HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Kennedy, Leighton BOTH CLEAR

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-05-2011, 03:54 PM
  #51
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,713
vCash: 500
Someone should claim him so we have around 2.3 mil to sign 5 players next season (not counting Lappy on LTIR) . That ***** gonna be fun.

Teams can really **** us over.... I hope they do it. Homer is such a jackass its hilarious.

sa cyred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 03:55 PM
  #52
AMDZen
Moon June Spoon Goon
 
AMDZen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Denver
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comely View Post
I could see Ottawa picking up Leighton as he would be a good backup for Anderson next year.
Avalanche pick up Leighton before you

The only team that can grab him before us is EDM and Dubnyk is 2x the goalie that either of ours is.

Avs would be stupid not to grab him at 800k

AMDZen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:01 PM
  #53
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,540
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDZen View Post
Avalanche pick up Leighton before you

The only team that can grab him before us is EDM and Dubnyk is 2x the goalie that either of ours is.

Avs would be stupid not to grab him at 800k
That's why I think there's no reason for Edmonton not to take him.

Trade him to Colorado or whoever in the offseason for a pick. It's a no-risk situation.

Seachd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:03 PM
  #54
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,756
vCash: 500
Awards:
Ennis and Gerbe have kicked Kennedy's tail this year but with the Sabres injury problems, that one-way deal kicked him in the butt even moreso. He'd probably have had nearly half-a-season worth of injury recalls. Instead... riding the bus.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:06 PM
  #55
AMDZen
Moon June Spoon Goon
 
AMDZen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Denver
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd View Post
That's why I think there's no reason for Edmonton not to take him.

Trade him to Colorado or whoever in the offseason for a pick. It's a no-risk situation.
Grabbing him off waivers for free is one thing, trading for him is another thing altogether. If they Avs had to trade for a goalie, it wouldn't be Leighton. They would try to get him off waivers, if EDM gets him first they are stuck with him. Their call.

AMDZen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:12 PM
  #56
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,540
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDZen View Post
Grabbing him off waivers for free is one thing, trading for him is another thing altogether. If they Avs had to trade for a goalie, it wouldn't be Leighton. They would try to get him off waivers, if EDM gets him first they are stuck with him. Their call.
I doubt they'd be stuck with him.

Seachd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:27 PM
  #57
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,739
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
People think both will be claimed? I bet neither does.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:35 PM
  #58
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
People think both will be claimed? I bet neither does.
Why wouldn't Leighton get claimed? Seriously, you don't think at the very least a division rival will want to gain a 800K cap advantage on the Flyers? You remember what happened to the Hawks in the offseason because of Tallon's mis-management of the cap? We'll you're going to see a somewhat lesser version of that happen this offseason. All I can say is enjoy the team you guys have now because the crap is gonna hit the fan after the year is over. At the very least, this should get Holmgren fired, so at least there is that to look forward to. Simply unbelievable something like this could happen in the NHL, especially when everyone saw the potential trouble it could cause with the Hawks just last year. Wow.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:38 PM
  #59
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,739
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Why wouldn't Leighton get claimed? Seriously, you don't think at the very least a division rival will want to gain a 800K cap advantage on the Flyers? You remember what happened to the Hawks in the offseason because of Tallon's mis-management of the cap? We'll you're going to see a somewhat lesser version of that happen this offseason. All I can say is enjoy the team you guys have now because the crap is gonna hit the fan after the year is over. At the very least, this should get Holmgren fired, so at least there is that to look forward to. Simply unbelievable something like this could happen in the NHL, especially when everyone saw the potential trouble it could cause with the Hawks just last year. Wow.
People have been saying the same things about many other guys that get waived, and I've yet to see the scenario you've described occur. The Pens, Rangers, and Devils are close to the cap, and the Islanders don't like to spend money.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:39 PM
  #60
RJ8812
Gunner Stahl #9
 
RJ8812's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sudbury
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,228
vCash: 500
who cares if Leighton is claimed? he will just be back in the AHL next year once the team that claims him realizes he stinks thus wont be on Philly's cap

RJ8812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:45 PM
  #61
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
People have been saying the same things about many other guys that get waived, and I've yet to see the scenario you've described occur. The Pens, Rangers, and Devils are close to the cap, and the Islanders don't like to spend money.
Considering how good the Flyers are and their already poor cap situation for next year, Holmgren just basically gave 29 teams a knife, stuck the Flyers neck out and said "Go to hell, you don't have the guts"

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:46 PM
  #62
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ8812 View Post
who cares if Leighton is claimed? he will just be back in the AHL next year once the team that claims him realizes he stinks thus wont be on Philly's cap
What's the difference at that point? The offseason will be over and the guys moved to create cap space will be long gone.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:58 PM
  #63
skip2mybordeleau
We're not that bad!
 
skip2mybordeleau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,479
vCash: 5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ8812 View Post
who cares if Leighton is claimed? he will just be back in the AHL next year once the team that claims him realizes he stinks thus wont be on Philly's cap

new stinks better than an old stink

and we got stinky elliot

skip2mybordeleau is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 04:58 PM
  #64
Dr Danglefest
Vindication
 
Dr Danglefest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beantown
Country: United States
Posts: 2,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
No. The Flyers made it to the Finals despite Leighton, not because of him.
how quickly the fans can turn on someone...jeez

Dr Danglefest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 05:15 PM
  #65
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beef Runner
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 40,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Danglefest View Post
how quickly the fans can turn on someone...jeez
It's what I and many others who actually watched the guy have said since day 1. He isn't talented...He's just big.

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 05:19 PM
  #66
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,115
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuiltTagonTough View Post
It wasn't stupid. He wanted a 1 way deal and Buffalo wouldn't give it to him. Considering this is the 2nd team that's moved him around on waivers now I'd say it was the right choice.
I don't get why all Sabres fans seem to be so pissy about Kennedy.

His qualifying offer was a one-way contract worth $698,500.
That means that it doesn't matter what he wanted; his qualifying offer was a one-way and if the Sabres wanted to keep him, that's what they had to offer.
They did so and he rejected the offer because it was the absolute minimum.
He had some leverage because he had a very good rookie year in Portland and a decent rookie NHL season, so he filed for salary arbitration.
The arbitrator awarded him a much better $1m contract, which the Sabres had to accept because it was less than $1.6m.

So, the Sabres created the mess themselves.
If they didn't feel that he was worthy of a one-way contract and just cared about flexibility, then they shouldn't have qualified him.
Instead, they qualified him and tried to get him to sign a two-way contract even though they had just offered him a one-way.
Unless Darcy is incredibly stupid, he was aware that most likely any award Kennedy received in arbitration would be less than $1.6m and therefore the Sabres would have to accept it.
He was also likely aware of the fact that it would be a one-way contract.
Therefore, they should have simply never qualified Kennedy if they didn't think he was worthy of a one-way contract because that was what he was likely to receive.
The following are the possible outcomes:
a.) he accepts his qualifying offer; he is on a one-way contract
b.) he rejects his qualifying offer and files for arbitration; any award will be a one-way contract
c.) he rejects his qualifying offer and signs an offer sheet; one-way contract
d.) he rejects his qualifying offer and instead signs a lesser two-way contract (which is stupid for him and therefore unlikely)
e.) he is not qualified and becomes an unrestricted free agent, allowing him to sign any contract

I really hope they decided to use the $666,666 they saved by buying out Kennedy on a lawyer to explain the CBA to Darcy.

As for your statement about waivers: it has nothing to do with the quality of a player.
Any movement between the AHL and NHL for him is subject to waivers.
He signed a one-way deal with the Rangers, a team that has a bunch of options at C/LW.
The Rangers chose veteran Todd White who had 99 points over the past two seasons instead of third year pro Kennedy, which is really a no brainer.
He was assigned to the AHL and had to clear re-entry waivers to return to the NHL because his contract was a one-way contract and he was subject to regular waivers already (because of his signing age, he was waiver exempt for three years or 70 games).
He played 85 NHL games on his entry-level contract which expired last year, so he will always be subject to at least regular waivers and is subject to re-entry waivers this year because of his one-way contract.

You didn't see him recalled by the Rangers this year because they didn't want to end up on the hook for half of his contract and end up with unusable cap space.
As soon as he was traded to Florida at the trade deadline, re-entry waivers became useless because he has a one year contract and any team that claimed him after the trade deadline wouldn't be able to use him (the one year contract part is important here because it wouldn't become an Avery situation where the team is on the hook for multiple years).
Florida isn't concerned about him being claimed and therefore being unavailable during the regular season or playoffs because they are not fighting for or making the playoffs, making it a no-risk situation.

I fail to see how him getting a one-way contract from a team and playing in enough games to become subject to waivers somehow validates getting rid of him as it's simply a technical matter.
Waivers have nothing to do with the quality of a player, they are just part of the CBA.

jfb392 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 05:42 PM
  #67
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,540
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ8812 View Post
who cares if Leighton is claimed? he will just be back in the AHL next year once the team that claims him realizes he stinks thus wont be on Philly's cap
Why wouldn't he count towards the Flyers' cap?

Seachd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 05:54 PM
  #68
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,702
vCash: 500
Considering the kind of situation Colorado is in for goalies, I wouldn't doubt if they pick up Leighton. He's better than Elliot or Budaj and would be cheaper than either of them.

SolidSnakeUS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 06:12 PM
  #69
Rivet52
Sabres & Blackhawks
 
Rivet52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,832
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rivet52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd View Post
Why wouldn't he count towards the Flyers' cap?
I'm assuming if the claiming team waives him next year and sends him to the minors. I'm not 100% sure if that's what could happen, if a team who claims him assigns him to the minors, him being off both that team's cap and the Flyers cap since he would be in the minors, but it would make sense.

The Sabres won't claim Leighton. We don't need him. He can't play this year for us and we have Enroth as our backup next year once Lalime retires. The only reason we claim him is to keep the Flyers from using him against us if we play them in the playoffs, and that isn't something I see Darcy doing.

Rivet52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 06:13 PM
  #70
ELab2
Registered User
 
ELab2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlantic City
Country: United States
Posts: 5,348
vCash: 500
What is the difference if Leighton gets called up now, or in the playoffs as far as being claimed? None as far as I can see.

So if he wants three goalies on the roster in case one goes down, and wants them all to have a couple NHL games played, he's going to call him up now.

I suppose you could wait for an injury, but then you've got Leighton sitting on ice in the meantime.

ELab2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 06:22 PM
  #71
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ELab2 View Post
What is the difference if Leighton gets called up now, or in the playoffs as far as being claimed? None as far as I can see.

So if he wants three goalies on the roster in case one goes down, and wants them all to have a couple NHL games played, he's going to call him up now.

I suppose you could wait for an injury, but then you've got Leighton sitting on ice in the meantime.
Maybe to make sure we definitely get someone other than him for next year? If we don't have Boosh and Leighton, we would really have to work our ***** off to find another goalie.

SolidSnakeUS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 07:14 PM
  #72
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,769
vCash: 500
All kidding aside, why wouldn't the Islanders or some other bottom-feeding team, especially in the East, grab Leighton?

Because they don't want to spend the money? They're only paying for a half of the remaining amount of this year's salary. At worst, the new team then has an $800,000 NHL capable backup goalie for next year.

Beyond that, the new team has an asset that could be moved. On top of this, the claiming team has a little bit of leverage in any dealings with the Flyers. (The claiming team potentially has the chance to reduce or remove Leighton from the payroll of the Flyers if I'm envisioning this correctly.)

In a weird sense, a team like the Islanders could attempt on cornering the goalie market. (Or maybe they just want to see if having 7 different goalies play in one season is a record.)

,
Mitch

mitchy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 07:21 PM
  #73
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchy22 View Post
All kidding aside, why wouldn't the Islanders or some other bottom-feeding team, especially in the East, grab Leighton?

Because they don't want to spend the money? They're only paying for a half of the remaining amount of this year's salary. At worst, the new team then has an $800,000 NHL capable backup goalie for next year.

Beyond that, the new team has an asset that could be moved. On top of this, the claiming team has a little bit of leverage in any dealings with the Flyers. (The claiming team potentially has the chance to reduce or remove Leighton from the payroll of the Flyers if I'm envisioning this correctly.)

In a weird sense, a team like the Islanders could attempt on cornering the goalie market. (Or maybe they just want to see if having 7 different goalies play in one season is a record.)

,
Mitch
If you guys rolled with Montoya and Leighton and upped your defense, you could be a much better team next year.

SolidSnakeUS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 07:25 PM
  #74
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,176
vCash: 500
I'd really question the team that claims Leighton other then to make him their 3rd goalie for next season. He's a career minor leaguer / fringe backup.

Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2011, 07:48 PM
  #75
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
If you guys rolled with Montoya and Leighton and upped your defense, you could be a much better team next year.
We could easily use another top-4 (ideally, top-2) on defense. However, we have six NHL contracts piling up back there and four RFAs to at least consider what to do with. I'm pretty sure the Islanders will stick with some mixture of what they have. I'll also be shocked if they don't trade away at least one d-man (unless there are no takers and they literally walk away from 2-3 salaries.)

With how good AMac and Hamonic have been, I'd place a fully healthy Islanders defense (whatever that is) somewhere in the middle of the pack. (Not to mention, the d-corp would be very much on the cheap and easily upgradeable due to expiring contracts at reasonable salaries.)

As far as the above scenario, as always, the question of what the **** to do with/what is Rick DiPietro remains.

,
Mitch

mitchy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:51 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.