Jump to content

Permanent Rumour Thread


Fanpuck33
 Share

Recommended Posts

With all the speculation (admittedly from fans not Insiders) about Petry or Savard being moved at the deadline... Is there recent precedent for someone with 4 years left on their deal being moved?

 

I figure we'd see (if we keep sucking), Chiarot, Lehkonen and Kulak being moved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 21.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • dlbalr

    1370

  • The Chicoutimi Cucumber

    1337

  • DON

    854

  • Commandant

    1166

"The Rangers have been in the market for a forward for quite some time. And I think it’s been amplified by the fact they lost Sammy Blais for the remainder of the season earlier this week," Dreger explained on Insider Trading Thursday.

 

Armia and Lehkonen make sense as possible fits to offer ... but there isn't a winger I wouldn't  move in the right deal (albeit Caufield requiring one heck of a return) ... but then I am 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Admittedly no specifics, but this scares the "heck" out of me

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It could be Arizona.  They want to trade Kessel this season, but it will drop them below the cap floor, so they need a contract to keep them above.  They were linked to Murray going on waivers for this reason. 

 

They could be trying to pull an asset out of San Jose to take Kane.  They may or may not have any desire to let him play though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

It's hard to believe there is an NHL team that wants to take on a guy that makes one bad decision after another.  How many chances do you give a guy?

 

Over the last four seasons Kane has scored at a 34g/82gms pace (87 goals in 212 games) ... sadly, absent a criminal conviction(s), with that kind of production there will always be somebody to give one more shot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, GHT120 said:

Admittedly no specifics, but this scares the "heck" out of me

 

Considering his suspension was for a fake vaccination card, is he actually vaccinated?  Considering non-vaccinated players can't cross the border to play in the NHL, that Eastern team Brooks references probably isn't Canadian-based.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DON said:

Will anyone touch him with ten foot pole?

Which dumb or desperate GM will claim him?

 

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

He already cleared waivers.

 

As unlikely as it is, a trade was IMO always more likely IMO (and many others) as the SJS are apparently willing to retain salary ... and couldn't imagine they expect to get much of anything in return

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, DON said:

Will anyone touch him with ten foot pole?

Which dumb or desperate GM will claim him?

Now that Molson seems to have embraced a rebuild (of some sort) If they would do Price for Kane and Reimer it *** MIGHT *** behoove Gorton/????? to listen ... I suspect it could be easier to trade (with cap/salary retained) Kane than Price to help the cap in a rebuild

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GHT120 said:

Now that Molson seems to have embraced a rebuild (of some sort) If they would do Price for Kane and Reimer it *** MIGHT *** behoove Gorton/????? to listen ... I suspect it could be easier to trade (with cap/salary retained) Kane than Price to help the cap in a rebuild

There’s no way Montreal trades for Kane.  Even for a rebuild.  He already has way too much negative publicity.

 

If San Jose does manage to trade Kane, it will be paying someone to take him.  Price has value.


In your example, San Jose would be also sending a high value pick or prospect the other way and there would be no salary retention from either side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

There’s no way Montreal trades for Kane.  Even for a rebuild.  He already has way too much negative publicity.

 

If San Jose does manage to trade Kane, it will be paying someone to take him.  Price has value.


In your example, San Jose would be also sending a high value pick or prospect the other way and there would be no salary retention from either side.

And perhaps not explicit enough was the idea to then flip him elsewhere, not keep him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

And perhaps not explicit enough was the idea to then flip him elsewhere, not keep him

 

No one wants Evander Kane, unless its on an exceptionally cheap deal. Even with 1/2 retention, no one is touching him, and I don't like the idea of 1/2 retention given the length left on his contract. 

 

This isn't the first time he's been a locker room cancer with his team.  It happened in Winnipeg and Buffalo too.   If we are rebuilding I'd rather have Price as a leader for young players than Evander Kane. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

No one wants Evander Kane, unless its on an exceptionally cheap deal. Even with 1/2 retention, no one is touching him, and I don't like the idea of 1/2 retention given the length left on his contract. 

 

This isn't the first time he's been a locker room cancer with his team.  It happened in Winnipeg and Buffalo too.   If we are rebuilding I'd rather have Price as a leader for young players than Evander Kane. 

I wouldn’t mind risk taking on Kane at 50% if we could lose the Price contract, and get a high pick, IF we think than we could get additional high picks, by moving him and retaining 50% of his contract. It would allow someone to get Kane really cheap. Of course, we’d have to gamble that he scores a lot, and is trouble free while we have him (I wouldn’t want to hold into him - I’d treat him like a pump and dump stock).

 

big risk of course is Kane has had numerous stops and the severity of the issues has been escalating, and someone with his life style choices on Crescent Street would be like a kid with free access to a cookie jar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, hab29RETIRED said:

I wouldn’t mind risk taking on Kane if we could list the Price contract, IF we think than we could get high picks, by moving him and retaining 50% of his contract. It would allow someone to get Kane really cheap. Of course, we’d have to gamble that he scores a lot, and is trouble free while we have him (I wouldn’t want to hold into him - I’d treat him like a pump and dump stock).

 

big risk of course is Kane has had numerous stops and the severity of the issues has been escalating, and someone with his life style choices on Crescent Street would be like a kid with free access to a cookie jar.

 

and that may be why you are not in Gorton's short list of GM candidates @hab29RETIRED 😁 🤪

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

and that may be why you are not in Gorton's short list of GM candidates @hab29RETIRED 😁 🤪

I’d rather retain $1.75m of Kane, by trading for him and the moving him, AND get additional assets than having Price at $10.5m. I also think Price will be very unhappy to be here through a rebuild with zero chance of winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I’d rather retain $1.75m of Kane, by trading for him and the moving him, AND get additional assets than having Price at $10.5m. I also think Price will be very unhappy to be here through a rebuild with zero chance of winning.

only Price knows if he will be happy here or not. He has had plenty of opportunities to ask to be traded.

 

I would have wanted Kane when he was in Winnipeg, when he posed in the photo in Vegas with the cash in his hands or now

 

not a fan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I’d rather retain $1.75m of Kane, by trading for him and the moving him, AND get additional assets than having Price at $10.5m. I also think Price will be very unhappy to be here through a rebuild with zero chance of winning.

 

Its not a zero sum game.  There may be other moves for price that don't involve Kane

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

and that may be why you are not in Gorton's short list of GM candidates @hab29RETIRED 😁 🤪

 

You don't know that. I don't think Gorton has his short list yet. He may be monitoring these boards looking for some brilliant minds.  He may be thinking outside the box, way outside. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

You don't know that. I don't think Gorton has his short list yet. He may be monitoring these boards looking for some brilliant minds.  He may be thinking outside the box, way outside. 

 

he may also be rethinking the box and wondering, why not TWO! boxes, a big one and a smaller one 😁 🤪 🤡

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...