HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Proposal: Original Six Three-Way: NYR/CHI/BOS (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1197671)

Zuccarello Awesome* 05-28-2012 02:22 AM

Original Six Three-Way: NYR/CHI/BOS
 
Rangers get Patrick Kane and Frolik

Bruins get Stalberg, Del Zotto, and Brian Boyle

Blackhawks get Tim Thomas and Gaborik


In detail:

Rangers give up Gaborik, Del Zotto, Boyle for Kane and Frolik

Bruins give up Thomas for Del Zotto, Boyle, Stalberg

Hawks give up Kane and Frolik for Thomas and Gaborik




At first glance, Boston gets fleeced. But the way I see it, Rask is their number one for the long-term, and getting back a 21 yr old top-4 offensive defenseman, a 6'7" third line center, and a 6'3" LW who are both young and have room to improve is a very good return for a 38 year old goalie.

The Hawks don't lose any production going from Kane to Gaborik, at least not in the regular season. Gaborik and Hossa have magical chemistry. The salary difference is more than compensated by dumping Frolik's salary. He's underachieved big-time. And they also get a proven clutch number 1 goalie that they've been missing since their cup run.

The Rangers get a dynamic multi-dimensional playmaking winger for one-dimensional Gaborik. Kane is on a better contract, is younger, and is a proven playoff performer. For those upgrades, they give up DZ (who they can afford to lose with McD, Staal, Girardi as their top 3, and especially if they add Schultz or Suter and/or Sauer recovers fully) and Boston kid, Brian Boyle.

t3hg00se 05-28-2012 02:24 AM

i dont see why the blackhawks do this lol

Zuccarello Awesome* 05-28-2012 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t3hg00se (Post 50233701)
i dont see why the blackhawks do this lol

You may be right, but a lot of their fans think a number 1 goalie should be their top priority this offseason. There has been talk that they might even be interested in Luongo. Thats a horrible contract. I figured they'd be just as interested in Thomas who has accomplished and proven much more vs Luongo who is a head case who wilts in big games and has one of the worst contracts in the NHL.

With that said, I think Chicago will obviously try a much simpler short-term fix like going after Vokoun on a 1-2 year deal. But if he signs elsewhere and there aren't many options, this could be a consideration, however unlikely.

Ryan McDonut 05-28-2012 02:29 AM

why would the hawks want to give up kane?

BlessThisMess513 05-28-2012 03:22 AM

Can't imagine Chicago would want another scorer.

n8 05-28-2012 03:39 AM

aaaaaand cue all the wacky Gaborik proposals. I think my one from last summer for Dustin Brown, Brayden Schenn, and a 1st was pretty sweet! Gaborik did have a pretty good season though. Obviously his post-season was 'concerning'

wolfgaze 05-28-2012 03:50 AM

It begins...

LordsCup* 05-28-2012 03:51 AM

Why in the hell would the Hawks do this?

BlueshirtBlitz 05-28-2012 04:12 AM

This is awful.

Kane One 05-28-2012 04:16 AM

Boston needs to add more to Chicago, IMO.

FultonReed 05-28-2012 06:31 AM

the only reason i could see Chicago ever taking Gaborik is to put him on a line with Hossa. otherwise... no.

turcotte8 05-28-2012 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordsCup (Post 50234459)
Why in the hell would the Hawks do this?

Even better question, why the hell would we do this? Gaborik, Del Zotto, and Boyle for Kane and Frolik? Is the OP joking?

jas 05-28-2012 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by turcotte8 (Post 50235349)
Even better question, why the hell would we do this? Gaborik, Del Zotto, and Boyle for Kane and Frolik? Is the OP joking?


The OP is determined to trade both of them. Fortunately for everyone involved, these proposals (like many others we will see over the course of the off-season), will remain the domain of the HF Ranger board and have no resemblance to what will actually take place. Your responsibility as a poster is to point, stare and laugh at everyone of them.

Kreider Typical 05-28-2012 07:54 AM

multi-season 40 goal scorer with the rangers alone. hit the 50 goal mark in minn and a 21 year old who hit 40 points on defense and looks capable of being a regular 50 point guy AND one of their best shutdown forwards...for a 30 goal scorer and a guy who hasn't scored more than 20 in years.

that makes sense :rollseyes: .....

not to mention thomas being past his prime and trading for him when he's a UFA in a year..

eco's bones 05-28-2012 08:00 AM

The idea the OP puts forward that 'at first glance Boston gets fleeced' is patently ridiculous. Thomas is about 35 years old. He doesn't have a lot of years left as a top goaltender. I wouldn't move Del Zotto for him one for one. No ****ing way. Even if we didn't have Lundqvist. And I'm not nearly as big a MDZ fan as some around her.

Would the Hawks move Kane? Would the Rangers even want Kane. Kane's had a lot of off ice incidents. Kane is a tremendous offensive talent but how committed a player is this guy? He's a more consistently productive version of Semin as far as I can tell. In other respects he's lackadaisical in his defensive responsibilities like Semin and pretty much a goof off on and off the ice which doesn't fit the way the Rangers under Tortorella do things. FWIW Avery was less of a distraction than Kane would promise to be and Avery was a more responsible player on the ice than Kane will ever hope to be.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* 05-28-2012 08:07 AM

This thread is going to give bern multiples when he stumbles upon it.

SnowblindNYR 05-28-2012 08:12 AM

Am I the only one that hates trade proposals? At least 9 out of 10 of them are ridiculous.

N9Y4R 05-28-2012 08:16 AM

Not that this will happen, but... Nobody would be shocked if Chicago tried to move Kane this summer, he has a chance to party himself right out of the NHL if he doesn'tget his head out of his arse. Chi is certainly growing tired of his shenanigans. That being said he is a 23yo top 10 offensive talent. Bos and Chi do not need NYR involved to work a trade.

And Gaborik has never scored 50. 3 time 40g guy, 42 career high.

jas 05-28-2012 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion (Post 50236045)
This thread is going to give bern multiples when he stumbles upon it.

He's working on a way to get Taylor Hall involved as we speak.

Rangers4Life74 05-28-2012 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jas (Post 50236165)
He's working on a way to get Taylor Hall involved as we speak.

without giving up Kreider

Boom Boom Geoffrion* 05-28-2012 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jas (Post 50236165)
He's working on a way to get Taylor Hall involved as we speak.

Awesome :D

chosen 05-28-2012 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eco's bones (Post 50235951)
The idea the OP puts forward that 'at first glance Boston gets fleeced' is patently ridiculous. Thomas is about 35 years old. He doesn't have a lot of years left as a top goaltender. I wouldn't move Del Zotto for him one for one. No ****ing way. Even if we didn't have Lundqvist. And I'm not nearly as big a MDZ fan as some around her.

Would the Hawks move Kane? Would the Rangers even want Kane. Kane's had a lot of off ice incidents. Kane is a tremendous offensive talent but how committed a player is this guy? He's a more consistently productive version of Semin as far as I can tell. In other respects he's lackadaisical in his defensive responsibilities like Semin and pretty much a goof off on and off the ice which doesn't fit the way the Rangers under Tortorella do things. FWIW Avery was less of a distraction than Kane would promise to be and Avery was a more responsible player on the ice than Kane will ever hope to be.

Yeah. Avery responsible and Kane not.

Avery couldn't crack one of the least offensively gifted teams in the NHL, showed himself to be a petulant brat on many occasions, but somehow he is in any way worthy of being held up as more responsible than Kane.

I'd trade Gaborik or Richards for Kane in a bleeping heartbeat. I wouldn't trade Mitchell for Avery. I wouldn't trade the Rangers last pick in next year's draft for Avery. I wouldn't accept Avery as a gift. Every NHL GM feels similarly.

Blueshirt Believer 05-28-2012 11:19 AM

Personally, I don't think Kane would work here at all. Probably wouldn't mesh with Torts attitude wise.

Stylistically, he doesn't fit our system either. He is a puck possession player who needs to be surrounded with other players who can move the puck.

He isn't big and he doesn't forecheck or play the boards all that well.

Kane is young and can grow with us, plus he is more versatile than Gabs but I don't see a fit here at all.

Stephen 05-28-2012 11:21 AM

Why do the Bruins give up so little and get so much in return?

chosen 05-28-2012 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blueshirt Believer (Post 50239737)
Personally, I don't think Kane would work here at all. Probably wouldn't mesh with Torts attitude wise.

Then screw Torts' attitude. This team needs offensive creativity, not more muckers.

Torts did a great job with a team missing finishers. Great coaches adjust to personnel. They don't shoehorn personnel into a system.

This year's team was tough as nails to play against and played great defense, but eventually ya have to score some goals. Even Lamoriello understands this. That is why he is a truly great GM.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:12 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.