![]() |
Vancouver-Detroit
Van: D Alex Edler, LW Bill Sweatt
Det: C Daren Helm, D Kyle Quincey, LW Tomas Tatar Det needs a good replacement for Lidstrom(not saying Edler is as good as him), Edler is a big upgrade on Quincey, Sweatt is a speedy forward prospect with decent defensive skills. Det has the cap space to sign Edler when he becomes a FA so I dont see that as a big drop in his value, plus why wouldn't Edler want to sign in D-Town?. Van gets a good 3rd line center, a replacement for Edler and a good talented forward prospect to add to vans poor prospect pool |
Big no from Van. I really like Helm, but he's not worth the huge downgrade from Edler to Quincey. The prospect swap doesn't change that.
|
No thank you.
|
Having watched a fair amount of Grand Rapids games this season, I really don't want to give up on Tatar. I think he could be a pretty good 2nd line type guy.
|
I might be interested in that if it's Ericsson instead.
|
Not interested in giving up Helm and Tatar to change a signed Quincey into a UFA Edler.
Now if it were Hamhuis... Quote:
To Det: D Hamhuis To Van: F Abdelkader, F Pulkkinen, D Ericsson |
The only way VAN trades Edler/Hamhuis is for an immediate upgrade (Edler/Hamhuis+ for Dats/Z).
|
I don't even understand why DET is proposing deals for Edler/Hamhuis.
Hamhuis has an NTC and signed with his hometown team. Edler is about as likely to re-sign as Howard is, he's also the #1 d-man on a team that's looking to contend. Wouldn't DET be better off targeting the dmen of NYR/PIT/WIN? Orpik or Martin are good enough fill ins. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Did you just ACTUALLY suggest Edler/Hamhuis for Datsyuk/Zetterberg? Here's my rebuttal. Kyle Quincey for Daniel Sedin. |
Quote:
VAN+ meant to be Edler/Hamuis+ for Dats/Z. Obviously the add in would be substantial. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Orpik and Martin being fill-ins is the problem; we have six guys in the 2-5 range. What we want is another #1. Preferably defensively sound, preferably under 30. Hence the love for Hamhuis. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The Canucks would just end up keeping all their players it doesn't look like Gillis is trying to sell off our top players for packages. |
Quote:
If you want Hamhuis: Smith+Helm+Jurco For Hamhuis |
Quote:
|
I suspect the OP is right and Edler moves along. I envision a deal including Luongo and expect a fairly big return, though.
|
Quote:
|
Canucks is not trading Hamhuis, especally not for futures.
|
Van definitely says no to this one ... change Helm to Filpula and that might be more realistic.
That said - I say ride out whatever this joke of a 40 game season might be and go for Edler @ free agency. Right before the lockout the difference between Gillis and Edlers management was 2+ million. If Gillis thinks hes going to strong-arm Edler into a Kesler contract when Suter just struck the jackpot hes dreaming. Even if Edler gets resigned a stop-gap such as timmonen wouldnt be bad either. A few years from now our top 4 will be Kronwall, Smith, Sproul, Ouellete. What we need to trade for is a big bodied stayhome defenseman that plays physical. We have extra forwards to throw at guys like Regehr or D. Murray. |
wont be a season, edler will be a UFA no point in this
|
There is nothing reasonable Detroit could come up with that I would accept for Hamhuis. Even a slight overpayment and I'd likely decline. This is not a knock toward Detroit by any means but Hamhuis is just too valuable. Not to mention he took a huge discount to play for the Nucks. If I were Gillis, even asking him wouldn't be an option.
As for the OP. Not enough quality. Helm is great but certainly not at the cost of Edler. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:50 AM. |
vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.