yes really. Sanheim isn't a stiff that you need to move ASAP. As CLiff said your giving away Laughton for free +. Horrible deal.
- hello it's me 2050

It doesn't seem like it is happening.

That's a trade I would call for the GM's head for making.
- MJL

Yeah. I didn't see that. I saw the below:

To STL: Hayes(50% retained), Sanheim
To Philly: Krug, 25OA, Neighbors and maybe one of Vrana or Kapanen

Then Flyers would try to move Krug to a team he would be ok going to like maybe Florida or Boston and gain a couple more assets there.

Getting rid of the Sanheim deal and freeing up as much as $13mil in cap space is worth Scott Laughton to me. If they are not flipping Krug I would be hesitant.


Also, I do not think there is a team in the league that would give you a first round pick straight up for Travis Sanheim. The teams that want don't have the cap space to take on his full cap hit.

In this deal, Sanheim and Krug are a wash in terms of AAV. Hayes (50%) and Laughton's AAV use almost of the Blues remaining cap space.
- mickel25

Sanheim is a solid NHL top 4 puck moving defenseman. You don't give up Laughton just to move him. That's malfeasance. Flyers are taking it on the chin in that deal.

They're taking on cap space from St. Louis and giving them two good players. The return if they include Laughton is not enough. Laughton himself is worth a 2nd round pick.

Yeah. I didn't see that. I saw the below:

To STL: Hayes(50% retained), Sanheim
To Philly: Krug, 25OA, Neighbors and maybe one of Vrana or Kapanen

Then Flyers would try to move Krug to a team he would be ok going to like maybe Florida or Boston and gain a couple more assets there.
- J35Bacher

Don't know anything about Neighbors

New blob

Yes, if that would be the trade. Sanheim to St Louis for the 25th pick and having to take on Krug. Yes, that is a bad deal. Sanheim alone is worth the 25th pick. Having to take the cap space off of them for a player they want to move, is then worth more.
- MJL

So Sanheim by himself is worth a 1st rdr (minimum 25th) without taking back a contract. Fair enough. Certainly we are only at the speculation phase of a potential deal, but I would assume more picks and a prospect would be involved. I'm curious how it plays out.

Is there any precedence for a trade like that? A playoff contender paying the team trading the player an asset as well as a 3rd team as asset to help with the cap. For a mediocre 3rd pair defenseman with 3 years of term left?
- MJL

an opinion doesn't need a precedent, could be, could not be. You believe RR has next to zero value, I believe there is a scenario that he has value. No doubt CF overpaid badly for him, but I also believe Bill when he says there were mroe than a few teams willing to give up a 1st for Risto. Yea, we can make the case his time with the Flyers has hurt his value but we can also make the case their is value. There will be GM's who share you thought, backed up by analytics and there will be other GM's who have a specific need, who think RR fits the need.

an opinion doesn't need a precedent, could be, could not be. You believe RR has next to zero value, I believe there is a scenario that he has value. No doubt CF overpaid badly for him, but I also believe Bill when he says there were mroe than a few teams willing to give up a 1st for Risto. Yea, we can make the case his time with the Flyers has hurt his value but we can also make the case their is value. There will be GM's who share you thought, backed up by analytics and there will be other GM's who have a specific need, who think RR fits the need.
- wcorvette

You're right it doesn't but I doubt you would find one. What is a precedence is the kind of players that are traded at the deadline. That's generally players on expiring contract and players that a team really wants for the future, if they're going to take on future years on the cap in a hockey trade. The idea that Ristolainen might improve if moved to a different team other than Buffalo, has had the wind knocked out of it. I don't see a playoff team having a specific need for a mediocre 3rd pair defenseman with 3 years of term left when there is normally plenty of those kinds of players available every deadline with no term.