I don’t usually engage in this much but since there’s been a dire dearth of any real hockey news to comment on I suppose it’s as good a time as any to shoot down some of the wacky trade and free agent rumors flying around.

First off, the Florida Panthers are not shopping defenseman Jay Bouwmeester. Sure, the fact that he signed a one-year contract taking him up to UFA status next summer likely means this is his final season with the Panthers, but as long as GM Jacques Martin believes there’s a chance to re-sign Bouwmeester he won’t be dealt, at least not at this time of the year.

Toronto Maple Leafs defenseman Bryan McCabe may apparently be willing to consider waiving his movement clause to accept a trade but that doesn’t mean he’ll be dealt soon.

According to recent reports out of Toronto the Leafs are believed waiting for a list from McCabe of teams he’d waive his clause to be dealt to, and the odds are that list will likely be a short one containing Cup contenders or perennial playoff teams.

And no, I don’t see him accepting a trade to the NY Islanders, because quite frankly I don’t think the Islanders, who now appear committed to rebuilding with youth, would be interested in his fat contract.

The Minnesota Wild are not shopping Marian Gaborik. That rumor is pure BS. They’re hoping to re-sign him and have no “contingency plans” to trade him now. As of this writing GM Doug Risebrough will be meeting with Gaborik in Slovakia this week to open contract talks.

Maybe later on in the season if Gaborik decides that he wants to test next summer’s UFA market Risebrough will shop him. Not now.

 Oh, and while I think of it, Bouwmeester isn’t being shopped for McCabe or Gaborik.

How do I know this? Because most NHL general managers are either on vacation, just back from vacation or soon to be heading out on vacation. Most teams have committed their cap space and have their rosters pretty much set. Heck, even a good number of player agents are taking this time to get in a little R&R.

That’s why there’s been almost nothing to report in terms of real hockey news. It’s the same thing every year.

Since the 2005-06 season ended, few significant trades have occured between the months of August and December, none of those involving players of the caliber of Gaborik, Bouwmeester and McCabe.

The reason for that is, quite simply, limited cap space, significantly limiting the market for players of that caliber during that time period.

Teams that will be busy in the coming weeks are those currently over the salary cap, like Philadelphia, Anaheim, Calgary and Chicago, who’ll have to dump some salary via trade or demotions to get under the cap by the start of the season.

The Nashville Predators could be forced to make a move or two via trade or free agency if Alexander Radulov remains in Russia for next season, while the Tampa Bay Lightning are heavy on forwards but light on defensive depth which suggests they might have a move or two remaining before next season begins.

That’s where your focus should be, rumormongers, not on dreaming up fantasy trades. 

With the 2008 NHL trade deadline fast approaching, rumors are flying fast and furious over which players might get traded, many of them centering around Toronto Maple Leafs captain Mats Sundin.

The Leafs are clearly in rebuild mode, having fired John Ferguson Jr as general manager, bringing back Cliff Fletcher as interim GM whilst searching for a permanent replacement, and fielding offers for some of their better – and expensive – veteran players.

Sundin tops the list, and for good reason, for despite his age (37) he’s still considered among the league’s top centers, currently on pace for an 82 point season, all the more noteworthy considering he’s achieved that on one of the NHL worst teams.

He’s also an unrestricted free agent but that won’t hurt his trade value, as there’s likely several teams willing to pay big for Sundin’s services, even if only as a playoff rental.

But there’s one thing standing in the way, Sundin’s no-trade clause and his persistent refusal to waive it to facilitate a trade.

Now it’s possible that Sundin could change his mind by the deadline, but if we take the Leafs captain at his word, he has no intention of doing so.

Such loyalty to a franchise, particularly one that hasn’t been to the Stanley Cup finals in 41 years, is commendable.

Other star veterans have left their long-time teams for an opportunity to play for a Cup contender, most notably Boston Bruins legend Ray Bourque in 2000 when he requested a trade to the Colorado Avalanche.

Nobody faulted Bourque for doing so, indeed, he was applauded for his long years of service with the Bruins and is still highly thought of by Bruins fans, who didn’t begrudge his desire to play elsewhere for a Stanley Cup.

But apparently for Sundin, playing for a Cup contender isn’t as important as being a Maple Leaf.

One would think he would be applauded for his loyalty, instead, he’s being criticized and vilified by some pundits and fans.

His critics suggest he’s merely being selfish for not agreeing to a trade, that he’s not putting the needs of the Leafs above his own, that he’s seriously hurting the franchise’s attempt for a strong start to their rebuilding program.

His refusal is being considered a prime example of how a player with a “no-trade/movement” clause can hold a team hostage and handcuff their efforts to rebuild.

These criticisms however are baseless and silly, petty carping by disgruntled followers of a so-called hockey institution seeking any scapegoat for the second-longest active Stanley Cup drought in NHL history.

Mats Sundin doesn’t owe the Leafs anything. He’s given everything to this team that they’ve always needed since he joined them in the summer of 1994 in a trade with the then-Quebec Nordiques.

He was behind the eight-ball in the eyes of Leafs fans upon his arrival, as team management had parted with beloved captain Wendal Clark as part of the deal for Sundin.

His leadership during the late 1990s was questioned, especially after he was made team captain in 1997after Doug Gilmour, another popular Leafs captain, departed.

The criticism was always worse in the playoffs, for despite the obvious shortcomings of the club from year to year he often was unfairly burdened with the blame for not carrying the Leafs further.

He’s led the Leafs in scoring every year but one since the 1994-95 season, he’s the Leafs all-time leading goal-scorer and points leader and second all time in assists, yet faced criticism that he “never took his game to the next level”.

His toughness was questioned, despite playing through injuries that would put lesser players on the sidelines.

Darryl Sittler, Wendal Clark and Doug Gilmour are considered icons for Toronto Maple Leaf fans, yet none of them led the Leafs in scoring as often as Sundin, and none of them had any better success getting the Leafs to the Cup Finals than Sundin.

So why doesn't Sundin get the respect he deserves? It wouldn't be because he's a Swede and not a "good Canadian boy" like Darryl, Wendal and Dougie, would it?

Who knows, but Sundin never conjures up the same reverence amongst Leafs fans as Sittler, Clark and Gilmour.

It’s one thing to face those criticisms and complaints, but in the hothouse atmosphere of Toronto, that kind of pressure would break most players.

Not Sundin. Through it all, he was consistently the Maple Leafs best player, both in the regular season and the playoffs. The Leafs could find no better representative.

He faced the media even after blowout losses, which over the last two seasons there’s been more of. He’s been through all the highs and lows and carried himself with class. He’s never sulked, never pouted, never tried to blame others.

And now, he’s getting dumped on because he doesn’t want to be traded.

Loyalty is supposed to be a two-way street, but obviously it’s only one way for some Toronto fans and pundits.

I don’t blame the Leafs management for considering the possibility of moving Sundin as part of their rebuilding program. It’s a business decision. I think Fletcher and his predecessor have handled this well, not belittling Sundin or trying to force him into accepting a trade.

All Sundin is doing is upholding his part of his contract, which he and his agent negotiated in good faith with the Maple Leafs. The clause was included, not as window dressing, but as a means of assuring Sundin peace of mind, to ensure he would remain in the only city he wanted to play hockey.

No one should be shocked if he decides to exercise that right.

Considering the Leafs erratic trade record in recent years and the salary cap, there’s no guarantee that Fletcher can land the kind of return that so many fans and pundits hope he can get. If Sundin wants to stay, then why not stop wasting time trying to trade him and focus instead on re-signing him?

After all, it’s not as though top free agents are stampeding to Toronto anymore, in part because of the salary cap but also because of the team’s mediocrity and the unrealistic expectations of the fan base. Keeping Sundin, a star who actually wants to be a Maple Leaf, might be a better option.

Leafs management has every right to ask him to waive it, and he has every right to refuse.

Despite it all, he’s being ripped as selfish, spoiled, unworthy to be a Maple Leaf despite all he’s done and continues to do for the franchise.

Some are calling for the Leafs to “play hardball” with Sundin, to strip him of the captaincy and tell him he’ll never play in Toronto again so he might as well waive the clause right now. In short, force him out of Toronto.

Yeah, that’s a great idea. The Maple Leafs already are garnering a reputation as a mismanaged franchise, let’s also make it known as a franchise that doesn’t appreciate its stars. What a great way to attract and retain talent.

For all Sundin has done for the Maple Leafs, he’s earned the right to decide if he’ll stay or go.

It’s that time of year again, folks, when the rumor mill goes into overdrive churning out all sorts of speculation as the NHL trade deadline nears.

And as always, a lot of what’s being spewed out is downright wacky.

Montreal trading Michael Ryder to Calgary for Alex Tanguay or to Atlanta for Marian Hossa?

Sure, if one overlooks the fact Tanguay has no desire to waive his “no-trade” clause to play in Montreal and that Thrashers GM Don Waddell isn’t an ####.

The Los Angeles Kings trading Rob Blake to the Anaheim Ducks?

As if Ducks GM Brian Burke’s blueline isn’t deep enough! Besides, Burke’s interest is in bolstering his offence, not adding another big-name defenseman to an already loaded defense corps.

Tampa Bay trading Brad Richards to Chicago for Nikolai Khabibulin?

Look, I know the Bolts desperately need a quality starting goaltender, but Khabibulin isn’t one anymore, and his salary ($6.75 million) is almost as pricey as Richards’ ($7.8 million), and oh yeah, Richards has a “no-trade” clause and no intention of waiving it.

Dallas trading Marty Turco to Tampa Bay for Martin St. Louis?

Which part of “no-trade clause” did you not understand?

The Carolina Hurricanes trading Eric Staal to the Edmonton Oilers?

I didn’t realize Hurricanes GM Jim Rutherford wanted to get out of his contract to sign with the Toronto Maple Leafs that badly.

Maybe these trades happen if you’re in a fantasy league or playing NHL 2K8. They don’t happen in today’s NHL.

Expect more wild and wacky rumors between now and the trade deadline on February 26th, which is now mercifully close meaning we won’t have to hear these nonsensical speculations for much longer!

I've previously posted the following on my website.  Given the NHL trade deadline is only a month away as well as the rise in recent weeks of really stupid trade rumors -many involving players with no-trade/no movement clauses or expensive long-term contracts that are almost unmovable - I've decided to re-post this here.
 
Consider the following to be helpful tips for internet and media rumormongers - who'll never listen anyway but what the hell - in hopes that it'll improve their creativity:

1. Players with no-trade/no-movement clauses almost never waive them unless they're in the final season of their contract and stuck on a non-playoff team, and then only in the weeks heading into the trade deadline to facilitate a trade to a playoff club. They don't waive them mid-way through their contract or in the middle of the summer.

2. Teams almost never trade a talented young player for picks and prospects, especially when that player is one of their most talented.

Last August a rumor flying around had the Boston Bruins trading Patrice Bergeron to the NY Islanders for picks and prospects. Come on, at least be more creative! Claim the Bruins are shopping Bergeron for, oh, say, Trent Hunter and Mike Comrie, or Comrie and Marc-Andre Bergeron. Sure, those rumors are unlikely too, but at least they're not incredibly  stupid.

3. General managers are not on the phone every day trying to swing trades, ok? I keep hearing that nonsense and it's simply not true. If it was, they'd have no time to devote to other aspects of running a team, like scouting, managing payroll, and player development. Yes, they have assistants but GMs must stay involved in day-to-day activities.

Most general managers aren't talking trade in August, because most have already committed their cap space for the upcoming season and have yet to fully evaluate their new rosters during training camp and pre-season. Cap constraints during the season means the earliest trades will occur is mid-to-late November, as salaries start to become more affordable.

Usually, the bulk of the deal occur in February, the same month as the trade deadline, and most who get traded fall into the category noted in my first point (Impending UFA playing on non-playoff club willing to waive NTC to play for a contender).

4. Remember the salary cap. A team with limited cap space is not going to take on a player carrying a hefty salary without dumping a lot of salary in return, and those deals almost never happen because of the potential adverse affect to roster depth.  More often than not, a team trying to move a high-salaried player is trying to free up cap space, not add to it. Those rumors are the easiest to debunk, folks, so do try to keep the cap in mind when you're trying to dream up who might be a good fit where.

5. Teams aren't going to trade one high-salaried player for another if the other player doesn't solve a problem area. It makes no sense to trade a high-salaried forward in exchange for a high-salaried netminder if said netminder won't help them, so please, no silly "Brad Richards to Colorado for Jose Theodore" rumors.

6. Correctly predicting one rumored trade doesn't make you a genius prognosticator if you're wrong most of the time. One rumor out of one hundred coming true is nothing to crow about.  If you were a weather forecaster with that kind of prediction rate you'd be unemployed in no time!

I'll be impressed if you can be accurate with your calls at least ten percent every season. Remember, a stopped clock is right twice a day but no one considers it an accurate measure of time.

Just follow these simple rules and you too can come up with more creative trade rumors that at least have a foot partially in reality rather than both feet firmly planted on Fantasy Island.

Cheers.

Montreal Canadiens defenseman Sheldon Souray has been featuring prominently in the rumor mill of late.

That's not surprising, given the Habs desperately clinging to one of the final playoff berths in the East, combined with his status this summer as an unrestricted free agent.

Big Shel's put up impressive offensive numbers this season, akin to last year's performance by Toronto Maple Leafs blueliner Bryan McCabe.

Like McCabe, Souray has that big shot from the point which provides the "power" in his team's powerplay. Also like McCabe, Souray's defensive game can be considered average at best.

Regardless, it's the offensive numbers that will guarentee Souray a big payday, either with the Habs or, as widely speculated, with another team, possibly one based in California where he can live and work closer to his young daughter, who lives with his ex-wife in Los Angeles.

Using McCabe as the comparable, Souray is likely to seek a similar deal (five years, $28.5 million) and will probably get it, if not from the Canadiens, then from somebody else.

That would seemingly be enough to perhaps convince GM Bob Gainey to consider jettisoning Souray by the deadline in hopes of a healthy return.

Hence the reason why Souray's name is featuring so prominently in recent rumor chatter. There's talk of the San Jose Sharks and Anaheim Ducks making a pitch for him, with names like Matt Carle, Joe Pavelski, Bobby Ryan and picks and prospects being kicked around.

I don't doubt that Gainey is receiving inquiries about Souray, but at the risk of this blowing up in my face, I'm not convinced that Gainey wants to move him.

At least not yet, anyway. While the trade deadline is fast approaching, Gainey could wait until the day itself before pulling the trigger. He might want to evaluate his club's performance over its next two or three games.

There's also the recent report from Sportsnet claiming Gainey not only won't trade Souray but will attempt to re-sign him.

I really like what Souray brings to the Habs offensive game, but I'm not thrilled over the prospect of paying $5.75 million per season to retain him.

I also have to figure that, if Gainey were receiving offers of Matt Carle, Joe Pavelski and a high pick from the Sharks, or Bobby Ryan, a pick and prospect from the Ducks, that he might've moved on one of those by now.

Quite frankly, I don't see the Sharks parting with those promising youngsters, even though GM Doug Wilson has been actively seeking an experienced puckmoving d-man throughout this season.

As for Anaheim, if Brian Burke is unwilling to part with his young players or the highly rated Ryan for rentals like Todd Bertuzzi or Keith Tkachuk, he's certainly not gonna part with them for a rental like Sheldon Souray.

None of this, of course, will keep Souray's name out of the rumor mill. All I'll say is that, barring a public declaration from Gainey, the Habs performance over their next two games might have some bearing on whether or not Souray gets traded by February 27th.

**UPDATE** Regarding Gainey's much-anticipated press conference, Habs Inside Out posted his comments. Suffice to say, I wouldn't expect a major deadline day swap by Monsieur Bob.

Eklund recently posted the names and potential destinations of several players whose names are popping up in the rumor mill. Here’s his list and my take. Enjoy!

Sopel to Ottawa. Given the Sens desire for more defensive depth that has some possibility, provided the already cap-squeezed Senators can move enough salary to fit in Sopel’s.

Sanderson to Vancouver, Nashville.  The Canucks tried the Sanderson experiment three years ago and it didn’t work out as well as hoped, so I doubt they’ll do a redux. Reports I’ve read out of Nashville suggest the Preds might seek an experienced blueliner.

Tucker to Detroit, Edmonton , St. Louis.  As long as Tucker’s sidelined and the Leafs have a shot at a playoff berth, he won’t be moving. If he did, I could see Detroit, but not Edmonton or St. Louis. The Oilers primary search right now is for a puckmoving blueliner, and if the Blues make a move, it’ll be for picks, prospects or young NHL players.

Zherdev to Montreal , Rangers.  The Rangers, I could see. Not the Habs, who need a scoring center, which Zherdev, a winger, isn’t.

Avery to Tampa , NY Rangers.  Again, the Rangers, I could see this for the grit he'd bring, but only after they've addressed their need for more scoring depth. Not Tampa Bay, as they’ve been long interested in more defensive depth (read: defenceman, defensive forward or goalie).

Leetch to Atlanta. He’s retired in all but word. I suspect if he were to play this season he would've made the decision much earlier than this.

Stuart to Ottawa , Edmonton , San Jose.  Yes to all three, although I also wouldn’t rule out the LA Kings, as I think Dean Lombardi, who drafted Stuart back when he was the Sharks GM, would like to land him.

Zhitnik to San Jose. Don’t see him moving anywhere. I think the Flyers  will hang onto him.

Knuble to Columbus. Ditto.

Hatcher to Detroit.  Why would the Wings want an aging, overpaid blueliner who hasn’t been the same since the new rules were introduced last season? Besides, the Wings primary need is for a scoring winger, not a defenseman.

Morrison to NY Rangers. The Canucks would probably shop him if they could get a quality center in return. The Rangers don’t have that to offer.

Gerber to Tampa. Given Gerber's performance this season, he wouldn't be a significant upgrade over Denis. Given the Bolts improvement over the past month, I don't them doing this.

In which I will occasionally analyse a rumor or two reported by "Eklund" on his Hockeybuzz.com website. 

Be advised that it's not my intent to trash Eklund, run him down or mock him, but merely to offer up my two cents worth. I'm well aware that he's a lightning rod for controversy and folks either love him or hate him. I'll leave that to others to debate.

My intent isn't to shoot the messenger, but merely to question certain rumors he reports.

Anyway, he reported Thursday of rumors of Brian Leetch possibly signing with the Edmonton Oilers, and of the Toronto Maple Leafs possibly having interest in Phoenix's Nick Boynton.

Regarding Leetch, I'm in agreement with Larry Brooks of the New York Post: he's not returning to action this season. I think Leetch has retired in all but word. Sure, he's a "name" but his best seasons are far behind him and he hasn't played an NHL game since April 2006.

I think his old Rangers teammate Kevin Lowe is more interested in Boston's Brad Stuart and former Oiler and current St. Louis Blue Eric Brewer.

As for Boynton, why? This simply doesn't make sense. The Leafs already have over $17 million tied up long-term in four blueliners (McCabe, Kaberle, Kubina and Gill). The last thing they need is another expensive ($2.95 million per season for two more seasons after this one) blueliner, particularly when their most obvious need is an offensive winger to play with Mats Sundin, and perhaps after that, someone who can stop pucks and make up for the Leafs defensive decificiencies better than Andrew Raycroft.

Yes, the Leafs defence corps needs more defensive "umph", but given what management has paid those four, they've left little wiggle room to upgrade. Forget moving Kubina or Gill, because nobody'll want 'em at their current salaries, and forget moving another forward, unless it's to get a better one back in return.  

An interesting point was raised this past Saturday on Hockey Night in Canada's intermission segment  "Satellite Hotstove" that a new trend of "trade and re-sign" could become prevalent in the NHL.

The panel noted that last season around this time the Pittsburgh Penguins and St. Louis Blues dealt forward Mark Recchi and Doug Weight respectively to the Carolina Hurricanes. Recchi and Weight were eligible for unrestricted free agency following the season and so conventional wisdom was that they were unlikely to re-sign with their former clubs, who thus dealt them rather than lose them for nothing. 

But after helping the Hurricanes win the 2006 Stanley Cup, Recchi and Weight did indeed re-sign with their former teams, rather than testing the UFA market for more lucrative contracts.

This season, a rumour has risen suggesting the woeful Philadelphia Flyers might trade team captain Peter Forsberg (providing he agrees to waive his no-trade clause) to a playoff contender but then re-sign him this summer as an unrestricted free agent.

It's also been speculated that Keith Tkachuk and Bill Guerin might go the same route with the rebuilding St. Louis Blues, accepting trades to potential Cup contenders but then re-signing with the Blues this summer.

Could this be the start of a trend? Possibly but it may not be a widespread one.  It seems that this could likely be used with veteran players whose best days are behind them, but still carry enough value to be of interest to potential Cup contenders seeking to bolster their rosters for the playoffs.

Still, it should be something to keep an eye on as the trade deadline approaches.

The Peter Forsberg trade rumors refuse to die. 

The Philadelphia media was abuzz Saturday with reports that almost a dozen teams have made trade inquiries of the Flyers for team captain Peter Forsberg.

It's unsuprising that there's so much interest in Forsberg, if one goes by his talent and the fact he's playing for the worst team in the NHL this season.

What is surprising, however, is the fact that these teams are apparently willing to accept damaged goods in a trade.

Despite his game-breaking skills, Forsberg has played at half-speed this season, plagued by pain in his surgically reconstructed right foot that has made skating very difficult, sending him on a seemingly endless quest this season for treatments, skate boots, and accessories to alleviate his problem.

Forsberg has repeatedly denied that he wants out of Philly, and as long as he declines to waive his "no-trade" clause he won't be going anywhere.

But there's growing speculation that he might accept a trade if the Flyers can get a good return, and that he'd leave with a "handshake deal" to re-sign with the club following this season, rather than test the UFA market. 

So, if you were a general manager looking for a first line center, would you make this trade? Would you trade away some promising young talent and draft picks and risk sacrificing your team's future for a quick fix player who's battling pain and might not even be available for every game and might not be playing at his best? A player who'll be gone by the summer?

I know I wouldn't. Would you, dear readers? Lemme know.

 

The Montreal Canadiens, who've sucked on toast over their last 12 games (4-8 record is ugly with a capital "UG"), placed forward Garth Murray on waivers today. If unclaimed Murray will be demoted to the Habs AHL affiliate in Hamiton, Ontario. 

Hat tip also to "Daniel" who e-mailed me prior to the start of Tuesday's Habs-Vancouver Canucks matchup noting that forward Sergei Samsonov and defenseman Craig Rivet were healthy scratches.

So what's up with Les Canadiens? Are they planning a big move here?

Unlikely. As always, the truth is usually far less glamorous or exciting.

The Habs have struggled big time of late, particularly offensively, so by exposing Murray to waivers they're making room to retain promising, energetic young center Maxim Lapierre, who's looked good in his recent call-ups with the team.

As for Samsonov and Rivet, they simply haven't played well of late. Head coach Guy Carbonneau, furious over his team's lack of effort in its last two games (an 8-3 pasting at the hands of the Ottawa Senators during "Hockey Day in Canada" on Saturday, followed by a lackluster 2-0 loss to the  Detroit Red Wings on Monday), is sending a message to his players that, regardless of  salary or status with the team, no one escapes punishment for crappy performances.

And given how crappy Samsonov and Rivet have played of late, why would any GM in his right mind wanna trade for them? Sammy's been an overpaid underachiever all season, while Rivet (an impending UFA this summer)simply hasn't played up to his usual steady, under-rated standards over the past month.

A month ago, Les Habs were one of the hottest teams in the league, at one point barely five points behind the Conference leading Sabres.

Now, they're 11 points back and in danger of sliding out of the top four teams in the Conference and possibly even out of playoff contention if this slide isn't checked soon.

It remains to be seen if Carbo's moves will stimulate his charges into playing more spirited hockey, or if this will only send them swooning further.

Yes, I'm harsh in my critiques of the Canadiens because they're my favourite team, this is my blog and I'll be as harsh with them as I please. So there, nyah...>:P

It’s been a while since I’ve heard a trade rumor reported in the media that made me laugh derisively out loud, but the following did just that.

I was watching Sportsnet’s Hockeycentral tonight, and the panel was discussing the latest speculations, when toward the end of the segment host Darren Millard almost sheepishly mentioned an internet rumor of the Colorado Avalanche supposedly discussing a potential trade with the Tampa Bay Lightning.

The supposed deal? Goalie Marc Denis and center Vincent Lecavalier to the Avs for goalie Jose Theodore and possibly another player.

Good thing I wasn’t drinking my Sidney Street Stout at that time or that would’ve resulted in a painful noser.

While I brayed with laughter,Millard's fellow panelists Bill Watters and Nick Kypreos were quick to dismiss this rumor leaving poor Millard looking more sheepish for having brought it up.

I’m not calling Millard stupid. He didn't cite it as a fact, wasn't suggesting this had any chance of happening, definitely didn’t look comfortable mentioning it and was left almost cringing after Watters and Kypreos were finished ripping it apart. I’m not shooting the messenger.

Millard isn’t stupid. The rumor is.

As Watters and Kypreos pointed out, Theodore simply hasn’t been playing well since last season. Montreal Canadiens GM Bob Gainey somehow enticed then-Avs GM Pierre Lacroix into acquiring Theodore last March, but apart from a few decent playoff games, the 2002 Vezina-Hart winner has shown no signs of returning to form.

This season, Theodore’s been outplayed by backup Peter Budaj, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Budaj takes over full time by March when the playoff races tighten up and every game becomes important. That'll leave the Avs with a $5.5 million backup riding the pine down the stretch.

It’s common knowledge the Lightning aren’t very pleased with Marc Denis poor performance since acquiring him last summer from Columbus, but you can bet what’s left of your Christmas turkey they won’t take a chance on a shaky Theodore and his hefty salary.

As for Lecavalier, even Watters and Kypreos don’t believe he (or Brad Richards or Martin St. Louis) will be going anywhere.

If the Avs want to be rid of Theodore, they’ll have to wait until June when they can buy out the remaining year of his salary at two-thirds its value.

Even without factoring in all the obvious salary cap issues such a trade would raise, this is most definitely the stupid trade rumor of the day, and the first really stupid one of the New Year.

The server problem's been fixed and spectorshockey.net is back in business, folks. I thank you for your patience. I'll leave the rumors from today that I posted earlier below.

MORE "NEDVED TO SENATORS".

OTTAWA SUN: Bruce Garrioch reports sources out of Philadelphia claim the Senators will claim centre Petr Nedved off re-entry waivers from the Flyers today. Should the Sens claim him only $600K of his salary will count against their cap as the Flyers will pick up the rest.

PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER: Tim Panaccio reports sources say the Senators claimed Nedved yesterday but the Senators had not comment.

Spector's Note: The Sens have until noon EDT today to claim Nedved. As I noted two days ago when this report first appeared this demonstrates there isn't much available or affordable for Sens GM John Muckler via trade. Claiming Nedved is an affordable gamble as the Sens obviously need depth at centre with Jason Spezza and Mike Fisher out with knee injuries.

FORSBERG WANTS OUT OF PHILLY?

NEW YORK POST: Larry Brooks recently reported a source claiming Philadelphia Flyers forward Peter Forsberg "has told confidantes that he is extremely unhappy and uncomfortable operating as captain of the Flyers". Brooks also claims a source saying "the Flyers' room has become increasingly dominated by neophytes who somehow believe their winning pedigree as juniors entitles them to lead the NHL squad."

Spector's Note: These "Forsberg wants out" rumours have been floating around since November, despite his denials. Forsberg is likely more concerned with getting healthy than in bailing on the Flyers. As for the status of the Flyers room, it's more likely that the absence of key players due to injury could account for "neophytes" having more of a voice right now.

DUCKS SHOPPING FOR DEFENCEMAN.

LOS ANGELES TIMES: Eric Stephens reports Anaheim Ducks GM Brian Burke said the loss of Chris Pronger and Francois Beauchemin for four weeks to had him shopping around for a defenceman. Potentially available d-men like Phoenix's Nick Boynton and St. Louis's Eric Brewer come with salaries Burke doesn't wish to pay. "We're going to see if we can get someone that fits," Burke said. "We have to make sure that we don't use up too much cap room either. We want to make sure we have some flexibility for later in the season." Burke isn't considering UFA blueliner Brian Leetch.

Spector's Note: Hat tip to "CBGB". To get the quality blueliner to fill in for Pronger and Beachemin could cost Burke in both salary and players. I can understand the desire for flexibility later in the season but if the club slumps due to these losses it could force him into action. For now, the Ducks will likely soldier on.

I can certainly tell that the lack of trade activity this early in the season is having an effect on some rumormongers when they start pulling trade ideas out of their butts that make absolutely no sense.

One that refuses to die is the cyberspace suggestion the Pittsburgh Penguins could/should shop rookie sensation Evgeni Malkin either by the trade deadline or at the June 2007 NHL entry draft.

The reasons for these suggestions/speculations are varied.

- Malkin supposedly doesn’t wanna play second fiddle to Sidney Crosby, even though the two have meshed well as teammates and linemates despite the language barrier.

Malkin obviously loves playing with “Sid the Kid”, but that hasn’t fully stopped this rumor as I still get the occasional e-mail from a reader claiming they'd either heard or read otherwise.

- The Penguins can’t afford to re-sign him, Crosby, Marc-Andre Fleury, Jordan Staal, Ryan Whitney and Colby Armstrong so they’ll move Malkin for an affordable return.

Never mind the fact that the Pens are presently under new ownership and the future of the franchise depends on getting a new arena in Pittsburgh or relocating the club elsewhere. Either way, the Pens so-called budget problems could become much ado about nothing, at least when it comes to re-signing their talented youngsters over the next two-three years.

- The Penguins need more depth and Malkin could fetch three or four or five players, even though such a move would seriously gut the depth of most NHL teams plus raise serious cap issues for the Pens.

What the originators of these fantasies continually overlook is the fact the Penguins control Malkin’s rights under the current CBA until age 27 or seven completed NHL seasons, whichever comes first.

Even if he were to hold out for big bucks, the Pens don’t have to trade him. They can let him sit on the sidelines for as long as it takes until he gets back under contract.

Sure, the Pens need more depth right now but what's to say they won't have that depth in two years time? Say, more than enough depth to cover off Malkin's absence - and with youngsters like Crosby, Staal and Armstrong, I'd say they've got enough right there - should he stage a protracted holdout.

Don’t factor in a threat of playing in Russia under such a holdout, since his cloak-and-dagger departure from his former Russian club pretty much rules out the possibility of such a return as they’d still hold his playing rights in the Russian Super League.

So enough of the silly fantasies of a Malkin trade in the near future. It simply isn’t gonna happen. 

-The Chicago Blackhawks.  GM Dale Tallon continues to shop for an scoring center or winger. He recently admitted speaking with 16 general managers this past Wednesday. He's not willing to move Brent Seabrook or Duncan Keith but Jim Vandermeer or Lasse Kukkonen may be available. They're not enough to land a scoring winger but perhaps Tallon could sweeten the pot or possible get a third team involved. With the Christmas trade freeze set to begin on December 19th, and with the 'Hawks still incredibly in the playoff hunt despite their rash of injuries, Tallon might try to pull the trigger on something. 

- John LeClair. He's done in Pittsburgh, having passed unclaimed through waivers, but there's plenty of rumblings that several clubs could be interested in him should the Penguins recall him, where he'd have to pass through re-entry waivers. Interested teams would then only have to pick up half his salary, and there's lots of talk the Flyers might try to bring him back to Philly. Waiver claims usually are based on the lowest seeded teams getting first crack so the Flyers have a legit shot at him if they're indeed interested, and don't rule out the Blackhawks making a grab. LeClair will return to the NHL this season, just not as a Penguin.

- Colorado Avalanche. The long-awaited debut of Jordan Leopold this weekend leaves the Avs with one blueliner too many, generating rumors they may shop one. The Denver Post claimed a couple of teams had spoken to Avs GM Francois Giguere, possibly for Ossi Vaananen. A deal might come within the next two weeks.

Just as a reminder, folks, the NHL Christmas Trade Freeze is from December 19 -27 2006. 

We haven't seen much trade activity throughout November and with December now fast approaching it appears more likely the first major trade of the 2006-07 season won't be happening this month.

It's still possible something big could happen this week; after all, the Joe Thornton trade occurred on the night of November 30th, 2005. Still, I'm not optimistic that we'll see a similar blockbuster (heck, ANY blockbuster) by November 30th, 2006.

With the last date of the Christmas Trade Freeze being 60 days from the February 27th trade deadline, perhaps we'll begin to see some significant player movement in December.  Most teams will have played between 30-35 games by December 19th and that could make some salaries more affordable to move.

If not, we're all but certain to see such movement pick up in January and increase significantly throughout February. It'll become clear by that point which teams won't be making the playoffs and that could lead to salary dumping trades with playoff contenders seeking to bolster their rosters.