Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
Can't say I've seen him play 40+ games this year but he's impressed me in all the ones I have seen. Was a good player in Dallas earlier in his career too, just ran into some struggles before. I think the value is close but I would insist on Asham coming back. Niskanen + Asham for Raymond + X. If that kills the deal then so be it.
I still can not believe Goligoski netted Neal and Niskanen. Move aside the fact that the Pens had no room for Goligoski given what they had in the system and on the team, and him due for a raise as a UFA. That deal is looking better and better. That depth is the only reason he might be available given a good return.
Oh well. Doesn't have to be this deal. I'm sure some team would swap a young winger of similar/equal value for Niskanen after the season if the Pens go in that direction.
After reconsideration, I am liking this trade proposal more and more. It would be better for Vancouver with one of our 6-8 D being added for one of Pittsburgh bottom line wingers, but I think the trade could work. We can then move Ballard for an overpaid winger on an expiring contract and all will be well.
After reconsideration, I am liking this trade proposal more and more. It would be better for Vancouver with one of our 6-8 D being added for one of Pittsburgh bottom line wingers, but I think the trade could work. We can then move Ballard for an overpaid winger on an expiring contract and all will be well.
All won't be well, I have no idea why people like this trade at all. It fits our needs sure but there are other deals that also fit our needs without giving up forward depth. This is plan B at best. There are many targets that can be had for picks that are as good or better than Niskanen. I say we move Ballard to NYI for Jurcina and a 3rd and then pay what it takes to acquire Gleason or Leopold. That is a much better solution than this deal, and I could probably come up with some other realistic scenarios better than this one too.
I'm nervous about moving Niskanin...I know Letang is back but...given the recent Sid escipade, I often wonder "for how long?"
I don't like this trade for this season as I think there are some UFA's that are just as good that can he had for less (as rentals) but if we don't resign the rental in the off season, I would open to this trade.
Mid season like this doesn't give a new defenseman (if one came back) much time to learn either system...and that makes me weary. Not only that but if Nisky goes away and no dman comes back, that means Lovejoy-Engelland for the 3rd pairing...which is not a Cup caliber 3rd pairing.
In season, no. Off season, I'd support it.
This is amazing...a trade proposal that actually provides a well thought out idea and is of equal value. I am literally in shock right now.
This is a deadline deal. In the offseason you move Ballard and go sign some UFA, and don't have to give up Raymond.
Both will be RFA. I was thinking more along the lines that the Pens may not want to pay Niskanen with Despres waiting in the wings and Vancouver may not want to pay Raymond, but maybe they do. I don't follow them.
Outside of the last statement (which I'm not sure is true) it sounds like he's a younger Pascal Dupuis. That's not a knock on him, I like Dupuis and he fits in well on the Pens, but if this trade went down I see Raymond becoming the source of a lot of complaining on our board after he starts flubbing setups from Crosby or Malkin.
As for that last statement, why is he a good bet for 20-25 goals at this point? He's scored at a rate of 18 goals per 82 games in his career so far and it looks like he's struggling to put up points this season. Is his injury affecting his play? Who have his linemates been this season?
I don't know much about Dupuis but I'm not sure it's the best comparison. Raymond, who is 6 years younger, had more points than Dupuis last year despite playing in 11 fewer games. Raymond has played most of this year on the third line (which isn't actually a terrible thing as his linemates have been playing well and the line has produced some offense).
In 09-10 Raymond had 25 goals and 53 points, and based on his play this season I don't see any reason why he couldn't reproduce those numbers on a consistent basis if he played on a second line and got a bit of PP time. Maybe Tyler Kennedy is a better comparison?
This season Raymond averages about 15-16 minutes of icetime per game, and slightly under 1m30s of PP time. He's on pace for about 18 goals, so I guess my "20 to 25" is a high target for this season but I firmly believe he has the skillset to be a perennial 20 goal scorer with speed and a strong 2-way game.
Value-wise, this deal may be fair for both sides, but I don't know if Vancouver wants to address their needs on defense by moving Raymond. He's one of the main reasons the Canucks forward groups is one of the deepest in the league, and having a third line that can score regularly would be a huge asset the playoffs.
They'd probably rather wait to see how Tanev plays, and if necessary, try to move a pick or less important roster player for a bottom pairing D-man at the deadline.
Why do the Pens want to jettison Niskanen anyway? I know they have a lot of depth at D, but is he really the guy they'd want to move?
I don't know much about Dupuis but I'm not sure it's the best comparison. Raymond, who is 6 years younger, had more points than Dupuis last year despite playing in 11 fewer games. Raymond has played most of this year on the third line (which isn't actually a terrible thing as his linemates have been playing well and the line has produced some offense).
In 09-10 Raymond had 25 goals and 53 points, and based on his play this season I don't see any reason why he couldn't reproduce those numbers on a consistent basis if he played on a second line and got a bit of PP time. Maybe Tyler Kennedy is a better comparison?
This season Raymond averages about 15-16 minutes of icetime per game, and slightly under 1m30s of PP time. He's on pace for about 18 goals, so I guess my "20 to 25" is a high target for this season but I firmly believe he has the skillset to be a perennial 20 goal scorer with speed and a strong 2-way game.
Value-wise, this deal may be fair for both sides, but I don't know if Vancouver wants to address their needs on defense by moving Raymond. He's one of the main reasons the Canucks forward groups is one of the deepest in the league, and having a third line that can score regularly would be a huge asset the playoffs.
They'd probably rather wait to see how Tanev plays, and if necessary, try to move a pick or less important roster player for a bottom pairing D-man at the deadline.
Why do the Pens want to jettison Niskanen anyway? I know they have a lot of depth at D, but is he really the guy they'd want to move?
I can see Raymond as a mix of Dupuis and Kennedy. He's like Dupuis in his penalty killing and speed (although Raymond is Raymond is faster) and Kennedy in his offense. But all three of those guys have a career shooting percentage right at 9% which shows they aren't goal scorers.
I agree that value wise it's not a bad trade. And Raymond would likely fit our teams play style and specifically Crosby's (if he returns).
But as you asked, why would we want to jettison Niskanen? This year I would not as we need Niskanen for this years playoff run unless a deal comes along that we cannot pass up. But after this season Niskanen might be moved as we have our top 4 defensemen set and Simon Despres will be ready for the NHL from the start. At that point I can see us moving his RFA rights for something.
I don't know much about Dupuis but I'm not sure it's the best comparison. Raymond, who is 6 years younger, had more points than Dupuis last year despite playing in 11 fewer games. Raymond has played most of this year on the third line (which isn't actually a terrible thing as his linemates have been playing well and the line has produced some offense).
In 09-10 Raymond had 25 goals and 53 points, and based on his play this season I don't see any reason why he couldn't reproduce those numbers on a consistent basis if he played on a second line and got a bit of PP time. Maybe Tyler Kennedy is a better comparison?
This season Raymond averages about 15-16 minutes of icetime per game, and slightly under 1m30s of PP time. He's on pace for about 18 goals, so I guess my "20 to 25" is a high target for this season but I firmly believe he has the skillset to be a perennial 20 goal scorer with speed and a strong 2-way game.
Value-wise, this deal may be fair for both sides, but I don't know if Vancouver wants to address their needs on defense by moving Raymond. He's one of the main reasons the Canucks forward groups is one of the deepest in the league, and having a third line that can score regularly would be a huge asset the playoffs.
They'd probably rather wait to see how Tanev plays, and if necessary, try to move a pick or less important roster player for a bottom pairing D-man at the deadline.
Why do the Pens want to jettison Niskanen anyway? I know they have a lot of depth at D, but is he really the guy they'd want to move?
All good points. In regards to the bolded, I would rather address our defense by trading Raymond and then trading picks for a rental 3rd line LW than simply trading picks for any of the dman rentals on the market this year. Regardless of how well Tanev plays I strongly feel that we need to add another RH shot dman before the deadline. Most of the UFA dmen this year are LH shots, and IMO not worth the assets they'll fetch.
If Vancouver could pry Chad Larose out of Carolina I would be fine moving Raymond. Obviously Raymond > Larose but Larose would be very solid as a 3rd liner in Van.
Maybe 2nd for Larose,
Raymond for Niskanen
Billy Sweatt for Frans Nielsen
Hansen Hodgson Nielsen
Lapierre Malhotra Larose
Hamhuis Bieksa
Edler Niskanen
Ballard Salo
Alberts, Rome, Tanev, Sulzer
If Vancouver could pry Chad Larose out of Carolina I would be fine moving Raymond. Obviously Raymond > Larose but Larose would be very solid as a 3rd liner in Van.
Maybe 2nd for Larose,
Raymond for Niskanen
Billy Sweatt for Frans Nielsen
Hansen Hodgson Nielsen
Lapierre Malhotra Larose
Hamhuis Bieksa
Edler Niskanen
Ballard Salo
Alberts, Rome, Tanev, Sulzer
If we could get Nielsen as a rental for Sweatt (which I sincerely doubt) I wouldn't trade our 2nd away for a guy like Larose. He's not what we need on our 4th line, too small and not punishing. We need our 4th line players to play a physically punishing game to wear down our opponents in the playoffs, as well as play a strong defensive game. Any offense we get out of them will be a luxury.
If Vancouver could pry Chad Larose out of Carolina I would be fine moving Raymond. Obviously Raymond > Larose but Larose would be very solid as a 3rd liner in Van.
Maybe 2nd for Larose,
Raymond for Niskanen Billy Sweatt for Frans Nielsen
Hansen Hodgson Nielsen
Lapierre Malhotra Larose
Hamhuis Bieksa
Edler Niskanen
Ballard Salo
Alberts, Rome, Tanev, Sulzer
Yeah, if the Islanders wanted a "meh" prospect for Nielsen, he would have been traded a long time ago.
It's going to cost a lot more than that to get him.
He's not what we need on our 4th line, too small and not punishing. We need our 4th line players to play a physically punishing game to wear down our opponents in the playoffs, as well as play a strong defensive game. Any offense we get out of them will be a luxury.
I knowhes not a big guy but he plays a pretty solid game defensively and is kind of like Jannik Hansen.
Would give us a lot of depth and could play a strong shutdown role with Malhotra
We'd have to find a replacement for Raymond, but Gillis did pretty well in that department last year at the deadline. And we need some more size up there anyway.
Nisk + Adams/Asham
for
Raymond + Sulzer/Alberts/Rome
I'm in.
This has to be the most civilized trade discussion ever on hfboards.
Would much rather get a guy more in the Torres mold than the Hansen mold for our 4th line.
With the way the 4th line is utilized I would say a Hansen mold would be more beneficial than a Torres mold.
Highest defensive end zone start % in the league, tough competition, and likely PK responsibility?
A Torres wouldn't really excel in that roll, but a Hansen type player would.
We'd have to find a replacement for Raymond, but Gillis did pretty well in that department last year at the deadline. And we need some more size up there anyway.
Nisk + Adams/Asham
for
Raymond + Sulzer/Alberts/Rome
I'm in.
This has to be the most civilized trade discussion ever on hfboards.
As I said (in a very civilized manor) earlier...Sulzer/Alberts/Rome offer nothing to the Penguins that we don't already have a ton of, while Adams/Asham does. That extra part of the trade may be fair in terms of value, but in reality is a negative for the Penguins. Any of those 3 defenders would be 8th defenders for the Penguins in a healthy defensive line-up (of which we are right now, for once).
If the Canucks want an Adams or an Asham then they have to start looking elsewhere because Shero isn't going to trade them heading into the playoffs when we're set to make a run ourselves.
I do love this discussion here, it's oddly civil, I'm just saying the second part of that deal is entirely unrealistic. I don't care if Craig Adams is worth a 4th rounder in a vacuum and Andrew Alberts is worth a 4th rounder in a vacuum...this isn't a vacuum. Adams/Asham are worth more to the Penguins than Sulzer/Alberts/Rome are to the Canucks, especially since the Penguins are completely overloaded on depth defense to begin with. The only deal I see the Penguins making involving a defenseman anytime soon would be a future pick/mid-level prospect for Hal Gill for veteran depth/the guy won a Cup with us 3 years ago and Shero never wanted to lose him.
I can accept the deal as a one-for-one...once you expand on it then you start building discrepancies. The Canucks are right in their desire to improve their fourth line, but the Penguins just aren't the team to make that discussion with.
__________________
“The most terrifying fact about the universe is not that it is hostile, but that it is indifferent. If we can come to terms with this indifference and accept the challenges of life within the boundaries of death, our existence as a species can have genuine meaning and fulfillment. However vast the darkness, we must supply our own light.” - Stanley Kubrick
