strong, fast kid with a lot of talent. I think if they asked for him, we could take out Lehner and put in Bishop. Otherwise I would be out personally.

Hoags wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:
My personal opinion is that I wouldn't let Silfverberg, Noesen or Lehner go. The rest are up for grabs I guess.

That's my feeling as well.

I still think Nash should go for a roster player (ie. Michalek), top prospect and a 1st. Columbus asking for more because Nash is worth more to them and they want to hit a home run. We'd be doing them a favor taking that salary on.

Would you make the deal if Michalek was involved? Seems like you're plugging a hole and immediately opening another one.

SpezDispenser wrote:
Would you make the deal if Michalek was involved? Seems like you're plugging a hole and immediately opening another one.

Well it's more of a 'hockey trade' in that we essentially swap roster players, the draft pick and prospect offsetting the fact that Nash is a higher caliber player. We don't take on as much salary cap hit either. I think it's more possible that we can win that trade since Nash would probably flourish here.

But I can't see how Nash could compensate for us blowing up our prospect pool for him. Giving up Lehner, 2 of our prospects and our 1st(which we need to draft Defense depth). We lose that trade 9/10 and we're stuck with Nash's cap hit for years.

Columbus is asking for too much, maybe they will get it from someone. Given the terrible shape our defense is in, I don't think we should blow our load for a forward.

Build from the net out.

I agree for the most part, not sure I'd be running to make a deal for Nash right now.

Hoags wrote:...Given the terrible shape our defense is in, I don't think we should blow our load for a forward.

SpezDispenser wrote:I agree for the most part, not sure I'd be running to make a deal for Nash right now.

You agree about the bolded part, too?

If Alfie is going to play another year, I'd like to see the Sens go for it all, which includes getting Nash. I don't care about Nash's salary as the Sens will a) not be a cap team even with him and b) it's not my money.

The cost may not be as high as people think as I believe Nash will only accept a trade to a few locations.

dennycrane wrote:If Alfie is going to play another year, I'd like to see the Sens go for it all, which includes getting Nash. I don't care about Nash's salary as the Sens will a) not be a cap team even with him and b) it's not my money.

The cost may not be as high as people think as I believe Nash will only accept a trade to a few locations.

Which I doubt includes Ottawa... but for those of you so concerned with our precious 1st pick, Mike Richards went to LA and no 1st rounder was included in that deal.

Like you say, once that deal is done people will say "is that all it cost?" And then they'll say, "yeah but I wasn't willing to give up (insert unproven prospect name here), anyway."