Reinhart, sign him or trade him?

[Sabre1974]

The guy is my favourite player and who's name and number is on my jersey but I am fed up with his soft play and I would trade him as much as it pains me to say it if the right deal was on the table. 

[Radar]

We are woefully short on forwards I'm not anxious to get rid of maybe the second best one we have.

[LGR4GM]

7 hours ago, Sabre1974 said:

The guy is my favourite player and who's name and number is on my jersey but I am fed up with his soft play and I would trade him as much as it pains me to say it if the right deal was on the table. 

I'd trade him for the right deal. I just don't think that deal exists. Aka a #2 center. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

On 2/1/2020 at 2:50 PM, LGR4GM said:

I'd trade him for the right deal. I just don't think that deal exists. Aka a #2 center. 

That’s fair but which 2c who produces 70 pts a year is available and is only 24-25 years old? 

As you said.  The deal doesn’t exist.  
 

 

Edited February 2, 2020 by GASabresIUFAN

[pi2000]

I'd trade Reinhart and Okposo for a pick, a prospect, and a middle 6 winger.

[sabremike]

17 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

I'd trade Reinhart and Okposo for a pick, a prospect, and a middle 6 winger.

You REALLY want that no playoff streak to hit 19 so it tops the Bills right???

[pi2000]

4 minutes ago, sabremike said:

You REALLY want that no playoff streak to hit 19 so it tops the Bills right???

, I want to spend the $6m/yr Okposo is getting for the next 3 years on somebody who deserves it.   

[Getpucksdeep]

No attachment here. He's solid but not a franchise player and I don't think he plays hard enough consistently. 

Marcus Johansson first 5 seasons - 345 games 186 points. .54ppg

Samson - 374 / 247 .66 ppg

Not sure who mojo played with at Caps but assuming it wasn't Backstrom.

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

That’s fair but which 2c who produces 70 pts a year is available and is only 24-25 years old? 

As you said.  The deal doesn’t exist.  

And ppl still want to dump Reinhart. Its just not logical. You can't build a team but dumping good players for random stuff. 

[sabremike]

2 hours ago, pi2000 said:

, I want to spend the $6m/yr Okposo is getting for the next 3 years on somebody who deserves it.   

Which won't get you a player nearly as good as Sam in UFA, so there's a hole you just created that won't be adequately filled. And our huge bounty in the trade will be a late round first (which Botts can waste on another junk low ceiling defenseman) and a third line winger.

[pi2000]

9 minutes ago, sabremike said:

Which won't get you a player nearly as good as Sam in UFA, so there's a hole you just created that won't be adequately filled. And our huge bounty in the trade will be a late round first (which Botts can waste on another junk low ceiling defenseman) and a third line winger.

You don't know that.  

$6m + Sam's $3m = $9m in cap space

vs

$6m + $7m = $13m against the cap to keep the status quo.

That's a net gain of of $22m/yr to use on filling out your middle 6, re-signing Dahlin down the road, shoring up the goaltender position.  That's significant.

But no. Things are going so well with Sam and Kyle on the roster, why try something different?

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

And ppl still want to dump Reinhart. Its just not logical. You can't build a team but dumping good players for random stuff. 

Not dumping, replacing. 

use the money you want to pay him on a different type of player(s).

[sabremike]

3 hours ago, pi2000 said:

You don't know that.  

$6m + Sam's $3m = $9m in cap space

vs

$6m + $7m = $13m against the cap to keep the status quo.

That's a net gain of of $22m/yr to use on filling out your middle 6, re-signing Dahlin down the road, shoring up the goaltender position.  That's significant.

But no. Things are going so well with Sam and Kyle on the roster, why try something different?

This is Karmanos Math at it's finest.

Next season:

Let's say Sam gets $6 million in arbitration.

Kyle makes $6 million next season.

That would be a cap gain of $12 million per season, not $22 million.

Then factor in the third liner we'd get back (and if you've seen the type of guys Botts likes think not very good and expensive) that would take $2-3 million off that number.

Now try and find a player (or players) you can get with that $9 million who would be as good as a just hitting his prime Sam.

Oh and did I mention there's a very real chance Okposo ends up on LTIR and his cap hit gets significantly reduced? And that even though he is making far more than what his value as a player is he has actually been one of our more effective players this year with the LOG line?

 

[sabremike]

11 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Not dumping, replacing. 

use the money you want to pay him on a different type of player(s).

And when Sam is traded we will also end up saving the $10 million per season cap hit on Jack when he demands a trade immediately afterwards.

[pi2000]

44 minutes ago, sabremike said:

This is Karmanos Math at it's finest.

Next season:

Let's say Sam gets $6 million in arbitration.

Kyle makes $6 million next season.

That would be a cap gain of $12 million per season, not $22 million.

Then factor in the third liner we'd get back (and if you've seen the type of guys Botts likes think not very good and expensive) that would take $2-3 million off that number.

Now try and find a player (or players) you can get with that $9 million who would be as good as a just hitting his prime Sam.

Oh and did I mention there's a very real chance Okposo ends up on LTIR and his cap hit gets significantly reduced? And that even though he is making far more than what his value as a player is he has actually been one of our more effective players this year with the LOG line?

 

This team needs depth scoring. You can't have that with a guy like Okposo getting $6m.   He's eating up 2 middle six contracts and contributing only $1-2m in value filling a 4th line role. 

 

46 minutes ago, sabremike said:

And when Sam is traded we will also end up saving the $10 million per season cap hit on Jack when he demands a trade immediately afterwards.

Ok so now we're keeping guys around because the core players are so mentally weak they'll need therapay if a teammate is traded?  That's a huge problem with this team.   The priority should be to win, not to make the players happy.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, sabremike said:

And when Sam is traded we will also end up saving the $10 million per season cap hit on Jack when he demands a trade immediately afterwards.

Why? Are they lovers?

[sabremike]

18 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Why? Are they lovers?

Sam is one of his best friends. He is also one of the very few good players in our entire organization. What would you expect to happen if Sam gets traded for a pu pu platter of junk ala ROR that makes our roster even more sad and terrible than it already is? If they could trade him for an excellent #2 center that wouldn't be a problem because that could actually improve the team but that type of trade is going to happen on the 10th of Never.

[PerreaultForever]

26 minutes ago, sabremike said:

Sam is one of his best friends. He is also one of the very few good players in our entire organization. What would you expect to happen if Sam gets traded for a pu pu platter of junk ala ROR that makes our roster even more sad and terrible than it already is? If they could trade him for an excellent #2 center that wouldn't be a problem because that could actually improve the team but that type of trade is going to happen on the 10th of Never.

As pi2000 said, you don't keep players on your roster because they are "friends."   NHL players have friends all over the league on numerous teams. They meet up when they are in town, vacation in the off season together, they are all rich and they all know it's a business. This should not be an issue, and simply can't be allowed to be an issue.

Now here's the problem I have with the logic. Those of us who don't like Sam and how he plays want him traded rather than awarded a big contract. That is simple and logical from that perspective. But.........

Your view (and others) is he is a really good player and so you can't trade him unless it's for a quality 2C but you won't get that you'll get a pu pu platter which makes no logical sense. If he actually is as good as you say teams should be lining up to get ahold of his services and bidding for them. Simple logic. The argument you make however, is contradictory. You can't have it both ways. If he's as good as you claim, he should fetch a good return too. 

[sabremike]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

As pi2000 said, you don't keep players on your roster because they are "friends."   NHL players have friends all over the league on numerous teams. They meet up when they are in town, vacation in the off season together, they are all rich and they all know it's a business. This should not be an issue, and simply can't be allowed to be an issue.

Now here's the problem I have with the logic. Those of us who don't like Sam and how he plays want him traded rather than awarded a big contract. That is simple and logical from that perspective. But.........

Your view (and others) is he is a really good player and so you can't trade him unless it's for a quality 2C but you won't get that you'll get a pu pu platter which makes no logical sense. If he actually is as good as you say teams should be lining up to get ahold of his services and bidding for them. Simple logic. The argument you make however, is contradictory. You can't have it both ways. If he's as good as you claim, he should fetch a good return too. 

Look at what we traded the Conn Smythe winner for two offseasons ago and get back to me. We have a GM who constantly gets conned and suckered, a Sam trade will be no different. And the idea that Sam is the problem with this team is complete lunacy as well, just like the idea that ROR was the problem with this team.

"Those who cannot remember the past..."

[LGR4GM]

4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

As pi2000 said, you don't keep players on your roster because they are "friends."   NHL players have friends all over the league on numerous teams. They meet up when they are in town, vacation in the off season together, they are all rich and they all know it's a business. This should not be an issue, and simply can't be allowed to be an issue.

Now here's the problem I have with the logic. Those of us who don't like Sam and how he plays want him traded rather than awarded a big contract. That is simple and logical from that perspective. But.........

Your view (and others) is he is a really good player and so you can't trade him unless it's for a quality 2C but you won't get that you'll get a pu pu platter which makes no logical sense. If he actually is as good as you say teams should be lining up to get ahold of his services and bidding for them. Simple logic. The argument you make however, is contradictory. You can't have it both ways. If he's as good as you claim, he should fetch a good return too. 

Or and stay with me, a good 2c is more valuable than a 1rw. That's why you don't trade good ones for peanuts like our gm did to make the owner happy. 

[shrader]

5 hours ago, sabremike said:

Look at what we traded the Conn Smythe winner for two offseasons ago and get back to me. We have a GM who constantly gets conned and suckered, a Sam trade will be no different. And the idea that Sam is the problem with this team is complete lunacy as well, just like the idea that ROR was the problem with this team.

"Those who cannot remember the past..."

So one bad trade now equates to "constantly" getting conned and suckered?  That's one hell of a logical leap right there.  I look through the rest of his deals and I don't see anything that come close to that label.  I can see some people suggesting Vesey or Sheary, but I see those as more of a buy low swing and a miss.

[PerreaultForever]

9 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Or and stay with me, a good 2c is more valuable than a 1rw. That's why you don't trade good ones for peanuts like our gm did to make the owner happy. 

It's impossible to talk hypotheticals, but if your 2C is better than Sam then you add in someone else or whatever.  Multi player deals, 3 team deals, whatever. You didn't really counter the point that if Reinhart has big value, he should be marketable for a good return.

Yes, the return on the ROR deal was horrible, even though at the time it seemed reasonable (a high pick, a top end prospect with size, an average 2c and a veteran defensive forward). JBot got the wrong guys, given. Epic fail. But........

12 hours ago, sabremike said:

Look at what we traded the Conn Smythe winner for two offseasons ago and get back to me. We have a GM who constantly gets conned and suckered, a Sam trade will be no different.

If this is a certainty, then JBot should be already fired no?  Why not believe he learned from that and he can pull another Jokiharju for Nylander type deal instead. Law of averages if nothing else. 

[LGR4GM]

The ROR trade was complete ***** garbage the second it happened. A 3c, a 3 winger, a 2 tier prospect, and an unknown 1st outside the top 10 for probably the best 2 way center in the league. It was *****.

Also you keep confusing 2 things. Reinhart has value but you just outlined how that trade works. So what's more valuable, spare parts that might add up to Reinhart or just having Reinhart. 

[pi2000]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

The ROR trade was complete ***** garbage the second it happened. A 3c, a 3 winger, a 2 tier prospect, and an unknown 1st outside the top 10 for probably the best 2 way center in the league. It was *****.

Also you keep confusing 2 things. Reinhart has value but you just outlined how that trade works. So what's more valuable, spare parts that might add up to Reinhart or just having Reinhart. 

Reinhart is bezerko ROR.   ROR did everything very well, defense, battles, 50/50's, face-offs, PK, PP, pass, score, etc.... a true jack-of-all-trades.   Reinhart does maybe 3 things well, he can score from in tight, has good vision and anticipation in the offensive zone when given time and space, and I can't really think of a third thing but maybe somebody else can.  Plays well with Eichel, putting up middling 1st line RW stats?  Is that good enough?    Or would the team be better off with a more well-rounded player who maybe doesn't have the same point production with Eichel?   Tough call.

[Curt]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

probably the best 2 way center in the league

No!  Really?  He’s good, but no, not that good.  Crosby?