NHL Rumor Mill – June 8, 2017

by | Jun 8, 2017 | Rumors | 83 comments

Despite undergoing recent shoulder surgery, Anaheim Ducks defenseman Sami Vatanen remains an attractive trade chip.

Latest on Sami Vatanen, Jordan Eberle, Mike Smith, Chris Tanev & more in your NHL rumor mill. 

TSN: Pierre LeBrun reports the Anaheim Ducks aren’t feeling pressure to move a defenseman before the upcoming NHL expansion draft. He said teams are lining up with interest in Ducks blueliner Sami Vatanen, with Toronto, Tampa Bay and New Jersey among the suitors. He also said the Ducks intend to protect blueliner Josh Manson from the expansion process. 

SPECTOR’S NOTE: So much for concerns that Vatanen’s recent shoulder surgery will adversely affect his trade value. While Ducks GM Bob Murray might not feel under the gun to ship out a d-man, I think it’s inevitable that he does so before the expansion draft. It’s also possible Murray could work out a deal with the Vegas Golden Knights to ensure they pass over one of their unprotected rearguards, but I’m not sure how he could make that work. 

Darren Dreger reports of developing interest in Edmonton Oilers winger Jordan Eberle, saying the New York Islanders are among the interested clubs. The Isles appear likely to move a defenseman (perhaps Travis Hamonic?). However, Dreger said the Oilers value Eberle, who was second on the club behind Connor McDavid in puck touches this season, and they’re not about to give him away. 

SPECTOR’S NOTE: The Oilers might value Eberle, but if there’s an opportunity to shed his $6 million salary-cap hit and bring in a solid asset on defense or right wing in return, GM Peter Chiarelli won’t hesitate to make that move. 

LeBrun said the Arizona Coyotes are listening to offers for goaltender Mike Smith, but they’re not going out of their way to move him. The Calgary Flames are among the suitors, though LeBrun feels their focus is on Pittsburgh Penguins netminder Marc-Andre Fleury. 

SPECTOR’S NOTE: Smith also reportedly submitted an eight-team no-trade list recently to Coyotes management. Tat’s not unusual as it’s among the terms of his contract. The Coyotes might intend to get younger in goal, but they currently have no one in their system capable of replacing Smith as their starting netminder. If they can’t find a suitable option via trade or free agency, I think they hang onto Smith for next season. 

FANRAG SPORTS NETWORK: Chris Nichols cited Elliotte Friedman telling Buffalo’s WGR 550 that a lot of teams have expressed interest in Vancouver Canucks defenseman Chris Tanev. He knows the Sabres are one of those clubs, and he could see the Toronto Maple Leafs and Dallas Stars also being potential suitors for Tanev’s services. The Canucks, however, are telling teams they’re not parting with him easily and could set an big asking price. 

Friedman’s colleague Luke Fox listed the Sabres, Stars, Leafs, New York Rangers and Tampa Bay Lightning as smart trade destinations for Tanev. 

SPECTOR’S NOTE: I don’t doubt the Canucks are getting inquiries into Tanev’s trade status and it’s only right that they at least listen. But I get the feeling they’re not exactly keen to deal him. If there’s a great offer, sure, they should consider it, but it wouldn’t surprise me if Tanev is still with the Canucks when the curtain rises on next season. 

CSNNE.COM: Joe Haggerty reports adding a top-four, left-shot defenseman is among the Boston Bruins’ offseason priorities. Anaheim’s Sami Vatanen, Minnesota’s Matthew Dumba and Jonas Brodin and Colorado’s Tyson Barrie are among the names believed available for the right price in this summer’s trade market, with Brodin the only left-handed shot in that group.

Haggerty reports of ongoing trade discussions between the Bruins and Wild which started leading up to the March trade deadline. He believes Brodin would be an ideal fit alongside promising Bruins blueliner Charlie McAvoy.

There’s indications the Wild, who dealt away their 2017 first-round draft pick to Arizona in the Martin Hanzal trade, want to get back into the opening round. Bruins GM Don Sweeney has indicated he’s willing to discuss dealing his first-round selection (18th overall) for the right price. The Wild also need to clear some cap space to re-sign Mikael Granlund and Nino Niederreiter.

Haggerty wonders if a package of the Bruins’ first round pick plus restricted free agent forward Ryan Spooner might tempt the Wild. 

TVA SPORTS: cites StarTribune.com’s Michael Russo could shop blueliner Matt Dumba before the expansion draft.

SPECTOR’S NOTE: It’s possible the Bruins and Wild could swing a deal that serves their mutual interests. The Wild risk losing a good defenseman in the expansion draft while the Bruins need to bolster their defense corps for next season.

Moving out Brodin’s $4.16 million annual cap hit would give them over $15 million (assuming a $73 million cap ceiling) in cap space to re-sign Granlund, Niederreiter and perhaps Erik Haula and Christian Folin. Not sure if they’d have a need for Spooner but he could prove an affordable re-signing for them too.

However, Russo’s comment about Dumba could throw a spanner into Haggerty’s trade scenario. It’ll be interesting to see what moves the Wild have in store over the next couple of weeks. 



  1. Wild need to hang on to Dumba. 7th overall pick and still very very young….I like Spooner and their first for defence but it won’t be Dumba

  2. I’m glad Benning is holding Tanev for a kings ransom. Of the D available there is an arguement that he is the best defensively. On a cheap contract, logs 25+mins, and has the stat numbers.
    He is exactly the piece that Nill/Hitch need to go along with Bishop. Surely Hamhuis is singing Tanev’s praises.
    That should be worth more than a 3rd OA in a weak draft.
    AV would love him in NY, would be awesome on a 2nd pairing in TB, Buf, MTL, CGY.
    Morgan Reilly would love his D partner from WC 2 years ago. Being a Toronto guy, they should dump a nice package for him.
    Like every other trade being brewed up, it’s going to flood right after expansion draft.

  3. The trade the Wild are “looking” to do, is to trade Charlie Coyle and one of their Dmen (Dumba/Brodin) for a center. A proven center and the Wild are trying to send Coyle out East. Any ideas? I hope not for a #1 this year and Spooner from Boston – thoughts?

    • Dumba/Brodin & Coyle for Bjugstad and a 1st. Thoughts?

      • As much as I like Bjugstad and the Wild desperately needs a #1 pick….or picks – any picks. I see that when the Wild brings back MN born players, it puts a ton of pressure on the player and the Coaching staff to play that player. I would respectfully decline.

      • Minnesota has nu erous young kids playi g in the NHL & according to the Hockey News Future Watch the best stable of prospects not yet in the NHL. Meaning the pick isn’t all that essential but they will be getting 1 & it will be at least a 1st when they move Brodin.

  4. “Puck touches????”

    • Yeah I had a good chuckle reading that too. That has to be the weakest arguement in praising a player I have ever heard. It’s like trying so hard to sell something and trying to find any redeeming quality to entice buyers. Next we’re going to hear how good and efficient he is in hoping over the boards.

      • LOL. That and maybe “most stick-waving checks.”

    • I had a good chuckle as well. This is taking meaningless stats to whole new level.

    • Next it’ll be puck looks

    • It’s certainly “flashy” Joey – but let’s face it, the web is chock-a-block full of similar über-fan wishful-thinking blogs.

      • PPP usually has well-written articles. That quality alone puts it ahead of most hockey blogs. Of course it helps to be a Leaf fan, George, I can see your problem.

    • Pension puppets is about as reliable as eklund not very good

      • What Eklund does and what this article is are quite different. It has nothing to do with validating a rumour so much as just analyzing the defensemen listed as the hottest commodity in terms of what he does, what he might bring, and what he would pay (not what he thinks he would go for so much).

        Personally things like this are a better read that rumour blogs, even if you disagree, there is something to discuss or think about.

        I like this article for what it is, and it’s funny as I have said a lot of the same things. It describes Vatanen as an Ok defensively defender against good competition, but not high end. It also acknowledges that Toronto may be better off in playing into their strength and preferring a defender who’s main job is getting the puck to the forwards and keeping them in the offensive zone as opposed to finding that true #1 all around guy, since he isn’t available.

        The difference is he isn’t sold overall, and is more concerned about Vatanten’s offense fading progressively as time goes on.

        Personally I think he should be one of the Leafs primary targets, and I think the assets Striker listed make the most sense.

      • Knew that was coming….so predictable

      • It used to be really good, then the writers developed an e-celebrity among the readers and used ppp as a platform to discuss politics and worse so, to mob with their fans, people who disagree with their pieces/politics.

      • I agree beaver that and some of the hockey articles are so unrealistic it’s tough to read

    • Toronto will be acquiring a Dman pre expansion draft & it may well be Vatanen, Toronto has what Anaheim will want but that isn’t JvR. Future contract demands are to high, Anaheim can’t fit him in under the cap long term.

      If Toronto wants Vatanen think, Brown, Kapanen, Komorov, prospects or picks. Some combination of these will get it done. A trade Toronto can afford to make & that will appeal to Murray.

      Toronto is in a great position to secure 1 of the 5 D available from the teams confronted with potentially losing 1 in the expansion draft & I assume they will pay the price required as these types of Dman are almost never available & wouldn’t be now if not for the expansion draft.

      • Hard to figure out why Ottawa is never mentioned in all these “teams that will lose a D” talk, especially with Chabot and Harpur and maybe Englund joining the competition this fall to compete with Karlsson, Methot, Cedci, Phaneuf, Wideman, Borowiecki and Claeson. That’s a lot of D-men and something’s gotta give. They MIGHT lose Methot in the draft, although I think Dorion will work out something to prevent that and if he does I can see Ceci being shopped with Chabot slotting in alongside Phaneuf.

      • No one is talking about the fact that Anaheim must expose one defender who’s played 40 games and is signed through 2017-18. If K Bieksa waives his NTC, he is the one left exposed, then they trade Vatanen, but they can not trade for JVR as they would have to protect him too. It has to be a rookie or a couple of picks.
        If Bieksa doesnt waive his clause, they will have to expose Vatanen and Fowler/Manson/Lindholm as Stoner didnt play 40 and Theodore and Montour are on rookie contracts.
        Conclusion: Nobody knows what is going to happen and LeBrun’s speculations are useless as usual. Bob Murray will probably do something that no one expects. He is done that for years.

      • I have mentioned Ott everytime i address the 5 teams faced with losing a Dman in expansion if 1 isn’t traded, Phaneuf doesn’t waive; could get selected in such a scenario although unlikely, or the pay Vegas off not to take 1.

        I don’t see Ceci being traded anytime soon. Still just a kid at least 2 years away from being fully developed but playing a top 4 role now. None of Chabot, Harpur or Cleasson will be ready to assume those sorts of minutes or responsibilities for years.

      • You are dead wrong about Claeson – he is ready now – played many flawless minutes in the pressure of the playoffs – and did not wilt. Harpur will be brought along slowly – but he will be on the roster in the fall unless he totally regresses in camp – and there’s no reason to suspect that. As for Chabot, I think you – and many more – are in for a big surprise. Ceci has flat-lined.

  5. I think all the prices will go down drastically a day or two ahead of the expansion draft. Everyone is holding on for the best deal but no one will want to lose a player, especially a young promising D-man for nothing.

    • I don’t & certainly not for any of the solid Dman of which there appear to be only 5 & almost twice as many teams bidding. 4 are going to be left wishing they offered more as 5 teams win, 4 lose.

    • But it isn’t “for nothing.” Each franchise hot about $18 million from the Las Vegas half a BILLION entry fee – I would think LV deserves something tangible in return.

      • “got about ….” bloody faded script.

      • George I don’t know what faded script is. But I do know I make a ton of spelling and grammar errors. So I will never judge because I live in a glass house.

      • LOL. Typos are a reality for sure. But by “faded script” I mean the script when you type a post in the “Submit A Comment” box is pale grey against a white background – and these ol’ eyes need all the help they can get.

        What I should do, I realize, is type it in a word program and then cut and paste it. Have to get into that habit.

  6. Brodin & Zucker/Coyle for BOS 1st & 2nd (Aquired from EDM) along with Spooner after the expansion draft to complete the deal

    BOS will protect:
    Krejci/Bergeron/Marchand/Backes/Pastrnak/Spooner/forward from MIN

    They will lose Colin Miller to Vegas unless a separate deal is worked out with them

    • I’m happy with just a Brodin & Zucker portion of the trade. I have been pining for this for quite sometime. If you can get a Spooner, Coyle swap in there some how as well that works for me to.

      I don’t see Minnesota moving Coyle. Coyle is 1 of those monster forwards which for me means a longer development curve, more like a Dman & in or around 400 NHL regular season games. He has played 353 regular season games to date so his best NHL performance is coming next season baring injures.

      For Brodin & Zucker, a prospect D not Carlo or McAvoy, 2 draft picks, a 1st; this years, & 2nd; next years, & send Spooner following the expansion draft if necessary, saving Minnesota having to protect him, allowing them to protect essentially an extra player.

      • If Brodin is coming it will be something more than spooner, he’s value couldn’t get much lower

      • Didn’t I just say a prospect D not Carlo or McAvoy a 1st & 2nd? Spooner is almost a toss in but there is also value in this trade scenario where Minnesota who has serious protection issues, to many D even for the 8 skater scenario & to many forwards for a 7, 3 & 1 scenario. Having a team send them an asset post expansion allows them to protect an extra player & that has to factor in somehow.

        If Boston can get it done with out having to include Spooner all the better. I like Spooner, I have him for 15 goals & 55 points next season if still in Boston, give or take 3 goals & 5 points. Solid 3rd line production at C. If traded to a team giving better ES ice time & linemates other than Belesky & Hayes add a few more.

      • Now Now Striker, the comment Bigbear made is the type of comment you make on a regular bases. When you get called out on it, you always reply, that you were just adding on and not making a comment about what was said. Can’t have it both ways bud.

      • The issue with text. I perceived his post to be that I said Spooner as the key component for Brodin. Just clarifying but point taken. Not related to my post, you think just on topic?

      • These sort of deals are allowed, correct? I haven’t really seen anything stating otherwise so I’m lead to believe that they are. Essentially it would be, using Striker’s scenario which is more realistic…

        Brodin & Zucker for BOS 2017 1st, BOS 2018 2nd, D prospect (Not Carlo/McAvoy) & “player to be named later” –> being Spooner after expansion draft

        Just seems like circumventing the expansion draft but I guess deals like this get made regularly

      • It was for SH one sided trade

      • Some futures are allowable but in this case it can just happen after the fact as a separate trade. Just like Bernier moving to Anh after his 2 mil bonus was paid on July 1st by Toronto but Anh taking his full cap hit. I perceive that deal was part of the trade that saw Andersen move but Anh wasn’t paying that 2 mil signing bonus so that portion of the trade was delayed.

        Spooner moves to Minnesota after the expansion draft for a 5th round pick & a prospect with no NHL future. Really the final compensation to the original deal.

    • I like it. Let’s call the GM’s.

      • Hahahaaaa

        Let’s just get this party started.

  7. Again, I am not sure why there is so much talk all of a sudden about how much the Oilers value Eberle? I agree with Lyle that if, and it’s BIG if, Charielli gets the chance to add Hamonic, like many are suggesting, to clear Eberle then he would do it in a flash! There would be other aspects to closing the deal of course. But if Edmonton goes into next season with Nurse, Klefbom, Russell, Sekera, Benning, and Hamonic then I think they would be justified in feeling good about their defense.

    And I can’t remember who said it yesterday but the possibility is very real that Eberle lights it up alongside Tavares. He did have chemistry with McDavid at times.

    • Well, playing alongside Tavares he might lead the league in “puck touches” – of course, it’s what he does with it when he “touches” it that will justify his $6 mil cap hit.

      • Yes, George you are absolutely right on that one. I was going to comment on that as well. Puck “touches”, Jesus, who actually counts that? The fact is he is a remnant of the past country club atmosphere that existed in Edmonton. I believe all of the players from that group need to be shown the door. RNH is next.

      • The trade talk about Eberle could have started with the club looking to motivate him to come to camp is the best shape of his life and play to the level of his salary. There were multiple comments after the Oilers season to the effect that Eberle’s physical conditioning was a problem. Wherever Eberle plays next year, he should be a far more driven player.

    • Edm’s D is solid even with out acquiring 1. Klefbom & Larsson is a solid 1st pairing D that will even get better & with Sekera, Nurse & Benning all this D really needs is time to mature & develop. Even Larsson isn’t fully developed for me. Klefbom, Nurse & Benning still have years of development ahead of them.

      The issue is, the chances Edm can secure 1 of the potential Dman available pre expansion draft isn’t likely no room to protect 1 & following the expansion draft those opportunities are going to be gone & the cost beyond rediculous again.

      • The one question mark is Sekera. he is 31 y/o and has just come off major knee surgery and isn’t expected back to 100% until some time after Christmas!

      • Agreed completely Striker! And in saying that maybe Edmonton does move him for another forward? But adding Hamonic certainly does not hurt.

      • An opportunity for Nurse to play significantly more minutes on the 2nd pairing. Not ideal but I like this top 4, young but solid.

        Kelfbom, Larsson.
        Nurse, Benning.

      • Steven.

        Just not sure that opportunity will exist for Hamonic nor does moving him make the most sense for NYI but at least 1 D needs to be traded pre expansion if not 2, Edm isn’t a good fit prior.

        NYI has Leddy, Boychuk, Hamonic, De Hann & Pulock all expansion draft eligible. NYI doesn’t have room to take on a forward pre expansion & Edm doesn’t have the room to take on a Dman before expansion. Not a great fit.

        NYI forwards. Tavares, Bailey, Strome, Ladd, Nelson, Lee, Clutterbuck & Cziskas. That’s 8. How do you get that down to 4 so NYI can protect 4 D? The only way would be to trade 2 D or pay Vegas off to avoid the players you would prefer to keep.

      • assuming that the Oilers sign Russell their defence looks like this. Larsson, Klefbom, Sekera, Nurse, Russell, and Benning. Now the issue is that Sekera will miss the first couple of months of next season do to knee surgery. If the Oilers can make a trade for Hamonic then that will stabilize the defence while Sekera is out. It will also mean that the Oilers could ease Sekera back into the lineup when he’s healthy to get back into game shape and also it will help the further development of Benning.

      • I have read that article, I don’t see it nor does it make any sense to me to protect Poluck over De Hann if NYI chooses the 8 skater scenario.

        Should they as this article assumes I would select De Haan happily, if Pulock is exposed instead of De Haan I select Nelson or Strome.

        Non of these are really positive scenario’s for NYI. They are 1 of the worsted position teams for expansion, certainly top 3. Minnesota #1, either Columbus or NYI #2, depends what Columbus does with Hartnell. Buy him out or convince him to waive his NMC & NYI is 2nd, if not then Columbus is 2nd worst. At least for me.

  8. I would not trade Brown or Kapanen in any deal for Vatanen or Tanev….both are very solid, young and Kapanen will soon be in the top nine….Brown will only get better. I would trade number 17 and other prospects: Leipsic, Rychel, and maybe even give JVR and draft pick

    • Which prospect wore #17 this season? You might want to use names as opposed to #’s especially when discussing prospects. The value of Leivo or Rychel in trade is virtually zero. Did Rychel’s value increase from when Toronto paid nothing to acquire him, Harrington & a conditional 5th?

      • I think he is referring to the Leafs draft pick, as I believe it’s the 17th.

  9. Lyle I am struggling to see why Vegas would put Ana in a position to have to move a d man. If Ana moves vatanen to another team it doesn’t help vegas at all. Wouldn’t they be better off dealing with Ana to get an asset, whatever asset it may be, than not getting an asset if Ana deals with another team? Why would McPhee let that happen? Unless Ana feels the return for vatenen outweighs the cost of moving an asset to keep him. But Vegas can insure that isn’t the case by keeping the cost reasonable. I don’t see the advantage for Vegas if teams trade elsewhere

    • No there is no benefit to Vegas. All teams are going to do what’s best for them, if that’s making a deal with Vegas as opposed to someone else, they will do that but Vegas isn’t in a position to give Anaheim what the 9 other teams in need of a solid #3 protector at D. I good player either expansion draft exempt or not on a good contract, prospects & picks.

      The only thing Vegas has to deal currently is picks & agreeing to pass on a player if compensated to do so. The value of the assets others have at least with Anaheim & Vatanen are better than anything Vegas can offer & costs Anaheim nothing.

      Bieksa waives, Vatanen is traded, Aneheim loses nothing of substance & or quality to Vegas. They get little to nothing. Kase, Kerdiles, etc. Anaheim even has room to take on a protector at forward if necessary, if the player returned in the Vatanen trade is expansion draft exempt they protect Cogliano & Vermette as their 6th & 7th forwards.

      • Vegas can offer Ana Vatanen! A top 4 d man. For a reasonable price! any other teram going to offer up a draft exempt top 4 d-man for him? If vegas takes, for argument sake a 2nd (not a post specifically about price) to not take vatanen then ana keeps their d man for the cost of a second… even if it was their late first its a late first to keep vatenen… who is possibly gonna offer a package to ana for vatanan to beat that?

      • and minny is another one. is the return for brodin or dumba worth more than the cost to vegas to not take them if left exposed? it all depends on what vegas is asking for but it would be foolish to make it so expensive they force teams to trade. Because by taking a prospect/pick to not select a player and alleviate their expansion woes they get a player off that team still AND the asset. if the team trades that player, as you said striker, vegas gets nothing out of that deal and the same scraps to pick from they had before… now minus the asset they could have gotten by working with teams like ana, minny, cbs etc.

      • @Chrisms,

        If it cost Anaheim a 1st to keep Vatanen, or say they could get say Roussel and the 3rd overall to trade him, they would likely prefer to trade him.

        Anaheim would need to decide if they would rather have Dallas’ first, their own first and Roussel, or have Vatanen.

        I think in this case Anaheim may have strongly considered trading Vatanen this summer anyway, so if that is the plan then it make sense to do so before expansion rather than pay anything to protect him. Anaheim has been rumoured to have interest in moving a D for quite some time, so I just don’t see a way for a deal to work if that is their intention.

      • again danny dead on. BUT.. the 3rd overall in a weak draft, a role player and the what 28th or 29th pick? or a puck moving top 4 blue liner? that’s not so cut and dry. I’m not sure it would cost that though… it may be a second or prospect instead of the 1st rounder.

      • Anyone of Arz, Buf, Car, Col, Dal, Det, NJ, TB or Tor can offer better than that. + Anh has 3 young Dman coming & it’s full at the inn so a good time to move 1.

        Again Anh probably takes a 1st back in trade + a player & or prospects, they don’t pay 1. No they don’t get to keep Vatanen but they don’t need to they have the best D in the NHL. Futures; picks & or prospects also mean they may well be exempt for the next round of expansion.

      • maybe considering the next round of expansion striker is valid… and ana is a look to the future kinda team. but is the first, who in your own words may never work out, the prospect etc worth more than en established young cost controlled top 4 d-man? I’ve seen the proposals you have shot down for tanev and vatanen is as good or better. Again lets say it cost ana the second rounder this year to keep vatanan. seems like vegas is taking it on the chin here but not really… cause if ana moves vatenen instead vegas is getting the same player they would have got before minus that pick. ana is in the position as you say to make this move and strengthen other areas… if they feel Theodore/Montour etc ready. but many of the teams don’t have that luxury.

      • Ultimately, I do think some situations may get resolved by trading of assets, but Vegas needs to keep the price high enough that some will pay, while others won’t, in order to maximize value.

        If Vegas makes it too cheap, they will obtain more picks, but they will be of less value. If they set values that are more fair, they will lose out on some deals, but get better picks and assets from those deals, and overall they are likely worth more net.

        The reality is, if Vegas grants every team a protection trade, they set the price too low and missed out on value. If they grant no protection trades, they set the price too high and they gain no assets. The maximum value for Vegas will be somewhere in the middle, and they need to sacrifice some of the deals in an attempt to maximize the value on others.

      • true danny but the value of the asset the team could potentially lose is also a factor. vatanan being very high… nelson/strome/pulock/de haan somewhat lower.

      • The compensation Vegas offers would need to be at least equal in value to what’s offered in trade as well as factoring in how those assets will effected by all the other business dynamics, cap hits, arbitration & waiver rights, expansion draft exempt or not today & in the future. Assets acquired in draft picks or still in Jr or university may well be exempt by the next round of expansion.

        There will be some payoffs for Vegas to pass on a player or even select a specific player, I just don’t see Anaheim as 1 of those. Minnesota quite possibly does both as they have 5 protectors at d & more than 8 forwards. Anaheim has 1 Dman too many & Bieksa, easily solvable if he doesn’t waive; buyout, & has room for potentially 2 protectors at forward depending upon your perception of Cogliano & or Vermette as protectors.

        We haven’t been on the same page or are debating semantics. What your suggesting will happen with some teams but I don’t believe so in this type of case. I just don’t think Vegas can solve as many issues or provide the same value. That said you could easily be correct & I wrong.

      • Chrisms.

        I think we will see all these scenario’s play out just a question of which teams doing what with Vegas. Trying to account for all possible variables.

        For me Vegas taking a 2nd & a prospect to pass on Vatanen isn’t fair compensation to them depending upon who that prospect is. Anaheim has 5 stud prospects, the 3 D, Steel & Jones none of which I see them giving up to get Vegas to pass on Vatanen.

        Vatanen should return a 1st round pick, solid prospect & very good player in trade from anyone of those 9 teams I mentioned. Remove anyone of those assets, alter the quality of the player & add picks or improve the quantity or quality of the prospect at least based on what Dman like Larsson, Jones, Hamilton, young stud Dman have moved in recent years.

      • It’s not comparable striker as this is a unique situation. Comparing say hall Larson doesn’t factor in the unique situation. You say taking a second and a prospect to not take a player like vatanen isn’t fair to Vegas but if they don’t take that and ducks move vatenen in a trade, protect 7 forwards etc… vegas gets the same player options. One where they get the player only. Another where they get the player a second and a prospect? Which is more “fair” for Vegas? Each team trading a player solely to not lose them for “nothing” in expansion is a loss for Vegas. Even if they coulda only got a third round pick back it’s still on pick more than they get by not playing ball. It’s terrible asset management. The value vegas has in letting teams keep there top 4 d (most scenarios are with d) and protect 7 offensemen is a commodity vegas gets to use once. Not taking advantage of it would be foolish. They demand more than the value of the team trading the player in return they will lose out

      • Not in all situations. The 1 with Anaheim if Bieksa waives yes but again Anh doesn’t need Vatanen. They have Montour, Theodore & Larsson all ready to advance & are in need of ideally a #1 LW a #2 at a bare minimum. Ritchie needs at least 1 more year in a semi shelteredt role playing 3rd line minutes, 2nd when injuries warrant or moving into that role after next seasons all star break.

        Anaheim’s situation isn’t just due to expansion. I expected Vatanen to be traded last summer. The time is now.

    • I think NYI and ANA are interesting because they might have considered moving a D this summer anyway for different reasons.

      ANA is contender that likely feels their window is small, who would be tight against the cap with no moves. They also have Montour and Theadore knocking on the door and likely able to provide much of what Vatanen does. So I think they may have been shopping him this summer anyway, or at least listening to offers, since teams would be asking because of the demaind.

      NYI needs to find a winger for Tavares, and they need to move some salary. That would likely have come at the expense of their blue line.

      Also, Anaheim is going to weigh offers for Vatanen against the cost to protect him. That means they still need to shop him if they hope to get Vegas protection price down. If at some point the offer for Vatanen is more than they feel he is worth, they trade him anyway.

      Also, Vegas needs to set a marktet for passing players over. If they don’t try and extract value from teams like Anaheim, Pittsburgh, Minnesota, The Islanders, Ottawa, and a few others, they hurt their chances overall. If they set the price at a 7th rounder because it’s the only way to get the teams to not consider trading the asset instead, they don’t get much.

      If they use a little pressure, maybe 2-3 teams pay them 2nds+ expose a decent player or something along those lines, and the rest just make other trades, the net return is better.

      • I’m glad you get the concept danny.. but I disagree. One… even if the market was a 7th rounder (it wont be, I foresee in this scenario very late 1sts, 2nds, or thirds, or b prospects) getting that 7th rounder still beats getting nothing. It is also true that ana may want to use a position of strength to upgrade a weakness… remains to be seen if the perception that expansion forces them to deal will it hurt the assets value… but good point that ana may have been looking anyway and this just sets a “deadline” to get the deal done. but if ana or minny get that deal with jersey or whomever that’s a loss for vegas… so they should be willing to play ball even if it is a lesser asset… it will come down to a game of chicken with the list due date at the finish line but its worth it for vegas to play ball.

      • The 7th was just meant to be a drastic example of if they let themselves get talked down.

        I said this above, but in the end Vegas will need to set a price for protection that will price some teams out, and some teams paying the maximum price in order to maximize value. It’s impossible to negotiate properly if the other team feels like you have no lower limit.

        Maybe it’s possible that they can get an optimized deal from each and every team without letting any of them go, but it would likely increase pressure to maximize a deal if they make it known they are willing to force the team to make a last minute trade rather than just take a cheap protection deal.

        I agree that Vegas should be in the mix on each and every one of these deals, I just disagree on the idea that Vegas loses value every time a team makes a trade instead of taking a protection deal. I think Vegas best value is finding a price that roughly half of the teams would accept and half walk away from as that is more likely to yield a higher total net gain. Vegas can’t get caught making it too cheap for one team if they want to negotiate successfully with the next.

        I see Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Ottawa and Columbus as their best bets to negotiate good value and probably the most likely candidates to make protection trades.

        It’s not that I think Anaheim and NYI would definitely trade D this summer, but both would have considered it as they have had D men in the rumour mill long before expansion was the main concern, so I am not sure if they would pay a significant price for protection, and I don’t think Vegas’ interests are best served by letting them get protection too cheaply, as it effects the bargaining power with the other clubs.

        In the end we just have different opinions on how Vegas can maximize value in the expansion draft, and there would be no way to really compare since there won’t be a way of knowing for sure what would happen under alternative scenarios.

        I think we both agree that if Vegas makes no protection deals that they would lose out though.

      • I can see that. One question though… does Vegas have to announce these trades prior to the lists being posted? If not then they have the leverage to make teams play the guessing game as to how much other teams are paying vegas to not draft someone. Pittsburgh is what made me realize how precarious this is. Say Pburgh has no deal in place to move MAF or he vetoes it. It comes down to the value of how much it costs pitt to buy out MAF and obtain an exposable goalie vs giving an asset to vegas not to draft murray. now vegas knows pens never will lose murray and a buy out doesn’t help vegas in anyway… so it becomes a game of chicken. ultimately pens could say we would rather pay the cap hit and salary and draft the 31st overall. if that happens vegas in a lurch, losing out. its quite interesting but teams with valuable assets difficult to protect are in as much the drivers seat as vegas is.

        man… if espn could televise this it would beat poker tourneys

      • Pittsburgh is one of the teams I think Vegas should make a deal with. Maybe Pittsburgh doesn’t want to give up 31st overall, but I think it’s roughly that value.

        They could likely make the trade simply by just agreeing to expose someone that wouldn’t be otherwise available. Maybe they just agree that Vegas will Pass on Fleury but make Hornqvist available.

        The structure makes this all very odd for negotiations, and the majority of the deals will need to be made before the expansion lists are finalized.

        My understanding is that teams can make trades after their lists are in place, but you can’t change your protected list, so there is no point in teams making trades with each other at that point, only with Vegas since you can’t protect the incoming player as he was not on your list.

        I believe official protection trades are going to be announced. They dont’ have to be, it’s possible a team agrees to a handshake deal, however there is no motivation for the team that isn’t Vegas in keeping the deal quiet, and I would not want to be exposing any major asset on a list I can’t go back on without an official deal.

        It could get interesting if a team submits their protection list without a firm deal in place, but figures they can get it worked out in the 3 days, since that gives all the power to Vegas. I assume if we see protection lists with surprising players available it could be because of a side deal, but I assume usually it will be more on the lines of a player was made available that Vegas will select, with another part to the deal, I don’t see many GMs making a player available they absolutely don’t want to lose without a trade firmly in place with the league.

      • Question is can the trade be official with the league but silent until lists are out. If league wants to give vegas bargaining power then that could happen. And vegas can insist trade is confidential until lists published or trade is void. I honestly don’t know? Striker… this one seems right up your alley?

      • Sorry I had stopped reading the thread as I’m tired of that debate & or discussion. Every team will do what they feel is best for them, including Vegas.

        They were saying on XM91 this afternoon, that several trades have prbably been agreed to between Vegas & several other teams but the NHL may be quashing them till after the cup is awarded.

        Who knows & even though i would prefer to discuss what has happened as opposed to what might, it’s happening soon. 8 days. Apparently XM91 also said any players being asked to waive their NMC’s for expansion have to happen by June 12th. They didn’t say if that info would be made public.

  10. How much does a puck touch counter make?

    Sounds like a dream job.

    HA HA

    • Probably way more than the stat is worth – right up there with +/-

  11. Going back to one of the first comments on this day’s post, there is no way the Canucks are trading Tanev to Calgary. He would probably give the Flames the best top 4 D in the NHL behind Nashville. A more likely target, however, could be someone like Justin Schultz, if Pittsburgh decides they can’t stomach his contract demands. I’ll admit that it seems unlikely, I doubt he can get a 7 year deal from any team except New Jersey right now, and after a cap hit of 1.4m in 2016-17, he may be due to earn T.J. Brodie numbers, just under 5m per season.

    If I were Treliving, and I’m not, and it’s likely a good thing too, I might trade Calgary’s 1st in 2017, Oliver Kylington, someone like Emile Poirier or Morgan Klimchuk, and make Pit take Lance Bouma, in exchange for Fleury and Schultz. If anyone could motivate Bouma to score 16 goals again it would be Sully. If it seems Penguins heavy to anyone Pit adds a 3rd rounder so Calgary can actually have one this draft.

    • I assume Stone if not signed by Vegas in the 3 day window to sign unptotected RFA’S or UFA’s forfeiting a selection from said team if they do sign 1 that Calgary will sign Stone as their #4 almost immediately following the expansion draft.

      If I’m Vegas Stone is better than any other player available from Calgary if he’s willing to sign with Vegas.

      I see Schultz signing in Pit. I think he gets he benefits from them & will take a 3 to 5 hear deal in or around 4.5 give or take 500k.

  12. Eberle & RNH & Fayne, Mark
    Sutter & Edler

    EDM gets more suited 3rd centre and top 4 dman, gain 6 mil in cap space

    • What do the Canucks get out of that deal?

      You apparently missed the memo. The Canucks have finally realised it’s time to rebuild. 2 years late but better late than never. It won’t be a complete tear down but a transition to younger players.

      Boeser, Goldobin & Eriksson in no particular order are the Canucks top 3 RW’s next season. If Goldobin isn’t ready, then I assume Virtanen gets another long look, Dahlen or addressed in trade.

      Vancouver is very well positioned in expansion. Losing nothing of consequence under the 7, 3 & 1 scenario. Forward protectors, Sedin, Sedin, Eriksson, Sutter, Horvat, Baertschi & Granlund. At D Edler, Tanev & Gubranson & in net Markstrom. Hutton, Stetcher & the 3 young RW’s above are all exempt for expansion. That leaves Dorsett, Sbisa or 1 of the young players not yet NHL players, Gaunce or Pedan!

      This isn’t really that bad a team next season.

      Baertschi, Horvat, Boeser.
      Sedin, Sedin, Goldobin.
      Granlund, Sutter, Eriksson.
      ?,?, Dorsett.

      Edler, Stetcher.
      Hutton, Tanev,
      Sbisa, Gubranson.

      Dorsett or Sbisa could be lost. Not sure either will interest Vegas but again what else is there?