Can Tampa really afford to trade away Foote? Gotta think an RD on he’s ELC will be super important to them IMO.

Well, they've got 5 forwards they probably want to protect (Stamkos, Point, Kucherov, Cirelli, Coleman) and 3 defensemen (Hedman, Sergachev, Cernak if not McDonagh), so I think he get's exposed unless they can work out a similar side deal, but they might well have spent some ammunition beating the cap problem this year.

As a Wings fan, I’d do the trade. 8 forwards, I’d protect your top 9 less Johnson and Getzlaf and probably keep Milano or Grant for now as the 8th guy. 4 defencemen Fowler, Foote, Lindholm, and Manson assuming he’s not traded somewhere. Not sure how to work around that Shattenkirk NTC though, hence why I think Manson might be traded to a contender (Jets?) and give Foote top 4 minutes.

Gotta get SEA to take Johnson, odds are he’ll happily go home as some people suggest. Even if they don’t take him exposing him isn’t a huge loss or risk. Worst case is you traded Jones and a 3rd for Foote and a 1st if that happens

1.) Regardless of any expansion deals I do that tirade as ANA we don’t need to protect Johnson.

2.) I am firmly against any expansion deals this time around, it would not be worth whoever we lose (one of Heinen, Milano, Shattenkirk, Manson, or in this scenario Johnson)

Protection
Henrique
Rakell
Silf
Terry
Lundestrom
Jones/Heinen/Milano
Steel

Fowler
Lindholm
Whomever plays better out of Shattenkirk/Manson

Gibson

Notable exposed
Milano
Heinen
Shattenkirk/Manson
Deslauriers
Guhle
Larsson
Stolarz
Johnson

3.) unless we are only giving up a 2021 3rd rounder the price is too high

[First intelligent response] Hard to improve on this -- your protection list is the same as mine (I'd choose Grant) except I'd actually protect Foote once I'd gotten him.

One:
Tampa needs Foote to much. Any trade involving Foote is unrealistic seeing as if I’m Tampa I cannot afford to lose more D, especially one so young and full of potential who they need this year especially on an ELC. So Tampa declines but could do it if you change the prospect.
Two:
Doesn’t matter to me really
Three:
Too be able to protect extra two players/ basically tell Seattle who they’re gonna be able to choose from, you’re gonna have to pay some picks (would be the cheapest). Unless you wanna toss them a prospect of some decent value (nothing special but nothing that’s a project or garbage - a middle ground). So like we trade you prospect A plus a pick for future considerations; being the selection of one of these “let’s say 5” players instead of these 7 (allowing you two protect two extra skaters).

The pick being like a 3rd and the spec being someone decent, idk the Anaheim specifics to well but nothing like a guy of lundestroms talent (I know he’s not the ducks top spec but he’s quite good), but a slight step below him seems fair

[Second intelligent response -- not surprising, coming from a valued Anaheim colleague]

I’d gotta believe Tampa doesn’t even care about expansion at this point. If they win a cup and lose a player - they’d probably choose that. I doubt Tampa cares about Seattle when their biggest enemy is themselves right now lol

No doubt! Tampa is going to have to trade multiple pieces off there roster and will still end up losing a good prospect/roster player in the expansion draft. I just don’t see it being Foote

[Third intelligent response, for being bang on re issue #3]

I’d rather just give them Manson then having them take a pick ( Seattle ).

I edited my comment as well. Being what the cost of question 3 would be I believe. I think many teams are going to biting the bullet on “protecting” extra players. Including teams from cup contenders to the rebuilding teams

Well, you sure as hell aren't gonna like MY solution!! (Because they might take Foote instead.)

That id wouldn’t be against tbh.

Are we taking money into account here as the Samueli’s just furloughed a decent amount of employees?

Ah, mine didn’t make it.
ABCD3954JKLQRTVWXYZ

Articles already say TB is prepared to trade NJD. TJ a 1st round pick and a prospect. And it said, Foote, Semykin, or Boulet. If they were ok with doing that. Then I’m sure they would do the deal with ANA if ANA added M.Jones back.

You didn't respond to any one of the three issues!

Side issue!

[Fourth intelligent response, for confirming how brilliant I am --I proposed this trade three weeks ago]

That’s 5 years of TJ contract at 5M per though. And TB not retaining any money either?? Not even 1M? I’d bet they would be happy with 4M more in cap space. I highly doubt Seattle takes Johnson. Who knows what ANA would have to give up in order for them to take him. I would say they would ask for atleast the 1st round pick.

And Comtois is eligible if he plays 40 games this year.

The side deal doesn't have to, in fact doesn't, require Seattle to take Johnson.

Jones' value is pretty much only defensive and he's been abysmal offensively, he's definitely an asset you can afford to lose. Johnson is a good player and fills a hole on your right side and/or center. Foote's cool enough. And the late first is cool enough. So yeah I'm down for the trade just to increase Anaheim's assets.

My expansion list would be:

Forwards: Rackell, Silverberg, Henrique, Steel, Terry, Milano, Johnson...honestly there's no one else I really want to protect. I didn't even really want to protect Johnson or Milano.

Defesemen: This is a tough one and clearly where Seattle will make it's pick. I like Foote but I'm not high enough on him to protect him. Assuming there's an extension in play for Manson, I probably protect the current four unless you think Seattle won't take on a big salary like Fowler's. I think you can do just about any combination and you'll be fine. You'll be losing a good player, but LHD are pretty replaceable and you'll always have at least two decent RHD left. Gun to my head I'm protecting Fowler, Shattenkirk, and Manson and gambling that Seattle won't take on a contract as big as Lindholm's if they can afford not to.

Goalies: Stolarz. Just Kidding. Protect the best goalie in the league.

Don't make a deal with Seattle. Lose your player and move on. I'm not sure there's any team that made a deal with Vegas that had it work out in their favor, and I would say Seattle's front office is smarter than Vegas' was.

[Fifth intelligent response] Really spot on -- nothing to add except that if you're not happy with protecting Johnson, don't forget about Lundestrom.

Ohh u want to keep TJ?? Really?? For 5M per for 4 more years. He turning 31 in July and is already regressing. Once 5’8 players lose their speed. Or even lose a step, they regress big time!! .