I think it is more then possible, but it still would make it very hard to replace the other spots. Then what happens is you try to sign Carter and Giroux.. however, with their salary raises trading a defenseman still isnt enough to cancel the cap between the two.. so in reality you lose a player from your team, and still lose cap space. On top of that we will need to sign a goalie, a reserve d-man, unless we are confident that Marshall is ready for an extended stay in the NHL, and what, 5 forwards? I think that will be verrry verry hard to do without either

A) Trading a big contract (timonen, or briere)
B) Trading Carter.

Do i necessarily want to do either of those? No, but sometimes things need to be done in order to keep the team competitive. I would hate to put all of our eggs in our basket to keep Carter, and then not be able to fill out a competitive roster below our top 2 lines.
- jak521

Can you show me what team has traded one of their top core young players, so they can keep lesser players?

The Flyers have seven forwards under contract for 2011-2012, after Carter and Giroux we'd need three for the full twelve. If depth is needed I still think Nodl and Kalinski have looked decent. Nodl was good enough to be a small factor in the Boston series. Either way, I think three forwards is doable with the estimated $9mil (I forget who threw that number out).

The defense is spoken for. There's rumblings of Timmo retiring, I'll believe it when it's more than whispers on the internet. For now the defense is solid, we could even afford to send a body out in a trade if needed.


Then comes the never ending discussion of goaltending:

For goaltending, we have to get a goalie somewhere. No matter what there's a big risk involved. If we go to the market, who's to say the guy we get earns his overstated free agent paycheck? We could end up with a Huet for all we know. As far as prospects go, there is a real risk involved, sure. However, the cost to take that risk is literally zero, considering we already have these players. If they don't pan out, the third option will remain available.

the third option, of course, is to trade. I need not say the simple philosphy, but I will: You trade if it makes your team better. Nobody in the "kee Carter" camp is saying to refuse if we're offered Ryan Miller for the guy. However, unless we're getting a fair deal there's no reason to deal fo a goalie with three prospects already fighting for the blue paint.
- BulliesPhan87

In forwards.. we have 6 NHL forwards who will be FA's next season. Sign Carter and Giroux and you have 4. 2 will play prominent scoring line roles. Zherdev and Leino.

You also lose Powe, and Carcillo, who will be easier to replace. However, both Kalinski and Nodl are RFA, and knowing that they are going to be starting in the NHL, presumably full time, would likely mean a raise, albeit, small. So say both of them at 1 mil. We still need atleast 2 scoring wingers. I havnt looked at the cap in general, but i think it will be difficult to make up their scoring in FA.

Timonen likely wont "retire" for another 2 seasons. He is making something like 5 this season, and 3.5 the following. The year after that is the steep decline, which would make most sense for him to retire.


As for the goalie, the third option may not be available if we dont have the cap space. Thats the whole point of the "whats going to happen" scenario.

definitely possible, but still wouldnt make up the cap needed to sign both Carter and Giroux. Would it help? Yes, most definitely, however, we would be losing a BIG part of our defense, and while i do think Bart is a serviceable d-man, looking at it now that is a big downgrade defensively. Again, 2 years from now we could have Bobby Ryan and Ziggy Palffy
- jak521

Why wouldn't it make up the cap needed to sign both carter and Giroux?

After a full season of seeing it together, trading one of the defenseman is absolutely logical. And why don't they come out on the + side of the cap?
- MJL

You would have to believe Marshall and/or Bourdon will be ready for a top six spot on the big club for 2011-2012. If they aren't, you have to figure they may never be ready.

Can you show me what team has traded one of their top core young players, so they can keep lesser players?
- MJL

Can you show me a team that had cap issues and moved half the team in order to resign a player? The Hawks moved Buff, Versteeg, and Ladd, but already had their guys signed to a contract.

The answer is no i cannot, simply because a team hasnt been in this situation yet, that i can recall.

Also, its not about keeping lesser players. Personally the way i see it, trading Carter is one option.

Its not about one for one, but about the team.

Now a question for you...

Do you think the team will be better the following season if we were to trade Carle, let Leino and Zherdev walk, sign Carter and Giroux?

I personally think our team gets alot weaker. That is how i see it.

Why wouldn't it make up the cap needed to sign both carter and Giroux?
- MJL

Well you seem to think Carter will get around 7 mill.. which is a 2 mil raise, and I believe Giroux will get atleast a 2 mil raise... and Carle only makes 3.4 mil, add to that whatever it is we get back if we were to trade him for a player.. insert Bartulis and his 600k...

It wouldnt be a wash.

Tool.

Bartulis doesn't need to step in and replace Coburn or Carle. And how do you know that after another year of development, that Bartulis isn't ready to step in and be a full time NHL defenseman?
- MJL

Assuming, like many other people, that one of Carle or Coburn end up as the 5th d-man, and Meszaros steps up and plays with either Pronger or Timonen, yes... Bartulis would absolutely need to replace them. Also, Odonnell is gone after this season.


Also, since you asked 2 times about the cap, does that require me to answer 2 times? JW

In forwards.. we have 6 NHL forwards who will be FA's next season. Sign Carter and Giroux and you have 4. 2 will play prominent scoring line roles. Zherdev and Leino.

You also lose Powe, and Carcillo, who will be easier to replace. However, both Kalinski and Nodl are RFA, and knowing that they are going to be starting in the NHL, presumably full time, would likely mean a raise, albeit, small. So say both of them at 1 mil. We still need atleast 2 scoring wingers. I havnt looked at the cap in general, but i think it will be difficult to make up their scoring in FA.

Timonen likely wont "retire" for another 2 seasons. He is making something like 5 this season, and 3.5 the following. The year after that is the steep decline, which would make most sense for him to retire.


As for the goalie, the third option may not be available if we dont have the cap space. Thats the whole point of the "whats going to happen" scenario.
- jak521

I'm not concerned with who we lose as far as free agency goes. What's important to me is who we keep. We'll have Briere, Richards, Hartnell, JVR, Lappy, Shelley, and Betts. The top priority resignings should be, in this order, Carter, Giroux, and (assuming he continues to rock) Leino. With Leino, that's ten,without it's nine. So two to three forwards. If Zherdev pans out, I assume he'll want a lot more money than he's getting. If he doesn't, why keep him?

As for Carcillo, I'd like to see him back, but not at a hefty premium. He is what he is, and such a player is not impossible to replace. Powe as well. As for Noodle and Kalinski, they haven't yet shown to be full time NHLers, so I'm less inclined to believe they'd get seven digits. Perhaps their money will depends on Carcillo and Powe.

I'm not going to cosider Kimmo's retirement. As long as it's only rumored, it may as well consider it fiction.

The goalie situation is difficult to slve for, and becaus of more than cap space. If a trade is made, we'd likely have to send a paid earner to get a solid starter. There's cap adustments both ways there. The best shot right now sounds like letting the young guys try for the spot. We still have Leighton for two years, which gives whoever would earnthe spot some wiggle room. Leighton showed he can handle a considerable workload in the regular season.

Can you show me what team has traded one of their top core young players, so they can keep lesser players?
- MJL

Boston

Obviously it's just a guesstimate for conversation purposes. But two numbers I don't like is 54 games player for Leino and 45 GP for Shelley.
- MJL

Lol, you're right, they're just best guesses.

Leino's a bit small at this point to be durable... I'm betting he's going to have some related issues from the hip injury he sustained during the playoffs... groin, hernia, pulled oblique, etc etc.

As for Shelley, we all know that Homer brings in the personnel but Lavi sets the lineup. And Lavi's history w/ the Flyers, Canes and Islanders pretty much illustrates his reluctance to utilize a dedicated enforcer. I think 46 games for Shelley, given that Carcillo and Powe are known and appreciated elements to the team, is pretty generous.

Boston
- 2Real

Calgary w/ Phaneuf and Florida w/ Bouwmeester, too.

It's going to become more and more commonplace in the coming years. GM's are starting to reap what the sowed w/ respect to ridiculous contracts coming out of entry-levels.

Boston
- 2Real

Calgary w/ Phaneuf and Florida w/ Bouwmeester, too.
- Tomahawk

Lol, you're right, they're just best guesses.

Leino's a bit small at this point to be durable... I'm betting he's going to have some related issues from the hip injury he sustained during the playoffs... groin, hernia, pulled oblique, etc etc.

As for Shelley, we all know that Homer brings in the personnel but Lavi sets the lineup. And Lavi's history w/ the Flyers, Canes and Islanders pretty much illustrates his reluctance to utilize a dedicated enforcer. I think 46 games for Shelley, given that Carcillo and Powe are known and appreciated elements to the team, is pretty generous.
- Tomahawk

I still wonder what the plan with Shelley is. Does management see something in him that we don't? Could he play normal fourth line shifts and be a semi-effective player?

Can you show me what team has traded one of their top core young players, so they can keep lesser players?
- MJL

Boston - kessel

If these core players were so important that a team should do what it takes to keep/get them, why are teams not willing to sign kovalchuk to his 8.5-10M contract. LA doesnt want to, lombardi said he doesnt want to jeopardize being able to sign kopitar/doughty/simmonds. NJ didnt want the high cap hit, and we all know how that worked out.

Calgary w/ Phaneuf and Florida w/ Bouwmeester, too.

It's going to become more and more commonplace in the coming years. GM's are starting to reap what the sowed w/ respect to ridiculous contracts coming out of entry-levels.
- Tomahawk

Phaneuf sounds like it was a locker room issue, no?

In regards to Kessel, Bouwmeester and Phaneuf:

I believe the trades of all three had just as much to do with their attitudes/wanting to play in their current city/off-ice issues, as their contract, if not more.

I still wonder what the plan with Shelley is. Does management see something in him that we don't? Could he play normal fourth line shifts and be a semi-effective player?
- BulliesPhan87

He showed w/ the Rangers that he can be a Parros/Orr type who can give you a dependable 6-10 minutes per night, maybe drop the gloves, maybe even score a goal once in a while.

But I see two things working against him... 1) he's not the best fighter out there... in fact if you go on Youtube, you can watch Matt Walker kicking his ass a couple of times, and 2) Powe is a perfect Laviolette bottom-six player and Carcillo can actually score goals so he's in the top-nine mix... how Shelley can crack the lineup on most night is a mystery to me.

New blog posted

In regards to Kessel, Bouwmeester and Phaneuf:

I believe the trades of all three had just as much to do with their attitudes/wanting to play in their current city/off-ice issues, as their contract, if not more.
- marooninja

Kessel was moved b/c they didn't feel he was worth his asking price, and they had other more important players to re-sign like Krejci, Thomas and Lucic on a limited budget.

Bouwmeester wanted out, but then again Florida capped what they were willing/able to offer him. They knew he wasn't worth his asking price and now we all know he's not worth that price either. Classic case of an overrated talent.

Phaneuf was the other shoe dropping from the Bouwmeester signing. Calgary needed "offense"... that trade still doesn't make any sense to me, but the locker-room stuff was never substantiated... it was meant as a hockey trade.

Boston - kessel

If these core players were so important that a team should do what it takes to keep/get them, why are teams not willing to sign kovalchuk to his 8.5-10M contract. LA doesnt want to, lombardi said he doesnt want to jeopardize being able to sign kopitar/doughty/simmonds. NJ didnt want the high cap hit, and we all know how that worked out.
- BradTardforGM

Um, it sounds like you answered your own question s far as LA goes. As for NJ, a big cap hit would make it very difficult to keep coreplayer Parise.

In regards to Boston, their offensive impotence was no secret. Only one team scored less than them.

just because something hasnt been done doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be tried.

Um, it sounds like you answered your own question s far as LA goes. As for NJ, a big cap hit would make it very difficult to keep coreplayer Parise.

In regards to Boston, their offensive impotence was no secret. Only one team scored less than them.
- BulliesPhan87

Right, and carter getting a raise to 7M, as some suggest he is worth, would make it hard to sign giroux/JVR and potentially leino.

Can you show me a team that had cap issues and moved half the team in order to resign a player? The Hawks moved Buff, Versteeg, and Ladd, but already had their guys signed to a contract.

The answer is no i cannot, simply because a team hasnt been in this situation yet, that i can recall.

Also, its not about keeping lesser players. Personally the way i see it, trading Carter is one option.

Its not about one for one, but about the team.

Now a question for you...

Do you think the team will be better the following season if we were to trade Carle, let Leino and Zherdev walk, sign Carter and Giroux?

I personally think our team gets alot weaker. That is how i see it.
- jak521

According to the logic that you and others are using, Chicago should have traded Toews or Kane, and kept Versteeg, Buff and Ladd.

Why would they have to trade Carle, and let Leino and Zherdev walk to resign Carter and Giroux?

And yes, I would move all three of those players to keep Giroux and Carter. And I disagree that the team would be weaker.