HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Chicago Blackhawks (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   Speculation: Marc Andre Fleury to Hawks at draft (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1201749)

coldsteelonice84 06-04-2012 10:52 AM

Marc Andre Fleury to Hawks at draft
 
The addition of Vokoun leads me to believe Fleury is on the move. They may have soured on him after these last playoffs. I'd love the move. Fleury is the best in the league athletically and would be a great fit for this team and offense first style. Crawford would likely go the other way and I've always thought Vokoun would be the perfect mentor for Crawford as they play the same positional style so that makes sense too. Obviously we'd be giving up more than just Crawford.

I'd guess:

Stalberg
Saad
Crawford

Hopefully we could keep Saad but I think the above deal gets it done and does a lot for Pittsburgh. Obviously, we get a real No. 1 so it helps us a lot too. Gotta give to get.

HawksFan74 06-04-2012 10:53 AM

Dude, did you watch him in the playoffs?

coldsteelonice84 06-04-2012 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawksFan74 (Post 50492597)
Dude, did you watch him in the playoffs?

Yeah, I did. He was awful. His team was also quite awful. It is what it is. He made two Cups in a row and won one too.

clydesdale line 06-04-2012 11:01 AM

Would love to see Bowman make a bigger deal with Staal involved as well. Fleury might be overrated, but still is one of the better goaltenders in the league. Love his athleticism behind the net. I would think TB/Yzerman would give them a call first. I doubt PIT trades him though.

DisgruntledHawkFan 06-04-2012 11:03 AM

If we're moving pieces with Crawford, I'd hope a goalie that isn't a question mark making a bunch of money isn't coming back.

UsernameWasTaken 06-04-2012 11:10 AM

If we're in the market for an overpriced and mentally fragile goalie, i'd prefer Luongo.

No Fun Shogun 06-04-2012 11:12 AM

I'll believe it when I see it.

MurrayBannerman 06-04-2012 11:12 AM

God no.

TorMenT 06-04-2012 11:13 AM

Fleury would cost more than Crawford, and who even knows if he's an upgrade. To acquire him would also cost us more than just Crawford. So that's already 2 losses (higher cap hit, loss of other pieces). Based on his playoffs performance this year, I'm not sure if he's even a better goalie at this point.

Cullksinikers 06-04-2012 11:20 AM

I don't even think he's going to be available. Plus, he was awful in the playoffs. He's bad and not available.

IU Hawks fan 06-04-2012 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UsernameWasTaken (Post 50493293)
If we're in the market for an overpriced and mentally fragile goalie, i'd prefer Luongo.

I sadly agree. Fleury is ****, IMO.

rick hawk 06-04-2012 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorMenT (Post 50493409)
Fleury would cost more than Crawford, and who even knows if he's an upgrade. To acquire him would also cost us more than just Crawford. So that's already 2 losses (higher cap hit, loss of other pieces). Based on his playoffs performance this year, I'm not sure if he's even a better goalie at this point.

Right on. Adding Stahlberg and Saad to the deal makes it really horrible for the Hawks. I'd consider Fleury for crawford even based on some good years in Fleury's past but no more than that. I don't know why Bowman couldn't get in on a deal like the Vokoun one. Other teams address their needs and get better. Bowman sits and waits...

Cullksinikers 06-04-2012 11:24 AM

Oh, snap. I thought coldsteel was just throwing a goalie proposal out there. Pittsburgh is either going to keep going with Fleury and have a very reliable backup if he ***** the bed or is going to roll with Vokoun as the starter.

Cullksinikers 06-04-2012 11:26 AM

Also, if we're going to make a trade with Pittsburgh, let's go after Staal. I would like to think we're kicking the tires on another goaltender, but I don't think MAF is the right solution given his atrocious playoff performance and big contract.

DayNah 06-04-2012 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UsernameWasTaken (Post 50493293)
If we're in the market for an overpriced and mentally fragile goalie, i'd prefer Luongo.

You're out of your mind.

So funny how quickly people forget the great things someone has done and only remember a **** year. I'd take Fleury in a heartbeat.

Sevanston 06-04-2012 11:38 AM

Fleury for Crawford is a lateral move.

Cullksinikers 06-04-2012 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DayNah (Post 50494343)
You're out of your mind.

So funny how quickly people forget the great things someone has done and only remember a **** year. I'd take Fleury in a heartbeat.

So, are you on the "keep Crawford" bandwagon?

I mean, he did damn well in the playoffs against Vancouver and was awful this year. No one on this board talks about his fairly solid start, just his awful season in 2011-12.

Cullksinikers 06-04-2012 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sevanston (Post 50494415)
Fleury for Crawford is a lateral move.

Agreed if we get the playoff version of MAF. We also lose cap space in an unnecessary fashion.

coldsteelonice84 06-04-2012 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cullksinikers (Post 50493929)
Also, if we're going to make a trade with Pittsburgh, let's go after Staal. I would like to think we're kicking the tires on another goaltender, but I don't think MAF is the right solution given his atrocious playoff performance and big contract.

What about Kane for Staal and Fleury? Hey, I don't want to move Kane but if the return was strong and helped us overcome Bowman's idiocy (not bringing in a good cheap goalie), then it may be the only way the team improves.

Martini* 06-04-2012 11:46 AM

The OP has done nothing but spam useless threads that contradict.

Time to push the button.

Cullksinikers 06-04-2012 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 (Post 50494685)
What about Kane for Staal and Fleury? Hey, I don't want to move Kane but if the return was strong and helped us overcome Bowman's idiocy (not bringing in a good cheap goalie), then it may be the only way the team improves.

Absolutely not.

You either trade Sharp for Staal and a guy like Tangradi or trade Bolland, Morin, and a couple first-round picks. After the second deal, you could sign a third line center like Moore instead of having Kruger in the top-nine.

UsernameWasTaken 06-04-2012 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DayNah (Post 50494343)
You're out of your mind.

So funny how quickly people forget the great things someone has done and only remember a **** year. I'd take Fleury in a heartbeat.

I don't know that Fleury has done all these great things. He's always been overrated...and lucky to be on a talented team. Luongo is better than Fleury IMO, except for age and contract.

Hawkaholic 06-04-2012 11:58 AM

No thanks.

Judrix 06-04-2012 12:02 PM

just looked at his career #'s on NHL.com...

HELL NO

DayNah 06-04-2012 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cullksinikers (Post 50494455)
So, are you on the "keep Crawford" bandwagon?

I mean, he did damn well in the playoffs against Vancouver and was awful this year. No one on this board talks about his fairly solid start, just his awful season in 2011-12.

I'm fine with giving Crawford another chance. Yes he sucked ass this year, no one is questioning that. There's been a lot of goaltenders that have off years, it happens. If he starts to **** the bed again then I'd have no problem with shipping him off. If I had the choice of Crawford or Fleury, I'm taking Fleury by a long shot.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12 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.