Sabres acquire goalie Malcolm Subban for Future Considerations

[PerreaultForever]

7 hours ago, Curt said:

Genuinely interested, do you have a single example of a time that future considerations turned out to be anything other than absolutely nothing?  I think it’s nothing 100% of the time, and it’s literally just the way that they must phrase “nothing” to comply with the CBA.

Jeff Beukeboom I believe was the "future considerations" in the Mark Messier to the Rangers deal. I think there was a high draft pick labelled as "future considerations" in the Lindros deal but don't remember. I know those are a long time ago........  I'm pretty sure there's been draft picks (usually not high ones) added in to complete some of these deals but I don't remember and am far too lazy to spend hours googling it.

It's rare that it means much. If we see some minor league shuffle with Chicago later or some other low end swap that'll probably be related, but it might never be explicit. It is probably just an "I owe you a favour" type thing. 

[Curt]

4 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Jeff Beukeboom I believe was the "future considerations" in the Mark Messier to the Rangers deal. I think there was a high draft pick labelled as "future considerations" in the Lindros deal but don't remember. I know those are a long time ago........  I'm pretty sure there's been draft picks (usually not high ones) added in to complete some of these deals but I don't remember and am far too lazy to spend hours googling it.

It's rare that it means much. If we see some minor league shuffle with Chicago later or some other low end swap that'll probably be related, but it might never be explicit. It is probably just an "I owe you a favour" type thing. 

I honestly just think that the CBA doesn’t allow a trade for nothing.  You have to say it’s for future considerations, even that ends up being diddly squat.

[Pimlach]

On 12/2/2021 at 1:46 PM, North Buffalo said:

Good move... watched Subban over the years... he runs hot and cold... deal is Sabres didnt give up too much for him and between Anderson, Tokarski and Subban Sabres solidify goaltending while younguns develop. Gotta say I like move.

Solidify?   

[Weave]

16 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Solidify?   

Like Jello

[Hoss]

10 hours ago, Curt said:

Genuinely interested, do you have a single example of a time that future considerations turned out to be anything other than absolutely nothing?  I think it’s nothing 100% of the time, and it’s literally just the way that they must phrase “nothing” to comply with the CBA.

Not hockey and not the same situation but the Padres and Nats were part of a three-time trade where the Nats got a “player to be named later” from the Padres for a player who wasn’t very good … and the player to be named later was Trea Turner who is one of the best shortstops in the league. Of course, player to be named later is much different because usually in baseball that means Team A has agreed to trade either one specific player to another team who is not eligible to be traded yet (which was the case for Turner) or Team A gave Team B three prospects to choose from but allowed them to make that choice later.

[PromoTheRobot]

There's a lot to unpack here.

 

[Doohicksie]

8 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

There's a lot to unpack here.

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

15 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

There's a lot to unpack here.

 

That’s what she said.  (Too soon?)

[Norcal]

 

[woods-racer]

He knows it's his last chance. He's living his dream. May he do well and get another contract. It's a win, win.

[Berg]

9 hours ago, woods-racer said:

He knows it's his last chance. He's living his dream. May he do well and get another contract. It's a win, win.

He looks like a smart guy👍 I believe in him!

[Curt]

14 hours ago, Hoss said:

Not hockey and not the same situation but the Padres and Nats were part of a three-time trade where the Nats got a “player to be named later” from the Padres for a player who wasn’t very good … and the player to be named later was Trea Turner who is one of the best shortstops in the league. Of course, player to be named later is much different because usually in baseball that means Team A has agreed to trade either one specific player to another team who is not eligible to be traded yet (which was the case for Turner) or Team A gave Team B three prospects to choose from but allowed them to make that choice later.

Right.  Very different scenario, as you say.  In MLB “player to be named later” always is an actual player, whereas in NHL “future considerations” is always nothing, at least since the start of the cap era.

Nats made out well in that deal.

[SwampD]

On 12/3/2021 at 6:08 AM, Curt said:

Genuinely interested, do you have a single example of a time that future considerations turned out to be anything other than absolutely nothing?  I think it’s nothing 100% of the time, and it’s literally just the way that they must phrase “nothing” to comply with the CBA.

Here’s an interesting post from Reddit about future considerations.

All of the answers here are correct, but I'll also add that 'future considerations' can be named in the future, and often times we're not privy to what is explicitly spelled out in the trade paperwork.

To take an example, Kevin Poulin was recently traded from Tampa Bay to Calgary for future considerations. Hypothetically, let's say that the specific consideration is that in the 2016 Entry Draft, Tampa Bay will swap 5th round picks with Calgary if Calgary's pick is higher in the draft. If this ends up being the case, we'd hear about it, but if Tampa Bay already has the higher pick, we wouldn't necessarily find out that that was the 'consideration' because it was so minor, and ultimately not fulfilled.

It tends to be pretty minor stuff. In the old days you could trade players for cash (Quebec famously got a buttload of cash in the Lindros trade, along with their haul of players) and Kris Draper was infamously traded from Winnipeg to Detroit for $1. You can't do that anymore. (I believe it was eliminated in the 2005 CBA.) What you also can't do is essentially loan a player, explicitly or implicitly. For example:

Arizona trades Shane Doan to Chicago for future considerations. The legalese of that paperwork can't then be 'The consideration is that in June of this year, Chicago will trade Shane Doan back to Arizona for a 7th Round Pick.' You can't put restrictions on a player being traded into the wording of 'future considerations.'

I wouldn't be surprised (though I don't have anything to back this up) if some teams just drew up completely insane conditional scenarios in order to facilitate a trade of a player for essentially nothing. IE: To use the Poulin example, Tampa Bay trades Poulin to Calgary for future considerations. The consideration being that if Calgary wins the cup the next 5 years running and Poulin posts a +.95SV% in each year and ties the single season win record, Tampa Bay receives a 7th. You know, something extremely unlikely, because you can't just give a player away, but the teams don't want to hassle with the possibility of a condition being satisfied (even for a 5th round pick.) Which may be why so many 'considerations' amount to nothing-- the ridiculous premises aren't satisfied.

[bob_sauve28]

12 hours ago, Norcal said:

 

TT comes in and gives him a hug at the end. 

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, bob_sauve28 said:

TT comes in and gives him a hug at the end. 

"One of us...One of us..."

[Hoss]

16 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

There's a lot to unpack here.

 

Both 27 at the time of the trade.

[Buffalonill]

By tomorrow Everyone will want to throw him into the sun

[bob_sauve28]

1 minute ago, Buffalonill said:

By tomorrow Everyone will want to throw him into the sun

Maybe, but he sure has a winning personality so that should temper many peoples reactions even if he lays an egg 

[French Collection]

Mike Bales becomes the Malcolm Whisperer and gets him to perform at the Craig Anderson level.

[bunomatic]

At least he isn’t a ‘ loud ‘ personality like his oldest brother. Just seems at least in that vid to be a little less of an attention seeker. Good luck to him.

[Norcal]

3 hours ago, French Collection said:

Mike Bales becomes the Malcolm Whisperer and gets him to perform at the Craig Anderson level.

That's a good one for the GameDay thread!

 

[Marvin]

Good luck, Malcolm.  You are going to need it behind this group.

[Doohicksie]

8 hours ago, bob_sauve28 said:

TT comes in and gives him a hug at the end. 

 I saw that.  He might not be C material, but I could see TNT being A material.

5 hours ago, Buffalonill said:

By tomorrow Everyone will want to throw him into the sun

Not an unfair prediction.

5 hours ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Maybe, but he sure has a winning personality so that should temper many peoples reactions even if he lays an egg 

Carter the Hutt has a winning personality too.  We were all to happy to see him move on.

[Doohicksie]

Thus endeth the Malcom Subban Era.

12 hours ago, Buffalonill said:

By tomorrow Everyone will want to throw him into the sun

[Ducky]

Vegas is going to need cap room when Eichel comes back.

That's when I would make the move to get LB from them. A big, tall, excellent goalie that should be able to be had with a 3rd and maybe even a 4th.

One more season after this one at 2.325m. Time frame works well too, no?