Ideally Malkin will go play in the KHL for $10+ million tax free per season and an easier schedule.

Ok..

*gives nurse outfit back*
- Flyskippy

*holds hand out for wig*
That too... bucko.

I think from a business perspective, it makes sense.

However, I'd be surprised if Dale Tallon pulled the trigger on something like this.

I agree that Pittsburgh trading Malkin would get them a huge haul.
- johndewar

Somebody on the Pens forum phrased it nicely: "The one thing you aren't getting in that trade is a player as good as Malkin. No thanks."

Although I personally wouldn't mind him leaving the division.

I'll probably get ripped on this proposal, but hear me out.

Changes are coming in Pittsburgh. Barring a crazy comeback, pieces are moving. One of the interesting things is that Malkin and Letang are up for deals next season, so one probably goes.

Were I Pitt's GM, I'd move Malkin, who would bring a much better return that Letang. And I'd move him to Florida for this return:

2014 1st
2015 1st
Huberdeau
Markstrom
Weiss

Now, most team's wouldn't make that deal, even for a player as great (most years) as Malkin. But I think Florida would. Here's why:

This year, season tix started at $7/game ($168) with a free jersey (~$100), which works out to roughly $2.83 per game. The team just cannot draw.

Evgeni Malkin is a marquee name. He's the guy you can put on a billboard on the highway and people will come to see him (imagine miniature Gretzky to LA). As a hockey trade, no GM would trade that amount for him. But with enough pressure, ownership would realize that Evgeni Malkin would be a huge marketing tool, and may tell their GM to get him no matter what the cost. Pittsburgh gets a young 1st line winger, a top rated young goalie, a good center, and 2 1st rounders. Florida gets one of the game's top superstars and a huge marketing tool.

I know it probably sounds crazy, but just wanted to throw it out there.
- jmatchett383

Pretty sure both teams say no to that.

I'm going to basically repeat something I said a few weeks ago.

While I would always be willing to listen to any trade proposal, I would not be willing to give up any of our top young talent for defenseman like Yandle or Edler. Also while I would love to have Nichushkin, Barkov or Drouin etc..., I am not willing to package the 11th pick with a guy like Schenn or Couturier to do so.

I am fine with just remaining at #11 and taking the best player available. I am also fine with trading down under the following conditions: I need to get 2 picks back for our one, the 1st can't be lower than #18, and the 2nd, no lower than #35.

Regarding our D: If there is no free agent worth signing, and no smart deal to be made then I am fine on starting the year with following:
Timonen-Schenn
Coburn-Grossmann
Mezaros-Gustafsson

Regarding Bryz: For no other reason than his contract simply sucks, it is apparent to me that he will be bought out this summer or next. That being said, I think it's just best to cut the cord now and move on. While it may certainly not be his fault, he is both a polarizing figure and at best a good, but not great, goalie and at this point I think it's best for the team to just move on.

And finally, I am loving watching the Pens go down!!

*holds hand out for wig*
That too... bucko.
- FlyersGrace

Um... This is actually my own hair.

Is Neil Little still with the organization? If so, how is Nitty's role different from Neil Little's (whom I thought was the "goalie scout")?
- johndewar

Somebody on the Pens forum phrased it nicely: "The one thing you aren't getting in that trade is a player as good as Malkin. No thanks."

Although I personally wouldn't mind him leaving the division.
- BulliesPhan87

No, but when you have the best center in the league (IF you can count on him being healthy) and a relatively young guy like Sutter, you can use a superstar like Malkin to address a host of questions as opposed to addressing 1 position really well.

- aightwebang17

Labeling Holmgren as mistake prone is another mischaracterization. Simply not the case.
- MJL

Forced to waive Vaananen and Metropolit before the '09 PO's because he didn't leave enough cap room to activate Briere from IR, the team then proceeded to lose in opening round to Pens partly because they didn't have enough depth,

Chose to draft Mathers instead of Hyka because they thought they could just sign Hyka post-camp as an undrafted UFA... turns out Hyka had to go back into the next draft (woops),

Decided to sign Lilja to a two-year contract on first day of UFA, even though it invoked 35+ status... Lilja spent almost the balance of that 2nd year in the AHL, would have created dead space against the cap as a result if not for CBA rule changes,

Signed Pronger to his back-diving extension not realizing that 35+ status kicked in when the contract came into effect, not when the contract was actually signed (Pronger was still 34 at the time),

Pre-emptively handed Lupul, Carter, Richards and JvR big-$ extensions, and then proceeded to trade all of them shortly thereafter due to (in part) cap concerns,

Didn't leave enough cap room to re-sign Upshall, dealt him for Carcillo(!),

Forced to dump Gagne for worse than nothing (had to take Matt Walker) because he they were desperate to shed salary after previously adding Meszaros and Zherdev(!),

Eminger(!) for a 1st-round draft pick, bye bye Markstrom/Carlson,

Traded for rights of Hamhuis and Nabokov even though indications were strong they wouldn't sign in Philly,

Asked Jagr and Carle to wait while he chased Suter/Parise... not surprisingly, they didn't,

Bryzgalov.



Now, don't get me wrong, I like Homer as GM, but those mistakes are just off the top of my head. I'm sure there's more I'm missing.

(And... I understand it's in your nature to refute every last one of these, but they're really not up for debate, sorry.)

Somebody on the Pens forum phrased it nicely: "The one thing you aren't getting in that trade is a player as good as Malkin. No thanks."

- BulliesPhan87

Very true, but trading him can bring parts that help you win.

I'm not saying I'd do it if I were Ray Shero, but yeah.....it'd be a huge haul.

No, but when you have the best center in the league (IF you can count on him being healthy) and a relatively young guy like Sutter, you can use a superstar like Malkin to address a host of questions as opposed to addressing 1 position really well.
- jmatchett383

I don't see it being worth it, not by a long shot. You can trade other guys to address those needs, too.

No, but when you have the best center in the league (IF you can count on him being healthy) and a relatively young guy like Sutter, you can use a superstar like Malkin to address a host of questions as opposed to addressing 1 position really well.
- jmatchett383

Having Malkin gives you the best chance to win. Not the sum of those other parts.

Ok..

*gives nurse outfit back*
- Flyskippy

I thought she sold books or toys or jewelry or spray on tatoos something.

Pre-emptively handed Lupul, Carter, Richards and JvR big-$ extensions, and then proceeded to trade all of them shortly thereafter due to (in part) cap concerns
- Tomahawk

This one isn't a mistake. Soon to be UFAs don't have the same trade value, and those trades each brought back great value (Pronger's injury not withstanding). The cap was a consideration, but I think you're really mischaracterizing these trades to call them mistakes.

Toclarify, that's not to say I think Holmgren is without error.

*holds hand out for wig*
That too... bucko.
- FlyersGrace

Hahahahaha... I have a picture of him in a wig.

(I won't post it skip so chill)

Very true, but trading him can bring parts that help you win.

I'm not saying I'd do it if I were Ray Shero, but yeah.....it'd be a huge haul.
- johndewar

A big haul, no doubt. But trading Malkin doesn't get you closer to a cup, not at this point imo.

Signed Pronger to his back-diving extension not realizing that 35+ status kicked in when the contract came into effect, not when the contract was actually signed (Pronger was still 34 at the time),

Didn't leave enough cap room to re-sign Upshall, dealt him for Carcillo(!),

Forced to dump Gagne for worse than nothing (had to take Matt Walker) because he they were desperate to shed salary after previously adding Meszaros and Zherdev(!),

Eminger(!) for a 1st-round draft pick, bye bye Markstrom/Carlson,


- Tomahawk

The mistakes I quoted above are the one's I think that Homer owns and are kind of indefensible.

I don't think you can paint the trading of players who received long extensions with the same broad brush as I think there were extenuating circumstances for each one.

I put Bryz on Snider as much as Homer.

Having Malkin gives you the best chance to win. Not the sum of those other parts.
- bradleyc4

In general, I agree with you on this, but if you can't pay anybody else because your cap is too heavily tied up in just a couple of players, that can impact your depth.

- aightwebang17

That's Ray Emery he's going after.

hey guys - some help here

have you guys read this book before? any good?

http://www.amazon.ca/Flye...words=philadelphia+flyers

Too bad the NHL wouldnt make an exception for pronger, savard type cases and let the teams buyout the player at full rate as they will never be playing hockey again so the teams could just move forward.
- allen_gamble

This! If the NHL allows "amendments" for players like Redden and Gomez, why not write in another "amendment" for the players that actually need it. Head injuries are normally not predictable, so there is no claim that a team knowingly signed a concussion-prone player to a long contract with the intention of using a CBO (before they were even instituted) in order to circumvent the cap. It's laughable. Instead, the teams have to go through these stupid dances where a player is on your team, then LTIR, but cannot do it during the off-season, blah blah blah. I think it's time for another amendment.....

hey guys - some help here

have you guys read this book before? any good?

http://www.amazon.ca/Flye...words=philadelphia+flyers
- sarmen25

I haven't read it, but you'll note it was written by Bob Clarke's daughter.

In general, I agree with you on this, but if you can't pay anybody else because your cap is too heavily tied up in just a couple of players, that can impact your depth.
- johndewar

You find other creative ways to address the issue, imo. You don't trade a superstar because of cap concerns.

-- Buyout of MAF
-- Finding better/cheap bottom six forwards and defensemen
-- Draft better
-- Creative trades

I don't think you can paint the trading of players who received long extensions with the same broad brush as I think there were extenuating circumstances for each one.
- johndewar

The reasons why they were traded may be varied, but the common thread is that Homer signed them all well in advance of them being FA's, almost always after career-seasons/incredible hot-streaks -- the real mistakes were made at the negotiating table.