Flyers - Penguins Trade

[Rob]

My big issue is how can you say it's a good trade for a contending team and not for a rebuilding team?

Because he's not winning anything next year.  He would need to increase his weekly point production by 100+ points to contend for a playoff spot next season.  This trade does increase his production, but not by even close to enough.  He's trading away his finest assets and he nets nothing since by the time he's competitive, Chara will be retired, Halak will be a backup somewhere and Getzlaf will be a 1/2 PPG player.

What if he flips those guys to contenders? GMs should be allowed to run their teams the way they want.

It's true that he could do this, but where's the evidence that he will?  The evidence we do have suggests that he won't.  Where was he this past trade deadline when he could and should have shopped Sedin to a contender for an overpayment?  That's what a good rebuilding team would have done.

This is why I hate TC's. People have their own ways to run the team. One GM says how great the deal is and another says each player for player should be even.

This is why we have 7 people on the TC - because opinions differ.  Right now the votes are tied 2-2.  The next 3 votes will decide this.  How is that not fair?

[papps]

Its ridiculous that I get penalized because you think Dave cannot run his team.  To his point, you should replace him if you feel he can't do the job.  Dave has been around a long time and has shown to be a competent GM in multiple leagues.  Its not like my teams have been very good in this league either.  I can't stand when people veto trades let alone when they think they are "protecting" another owner.  If that's the issue he shouldn't be in the league.  I'm pretty much done with this and could care less at this point if the trade is approved or not. 

[snugerud]

Its ridiculous that I get penalized because you think Dave cannot run his team.  To his point, you should replace him if you feel he can't do the job.  Dave has been around a long time and has shown to be a competent GM in multiple leagues.  Its not like my teams have been very good in this league either.  I can't stand when people veto trades let alone when they think they are "protecting" another owner.  If that's the issue he shouldn't be in the league.  I'm pretty much done with this and could care less at this point if the trade is approved or not.

I dont know why you are getting upset.  If its a fair deal going both ways you haven't lost anything or been penalized other than some time in banging out the deal. 

My veto is based on protecting the team , not the GM.  You called into question of the strategy.  I will point to the Vancouver Canucks as exhibit A.  Gilly came in, traded away all the young players and picks for high priced veterans made a 1st round exit in the playoffs and then bailed. Ask Drew how that is working out for him these days.  The trade IMO ( and yes it is just that my opinion being on the trade committee) that this trade was going to be detrimental to the longer term viability of the team. 

[-BA-]

Philly gets:
C Tomas Hertl, $0.2m (P-16/17)
LW James van Riemsdyk, $5.3m (2019-2020)
Pick 1-12

Penguins get:
C Ryan Getzlaf, $6.9m (2017-2018)
LW Evander Kane, $6.7m (2016-2017)
G Jaroslav Halak, $4m (2017-2018)
D Zdeno Chara, $6.9m (2017-2018)

This is a win-win deal for both teams.  I get two good players, a pick, and much needed cap space and the Pens use their cash to bring in four good players to help round out their roster.  Both teams fill needs here. 

Thanks for the deal, Dave!  Good luck to you!

Here are my thoughts.

This does look like a deal a team on the verge of winning a championship would do, which Pit is def not. It makes his team better in the short term, but really hurts him long term, by tying up cap space on veterans that are closer to their decline than their prime.

Hertl had a real nice year and is under a prospect contract and subject to a prospect extension. He looks to be on the rise.

Kane and van Reimsdyk are basically a wash point wise, and are the same age, but Kane costs 1.4M more.

I believe Getslaf has a few good years left in him but I don't know that he will perform better than he did this year, so 3 ppg may be the best you can hope for.

Halak has bounced around a bit and is 30 yrs old. I think he is a lot closer to being a solid backup. This year he only played 36 games so he is already splitting time. Pit has nothing at G now, so I understand adding a servicable goalie is a good thing, but in a year or 2 how much will he be playing.

Chara scores over 2ppg but he is 38 and has a HORRIBLE contract.

The first round pick should still be decent. but I don't see why this was needed in the deal at all.

I understand why Philly would love this deal, they get 2 young players that are under contract for a while assuming the prospect extension for Hertl, for more expensive players under shorter contracts, and 3 of those guys are 30 or over. Halak does not make up they difference between these 2 players based on the number of games that he is playing, even if his numbers are good in those games.

To give up that much cap and still get 2 very good young players is just too much for me. Sorry but I just can't buy this deal for a 2 win team. 

Maybe you can work out a smaller deal with 1 of the players or something, but too me its just too big of a deal to make sense as is.

[Tarheels55]

Smaller deal will be worked out. 

[izaman3]

I understand where the vetoes are coming from, but I approve this deal.

Cap space will be important over the next few years but Pitt has plenty of it to use how they see fit. Goalies are always valuable and Pitt really needs one. I like Kane over JVR and look for him to play even better with Eichel next year. I also think that Getzlaf and Chara make attractive trade chips for next deadline and they will increase the return on this trade. Pitt can send cash tied to these contracts if needed to make a deal work.

[Rob]

Both members are preferring to scrap this trade and go with the revised deal posted.