HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   time for Edmonton/Boston to pull the trigger? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=217358)

OReilly24_Thornton19 01-31-2006 03:53 AM

time for Edmonton/Boston to pull the trigger?
 
Going to float an idea up and I bet that a ton of people wont like it for their own reasons... but i guess i am interested to see if people think it would be fair for the Oilers. I'm enough of a bruin fan that i will trust myself to believe it's fair for us.

Edmonton seems to have just upped their payroll quite substantial to land a couple dmen. They had the cap room all along... but they have their own problems so far as short pocket ownership and a rather poor market place.

Now Ottawa ownership went public this weak crying poverty again and stating in their market very similar to Edmonton and with a similar payroll and similar ticket prices/tv deals... the won't turn a profit without getting a couple rounds into the playoffs.

Maybe Ottawa is crying the sky is falling... or maybe without revenue sharing, small market teams in Canada still have it a bit tough.

If Edmonton raises their payroll... they reduce their participation in revenue sharing.

I think Edmonton needs to dump some payroll to make room for their dmen pickups and also they need to add a goaltender now with more potential to maybe be a true number 1 for them for a playoff push since that is what this is all about.

Of course, Boston has the cheaply paid Andrew Raycroft who at best seems to be in a bit of a snit over his contract and how Boston treated him in negotiations... and at worst might have been part of an inside rebellion with Thornton/Murray/Boynton and friends to try to get Sullivan/OCConnell fired this year.

Raycroft figures to need a new home sooner then later with Toivonen displacing him as the goaltender of the future and Thomas being on enough of a hot streak right now that he wont be going anywhere anytime soon himself.

There would be no need for Boston to trade Raycroft for garbage... since he isnt paid that much and could be kept till next year and given a shot to play his trade value back up... but if a trade makes sense here and now... why shouldn't a deal get made?

Edmonton's biggest chunk of payroll being paid to their least productive star talent is the Michael Peca 4 million.

Peca of course was signed to a 4 mill a year deal to serve as a second line center in NY... and was then dealt to Edmonton when he couldnt live up to second line responsibility in NY. Edmonton wanted him to be their first line guy I think, but lucky for them Horcorff/Stoll lived up to their own promise cause Peca has clearly shown he is a third line guy at this point in his career.

4 mill is too much for Edmonton to pay a third line guy when they have Marty Reasoner around to do that job for half the cost.

Boston is now playing Wayne Primeau as their first line guy the last few games... he is getting more icetime than anyone. He is responding well to the challange too which is maybe a bit surprising, but nice.

Of course, Bergeron is the team's best scoring center and good on faceoffs. He plays a good 2-way game and has developed nice chemistry and work ethic alongside linemates Marco Sturm and Brad Boyes. This threesome hasn't been outplayed by anyone they've been matched against in quite awhile.

Peca effectively would be played third line if Boston picked him up... and would be given Samsonov/Murray as linemates once those two get healthy I think. It might seem like a strange line on paper, but Peca's faceoff ability/defensive resonsibilty/and willingness to win at playoff time would all be welcomed additions to Boston.

Boston does have the cap room to take the hit... and they could definitely try to get Peca to agree to a new contract before losing him as an UFA next season.

I would think Raycroft for Peca might be fair by itself... but it is too risky to leave as is. Peca being an UFA and Raycroft sucking needs to be addressed

i would think both teams should include future draft picks in this deal... both sides conditional.

for example if raycroft wins like 30 games and peca leaves after this year the draft pick swap favors boston in 2007

on the other hand if peca resigns and raycroft stinks next year the pick flips favor edmonton in 2007

a Peca who might sign for around 2 mill a year to stay in a place he liked is a pretty valuable guy i think... and a raycroft that could maybe bounce back to roty form could be even more valuable...

its a trade that could easily be homerun for either team or both... and at worst, I think both teams are moving problems and getting something back that they need.

Shouldn't they be pulling the trigger on this move?

Or am i crazy

Jimmi Jenkins 01-31-2006 04:04 AM

I think Edmonton will bite the bullet on Peca's Salary, because he's a very good shut down center and they may try to resign him for about 1.5 or so. I think the Oilers would be more incline to send a D-man as part of any deal for a Goaltender. Though I don't want to see the Oilers lose money, if they have to this year to set the team up properly, as a fan, I could handle it. Though I want them to pull a goaltender deal soon.

Vyse64 01-31-2006 05:06 AM

Oilers has a budget, and adding Tarnstrom and Spacek only will cost about the Oilers about 1.5 million the rest of the season, affording Peca and a goalie for the rest of the season isn't out of the question

Staios (about 600K left)
Conklin (about 410L left) or Markkanen (about 330K left)
Ulanov (about 330K left)
Laraque (about 400K left) {not likely in my mind}
equais to about 1.7 million that the Oilers can dump or throw in on a trade for goalie

plus trading Peca makes little sense to me from the Oilers view point

jcoldwell 01-31-2006 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OReilly24_Thornton19
Peca effectively would be played third line if Boston picked him up... and would be given Samsonov/Murray as linemates once those two get healthy I think. It might seem like a strange line on paper, but Peca's faceoff ability/defensive resonsibilty/and willingness to win at playoff time would all be welcomed additions to Boston.

What is different with Peca playing 3rd line center for Edmonton than it is with Boston? To me it is 3rd line. And for your payroll exuse, Edmonton already paid 3/4's of his salary so it isn't much different to pay him the rest and see if the Oilers can sign him for about $1-$1.5 M next season.

If we do trade Peca who would play 3rd/4th line behind or in front of Reasoner? A rookie? I don't think so.

And I think Raycroft would be a high risk factor as I don't know how well he would perform under the pressure of the Oiler faithful. I do believe the fans would be highly critical of any goalie coming to Edmonton as we all know that that is what we truly need. For me, if I was KLowe, I would be going after a veteren goalie with playoff experience.

BruinAddict 01-31-2006 06:20 AM

No friggin' way.

Pepper 01-31-2006 07:16 AM

If Oilers think they can get Raycroft for Peca they'll be in for a rude surprise.

Bruwinz37 01-31-2006 07:53 AM

If we traded Raycroft for Peca I would throw up in my mouth.

Jesus that is awful.

DrOiler 01-31-2006 09:35 AM

Edmonton's "market" is just fine. They have sold out every home game except one where they were 200 short. The financial restriction comes into play with regards to the building. They could use a larger building with more luxery boxes.

Edmonton has large enough pockets and are spending more wisely than some other teams....*cough* Boston.

As for your trade proposal....no. Raycroft had one good season, is now cold and injury prone. Peca is overpayment.

Pepper 01-31-2006 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrOiler
As for your trade proposal....no. Raycroft had one good season, is now cold and injury prone. Peca is overpayment.

:shakehead

Peca and his $4M contract makes trade value pretty damn low right now.

You will never get Raycroft for Peca.

Vyse64 01-31-2006 09:58 AM

it makes no sense for either team to do it

risto 01-31-2006 09:59 AM

Most of Peca's salary has already been paid, that's why you don't trade him now. And besides, why would you trade the guy when he's finding his legs and game again.

s7ark 01-31-2006 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by risto
Most of Peca's salary has already been paid, that's why you don't trade him now. And besides, why would you trade the guy when he's finding his legs and game again.


Exactly, we have been waiting all year for this version of Peca. I doubt we are likely to trade him now. Esp with Moreau spraining his ankle yesterday.

Wolfpack 01-31-2006 10:32 AM

There is no doubt that Peca is overpaid at $4 million, and if you look at his lack of offensive production this year it only serves to back that up.

However, Peca has shown himself to be the kind of defensive specialist that the Oilers haven't had in a long time. The star players that usually own the Oilers have been absolutely invisible against this team this year (5-on-5 at least,) and the Oilers' PK has vastly improved over last season.

Most of Peca's salary for this season has already been paid, and I bet there are a bunch of teams heading into the playoffs that are going to be calling Kevin Lowe and asking what it would take to land Peca. But if the Oilers want to experience some playoff success themselves this year, I think they've got to hold onto Peca and try to re-sign him as an UFA in the offseason.

The Oilers have 8 NHL calibre defencemen right now. I'd be shocked if their next trade did not involve a d-man.

JonQuixote 01-31-2006 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pepper
:shakehead

Peca and his $4M contract makes trade value pretty damn low right now.

You will never get Raycroft for Peca.

At this stage of the game, Peca's salary is a non-factor. His UFA status at the end of the year might be. But his salary has been mostly paid.

I dunno. I would imagine Peca is extremely valuable to *any* team looking to make a playoff run. His abilities as a checking center and a penalty killer would be invaluable.

But looking at respective playoff positions, that would suggest that Peca is more valuable to the Oilers right now than to the Bruins.

That said, if a two-time Selke winner isn't enough for Andrew Raycroft, I guess you're better off hanging on to him and hoping that the rest of the year riding the pine behind Toivonen and Thomas somehow increases the guy's trade value.

Pepper 01-31-2006 10:59 AM

Ah, Peca is an UFA at the summer? That gives him more value.

Enough to get Raycroft? Dunno, I still doubt that.

stungun 01-31-2006 11:19 AM

bad value for a young goaltender even if he is struggling this year. why move sammy and murray to the the third line with peca ??? and who is gonna play on the second line. doesnt make sense. i really dont see razor going anywhere unless a team blows the bruins away with an offer. you dont develop two young goaltenders just to throw them away for a soon to be ufa just because the struggled one year. that would be bad asset management.

Hockey_Nut99 01-31-2006 11:23 AM

I don't want Edmonton to trade Peca at all. Especially not for a goaltender who has played worse than our goaltenders. Kevin Lowe is a smart man. He's one of those GM's who can't be fleeced. Very hockey knowledgable.

MrMackey 01-31-2006 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OReilly24_Thornton19
Edmonton seems to have just upped their payroll quite substantial to land a couple dmen. They had the cap room all along... but they have their own problems so far as short pocket ownership and a rather poor market place.

Now Ottawa ownership went public this weak crying poverty again and stating in their market very similar to Edmonton and with a similar payroll and similar ticket prices/tv deals... the won't turn a profit without getting a couple rounds into the playoffs.

Maybe Ottawa is crying the sky is falling... or maybe without revenue sharing, small market teams in Canada still have it a bit tough.

If Edmonton raises their payroll... they reduce their participation in revenue sharing.

You're just a bit off with your assessment, but its understandable because listening to the earstern-based media its easy to make the assumption that Edmonton is poverty-striken.

Edmonton is in the top half of the league in terms of revenue, and one of the few teams that makes a profit. We're not eligible for revenue sharing.

We've been the poster child for small market teams and our ownership group has been very vocal about needing certain things to ensure viability in Edmonton. The CDN dollar was a major factor for a number of years, and trying to get back on track from the Pocklington days was an uphill battle... therefore Edmonton's ownership has always kept a strict limit on spending, such that they would break even with one playoff round. Fluctuations in the dollar and things like the 3rd jerseys and Heritage Classic provided them with small profits.

With the dollar what it is now compared to what it was in 03/04, our payroll in CDN dollars is actually much lower now. With confidence that adding $2-3M in salary will make a difference, ownership seems much more willing to budge on payroll. In the previous CBA, adding a $2M player at the deadline was fruitless because the rosters of our first round competitors were always in the $50-70M range.

I'm not opposed to a Peca for Raycroft swap if it was part of a larger deal, but the move wouldn't be made for monetary reasons. Edmonton can easily afford Peca's contract.

JonQuixote 01-31-2006 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMackey
I'm not opposed to a Peca for Raycroft swap if it was part of a larger deal, but the move wouldn't be made for monetary reasons. Edmonton can easily afford Peca's contract.

Yeah, but there is a self-imposed budget. And we are currently over it (or had ownership increase it).

Moving Peca would not only bring the return, *but* it would free up money to grab another rent-a-player for the playoffs. Keith Tkachuk? Mark Recchi? Etc.

Not that I think we should move Peca. Just that there could be wisdom or monetary reasons behind it.

BruinAddict 01-31-2006 04:06 PM

I can't believe people are still talking about this... it's as likely as Stoll or Torres coming to Boston for Wayne Primeau.

OReilly24_Thornton19 01-31-2006 04:18 PM

i actually live in alberta and listen to more western based media then eastern...

that said I am going on the Pittsburg/Ottawa reality that their own ownership has been stating for my assumptions of the finances of the Oilers.

Lemieux with a payroll much lower than Edmontons at this point is still losing money

St Louis with a huge market and a payroll much lower than Edmontons is still losing money

Ottawa with crowds just as good or better than Edmonton's and higher ticket prices and such is reported that they will lose money this year too

Edmonton doesnt have any rich ego owners willing to throw away money to own their team. They bought the franchise as a community service under the belief that the NHL needed Edmonton and Edmonton deserved the NHL

The plan always was to fix the NHL and get some sort of revunue sharing that would take money out of the big rich markets that need time to learn to love the sport and give it to the small poor markets where the people will keep the game alive in the meantime if allowed

Well.. the new CBA provides for revenue sharing but its a staggered system from all reports. You have to qualify for it by meeting certain requirements. Im not sure what the final requirements will be pegged at... but one thing that seems certain is that teams that having lower payrolls will get more than teams with higher payrolls.

So if Edmonton saves a million now by moving Peca for example... not only do they save that million but maybe it will increase there share of revenue sharing by a million or a few hundred thousand or a few million....

whatever

this is what Pittsburgh is after right now too with Lemieux and Palffy retirering. When Palffy retires, Pittsburgh gets to get his salary paid by insurance which is step one to saving money, but they also get more revenue share dollars too. When Lemiux retires he might be out the money he pays himself but since the team is losing money anyhow, that is robbing peter to pay paul.

with Lemiex retired the Penguin payroll drops way down and their participation in revenue sharing goes way up.

There is general belief that a home playoff date is worth somewhere between 1 and up to 2 million dollars for the owners of a team.

The best way to be profitable is to get 8-12 home playoff dates in a good playoff run...

but if a team isnt certain to make the playoffs or is at risk to be eliminated early in the first round after just a couple home dates, then money can become very tight.

This will all play out in the coming years and we will see if these early signs I am picking up are true or just false rumors to try to keep the gravy train from government open for hockey...

in the meantime though I think this proposed deal does help both teams.

for Boston fans who have said Peca isnt worth Raycroft... they mean last year's raycroft. This would be true if last year's raycroft was the guy dealt. I don't think these fans read my inclusion of pick swaps as part of the equation. I would protect the B's from Raycroft bouncing back to this form.


For Edmonton fans who have said Peca is too valuable to give up for just Raycroft, remember I have included pick protection for both teams. If there is only this years raycroft being moved and if Peca were to resign in Boston, then there is pick compensation headed to edmonton under my proposal.

lets face it... if Raycroft is as good as his roty status then he'd be worth a first round pick from a playoff team... so say he bounces back next year with 30+ wins and a gaa under 2.5 or whatever numbers are good now... then we could easily say Edmonton surrenders there 2007 first round pick as part of this deal

if on the other hand raycroft sucks all next year and Peca meanwhile has resigned with the Bruins and is their captain and maybe has 20 goals and 20 assists and plays 20 mins a night and is a top 10 finalist for the selke again... then he'd be worth a first round pick himself.

We could easily say the Bruin 2007 first round pick could be sacraficed under this type of situation.

i wouldnt say just a first either way... i'd probably say the team losing the first should get a couple other things back too...

but there are ways to protect teams when risky deals are made.

the important thing is for right now Boston gets a leadership upgrade... a center who can be used in a pinch to help ther top lines... a playoff help they need if they make the playoffs... and someone that can be very useful to changing their culture for next year

edmonton gets their best legitimate shot at having a number 1 goaltender in town that is worthy of the title since Cujo was let go.

the move does actually make sense for both teams on many levels. It could blow up in either's face too I guess... but thats where the picks come in. I dont think this trade would cripple either team.

Peca is replaceable in Edmonton
Raycroft has already been replaced in Boston

I dont see how its that complicated but I doubted anyone here would like the deal anyhow. It works for me that both sides think their team is being screwed. Thats always the indication for me that the deal is pretty fair

MrMackey 01-31-2006 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonQuixote
Yeah, but there is a self-imposed budget. And we are currently over it (or had ownership increase it).

Moving Peca would not only bring the return, *but* it would free up money to grab another rent-a-player for the playoffs. Keith Tkachuk? Mark Recchi? Etc.

Not that I think we should move Peca. Just that there could be wisdom or monetary reasons behind it.

Kevin Lowe's been saying since the start of the year that the budget was in the $34-36M range and that they'd be looking to save a bit to bring in more impact players later in the season. We're below $34M now (without pro-rating the new guys), and we could bring on a lot more salary because prorating the incoming salary for 25 games or so won't take much out of our budget. Lowe discussed raising the budget with ownership, but these latest moves didn't require a budget increase.

We might move a guy like Peca if we need to bring in another expensive forward... but my point is that the Oilers aren't overextended at this point, and they do not need to dump salary.

Also... I can't see Tkachuk moving because he's on a team option at a low price for next year.

OReilly24_Thornton19 01-31-2006 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMackey
Kevin Lowe's been saying since the start of the year that the budget was in the $34-36M range and that they'd be looking to save a bit to bring in more impact players later in the season. We're below $34M now (without pro-rating the new guys), and we could bring on a lot more salary because prorating the incoming salary for 25 games or so won't take much out of our budget. Lowe discussed raising the budget with ownership, but these latest moves didn't require a budget increase.

We might move a guy like Peca if we need to bring in another expensive forward... but my point is that the Oilers aren't overextended at this point, and they do not need to dump salary.

Also... I can't see Tkachuk moving because he's on a team option at a low price for next year.


For what it's worth I think it was Nichols I heard interviewed the other day of the trades and he did say that he had increased the oil budget to make the moves... or maybe it was Lowe himself I heard interviewed saying that Nichols had given him the OK?

I am not saying that the Oilers cant handle this latest move but the latest move doesnt do the job unless a goaltending improvement is added as well...

the latest move already adds payroll

unless payroll is now subtracted where does the money come from to improve the goaltending?

ottawa could be blowing smoke with the comments they are making on their finances. that is easy to believe... but then Pittsburgh/St Louis clearly have messed up ownership situations that are not rolling in profits or those situations wouldnt be so messed up

NHL PR wants everyone to believe that the sacraficed season made everything perfect for the small market teams... but I think we can already see that isnt the case

I think that there is a bit of a gag order right now... but things are leaking out and in cases like Pittsburgh/St Louis its pretty damn hard not to view it as a full blown dam bust.

Maybe Oilers have it better. Maybe they dont. maybe they think paying a 3rd line guy like Peca 4 mill is a wise use of their limited resources. maybe they dont

Boston doesnt have a legit second line center right now. maybe Boston thinks Primeau can do that job but then we dont have a legit third line center either.

Boston has a culture problem and has for years. No one in Boston knows how to be winners. Peca has always been a winner.

Peca making 4 mill is a bad investment in boston too... but if I was making the deal for him it would be with the intention to resign him

I think Boston should view this as what they need

I think Peca has to realize no one will give him 4 mill next year

the question is what does peca think he will get?

Marty Lapointe got like 2.5 mill with Chicago and Bobby Holik got over 4 mill with Atlanta.

Peca might still be a 3 mill player even after his stuggles the last couple years with some idiot team.

At 3 mill, i wouldnt want him myself.

at 2.5 i'd think about it pretty serious

at 2 its a done deal

Dave Scatchard was given 2.1 and peca is petter than he.

something between 2-2.5 and i hope for the sake of My Bruins some deal like this goes down

We need the help still to get into the playoffs.

I dont want Raycroft dealt unless draft pick protection comes back to us... but I do want him dealt and I want immediate help back from him too.

BruinAddict 01-31-2006 06:05 PM

How do you get the impression that Peca is a "legit second line center" when you live in Alberta? You should know first hand that he is no longer anything more than a checking line center. Ever since Tucker's hit on Peca, he has not been the same.

MrMackey 01-31-2006 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BruinAddict
How do you get the impression that Peca is a "legit second line center" when you live in Alberta?

I'm wondering that as well. I mean I have a much better read on the Bruins lineup from Calgary, then I would if I was anywhere near Boston.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:52 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.