The Binnington effect on our Trade Bait

[gpe13579]

Trading 50, 72 and 10 the main return of the trade is the cap space.

Any of those three can be replaced by a replacement level player at a much lower cost. Yeah, the big game Binner stuff can be talked about as a reason to keep him but the Blues don't appear to be headed for many big games in the next couple of years.

Get what you can for those three of course, but the cap space is valuable. You would essentially end up getting whatever the trade return is AND whatever you get with the freed up dollars.

Now, if they decide to move 25 then you have to get value. As many things as he does poorly, he can score goals on his own and that cannot be replaced by a replacement level guy. Not advocating one way or the other on 25 but IF they do move him the return has to be tangible.

You’re wrong. Those guys can’t be replaced with just replacement level players. That means they have NO value at all.
Army can get assets for each of those players….which proves they have value. Just because you don’t like a player, doesn’t mean the rest of the league agrees.

Great.

I hope the league does value them. Of course we want to get the most we can. Just saying the cap space has value in addition to whatever you get back in the trade.

It doesn’t have to be some great return to trade them. And I actually like all three of them and if the Blues were in different circumstances I would not move them but they are where they are so to me the return, no matter what it is, and the return garnered with the cap space has to be considered.

[SteveR85]

Trading 50, 72 and 10 the main return of the trade is the cap space.

Any of those three can be replaced by a replacement level player at a much lower cost. Yeah, the big game Binner stuff can be talked about as a reason to keep him but the Blues don't appear to be headed for many big games in the next couple of years.

Get what you can for those three of course, but the cap space is valuable. You would essentially end up getting whatever the trade return is AND whatever you get with the freed up dollars.

Now, if they decide to move 25 then you have to get value. As many things as he does poorly, he can score goals on his own and that cannot be replaced by a replacement level guy. Not advocating one way or the other on 25 but IF they do move him the return has to be tangible.

You’re wrong. Those guys can’t be replaced with just replacement level players. That means they have NO value at all.
Army can get assets for each of those players….which proves they have value. Just because you don’t like a player, doesn’t mean the rest of the league agrees.

Great.

I hope the league does value them. Of course we want to get the most we can. Just saying the cap space has value in addition to whatever you get back in the trade.

It doesn’t have to be some great return to trade them. And I actually like all three of them and if the Blues were in different circumstances I would not move them but they are where they are so to me the return, no matter what it is, and the return garnered with the cap space has to be considered.

Criminally undervaluing Binnington, Schenn and Faulk. As Bubble pointed out, if they were truly replacement level players, they would have zero value in a trade. Each should bring back between a 1st and 2nd round pick in a trade plus a prospect or NHL player coming back.

One more point - cap space isn't really at the premium that it was during the COVID era. Moving Schenn, Faulk, and Binnington at full cap hit would save 19M on the cap next year, sure. But who are we spending that cap space on? Have you seen the UFA class? Removing all three contracts would actually put the Blues under the cap floor next season.

[gpe13579]

Trading 50, 72 and 10 the main return of the trade is the cap space.

Any of those three can be replaced by a replacement level player at a much lower cost. Yeah, the big game Binner stuff can be talked about as a reason to keep him but the Blues don't appear to be headed for many big games in the next couple of years.

Get what you can for those three of course, but the cap space is valuable. You would essentially end up getting whatever the trade return is AND whatever you get with the freed up dollars.

Now, if they decide to move 25 then you have to get value. As many things as he does poorly, he can score goals on his own and that cannot be replaced by a replacement level guy. Not advocating one way or the other on 25 but IF they do move him the return has to be tangible.

You’re wrong. Those guys can’t be replaced with just replacement level players. That means they have NO value at all.
Army can get assets for each of those players….which proves they have value. Just because you don’t like a player, doesn’t mean the rest of the league agrees.

Great.

I hope the league does value them. Of course we want to get the most we can. Just saying the cap space has value in addition to whatever you get back in the trade.

It doesn’t have to be some great return to trade them. And I actually like all three of them and if the Blues were in different circumstances I would not move them but they are where they are so to me the return, no matter what it is, and the return garnered with the cap space has to be considered.

Criminally undervaluing Binnington, Schenn and Faulk. As Bubble pointed out, if they were truly replacement level players, they would have zero value in a trade. Each should bring back between a 1st and 2nd round pick in a trade plus a prospect or NHL player coming back.

One more point - cap space isn't really at the premium that it was during the COVID era. Moving Schenn, Faulk, and Binnington at full cap hit would save 19M on the cap next year, sure. But who are we spending that cap space on? Have you seen the UFA class? Removing all three contracts would actually put the Blues under the cap floor next season.

So just run it back again? I’m not interested in that. These are aging players that can help a team that is ready to something now. That is not the Blues. You”re telling me that Schenns production can’t be replaced at a far lower cost? Faulk? Even Binnington?

If that’s your stance so be it. We will have to agree to disagree.

If I’m the Blues alum moving all three. We’ll see what happens.

[skilles]

Trading 50, 72 and 10 the main return of the trade is the cap space.

Any of those three can be replaced by a replacement level player at a much lower cost. Yeah, the big game Binner stuff can be talked about as a reason to keep him but the Blues don't appear to be headed for many big games in the next couple of years.

Get what you can for those three of course, but the cap space is valuable. You would essentially end up getting whatever the trade return is AND whatever you get with the freed up dollars.

Now, if they decide to move 25 then you have to get value. As many things as he does poorly, he can score goals on his own and that cannot be replaced by a replacement level guy. Not advocating one way or the other on 25 but IF they do move him the return has to be tangible.

You’re wrong. Those guys can’t be replaced with just replacement level players. That means they have NO value at all.
Army can get assets for each of those players….which proves they have value. Just because you don’t like a player, doesn’t mean the rest of the league agrees.

Great.

I hope the league does value them. Of course we want to get the most we can. Just saying the cap space has value in addition to whatever you get back in the trade.

It doesn’t have to be some great return to trade them. And I actually like all three of them and if the Blues were in different circumstances I would not move them but they are where they are so to me the return, no matter what it is, and the return garnered with the cap space has to be considered.

Criminally undervaluing Binnington, Schenn and Faulk. As Bubble pointed out, if they were truly replacement level players, they would have zero value in a trade. Each should bring back between a 1st and 2nd round pick in a trade plus a prospect or NHL player coming back.

One more point - cap space isn't really at the premium that it was during the COVID era. Moving Schenn, Faulk, and Binnington at full cap hit would save 19M on the cap next year, sure. But who are we spending that cap space on? Have you seen the UFA class? Removing all three contracts would actually put the Blues under the cap floor next season.

So just run it back again? I’m not interested in that. These are aging players that can help a team that is ready to something now. That is not the Blues. You”re telling me that Schenns production can’t be replaced at a far lower cost? Faulk? Even Binnington?

If that’s your stance so be it. We will have to agree to disagree.

If I’m the Blues alum moving all three. We’ll see what happens.

If they were UFA we would move them for sure but they are not, if we "run it back again" 1 of 2 things will happen. We'll either have a good year or they will be traded as rentals and these player probably have more trade value being pure rentals. They all have no trade clauses so they likely won't go to bad teams and most contenders probably won't see the extra year as a plus.

My biggest argument is we need to give our young players a chance to succeed and gutting the team won't do that.

[BleedingBleu]

Easily worth a first and a legit prospect with that showing

I agree and for several reasons.

No one cares about the President’s Trophy. It’s the Stanley Cup everyone wants. Doesn’t matter if it’s the 1 Seed or the 16th Team in on the last day of the season, everyone has a shot if their Goalie is Elite. Jordan Binnington is a proven Stanley Cup Champion. He’s a proven Big-Game Goalie. Who else would be available? No one.

A Canadian Team hasn’t won the Cup in 32 years. The pressure is on. The Montreal Canadians have a great team, but no goalie. The Edmonton Oilers have studs on the ice including a Generational Player who only signed a 2-year extension. I have three letters to describe Toronto… L O L. The heat is on and all three of those teams have Goalie problems.

Buffalo hasn’t been to the playoffs in 14 years. They’ll likely make it this year, but they don’t have a great goalie situation, either. There are a LOT of desperate teams who fall into this category and should want it bad enough to make a “bad” decision. Not because Binnington is bad, but because they’ll overpay for a lottery ticket.

It wasn’t that long ago that the prevailing thought was you needed a Big Time Goaltender to win the Cup. I’m not so sure that’s really changed (Bobrovsky in Florida & Vasilevskiy in Tampa). Just ask Winnipeg about their thoughts on a Big Game Goalie…

Just look at the transactions the desperate Blues made to try and get one of those w/Halak in the middle of it all…

Jaroslav Halák

June 17, 2010: Traded by the Montreal Canadiens to the St. Louis Blues for Lars Eller and Ian Schultz.

February 28, 2014: Traded by the St. Louis Blues with 1st round draft pick in 2015 (later traded to Winnipeg,­ Winnipeg selected Jack Roslovic), 3rd round draft pick in 2016 (later traded to Florida, Florida selected Linus Nassen), William Carrier and Chris Stewart to the Buffalo Sabres for Ryan Miller and Steve Ott.

So yeah, I’m not trading him for less and I’m certainly not motivated to move him for a Late 2nd nor 3rd Round Pick. I’ll let that asset depreciate or recover before I sell Pennie’s on the dollar.

He’s under contract through next year at $6M, is 32 and the Starting Goaltender for Team Canada. Yeah, you’re gonna need to fork over some real assets to pry him out of St Louis

[Younghopp1991]

Easily worth a first and a legit prospect with that showing

I agree and for several reasons.

No one cares about the President’s Trophy. It’s the Stanley Cup everyone wants. Doesn’t matter if it’s the 1 Seed or the 16th Team in on the last day of the season, everyone has a shot if their Goalie is Elite. Jordan Binnington is a proven Stanley Cup Champion. He’s a proven Big-Game Goalie. Who else would be available? No one.

A Canadian Team hasn’t won the Cup in 32 years. The pressure is on. The Montreal Canadians have a great team, but no goalie. The Edmonton Oilers have studs on the ice including a Generational Player who only signed a 2-year extension. I have three letters to describe Toronto… L O L. The heat is on and all three of those teams have Goalie problems.

Buffalo hasn’t been to the playoffs in 14 years. They’ll likely make it this year, but they don’t have a great goalie situation, either. There are a LOT of desperate teams who fall into this category and should want it bad enough to make a “bad” decision. Not because Binnington is bad, but because they’ll overpay for a lottery ticket.

It wasn’t that long ago that the prevailing thought was you needed a Big Time Goaltender to win the Cup. I’m not so sure that’s really changed (Bobrovsky in Florida & Vasilevskiy in Tampa). Just ask Winnipeg about their thoughts on a Big Game Goalie…

Just look at the transactions the desperate Blues made to try and get one of those w/Halak in the middle of it all…

Jaroslav Halák

June 17, 2010: Traded by the Montreal Canadiens to the St. Louis Blues for Lars Eller and Ian Schultz.

February 28, 2014: Traded by the St. Louis Blues with 1st round draft pick in 2015 (later traded to Winnipeg,­ Winnipeg selected Jack Roslovic), 3rd round draft pick in 2016 (later traded to Florida, Florida selected Linus Nassen), William Carrier and Chris Stewart to the Buffalo Sabres for Ryan Miller and Steve Ott.

So yeah, I’m not trading him for less and I’m certainly not motivated to move him for a Late 2nd nor 3rd Round Pick. I’ll let that asset depreciate or recover before I sell Pennie’s on the dollar.

He’s under contract through next year at $6M, is 32 and the Starting Goaltender for Team Canada. Yeah, you’re gonna need to fork over some real assets to pry him out of St Louis

Well written. If you are willing to trade me a 1st or equal asset, even a late first then i make the move. But anything less than that is unnecessary. Even as a backup he is valuable.

[MandatoryDenial]

Binner…and I wouldn’t settle for anything less. If we can’t get a first rounder, then he can retire a Blue.

I agree and that is what many I feel in this forum doesn't realize. Those in contention and those who want to be in contention come to you. To say that Binnington who has a cup ring and a history of being a lights out goaltender won't bring back a first and a grade A prospect? O'k then hang up. That is his value and that is what you demand and that is the starting position for all our guys. Faulk you ask for nothing less. Schenn, I would do what he wants. You have to respect your captain but he must also bring back a first and a prospect at the minimum. Our goal should be what is best for our team, long term. Our goal shouldn't be to do favors for other teams. If they don't want to pay us the value we need in futures then politely thank the other team for their time and move on.

[The Average Gatsby]

Trading 50, 72 and 10 the main return of the trade is the cap space.

Any of those three can be replaced by a replacement level player at a much lower cost. Yeah, the big game Binner stuff can be talked about as a reason to keep him but the Blues don't appear to be headed for many big games in the next couple of years.

Get what you can for those three of course, but the cap space is valuable. You would essentially end up getting whatever the trade return is AND whatever you get with the freed up dollars.

Now, if they decide to move 25 then you have to get value. As many things as he does poorly, he can score goals on his own and that cannot be replaced by a replacement level guy. Not advocating one way or the other on 25 but IF they do move him the return has to be tangible.

You’re wrong. Those guys can’t be replaced with just replacement level players. That means they have NO value at all.
Army can get assets for each of those players….which proves they have value. Just because you don’t like a player, doesn’t mean the rest of the league agrees.

Great.

I hope the league does value them. Of course we want to get the most we can. Just saying the cap space has value in addition to whatever you get back in the trade.

It doesn’t have to be some great return to trade them. And I actually like all three of them and if the Blues were in different circumstances I would not move them but they are where they are so to me the return, no matter what it is, and the return garnered with the cap space has to be considered.

Criminally undervaluing Binnington, Schenn and Faulk. As Bubble pointed out, if they were truly replacement level players, they would have zero value in a trade. Each should bring back between a 1st and 2nd round pick in a trade plus a prospect or NHL player coming back.

One more point - cap space isn't really at the premium that it was during the COVID era. Moving Schenn, Faulk, and Binnington at full cap hit would save 19M on the cap next year, sure. But who are we spending that cap space on? Have you seen the UFA class? Removing all three contracts would actually put the Blues under the cap floor next season.

So just run it back again? I’m not interested in that. These are aging players that can help a team that is ready to something now. That is not the Blues. You”re telling me that Schenns production can’t be replaced at a far lower cost? Faulk? Even Binnington?

If that’s your stance so be it. We will have to agree to disagree.

If I’m the Blues alum moving all three. We’ll see what happens.

If they were UFA we would move them for sure but they are not, if we "run it back again" 1 of 2 things will happen. We'll either have a good year or they will be traded as rentals and these player probably have more trade value being pure rentals. They all have no trade clauses so they likely won't go to bad teams and most contenders probably won't see the extra year as a plus.

My biggest argument is we need to give our young players a chance to succeed and gutting the team won't do that.

Man I disagree with pretty much all of this. You can eat 50% of the cap hits for Schenn, Faulk, and Binnington and whoever trades for them gets 2 shots at the cup with them at very cheap cap hits. They also do not have full no trade clauses just fyi.

[skilles]

Trading 50, 72 and 10 the main return of the trade is the cap space.

Any of those three can be replaced by a replacement level player at a much lower cost. Yeah, the big game Binner stuff can be talked about as a reason to keep him but the Blues don't appear to be headed for many big games in the next couple of years.

Get what you can for those three of course, but the cap space is valuable. You would essentially end up getting whatever the trade return is AND whatever you get with the freed up dollars.

Now, if they decide to move 25 then you have to get value. As many things as he does poorly, he can score goals on his own and that cannot be replaced by a replacement level guy. Not advocating one way or the other on 25 but IF they do move him the return has to be tangible.

You’re wrong. Those guys can’t be replaced with just replacement level players. That means they have NO value at all.
Army can get assets for each of those players….which proves they have value. Just because you don’t like a player, doesn’t mean the rest of the league agrees.

Great.

I hope the league does value them. Of course we want to get the most we can. Just saying the cap space has value in addition to whatever you get back in the trade.

It doesn’t have to be some great return to trade them. And I actually like all three of them and if the Blues were in different circumstances I would not move them but they are where they are so to me the return, no matter what it is, and the return garnered with the cap space has to be considered.

Criminally undervaluing Binnington, Schenn and Faulk. As Bubble pointed out, if they were truly replacement level players, they would have zero value in a trade. Each should bring back between a 1st and 2nd round pick in a trade plus a prospect or NHL player coming back.

One more point - cap space isn't really at the premium that it was during the COVID era. Moving Schenn, Faulk, and Binnington at full cap hit would save 19M on the cap next year, sure. But who are we spending that cap space on? Have you seen the UFA class? Removing all three contracts would actually put the Blues under the cap floor next season.

So just run it back again? I’m not interested in that. These are aging players that can help a team that is ready to something now. That is not the Blues. You”re telling me that Schenns production can’t be replaced at a far lower cost? Faulk? Even Binnington?

If that’s your stance so be it. We will have to agree to disagree.

If I’m the Blues alum moving all three. We’ll see what happens.

If they were UFA we would move them for sure but they are not, if we "run it back again" 1 of 2 things will happen. We'll either have a good year or they will be traded as rentals and these player probably have more trade value being pure rentals. They all have no trade clauses so they likely won't go to bad teams and most contenders probably won't see the extra year as a plus.

My biggest argument is we need to give our young players a chance to succeed and gutting the team won't do that.

Man I disagree with pretty much all of this. You can eat 50% of the cap hits for Schenn, Faulk, and Binnington and whoever trades for them gets 2 shots at the cup with them at very cheap cap hits. They also do not have full no trade clauses just fyi.

I'd bet most of what we disagree on is what we think the returns will be, For example I'm ready to trade Binny but unless someone pays up I just don't see this as the time to do it.

I'd defintely trade all 3 for the right price but I'd hold pretty firm on the price being a 1st minimum.

[The Average Gatsby]

Trading 50, 72 and 10 the main return of the trade is the cap space.

Any of those three can be replaced by a replacement level player at a much lower cost. Yeah, the big game Binner stuff can be talked about as a reason to keep him but the Blues don't appear to be headed for many big games in the next couple of years.

Get what you can for those three of course, but the cap space is valuable. You would essentially end up getting whatever the trade return is AND whatever you get with the freed up dollars.

Now, if they decide to move 25 then you have to get value. As many things as he does poorly, he can score goals on his own and that cannot be replaced by a replacement level guy. Not advocating one way or the other on 25 but IF they do move him the return has to be tangible.

You’re wrong. Those guys can’t be replaced with just replacement level players. That means they have NO value at all.
Army can get assets for each of those players….which proves they have value. Just because you don’t like a player, doesn’t mean the rest of the league agrees.

Great.

I hope the league does value them. Of course we want to get the most we can. Just saying the cap space has value in addition to whatever you get back in the trade.

It doesn’t have to be some great return to trade them. And I actually like all three of them and if the Blues were in different circumstances I would not move them but they are where they are so to me the return, no matter what it is, and the return garnered with the cap space has to be considered.

Criminally undervaluing Binnington, Schenn and Faulk. As Bubble pointed out, if they were truly replacement level players, they would have zero value in a trade. Each should bring back between a 1st and 2nd round pick in a trade plus a prospect or NHL player coming back.

One more point - cap space isn't really at the premium that it was during the COVID era. Moving Schenn, Faulk, and Binnington at full cap hit would save 19M on the cap next year, sure. But who are we spending that cap space on? Have you seen the UFA class? Removing all three contracts would actually put the Blues under the cap floor next season.

So just run it back again? I’m not interested in that. These are aging players that can help a team that is ready to something now. That is not the Blues. You”re telling me that Schenns production can’t be replaced at a far lower cost? Faulk? Even Binnington?

If that’s your stance so be it. We will have to agree to disagree.

If I’m the Blues alum moving all three. We’ll see what happens.

If they were UFA we would move them for sure but they are not, if we "run it back again" 1 of 2 things will happen. We'll either have a good year or they will be traded as rentals and these player probably have more trade value being pure rentals. They all have no trade clauses so they likely won't go to bad teams and most contenders probably won't see the extra year as a plus.

My biggest argument is we need to give our young players a chance to succeed and gutting the team won't do that.

Man I disagree with pretty much all of this. You can eat 50% of the cap hits for Schenn, Faulk, and Binnington and whoever trades for them gets 2 shots at the cup with them at very cheap cap hits. They also do not have full no trade clauses just fyi.

I'd bet most of what we disagree on is what we think the returns will be, For example I'm ready to trade Binny but unless someone pays up I just don't see this as the time to do it.

I'd defintely trade all 3 for the right price but I'd hold pretty firm on the price being a 1st minimum.

Yeah that’s correct. I’m not trying to give these guys away for nothing but if you get offered at least a first you take it and run. I don’t think Binnington would have netted a first before the Olympics but if continues to play well he should. Also if we hold on to them I do worry about their value being lower next season.

[IsDurbanodoingtime]

The larger question with Binner is will he even waive if a suitable deal were in place? He gets the same deference Schenn received He is a fiercely proud guy who has steadfastly maintained he wants to stay. I think it's too complicated a deal to do over the tradeline. Let some contenders choke over goaltending this spring and see what the market brings over the summer. No hurry to do a deal by the deadline.

[The Average Gatsby]

The larger question with Binner is will he even waive if a suitable deal were in place? He gets the same deference Schenn received He is a fiercely proud guy who has steadfastly maintained he wants to stay. I think it's too complicated a deal to do over the tradeline. Let some contenders choke over goaltending this spring and see what the market brings over the summer. No hurry to do a deal by the deadline.

He doesn’t need to waive anything. He only has a 14 team no trade list.

[Blues Dave]

Easily worth a first and a legit prospect with that showing

Who?

Binner…and I wouldn’t settle for anything less. If we can’t get a first rounder, then he can retire a Blue.

Pierre, I truly value your opinion. You know more than 99% of the posters on here, especially prospects.
But the hard truth is that goalies do not get that kind of return in today's NHL...especially goalies with Binner's numbers over the last few years. I like Binner, if we can only get a 3rd, I have no problem keeping him....but if you think he will actually fetch a 1st round pick, I would drive him to the airport.
The Blues searched for 20 years to get a quality STANLEY CUP QUALITY goalie....so I realize they don't grow on trees. But to think the Blues are close and can win it all next season is "miracle best case scenario thinking". Again, I have no problem keeping him...but they will never get a 1st for him IMO.

He has a pedigree that nobody else on the market has and a couple of teams that are on the rise could use a goalie. The price is high…I ain’t moving off of a first..it’s a demand for a Stanley cup , 4 nations. And possible Olympic gold medalist

Tim, this is the most important reason when talking about "moving" Binny. There are no 100% guarantees that come with a goalie, but at this time Binny is pretty damm close to exactly that. If you've already got a good team, is it worth it to you to take a shot on a goaltender who has a habit of coming through big time. That's what they have to pay for. That's not the value of a goalies stats. That's Jordan Binnington playing goal for you doing what he does. If they don't want to pay for that possible oportunity....that's fine, we'll keep him.

[Pierre McGuire]

Easily worth a first and a legit prospect with that showing

Who?

Binner…and I wouldn’t settle for anything less. If we can’t get a first rounder, then he can retire a Blue.

Pierre, I truly value your opinion. You know more than 99% of the posters on here, especially prospects.
But the hard truth is that goalies do not get that kind of return in today's NHL...especially goalies with Binner's numbers over the last few years. I like Binner, if we can only get a 3rd, I have no problem keeping him....but if you think he will actually fetch a 1st round pick, I would drive him to the airport.
The Blues searched for 20 years to get a quality STANLEY CUP QUALITY goalie....so I realize they don't grow on trees. But to think the Blues are close and can win it all next season is "miracle best case scenario thinking". Again, I have no problem keeping him...but they will never get a 1st for him IMO.

He has a pedigree that nobody else on the market has and a couple of teams that are on the rise could use a goalie. The price is high…I ain’t moving off of a first..it’s a demand for a Stanley cup , 4 nations. And possible Olympic gold medalist

Tim, this is the most important reason when talking about "moving" Binny. There are no 100% guarantees that come with a goalie, but at this time Binny is pretty damm close to exactly that. If you've already got a good team, is it worth it to you to take a shot on a goaltender who has a habit of coming through big time. That's what they have to pay for. That's not the value of a goalies stats. That's Jordan Binnington playing goal for you doing what he does. If they don't want to pay for that possible oportunity....that's fine, we'll keep him.

Yessir…there is a price and he’s not moved until that price is met

[a smell of green grass]

If Binnington wants to retire in St Louis, I would keep him here. I think that the fans would like that too. He and the team must accept, however, that he needs to be the backup goalie soon because St Louis is in "rebuild for the next Cup" mode, and Binnington does not have that much runway left.

If Binnington would prefer to help a current contender win a CUP, either as starter or backup, then I would seek a trade to accomplish that. No hard feelings, etc. As an example of one destination, Edmonton does not want to go down in history as never filling the pipes when McDavid and Draisitl are up front.

If we do trade him, I would try to get one of Detroit's prospect goalies, Cossa or Augustine. I would not accept a "Dean" level prospect for him. It would have to be prospect with 1A potential. If that is not possible, I would send him to a team with a lot of Cap, and I would package trade Binnington and Buchnevich for a bag of pucks and two 2nd-round picks.