• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

Brassard to Penguins

azzurri63 said:
I really don't get this deal from Vegas' perspective. Something fishy about the whole thing and personally think the league should have revoked it.

The way they structured it in the end is perfectly legal. We can't have the league denying trades because they feel fishy or they just don't like them. That's not a can of worms the league needs to open.
 
bustaheims said:
azzurri63 said:
I really don't get this deal from Vegas' perspective. Something fishy about the whole thing and personally think the league should have revoked it.

The way they structured it in the end is perfectly legal. We can't have the league denying trades because they feel fishy or they just don't like them. That's not a can of worms the league needs to open.

Yeah, they reserve that for free agent signings.

Anyhoo, the issue here is how you price draft picks. We all agree that teams should be able to, if they want, effectively buy draft picks by being willing to take on bad contracts. To me the 2-3 million for a 4th seems insane and if I were owning a hockey team it's not how I'd spend my money but if Bill Foley wants to do that, well, it's his business. Vegas isn't going to be a cap team any time soon.
 
Nik the Trik said:
Anyhoo, the issue here is how you price draft picks. We all agree that teams should be able to, if they want, effectively buy draft picks by being willing to take on bad contracts. To me the 2-3 million for a 4th seems insane and if I were owning a hockey team it's not how I'd spend my money but if Bill Foley wants to do that, well, it's his business. Vegas isn't going to be a cap team any time soon.

To be fair, the Leafs essentially did the same thing last season when they traded Corrado for Fehr, Oleksy, and a 4th.
 
According to McKenzie, Pittsburgh and Vegas were actually talking about a Reaves trade earlier this week on their own. So if the Knights saw him as a valuable addition rather than just a throw-in it makes a little more sense for them, I guess.
 
bustaheims said:
To be fair, the Leafs essentially did the same thing last season when they traded Corrado for Fehr, Oleksy, and a 4th.

I may be misremembering this but I thought the general perception of that deal when it was made was that the Leafs had legit use for Fehr as a 4th line C that got derailed when he broke his finger. Yeah Fehr was making too much money but I don't think the idea was he'd never see the ice.
 
Nik the Trik said:
I may be misremembering this but I thought the general perception of that deal when it was made was that the Leafs had legit use for Fehr as a 4th line C that got derailed when he broke his finger. Yeah Fehr was making too much money but I don't think the idea was he'd never see the ice.

They'd already added Boyle as a 4th line C when the deal was made. Fehr was a cap dump that the Leafs tried to make useful.
 
bustaheims said:
They'd already added Boyle as a 4th line C when the deal was made. Fehr was a cap dump that the Leafs tried to make useful.

Again, my recollection of it is that Fehr was seen as potentially useful but I'm happy enough to say I could be wrong there. Either way it's still not how I'd spend that sort of money but MLSE can if they like.
 
giphy.gif
 
Nik the Trik said:
bustaheims said:
They'd already added Boyle as a 4th line C when the deal was made. Fehr was a cap dump that the Leafs tried to make useful.

Again, my recollection of it is that Fehr was seen as potentially useful but I'm happy enough to say I could be wrong there. Either way it's still not how I'd spend that sort of money but MLSE can if they like.

I thought Fehr got into the line-up right away after the trade and then got injured, but it actually took him 3 weeks and an injury to Soshnikov for him to get a chance (then he got injured too).
 
Kelly McCrimmon is a huge fan of former Brandon Wheat King Ryan Reaves. So it?s not exactly $ for just the 4th in their eyes.
 
herman said:
Kelly McCrimmon is a huge fan of former Brandon Wheat King Ryan Reaves. So it?s not exactly $ for just the 4th in their eyes.

But they didn't have to link the deals. They could have traded for Reaves independently of any Brassard connection.
 
Nik the Trik said:
herman said:
Kelly McCrimmon is a huge fan of former Brandon Wheat King Ryan Reaves. So it?s not exactly $ for just the 4th in their eyes.

But they didn't have to link the deals. They could have traded for Reaves independently of any Brassard connection.

I suspect that was their original intention (take Reaves + a pick for something), and then found out about the Brassard situation and the opportunity to mess with a division rival and give a bit of a thank you note to the team that basically gifted them Fleury.

Breakdown by Bob
https://twitter.com/TSNBobMcKenzie/status/967411181634727937
 
herman said:
I suspect that was their original intention (take Reaves + a pick for something), and then found out about the Brassard situation and the opportunity to mess with a division rival and give a bit of a thank you note to the team that basically gifted them Fleury.

I mean, I'm not going to weigh in on what they may have been thinking but I don't understand the Fleury angle. If there was any market for him he'd have been traded.
 
Nik the Trik said:
herman said:
I suspect that was their original intention (take Reaves + a pick for something), and then found out about the Brassard situation and the opportunity to mess with a division rival and give a bit of a thank you note to the team that basically gifted them Fleury.

I mean, I'm not going to weigh in on what they may have been thinking but I don't understand the Fleury angle. If there was any market for him he'd have been traded.

My understanding of the Fleury deal is that Rutherford spoke with Fleury very early on and told him Murray had to be their guy going forward (cap considerations, etc). He asked Fleury where he wanted to go and Fleury picked Vegas; essentially, they didn't try to trade him and reserved him all season for the expansion draft pick.

This article hints at that, but I can't recall the original source I read this from. Why Vegas needs to feel particularly chummy about it, I am guessing is about adding an All Star to their franchise from day 1 helps with marketing and winning.
 
herman said:
My understanding of the Fleury deal is that Rutherford spoke with Fleury very early on and told him Murray had to be their guy going forward (cap considerations, etc). He asked Fleury where he wanted to go and Fleury picked Vegas; essentially, they didn't try to trade him and reserved him all season for the expansion draft pick.

This article hints at that, but I can't recall the original source I read this from. Why Vegas needs to feel particularly chummy about it, I am guessing is about adding an All Star to their franchise from day 1 helps with marketing and winning.

We may remember things pretty differently because the talk I remember all year was that the market for Fleury just didn't exist(in effect, there'd be no team that would have chosen him as their one goalie to protect). That contract was seen as pretty ugly all year and, let's be real, I don't think any of us went into this season thinking Marc-Andre Fleury: All-Star Goalie.
 
Nik the Trik said:
herman said:
My understanding of the Fleury deal is that Rutherford spoke with Fleury very early on and told him Murray had to be their guy going forward (cap considerations, etc). He asked Fleury where he wanted to go and Fleury picked Vegas; essentially, they didn't try to trade him and reserved him all season for the expansion draft pick.

This article hints at that, but I can't recall the original source I read this from. Why Vegas needs to feel particularly chummy about it, I am guessing is about adding an All Star to their franchise from day 1 helps with marketing and winning.

We may remember things pretty differently because the talk I remember all year was that the market for Fleury just didn't exist(in effect, there'd be no team that would have chosen him as their one goalie to protect). That contract was seen as pretty ugly all year and, let's be real, I don't think any of us went into this season thinking Marc-Andre Fleury: All-Star Goalie.
The Flames were the only team that "kicked the tires". All the other teams pretty much had the goalies set. I suppose he could have been traded to back up but I don't recall any other teams rumoured to be looking at him other then Calgary.
 
Back
Top