They don't need all of them. If they sign a legitimate number 4 guy and trade Ellis for a position of weakness they are better because of it. And they don't lose a good forward to LV.

Smart asset management.
- Santo_44

i think they already played that card with the jones trade

they could probably replace any forward they lose from the ufa market.

Shattenkirk, would probably get $7M per, Alzner maybe 4M or 4.5M?

Money and term has to be a factor, and I think he signs with the Rangers, not us
- PatC80

And Shat is easily a $6-7m D man, while Alzner is really just a $3m guy. I'd rather pay a fair price for an expensive Dman than overpay for an average guy.

"Meow meow, we couldn't make it to last nights game because we didn't want to drive 20 minutes and don't get our allowance until Saturday. Meow."

- Sens "fans"
- As_I_See_It

They don't need all of them. If they sign a legitimate number 4 guy and trade Ellis for a position of weakness they are better because of it. And they don't lose a good forward to LV.

Smart asset management.
- Santo_44

Maybe, but more trades and player movement is expected than usual because of expansion, so to maximize their return, Preds might be better off, if they wait. From what you are saying they will have cap issues, why would they trade an asset that makes only 2.5M for the next two years?

And Shat is easily a $6-7m D man, while Alzner is really just a $3m guy. I'd rather pay a fair price for an expensive Dman than overpay for an average guy.
- lumlums

Yes! Added bonus: Acquire a player for what he is worth and give up no assets other than cap space. Besides all of this, Alzner is only a filler guy, surely not even close to a top pair d-man.

Yes! Added bonus: Acquire a player for what he is worth and give up no assets other than cap space. Besides all of this, Alzner is only a filler guy, surely not even close to a top pair d-man.
- winsix

Damn right. If we could add Shat for market value and trade for someone like Manson then we're absolutely set.

Rielly - Shat/Manson
Gards - Manson/Shat
Warm body - Zaits



EDIT: (frank), even if we only add Shat and have a top four including Zaits then we're in much better shape because as much as we love Rielly, Shat is a better player.

Draft the best player available.

Do not draft d cause you need d, that guy isn't gonna help for like 3 years min.
- burn

Agree fully, just keep stock piling the gems and trade the excess for the pieces needed.

Also wow...Guy Boucher has never coached a team past three years at ANY LEVEL. The (frank)?

Something is up with Le Chiffre.
- AdamFrench

I was watching the game thinking he looked like someone I just couldn't place it.

The bond villain of hockey, fitting its with the Sens, altho he is doing a heck of a job this year with that team.

I see what you did there Pat.

Nice.
- Scabeh

You, you're good

And Shat is easily a $6-7m D man, while Alzner is really just a $3m guy. I'd rather pay a fair price for an expensive Dman than overpay for an average guy.
- lumlums

Yes, he is...I agree that he will get that too, but not for 6 or 7 years

They are weak on forward.

They don't need two top pairings and two number 3 D. In a couple years they are going to have to be paying Subban 9 million, Josi 8 million and Ellis 7 million. Almost 30 million tied up to 4 D.

Josi Subban Ekholm and Stone(free agent)

Trade Ellis for a top line winger and whatever assets you can get. It makes sense on their part.
- Santo_44

Dont have to move anyone now.
They have time.

And Shat is easily a $6-7m D man, while Alzner is really just a $3m guy. I'd rather pay a fair price for an expensive Dman than overpay for an average guy.
- lumlums

People underate Shatts defensive skills. When he's on the ice the puck is not in his end.

A Shatts/Manson with Reilly and Gardiner would be sweet.

Dont have to move anyone now.
They have time.
- Fakepartofme

They should.

Like I said. Smart asset management.

Damn right. If we could add Shat for market value and trade for someone like Manson then we're absolutely set.

Rielly - Shat/Manson
Gards - Manson/Shat
Warm body - Zaits



EDIT: (frank), even if we only add Shat and have a top four including Zaits then we're in much better shape because as much as we love Rielly, Shat is a better player.
- lumlums

Agreed.

I would do something like:

Rielly - Shat
Gardner - Zait
Nelson - Manson
Polak

Now we're talking.

Everybody talks about Franson, we have Nelson and he could be better. Grittier with a good point shot and his skating is good for a big guy.

People underate Shatts defensive skills. When he's on the ice the puck is not in his end.

A Shatts/Manson with Reilly and Gardiner would be sweet.
- Santo_44

I'm not debating Shatt's talent. The point I am making is, based on the $$ and term he will get, he shouldn't be a target for the Leafs. 7x7 is too much.

They don't need all of them. If they sign a legitimate number 4 guy and trade Ellis for a position of weakness they are better because of it. And they don't lose a good forward to LV.

Smart asset management.
- Santo_44

A number 4 guy will cost more than what Ellis is making.
They wont lose a good forward to LV.

They have players to expose that Im sure they would be fine with losing

I'm not debating Shatt's talent. The point I am making is, based on the $$ and term he will get, he shouldn't be a target for the Leafs. 7x7 is too much.
- PatC80

Why is it too much???

I keep hearing this and don't get it.

His age is good for that contract.
His skill is good for that contract.
The Leafs' D is in NEED.
The Leafs have plenty of cap space and more coming over the next year with Lupul, Martin, Gleason.....

This is the perfect player to fill out our roster and the perfect time to get him. We lose nothing but money.

They should.

Like I said. Smart asset management.
- Santo_44

Moving out a 2.5m quality D man just to sign a more expensive 4 guy is not smart asset management.

Smart asset management was having 5 top D, and moving one for a quality forward...which they did.
No rush to move out anyone...their time for a cup is now and the next couple of years.

Why is it too much???

I keep hearing this and don't get it.

His age is good for that contract.
His skill is good for that contract.
The Leafs' D is in NEED.
The Leafs have plenty of cap space and more coming over the next year with Lupul, Martin, Gleason.....

This is the perfect player to fill out our roster and the perfect time to get him. We lose nothing but money.
- underhill14

I believe they have lupul for another year.

Why is it too much???

I keep hearing this and don't get it.

His age is good for that contract.
His skill is good for that contract.
The Leafs' D is in NEED.
The Leafs have plenty of cap space and more coming over the next year with Lupul, Martin, Gleason.....

This is the perfect player to fill out our roster and the perfect time to get him. We lose nothing but money.
- underhill14

Agree

A number 4 guy will cost more than what Ellis is making.
They wont lose a good forward to LV.

They have players to expose that Im sure they would be fine with losing
- Fakepartofme

yeah, i'm not seeing it. anahiem, nash and minny are all have deep defenses worth protecting in the expansion draft.

duck and wild will lose rackell/silfverberg/zucker if they overload on protecting dmen. those guys can’t be replaced on the ufa market.

for the preds, smith/jankrot are easily replaceable on the ufa market. top 4 dmen are not.

I believe they have lupul for another year.
- Fakepartofme

and another year of Gleason + another 1.2M for Phil Kessel

Why is it too much???

I keep hearing this and don't get it.

His age is good for that contract.
His skill is good for that contract.
The Leafs' D is in NEED.
The Leafs have plenty of cap space and more coming over the next year with Lupul, Martin, Gleason.....

This is the perfect player to fill out our roster and the perfect time to get him. We lose nothing but money.
- underhill14

signing a 28 year old for 7 years when the team might not be primed for a cup for another 2 seasons...I dont know

and another year of Gleason + another 1.2M for Phil Kessel
- PatC80

ugh.
and kessel for 5.

Why is it too much???

I keep hearing this and don't get it.

His age is good for that contract.
His skill is good for that contract.
The Leafs' D is in NEED.
The Leafs have plenty of cap space and more coming over the next year with Lupul, Martin, Gleason.....

This is the perfect player to fill out our roster and the perfect time to get him. We lose nothing but money.
- underhill14

Cause he is 28 now and will be signed for 7 seasons. I know my math sucks, how is yours?