Skip to content

Report: Kesler only wants to be traded to Penguins or ‘Hawks (Updated)

Jun 23, 2014, 10:07 AM EDT

Ryan Kesler Getty Images

Ryan Kesler has requested a trade, but the 29-year-old center doesn’t want to go just anywhere.

Kesler, who has a no-trade clause, apparently wants the Vancouver Canucks to trade him to Pittsburgh or Chicago, according to the Ottawa Sun. Assuming the report is accurate (it was previously reported that Kesler has given Vancouver a list of six teams to which he’s willing to be traded), it wouldn’t be too hard to see why Kesler would want to go to either team, given the caliber of players he would be able to share the ice with. Still, it’s not a given that either squad would be willing to make a serious effort to get him.

Based on the their current roster, the Penguins seem the less likely destination out of the two. They already have Sidney Crosby, Evgeni Malkin, and restricted free agent Brandon Sutter as their top three centers. They could shift Malkin to the right wing, but the bigger issue is Kesler’s $5 million annual cap hit. Is it really worth it for Pittsburgh to take on that kind of salary to add to an area of strength, when it already has depth issues due to the top-heavy nature of its cap allocations?

Chicago is a bit of a different case, given that it does need a second-line center after parting ways with Michal Handzus. Andrew Shaw might fill that void, but Kesler would be a safer bet and it’d allow Shaw to headline Chicago’s third line.

That being said, the salary cap is an issue with the Blackhawks too, especially seeing as they need to account for the likelihood that Jonathan Toews and Patrick Kane will get meaningful raises starting in 2015-16. Unless Vancouver is inclined to retain some of Kesler’s cap hit, that might ultimately keep him out of Chicago.

And of course, that’s just examining whether or not Kesler would fit into Chicago or Pittsburgh’s plans. It glossed over the issue of what Vancouver would want in return and factoring in that makes a move to Chicago or Pittsburgh more difficult to pull off.

Update: Kesler is also willing to go to Anaheim, according to CBC’s Elliotte Friedman. The Ducks are in a pretty good position right now from a cap perspective, so they wouldn’t have that complication to deal with.

  1. rsl22 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:15 AM

    Nash, St. Louis, and now Kesler, openly demanding trades to very limited markets and handcuffing their GMs. Is this the new trend? Just be a whiney bïch to get your way?

    Of course the article could be entirely false, but players are getting ridiculous. GMs should add a provision in contacts that if you demand a no trade clause in contact, and then publicly demand a trade, the NTC is automatically waived.

    • hockey412 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM

      I think Tampa did ok on that St. Louis trade…and I KNOW that Columbus did ok…the point being, the players are always going to try to go where they want to go – there’s nothing wrong with that. GM’s allow them to sign clauses that give them that power. Kesler’s under contract for two more years – if they want him, they can ‘force’ him to stay. They’re holding cards in this too. But players aren’t ‘owned’, they have the right to some power over their lives.

      • hockey412 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:28 AM

        and further – Kesler can’t “demand” a trade, as you said. He can request one, but he’s under contract. So if he pushes his envelope too far, the Canucks can tell him to shut up and play. They just need to weigh the consequences of doing that.

      • rsl22 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:31 AM

        They signed their right away when they took $5MM a year to play hockey for one team for a few years. The players rights are owned in fact.

      • hockey412 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:32 AM

        They are under contract for a specific amount of time – not owned. They can walk away for nothing, or the teams can get something for them. Saying they’re owned and have no say where they go is kind of creepy.

      • rsl22 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:37 AM

        You seem to misunderstand the concept of rights.

      • hockey412 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM

        Then I hope to hell you are never in a position of power. It comes down to the fact that Vancouver took leverage off of itself in their contract to Kesler. They could have traded him anywhere, but only before 2012/2013. They can keep him, but he’s basically putting them on notice that he isn’t going to re-sign in two years, so trade him or let him walk when the time comes for nothing. He has a contractual right to do what he’s doing, they have a contractual right to keep him for two years or trade him to one of those teams. This is Vancouver’s doing – and look at all the NTC/NMC’s they give – it’s mind-boggling.

    • dueman - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM

      This is another beautiful piece of fantasy, I mean journalism, straight from the wonderful imagination of Bruce Garrioch, of the Ottawa Sun. This guy should get an award, just for the sheer amount of bull$hit, that he gets away with printing!

    • thisischavez - Jun 23, 2014 at 9:15 PM

      I hear what you’re saying but for years (decades, actually) it was just the opposite way around. The players had no say whatsoever and the teams just did what they wanted. I understand that, in theory, that’s how it should be, but, c’mon. If you were a player and had leverage to do what they’re doing, wouldn’t you?

    • tdrusher225 - Jun 24, 2014 at 12:52 AM

      This starting to feel like the NBA

  2. lateralous - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:15 AM

    I understand that players bargain for a no-trade clause when they sign a deal but at the point that the player is demanding a trade and not the other way around, they need to be more flexible about where they will go than just listing off two top teams that are already up against the cap. By the same contract, it’s also Vancouver’s right not to trade him so until he expands his list giving them the opportunity for a better return, the Canucks should deny his request and just hold on to him.

    • hockey412 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:22 AM

      They can do that. But let’s say they trade him for two young (and good) players now – two years from now they’ve still got two good players. If they don’t trade him, two years from now when their ‘asset’ walks away to sign somewhere else, they’ve got nothing. They don’t win by hanging on to him.

    • c9castine - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:10 AM

      how is purposefully retaining a player that you signed to a contract that allows him to control his movement for the sake of trying to negotiate the right that you signed him to beneficial to the organization?

      of course the media uses the word demand, but i dont think keslar put a gun to anybodys head. he probably said, “im unhappy and i would like a change.” im sure vancouver will oblige because it doesnt make sense to hold on to a player who is not happy with you when you can get good return on him in an organization that should be retooling, almost rebuilding.

      you need to look at the situation for what it is – a business arrangement with each party having contractual rights and obligations and each party looking out for number one.

      • lateralous - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:48 AM

        For example, say Chicago lands Joe Thornton and Pitt only wants to give up someone like James Neal (who I personally wouldn’t want). It makes more sense to hold on to Kesler until he is open to more destinations than taking a lesser deal. No where did I say you ride out the whole two years and lose him for free.

      • c9castine - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:52 AM

        right i agree.

        why would you blame kelsar for negotiating but not vancouver? thats all that is happening here. of course kelsar is going to start with the two teams or however many teams he really wants to go to. as time goes on if deals with those teams dont happen, im sure the list will expand.

        maybe i just play hardball but if somebody says “how much you wanna pay for this car” i say 0.

  3. gbart22 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:15 AM

    Players can want specific cities all they want doesn’t mean that is where they are going to end up if you want to be traded out of a city you’re going to go where someone can afford you

  4. hockey412 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:20 AM

    Pittsburgh isn’t that far out of the realm of possibility – Sutter in an RFA and was already making $2.7M – and will want a raise. So any package coming out of Pittsburgh would include Sutter. But they can’t afford to give any draft picks – so there would have to be another roster player involved…they have depth on defense but they are losing a big chunk of their defense. It would be tough.

  5. comeonnowguys - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:21 AM

    So, if the report is true, and if Vancouver agrees, it’s probably Pittsburgh.

    Am I correct in saying that otherwise this would be Bowman’s first blockbuster trade, rather than trading to clear cap space?

    • McFaddensPulledHammy - Jun 23, 2014 at 1:28 PM

      I can’t see him going to Pittsburgh. They have no depth, no coach, and nothing to give.

  6. bihler7 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:21 AM

    James Neal makes $5 mil, that would be a nice piece to start the Pens trade package around.

    • chanceoffleury - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:05 AM

      Trading their only true top line winger for a fourth center probably is not a great place to start. Not unless they’ve got another trade lined up to flip Sutter for a reputable winger. Kesler is older and signed to a shorter term than Neal. Neal is signed pretty cheap for the kinds of numbers he can put up. I think you get a new coach in there to deal with him before you trade him. Bylsma seemed like a bit of a doormat. Give Neal a coach that’s not afraid to sit his a$$ in the press box any time he tries to take it an inch over the line and he might respond by actually behaving himself. Bylsma was too scared to piss guys like Neal or Letang off by benching them which is what damaged that level of respect a player should have for their coach’s authority. They just walked all over him and did whatever they want like spoiled children who know the threats wouldn’t be carried out.

  7. greatmiamisportsmind - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:21 AM

    What a cry baby. If you really want out of Vancouver that badly, you should be open to any of the other 29 teams, just not 2.

    Your typical athlete who cries until he gets his way. Nobody is forcing you to play hockey anywhere. Go get yourself a normal 8-5 job with annoying co-workers, crap bosses, and everything else us normal workers do. I’d love to get a $5 million per year job, I’d go to Vancouver for that, let alone any of the other 29 NHL locations.

    • rsl22 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM

      You’ve never been to Winnipeg, have you?

      • greatmiamisportsmind - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:39 AM

        Never been to Winnipeg but growing up in Minneapolis is a 7 hour drive to Winnipeg. I get it sucks and it’s cold their.

      • lostpuppysyndrome - Jun 23, 2014 at 5:36 PM

        Oy, just where do you get off? Winnipeg may be neck deep in strangulating bureaucracy, potholes the size of Lake Michigan, and vast swathes of houses displaying the latest trendy shade of pastel stucco, but it’s actually not a bad town. In summer.

      • greatmiamisportsmind - Jun 23, 2014 at 6:00 PM

        So for 6 weeks of the year it’s a nice place. But not during hockey season

    • moarjam - Jun 23, 2014 at 1:50 PM

      I get what you’re saying but its completely misguided. Those who work ‘normal jobs’ get to pick where that job is. And if you want to leave a ‘normal job’ your boss doesn’t get to send you to somewhere you have no desire being.

      As for you wanting his $5m job? Well, become a skilled laborer like Ryan Kesler and then tell me you’re just happy to be there and not care about your personal happiness. I have a feeling your tune would change.

      VAN gave him a NTC. Blame VAN not Kesler. Of course the guy is going to want to go to a situation that’s advantageous to him. Its his life!

      • greatmiamisportsmind - Jun 24, 2014 at 1:06 AM

        Actually we do have a choice where we work to certain point. I’m guessing a person who puts forth the time/money to get an education is going to have a more skilled job, albeit not making $5 million a year in all likeliness, but I’m also guessing they are less likely to be making minimum wage flipping burgers at McDonald’s or throwing in pizza at Dominoes.

  8. tmoore4075 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:28 AM

    I just can’t imagine him going to a conference rival in Chicago. You’d have to imagine the price the Canucks would want would be more than what they’d ask from Pitt.

    I understand a limited list for wanting to go places but this is dumb. There are other good teams out there and as some have said you get a no trade clause to protect yourself from moving, but then get to protect yourself from where to go? The team gets what out of this deal?

    • comeonnowguys - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:34 AM

      That’s why I find the Anaheim talk so puzzling. They would be shipping him within the division, much less the conference. The adjusted price would seem to be steep.

      • tmoore4075 - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:48 AM

        Yeah in a playoff format this is mainly divisional and you’d be giving an already good Ducks team a good two-way center to play against you. Ahh can’t wait for the weekend and the start of free agency. Going to be fun.

      • areaman714 - Jun 23, 2014 at 12:19 PM

        If I recall, the Nucks were one for California last season. They weren’t close to beating any California team with Kesler in their lineup. The Ducks have much more to offer the Nucks than the Hawks or Pens. Getting minimal return on such a valuable asset may put them into a deeper and longer rebuilding mode than they want to be.

      • comeonnowguys - Jun 23, 2014 at 12:26 PM

        I get that the Ducks have more to offer, but as you point out, they already own the Canucks, and Vancouver is going to make them better? I am just surprised the asking price in that case isn’t crazy.

      • stuuuu86 - Jun 23, 2014 at 12:43 PM

        But if the Ducks have the best to offer in exchange for Kesler, do you take that deal even if its within the division? The Ducks have a lot of assets and young players (and draft picks) to offer up. Not to mention they desperately need a second line center behind Getz.

      • comeonnowguys - Jun 23, 2014 at 1:16 PM

        I am just saying it should be a factor in just how “good” a deal is. Of course it should not make any offer from Anaheim a non-starter.

      • areaman714 - Jun 23, 2014 at 3:06 PM

        I agree, it is not often a prudent decision to ship a player the caliber of Kesler to a division rival. The Nucks aren’t just trying to overtake the Ducks in the division as they have the Kings and Sharks that will be really good for the near future. Does a deal getting less from the Hawks or Pens put them reasonably closer to competing with the top three in the West? Who knows . . . There is a real possibility that last year was a huge anomaly and they are closer than they showed. Either way, losing a 2C like Kesler is not easy to overcome in any circumstance. The fact is, Kesler wants out and I’d go with the best deal irregardless of geographics.

  9. notan9ner - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:29 AM

    break a leg…

    wait u do that every season….

  10. storminator16 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:30 AM

    He may be asking to be traded to team X and Y, but Benning would be better off convincing him to be traded to team Z. Kesler’s only other option would be to continue to play for the Canucks or face suspension if he chooses not to do so. The player does not have leverage to dictate where he’ll be traded. Even if a player has a no-trade/no-movement clause, if he is asking to be traded, how the deuces do they have leverage in the situation? They don’t.

    • hockey412 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:45 AM

      They do. And Vancouver gave them the leverage. They didn’t sign him to a limited NTC, they said he has all the power. Take a look at their signings. They gave similar clauses to both Sedins, Kesler, Burrows, Edler, Bieksa, Garrison, Hamhuis….seems like they make a habit of taking the power out of their own hands…and that’s just the non-limited NTC’s.

    • storminator16 - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:01 AM

      Only fans believe players have leverage. They don’t.

      • hockey412 - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:18 AM

        Tell that to St. Louis.

      • storminator16 - Jun 23, 2014 at 12:19 PM

        In the grand scheme of things, it worked out for Yzerman, did it not? If he didn’t get that much compensation from the Rangers, Yzerman could easily just told the player to stay put ’til after the season. If Yzerman re-signs Callahan, then who had the leverage there? The player may got what he wanted but he may have helped out his former team immensely (time will tell).

      • hockey412 - Jun 24, 2014 at 8:13 AM

        Leverage isn’t about who ‘wins’ – see my first comment way up top. When a player uses leverages, he’s trying to get what he wants from his career (which is what we all do in life). He doesn’t care what the team gets back. And that was my original point. Yes, the player may be trying to use leverage to get out, but that does not mean that the team holding his contract loses. I’ve seen some pretty good deals. Hell look at Staal going to Carolina….think he didn’t use any leverage there? Shero straight up asked him where he was wanting to go, and made it happen.

      • storminator16 - Jun 24, 2014 at 9:38 AM

        Yes, your definition of “leverage” and my definition are two different things. Just because a player got moved to where he wanted doesn’t mean he had “leverage”. My point is the GM doesn’t have to move a player unless the GM is getting back a handsome sum. My point was that no GM should feel like they need to move a player. The player can just wait. Trade requests don’t have to be honorned. I’m sure there are many trade requests every year that we never hear about. The ones we hear about, fans and media think “oh, the player has all the leverage ™!” just because he/she hears about it. Baloney.

      • hockey412 - Jun 24, 2014 at 2:23 PM

        Ah – no, I don’t disagree with that at all. But my point isn’t that they HAVE to honor it. They don’t – they can make him play out the rest of their contract and lose them for nothing. But if they don’t honor the request, then try to trade that player for a handsome sum later, the player in no way is under obligation to honor that. Why? Becuase they gave the player that leverage with a non-limited NTC. That’s the leverage I’m talking about.

    • storminator16 - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:02 AM

      With all this said, this is a silly Bruce Garrioch rumor.

      • moarjam - Jun 23, 2014 at 1:57 PM

        Doesn’t matter if it worked out for Yzerman. St. Louis still got his way (demand).

        Did he use magic to get his boss to trade him? No I believe he applied pressure and forced Yzerman’s hand. If that isn’t using leverage, I don’t know what is….

      • storminator16 - Jun 24, 2014 at 9:44 AM

        I LOL’d. You people are so stuck into your fairy tales and lollipops. Yes, Steve Yzerman got no sleep at night, wondering if St. Louis was going to call the troll mafia to do wicked things to his wittle ‘ol famiwy.

        Look up “leverage” in the dictionary. It doesn’t apply to your arguments.

  11. Eutaw's Finest - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:46 AM

    So for Vancouver to go back to Kesler and say “look, Pitt and Chicago have no cap space and aren’t willing to trade with us, so you’re stuck here at least til the deadline,” would behoove them. Perhaps Kesler would open up to more than just 2 teams. Just a thought.

  12. jkulha86 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM

    Wont make much sense financially for Pittsburgh unless Letang is a part of the deal. Sutter& Letang for Kesler & 1st round pick.

    • claysbar - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:57 AM

      Holy over-payment Batman. If Leteng is included it would be straight up player for player with Pens taking a hit on the talent side just to free up cap space.

    • c9castine - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:19 AM

      holy smokes dude. what are you trying to do!!?

      sutter is 25 and seemed to have just rounder a corner into what should be the best hockey of his life. he had excellent end to the season and an excellent playoff. hes looking to be a solid 40-50 pt 3rd line center who should be one of the best defensive centers in the game at the same time. great teammate and great leadership skills. a young guy who is signing his second contract with 415 NHL games under his belt.

      at this point, keslar and sutter arent too far off in value. he had 43 points and was a -15 this year. i know a better situation would make kelsar the much better player he is, but still.

  13. echech88 - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM

    Well if this is true, Spezza to Anaheim looking a little more likely.

    • areaman714 - Jun 23, 2014 at 12:22 PM

      He’d have to be cheap, I don’t think the Ducks are all too excited about his 7 million dollar cap hit.

    • comeonnowguys - Jun 23, 2014 at 12:29 PM

      I could see an early Spezza deal drastically changing the Kesler landscape.

  14. leepetertk - Jun 23, 2014 at 10:55 AM

    That is frustrating to management to only have two teams to negotiate with. I understand wanting to go to a contender, but only Pittsburgh and Chicago? I would have thought Anaheim, Los Angeles, and Boston would at least be on the list. Then also teams that could be elite by adding one more player, like St. Louis or maybe San Jose.

  15. storminator16 - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:09 AM

    Elliot Friedman’s 30 Thoughts (http://www.cbc.ca/sports-content/hockey/opinion/2014/06/30-thoughts-nhl-free-agents-reluctant-to-commit-early.html) today:

    “The Ottawa Sun’s Bruce Garrioch reported Kesler would only go to Chicago or Pittsburgh. I don’t think the list is a long one, but it does include Anaheim.”

    Without saying Garrioch is a liar, he called Garrioch a liar.

  16. yvrmike - Jun 23, 2014 at 11:35 AM

    ARE YOU SERIOUS ABOUT THIS
    “Unless Vancouver is inclined to retain some of Kesler’s cap hit”
    WOW! who did you get to write this article. I guess it must have been a slow day and had nothing else to dream about and you just started typing garbage away.
    Letang = kesler
    Sutter = 1st round pick. Are you serious.
    Stay in Ottawa and consider changing careers in writing political stories.

  17. letsgopens8771 - Jun 23, 2014 at 12:08 PM

    Maybe the Penguins should consider trading James Neal. He is becoming known as a dirty player, and whenever you need him, (especially in the playoffs) he is in the penalty box. He makes stupid decisions and takes stupid penalties when you need him not to.

  18. blynasty - Jun 23, 2014 at 12:24 PM

    Kesler and Lack for Sutter and Fleury

  19. hockeyfan117 - Jun 23, 2014 at 12:35 PM

    If it is to Chicago I am confident its going to be for minor leaguers and spare parts. Vancouver should be used to trading good players and getting nothing in return see (Lou and Schneider).

    Nucks fans should think about these plaers; Kevin Hayes rights, Mark McNeil, draft pick(s) and maybe a combination of Versteeg or Bickell, Oduya. There is no way Bowman parts with Saad, Tuevo or Clendening or any other core prospect or player for a 30 yr old Ryan Kesler.

    • blackhawksdynasty - Jun 23, 2014 at 2:28 PM

      I bet he’d consider sending Sharp for Kesler. Contract #s are very similar and both teams get help in areas they need it.

  20. earpaniac - Jun 23, 2014 at 12:52 PM

    Pit doesn’t need him, and I can’t see StanBo giving up what Van would want for him. The smartest thing for Van can do is keep him for now and hope his list of teams grows if he’s that unhappy.

  21. McFaddensPulledHammy - Jun 23, 2014 at 1:27 PM

    If you are Kesler, I understand you want to go to Pittsburgh, but right now without a coach, are they really a destination? What if they hire Torts?

    StanBo will part with Leddy, Teuvo, and this years #1 for Kesler.

    Sharp will get moved for prospects to clear the cap space for the extensions for #19 and #88.

    Next year’s lines will look like:

    Bickell – Toews – Hossa
    Saad – Kesler – Kane
    Versuckness – Kruger – Shaw
    Bollig – Regin – Smith

    Seabrook – Keith
    Hammer – Oduya
    Clendening – Rosival

    • blackhawksdynasty - Jun 23, 2014 at 2:39 PM

      No. Bowman will NOT part with TT. Too much potential and they haven’t even given him a real chance yet. The rest of what you mentioned I can see as possibilities. I’d be surprised to see Leddy moved, but I wouldn’t be against it – assuming Rundblad is NHL ready. Chicago still needs some size and strength on the back end if they hope to keep the puck out of the net next year. My 11 yr old could have parked in front of Crawford this year since the D refuses to get physical in that area.

      • comeonnowguys - Jun 23, 2014 at 2:57 PM

        Given that Q is less than happy with Leddy and with Clendening in the pipe, Leddy probably would go. I really like him but gotta give to get.

        Three late season games are a terrible sample but if Q won’t play someone and Q isn’t gong anywhere…

    • beergold - Jun 23, 2014 at 3:20 PM

      No worry on the Torts thing in Pitt…he is done as an NHL coach. Look for him as a JR kind of hockey analist. (typo intended)

  22. sixchr - Jun 23, 2014 at 1:36 PM

    I’m surprised that with a new GM and coach Kesler is still pushing for this. He has to know that he’s a major part of what Benning wants to do with the team so what does he want? Does he want to be competitive, fight for it, and be a part of the solution or does he just want to go latch on to another good team and be carried?

    • McFaddensPulledHammy - Jun 23, 2014 at 1:52 PM

      If you are a pro athlete who wants to win a championship, do you go to the Kansas City Royals, Minnesota Timberwolves, Jacksonville Jaguars, or Florida Panthers instead of the Boston Red Sox, San Antonio Spurs, New England Patriots, or Chicago Blackhawks?

      In Kesler’s specific situation, I’m sure he sees himself as the missing piece to both team’s problems of last year.

      • sixchr - Jun 23, 2014 at 3:46 PM

        Except he’s in a relative market that cares about the sport.

  23. imthedudedude - Jun 23, 2014 at 1:43 PM

    Hockey players seem like the biggest babies when it comes to where they wanna be traded. Lately it’s been all Pitt, Boston, Chicago, LA… Well what do you mean? You don’t wanna play for Florida or Columbus?

    • comeonnowguys - Jun 23, 2014 at 3:00 PM

      Still not anywhere as bad as the NBA.

  24. bruceeff - Jun 23, 2014 at 1:51 PM

    I’d be willing to entertain a Wings/Canucks trade. Kesler for Stephen Weiss straight-up. They’re both centers, they both make the same amount of money, and they both come with their own set of challenges. Maybe a change of scenery will do them both good.

  25. kastout11 - Jun 23, 2014 at 2:16 PM

    The new GM in Pittsuburgh is not going to pull the trigger on this trade. He will deplete an already depleted roster. Kessler is overrated anyway. He in untradable and will be lacing up the skates for Vancouver next year.

  26. earpaniac - Jun 23, 2014 at 7:51 PM

    As reluctant as StanBo is to normally trade his prospects, I can’t see him trading the best one he’s had in TT. Leddy, yes, Sharp, yes, but not TT.

  27. dontbeadope - Jun 23, 2014 at 9:43 PM

    Hasn’t anyone considered the fact that just because the Hawks could use a center doesn’t mean that they would pay for one from Vancouver? You really don’t want a player that the fans will boo all year long do you?

  28. selanne08 - Jun 24, 2014 at 9:14 PM

    If I’m the Ducks, I’m not making a trade for Kesler, much less Spezza…the last time the Ducks had 2 first round picks, they got Getzlaf and Perry…NOT for a 29 year old two contract year player…instead, I’m keeping my young assets and going all in on Stastny. Even at 7 million a year for 5-6 years, I would rather pay the extra 2 million and keep my picks and young players. Allen and Beauchemin are UFA after next year (7 million total), and they are $22 million under the cap right now, even before dropping Sourey’s contract at $3.6 million…they have set themselves up so that contracts drop as they need to pay people. They could even add Niskanen at $5 million if they wanted to as well, to start replacing the older defencemen, or hold onto the money and go after next year’s UFAs.

Featured video

Caps' 'culture change' proving positive

Sign up for Fantasy hockey

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. J. Spezza (3115)
  2. P. Datsyuk (3114)
  3. E. Kane (2935)
  4. J. Drouin (2747)
  5. M. Gaborik (2622)
  1. S. Varlamov (2561)
  2. E. Staal (2531)
  3. P. Stastny (2474)
  4. V. Hedman (2328)
  5. J. Franzen (2168)