HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Philadelphia Flyers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=21)
-   -   Undo a move. (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=252021)

Roger's Pancreas* 05-14-2006 05:31 PM

Undo a move.
 
Bobby's track record as GM has been pretty solid but every once in a while he runs into trouble, nothing too dramatic however. If you could go back and undo some of his trades which ones would you consider?

Personally...

1) Brind'amour for Primeau. It was good while it lasted but Primes is sidelines for god knows how long and Rod is captain of a contender that many had pegged for a dead last finish.

2) The Zhamnov deal. The transation made Philly an instant challenger with superb depth down the center. The downside... we lose a top four defenseman who's tough as nails, and another uber-pest in the making. We really could have used those pieces, and Anderson's lack of success in the NCAA really leaves the Flyers without much to look forward to after Zhamnov's departure.

3) Danny Markov for a third? There had to be more to this than we're all seeing.

4) Denis Gauthier for two seconds. I know the Flyers needed some grit on the back end ever since Hatch pussed out but come on... don't sacrifice intelligence in the process. Goats and Rico were, bar none, the worst defenseman during the playoffs. To make matters worse, the dude got a huge raise just because he can hit hard. Those two seconds (in addition with the others) could have set Bobby up for a huge jump in draft position.

MiamiScreamingEagles 05-14-2006 05:38 PM

In retrospect, Justin Williams for Markov. At the time I liked the deal so I can't be overly critical.

GKJ 05-14-2006 05:39 PM

1) Doesn't look good right now, it looked really good in 2002 and 2004

2) Doesn't look good now, but we're not the Bruins, we make moves to try and win in the coming year

3) Cap dump, we all want that one back, that pick was sent to the Kings with Roenick

4) No argument here

GKJ 05-14-2006 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MiamiScreamingEagles
In retrospect, Justin Williams for Markov. At the time I liked the deal so I can't be overly critical.


Justin Williams would have never scored 30 goals here

MiamiScreamingEagles 05-14-2006 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514
Justin Williams would have never scored 30 goals here


I said something like that about Rusty, too. In Williams' case, probably not a 30-goal scorer but I like his grit, speed and "d." He had injuries with the Flyers, too, and who knows what he would have had (labrum?) if he played here in 2005-06.

pit 05-14-2006 06:39 PM

The Oates deal.

Not because anything of substance was ultimately lost, but because those chips could have been used the next year instead and saved us from losing other players.

1st, 2nd, 3rd pick and a goalie prospect.

Those assets could have been used in the Malakhov/Markov/Zhamnov/Burke trades instead and allowed us to keep some of what we gave up.

I understand the need for the deal with Roenick and Primeau going down, but considering how we fared in the first round, we were bent over badly.

Steve L* 05-14-2006 07:01 PM

Justin Williams, he was my favourite Flyer at the time, everyone said hes nothing more than a 3rd liner at the time.

Oates. Panic move.

Hitch, hes not looking good in the new NHL.

GKJ 05-14-2006 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pit
The Oates deal.

Not because anything of substance was ultimately lost, but because those chips could have been used the next year instead and saved us from losing other players.

1st, 2nd, 3rd pick and a goalie prospect.

Those assets could have been used in the Malakhov/Markov/Zhamnov/Burke trades instead and allowed us to keep some of what we gave up.

I understand the need for the deal with Roenick and Primeau going down, but considering how we fared in the first round, we were bent over badly.


those picks would have already been used

BobbyClarkeFan16 05-14-2006 08:21 PM

For me, it would be the acquisitions of Paul Coffey and Dan McGillis. The first round pick that we gave up for a washed up Coffey turned out to be Scott Hannan and the player we gave up for Dan McGillis was Janne Niinimaa. We needed a puck handler with skill at the time and we gave up way too early on Niinimaa.

John Flyers Fan 05-14-2006 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16
For me, it would be the acquisitions of Paul Coffey and Dan McGillis. The first round pick that we gave up for a washed up Coffey turned out to be Scott Hannan and the player we gave up for Dan McGillis was Janne Niinimaa. We needed a puck handler with skill at the time and we gave up way too early on Niinimaa.

Ragarsson obtained for McGillis, was a better player than Niinimaa if he would have stayed in North America.

GKJ 05-14-2006 08:53 PM

Judging by how Niinimaa's carreer has went, getting rid of him might not have been a bad idea, he played well for Edmonton, but it seems like he has gotten worse with age, and that's not good when you're in your 20's. He may have had his best years here, and with McGillis we got a 2nd round pick, and McGillis was a solid two-way defenseman who could score and play good enough defense, so it's not like we dumped off Niinimaa, and the Oilers gave up a lot for him

Pantokrator 05-14-2006 11:31 PM

1) Poulin for Linesman. Poulin was the heart and soul of the team. I believe this ultimately led to Clarke's first ouster. Poulin went on to have several more serviceable years, whereas Linesman retired soon after.

2) Brind'Amour for Primeau. I never liked Primeau (being down here in Canes country, he pretty much forced the team to trade him; I never liked that ploy) and always loved Brind'Amour. Primeau's performance in the playoffs in 2004 undid some of my dismay.

3) Oulette plus 1st, 2nd, 3rd picks for Oates just on the principle of the matter! Why give up that much for a guy who played 15 games or so? I would have tolerated it more if Oates had stuck around.

4) Williams for Markov. I understood it at the time because of the need for defensmen (plus I really liked Markov) and also I don't think Williams would have ever been super effective in the old NHL, especially on the Flyers. Now however, man, that deal looks bad.

5) Prospal for Falloon and Daigle. I didn't mind it at the time because of the potential, but I always liked Prospal. I never thought he'd be as much of a producer as he turned out to be.

swflyers8* 05-14-2006 11:38 PM

Quote:

I didn't mind it at the time because of the potential, but I always liked Prospal. I never thought he'd be as much of a producer as he turned out to be.
The guy is great in the regular season and disappears in the post season. Highest amount of points he has ever gotten in 6 in 2 rounds of playoff hockey. No big loss IMO.

As far the Oates deal, I don't mind trading Oulette, he hasn't done anything. The picks are the bad part of the deal. Markov was a horse for a us in the playoffs so I have no problem with the deal. Williams just didn't work with Hitch. I'm glad to see him having success.

steinie77 05-14-2006 11:47 PM

The Oates deal or the Comrie deal (to obtain him).

Clarke wouldn't give up Ouellete for Ray Bourque, but he would seriously overpay and include him for Oates? Would have much rather had Bourque, bar none.

Woywitka for Comrie. I would have liked to see Woywitka given a shot on the Flyers. I know he hasn't yet fully developed, but he would have been nice to see in addition to Pitkanen, Meyer, and Gauthier moving forward.

MiamiScreamingEagles 05-15-2006 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steinie77
The Oates deal or the Comrie deal (to obtain him).

Clarke wouldn't give up Ouellete for Ray Bourque, but he would seriously overpay and include him for Oates? Would have much rather had Bourque, bar none.

Woywitka for Comrie. I would have liked to see Woywitka given a shot on the Flyers. I know he hasn't yet fully developed, but he would have been nice to see in addition to Pitkanen, Meyer, and Gauthier moving forward.


IIRC, the Bruins wanted Gagne, who Clarke would not surrender, and that was much the reason Bourque never went to the Flyers.

Dig Out Your Soul 05-15-2006 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steinie77
Woywitka for Comrie. I would have liked to see Woywitka given a shot on the Flyers. I know he hasn't yet fully developed, but he would have been nice to see in addition to Pitkanen, Meyer, and Gauthier moving forward.

Woywitka, I'm pretty sure, is already bordering on "bust" territory. We moved Comrie quickly after but I'm still sure that trade didn't hurt us.

BobbyClarkeFan16 05-15-2006 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
Markov was a horse for a us in the playoffs so I have no problem with the deal. Williams just didn't work with Hitch.

What bugs me about the Markov deal was that he was dealt to make room for the glimmer idiots. Add to it, he was only dealt for a third round pick. As for Williams not working with Hitch, could it possibly be that Hitch didn't work with Williams?

GoneFullHextall 05-15-2006 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trippyime
Woywitka, I'm pretty sure, is already bordering on "bust" territory. We moved Comrie quickly after but I'm still sure that trade didn't hurt us.


exactly. he couldnt even make the Blues this year, and didnt exactly have a group of great defenseman anyway

easton122 05-15-2006 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16
As for Williams not working with Hitch, could it possibly be that Hitch didn't work with Williams?

There is no doubt in my mind that that is true.

Hitchcock has run McGillis, Williams, Fedoruk and Sharp out of Philadelphia.

easton122 05-15-2006 12:41 PM

1. Williams for Markov- It would be so much better if this didn't turn out to be a playoff rental and a 3rd round pick. We could have really used him this year.

2. Letting Recchi walk- Our biggest problem all season was secondary scoring. I hated letting him go at the time and we could have really used him with the hords of injuries we encountered.

3. Brind'Amour for Primeau- Only because of health problems. A healthy Primeau is the heart and soul of this hockey club and one of the most dominant players in the NHL (not necessarily offensively but defensively).

4. Comrie for Burke, Radivojevic and Eager- I like Radio and I love Eager but we could've used some more scoring.

5. Vandermeer, Fraser and picks for Zhamnov- Zhamnov played great in the first round against the Debbies but we beat them in 5 games so we would have won the series without him IMO. Besides the first round he was a non-factor the rest of the playoffs though. If we had Vandermeer we wouldn't have had to trade for Gauthier and Vandermeer is better IMO. Big loss.

6. Markov for a 3rd- Markov can skate and hit. Yes he is injury prone but he is the type of guy who couldn't be able to walk to not play in the playoffs. A warrior who had by far the best +/- in the 04 playoffs. Not a huge stat but it says something when he had a good lead on the rest of the league and he only played to the end of the 3rd round. Keeping Markov for his 2.2 mil salary would have been 10 times better than signing both Rathje and Hatcher. One of them and Markov would have been much more effective.

tytech 05-15-2006 12:46 PM

You said GM moves so signing HATHCER and Rathje to five year deals at 3.5 million is unbelievable. Nobody will take these guys off our hands. Even if we ask for "future considerations". We are stuck with them and buying them out will be pricey. Look at the 4 teams left. Other teams will get faster with time and more and more teams will adapt to the new NHL. You think it was bad with those two this year, add on another, and another, and another ,and another.

Bill_Meltzer 05-15-2006 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tytech
You said GM moves so signing HATHCER and Rathje to five year deals at 3.5 million is unbelievable. Nobody will take these guys off our hands. Even if we ask for "future considerations". We are stuck with them and buying them out will be pricey.


There is still a market for Mike Rathje around the NHL, if the Flyers were included to unload him. Every team still needs at least one of his type of D on their blueline -- no team is going to have six small, puck moving D-- and the consensus is that he did just fine this season under the new rules until the hip problems started to affect him. The bigger thing with Rathje is that he has a no trade clause that he'd have to waive.

Hatcher, with his chronic bad knees and two years older than Rathje, may be another story.

Roger's Pancreas* 05-15-2006 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by easton122
1. Williams for Markov- It would be so much better if this didn't turn out to be a playoff rental and a 3rd round pick. We could have really used him this year.

2. Letting Recchi walk- Our biggest problem all season was secondary scoring. I hated letting him go at the time and we could have really used him with the hords of injuries we encountered.

3. Brind'Amour for Primeau- Only because of health problems. A healthy Primeau is the heart and soul of this hockey club and one of the most dominant players in the NHL (not necessarily offensively but defensively).

4. Comrie for Burke, Radivojevic and Eager- I like Radio and I love Eager but we could've used some more scoring.

5. Vandermeer, Fraser and picks for Zhamnov- Zhamnov played great in the first round against the Debbies but we beat them in 5 games so we would have won the series without him IMO. Besides the first round he was a non-factor the rest of the playoffs though. If we had Vandermeer we wouldn't have had to trade for Gauthier and Vandermeer is better IMO. Big loss.

6. Markov for a 3rd- Markov can skate and hit. Yes he is injury prone but he is the type of guy who couldn't be able to walk to not play in the playoffs. A warrior who had by far the best +/- in the 04 playoffs. Not a huge stat but it says something when he had a good lead on the rest of the league and he only played to the end of the 3rd round. Keeping Markov for his 2.2 mil salary would have been 10 times better than signing both Rathje and Hatcher. One of them and Markov would have been much more effective.

1. This move never bothered me because Markov was awesome for the Flyers, while Williams was looking rather out of place at times. The issue I have with it all is that Markov was dealt for cap relief (at 2.5 while Rathje is signed at 3.5?) for a ****-*** third round pick. See no. 6.

2. Recchi was too old for his own good. The time he spent in Pittsburgh was a great indication as to how much of a liability on defense a 39 year old player could be.

4. Kind of disagree. Comrie didn't fit in Philly, mainly because of his character. The pieces we acquired in that trade have tons of character that will prove useful in the future. Another bonus is that the amount of cash saved in that deal, since Eager and Radio will never earn big bucks.

AGraveOne 05-15-2006 01:57 PM

geesh...Primeau healthy is not as good as Brind'Amour. '04 is all you got for Primeau...but he was/is still less than Rod.

Bad trade. I just hate that Primeau gets thought of as highly as Brind'Amour - Brind'Amour is the utmost of team player without care for his own numbers and such.

Does anyone remember that breakaway in the last season's playoffs where Primeau fell over nothing and then into the goalie negating his own goal by drawing an interference penalty?

I think that philly lacked so much leadership last season that it made it ideal for Primeau to be a leader...he can only profit where there is ZERO pressure. (that is my annoyed view of him)

I wish Philly had kept Brind'Amour...oh well.

Roger's Pancreas* 05-15-2006 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AGraveOne
geesh...Primeau healthy is not as good as Brind'Amour. '04 is all you got for Primeau...but he was/is still less than Rod.

Bad trade. I just hate that Primeau gets thought of as highly as Brind'Amour - Brind'Amour is the utmost of team player without care for his own numbers and such.

Does anyone remember that breakaway in the last season's playoffs where Primeau fell over nothing and then into the goalie negating his own goal by drawing an interference penalty?

I think that philly lacked so much leadership last season that it made it ideal for Primeau to be a leader...he can only profit where there is ZERO pressure. (that is my annoyed view of him)

I wish Philly had kept Brind'Amour...oh well.

You're looking at the points for but Primes also prevents a lot of goals against. This year was a prime example. Without Primeau, the Flyers struggled all year at keeping the big names off the board. Guys like Crosby and Jagr were having a blast without Primeau running shut-down duty.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:16 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.