Trade Deadline BONANZA 2015

Their seems to be two camps on this site regarding the sens and their current roster. I'm not a regular poster but check out the site a few times a week to see what's in the works and this is what I gather:
1) people that are happy with the team as is, willing to wait and be patient and watch what we have develop. Those people are likely fine with the fact that nothing happened today
2) Those that don't want to wait, post regularly (at least once a day) about how Lazar only has a few goals and is a wasted roster spot. Players like Michalek, Legwand, Phillips, and Greening show how inept Brian Murray is. Ownership is limiting money spent and therefore ruining our chances of winning a cup this year and bringing in star players to take the roster spots of useless players like Lazar. They also think the idea of being patient is ridiculous.

Personally, I think management has made a few mistakes but what GM hasn't? Signing guys like Michalek and Phillips to their current deals are minor mistakes but I believe they were measured risks. You need veteran presence so why not keep vets around that you know fit well. I've always been a huge Michalek fan so I'm sure I'm biased but I completely disagree with Garrioch on that if there was anyone willing to take his salary, they would have sent him packing. Or, at least I hope not. A Michalek season is like his skating...starts slow but once he gets going, he's a beast.

That's just SSF saying Lazar is wasting a roster spot lol, I'm not even sure if he's serious.

The way most of us think, IMO, is that we have a really young team that some of us thought may have taken a bigger jump this season, but while they've progressed well, we're only seeing the fruits of this labour now.

The foundation of this team is built well with Stone, Hoffman, Turris, Zibanejad, Ryan, Pageau (yes, I like him a lot), Lazar, Karlsson, Methot, MacArthur, Ceci, Borowiecki, Gryba, Lehner and/or Anderson.

I can't imagine many people arguing that we have a nice, young roster.

Michalek wasn;t a mistake in my eyes at the time. He played well towards the end of the year and I thought his knee issues were past, but then he blew at the beginning half of the year. So which Michalek will we get? The crap one or this one? If it's this one, he's well worth the 4 million and I have no issues at all personally.

Phillips was also a good signing at the time in my eyes. Cheap, bottom pairing guy, willing to stay in Ottawa. No problems with that either.

I wouldn't criticize Murray too much, except he now has to really examine this roster, take emotions out of it and get a top line winger OR a solid, 2nd pairing D-man who could be a top pairing guy if pressed.

We're close, but Murray's not known for finishing the job unfortunately.

I dunno, there seems to be quite a few people saying they want big money brought in. With recent history (Ryan trade, and Murray stating numerous times that he's looking for a similar deal), I can only assume that means people want young guys shipped out for big name, big money players like Clarkson and Vanek.

Vandelay wrote:I dunno, there seems to be quite a few people saying they want big money brought in.  With recent history (Ryan trade, and Murray stating numerous times that he's looking for a similar deal), I can only assume that means people want young guys shipped out for big name, big money players like Clarkson and Vanek.

That's exactly what we need - another Bobby Ryan.  Not a heartless slug like Vanek whose talent level has gone down the crapper.  No idea where we'll get another Ryan....if that's even attainable.

EDIT: Big money, as in a big time winger for line one, where there'd be money out too, I assume. That's fair, we need either a sniper or a big time D-man to complete this retool IMO.

Did anyone think getting Ryan was attainable? It can happen again.

SpezDispensed wrote:

Vandelay wrote:I dunno, there seems to be quite a few people saying they want big money brought in.  With recent history (Ryan trade, and Murray stating numerous times that he's looking for a similar deal), I can only assume that means people want young guys shipped out for big name, big money players like Clarkson and Vanek.

That's exactly what we need - another Bobby Ryan.  Not a heartless slug like Vanek whose talent level has gone down the crapper.  No idea where we'll get another Ryan....if that's even attainable.

EDIT: Big money, as in a big time winger for line one, where there'd be money out too, I assume.  That's fair, we need either a sniper or a big time D-man to complete this retool IMO.

As in, not a player you'll find on July 1, but only one you can trade for. Which requires there being a) a player out there like that who b) a GM wants to trade for whatever reason.

How many players of Ryan's calibre / status have been traded, to any team, since BM brought him to OTT?

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Vandelay wrote:I dunno, there seems to be quite a few people saying they want big money brought in.  With recent history (Ryan trade, and Murray stating numerous times that he's looking for a similar deal), I can only assume that means people want young guys shipped out for big name, big money players like Clarkson and Vanek.

That's exactly what we need - another Bobby Ryan.  Not a heartless slug like Vanek whose talent level has gone down the crapper.  No idea where we'll get another Ryan....if that's even attainable.

EDIT: Big money, as in a big time winger for line one, where there'd be money out too, I assume.  That's fair, we need either a sniper or a big time D-man to complete this retool IMO.

As in, not a player you'll find on July 1, but only one you can trade for. Which requires there being a) a player out there like that who b) a GM wants to trade for whatever reason.

How many players of Ryan's calibre / status have been traded, to any team, since BM brought him to OTT?

Not many. If we can't do it, we can't do it. But there has to be careful attention paid to either looking for one of those guys, or getting Ceci an excellent NHL D-man to further improve our team.

Unless they think Cowen/Wiercioch/Wikstrand/Claesson can do it. We'll see. In any event, Ottawa is primed to break out - as we all thought they would at the beginning of the year, but to climb up high enough to be a threat in the playoffs as well, they need to add something I think.

Vandelay wrote:I dunno, there seems to be quite a few people saying they want big money brought in.  With recent history (Ryan trade, and Murray stating numerous times that he's looking for a similar deal), I can only assume that means people want young guys shipped out for big name, big money players like Clarkson and Vanek.

And then there is the camp that likes giving young players the chance to grow, wants to build through th draft and thinks the UFA market is usually a mistake for anything other than depth, but also believe that the internal budget is real and hamstrings the GM from being creative.

Oglethorpe wrote:

Vandelay wrote:I dunno, there seems to be quite a few people saying they want big money brought in.  With recent history (Ryan trade, and Murray stating numerous times that he's looking for a similar deal), I can only assume that means people want young guys shipped out for big name, big money players like Clarkson and Vanek.

And then there is the camp that likes giving young players the chance to grow, wants to build through th draft and thinks the UFA market is usually a mistake for anything other than depth, but also believe that the internal budget is real and hamstrings the GM from being creative.  

Are you in the camp? So, you really think that if Murray were to find another Ryan type deal, it would be a no-go because of internal budget? You still haven't mentioned any player that you thought should have been brought in and wasn't. Again, I'm not asking for a source, I'm genuinely curious who you think these players are.

SpezDispensed wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Vandelay wrote:I dunno, there seems to be quite a few people saying they want big money brought in.  With recent history (Ryan trade, and Murray stating numerous times that he's looking for a similar deal), I can only assume that means people want young guys shipped out for big name, big money players like Clarkson and Vanek.

That's exactly what we need - another Bobby Ryan.  Not a heartless slug like Vanek whose talent level has gone down the crapper.  No idea where we'll get another Ryan....if that's even attainable.

EDIT: Big money, as in a big time winger for line one, where there'd be money out too, I assume.  That's fair, we need either a sniper or a big time D-man to complete this retool IMO.

As in, not a player you'll find on July 1, but only one you can trade for. Which requires there being a) a player out there like that who b) a GM wants to trade for whatever reason.

How many players of Ryan's calibre / status have been traded, to any team, since BM brought him to OTT?

Not many.  If we can't do it, we can't do it.  But there has to be careful attention paid to either looking for one of those guys, or getting Ceci an excellent NHL D-man to further improve our team.

Unless they think Cowen/Wiercioch/Wikstrand/Claesson can do it.  We'll see.  In any event, Ottawa is primed to break out - as we all thought they would at the beginning of the year, but to climb up high enough to be a threat in the playoffs as well, they need to add something I think.

Only way I see us addressing one of those needs is trading one of Anderson or the Lehner. Maybe a Anderson for Marleau deal this summer?

Vandelay wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Vandelay wrote:I dunno, there seems to be quite a few people saying they want big money brought in.  With recent history (Ryan trade, and Murray stating numerous times that he's looking for a similar deal), I can only assume that means people want young guys shipped out for big name, big money players like Clarkson and Vanek.

That's exactly what we need - another Bobby Ryan.  Not a heartless slug like Vanek whose talent level has gone down the crapper.  No idea where we'll get another Ryan....if that's even attainable.

EDIT: Big money, as in a big time winger for line one, where there'd be money out too, I assume.  That's fair, we need either a sniper or a big time D-man to complete this retool IMO.

As in, not a player you'll find on July 1, but only one you can trade for. Which requires there being a) a player out there like that who b) a GM wants to trade for whatever reason.

How many players of Ryan's calibre / status have been traded, to any team, since BM brought him to OTT?

Not many.  If we can't do it, we can't do it.  But there has to be careful attention paid to either looking for one of those guys, or getting Ceci an excellent NHL D-man to further improve our team.

Unless they think Cowen/Wiercioch/Wikstrand/Claesson can do it.  We'll see.  In any event, Ottawa is primed to break out - as we all thought they would at the beginning of the year, but to climb up high enough to be a threat in the playoffs as well, they need to add something I think.

Only way I see us addressing one of those needs is trading one of Anderson or the Lehner.  Maybe a Anderson for Marleau deal this summer?

I have a major man crush on Marleau....but he's getting old. Really old. I think I'd pass at this point as he'd start the season as a 36 year old.

Oglethorpe wrote:

Vandelay wrote:I dunno, there seems to be quite a few people saying they want big money brought in.  With recent history (Ryan trade, and Murray stating numerous times that he's looking for a similar deal), I can only assume that means people want young guys shipped out for big name, big money players like Clarkson and Vanek.

And then there is the camp that likes giving young players the chance to grow, wants to build through th draft and thinks the UFA market is usually a mistake for anything other than depth, but also believe that the internal budget is real and hamstrings the GM from being creative.  

And the evidence for that thesis? Speculation, innuendo, and a creative imagination. Sure makes making the argument easy.

Yah, it's time that people start using some facts behind their claims about the budget hampering the Sens. Where's the proof? Look forward to hearing it.

I also don't really get it. At this point every single thing that we were told is happening. He spent when he needed to spend, he let his GM build the team with youth and we're about to be a near-cap team, not necessarily a cap team, but close to it with only Greening as being the really bad contract.

Not only that, he let Murray fire the coach mid-season.

I don't see a budget thing at all, although it'll be yet another topic of conversation in the summer when Cowen, Legwand and maybe even Michalek are traded for picks, but this is cutting some of the big contracts that can be replaced with smaller contracts - or a trade etc., while keeping all your most important players.

SpezDispensed wrote:I also don't really get it.  At this point every single thing that we were told is happening.  He spent when he needed to spend, he let his GM build the team with youth and we're about to be a near-cap team, not necessarily a cap team, but close to it with only Greening as being the really bad contract.

Not only that, he let Murray fire the coach mid-season.

I don't see a budget thing at all, although it'll be yet another topic of conversation in the summer when Cowen, Legwand and maybe even Michalek are traded for picks, but this is cutting some of the big contracts that can be replaced with smaller contracts - or a trade etc., while keeping all your most important players.

When our GM comes out and says, "Yeah, we had to trade this awesome young player because THE BUDGET," then there will be some sense to the argument. But until then, it's a convenient catch-all argument with no basis beyond speculation. This team has stepped up again and again to sign all of its key players in the last 10~ months.

Did you guys even listen to Murray's media scrum today. He said he would move a Dman this offseason to get within the budget. He said budget, not implied or another term. Not moving a player to get a better piece or to make room for kids, because of budget. This isn't to say that it won't be as part of a package, but it is clear that they will have an internal budget and that may hurt the chances of obtaining what we need. I have heard the plan is to be around 60M in salaries next season.

Oglethorpe wrote:Did you guys even listen to Murray's media scrum today.  He said he would move a Dman this offseason to get within the budget.  He said budget, not implied or another term.  Not moving a player to get a better piece or to make room for kids, because of budget.  This isn't to say that it won't be as part of a package, but it is clear that they will have an internal budget and that may hurt the chances of obtaining what we need.  I have heard the plan is to be around 60M in salaries next season.  

Yeah, I heard it. I have no doubt we have a budget that's below the cap, but above the floor. As to whether or not that has ever, once, ever made BM trade away a player he'd rather keep, or not trade for a player he wanted, we have zero evidence for.

For the specific quote today -- he called it a 'veteran issue,' on D -- I genuinely think he was talking about getting Phillips off the books.

As to the supposed $60 mil budget next year, we'll see. If we re-sign our key RFAs and ice the best 23-man roster we can while cutting the deadwood, I don't care if we're paying $55 mil or $65 mil.

The time to get our panties in a bunch will be when we trade a young player with upside for picks, etc, or when we here our GM say, 'yeah, we wanted to be in on that Ryan-esque player, but BUDGET.' Until then, it's all -- let me be clear, as our CPC members always say -- there is ZERO evidence for the thesis.

Oglethorpe wrote:Did you guys even listen to Murray's media scrum today.  He said he would move a Dman this offseason to get within the budget.  He said budget, not implied or another term.  Not moving a player to get a better piece or to make room for kids, because of budget.  This isn't to say that it won't be as part of a package, but it is clear that they will have an internal budget and that may hurt the chances of obtaining what we need.  I have heard the plan is to be around 60M in salaries next season.  

To get under the cap is what he meant. It has to be.

Here, let's break it down:

Ryan - 7.25
Turris - 3.5
MacArthur - 4.650
Stone - ? the smart guess would be between 2 and 3, let's say 2.5
Hoffman - see Stone
Legwand - 3.0
Pageau - the guess would be around 1.0
Greening - 2.65
Michalek - 4.0
Neil - 1.9
Smith 1.887
Chiasson - the guess would be 1.5-2.0 - say 1.75
Zibanejad - see Stone, Hoffman, probably 2.5-3, say 2.75

That's 13 forwards - the hope from me personally is we dump Legwand and sign Condra to half his amount. Lazar will probably start in the AHL, unless we can dump Greening. But these are hypotheticals.

Total for 13 forward is = 39.337

Karlsson - 6.5
Methot - 4.9
Cowen - 3.1
Wiercioch - 2.0
Phillips - 2.5
Ceci - 1.369
Gryba - 1.25
Boro - 1.1

Total for the 8 D = 22.719

Goalies:

Anderson - 4.2
Lehner - 2.225

Total for goalies: 6.425

TOTAL:
Forwards: 39.337
Defence: 22.719
Goalies: 6.425

TOTAL: 68.48

So...right at the cap in other words. So, of course he has to dump a D-man and a F to get within budget - both our 'internal' budget and the NHLs cap.

Real $$ values vs cap hits are relatively close too, so it's not really like the amount is lower in real money. I think perhaps Ryan's is 1 million less, in most instances it's actually more.