NHL Rumor Mill – February 9, 2017

by | Feb 9, 2017 | Rumors | 77 comments

Dallas Stars winger Patrick Sharp could be on the move by the March 1 trade deadline.

Latest on the Stars, Senators and Canadiens in your NHL rumor mill. 

ESPN.COM:  Pierre LeBrun reports the Dallas Stars’ strategy for the upcoming NHL trade deadline will depend upon their performance over the next three weeks. If the struggling Stars fail to gain ground in the playoff chase, they’ll have little choice but to start shopping some of their pending unrestricted free agents.

Topping the list is veteran winger Patrick Sharp, whose offensive skills and playoff experience could help any contender. Versatile forward Patrick Eaves, currently sidelined defenseman Johnny Oduya and winger Jiri Hudler could also hit the block.

LeBrun also reports the Stars have reportedly had preliminary discussions with the Pittsburgh Penguins about Marc-Andre Fleury, but there’s nothing imminent on that front. 

THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS: Mike Heika, responding to questions in a recent live chat, believes most Stars fans “would be happy if they gave up on the season, traded Patrick Sharp, Johnny Oduya, Patrick  Eaves and whatever else they can use to get prospects and draft picks and then start fresh next season.”

Heika thinks the fans want a new head coach, two new goaltenders and for management to use the cap space cleared by cutting loose their UFAs to pursue a top-two defenseman. He also feels Sharp, Hudler and Lauri Korpikoski could attract interest at the trade deadline. 

SPECTOR’S NOTE: The Stars are seven points away from the final wild-card berth in the Western Conference. If they fail to gain ground in the next two weeks, GM Jim Nill will be selling. Sharp and Eaves would attract the most interest. Hudler really hurt his trade value with a middling performance last season with the Calgary Flames and Florida Panthers. If Oduya’s still sidelined by month’s end, I doubt he’ll be dealt.

I’ve suggested before that Fleury to the Stars for Antti Niemi might make sense for both clubs. However, that depends upon Fleury’s willingness to move and if the Stars are on his list of preferred destinations.

Having topped the Western Conference standings in 2015-16, the Stars’ performance this season could spark some changes. Because the roster was walloped by injuries, I doubt head coach Lindy Ruff will bear the brunt of it. A goaltending change is a must. They cannot carry on with the ineffective tandem of Niemi and Kari Lehtonen. At least one of them must go, and the expansion draft might not take care of that for them. Landing a top-pairing defenseman won’t be easy. 

OTTAWA SUN: Buried deep in this recent Don Brennan column is this little nugget regarding Senators defenseman Dion Phaneuf: “It’s widely believed the Senators will protect Cody Ceci and Marc Methot along with Erik Karlsson, and ask Dion Phaneuf to waive his no-move with the thinking Las Vegas won’t touch the latter’s hefty contract.”

SPECTOR’S NOTE: If the Sens ask Phaneuf to do this and he accepts, don’t be so sure the Golden Knights won’t claim him. Yes, Phaneuf has four more seasons at $7 million annually left on his contract, but maybe the Golden Knights management would consider him a worthwhile selection. 

THE PROVINCE: Ben Kuzma recently reports a Montreal Canadiens was in Vancouver watching Canucks winger Alex Burrows. Kuzma claims Canadiens GM Marc Bergevin loves the Quebec-born Burrows. 

SPECTOR’S NOTE: The Canadiens need depth at center, not a past-his-prime agitating winger. Canucks GM Jim Benning said he wouldn’t asking his players carrying no-movement/no-trade clauses to waive them. Unless Burrows wants out, he won’t be going anywhere if Benning stands by his word.

**UPDATE**  Kuzma also quoted Benning, who’s on a European scouting trip, saying “We’re going to see where we’re at.” He added that he’ll have individual conversations with those players at their agents, but he’s still hoping they can stay in the playoff chase. 


  1. The Stars need to pursue someone like Fluery and try to unload one of Niemi or Lehtonen the other way. Your trade partner in this scenario would likely ask for the one with less term left. That way they are not committed to an ineffective netminder who may have to take the starting job if their is an injury to your actual starter. Either could be a decent backup. After that they need to buy out the one left because Vegas will not take either. They hired a knowledgeable manager in George MacPhee who will not start out in Vegas with a starting goalie the caliber of either of those two. Injuries affect every team at some point and Dallas is not immune to that either. Trading Sharp and Oduya could provide picks for the future as both have winning experience(s) in Chicago. I wonder if keeping Patrick Eaves in the fold is a good idea for Dallas. He is a very serviceable player and could help the mini rebuild. The risk in all this is if Fleury can do well in Dallas; a team that has not been great defensively lately.

    • Fleury is at his best playing behind a bad defense, actually. He can make the saves he shouldn’t make.

      • True enough. And Pittsburgh hasn’t always put a solid D in front of him.

      • Agreed MG many years in Pittsburgh he stood on his head making athletic saves. last year from October to January he kept the Penguins afloat until they changed coaches and caught fire. he is a good goalie and outside of that one concussion (which everybody makes a big deal about) he has been a rock and durable. Dallas, St.Louis, Winnipeg, yes Buffalo and Toronto could all use him.

      • You could add Calgary to that list

    • Niemi and a decent pick or prospect for maf is solid… or even oduya if healthy. Pens can buy out niemi next season or ride out the contract

    • What would it take to trade for someone like Sharp?

  2. Phaneuf could provide some stability for a new franchise in Vegas. He is known to be a supportive team mate and has performed well in Ottawa. The strategy of keeping the younger defencemen in Ottawa and exposing Phaneuf should not come as a surprise to him. He has been around long enough to understand that. Toronto gave him too much money and responsibility. For less money, term, and responsibility his fit in Toronto would have been much more acceptable and he would probably still be there.

  3. Burrows helps absolutely nothing in Montreal! Not much more to say on that one.

  4. The contract might be the main reason an expansion team would like Phaneuf, he is still a fairly capable top 4 guy and the price tag would help with getting to the floor, even tho their floor will be lower it may help them with addition of younger less expensive depth.

    • While all that is entirely possible, I really think Dorion will work out one of those “sweetheart” future consideration deals with McPhee whereby he picks someone else and winds up with that pick AND a prospect/pick.

    • I am not 100% sure Dion would waive with the chance of playing the next 4 years on what will essentially be the worst team in the league. When his contract is completed he will be 36 and might have a hard time finding another depending how the next couple of years play out. Kind of takes any chance he would ever have at winning a cup away,

      • I’m not sure given the way the NHL decided to do this that Vegas will be as bad as some expansion teams in other sports in the past. I don’t think they are going to be a playoff team or anything like that but the way they have the draft set up the number of teams to pick from and only 1 team choosing (instead of Vegas and Quebec ) they might be better than expansion in the past just because the volume.

      • Isn’t Dion married to an actress? Vegas is a lot closer to Hollywood than Ottawa.

    • I like the move, but at this point, if he does waive and we retain, I’m not sure I’d protect Ceci over Wideman. He has been looking way more solid as of late and seems to carry the play better than ceci. I know ceci is playing way more minutes, but with Chabot coming up, I’d be more willing to keep Wideman.

  5. The Pens and Stars might be able to make a bigger deal.

    The Pens have more defenseman than they can protect and/or keep under the cap and the Stars’ D prospects look to be mostly suspects.

    Fleury and either Maatta or Pouliot to the Stars. What comes back is hard to say. It seems clear that Niemi has to come back, but hopefully the Stars could eat some of that cap hit.

    I doubt they want to part with him but the Stars have a young center named Denis Guryanov who was awesome in the World Jrs.

    He reminded me of a poor man’s Malkin.

    I’d offer up Maatta if the Pens can get another D rental. Perhaps Oduya.

    • Pens can not trade a young top 4 unless another young top 4 comes back. Nothing in the system to replace maatta. Pens certainly don’t “need” another forward prospect… a nice luxury sure. But not a need. Maf for oduya and niemi hits two needs for pens

      • Chrisms…I make that move for Oduya and move Fluery and Pouliot.

        i would move Matta for the right price say Duchense or someone of that nature with Letang. Dumolin, Schultz, Cole, Daley they are solid enough…can go out and get a Ron Hainsey from Carolina so

      • All I’ll say is that I hope many NHL GM’s like Maatta as much as you do.

        He’s not a good fit for Sullivan’s system and is very replaceable.

        He still has a high ceiling, but it won’t be reached under Sullivan and his floor is low.

        Ian Cole and Justin Schultz are the top 4 defenseman I’m worried about losing. Olli can go.

      • I’d be happy to argue a maatta for another d man as you are right, I’m a fan. But maatta for someone not a young d man is terrible… like fireable offense. Daley is playing like a player you trade scuderi for… schultz struggles when playing top 4 and is suited for sheltered minutes. Dumo has regressed this year. Maatta has been inconsistent too… but unless he is a piece for a trouba etc you can’t move him. Come up with a deal that doesn’t leave our defense even thinner and you got something that makes sense.

      • I’d gladly trade Olli in a package for Trouba. I just don’t know if the Jets would.

        I also like the idea of sending Olli to NJ for a pick and Ben Lovejoy with the Devils picking up half his cap hit.

        Lovejoy would cost the Pens $1.33 M a year and slot perfectly into Schultz’s current $1.4 M cap hit. Schultz can then be offered Olli’s (basically) $4 M cap hit.

        Lovejoy was a big part of last year’s Cup win. Maatta was not.

      • Lovejoy. No. Not for a d with top 3 potential. A part of a sign n trade with St. Louis for shat maybe. Maatta maf for signed shat and a prospect/pick. I’m a maatta fan and do not want to trade him. But if he is a young! D man has to come back. Dp a bust waiting and no top 4 talent…yet… in the wings.

      • I don’t think maata and fleury would get an unsigned shat, maata is always hurt and gone downhill quickly

      • Yup. Downhill quickly is something the bruins fans would recognize. ?

      • Atleast bruins fans can admit it? The trade offer you said is like a leaf fan trade proposal that’s how bad that is!

      • Habs fan dressed up in a bear suit

  6. Unless Pittsburgh is getting something back right away that can help them win another cup there is no need to trade Fleury at the deadline, unless its to clear cap space for another trade.

    Flipping him for Niemi now just to move him makes no sense unless they are worried they wont be able to move him before the expansion draft.

    I would rather have Fleury as a backup in case Murray gets hurt then the prospect of have to start Niemi in the playoffs.

    • I’d rather worry about my backup goalie later than risk losing the most valuable goalie in hockey.

      Given his age, I wouldn’t trade Murray for any other goalie in the NHL.

      There will be no “side deal” that stops Vegas from claiming Murray. The Pens have to get rid of MAF. Better safe than sorry. Buying him out would be a disaster.

      Niemi did win a Cup. You could do a lot worse for a backup. You could hope that Jarry pulls a Murray if worse came to worse.

      • Or you could just hold on to Fleury in case Murray goes down and move him before the expansion draft for a 2nd/3rd round pick if you have to and enjoy the $5mill in cap space without having to buy Neimi out.

        I just don’t think you move him just to move him now unless you are getting a someone to help push for a cup.

        There are going to be more teams then just Dallas that are going to need decent #1 goalie moving forward. I would think Calgary would be very interested at the end of the year,

      • I would have thought the same but local beat writers have indicated that Brian Burke is not a Fleury fan.

        It’s a game of musical chairs and there might only be one or two chairs.

        Ben Bishop is still out there, too.

        Also, the idea that Fleury would lead the Pens to a Cup if Murray gets hurt is dubious. Fleury has struggled as a backup so if he was tossed into a series cold expecting him to win is iffy, at best. Murray would have to get hurt before the playoffs and give MAF time to get back into rythym for him to be a potential Cup winning caliber goalie.

        Such timing is statistically unlikely and not worth risking Murray.

      • Don’t be to sure about the side deal. Here is the situation for Mcfee…
        Mcfee- “I want Murray, ha ha ha, you are stuck protecting MAF.”
        GMJR- “No I could buy him out.”
        Mcfee- “That would be a disaster, why would you do that?”
        GMJR- “Murray is our goalie for the future… either you take a second round pick or half decent prospect to not pick Murray or I buy out MAF and you get one asset instead of two for your rebuilding team that needs to establish a system… seeing hows you are in the western conference MAF cap hit affecting us is hardly your concern.”
        Mcfee- “oh… your right… better to get two assets than one.”

        See how that works?

      • And if McPhee takes the 2nd round pick and still picks Murray? What then? Whine to Gary? “But…he promised!”

        The league warned teams not to pull stunts regarding this expansion and would gladly punish a team to protect it’s next $500 million ask.

        Any such deal would be unenforceable and a gentleman’s agreement. McPhee can play dumb and walk away with a franchise goalie. Risking one of your most important assets in such a scenario is ill advised.

        Not to mention a waste of assets…why pay a 2nd to keep a goalie you want/need to get rid of anyway?

        Fleury gotta go.

      • Making side deals in this expansion won’t be as easy or cheap as past drafts. Protected rosters are smaller, the exemption of players far stricker. A 2nd round pick isn’t getting Mcphee to pass on a good player.

        No NHL team is allowed more than 50 contracts. Vegas will get 30 players min in the expansion draft. There will be the odd side deal but it will be significantly more costly than in any previous expansion.

        Vegas will draft a min of 7 players. As of march 1 they can start trading for players & they can sign any UFA’s coming out of JR or college.

        Vegas will be the best expansion team ever. That still only gets them last overall but they can’t be any worse than colorado ths year, toronto last year or Buffalo the year before that.

      • Mg. League has come out endorsing side deals. It would be honored. Bettman himself endorsed said deals.

      • Striker… that’s true if teams have no options. Pens can say take this pick/prospect or we buy maf out. McGee gets an extra asset or he doesn’t. People need to remember both teams in this case come to the table with options. Sure Murray is worth a first or more… but the actual cost vs cost isn’t that. It’s how much is absorbing maf buy out worth it to pens. Is it worth losing a first to not buy him out? A second? Less? Balls honestly in the pens court here.

      • Only a pens fan would think the ball is in Pitts court?? Lmao fleury is virtually worth nothing to the pens unless they keep him

    • The most valuable goalie in hockey? Did Carey Price get hit by a bus or something cause last I looked that’s the only goalie with a Hart,Vezna Lindsey and Jennings trophy. I get it he looks good but he’s played 42 NHL games so far it may be a little premature to call him the most valuable goalie in hockey lol

      • I wouldn’t trade 12 prime years of Murray for 5 prime years of Price.

        If it was for a game or a season, I’d take Price, sure.

      • I think it’s way to premature to be betting on Murray as having 12 prime years ahead. Nor would I put him as one of the most valuable goalies out there …. James Carey. This list goes on and on.

      • It is premature Sticky but there sure aint a lot of goailies I would trade him for based on age/cap hit/ potential. I am curious who you would want over Murray that meets teams needs now and for the distant future?

      • I’m with Shticky on this one… most valuable goalie?

        I do agree that his age/cap hit is great. He’s only signed for 3 more years. If he continues playing the way he has get ready for an enormous contract. Price’s current contract/most recent one signed was a 6 year $39m. Murray isn’t going to continue playing on a $3.75m per contract. Once the 3 years is up or in final year he’s going to want to be paid as an elite goaltender.

      • Not that I’d take over Murray but remember a year or so ago when the same was being said about Gibson for the Ducks? Or a little further back when it was said of Bernier or Allen? young goalies have ups and downs and 40 some games spread over a season and a half wouldn’t exactly assure me that he is the next Price or Hasek is all I’m saying. Especially for a goalie who’s career hinges so much on health maybe more so than any other position. How does a 175 lb frame hold up on a guy who’s 6’5 if he is playing 60+ games a season instead of 42? lot of variables yet to be accounted for. I’m not sure who I’d trade Murray for on the flip side I’m not sure how many proven no.1 goalies I’d send packing because of a young goalie either.

      • Any goalie can become Jim Carey. Hank looked like him for a few weeks this year, right?

        But fair enough…

        What goalie would you take over Murray?

      • Hanks also been one of, if not they most dominant goalies in the league for years. Not a guy with 42 games and 3 injuries in a calendar year. Everyone goes through a funk at every position. Even the mighty Roy let in 9-10 in a game.

        I like Murray, I like his contract. I just wouldn’t put the most valuable label on any goaltender, or player for that matter on a small sample size.

      • Price, Holtby, Talbot Jones Dubnyk Bobrovski… all guys that are more proven yes they get paid more because they have showed themselves to be worth the contract. Murray is not going to be on his entry contract forever let’s see what he is worth after a couple seasons. Saying Murray is the most valuable goalie in the NHL would be the equivalent of a Leaf fan sayin Mathews must be the most valuable centre. I would rather have him with his contract than Crosby…it’s just mad to suggest guys at 40 games are in the running for the most valuable anything.

      • Jones and Talbot don’t exactly have long track records. Each was a starter for a few months longer than Murray. He won a Cup. He wins the tie breaker.

        Dubnyk and Bob have shown high ceilings, but low floors.

        I would take Murray over Price because of the age difference. Price is better.

        Holtby is a solid answer if you want more track record and are willing to trade 5 years for it.

        I’d still take Murray over any of them.

      • And not Matthews, but yeah…Connor McDavid is absolutely 100% without one doubt the most valuable player in the league, even if Crosby is better right now.

        Crosby and Price are the same age. Same argument.

      • Yeah have to agree to disagree MG I just don’t see it. drawing lines or comparisons with McDavid?…maybe he turns out like you think he might but I have a hard time seeing a goalie as generational (and that’s what you’re saying)with less than a season experience good playoff run or not I’m not sure he wins that cup if not for the rest of the team as well he played great don’t get me wrong but Crosby Kessel Malkin (and if winning a cup in Pittsburgh means a goalie is generational I doubt that people like yourself and some others are volunteering drive MAF to the airport)It’s not like he put the team on his shoulders like a Marty. I watched Murray as a junior and there was quite a difference brtween him and McDavid I must say.

        Talbot at 162 games Jones 145 are generally 2 guys with 2 years as clear cut no1 guys who will have played 2 full seasons on top of their time as backups. Price Holtby Dubnyk Schneider in NJ Bishop Hank Craig Anderson Bobrovski why is the goalie market so flat? Oh yah cause it seems like there are so many good goalies that I wouldn’t want to say I’d never want to trade one or that one a that hasn’t played a full season is more valuable than any of the others who all had high points in their careers as well.

  7. Why would Phaneuf agree to waive his NMC? You can’t get it back afterward. Once it’s waived it’s gone for good. If Phaneuf waived it, then in two to the three years if his abilities decline further he might find himself having to ride the bus in the AHL in order to collect what’s still left on his contract. Humiliating himself in the process.

    What does Phaneuf gain? Why would he agree to this it makes absolutely no sense?

    These so-called “journalists” that come up with this crap should go back to school and study logic perhaps.

    • He would “waive” it IF Dorion is able to work out a deal like I mention above with McPhee – i.e., although Phaneuf is exposed, McPhee takes another player from Ottawa in return for “future considerations” – read a prospect and maybe a pick. If that is negotiated beforehand, and Phaneuf is made aware of the arrangement, why wouldn’t he “waive” his NM for the draft knowing he’d still be with the Sens along with Karlsson, Methot and Ceci (who they WILL protect), with Chabot almost certainly joining the D corps next season.

      I’m not saying that will happen – but there will almost certainly be a number of deals like that made which, in the end, gives Las Vegas and even bigger stockpile of young prospects/picks.

      • Mind you, I’m not aware that waiving a NM clause for the purposes of the expansion draft means a player gives that right up forever. Is that specified somewhere?

      • WellGeorge I could kinda see it because if MST is right and it was gone for good, in a year or 2 the Sens don’t really see the fit with Phaneuf and sent him packing to Arizona Vegas or some other team as a means to get to the floor or worse he spends a year or 2 riding a bus in the AHL to finish off his career. If I was Phaneuf I’d laugh at the mention of waiving that clause if it meant that it was gone for good, which I’m not sure it is as he has already been traded with it.

      • It’s not gone for good

      • Oh yeah – if waiving a NMC for the expansion draft meant a player was exposing himself at any future date, then all bets are off. A LOT of players could be affected that way . But until mst mentioned that as a deterrent I had never heard anywhere that that was the case. I also think Las Vegas would be on the hook for a player like that once they picked him – i.e., his NMC kicks back in, being a one-time thing only.

        I’d sure like to see some clarification of that. Lyle?

      • Actually maybe it is gone for good. According to cap friendly there is this, seems the Senators decided to retain his NMC they didn’t have to they could have just left it after the deal.

        CLA– USE DETAILS: Lists 10 teams he can be traded to. Senators retained his Modified NTC after the trade. Source: Elliotte Friedman http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-nhl-trade-deadline-2015-rumours

      • When a player with a ntc lifts it to move to a team as soon as the trade is accepted the ntc comes back in to prevent the player from being moved right away to a team he doesn’t want to go to

  8. So I know Benning will not ask his NTC players to waive them but would he allow teams to ask the players if the are interested in them? I ask because I have wondered if Alex Edler would be of interest to Mtl? He is a left D to fit with Weber, frees up 5 mill for Van. Throw in a pick and Van is getting cap relief and a prospect in return and Mtl gets a D man. Edler gets a shot at the Cup (better than Van at least) for the rest of his current contract.

    • Montreal do not have 5 mill in cap space, so the canuckle heads would have to take back a 4-5 mill contract.

      • According to Capfriendly Mtl deadline cap space is 3 mill with McCarron and Carr call up. Desharnais is UFA at the end of season making 3.5, Beaulieu 1 mill RFA. So those two traded (Desharnais is a must to whereever but a must trade) and Mtl has the cap space no salary retention needed.

      • “canuckle heads”???? Do you lay awake at night dreaming up derogatory terms for all other 29 teams?

    • An intriguing idea, guess it would depend on what’s coming back. The Canucks have actually managed to build up a few assets on D. There not Ana or Min yet but that is where they have the most depth. They could definitely look at flipping a D man for prospects at some point over the next year or two.

  9. Love how my comment regarding Burrows gained no traction whatsoever! Nobody supported my opinion that he would provide no help to Montreal and nobody bothered to counter it either. I guess that says how much anybody cares about Burrows! Guess I nailed it when I said, “not much more to say on that one!”

    • Hey Steve, if you need someone to fain disagreement I’ll play. Compared to David Desharnais (who has been forced to the wing), Sven Andrighetto, and Daniel Carr, Burrows has more and better playoff performance than any of them. In that sense he is an upgrade for the Habs… 🙂

      • I agree with ya Steven. A few years ago he would be an upgrade. Very wrong on ur assessment “Habsfan1”. No on you listed is much worse then Burrows. Would be Montreal paying for nothing extra.

    • Hey Steven, You’re right there was not a whole lot of response. The Habs might be interested in Burrows but he’ll command such a low return that it doesn’t really hit the radar. They have similar players in Shaw and Gallagher (not saying Burrows is as good as either just similar style).

      This may well be the “deal of the day” on trade center if things don’t pick up though 🙂 Burrows to Mtl for a 4th rounder.

  10. Sorry, Steven, typo, my bad….. oh and Burrows is also bigger than those three.

  11. Montreal needs a second line center. They have kicked the tires on Duchene (incredibly expensive) and Hanzal (expensive for a guy who is essentially a third line pivot. Given that even the Vancouver management had finally admitted that they are going to become a seller, I think that there is the basis for a deal to be done here. Brandon Sutter is a good quality 2nd line center. Good at face-offs, good defensively, modestly improves the quality of his line mates (see the bump in Granlund’s stats this year), and is a streaky scorer himself. He will probably end up with 15 to 20 goals this year on a sad sack, offensively challenged Vancouver team. He is 27, has a NTC (probably not a problem), and is on a long term contract at a quite reasonable cap number ($4.375 Million to 2020/21). Sutter is a better option than Hanzal, Plekanec, or Desharnais, and would like remain so for the duration of the length of his contract. He is not Duchene, but Montreal seems to lack the willingness and pieces in play to get that one done. What should Vancouver want for Sutter? It needs to be something that helps (a bit) to give them a future in coming years. It seems pretty certain now that the Canucks won’t be a playoff team for the next few years (for a big bunch of reasons). I think a variation of what was being considered for Hanzal should do it (Sutter being a much better player). To Montreal: Sutter and a fifth; to Vancouver: McCarron, Montreal’s 1st for this year (a late first round pick in a weak year), one of their many stockpiled 2nd rounders, another B/C grade forward prospect (he has to be at least able to hit the front of the net with his shot) and Desharnais’ expiring UFA contract ($3.5 million). The last piece should resolve any cap difficulties taking on Sutter’s contract and still leave Bergeron some room to tweak his roster with other moves. It would be a good deal for both teams, but of course is highly unlikely to be done for that reason alone.

    • Habs say no. Huge over pay. Your right regarding Hanzal and the ridiculous ask. The supposed ask for Hanzal MAYBE gets a look if Duclaire is included. MacCarron is close to a non-starter for any Hab trades unless the deal gives the Habs a serious Cup chance, which Sutter does not today.

    • forget it.

      Rather have McCarron straight up over Sutter, more upside going forward.

      Would rather have Grigoenko or Colborne over Sutter – much less expensive to obtain and maintain.

      Van can dump their rejects somewhere else, imo.

      • I agree Rattus. However, I am going to go on a bit of a trade tangent.

        Marc Bergevin has gone on record as saying he wants a bonefide top 6 centre with size because he’s: “All in”. You also get a sense from Bergevin that he’s not entirely sold on Alex Galchenyuk as his #1. Now, conversely, Don Sweeney made it very clear during his Claude Julien Press conference, that he’s not deviating from:”The plan.” That plan appears to be a rebuild of the Boston Bruins. All that being said, why not strike a deal with the B’s for Patrice Bergeron?

        It’s not as far fetched as it sounds. Patrice Bergeron has connections with members of the Habs as he is kind of a ring leader of an off season work out group that includes Philip Danault and David Desharnais. Don Sweeney has demonstrated he’s not afraid to trade an “Ultimate Bruin” type player. In the past, he’s moved Lucic and Hamilton for ultimately: Jakub Zboril, Jeremy Lauzon, Colin Miller, Zachary Senyshyn, Jakob Forsbacka-Karlsson, Sean Kuraly and Trent Federick. That looks like rebuild mode to me. If MTL offered a return that allows Don Sweeney to pick a couple more of: “His Guys”…It may persuade Don Sweeney to part with Bergeron.

        Now…Having said ALL of that…Bergevin would have to put together a package that would appeal to Don Sweeney. Assuming you’ve decided Galchenyuk is not your guy, The package I would offer:

        To BOS: Alex Galchenyuk, Jeff Petry, 1st 2017, 1st 2018

        To MTL: Patrice Bergeron, Zdeno Chara

        There’s your “All In, Stanley Cup, Deadline Deal.” Boston gets a young forward, their veteran right hand D, plus 2 futures to add to the Don Sweeney, future core. Montreal gets their veteran #1, defense 1st, centre; plus a veteran D and 2nd Mark Messier award winner (2011) in your dressing room and on the ice. Chara has 85 hits and 95 blocked shots this season at age 39.

        What could make this trade work is the fact that your giving Sweeney a way to dump Chara’s Salary. You’re giving them younger roster players to use now; as well as younger assets for later on in the 1st rounders. What makes it not work is trading between division rivals. Boston doesn’t want to hand MTL a potential Stanley Cup. Neither team, wants to have players come back to haunt them on a nightly basis.

        It’s a total fantasy deal. But sometimes it’s just fun to go off on a trade tangent.

      • Mr Rat. BTW a really appropriate nickname – fits like a glove. If you think Sutter is a “reject” – well you live up to your name. He is NOT a first line center. He is however a good 2nd line center. Which is what Montreal needs, in most professional opinions. If they can get such a player from some other team at a lower price, they should do it. But if that was available, they probably would have already done that deal. McCarron will never be a first line center, except on a team that lacks a first line center. He will become in 3 to 4 years become a very good 2nd line center – basically what Sutter is now. The problem being Price and Weber will be past their prime in three to four years. Montreal needs to fix their problem at center now, and if they do it is going to be expensive, whether they get that player from the Canucks or some other team.

  12. Toronto stay the course, and they will. All this talk about them stalking up . . . clue in people. They are going to stalk up on picks and prospects again . . . how? The new method, take on contracts that people need to get rid of, but, as long as there are draft picks and prospects involved.

    • Until the NHL smartens up and closes that loophole for the richest clubs.

      • It’s not a loop hole & not for the richest clubs. Florida 1 of the poorest just used it twice this summer paying NJ to take Savrd & Arizona to take Bolland.

        This won’t be changed in the next CBA

      • Very good example Striker.

      • Well they damned well should. It’s a bloody joke.

  13. I do not understand what happend with Niemi looked so promising with the hawks run and then downhill.