Not to completely derail this Gardiner thread, but I'm becoming more and more sure that Dubas wanted Ceci to be a part of the Zaitsev trade. If he didn't... then I really can't wrap my head around why the sens included him in the deal. I don't really think anyone's explored that decision from their end.
The assumption has always seemed to be they dumped him on us. That Ceci was the price to pay to get rid of Zaitsev. But did Ottawa view him as a negative asset like we did our guy? I don't think that they did. He played tons of minutes for them and I think it's fair to say that they're not exactly the most analytically inclined team in the league. I mean if they think that Zaitsev AND Hainsey can provide value to their team then surely they at least think Ceci is a capable NHL defencemen. So why would they "dump" a player like that if they didn't have to? Even if they didn't see Ceci as being a long-term part of their team why not just make the Zaitsev trade sans Ceci, sign him to a 1-year deal like we did, and then ship him somewhere for anything at the deadline?
The assumption has always seemed to be they dumped him on us. That Ceci was the price to pay to get rid of Zaitsev. But did Ottawa view him as a negative asset like we did our guy? I don't think that they did. He played tons of minutes for them and I think it's fair to say that they're not exactly the most analytically inclined team in the league. I mean if they think that Zaitsev AND Hainsey can provide value to their team then surely they at least think Ceci is a capable NHL defencemen. So why would they "dump" a player like that if they didn't have to? Even if they didn't see Ceci as being a long-term part of their team why not just make the Zaitsev trade sans Ceci, sign him to a 1-year deal like we did, and then ship him somewhere for anything at the deadline?