Don't fret too much worrying about overpaying for a player like Neil who really is a glorified Mike Brown. He's nearly 34 and has 3 more years left at $1.9M/yr. Do you really think Bowman would take that salary on because he thinks he may have trouble re-signing Stalberg?

Chris Neil is worth a minor leaguer like a Shawn Lalonde and a draft pick. That's it. Otherwise, Eugene Melnyk can keep paying Neil out the $6M he owes him for the duration of his contract. And there ain't going to be much revenue playoff games with Erik Karlsson gone, which is very sad in its own right.
- RickJ

while neil obviously isn't a sniper or art ross candiate, saying he's a glorified mike brown is a little ridiculous. the guy scored 13 goals and 30 pts last season, and has multiple 10+ goal seasons. neil is tough, gritty, physical, irritating, but also has the ability to put the puck in the net, and is a great presence in front of the goalie. i'm not saying the guy is gonna be a top six winger, and perhaps sens fans overvalue him a little, but you are UNDERVALUING him by a TON.

Well, I heard a rumor about Lehner going to COL for O'Reilly this AM as well. So, if true, there goes some of your logic.

BUT . . . in a broad sense, you could be right. Murray has to decide whether to reload on the fly for next year or try to patch for this year. Losing Karlsson has to push him more toward the former because there is no "patch" that will be acquired and an already thin defense.
- John Jaeckel

Last thing we need to do is sell out to try and scratch into the playoffs. Missing this year and getting a top 5 pick is all but assured now. And, now Sens fans will be patient and attribute this year to injuries and bad luck. Nobody in Ottawa will be calling for changes if we don't make the playoffs with everything that has already happened.. Don't forget it's not just Karlsson and Spezza, cowen missed the whole season as well. But, grabbing a few patchwork pieces and trying to push for the playoffs is the wrong direction because making the playoffs and getting bounced in the 1st round does nothing for us this year and getting spots 9-11 also leaves us with not as high quality draft pick as we need.

Well, I heard a rumor about Lehner going to COL for O'Reilly this AM as well. So, if true, there goes some of your logic.
BUT . . . in a broad sense, you could be right. Murray has to decide whether to reload on the fly for next year or try to patch for this year. Losing Karlsson has to push him more toward the former because there is no "patch" that will be acquired and an already thin defense.
- John Jaeckel

there is pretty much ZERO chance that lehner will be moved, especially now that the sens season is pretty much over. lehner is the future franchise goalie, and with anderson on the wrong side of 30, and most of the sens core being fairly young, there is little chance that lehner will be moved.

Neil turns 34 in June. I think at most we give up Frolik, maybe Bickell.

I would be pissed if it was Shaw.
- Winterland

I would have no problem with the Hawks acquiring a 33 year old who brings what Neil does and sending a young player with upside the other way—as long as that player was not vital to the Hawks.

Every Hawk fan needs to view this as a shot at the Cup this year. And get out of the mindset of "building for the future."

Bowman has been loathe to deal for the last two years because of his "prospects" and it got the Hawks nowhere. If the Hawks are willing to step up and do a value for value deal to add a missing piece to a very, very good team, it is very encouraging.

But I would not deal Shaw either, for Neil at least.

there is pretty much ZERO chance that lehner will be moved, especially now that the sens season as pretty much over. lehner is the future franchise goalie, and with anderson on the wrong side of 30, and most of the sens core being fairly young, there is little chance that lehner will be moved.
- sensarmy_11

I agree with this logic. Sharing something I heard is all.

Last thing we need to do is sell out to try and scratch into the playoffs. Missing this year and getting a top 5 pick is all but assured now. And, now Sens fans will be patient and attribute this year to injuries and bad luck. Nobody in Ottawa will be calling for changes if we don't make the playoffs with everything that has already happened.. Don't forget it's not just Karlsson and Spezza, cowen missed the whole season as well. But, grabbing a few patchwork pieces and trying to push for the playoffs is the wrong direction because making the playoffs and getting bounced in the 1st round does nothing for us this year and getting spots 9-11 also leaves us with not as high quality draft pick as we need.
- riceroni

100% agreed.

So why are you arguing for holding on to Neil at all costs if he can bring a younger player with potentially higher upside?

Well, I heard a rumor about Lehner going to COL for O'Reilly this AM as well. So, if true, there goes some of your logic.

BUT . . . in a broad sense, you could be right. Murray has to decide whether to reload on the fly for next year or try to patch for this year. Losing Karlsson has to push him more toward the former because there is no "patch" that will be acquired and an already thin defense.
- John Jaeckel

I would believe the Lehner for O'Reilly has lots of potential yesterday. The Baby Sens added another goalie to their roster yesterday. So, I thought Lehner was on the move.

But, everything changed last night. This team is not going to make the playoffs. St. Louis apparently wants Bishop back. Not sure of the Kekalainen connection but he apparently wants Bishop in Columbus.

But Murray needs to rethink the situation. With O'Rielly he was going to be able to make a serious run. Now he needs to think about long term.

Anderson will get a very substantial return.

I would believe the Lehner for O'Reilly has lots of potential yesterday. The Baby Sens added another goalie to their roster yesterday. So, I thought Lehner was on the move.

But, everything changed last night. This team is not going to make the playoffs. St. Louis apparently wants Bishop back. Not sure of the Kekalainen connection but he apparently wants Bishop in Columbus.

But Murray needs to rethink the situation. With O'Rielly he was going to be able to make a serious run. Now he needs to think about long term.

Anderson will get a very substantial return.
- spatso

they aren't going to move anderson (IMO) and they aren't gonna move lehner. the only goalie that will be shopped around is bishop.

anderson, despite how well he's playing, wont' get the kind of return that makes him worth moving. the guy is having a great year, and having him and lehner means that ottawa has 2 great goalies moving forward, who can play without the weight of the world on their shoulders. if we move anderson, then it's ALL ON LEHNER, and is that really something you want to do to him right away. let anderson be teh guy for a couple of years, with lehner backing up and getting his 20 games a year, and then give him the crease full time.

Rick,

Not sure I completely agree with the first part of your post. I see the logic, but not sure the hawks would be (or are) as down on Neil as you say. They inquired about him last year as well.

I will say although I like the Sens coach and goalie quite a bit, I do agree that Sens fans might need to adjust to a wait til next year approach with Karlsson now out long term.
- John Jaeckel

JJ, I probably should have said Neil was a player like Mike Brown. I see the value of adding a Neil (and his contract), but at his age not at the cost of a roster player like Stalberg. I could see them parting with a Lalonde or an Olsen if they don't feel those kids are going to make it in Chicago and Bryan Murray is real short on D men now.

Unfortunately for Sens fans they had better adjust their expectations because losing Karlsson is like losing a Paul Coffey. It's horrible and a huge loss to the talent base of the NHL. Even worse, it could take him a year and a half to come back from the injury and no guarantee he will ever be the same.

100% agreed.

So why are you arguing for holding on to Neil at all costs if he can bring a younger player with potentially higher upside?
- John Jaeckel

Well, the reason why I am against moving Neil is that he is a guy that every team needs to have on their roster and is hard to find. He is a guy that is fully committed and a great example not just for the young players but for veterans as well. In the Montreal game here in Ottawa a few weeks back we were down 1-0 and he ended up fighting Prust I believe, right after that the Sens got their grove back and ended up winning that game 5-1. He has done that sort of thing repeatedly and is almost like another coach out there. He gets his own team fired up and ready to play every shift. No matter what the score of the game is or how much time is left, Neil continues to play hard. Guys like that you just don't let go of. But as I said, if he does get traded, it will have to take an overpayment because while he is not a stat leader, the intangibles he brings to the Sens is immeasurable. Also, being a fan favourite you can't sell trading him for a 2nd or 3rd round pick and a low level prospect... Just can't happen

JJ, I probably should have said Neil was a player like Mike Brown. I see the value of adding a Neil (and his contract), but at his age not at the cost of a roster player like Stalberg. I could see them parting with a Lalonde or an Olsen if they don't feel those kids are going to make it in Chicago and Bryan Murray is real short on D men now.

Unfortunately for Sens fans they had better adjust their expectations because losing Karlsson is like losing a Paul Coffey. It's horrible and a huge loss to the talent base of the NHL. Even worse, it could take him a year and a half to come back from the injury and no guarantee he will ever be the same.
- RickJ

Ottawa fans will adapt to the loss of Karlsson pretty quickly.

They will understand the reality as a matter of fact and adjust quickly to the idea of this year being a rebuilding opportunity.

I believe there are just some great fits for Ottawa players. Anderson in St. Louis is a no brainer. Gonchar to the Flyers would be a great short term fix for the Flyers. Ottawa fans will enthusiastically support Alfredssen to the Bruins for minor consideration. Within 48 hours most Ottawa fans will start seeing the opportunity in the situation.

I'm curious if Stalberg is one of the players being discussed here.

I'd be highly shocked - if he plays out the season in Chicago - that he'd be a Hawk in the 2013-14 campaign and beyond. With the lowered cap next year, and with Leddy and Kruger neeeding new deals, I have to think that Stalberg is the odd man out in this situation. I'm guessing his asking price will be more than the 'Hawks are able to afford (If I were his agent, I'd make a case for $3M or $3.5M).

Here's the thing - I know Sens fans are being a bit overprotective (and over ambitious with his value, IMO) of their guy here. But is Chris Neil really the best that the 'Hawks can do for a 20 goal scorer with elite NHL speed? We're talking about a 33 year old checking foward. Not saying I don't like the guy's game - I certainly do, and wouldn't mind seeing him in an Indianhead-crested sweater. But if Stalberg is the guy being dangled, I think it's foolish.

How big of an upgrade is Neil -really? He'd be a physical foward on a team that's lacking physicality - fine. However, with Carcillo returing, Mayers, Bollig, and now Bickell finally using his frame - is the incremental gain in physicality worth moving a valuable piece that could be packaged for something better?

If Stalberg is on the block, I'd certainly hope the target is an upgrade at Center, preferably someone with top-six potential, rather than another bottom-six checking winger I think the team is fine in that regard.

I would have no problem with the Hawks acquiring a 33 year old who brings what Neil does and sending a young player with upside the other way—as long as that player was not vital to the Hawks.

Every Hawk fan needs to view this as a shot at the Cup this year. And get out of the mindset of "building for the future."

Bowman has been loathe to deal for the last two years because of his "prospects" and it got the Hawks nowhere. If the Hawks are willing to step up and do a value for value deal to add a missing piece to a very, very good team, it is very encouraging.

But I would not deal Shaw either, for Neil at least.
- John Jaeckel

Kind of like the O'Reilly talk. That dude's rights will not come cheap, nor would his $ amount but in term of fixing one glaring hole and a second not as bad but always an issue (Faceoffs and Board Stremph) that is an insta-patch.

Pretty much solidifies the top six but would probably cost 1 NHL player and 1 very good prospect at a minimum.

Adding O'Reilly and Neil with subtracting one of each of the following (Stalberg / Bickell) (Frolik / Kruger / Shaw / Bolland) (Any TOP prospect in Rockford or otherwise) (Any B Prospect)

Would make them an incredibly difficult team to play against TODAY. Allows them to retain all irreplaceable players and on paper makes them definitely the best team in the West.

Not advocating that, not saying that it is even possible, wouldn't be disappointed with that, wouldn't be disappointed with them sitting on their hands but if those players are truly available it would seem silly not to consider throwing money and assets in the pot.

I'm curious if Stalberg is one of the players being discussed here.

I'd be highly shocked - if he plays out the season in Chicago - that he'd be a Hawk in the 2013-14 campaign and beyond. With the lowered cap next year, and with Leddy and Kruger neeeding new deals, I have to think that Stalberg is the odd man out in this situation. I'm guessing his asking price will be more than the 'Hawks are able to afford (If I were his agent, I'd make a case for $3M or $3.5M).

Here's the thing - I know Sens fans are being a bit overprotective (and over ambitious with his value, IMO) of their guy here. But is Chris Neil really the best that the 'Hawks can do for a 20 goal scorer with elite NHL speed? We're talking about a 33 year old checking foward. Not saying I don't like the guy's game - I certainly do, and wouldn't mind seeing him in an Indianhead-crested sweater. But if Stalberg is the guy being dangled, I think it's foolish.

How big of an upgrade is Neil -really? He'd be a physical foward on a team that's lacking physicality - fine. However, with Carcillo returing, Mayers, Bollig, and now Bickell finally using his frame - is the incremental gain in physicality worth moving a valuable piece that could be packaged for something better?

If Stalberg is on the block, I'd certainly hope the target is an upgrade at Center, preferably someone with top-six potential, rather than another bottom-six checking foward. I think the team is fine in that regard.
- FredoXV

Neil > Mayers and Carcillo by large margin

Well, the reason why I am against moving Neil is that he is a guy that every team needs to have on their roster and is hard to find. He is a guy that is fully committed and a great example not just for the young players but for veterans as well. In the Montreal game here in Ottawa a few weeks back we were down 1-0 and he ended up fighting Prust I believe, right after that the Sens got their grove back and ended up winning that game 5-1. He has done that sort of thing repeatedly and is almost like another coach out there. He gets his own team fired up and ready to play every shift. No matter what the score of the game is or how much time is left, Neil continues to play hard. Guys like that you just don't let go of. But as I said, if he does get traded, it will have to take an overpayment because while he is not a stat leader, the intangibles he brings to the Sens is immeasurable. Also, being a fan favourite you can't sell trading him for a 2nd or 3rd round pick and a low level prospect... Just can't happen
- riceroni

I agree. Trading Alfredssen is probably an easier sell if it gets him a shot at the Cup.

The only way I see a deal for Neil being possible if he is part of a package with another player (eg Anderson) in a deal with St. Louis that includes a top blue chip prospect Scwartz and a pick.

Well, the reason why I am against moving Neil is that he is a guy that every team needs to have on their roster and is hard to find. He is a guy that is fully committed and a great example not just for the young players but for veterans as well. In the Montreal game here in Ottawa a few weeks back we were down 1-0 and he ended up fighting Prust I believe, right after that the Sens got their grove back and ended up winning that game 5-1. He has done that sort of thing repeatedly and is almost like another coach out there. He gets his own team fired up and ready to play every shift. No matter what the score of the game is or how much time is left, Neil continues to play hard. Guys like that you just don't let go of. But as I said, if he does get traded, it will have to take an overpayment because while he is not a stat leader, the intangibles he brings to the Sens is immeasurable. Also, being a fan favourite you can't sell trading him for a 2nd or 3rd round pick and a low level prospect... Just can't happen
- riceroni

Great post! Many of our Hawk posters should read this. This lays out the value that guys like Neil bring, which most us know as we anxiously covet a player like this.

The important take away is that often that assumption by hawk fans that these guys are dime a dozen and can be had easily. The reality is that it is often very difficult to pry them away from their teams. These guys are not easily replaceable.

I would believe the Lehner for O'Reilly has lots of potential yesterday. The Baby Sens added another goalie to their roster yesterday. So, I thought Lehner was on the move.

But, everything changed last night. This team is not going to make the playoffs. St. Louis apparently wants Bishop back. Not sure of the Kekalainen connection but he apparently wants Bishop in Columbus.

But Murray needs to rethink the situation. With O'Rielly he was going to be able to make a serious run. Now he needs to think about long term.

Anderson will get a very substantial return.
- spatso

That makes tons of sense. At best, Bob could be viewed as a bridge to get them 'competitively" to their actual goalie of the future. Mason is still Mason (unfortunately, like Marc Denis, a promising goalie destroyed my the ineptitude of the BJ's).

Also agreed on Craig. Long time readers will tell you, I have always been a big believer in him.

a bottom 6 of

Shaw Stalberg Bickell
Kruger Carcillo Neil

would very much frustrate a lot of lines in the NHL
- FourFeathers773

That would look pretty good.

Neil > Mayers and Carcillo by large margin
- fattybeef

Not denying that - is lower-line wingers an area that we are so desperate to upgrade?

All the holes everyone was complaining about prior to the season were center and goal - and those are still really the two big quesitons marks (goalie to a lesser extent if Crawford continues his high level of play).

Don't see a Stalberg-for-Neil trade really making any sense for what this team is critically lacking.

they aren't going to move anderson (IMO) and they aren't gonna move lehner. the only goalie that will be shopped around is bishop.

anderson, despite how well he's playing, wont' get the kind of return that makes him worth moving. the guy is having a great year, and having him and lehner means that ottawa has 2 great goalies moving forward, who can play without the weight of the world on their shoulders. if we move anderson, then it's ALL ON LEHNER, and is that really something you want to do to him right away. let anderson be teh guy for a couple of years, with lehner backing up and getting his 20 games a year, and then give him the crease full time.
- sensarmy_11

This is just me, but I would deal Crawford and Lalonde (or a pick) for Anderson. Even though Crawford is having a good year and is a good goalie, I have always felt, and still feel, Craig is the better goalie and especially come playoff time.

Not denying that - is lower-line wingers an area that we are so desperate to upgrade?

All the holes everyone was complaining about prior to the season were center and goal - and those are really the two big quesitons marks (goalie to a lesser extent if Crawford continues his high level of play).

Don't see a Stalberg-for-Neil trade really making any sense for what this team is critically lacking.
- FredoXV

Disagree. Center (or really just another guy who can go 50%+ when needed at the dot) is a need. But size, grit, toughness is a pretty big need for this club.

Not denying that - is lower-line wingers an area that we are so desperate to upgrade?

All the holes everyone was complaining about prior to the season were center and goal - and those are still really the two big quesitons marks (goalie to a lesser extent if Crawford continues his high level of play).

Don't see a Stalberg-for-Neil trade really making any sense for what this team is critically lacking.
- FredoXV

Who on our board is lambasting all the trade freaks? Me...that is who.

Now, when faced with the fact that you have to give to get, many will get buyers remorse or second thoughts. Not saying you Fred, just pointing out the reality of the situation.

I love Stalberg, but he will be a UFA at years end. His high end is amazing at times, but is not as predictable and reliable defensively, even though he hustles.

Meli Al said this many times in the past 6 months, and that is if Stalberg is not in your top 6 plans, you go ahead and deal him.

Disagree. Center (or really just another guy who can go 50%+ when needed at the dot) is a need. But size, grit, toughness is a pretty big need for this club.
- John Jaeckel

Not denying the void in the physicality department - I just think moving a 20 goal scorer with elite speed for a 33 year old checking forward is silly - Especially when his presence on that third line has created a big match-up problem for the opposition this year.

I think the right move is to trade him at some point, I just don't see Neil as the right return. Everyone gets on Stan for not making moves - but despite is track record, GM's success is equally dependent on the moves they don't make at times. If Neil can be had on the cheap - then fine. If he costs the team what is probably their most valuable trade piece (I say this because I think Leddy and Kruger are now untouchable), it's the wrong move in my opnoin.

Disagree. Center (or really just another guy who can go 50%+ when needed at the dot) is a need. But size, grit, toughness is a pretty big need for this club.
- John Jaeckel

Wonder if OTT would bite on a Stalberg return (they'd still have to sign him) where-as the 'Hawks would have 3 seasons more of cost certainty with Neil. My guess is OTT would rather have Kruger. Or they could ask for a mid-level prospect in addition to Stalberg. They know the 'Hawks [real] need.

Who on our board is lambasting all the trade freaks? Me...that is who.

Now, when faced with the fact that you have to give to get, many will get buyers remorse or second thoughts. Not saying you Fred, just pointing out the reality of the situation.

I love Stalberg, but he will be a UFA at years end. His high end is amazing at times, but is not as predictable and reliable defensively, even though he hustles.

Meli Al said this many times in the past 6 months, and that is if Stalberg is not in your top 6 plans, you go ahead and deal him.
- TrueGrit

I agree with you, check a couple posts back. I think the right move is to move him this year,. But to do so for a 33-year-old checking winger makes no sense to me.