HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Dallas Stars (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=44)
-   -   Loui Eriksson - trade bait? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1354379)

tjcurrie 02-19-2013 11:28 AM

Loui Eriksson - trade bait?
 
Are you calm yet? Okay.

Aside from Benn, he's likely the one who would bring the highest return. I'm not starting some "Let's get rid of Loui based on 16 games" bandwagon, but let's look at some points:

- Clearly this team is in dire need of a #1 Dman, heck we don't even have a #2 at this point. Aside from playing the waiting game with Dillon and Oleksiak, I don't see how we're going to fill those needs.

- We're somewhat lacking in young high end talent. Either we tank this season to grab a top 3 pick, or some of our guys in the system really overachieve.

- Eriksson will be 28 in the summer. That's far from over the hill, but typically players don't peak beyond that. He's still a darn good player, but is his value at it's highest, or is it going to go down?

- Joe has proven he's not scared to pull the trigger.

Clearly this team has needs. To acquire those needs, you explore options. Is this an option? Would anyone consider it?

Flame away...

Ampersand 02-19-2013 11:30 AM

Nope, not even for a second.

tjcurrie 02-19-2013 11:36 AM

To me it's a "depends on the return" kinda thing. And I think the return would be high.

Satan 02-19-2013 11:37 AM

The last time we traded for a top d-man worked well so let's roll the dice again. :sarcasm:

I'm open to considering it, but the return would have to be outrageous.

StarsFan74 02-19-2013 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tjcurrie (Post 60016443)
Are you calm yet? Okay.

Aside from Benn, he's likely the one who would bring the highest return. I'm not starting some "Let's get rid of Loui based on 16 games" bandwagon, but let's look at some points:

- Clearly this team is in dire need of a #1 Dman, heck we don't even have a #2 at this point. Aside from playing the waiting game with Dillon and Oleksiak, I don't see how we're going to fill those needs.

- We're somewhat lacking in young high end talent. Either we tank this season to grab a top 3 pick, or some of our guys in the system really overachieve.

- Eriksson will be 28 in the summer. That's far from over the hill, but typically players don't peak beyond that. He's still a darn good player, but is his value at it's highest, or is it going to go down?

- Joe has proven he's not scared to pull the trigger.

Clearly this team has needs. To acquire those needs, you explore options. Is this an option? Would anyone consider it?

Flame away...

He's also proven he's prone to making a very bad deal out of desperation. I see that being the case when it comes to acquiring that #1D.

I'd rather he use his "fearlessness" into trading up to get a player we want....for once.

tjcurrie 02-19-2013 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Gary Oak (Post 60016861)
The last time we traded for a top d-man worked well so let's roll the dice again. :sarcasm:

I'm open to considering it, but the return would have to be outrageous.

Can't really go by moves made in the past. You win some you lose some. That's a clear loss and Joe really did "roll the dice".

I'm not talking about rolling the dice though. I'm talking about fetching some true talent. I don't have any examples to lay out, but as I said I think the return would be high and I'm pretty sure 29 teams would be lining up. I think you explore all options to make this team better and to me you can't shut out this option.

tjcurrie 02-19-2013 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StarsFan74 (Post 60017169)
He's also proven he's prone to making a very bad deal out of desperation. I see that being the case when it comes to acquiring that #1D.

I'd rather he use his "fearlessness" into trading up to get a player we want....for once.

That's fine too. And I don't mean we trade Loui specifically for a defenseman. I was just laying out our needs - defensemen and young high end talent. Loui could fetch either or, or both.

I also think Joe needs to open the line when it comes to other vets like Morrow, Ryder, Robidas, and possibly Jagr depending on where we're at come deadline. Out of all those, Loui would bring the highest return.

You have to keep some vets, but you also have to explore all options and flip assets in to assets.

Troy McClure 02-19-2013 12:02 PM

Like every player who has ever been given an extension by this franchise, Loui has a no trade clause.

tjcurrie 02-19-2013 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy McClure (Post 60018049)
Like every player who has ever been given an extension by this franchise, Loui has a no trade clause.

Fair enough, but it doesnt mean he's not going to okay a trade. Suppose it means we may not be able to ship him to say Columbus in the summer to move up in the draft though.

piqued 02-19-2013 12:25 PM

Of course not. Loui is the kind of player you desperately try to add more of, not subtract. Sure the team has needs. The second you trade away Eriksson a player like Eriksson will be a critical need. What's the point?

Troy McClure 02-19-2013 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tjcurrie (Post 60018591)
Fair enough, but it doesnt mean he's not going to okay a trade. Suppose it means we may not be able to ship him to say Columbus in the summer to move up in the draft though.

This team will benefit more in the long term and short term by keeping Loui than they would by getting a draft pick.

I might listen if Loui could land a great d-man, but I doubt that would happen. No team is sitting on a surplus of all star defensemen.

tjcurrie 02-19-2013 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piqued (Post 60019047)
Of course not. Loui is the kind of player you desperately try to add more of, not subtract. Sure the team has needs. The second you trade away Eriksson a player like Eriksson will be a critical need. What's the point?

I imagined that'd be the initial response of the majority.

It should depend on what you can get in return, shouldnt it? You cant tell me guys like that havent been traded before. And Im sure theres examples of losing and winning the deal.

Many were saying we lost the Ribeiro deal because scoring centers are hard to come by and you dont just trade them away. I think we made out fine there. Not comparing Ribs and Loui.

Just exploring options. We have plenty of needs. How to we fill those needs? Sometimes you gotta give to get.

piqued 02-19-2013 12:52 PM

I don't know how you can bring him up and then say you're not comparing them. Ribs wasn't a part of the future of the team and had only 1 year remaining on his contract. Loui is a part of the core and has 3 years remaining and no reason to believe he wouldn't re-sign when the time comes.

Creating a hypothetical where the Stars get a return they can't possibly refuse doesn't have much meaning since it's not going to happen.

Eriksson is the epitome of a player you never should want to trade. He's exactly what you want a Dallas Star to be.

StarsFan74 02-19-2013 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tjcurrie (Post 60017601)
That's fine too. And I don't mean we trade Loui specifically for a defenseman. I was just laying out our needs - defensemen and young high end talent. Loui could fetch either or, or both.

I also think Joe needs to open the line when it comes to other vets like Morrow, Ryder, Robidas, and possibly Jagr depending on where we're at come deadline. Out of all those, Loui would bring the highest return.

You have to keep some vets, but you also have to explore all options and flip assets in to assets.

What GMJN needs to demonstrate first is that when the time comes, he isn't afraid to deal his own assets away i.e., the assets HE had a role bringing in to this organization. IMO, he should not be allowed to touch any of Eriksson, Benn, Larsen, etc., (and might I say on principle, not even Morrow or Robidas) before he demonstrates he will move the players he brought in, like Goligoski, Roy, Jagr, Ryder, Whitney, etc. for the betterment of the team.

Troy McClure 02-19-2013 01:27 PM

Joe should feel free to trade anyone he wants. He shouldn't be restrained from trading guys you like all because another GM acquired them.

StarsFan74 02-19-2013 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy McClure (Post 60022141)
Joe should feel free to trade anyone he wants.He shouldn't be restrained from trading guys you like all because another GM acquired them.[/B]

He has been left free to trade whomever he wants and he's demonstrated so far he won't touch his own assets. For example, leaving a 35 y.o. Souray untouched whilst trading (a much younger) Grossmann away for a very late 2nd rounder and a 3rd rounder, only to let the former walk away for nothing in the off-season, reeks of a pathetic inability to read the team's fortunes or a sense of hubris/need to put his own stamp on the team...or both.

Troy McClure 02-19-2013 01:42 PM

Or maybe Grossman was going to get a better return than Souray.

I guess I don't see many or any examples of what you're taking about.

BigG44 02-19-2013 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy McClure (Post 60022993)
Or maybe Grossman was going to get a better return than Souray.

I guess I don't see many or any examples of what you're taking about.

I don't either. I can't think of one person who argued Dallas should have kept Grossmann. He had value, and I agree with Dallas that they shouldn't have paid him the raise that was coming.

It would have been nice to get something for Souray, but you don't lose anything by not trading him. He was a free asset in free agency. Grossmann on the other hand was an asset you developed and invested a huge amount of time and effort in. That would have been a travesty to lose him for nothing. I don't like that they turned their backs on a pick or potentially more for Souray, but it's not surprising GMJN chose to try and win rather than sell assets. That's what he does. Hopefully that doesn't happen again though should the situation present itself again.

It seems that GMJN came down to deciding between Grossmann and Daley, and he chose Daley. I'm fine with that choice. He may be a bit older, but he's more mobile, and he moves the puck better (not to say Grossmann was terrible though). GMJN obviously values puck movement and mobility which isn't a bad thing.

Chaos 02-19-2013 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StarsFan74 (Post 60022745)
He has been left free to trade whomever he wants and he's demonstrated so far he won't touch his own assets. For example, leaving a 35 y.o. Souray untouched whilst trading (a much younger) Grossmann away for a very late 2nd rounder and a 3rd rounder, only to let the former walk away for nothing in the off-season, reeks of a pathetic inability to read the team's fortunes or a sense of hubris/need to put his own stamp on the team...or both.

That pick was right in the middle of the 2nd round at the time of the trade. Had the Kings not gone on to win the Cup, it would have been in the middle of the round come draft time.

StarsFan74 02-19-2013 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy McClure (Post 60022993)
Or maybe Grossman was going to get a better return than Souray.

Or maybe he wasn't going to.

Or maybe it'd have made sense if he decided to bring Souray back.

Quote:

I guess I don't see many or any examples of what you're taking about.
Has he traded away a player (of consequence) he was responsible for bringing into this organization? No, he let the Dvoraks, Burishes, Sourays, etc. walk for nothing. Henceforth, he'd better deal away any of his Jagrs, Ryders, Whitneys, Roys, etc., in case he doesn't plan on re-signing any of them.

StarsFan74 02-19-2013 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaos (Post 60023493)
That pick was right in the middle of the 2nd round at the time of the trade. Had the Kings not gone on to win the Cup, it would have been in the middle of the round come draft time.

I am well aware.

BigG44 02-19-2013 02:00 PM

I think 90% of us are going to agree with you that if Dallas is out of the playoffs or close to missing, we'd prefer they'd stop rolling the dice and trade expiring contracts.

This need to identify how the player came into the organization is going to lose most people. It's an unnecessary distinction. Honestly, who cares? He's not trading players that he thinks can help the team for a final push into the playoffs ... that's a more logical way to look at it. He's not playing favorites.

He clearly pointed out that he felt Fistric was ready for a bigger role, and I think most of us agreed. He didn't think he was hurting the playoff chances by moving Grossmann. Finally, I think an overwhelming majority of people agree Grossmann had more value that Souray ... so they traded the better asset for the better return.

Brand New Stars 02-19-2013 02:04 PM

I love Loui, but I'd trade anyone for the right price.

StarsFan74 02-19-2013 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigG44 (Post 60023361)
It seems that GMJN came down to deciding between Grossmann and Daley, and he chose Daley. I'm fine with that choice. He may be a bit older, but he's more mobile, and he moves the puck better (not to say Grossmann was terrible though). GMJN obviously values puck movement and mobility which isn't a bad thing.

How do you know it was between Daley and Grossmann? Daley has a limited NTC clause too.

Seems like confirmation bias to me.

Chaos 02-19-2013 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StarsFan74 (Post 60023825)
I am well aware.

Then dont keep claiming he traded Grossmann for a 'late 2nd rounder.'


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:54 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.