HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Philadelphia Flyers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=21)
-   -   New Rumor... (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=37906)

Teezax 12-22-2003 07:36 AM

New Rumor...
 
Saw this on hockeytraderumors.com...

Esche and Primeau for Khabibulin...

The question remains, would you do it?
As much as I like Esche and hope to see him here for awhile, you
gotta make this trade if your Bobby..although ditching Primeau leaves another hole at center until Lapointe comes back.

Dr Love 12-22-2003 07:37 AM

Clarke dismissed the Post story and said Primeau epitomizes what coach Ken Hitchcock teaches - relentless work, checking, defense.

"Why would I trade the guy who sets the leadership example for the rest of the team?" the Flyers GM said.

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/sports/7546254.htm

Teezax 12-22-2003 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Love
Clarke dismissed the Post story and said Primeau epitomizes what coach Ken Hitchcock teaches - relentless work, checking, defense.

"Why would I trade the guy who sets the leadership example for the rest of the team?" the Flyers GM said.

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/sports/7546254.htm

hadn't see that article, but then again Clarke also said he had no interest in Comrie...when the needs open up anything could happen. The question remains, would you do it?

wasting time 12-22-2003 07:49 AM

Ahhhh. now the Comrie acquisition is making sense.

I like it for Philly, a lot.

wasting time 12-22-2003 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teezax
Saw this on hockeytraderumors.com...

Esche and Primeau for Khabibulin...

The question remains, would you do it?
As much as I like Esche and hope to see him here for awhile, you
gotta make this trade if your Bobby..although ditching Primeau leaves another hole at center until Lapointe comes back.

doesn't Philly have a guy in the system who can play 4th center, or a winger that can play center?

Dr Love 12-22-2003 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teezax
hadn't see that article, but then again Clarke also said he had no interest in Comrie...when the needs open up anything could happen. The question remains, would you do it?

No, I wouldn't. Bulin has won one playoff round in his career. He is no guarantee to take this team far.

The goalies available do not have a great playoff track record. Esche is playing just fine and the team and the coaches believe in him. It all boils down to this... the margin of improvement that one of the available goalies would bring to this team would not be justified by the cost to aquire them in a trade. Kolzig has had one run, and done nothing since. Khabibulin has one a single round. Burke hasn't won a round since 1988, and has already been here and absolutely sucked. CuJo has the best track record, taking two different teams to the CF twice, but he flat out stinks this year and the money is a giant red flag. I'd rather take my chances with Esche. His play has done nothing to warrant not being the goalie come playoff time.

stanley 12-22-2003 07:57 AM

I don't see it happening. I don't think the acquisition of Comrie was made to replace anybody this year, rather accentuate what they already have.

Question: When has Clarke given up a contributing veteran player during the season without getting another veteran at that position in return?

Answer: You have to go all the way back to December 1995, when he traded Kevin Dineen to Hartford for future considerations, and Dineen was in the twilight of his career, so to call him a contributing veteran at that point is a stretch.

The prescedent for him to move Primeau without getting another center in return doesn't exist. I'm sure somebody is going to try and use Clarke's initial dismissal of his interest in Comrie followed by the trade for that player as evidence that you can't be sure what he's thinking. However, keep in mind that the dismissal was made in reference to the rumor that Handzus was going to get moved for Comrie.

Trade rumors take on a life of their own. If one reads a rumor enough times, fiction quickly becomes some warped form of reality.

Flyers26 12-22-2003 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stanley
I don't see it happening. I don't think the acquisition of Comrie was made to replace anybody this year, rather accentuate what they already have.

Question: When has Clarke given up a contributing veteran player during the season without getting another veteran at that position in return?

Answer: You have to go all the way back to December 1995, when he traded Kevin Dineen to Hartford for future considerations, and Dineen was in the twilight of his career, so to call him a contributing veteran at that point is a stretch.

I'm not even sure that was Clarke. He might have been gone by then.
I know in the similar era, we traded Poulin & Propp, separately, to Boston.

MojoJojo 12-22-2003 08:29 AM

Problem is that Primeau has defferred half his salary to help out the team. Does Tampa pick up the 2.5 mil we owe him for next season?
Doesnt make too much sense from Tampa's POV, since the deal comes down to Esche for Habib after Primeaus contract is up.

Anyway, Khabibulin = Cechmanek. Great stats, bad puck handler, lets in bad goals, erratic, unproven in the playoffs. Not that he wouldnt be an improvement over Hackett.

How about this instead: Handzus + Esche for Theodore. Let Theo and Hackett fight for the starting position again.

DanKordicsFist 12-22-2003 08:40 AM

How about Hackett for Nittymaki

or Hackett for Malec

or Hackett for Little

or Hackett for a roll of tape and a broken stick

Teezax 12-22-2003 09:46 AM

i think it's time we let Hackett rest and see what Esche can do as our starter, we haven't seen enough of him yet to make a judgement on if he will showup in the playoffs. Give him the time now, by the deadline in March we'll know if we have to make any changes.

Sotnos 12-22-2003 09:48 AM

Sorry to butt in here...
Quote:

Originally Posted by MojoJojo
Doesnt make too much sense from Tampa's POV, since the deal comes down to Esche for Habib after Primeaus contract is up.

True. It makes no sense for Tampa to trade away what is (arguably) its best "asset" to address their strongest position - center. Would be very stupid to trade Khabi now anyway and it had better not happen or I won't be too happy. I believe the original Brooks column made no mention of Esche, it just said "a deal centered around Primeau", which makes it sound even worse. :)
Quote:

Anyway, Khabibulin = Cechmanek. Great stats, bad puck handler, lets in bad goals, erratic, unproven in the playoffs. Not that he wouldnt be an improvement over Hackett.
Well, he's no Brodeur, but let me just say that his performance vs. Philly was easily the worst puck-handling performance I've EVER seen from him, so please don't judge the guy by that. Sure he lets in bad goals, who doesn't, but I've never before seen him be directly responsible for two goals in one game. He's usually a bit better with the puck, mostly just leaves it behind the goal for the Dmen to come and get. ;)

FlyerFire 12-22-2003 10:22 AM

i agree
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Teezax
i think it's time we let Hackett rest and see what Esche can do as our starter, we haven't seen enough of him yet to make a judgement on if he will showup in the playoffs. Give him the time now, by the deadline in March we'll know if we have to make any changes.

playing a game with Hackett is like treading water-never know when you're going under.played pretty poorly against ATL.

wasting time 12-22-2003 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MojoJojo
Problem is that Primeau has defferred half his salary to help out the team. Does Tampa pick up the 2.5 mil we owe him for next season?
Doesnt make too much sense from Tampa's POV, since the deal comes down to Esche for Habib after Primeaus contract is up.

Anyway, Khabibulin = Cechmanek. Great stats, bad puck handler, lets in bad goals, erratic, unproven in the playoffs. Not that he wouldnt be an improvement over Hackett.

How about this instead: Handzus + Esche for Theodore. Let Theo and Hackett fight for the starting position again.


Khabibulin = Czechmanek?

Whooo boy!

I think we just found out who Bobby's goalie scout has been for the past 5 years.

wasting time 12-22-2003 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MojoJojo
Problem is that Primeau has defferred half his salary to help out the team. Does Tampa pick up the 2.5 mil we owe him for next season?
Doesnt make too much sense from Tampa's POV, since the deal comes down to Esche for Habib after Primeaus contract is up.

Anyway, Khabibulin = Cechmanek. Great stats, bad puck handler, lets in bad goals, erratic, unproven in the playoffs. Not that he wouldnt be an improvement over Hackett.

How about this instead: Handzus + Esche for Theodore. Let Theo and Hackett fight for the starting position again.


Handzus and Esche for Theodore :joker:

You're silly.

stanley 12-22-2003 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wasting time
Khabibulin = Czechmanek?

Whooo boy!

I think we just found out who Bobby's goalie scout has been for the past 5 years.

I always love this utterly qualitative "argument." Now for a little quantitative analysis:

(Player, GAA, SV%) League standing in parentheses.

2002-03
Khabilbulin, 2.47 (T-16), .911 (T-17, with Hackett - ooh, that's gotta hurt)
Cechmanek, 1.83 (2), .925 (3)

2001-02
Khabibulin, 2.36 (T-16), .920 (T-5)
Cechmanek, 2.05 (2), .921 (T-3)

2000-01
Khabilbulin - no results, held out
Cechmanek, 2.01 (1), .921 (T-3)

I think I hurt myself typing "Khabibulin" four times, but it was an otherwise simple exercise up to this point. I just reached for statistics.

I'd reach for the "he hasn't done anything at the NHL level," but be prepared to retort the five league championships he has won. Not much left that far out on the plank. Statistically, nobody has been more effective at stopping the puck in those three years than Roman Cechmanek.

Stupid Clarke.

wasting time 12-22-2003 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stanley
I always love this utterly qualitative "argument." Now for a little quantitative analysis:

(Player, GAA, SV%) League standing in parentheses.

2002-03
Khabilbulin, 2.47 (T-16), .911 (T-17, with Hackett - ooh, that's gotta hurt)
Cechmanek, 1.83 (2), .925 (3)

2001-02
Khabibulin, 2.36 (T-16), .920 (T-5)
Cechmanek, 2.05 (2), .921 (T-3)

2000-01
Khabilbulin - no results, held out
Cechmanek, 2.01 (1), .921 (T-3)

I think I hurt myself typing "Khabibulin" four times, but it was an otherwise simple exercise up to this point. I just reached for statistics.

I'd reach for the "he hasn't done anything at the NHL level," but be prepared to retort the five league championships he has won. Not much left that far out on the plank. Statistically, nobody has been more effective at stopping the puck in those three years than Roman Cechmanek.

Stupid Clarke.

Ha Ha, I just love it when you Flyer Fans quote GAA and SV% to justify why your goaltenders are fine. You have been doing this for years, and in the end you all finally realize that Clarke is a bozo when it comes to his goalies.


Tel me this:

Both Hackett and Esche have better GAA and SV% than Eddie Belfour. Are they better?

SaveByHexy 12-22-2003 11:45 AM

I don't understand some peoples' arguments....They are always talking about how Khabibulin or Joseph or Kolzig have not done anything (i.e. won a Stanley Cup). So what? Ed Belfour never had won a cup until a few years ago. Hasek had never won a cup up until two years ago. How long did it take Ray Bourque to win a cup? The point is, you don't have to have already won Stanley Cups to give a team a better chance at winning it all. How many people were clamoring for us to get Chris Osgood this offseason, or last spring? The guy has two cup rings, but no one wanted him here (not that Hackett was the popular choice either...and Ozzie is having a good year so far, I'll give him that). It's a reciprocal thing--either Bulin or Cujo or Kolzig would give us a better chance of winning a Cup, and in turn our team would give them a better chance of getting that monkey off of their backs. I don't think there should be any question as to whether any of these goalies is better than Hackett, and even if you think none of them can win us a cup, don't you at least think they would increase our chances of getting there? Hackett is an above-average journeyman backup. Khabibulin and Joseph have always had a high standard of play, and Kolzig's won a Vezina and taken his team to the finals. To think not one of these goalies would be an upgrade, IMO, is absurd.

As for the statistical analysis and comparison of Khabibulin and Cechmanek, yes Cechmanek did put up better numbers. I liked Roman, and perhaps he was better than Khabi. But since Cechmanek is gone, the question comes down to whether Khabibulin is better than Hackett, which in my opinion is obviously yes.

Dr Love 12-22-2003 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amonte11Scores
I don't understand some peoples' arguments....They are always talking about how Khabibulin or Joseph or Kolzig have not done anything (i.e. won a Stanley Cup). So what? Ed Belfour never had won a cup until a few years ago. Hasek had never won a cup up until two years ago. How long did it take Ray Bourque to win a cup? The point is, you don't have to have already won Stanley Cups to give a team a better chance at winning it all. How many people were clamoring for us to get Chris Osgood this offseason, or last spring? The guy has two cup rings, but no one wanted him here (not that Hackett was the popular choice either...and Ozzie is having a good year so far, I'll give him that). It's a reciprocal thing--either Bulin or Cujo or Kolzig would give us a better chance of winning a Cup, and in turn our team would give them a better chance of getting that monkey off of their backs. I don't think there should be any question as to whether any of these goalies is better than Hackett, and even if you think none of them can win us a cup, don't you at least think they would increase our chances of getting there? Hackett is an above-average journeyman backup. Khabibulin and Joseph have always had a high standard of play, and Kolzig's won a Vezina and taken his team to the finals. To think not one of these goalies would be an upgrade, IMO, is absurd.

You can use the same arguements for Esche and Hackett as well. Another reason not to make a trade.

John Flyers Fan 12-22-2003 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amonte11Scores
since Cechmanek is gone, the question comes down to whether Khabibulin is better than Hackett, which in my opinion is obviously yes.


Esche, Esche, Esche, Esche ... again, again, again ... he'll be the starter come playoff time, not Hackett .....

stanley 12-22-2003 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wasting time
Ha Ha, I just love it when you Flyer Fans quote GAA and SV% to justify why your goaltenders are fine. You have been doing this for years, and in the end you all finally realize that Clarke is a bozo when it comes to his goalies.

Tel me this:

Both Hackett and Esche have better GAA and SV% than Eddie Belfour. Are they better?

When did I write that I was a Flyer fan? When did Ed Belfour enter this discussion? You're reaching. I just think you're bent out of shape because you implied that it was laughable for one to consider Cechmanek better than Khabibulin, and I called you on it.

Are they better? I don't think so, but I'm not about to pass off my bias as fact. I also have written several times in other threads that I think Esche is of the ability and age to have a break-out season. Statistically, players encounter significant statistical improvement when they enter their middle twenties, and he's steadily been more reliable with time. Few people predicted the likes of Theodore and Giguere would experience the success they had before they encountered it. Somebody gave them the chance to succeed and I don't believe it's any small coincidence that they bloomed when the did. I don't have the data to confirm my suspiscion, but it would be interesting to review. The Flyers are taking a gamble, but wouldn't argue with anybody who claimed that when the value and cost to acquire the available goaltenders is considered, it's no more a gamble. If anybody hears that Lou is offering up Brodeur, let me know and I'll sell the information to Clarke.

Bill James and a few other people have determined that if you took every baseball player that has ever competed in the game and evaulated them with various value-based formulas (too involved to discuss here), you find that players are most productive at the age of 27. After that, production drops at a consistent rate. Moreover, different positional players encounter production-impacting factors. For example, any student of Sabremetrics would know you'd be much wiser to gamble on a 31-year-old second baseman than a 31-year-old catcher. I digress. I know of nobody who has conducted the same breadth of statistical analysis of hockey players, although I'm certain somebody has crunched the numbers and results to see what it all might mean. Hockey has some differences, such as its fast-paced, ever-changing style during a game that make it inherently difficult to assess (baseball doesn't have the first-baseman running off the field on a change when the batter is running down the baseline). I'd be really interested to see the numbers regarding goaltenders.

After reading that, maybe you can see how I can be wholly unimpressed by a statistical analysis comprised of an equal sign and a question mark. You're not alone. Now I'm not trying to claim I'm a statistical snob. We could fill the room with the stuff I don't know. I am simply interested in seeing people acknowledge they don't have all the information rather than present an end-all, beat-all scenario.

Anywho, I replied to respond to your last post. I'd prefer that you just write "I hate Clarke and I hate Cechmanek and I hate the Flyers" rather than attempting to pass of qualitative information as fact. If you're just coming here to ruffle up the hen house, I'd respectfully prefer that you just go away. This is a public forum, but we didn't all ask you to irritate everyone. Heated debate is fine - I wish we could all discuss this stuff without the agenda of supporting our respective favorites - but that's not what you've been doing.

Thanks.

DanKordicsFist 12-22-2003 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wasting time
Ha Ha, I just love it when you Flyer Fans quote GAA and SV% to justify why your goaltenders are fine. You have been doing this for years, and in the end you all finally realize that Clarke is a bozo when it comes to his goalies.


Tel me this:

Both Hackett and Esche have better GAA and SV% than Eddie Belfour. Are they better?

You have GOT to be a Leafs fan. The top 'o the heap of whining. I've never seen a team and fan base take on the coaches personality the way Toronto has.

I would have to say yes they are. Belfour is a flake. Brett Hull and an obscure ruling that was NEVER used during the season won HIM a cup. Cujo, same problem except his teams couldn't overcome it. Khabibulin, Cechmanek? Same guy as far as what I've seen of them in the playoffs, inconsistent.

So you're arguing on the flyers forum because you have a sincere love of all the teams in the league and can't get enough discussion about them? Or is it because your team is winning RIGHT NOW and if anyone says anything about your team you can point to your record and feel a pseudo-sense of superiority? Will you still come here when your team hits the skids or is bounced from the playoffs as usual?

One thing I know about Maple Leafs fans is they take everything literally while simutaneously creating a rich fantasy life about themselves and their team. Nothing you've said hasn't been easily disputed and your only come backs amount to "Oh yeah" You truly are "wasting time"

GoneFullHextall 12-22-2003 12:16 PM

2 WORDS ON THIS TRADE RUMOR ON WHERE IT STARTED

LARRY BROOKS

now please we can end the discussion right there.

Gagne2433 12-22-2003 12:17 PM

Primeau, Pitkanen aside, is, in my opinion, the most valuable player on this team for two reasons.

1) He brings it every night. People need to realize that he is not the guy he was when he was in Detroit. He is a gritty player and I love what he brings to the team. Is he the most skilled? No. But, he is the best captain this franchise has had in years. And that is valuable.

2) He is an expiring contract. His trade value is rather high right now. Any team would love to unload a solid player with a heavy contract (ie. Bulin [as I assume he makes solid cash]) for a guy who is making a lot now but will be making nothing going into this trecherous summer negotiations.

I think Esche is going to be a player.....Like Clarke said, there is only one great goalie in the league right now. No reason to think Esche CANNOT BE a guy that can carry this team.

Teezax 12-22-2003 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanKordicsFist
You have GOT to be a Leafs fan. The top 'o the heap of whining. I've never seen a team and fan base take on the coaches personality the way Toronto has.

I would have to say yes they are. Belfour is a flake. Brett Hull and an obscure ruling that was NEVER used during the season won HIM a cup. Cujo, same problem except his teams couldn't overcome it. Khabibulin, Cechmanek? Same guy as far as what I've seen of them in the playoffs, inconsistent.

So you're arguing on the flyers forum because you have a sincere love of all the teams in the league and can't get enough discussion about them? Or is it because your team is winning RIGHT NOW and if anyone says anything about your team you can point to your record and feel a pseudo-sense of superiority? Will you still come here when your team hits the skids or is bounced from the playoffs as usual?

One thing I know about Maple Leafs fans is they take everything literally while simutaneously creating a rich fantasy life about themselves and their team. Nothing you've said hasn't been easily disputed and your only come backs amount to "Oh yeah" You truly are "wasting time"

:handclap:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:17 PM.

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.