In today’s NHL rumor mill, we look at some possible offseason moves by the Anaheim Ducks, Minnesota Wild and Vancouver Canucks.
What next for the Anaheim Ducks?
Have defenseman Sami Vatanen and goalie Frederik Andersen played their final games for the Anaheim Ducks?
ESPN.COM: Following yet another disappointing playoff exit for the Anaheim Ducks, Craig Custance suggests they pursue Tampa Bay Lightning left wing Jonathan Drouin if he’s available via the trade market, shop one of their goalies if the league is expanding after next season and re-sign defenseman Hampus Lindholm to a long-term extension.
Custance believes the 21-year-old Drouin could be a good fit alongside first-line stars Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry. Of the goalies, Frederik Andersen could be the trade candidate, as he’s a restricted free agent with arbitration rights who’s a year away from eligibility for unrestricted free agent status. Economics could force the Ducks to choose between Lindholm, who’s coming off an entry-level contract, and Sami Vatanen, who’s also an RFA with arbitration rights.
EDMONTON JOURNAL: David Staples dismisses the notion of the Ducks shipping Vatanen to the Edmonton Oilers straight up for right wing Jordan Eberle. Staples said “it’s hard to see how such a deal would work for budget conscious Anaheim, a team also loaded with right shot forwards”
SPECTOR’S NOTE: If the Lightning are still entertaining offers for Drouin this summer, the asking price likely remains a top-four defenseman with a right-handed shot. The only one fitting that description is Vatanen, but given the Bolts’ own salary-cap issues both this summer and next, he might be too expensive salary-wise. I concur with Staples’ take on a Vatanen-for-Eberle swap. While the Oilers could be interested in Vatanen, the Ducks could balk at Eberle’s $6 million per season cap hit.
Latest on the Wild.
TWINCITIES.COM: Chad Graff reports Minnesota Wild GM Chuck Fletcher believes he has enough salary-cap space to add a player or two to bolster his roster for next season. He has over $8 million coming off his books this summer. Graff suggests two Minnesotans (St. Louis Blues center David Backes and New York Islanders right wing Kyle Okposo) could be available via free agency in July. Graff notes Fletcher could free up additional cap room by buying out under-performing winger Thomas Vanek, but the Wild GM called that talk premature. Fletcher feels he’ll have more flexibility and more assets to work with this summer.
Fletcher also acknowledged backup goaltender Darcy Kuemper will likely be traded this summer. The 26-year-old is a restricted free agent with arbitration rights this summer. The Wild GM also came to the defense of blueliner Matt Dumba, who struggled at times this season and was the subject of trade chatter. He also believes winger Jason Zucker will bounce back after managing only 13 goals in 71 games in 2015-16.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: Even taking into account the $8 million coming off the Wild’s books this summer, they still have over $63 million invested in 15 players. Assuming a projected cap ceiling of $74 million is correct, Fletcher will have around $11 million to work with. Dumba is a restricted free agent coming off an entry-level contract, while Zucker has arbitration rights. Assuming he re-signs those two to affordable short-term deals, that will still eat up over one-third of his cap space. He certainly won’t have enough to land Backes or Okposo via free agency and still have sufficient room to fill out the rest of the roster unless he dumps a lot of salary. The asking price from those guys could be around $6 million per season.
To improve the offense, Fletcher could shop a defenseman such as Jonas Brodin ($4.1 million) or Marco Scandella ($4 million) for a scoring forward. Perhaps he moves both of them. I don’t see how he can avoid buying out Vanek, which will be the easiest way to free up some much-needed cap room this summer. I don’t expect he’ll find much of a trade market for a fading winger carrying a $6.5 million cap hit ($7.5 million in actual salary) next season.
No surprise that Kuemper will be shopped. Consistency’s been an issue for him, relegating him to backup duty. Perhaps Fletcher will package Kuemper with a defenseman to land a top scorer. There’s plenty of veteran goalies available this summer who’ll be more affordable options to back up starter Devan Dubnyk.
Update on the Canucks.
THE PROVINCE: Ben Kuzma recently played the “offseason simulator” game with the Vancouver Canucks to determine their possible moves this summer. He wonders if pending UFA defenseman Dan Hamhuis will remain with the Canucks or try to maximize his worth and not take a cut from his current $4.25 million annual salary. Kuzma considers fading veteran forwards Alex Burrows and Chris Higgins as buyout candidates. Each have a year remaining on their contracts, with Burrows carrying a $4.5 million cap hit and Higgins $2.5 million. He believes the Canucks will kick the tires on Boston Bruins pending UFA winger Loui Eriksson. Other Canucks UFAs, notably Radim Vrbata, Brandon Prust, Yannick Weber and Matt Bartkowski, won’t be back.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: Nothing here that wasn’t already speculated upon earlier this month. Hamhuis is a wild card. He could test the UFA market but the British Columbia native loves living and playing in Vancouver. His departure this summer isn’t assured. If skating alongside the Sedin Twins is a draw for Eriksson he could sign with the Canucks, but he’s seeking around $6 million annually on a five-year deal.
So the Bolts want a top four defenseman for Drouin but because of cap issues they can’t afford to take on a top four defenseman. Is this a great example of a “Catch-22” or what!
Starting to wonder if resigning Braydon Coburn was really a good idea.
removing Stamkos would clean that up nicely.
Except Stamkos isn’t on their books for next season. They also need to re-sign or replace Ben Bishop and Victor Hedman too in the next year or two. If they re-sign Stamkos, it all but assures at least one of these two gets shopped this season.
I see a Buffalo/ Anaheim deal involving Girgensons and Fowler. Other players and picks may be involved, so both teams truly get all they need.
Off topic..Matt Murray is ready for a starters job. Fleury’s on the books for 3 more years after this one and appears to have a 12 team no trade list.
-Do they trade one or the other?
-Does Murray stay a backup for 3 years?
-Does Fleury backup?
-Is this a good problem to have?
I really like the both of them. On paper it makes sense that Fleury should be traded for a Dman. I’m thinking if I were a GM I would make it team policy for all players with NTC’s to submit their no trade lists every year. Or do they? I wouldn’t want to ask them in an awkward situation such as this.
Matt Murray is a decent goalie ..
Rutherford can give Lou a call..
I am sure the Lesfs can accommodate the Penguins !!
It looks like expansion is coming. So perhaps trading one of them to get back assets would be wise. Murray is doing well. It may not be a bad thing to go with the younger guy and move out Fleury.
Off topic but a great topic. Murray is going to be a fantastic goalie in this league. Likely Jarry will turn into one as well. Fleury is already a great goalie. As a Pens fan, that is a FANTASTIC problem to have!!
At the moment I am leaning towards finding a new home for Flower – Murray is clearly the future and has a more team friendly contract at the moment. I have heard some chatter recently about figuring out what you have in Murray. If you think he is having a standout year/playoffs (I doubt it considering his AHL track record) but likely won’t keep this up long term, then you consider moving Murray and getting a large bounty. I still think it makes more sense to trade Fleury, but its interesting to think about.
I expect you get a larger bounty for Fleury at the moment – perhaps a team like Calgary could see him as an answer to their G problems?
You really expect “a large bounty” for a 31-year-old goalie who seems prone to concussions and who has a cap hit of close to $6 mil for the next 3 years? Lower your sights.
In all due respect to Craig Custance he is missing big picture. Lindholm will be resigned, he is the Ducks best D-man and Vatanen will be traded because Ducks have several clones just like him waiting to take his place like Therodore. Vatanen will be traded as will one of the goalie for draft picks.
The point in making the trades is that they will loose one or more in expansion draft so why trade them for players that they cannot or may not protect in expansion draft. Next, the dead bodies at the door step that once against caused a early exit in playoffs are named Gerzlaf and Perry. Look at their history good production in regular season and Zip in the playoffs, from memory ZERO for Perry and 2 for Gezts. these two are the southern California soul mates of Joe Thornton and Patrick Marleau, great regular seasons and disappear in playoffs. Time for both to leave, they need a change and so do Ducks. Ducks still need a stud D-man and and wondering ( well wishing) Gerzlaf / Perry to New York for McDonagh and Stepan ( other assorted parts traded to even out the caps issues and other things). Or Montreal is always crying that they need Strong / Tough / Scoring forwards, well Ducks have two.
I’m no Rangers fan but I don’t think the Rangers would even trade McDonagh straight up for Perry or Getzlaf. McDonagh and Lundqvist might be the only untouchables for them.
Your right, I would not for McDonagh but I’m offering BOTH Getz & Perry to get MCD + a good center back, if I have to toss in something else, I would. Having MCD / Lindholm as my top pairing D-men and my three centers as Stepan / Kessler / Rakell is the goal and if I have to toss another piece in, I would.
From a cap stand point the Rangers who are cap crunched already, are giving up 2 young players at 11 per for 2 players at nearly 17 per? Where do they sign up?
NY4LIFE
That’s what I want, doesn’t mean I’ll get it. Something like this would take weeks to work out, gee will you take Garidi instead of MCD, ok but you take Kessler instead of Getz etc, etc. I think that it’s starts here, I targeted MCD because he is really good and IF the Rangers did trade him they still have a lot of VETS on D left there. It’s with MCD is who I want, is there ANYBODY or combination of players you want. If you say NO on trading MCD, talks are over. If you say, you have nothing that I want talks over. Anything in between means we start tossing names back and forth.
I’d like Toes, Kane and Seabrook For Girardi , Brassard and Zuccs. But I won’t get it. I don’t think any one player on NY’s roster is safe, and judging by the exit interviews and comments from Gorton and AV, neither should any player. Without question I think NY will be moving a surprise player or 2 this year. But there is absolutely no way NY is taking on those contracts. Even if it made sense, it makes no sense cap wise. Not only is that giving up McDonagh and Stepan, that’s giving up Miller, Kreider etc.That is about a 26 million dollar 1st line. NASH 7.8, Getz and Perry combined at 17+. NY can’t afford Getz or Perry, never mind both of them. If NY gives up McDonagh, I don’t think they will be looking for 30+ yo players in return. However, I think Mcdonagh is relatively safe….Or as safe as any Ranger should be at the moment.
How about Nash /Stepan for Getz and Perry? Now that isn’t exactly giving up a #1 d and 6 million in cap space!…. But really, I still wouldn’t like it.
NY4LIFE
Not against Nash but big need here is the stud D-man.
Now if its MSD / NASH and ? versus Getz / Perry and ?
There is some more talking to do. If MCD is a no go then need
to look elsewhere for a D-man.
I would love to see Perry in a Habs Jersey, but I doubt the Habs would trade for either of these guys. Great players, but both on the wrong side of 30 and both will probably start their inevitable decline soon. With that in mind, the Habs just don’t have the assets to swing this type of deal without completely gutting what is left of their meager farm system. A hockey deal is almost certainly out of the question, unless the Habs decided they have had enough of Subban.
I guess all of that is moot considering that both of the aforementioned players have no-movement clauses and probably wouldn’t agree to such a move, anyway.
Jeff
Saw that about the coaching firing, smack of, players don’t perform,
oh well, don’t make the hard choices, fire the coach. Hey wait maybe we can bring back Carlye or Ron Wilson ( coarse sandpaper or extra coarse sandpaper).
Are you suggesting one team take two players who you claim can’t succeed in the playoffs by giving up good players?
Jeff
In one sense yes Perry & Getzlaf are really good players as is Thornton & Marleau and as is Stepan & McDonagh and a bunch of others that some teams have, Oshie, Perron, Hagglin & Nash etc.
BUT NONE HAVE OF THE above have that “magic cup touch” as Kane & Towes has so far. If your telling me Stepan is better than Getzlaf, hell no, now if you won’t make the trade because Stepan is younger or makes less money, well then yes but I don’t see that as part of this if other assets are added. The real question becomes what is the goal in mind, rebuild, mini re-build, Go for it now, or in some cases players just need a change of location and start fresh and for Getzlaf & Perry I think that what they need, a fresh start.
Looks like they are getting a fresh start with a new coach. Again.
Getzlaf’s playoff stats. 104 games, 29 goals, 70 assist, 99 points. This season 2 goals & 5 points in 7 games.
Perry’s playoff stats. 97 games, 32 goals, 46 assists, 78 points. This season 4 assist in 7 games.
Perry & Getzlaf are fine. Perry had some serious struggles defensively but Anaheim lost as Rinne stood on his head especially in game 7 where Anaheim seriously outplayed them.
Now Beadreau made some odd choices & personal decissions. Sitting Theodre in game 7 & dressing Stoner after having been injured was incredibly odd. He; Stoner & Despres got schooled on Nashville’s 1st goal & both barely played after that.
Just got to my hotel in Dallas looking forward to tonights game.
Striker
I’m OK with both during regular season and point totals in playoffs.
1) 2016 Ducks lead Nsh 3 games to 2 – lose last two games
2) 2015 Ducks lead Chic 3 games to 2 lose last two games
3) 2014 Ducks lead LA 3 games to 2 lose last two games
Now is it fair to blame Getz & Perry, maybe not.
Should you make changes and try and get the cup, certainly
Ok, who do you use as bait to make changes that will improve team?
Will trading Fowler or Silvfburg get you that “game changer”, don’t think so. So who ?
I think Andersen & Vatnanen are goners. Murray’s working on a fairly tight budget & Kelser’s new deal kicks in next season & Lindholm is going to get a significant raise coming out of his ELC but Murray will bridge him as he’s not making him a UFA at a young age like Toronto just did with Reilly. 3 years at about 5 then an 8 year deal after that.
Those 2 players, Andersen & Vatanen probably move primarily for expansion exempt assets, young prospect & picks but bring back 1 future top 6 forward.
Murray is 1 of my favorite GM’s, no team has accomplished as much as Anaheim spending so little money. For the most part what you see in Anaheim is what you get.
Theodore & Ritchie will be NHL regulars next season in Anaheim. 1 player comes back in trade for Andersen & Vatanen that plays for them next season. If TB moves Drouin & Stamkos isn’t retained there is certainly a fit there. Vatanen & for Drouin &?
Certainty looks like expansion is coming. I wonder how this affects the ufa’s? or maybe it doesn’t. You would think if your going to sign a ufa, then your going to want to protect him. What about the second tier ufa’s maybe have to settle for 1 year contract? Going to very interesting to see how the nmc, ntc work, could hinder some teams. Should be an interesting off season.
It will be interesting. I can see teams gambling though. If the league expands by only one team each team will lose 1 player. If league goes up by two each team loses two.
If a team is only going to lose one player I can see them gambling a bit and hoping the guy they want to keep doesn’t get selected. For instance if two or three other goalies are available to be selected by the expansion club a team could assess its odds of its goalie being selected by the club. Perhaps they will leave the player unprotected feeling the expansion club will take the other guys.
It’s going to be interesting to see the wheeling and dealing done to protect players.
Expansion will have an impact in a couple of areas:
I do think that when a trade is made each team will ask, If I get this guy, can I protect him in the expansion draft, if I have to protect him, who do I drop off the list that I can protect? Second point is the bad teams who have a lot of draft picks ( listen up Toronto), this is your chance to get good players now by just giving up draft picks. When Wash, Pitts, ST Lou, LA, Chic, Ana, TB etc , etc fully realize they could lose someone really good and get nothing, they will start NOW to try and be first in line to get the best deal they can for someone they figure to lose next summer.
The NHL announced today, with agreement from the NHLPA, that NMC players are not exempt from being chosen in expansion drafts, and thus they must be protected like everyone else.
I have stated before that I thought Andersen was over valued for anyone looking for a #1 goalie. I’m not so sure anymore, he played well vs Nashville.
Going forward I know he is an RFA but who do you choose, him or Gibson ?
Just a guess but Ducks have NO IDEA which to trade, it will come down to who ( if anybody) offers the most. My first call would be Vancouver and offer up one or other for Vancouver’s #1 which is a nice one, but Vancouver is screwed up on goalies, They has Lu & Schnider and wanted to get ride of Lu but traded Schnider to Jersey for #9 pick, then traded Lu, went with Lack then traded Lack, signed Miller and now want to dump Miller. Soooooo Andersen or Gibson for Vancouver’s #1 and Miller. If no, then Van’s # 1 NEXT YEAR + Van Sends back the Ducks #2 this years draft + Miller. Miller is a salary dump BUT Ducks will need a back up and can absorb his salary for a year. If Miller has any life left we will then find out how badly he wants to stay near his wife’s home in So Cal on a back up’s goalies salary.
I’m fairly certain the Canucks are going to pass the torch to Markstrom when Miller’s contract expires, sign him a back up & in about 3 or 4 years Demko will be brought into back up Markstrom & over a few years the torch passed to Demko.
I always thought Gibson was their goalie of the future. It takes many goalies time to grow into that top spot. I said this a lot awhile back but until a goalie is around 26 – 27 years of age he isn’t likely to make that leap to the starter position. Gibson was born in 93. Making him around 23 years of age. He is still young and I wouldn’t give up on him. Reminds me of Ottawa moving Bishop and Lehner. Lehner seems to keep getting injured so I am still fine with moving him but Bishop seems to have evolved to a solid starter now he is at the expected age.
I’d keep Gibson.
Jeff
Agreed but I am guessing that if there was NO expansion that Ducks would wait a year or two longer to see who was the better of the two, but with expansion they are sort of forced to make a choice now unless they are offered zip which is always possible.
I guess Boudreau now goes “to the top of the list” in the Sens search for a new coach!
I think he lands in Minnesota.
I didn’t say he lands in Ottawa – I said he goes to the top of their list. We’ll see.
Absolutely George. I agree.
It wasn’t meant as a rebuttal just a comment about where I think he might land. Should have probably posted separately.
I like Beadreau & he would be a great option for Ottawa but someone had to pay the price for Anaheim’s game 7 failure. That’s 4 years in a row. Brutal. They were my cup winner.
Andersen & Vatanen will both be traded this summer. After that Anaheim is set for expansion. They can even take 2 forwards back to make their 7F keepers.
Getzlaf, Perry, Kesler, Silverberg, Rackell, ?, ?, Fowler, Linholm, Despres & Gibson.
Murray may just move them both for futures but he might just take back 1 protector & protect Pirri at F.
It seems that players with NMC MUST be protected HOWEVER those with NMC CAN be exposed for the expansion draft. There will be teams that will take advantage of that one.