HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Proposal: Phi - mtl (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1239965)

Scuba-Steve 07-31-2012 11:18 PM

Phi - mtl
 
To Philly :

- Andrei Markov

- 2nd round MTL 2013 ( conditional if Markov plays less than 40 games in 12-13 )


To Montreal :

- Scott Laughton

- 1st round PHI 2013 ( conditional if Markov play more than 60 games in 12-13 )



The Flyers need a 1st pairing defensemen and this is a low risk / high reward deal for them . They are already stacked on offense so losing Laughton wouldn't hurt them that much . The Habs are rebuilding and that deal would help them going in that way .

LatvianTwist 07-31-2012 11:25 PM

Don't see them giving up Laughton. Read makes more sense for Both sides, as he's a bottom 6 center for Montreal which they could use, and is less important to the Flyers.

That said, don't think Montreal wants to move Markov.

Pierre Dagenais 07-31-2012 11:34 PM

No way...

If Markov plays 60+ games then he is worth more than Laughton + a 1st

tsujimoto74 07-31-2012 11:37 PM

There is absolutely no reason for Montreal to do this. Unless they're unhealthily invested in Philadelphia's success.

hockeyguy 08-01-2012 12:01 AM

i think the flyers would be hesitant to move a first for an aging defenseman that hasnt played more than 10 games the last 2 years

Vikke 08-01-2012 12:03 AM

There are better D-men to be had for that package. A lot healthier ones, too.

BlueMapleDawg 08-01-2012 12:10 AM

Terrible for the Flyers. Pretty much giving up two 1st round picks for Markov? Is that a f***ing joke?

Markov is donezo. Hate to break it to you Habs fans.

I can't believe there are Habs fans who wouldn't make this trade.

Krishna 08-01-2012 12:12 AM

65 games for markov in the last 3 years?

We'll pass

LyricalLyricist 08-01-2012 12:21 AM

I understand the injury concerns, but you're only giving up the 1st IF markov plays 60+ games. So doesn't that mean the injury is irrelevant at that point? That being said, it's not worth it as there's still an initial risk that laughton will be traded for say 5 games of markov.

Scuba-Steve 08-01-2012 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist (Post 53173019)
I understand the injury concerns, but you're only giving up the 1st IF markov plays 60+ games. So doesn't that mean the injury is irrelevant at that point? That being said, it's not worth it as there's still an initial risk that laughton will be traded for say 5 games of markov.

If Markov play only 5 games they have a 2nd round pick , probably in the 30 - 40 range in a deep draft .

I don't understand why you guys says this deal sucks ... In the worst case scenario , the Flyers get Andrei Markov for let's say 30 games and a high 2nd round pick in 2013 for Scott Laughton . In the best case Markov stays healthy and we all know what a healthy Markov can do .

Broad Street Elite 08-01-2012 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist (Post 53173019)
I understand the injury concerns, but you're only giving up the 1st IF markov plays 60+ games. So doesn't that mean the injury is irrelevant at that point? That being said, it's not worth it as there's still an initial risk that laughton will be traded for say 5 games of markov.

The most likely scenario is that Markov misses the mark and we end up trading Laughton for a 2nd rounder next year. However, if Markov plays 60 games (even if he's a shell of his former self) we pay Laughton AND another first.

The only scenario where we get fair value is Markov playing and looking like he did in his prime. Seems to me like that's a tough gamble for us to take.

If the caliber of picks were flopped (Mtl's conditional being a first, Flyers a second), we might be talking about getting closer to reasonable value, but I still don't know that I'd play russian roulette with the contract.

LyricalLyricist 08-01-2012 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scuba-Steve (Post 53173107)
If Markov play only 5 games they have a 2nd round pick , probably in the 30 - 40 range in a deep draft .

True, but then what's incentive for montreal? I mean, say markov plays 39 games, habs trade him for free.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite (Post 53173131)
The most likely scenario is that Markov misses the mark and we end up trading Laughton for a 2nd rounder next year. However, if Markov plays 60 games (even if he's a shell of his former self) we pay Laughton AND another first.

The only scenario where we get fair value is Markov playing and looking like he did in his prime. Seems to me like that's a tough gamble for us to take.

If the caliber of picks were flopped (Mtl's conditional being a first, Flyers a second), we might be talking about getting closer to reasonable value, but I still don't know that I'd play russian roulette with the contract.

Montreal's first would be way too high. lol

Imagine, habs give up Markov + 7th overall for Laughton. Ouch.:laugh:

Clipitar 08-01-2012 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite (Post 53173131)
The most likely scenario is that Markov misses the mark and we end up trading Laughton for a 2nd rounder next year. However, if Markov plays 60 games (even if he's a shell of his former self) we pay Laughton AND another first.

The only scenario where we get fair value is Markov playing and looking like he did in his prime. Seems to me like that's a tough gamble for us to take.

If the caliber of picks were flopped (Mtl's conditional being a first, Flyers a second), we might be talking about getting closer to reasonable value, but I still don't know that I'd play russian roulette with the contract.

Well, then you wouldn't get him for Laughton and a potentially late 1st. Not even remotely. Markov at his best is worth much more than that.

Scuba-Steve 08-01-2012 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist (Post 53173189)
True, but then what's incentive for montreal? I mean, say markov plays 39 games, habs trade him for free.:

That's a risk the Habs would have to take . And i don't think they're gonna be in the playoffs even with a healthy Markov so it helps the rebuild .

Scuba-Steve 08-01-2012 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite (Post 53173131)
The most likely scenario is that Markov misses the mark and we end up trading Laughton for a 2nd rounder next year. However, if Markov plays 60 games (even if he's a shell of his former self) we pay Laughton AND another first.

The only scenario where we get fair value is Markov playing and looking like he did in his prime. Seems to me like that's a tough gamble for us to take.

If the caliber of picks were flopped (Mtl's conditional being a first, Flyers a second), we might be talking about getting closer to reasonable value, but I still don't know that I'd play russian roulette with the contract.

If Markov ends up playing like he did in his prime you guys got a very nice deal . A prime Markov is worth a lot more than 2 late 1st . A LOT more !

LyricalLyricist 08-01-2012 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scuba-Steve (Post 53173255)
That's a risk the Habs would have to take . And i don't think they're gonna be in the playoffs even with a healthy Markov so it helps the rebuild .

The key part here is "would have to take". Habs don't really need to trade the longest serving hab on the team. Everybody likes markov. I mean, maybe at deadline, we can see a deal but I don't see habs pushing him out the door just yet. They really have no incentive to trade him asap.

LatvianTwist 08-01-2012 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vikke (Post 53172695)
There are better D-men to be had for that package. A lot healthier ones, too.

Better, absolutely not.

Prongo 08-01-2012 01:40 AM

Why would any GM include that conditional pick in there is beyond me. It's not like adding a conditional on making the Cup Finals. Every team's goal is to make the Finals, so a team would have no problem throwing that in there. Throwing it in there for a guy to make the 60 game mark is crazy. Imagine if Holmgren throws that in there and Markov plays 60 games and the Flyers miss the playoffs because Giroux goes down for an extended period. We would be screwed, and that's why that conditional pick would never happen. You generally want to put those conditionals on the performance of the team, and not a single player.

I would rather package that 1st and Scott Laughton along with another piece and try to get Yandle. Is that possible? I doubt it, but we won't be trying to acquire another aging defenseman who has played 65 games in the last three years. At least not for that package I would think.

With that contract and his significant injuries he has suffered the last couple of years, I don't really see Markov going anywhere. I hope he recovers and plays like he did when he was able to, Montreal would be a treat to watch again.

Intense Rage 08-01-2012 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clipitar (Post 53173215)
Well, then you wouldn't get him for Laughton and a potentially late 1st. Not even remotely. Markov at his best is worth much more than that.

I don't think anyone even remembers Markov at his best.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Scuba-Steve (Post 53173107)
If Markov play only 5 games they have a 2nd round pick , probably in the 30 - 40 range in a deep draft .

I don't understand why you guys says this deal sucks ... In the worst case scenario , the Flyers get Andrei Markov for let's say 30 games and a high 2nd round pick in 2013 for Scott Laughton . In the best case Markov stays healthy and we all know what a healthy Markov can do .

Who knows... We havent seen a healthy Markov for a long time.

LyricalLyricist 08-01-2012 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prongo (Post 53173851)
Why would any GM include that conditional pick in there is beyond me. It's not like adding a conditional on making the Cup Finals. Every team's goal is to make the Finals, so a team would have no problem throwing that in there. Throwing it in there for a guy to make the 60 game mark is crazy. Imagine if Holmgren throws that in there and Markov plays 60 games and the Flyers miss the playoffs because Giroux goes down for an extended period. We would be screwed, and that's why that conditional pick would never happen. You generally want to put those conditionals on the performance of the team, and not a single player.

I would rather package that 1st and Scott Laughton along with another piece and try to get Yandle. Is that possible? I doubt it, but we won't be trying to acquire another aging defenseman who has played 65 games in the last three years. At least not for that package I would think.

With that contract and his significant injuries he has suffered the last couple of years, I don't really see Markov going anywhere. I hope he recovers and plays like he did when he was able to, Montreal would be a treat to watch again.

I doubt you'd feel any more comfortable with the condition being philly makes playoffs or 2nd round. Especially if markov plays 0 games. At this point, the biggest question is his health, you can make it a team thing, but you might get shafted more.

vokiel 08-01-2012 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LatvianTwist (Post 53171763)
Don't see them giving up Laughton. Read makes more sense for Both sides, as he's a bottom 6 center for Montreal which they could use, and is less important to the Flyers.

That said, don't think Montreal wants to move Markov.

In what dimension? We've got plenty of those already.

This trade addresses nothing for Montreal, pass.

Sureves 08-01-2012 10:27 AM

Am I the only one who doesn't even remember if Markov was good because it was so long ago?

habs03 08-01-2012 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sureves (Post 53179199)
Am I the only one who doesn't even remember if Markov was good because it was so long ago?

Before his injury, a for sure top 10 D-men in the league, in the 6-7 range I'd say.

YuioIklo 08-01-2012 10:31 AM

Why would the Flyers trade their 2012 1st rounder for a guy who will probably be injured?

Clipitar 08-01-2012 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prongo (Post 53173851)
Why would any GM include that conditional pick in there is beyond me. It's not like adding a conditional on making the Cup Finals. Every team's goal is to make the Finals, so a team would have no problem throwing that in there. Throwing it in there for a guy to make the 60 game mark is crazy. Imagine if Holmgren throws that in there and Markov plays 60 games and the Flyers miss the playoffs because Giroux goes down for an extended period. We would be screwed, and that's why that conditional pick would never happen. You generally want to put those conditionals on the performance of the team, and not a single player.

I would rather package that 1st and Scott Laughton along with another piece and try to get Yandle. Is that possible? I doubt it, but we won't be trying to acquire another aging defenseman who has played 65 games in the last three years. At least not for that package I would think.

With that contract and his significant injuries he has suffered the last couple of years, I don't really see Markov going anywhere. I hope he recovers and plays like he did when he was able to, Montreal would be a treat to watch again.

You bring some really good points, but there's no way you can get Yandle for this package unless the added piece is one you wouldn't want to part with (Simmonds or Hartnell?).

I'd assume the Yotes ask for Couturier+ for their best OFD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Intense Rage (Post 53173927)
I don't think anyone even remembers Markov at his best.

Who knows... We havent seen a healthy Markov for a long time.

Have you started following hockey 2 years ago?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:58 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.