HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Chicago Blackhawks (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   Proposal: Viktor Stalberg + Marcus Kruger = _______ ? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1112781)

Recoil 02-20-2012 05:01 PM

Viktor Stalberg + Marcus Kruger = _______ ?
 
I figured I'd toss this out here. On another board the idea of trading Viktor Stalberg came up, and whether or not it would be a good idea was the topic. There are some positives for trading him:

1) Selling while his value is high
2) Low Cap hit would be of value to a team acquiring him for a playoff push
3) Fast, versatile player also drives his value up.

The negatives are, mainly, the fact that he is way out performing his contract here, and has played well on several lines means he has value to THIS team. I tend to think that even though he would make a very good piece to dangle in front of a desperate team or two, given his production, speed and cap hit, is that we need to get ENOUGH value back on him this season and next. Yes, we have guys like Morin, Saad, McNeil, etc. A couple of those kids, however, are probably still a good 2 years away from being able to be a solid contributor in the NHL. So could we get enough back on just Stalberg alone? Probably not, but if we bundle in a draft pick, or....

add in Marcus Kruger.

Adding Kruger to a trade with Stalberg gets a team two pieces. A fast, physical forward, who has been putting up some good numbers. It also gives them a young "for the future" defensive minded center for a teams third line.

Would those two together be enough to pry lose a serious #2C from a team? If so, who could we get?

And as to why I'm putting those two together, Kruger, as has been discussed, may or may not be a good fit for this team long term. A lot here agree he's not an ideal #2C today and may never be. Could he be a good future #3C? Potentially. But RIGHT NOW if he can be moved with Stalberg for a real #2C, then we need to consider it.

1) We have a solid #2C for Hossa/Sharp/Morin (if called up)/Hayes/whomever
2) Bolland can play his #3C for the postseason and the next two years
3) We do have other Centers in our system: Pirri, Kevin Hayes, and McNeil.

If I'm a GM, I think its worth looking at. What do you guys think, and most importantly, who do you think we could get in return for them?

brtriad 02-20-2012 05:04 PM

I still don't understand why these two players are brought up in the same sentence.

Sevanston 02-20-2012 05:10 PM

Viktor Stalberg + Marcus Kruger = The Swedish Fish - Niklas Hjalmarsson

Bubba88 02-20-2012 05:14 PM

why not just keep both and be happy we have quality players for this low salary this and next year? Why should we do other teams any favors while trading away our best depth guys?

Frolik and Bickell are to blame - even Krüger has more points then these 2 have

Recoil 02-20-2012 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brtriad (Post 44516097)
I still don't understand why these two players are brought up in the same sentence.

LOL. Well, I was talking about how they would work in a trade deadline move as part of a package. I wasn't trolling Bubba88. Honest.

BBSeabs27 02-20-2012 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubba88 (Post 44516569)
why not just keep both and be happy we have quality players for this low salary this and next year? Why should we do other teams any favors while trading away our best depth guys?

Frolik and Bickell are to blame - even Krüger has more points then these 2 have

yeah i agree. Kruger still has too much potential to know for sure what he could turn out to be. As I learned recently he's been compared to Zetterberg. Really? You wanna trade a Zetterberg?

VS, in a similar situation, I think he is still going to get a little better. He just needs to work on his hands more.

Recoil 02-20-2012 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBSeabs27 (Post 44517387)
yeah i agree. Kruger still has too much potential to know for sure what he could turn out to be. As I learned recently he's been compared to Zetterberg. Really? You wanna trade a Zetterberg?

LOL! Really?!?! Where do people find this stuff? :laugh:

HawksFan74 02-20-2012 06:23 PM

Kruger and Zetterberg should never be uttered in the same sentence.

Recoil 02-20-2012 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawksFan74 (Post 44519961)
Kruger and Zetterberg should never be uttered in the same sentence.

Probably from the same person who said HJalmarsson was remenicient of an early Lidstrom. :laugh:

Back on topic though, as far as who we could get in return for a Stalberg + Kruger package, Grabovski is certainly one option. Although I'd hope we can get someone with a year or two on their deal at least, versus just a rental. If it's a rental, this isn't a trade I would propose. If we think it is someone we can offer an extension to though, that might be OK.

HawksFan74 02-20-2012 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recoil (Post 44520105)
Probably from the same person who said HJalmarsson was remenicient of an early Lidstrom. :laugh:

Back on topic though, as far as who we could get in return for a Stalberg + Kruger package, Grabovski is certainly one option. Although I'd hope we can get someone with a year or two on their deal at least, versus just a rental. If it's a rental, this isn't a trade I would propose. If we think it is someone we can offer an extension to though, that might be OK.

I really don't think other teams see value in Kruger at this point. It would be great to get Grab but you're giving up two guys on your roster to get one. Who is going to step up at wing? I am record for dumping Kruger for an upgrade. Frolik would be great as well but the Hawks would have to throw in some picks.

Recoil 02-20-2012 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawksFan74 (Post 44520391)
I really don't think other teams see value in Kruger at this point. It would be great to get Grab but you're giving up two guys on your roster to get one. Who is going to step up at wing? I am record for dumping Kruger for an upgrade. Frolik would be great as well but the Hawks would have to throw in some picks.

Well, there are two things in regards to this:

1) You don't move two guys like Kruger / Stalberg, who are young, unless you are confident you can sign Grabovski to a number that fits in with your plans. This part is a big IF. If he is only a rental, no way you do this.

2) You would need to count on bringing up a Morin for the remainder of the season and let him get his legs / experience in the NHL. Keeping Hayes up would be a given at this point.

theaub 02-20-2012 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBSeabs27 (Post 44517387)
yeah i agree. Kruger still has too much potential to know for sure what he could turn out to be. As I learned recently he's been compared to Zetterberg. Really? You wanna trade a Zetterberg?

Sounds like we should trade him for future Datsyuk, Nikolai Kulemin.

BBSeabs27 02-20-2012 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theaub (Post 44521737)
Sounds like we should trade him for future Datsyuk, Nikolai Kulemin.

Datsyuk is stretching it. But Kruger is still only 21, he has plenty of time to develop into a Zetterberg-esque player.

RomersWorld* 02-20-2012 08:06 PM

Zetterberg is a Conn Smythe winner and one of the best playoff performers for the past 10 years. No way Kruger comes close to his defense or offense.

If be extremely happy if Kruger was a Valtteri Filppula.

LandofLincoln 02-20-2012 08:16 PM

lose them in different trades not together
 
Stalberg + Kruger = the Blackhawks probably losing in that trade.... I don't want a 4million rental for guys that have low cap hits and a decent upside.

Together probably worth a #11-#18 overall pick and I wouldn't want a 1st round pick....I like them and value them more than what they are worth.

I think the Hawks packaging Stalberg and a 2nd rounder for a defenseman is a possibility. A top 3-4 defenseman who the BlackHawks could have 3-4 years. Send Kruger to Colombus with a 3rd rounder and get Vinny Prospal to fill Stalberg's position.

Marotte Marauder 02-20-2012 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBSeabs27 (Post 44523737)
Datsyuk is stretching it. But Kruger is still only 21, he has plenty of time to develop into a Zetterberg-esque player.

Please stop with this nonsense. The only thing they have in common is both were late round draft picks. :help:

The difference is that the world is a lot smaller now than in 1999 when Hank was drafted.

Sevanston 02-20-2012 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recoil (Post 44520105)
Probably from the same person who said HJalmarsson was remenicient of an early Lidstrom. :laugh:

That person would be Scotty Bowman.

He tends to over-exaggerate these days. He's also compared Leddy to Phil Housley.

Also, Kruger has been compared to Zetterberg his entire career. We just went over this in another thread sometime in the past week. Both him and Z's former coach (can't remember the name) compared the two, saying that Kruger is further ahead than Z was at Kruger's age. Kruger himself has said he tries to model his game after Zetterberg. He's not there yet, but it's his first full year in the NHL. Give him some time and we'll see where he ends up.

People are really enjoying beating up on a 21 year old kid who's playing solid NHL hockey.

Marotte Marauder 02-20-2012 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sevanston (Post 44528473)
That person would be Scotty Bowman.

He tends to over-exaggerate these days. He's also compared Leddy to Phil Housley.

Also, Kruger has been compared to Zetterberg his entire career. We just went over this in another thread sometime in the past week. Both him and Z's former coach (can't remember the name) compared the two, saying that Kruger is further ahead than Z was at Kruger's age. Kruger himself has said he tries to model his game after Zetterberg. He's not there yet, but it's his first full year in the NHL. Give him some time and we'll see where he ends up.

People are really enjoying beating up on a 21 year old kid who's playing solid NHL hockey.

Great idea comparing Z and Kruger, they don't even play the same position, Z has been a scorer since day 1, Kruger not so much.

Remember Frolik? He was Baby Jagr, also not so much.

HockeySensible 02-20-2012 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder (Post 44534207)
Great idea comparing Z and Kruger, they don't even play the same position, Z has been a scorer since day 1, Kruger not so much.

Remember Frolik? He was Baby Jagr, also not so much.

What does their position have to do with anything? If there was a carbon copy of Patrick Kane who played LW, is the comparison of playing style and ability uncomparable because he plays the left side, and not the right? They're all forwards. As far as Zetterberg, he joined the NHL with a year more experience than Kruger (being a year older) and stepped into a larger role on the team, from day 1.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sevanston (Post 44528473)
That person would be Scotty Bowman.

He tends to over-exaggerate these days. He's also compared Leddy to Phil Housley.

Also, Kruger has been compared to Zetterberg his entire career. We just went over this in another thread sometime in the past week. Both him and Z's former coach (can't remember the name) compared the two, saying that Kruger is further ahead than Z was at Kruger's age. Kruger himself has said he tries to model his game after Zetterberg. He's not there yet, but it's his first full year in the NHL. Give him some time and we'll see where he ends up.

People are really enjoying beating up on a 21 year old kid who's playing solid NHL hockey.

It's sad, but at the same time.. I'm so going to enjoy bringing up threads like these in a couple years. Carry on folks!

Chris Hansen 02-20-2012 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder (Post 44534207)
Great idea comparing Z and Kruger, they don't even play the same position, Z has been a scorer since day 1, Kruger not so much.

Remember Frolik? He was Baby Jagr, also not so much.

Not that it matters, but they are both centers. Same position.

Bubba88 02-21-2012 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RomersWorld (Post 44525399)
Zetterberg is a Conn Smythe winner and one of the best playoff performers for the past 10 years. No way Kruger comes close to his defense or offense.

If be extremely happy if Kruger was a Valtteri Filppula.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder (Post 44526411)
Please stop with this nonsense. The only thing they have in common is both were late round draft picks. :help:

The difference is that the world is a lot smaller now than in 1999 when Hank was drafted.

Sharp was Sharp at the age of 21
Datsyuk was Datsyuk at the age of 21
Zetterberg was Zetterberg at the age of 21


back then, we all knew that Sharp will be a constant 30+ goal scorer; Datsyuk the best Two Way player of the World; Zetterberg a 80+ Two Way player that wins a Conn Smyhte?

do I really need to search for more?


nobody here says that Krüger will end up as a guy like Zetterberg, but when one of the best coaches around the world trained both and he says that Krüger is ahead of Zetterberg at the same age, it is true. This doesn't mean he will end up better than him or anything else. All this says is that Krüger age 19 > Zetterberg age 19

Marotte Marauder 02-21-2012 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubba88 (Post 44543521)

nobody here says that Krüger will end up as a guy like Zetterberg, some here (BBSeabs) already think he is Hank, but when one of the best coaches around the world trained both and he says that Krüger is ahead of Zetterberg at the same age, it is true -coaches say a lot of things, not always true and not always for the right reasons. This doesn't mean he will end up better than him or anything else. All this says is that Krüger age 19 > Zetterberg age 19

Why don't we compare Zeterberg and Kruger at age 20? Because it invalidates any comparison?

I can remember 100s of players coming up who were the next coming of... or were even better than so and so at the same age. It is very difficult to maintain that trajectory over a longer period of time. As we see, if we believe (and I don't) Kruger was better than Zetterberg at age 19, he has fallen behind at age 20 and 21. I certainly expect the gap to widen, not narrow.

PPQB 02-21-2012 08:41 AM

The same guys suggesting we trade Stalberg and Kruger would be the same guys complaining we traded them after Sharp or Bolland go down with an injury. These 2 are worth way more to the team now and going forward than anything an xbox GM thinks he can get in a package deal for them.

Bubba88 02-21-2012 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder (Post 44547675)
Why don't we compare Zeterberg and Kruger at age 20? Because it invalidates any comparison?

I can remember 100s of players coming up who were the next coming of... or were even better than so and so at the same age. It is very difficult to maintain that trajectory over a longer period of time. As we see, if we believe (and I don't) Kruger was better than Zetterberg at age 19, he has fallen behind at age 20 and 21. I certainly expect the gap to widen, not narrow.

when did I ever compare him to Z?

Krüger plays the same style Zetterberg plays. Will he ever be as good as Z? I doubt it, but nobody knows what will happen.


But Nielsen wasn't wrong. Krüger is a solid Top9 Player that will only get better

AbeLincolnsGhost 02-21-2012 04:07 PM

People keep mentioning we should sell high on Stalberg, but that assumes that his value is never going to be where it is now (not to mention potential for it to rise.) I think it would be silly to trade a player who is showing that he can be a good piece just because this is the first time he has shown what he can be. He isn't automatically going to go back to being the player people hated once the season ends.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:30 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.