he has a NMC, if he doesnt wanna be traded he doesnt have to accept anything. and you cant send him down so he will only be in the NHL
- sjk540

His NMC wasnt voided when he was traded from the Flyers?

EDIT: Lets just say his NMC has been voided, do you think the Jackets would trade him?

MacDonald for a forward with a similar contract.
- Feanor

That's what I think might happen.

I always thought a trade of MacDonald to Chicago for Bickell could work. Probably a couple other pieces either way to make it nice a neat but that was a forward I think could bring size and play a 3rd line role.

Also would have given Chicago and upgrade on their back end on their 3rd pair.

MacD at $4m for Bickell could work. Just like LA, Chicago's lack of depth on D killed them this season.

Matt Moulson?
- PLindbergh31

That's who I was thinking earlier this year. But apparently he's really slowed down, maybe to the point where we'd be better off keeping MacDonald.

His NMC wasnt voided when he was traded from the Flyers?

EDIT: Lets just say his NMC has been voided, do you think the Jackets would trade him?
- jak521

nope. ok so hypothetically, i think the blue jackets would probably trade him for anything they can get. hes one of the top 5 players paid on the bluejackets, and those of those 5, 4 have NMC's. so yes, absolutely i think they try to trade him.

the question is, do you think a team would take on that contract alone? i think in a perfect world only does Hartnell get traded for only a draft pick, unless theres a team that needs to get over the cap floor like arizona did with grossmann and pronger last year.

Still, you're looking at this all wrong. First case in point, what would have happened against the caps with hartnell. do you think hartnell, even in his prime, was the type of player who singlehandedly bring a team into the playoffs. he was never that, put the team on his back, type player, ever. We may have had more goals, but would it have mattered in a 4-1 game or a 6-1 game. maybe in a 1-0 game but all those thigns are hypothetical. you never know what wouldve happened here.

and at what cost would it have meant for one of the younger players if hartsy was still here. does simmonds emerge as a perennial 30 goal scorer without the time on the first unit PP and first line? maybe, maybe not. i can almost guarantee schenn doesnt improve as he did this year if hartsy is on this team, and i ask, who is more important? How bout the money we free up in the next three years for players who need extensions. with that much money on the cap can we sign a schenn, gudas, MDZ, to the contracts we want, and would we have also the amount of space left we do? how hard it is to navigate around the cap with albatross contracts like that?

another point, which forward would you be willing to lose because you must protect a hartnell with a NMC from the expansion draft?

id be willing to bet with you that the next three years hartsy doesnt average 40-50 points. as he gets older, his production will decrease, he will be slower, and he will end up being a bad contract on your squad, just like umberger. except guess what, umberger is gone with a buyout this year, no more bad contract. 1.5 per year is nothing compared to almost 5 for the next 3. no chance

i think hexy does this trade if it was presented again, 100%
- sjk540

So my stating that Hartnell helping in the Caps series is "hypothetical" and "you never know what would've happened here". Yet two of your main points, 1.) Schenn not improving; and 2.) Hartnell's production decreasing, are based in........ "almost guarantees" and "willing to bets". Fair points?

I never stated Hartnell was the type of player to put the team on his back. I'd say the bulk of the people on here would agree that he was a very streaky player. That being said, I think most would agree that the Caps series is a type of series that Hartnell would thrive in. A chippy series with Caps players taking runs at star players (Jake, Ghost)? A series in which Holtby essentially had barricades set up on both sides to have a clear view at each shot? A series in which the powerplay was stagnant? I just offered three aspects of this series that play to Hartnell's weaknesses. Again, not guaranteeing a win. But better odds. And I'm not even arguing that they needed to win that series. We all knew what it was going into it. But there's no denying what he "could" have brought to that series.

As to your other questions. Simmonds and Schenn are more important than Hartnell. Luckily, hockey allows you to have multiple impact players if they work within the cap. It could've worked (Hartnell and Umburger at practically the same cap hit). Also, There's two PP lines and you could've taken off good ol' Ryan White to fit Hartnell (or Simmonds). The day the Flyers complain about too much talent on the power play is a good day.

I'm not sure I call Hartnell's contract an "albatross". Three more years of 4.75M is not the end of the world. It's a fair price for someone with his impact. Again, assuming he keeps up his pace. Which, my main contention, is that there's no reason to assume he wouldn't. I'd be willing to offer Laughton or Raffl out there. Not optimal, but it's a necessary evil when you have a talented roster. And there's also no guarantee that one of those guys even gets picked in the draft.

I don't think Hexy makes this trade if he could see into the future; my primary argument. Which is a fair argument. Because seeing into the future is a real thing.

Joffrey Lupul was for me.
- aightwebang17

Lupul had a reputation for being very rude to the ladies as well.

The story I've heard (3rd hand) was that he and Richards were partying and each had a lady-friend for the night. Richards and his girl went upstairs, so Lupul asked if his girl wanted to follow suit. When she said no, he pulled out the "DON'T YOU KNOW WHO I AM!?" line that has worked for no one ever in history.

Pat Burrell, on the other hand, is a man who knows how to get poop done.

Exactly right. That's how Klentak approached it in the offseason. He brought in journeymen type guys like Hernandez, Russell, Bailey etc. so there would be depth. If one isn't performing, fine bring up another guy to replace him. People keep mentioning their bullpen will regress at some point I just don't see it. It certainly won't be as violent as some are suggesting. The biggest issue is scoring runs and bailing out the young pitchers when push comes to shove.
- TobyFlenderson

His approach of "try to stockpile arms" is great. It is just so frustrating that everyone saw this coming, yet they did nothing. For 2 years it was obvious the core was cooked and they wouldnt start the rebuild. This is so much more fun than watching them try to duct tape the late 2000's era phillies back together

That's who I was thinking earlier this year. But apparently he's really slowed down, maybe to the point where we'd be better off keeping MacDonald.
- Feanor

I was trying to look at forwards with similar contracts to MacDonald that were feasible. I came up with Moulson, and Clark Macarthur at first look. Macarthur basically missed the entire year with concussions.

His NMC wasnt voided when he was traded from the Flyers?

EDIT: Lets just say his NMC has been voided, do you think the Jackets would trade him?
- jak521

It was not voided...he waived it to go to the Flyers

MacD at $4m for Bickell could work. Just like LA, Chicago's lack of depth on D killed them this season.



That's who I was thinking earlier this year. But apparently he's really slowed down, maybe to the point where we'd be better off keeping MacDonald.
- Feanor

Bickells is up after the season though...Flyers could retain salary on that though...make it a positive cap gain for the hawks

Pavel Padakin, who played in the AHL and the ECHL this season, is going to the KHL for 16-17.

http://www.hcsochi.ru/art...in-v-stane-leopardov-4072
http://www.eliteprospects...m/player.php?player=68358
- Feanor

I will try to remember to pour one out for him tonight, but please excuse me if I forget

Its maddening. Richards is a leader, Carter is lazy, but all he does is score...blah blah blah

Patrick Sharp.......sigh
- MBFlyerfan

There is literally no winning with people that stupid

I prefer Corpseburger personally

So my stating that Hartnell helping in the Caps series is "hypothetical" and "you never know what would've happened here". Yet two of your main points, 1.) Schenn not improving; and 2.) Hartnell's production decreasing, are based in........ "almost guarantees" and "willing to bets". Fair points?

I never stated Hartnell was the type of player to put the team on his back. I'd say the bulk of the people on here would agree that he was a very streaky player. That being said, I think most would agree that the Caps series is a type of series that Hartnell would thrive in. A chippy series with Caps players taking runs at star players (Jake, Ghost)? A series in which Holtby essentially had barricades set up on both sides to have a clear view at each shot? A series in which the powerplay was stagnant? I just offered three aspects of this series that play to Hartnell's weaknesses. Again, not guaranteeing a win. But better odds. And I'm not even arguing that they needed to win that series. We all knew what it was going into it. But there's no denying what he "could" have brought to that series.

As to your other questions. Simmonds and Schenn are more important than Hartnell. Luckily, hockey allows you to have multiple impact players if they work within the cap. It could've worked (Hartnell and Umburger at practically the same cap hit). Also, There's two PP lines and you could've taken off good ol' Ryan White to fit Hartnell (or Simmonds). The day the Flyers complain about too much talent on the power play is a good day.

I'm not sure I call Hartnell's contract an "albatross". Three more years of 4.75M is not the end of the world. It's a fair price for someone with his impact. Again, assuming he keeps up his pace. Which, my main contention, is that there's no reason to assume he wouldn't. I'd be willing to offer Laughton or Raffl out there. Not optimal, but it's a necessary evil when you have a talented roster. And there's also no guarantee that one of those guys even gets picked in the draft.

I don't think Hexy makes this trade if he could see into the future; my primary argument. Which is a fair argument. Because seeing into the future is a real thing.
- steelydan

And boom goes the dynamite.


Seriously though. I think Hartnell was only moved because of his contract.

I dont think we traded FOR Umberger because of Hartnells contract. We could have traded him for peanuts. Hextall openly said he liked what Umberger can bring to the team. He was coming off of an injury plagued season, but was a 20-25 goal scorer the 4 years prior.

I honestly believe that Hextall thought he was getting the best of both worlds. A better two way player (at the cost of some offense) and a better contract. The player part absolutely didnt work. The contract part has.

It was a bad trade in ANY other sense then that of the cap, and even that part of it is just about to happen. I dont doubt for a second that we could have traded a very successful Hartnell to another team for something other than RJ Umberger.

Two cheap free agent forwards I'd be interested in if they would take one year deals at around $1.5m are Brodziak in St Louis and Stalberg in NY. They would add good size and depth to the bottom six, and hopefully allow Bellemare to move to the wing. And the Umberger buyout would cover their contracts.

Voracek-Giroux-Simmonds
Raffl-Couturier-Schenn
Stalberg-Cousins-Read
Laughton-Brodziak-Bellemare
VdV, WHite
- Feanor

Brodziak is a no for me...plus hes played his entire career in the west. I dont think that really solves any issue of the current 4th

hartnell had a NMC so no he couldnt have been traded. buying him out would add on another 4 years of dead cap space if you bought him out the following year, which is not a good thing. also, with the expansion draft, in the end, you would be not protecting raffl, laughton, and cousins. so no, you do not have those options after all.
- sjk540

Thanks for that. He had a NMC when we traded him the first time, right? So nothing is impossible, but point taken.

It was not voided...he waived it to go to the Flyers
- YuenglingJagr

I forgot that it only gets voided if the other team acquires them before the contract kicks in. The other team has the say then. Sort of like with Carter and Richards.

The fact CBJ couldn't move Hartnell at the last deadline with only three years and change left on his contract shows you what Hextall was up against trying to move it in summer 2014 when it had five years left to go.

nope. ok so hypothetically, i think the blue jackets would probably trade him for anything they can get. hes one of the top 5 players paid on the bluejackets, and those of those 5, 4 have NMC's. so yes, absolutely i think they try to trade him.

the question is, do you think a team would take on that contract alone? i think in a perfect world only does Hartnell get traded for only a draft pick, unless theres a team that needs to get over the cap floor like arizona did with grossmann and pronger last year.
- sjk540

But you are not taking on that contract alone. You are taking on that contract for a guy who historically scored at a 20-30 goals, 40-60 clip while playing a power forward role.

Clarkson was traded. That contract was heinous. Bad contracts with bad players can get moved... Bad contracts with good players do get moved.

You can only protect seven forwards: G, Jake, Simmer, Schenn, Coots is 5.

Hartnell would be 6.

Therefore two out of Raffl, Laughton and Cousins would have to be left unprotected.
- Feanor

Thanks.

I'd protect G and Hartnell (no choice) as well as Jake, Simmonds, Schenn, Coots, and Cousins. I'd leave Laughton and Raffl out there. Again, there are 29 other teams doing the same thing and likely leaving some better talent out there, so the Flyers aren't a shoe-in to get picked apart by vultures.

Remember how great umberger looked in the preseason. Better than simmonds

The guy is just shot. Good player for a couple years here.

Thanks for that. He had a NMC when we traded him the first time, right? So nothing is impossible, but point taken.
- steelydan

He did...and waived it.

I think he was run out of town as a scapegoat personally...but theres no question that Umberger wasnt as good as they hoped

But you are not taking on that contract alone. You are taking on that contract for a guy who historically scored at a 20-30 goals, 40-60 clip while playing a power forward role.

Clarkson was traded. That contract was heinous. Bad contracts with bad players can get moved... Bad contracts with good players do get moved.
- jak521

The only reason he was traded is Toronto had the money to stash Horton.

Remember how great umberger looked in the preseason. Better than simmonds
- Just5

Konecny was the only person I noticed in the preseason

The only reason he was traded is Toronto had the money to stash Horton.
- J35Bacher

correct...the contract was uninsured...how? I have no idea