Proposal: Trade Juuse Saros

[Porter Stoutheart]

That’s the route this team has taken for years is going after the lesser players. Minus konecny the players I listed were all rfas so you can just sign those players in the off-season you have to acquire them through trade. Saying that my number 1 option would be to go hard after stammer. He is up there in age but still produces at almost a ppg. Plus he plays center and before anyone says he’s played wing the last couple year so did orielly. As far as the other person I would try everything to sign is Zadarov. We need that defensive defenseman who is has that meanness in him and keep anyone posting up in front of our net

It doesn’t seem like Stamkos will have any incentive to test the market, unfortunately. Or at least Tampa will take care of him at any “sane” contract value. I’m not willing to consider him as being practically available.

Meanwhile Zadorov will command an enormous premium as a highly desirable commodity for several teams. I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if he gets 5-7 yrs at as much as $6M! Of course he’s not THAT good, but with the Cap going up a lot of teams will be able to convince themselves that they can afford a couple extra years or couple extra million. And I’m still tempted to include us in that category.

 

[Flgatorguy87]

I'm convinced some of you rationalize away these options for player additions as a protective factor for yourself when we don't sign them...

It's the only way I can think of that some of the names that get brought up get shit on so hard in these threads when we are talking about a team that had positional average players at best for their depth scoring.

There are no perfect players, and if there were we wouldn't have a chance to sign them. Every summer is like ground hog day it seems like. Nobody is good enough at X,Y,Z to contribute, they aren't any better than X,YZ, so why sign them? Same questions. I don't get it.

 

[drwpreds]

I'm convinced some of you rationalize away these options for player additions as a protective factor for yourself when we don't sign them...

It's the only way I can think of that some of the names that get brought up get shit on so hard in these threads when we are talking about a team that had positional average players at best for their depth scoring.

There are no perfect players, and if there were we wouldn't have a chance to sign them. Every summer is like ground hog day it seems like. Nobody is good enough at X,Y,Z to contribute, they aren't any better than X,YZ, so why sign them? Same questions. I don't get it.

100%- I have posted on this before- and it is not just a thing on this board- ALL fans seem to do this. You can bring up just about any NHL player in a discussion on possibly signing or trading for and almost without fail the vast majority of responses will be to shoot down that potential player being added. Once you start looking for it it is actually pretty funny- lol

 

[glenngineer]

Why add Marner? Right? We’ve never had a guy top 100 with only a couple of instances breaking 90+, why would we want a guy like that on our team.

 

[PredsV82]

Bottom line, if we can get a good younger asset for Saros, you do it. But not just for later 1st round picks, B prospects, etc.

Some of these teams should be desperate. Carolina, Toronto, (Edmonton if they lose) are all nearing the end of their window and probably feel that goaltending has cost them a cup

 

[BigFatCat999]

I think there are two options

Option one extend lanky for couple more years keep asking in Milwaukee till the trade deadline or until a team is desperate enough to meet the predators price.

Option two predators target up one thing that they want in the off-season and make the trade for Saros.

Either way, the Preds have to make a decision either now or at the trade deadline

Right on Doc, I do not want to poo poo platter for. Saros

 

[ShagDaddy]

I'm convinced some of you rationalize away these options for player additions as a protective factor for yourself when we don't sign them...

It's the only way I can think of that some of the names that get brought up get shit on so hard in these threads when we are talking about a team that had positional average players at best for their depth scoring.

There are no perfect players, and if there were we wouldn't have a chance to sign them. Every summer is like ground hog day it seems like. Nobody is good enough at X,Y,Z to contribute, they aren't any better than X,YZ, so why sign them? Same questions. I don't get it.

I had a novel typed out in response to your observation but ended up deleting it.

I agree with you though, I don’t understand the rationale that some people here use to justify their thought process. Some of the comments have reached facebook and reddit levels of absurdity.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

I'm convinced some of you rationalize away these options for player additions as a protective factor for yourself when we don't sign them...

It's the only way I can think of that some of the names that get brought up get shit on so hard in these threads when we are talking about a team that had positional average players at best for their depth scoring.

There are no perfect players, and if there were we wouldn't have a chance to sign them. Every summer is like ground hog day it seems like. Nobody is good enough at X,Y,Z to contribute, they aren't any better than X,YZ, so why sign them? Same questions. I don't get it.

Hmm, I'm not sure if you are referencing my post immediately above yours re: Stamkos and Zadorov or not. But I really don't understand your theory. What the heck would we be protecting ourselves from? Nobody here makes a living off what we post. Everybody posts some mix of dumb opinions and good ones, in varying proportions. We wouldn't venture an opinion at all if we were so scared about being proven wrong?

But on Stamkos, It sure seems like everybody believes they intend to offer him a contract in TB, and he has been a lifer there and probably wants to retire there, so I wouldn't see what's controversial about stating that it's highly unlikely he signs anywhere else. Nobody is protecting themselves by saying that. It's just commenting on what we see. Ditto Zadorov. He's going to get overpaid. I still want us to try to sign him, even acknowledging that. It's probably going to take something like the Ekholm contract to land him. Which is a bit sad, since Ekholm is a much better player. But that's where we are.

Or if it's Marner... there simply ARE pros and cons. Folks are stacking those on the scales, and then it's all subjective which side tips up or down. Etc etc for any other proposed player acquisition. There's nothing wrong with pointing out the pros and cons.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Incidentally, I wonder if Lankinen looks at things quite the same way as we do here. We tend to take it for granted that if we want to keep hium, then we just go out and extend him and he stays. Whereas he's nearing 30, is wedged into a pure backup role here so far, maybe he himself would like a chance somewhere else?

$2M is really good money for the limited amount he plays, so I don't think he'll beat the money on the open market. But maybe he could think he has a better chance of playing more somewhere else, and thereby earning more money down the road. We're not likely to have made any decisions on Saros before July 1st, so Lankinen will likely have to decide independent of knowing what the ultimate resolution of Saros' future will be. And meanwhile, he'll be hearing Askarov's footsteps here.

 

[Armourboy]

Hmm, I'm not sure if you are referencing my post immediately above yours re: Stamkos and Zadorov or not. But I really don't understand your theory. What the heck would we be protecting ourselves from? Nobody here makes a living off what we post. Everybody posts some mix of dumb opinions and good ones, in varying proportions. We wouldn't venture an opinion at all if we were so scared about being proven wrong?

But on Stamkos, It sure seems like everybody believes they intend to offer him a contract in TB, and he has been a lifer there and probably wants to retire there, so I wouldn't see what's controversial about stating that it's highly unlikely he signs anywhere else. Nobody is protecting themselves by saying that. It's just commenting on what we see. Ditto Zadorov. He's going to get overpaid. I still want us to try to sign him, even acknowledging that. It's probably going to take something like the Ekholm contract to land him. Which is a bit sad, since Ekholm is a much better player. But that's where we are.

Or if it's Marner... there simply ARE pros and cons. Folks are stacking those on the scales, and then it's all subjective which side tips up or down. Etc etc for any other proposed player acquisition. There's nothing wrong with pointing out the pros and cons.

Exactly there are pros and cons to going to get every player, and sometimes its not even the player themselves, but the contract they are looking for.

Zadarov fits the later. He's a solid enough Dman, brings some things that teams like but he's never really found a long term home and he supposedly wanting 6 x 6. Now it's not just this fan base, there are a whole slew of posts on this board thinking that is a bad idea, including the 5 teams he has played for over 10 years. Generally speaking you don't often come out ahead overpaying journeyman players long term.

Stamkos we all know. Dude has been a great player over the years. but he has been often injured and is 34. I don't think there is anything wrong with asking yourself if that is a direction you want to go. Do we want to bring in another old guy, and what does that look like cap wise. Then there is the wonder if he would even leave Tampa to start with. There is only so many guys you can talk to on July 1, so you don't want to be wasting it on a guy that has no intention of going anywhere.

Marner is a guy that has shown he can put up points, and play solid defense, but does come with a reputation of being soft. Taking that gamble would be fine, but once again that contract shows its ugly head. The gamble isn't so much on the player as it is on that contract. At 9 million you take it all day long, at 11-12, well you gotta think about it really hard.

The positives are great on all 3 guys, but it ain't the positives that get NHL GM's fired.

 

[predhead1]

Marner is a guy that has shown he can put up points, and play solid defense, but does come with a reputation of being soft.

If there really is interest on our side, then I'm sure Trotz is talking to ROR to get his candid opinion on Marner's character, so there shouldn't be any surprises in the decision-making process. Agree with your thoughts on the $$$$ - it's a risk to make that move, but it does seem like it goes towards moving us out of the mushy middle.