2017 Sens Off-Season

Ev wrote:Too much. Giroux is a steadily declining player

Why is that though? He's talented big time, why is he declining in what should be his prime?

Ev wrote:

PTFlea wrote:

Ev wrote:if Methot is lost, then so be it. He's aging, injury prone, has a messed up finger, and isn't that great.

It's a big deal for Ottawa if he's claimed IMO.  It messes with the dynamic we have where Methot is Karl's partner and Dion is Ceci's partner and they coexist very well.  I personally really like Claesson a lot, but even you said we should continue to have him on the third pairing, so that means, what, Chabot comes in and tries to pick up the slack lost my Methot?  Or we have to go out and get a new D-man who needs to learn the whole system and needs to learn what he can and can't do with Karlsson.

It's a pain.

Karlsson can play with anybody IMO. If Methot is lost, they would go after a D-man in UFA of trade. The system isn't hard to learn for defensemen. Karl Alzner for example could be a big add if we lost Methot. Better player in almost every way.

That is true. Alzner would be quite the pick up but I'm sure wsh resigns him to keep.

PTFlea wrote:Brassard, White, 1st, Dzingel for Giroux.  No?  I want to dream though.

Too much. Bu I agree with your logic. Dorion should be working the phones to see what value Methot and Ceci have in the market. If we lose one for nothing he failed as a GM. But if he can package one of them in a trade and add something else for a top-six forward upgrade now is the time to do it.

He will have to look at each team and who they are protecting. Both have different values. Methot is a better stay at home defenceman but he's injury prone and older. Ceci isn't as good but he's younger and the team has contract control over him.

Could be an interesting week for Sens fans.

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:

PTFlea wrote:Brassard, White, 1st, Dzingel for Giroux.  No?  I want to dream though.

Too much. Bu I agree with your logic. Dorion should be working the phones to see what value Methot and Ceci have in the market. If we lose one for nothing he failed as a GM. But if he can package one of them in a trade and add something else for a top-six forward upgrade now is the time to do it.

He will have to look at each team and who they are protecting. Both have different values. Methot is a better stay at home defenceman but he's injury prone and older. Ceci isn't as good but he's younger and the team has contract control over him.

Could be an interesting week for Sens fans.

I want to point the obvious fault in this argument. They would not lose one for "nothing". It would unable us to keep another player like Claesson from being picked by Vegas. If we do manage to trade a guy like methot it's at the expense of a guy like claesson going to Vegas. It's quite a loss.

I want to also point out that there are a lot of teams looking to lose d-men and it might not be easy to deal a LH d-man. It's more probable that you could find a trade for a RH like Ceci. So I don't think it's as clear cut as saying Dorion will have failed.

I have grown to hate making bold predictions but it's possible to imagine a guy like claesson being a possible partner for Karlsson a couple years from now. It might. E too much to ask for next year but he's shown he could be that guy in time. So is losing methot such a great cost if it means keeping claesson? Time will tell. Sometimes the best move is no move.

On another note, a pairing of Phaneuf on the right and claesson on the left could be interesting next year. (If Ceci is dealt) leaving chabot, boro and wideman as a third pairing (that would likely mean we lost Dzingel)

Ya I mean there are a lot of different factors to consider. Losing Methot may hurt, but is his value to the team given his salary hit more than Claesson's?

- Claesson is 24 making $650K and is an RFA in 2018/19
- Ceci is 23 making $2.8M and is an RFA in 2018/19
- Methot will be 32 next week, making $4.9M and is a UFA 2019/20.

It's hard to compare Claesson, Ceci and Methot given their ice-time, matchups and d-partners. I do think losing Methot is the logical choice in this situation to be honest. Fans won't be happy as everyone is calling for Ceci's head, but most fans do not consider the cap relief it will create. Eugene will need that cap space but more importantly the cash flow to re-sign Turris, Stone and Karlsson. I am not sure Claesson can handle top pairing minutes, but they do have Phaneuf who can play the majority of his minutes with Karl and have Claesson play a few shifts with a Chabot-Karl powerplay pairing.

This is the same argument with Ryan. The Sens' best bet is to lose Ryan but I strongly feel that Vegas will not be interested in him

Like it or not, Ceci played really tough minutes for us which would be hard to replace, especially on the right side. Pretty much anyone does well playing with Karlsson. And given his ice tone Karlsson plays with pretty much everyone as it is. We have an issue with right side depth so losing on that side would be a problem.

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

wprager wrote:He's a big name,  and his wife is well known in Hollywood. He could be taken.

for the second time, Vegas is not LA

4 hours away. That's not a hard commute. Especially if you wanna audition

It's not just proximity for her,  it's the brand recognition for the team.  She may not be an A-lister anymore,  but she been a regular on two successful network shows (and some less so) and she's been getting steady work (last year on a Netflix series,  then Goon this past year.

Seems like Phaneuf will be traded

Surprised to hear that Phaneuf might be traded, but that's an interesting option. I bet he has a bit more trade value now than he did when we landed him, but we'll see. To do a trade before the expansion draft means the team receiving him would pretty much have to protect him (I think?).

Anyway, people are making too much of the D issue. If we end up exposing either Ceci or Methot, that's not the worst thing in the world. If Vegas takes Ceci, which would be the most likely scenario, then we get to keep Methot, Claesson, and Wideman.

If we trade one of Ceci/Methot/Phaneuf, then guess what? We're likely losing Claesson or Wideman, either of which could end up being better than the aforementioned d-men in a couple years. There's no easy solution to the problem, and the most likely scenario sounds like we're going to lose two defencemen (one via a trade and one to expansion). Depending on the trade return, I might say the preferable scenario is just losing one d-man via expansion.

Anyway, lots to consider here.

Why the hell would we trade phaneuf?

PTFlea wrote:Why the hell would we trade phaneuf?

It was a Brennan article. Nothing he writes ever makes sense. But it was essentially to trade him to one of the 12 teams on his trade list for nothing so we can keep Ceci and Methot. He was citing the fact that he's a $7M cap hit and made no reference to the fact that he's on a sliding salary for the remainder of his contract. Brennan just writes this stuff to stir up the pot.

And I agree. We lose a d-man. So what. We have a ton of depth in that position and there is always the UFA route if needed.

FYI, it's not just Brennan reporting that Phaneuf might be traded. Dreger was on this today too.

I think there's a possibility any of the 3 D-men could be traded, but I doubt it's Phaneuf personally. This likely means Vegas has said no to any deal to protect Methot/Ceci - which sucks, so it's plan B now.

Again though, I have a good feeling about Claesson from watching him the last half of the year and in the playoffs. He could conceivably spend time in the top 4 with Chabot muscling him out of there by mid-season. Or we could get a UFA like Alzner, although I hate free agency. Or a trade. Who knows anymore.

If there's a taker for Phaneuf it makes a lot of sense. We can replace him in FA or trade and we'd save some money probably

Phaneuf has proven he can be a helpful player for us and it took us a long time to be able to find someone for the top 4. Im not so sure he'll be easily replaceable. The only positive I'd see is it might save us some headaches down the road.

We never seem to do well in FA, always seems to be another team that beats us to the top FA so I don't see that as a valid option. Trade could be a road worth going down but I assume there will be some heavy bidding for some of those Damien that will become available after expansion draft. I hate to say it but our best option might be to capitalize on the current need for a right handed D and try to see what is available for Ceci. Anaheim seems to have made a deal, the more I hear the more I think minny will just wind up loosing one player to Vegas and won't make any pre draft deals. So that opens up the market for a guy like Ceci.
Or we stand pat, loose methot and that is that. Which doesn't sound all that terrible since any other scenario sees us likely loosing two D.

Ev wrote:If there's a taker for Phaneuf it makes a lot of sense. We can replace him in FA or trade and we'd save some money probably

I've said it before and I'll say it again: chemistry is huge in sports and Phaneuf fits like a glove. In fact, the whole team is perfectly balanced. It'd be a shame to get that top 4 guy we've always wanted, then have to trade them.

The only guy I'm ok with losing is Ceci - because I think he can be replaced by Chabot/Claesson/Harper by committee.

PTFlea wrote:

Ev wrote:If there's a taker for Phaneuf it makes a lot of sense. We can replace him in FA or trade and we'd save some money probably

I've said it before and I'll say it again: chemistry is huge in sports and Phaneuf fits like a glove.  In fact, the whole team is perfectly balanced.  It'd be a shame to get that top 4 guy we've always wanted, then have to trade them.

The only guy I'm ok with losing is Ceci - because I think he can be replaced by Chabot/Claesson/Harper by committee.

Im still unsure of what we have in Ceci so for me it's still a hard sell. I guess the part that intreagues me the most isn't what we have to lose in Ceci but we could potentially gain. I'm all for losing Ceci if it means he's involved Ina trade for a top LW like Drouin. Im not for losing him if it's just to clear out space. Maybe losing methot makes more sense then.
The advantage we hVe with Phaneuf is that he can play the right or left. In a scenario where we lose Ceci then we may slide Phaneuf to the right and move up claesson(if he's not lost to expansion) or chabot(in time) or find a LH Dman through FA (there's a lot more of those than RH)