HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Los Angeles Kings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42)
-   -   Serious Trade Proposal (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=64005)

not quite yoda 03-22-2004 12:03 AM

Serious Trade Proposal
 
I am a Habs fan. Considering that we just acquired Danis and already have Halak and Michaud in the system... I figure that Garon is expendable.

He's 26, cheap (1.5M$) and prooving he can be effective no1 level keeper. He is putting up good numbers while being in only his first full NHL season. He deserves to be given a shot next season as a no1 but will never be able to here with Theodore firmly established.

I figure the Kings, Canucks, Rangers and Leafs may all be interested in him. I noticed that someone on this board offered up Palffy as trade bait but he commandsa hefty price tag and not many teams are looking to take on high salaries right now.

I was thinking along the lines of a 1 for 1 deal. A good 24 or under skater or blue chip prospect could do the trick. Looking at the Kings organization, I was think of D.Brown or D.Grebeshkov.

How does Garon for Grebeshkov sound? One for one.

2goodtimes 03-22-2004 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by espion
I am a Habs fan. Considering that we just acquired Danis and already have Halak and Michaud in the system... I figure that Garon is expendable.

He's 26, cheap (1.5M$) and prooving he can be effective no1 level keeper. He is putting up good numbers while being in only his first full NHL season. He deserves to be given a shot next season as a no1 but will never be able to here with Theodore firmly established.

I figure the Kings, Canucks, Rangers and Leafs may all be interested in him. I noticed that someone on this board offered up Palffy as trade bait but he commandsa hefty price tag and not many teams are looking to take on high salaries right now.

I was thinking along the lines of a 1 for 1 deal. A good 24 or under skater or blue chip prospect could do the trick. Looking at the Kings organization, I was think of D.Brown or D.Grebeshkov.

How does Garon for Grebeshkov sound? One for one.


Just how blue chip are you talking? I mean there are lots of shades of blue, but something tells me the shade your talking is a non-tradable asset. Grebs, Frolov, Brown and Gleason are not available in any trade. I would offer up the rights to Aaron Rome for Garon since you are willing to go straight up. Rome plays with more grit to compliment his frame (6'1) and the ability to score, to a limited extent a sign of gaging his offensive awareness- numbers in juniors (SWIFT CURRENT 52GP - 9G - 34A - 43PTS - PIM 154). Check out his profile before you frown on the offer.

2gt

The VEGASKING 03-22-2004 12:29 AM

Garons name was floating around in my head last night. I'd rather give up Brown. I'd do that deal straight up.

Legionnaire 03-22-2004 12:31 AM

Not very good to me. As good as Garon has been in a backup role, that is exactly the extent of his experience. It is a big jump going from a backup to a regular starter. Do I think Garon can make that transition? Yeah, probably. The real question is, do I want to sacrifice a sure thing for a question mark? Probably not.

I personally don't think that Garon's value is that high. I would say that a second round pick, and or a second/third tier prospect would get it done. But, that is just my opinion.

not quite yoda 03-22-2004 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2goodtimes
Just how blue chip are you talking? I mean there are lots of shades of blue, but something tells me the shade your talking is a non-tradable asset. Grebs, Frolov, Brown and Gleason are not available in any trade. I would offer up the rights to Aaron Rome for Garon since you are willing to go straight up. Rome plays with more grit to compliment his frame (6'1) and the ability to score, to a limited extent a sign of gaging his offensive awareness- numbers in juniors (SWIFT CURRENT 52GP - 9G - 34A - 43PTS - PIM 154). Check out his profile before you frown on the offer.

2gt

Hehe... You gotta give something up to get something good. I am offering an established NHL keeper. If you have been watching him all year, you would believe me when I say that he does have no1 clout.

For a guy who has already been drafted, a 9 goal season in the high scoring WHL... not too impressive. Frankly, I never heard of Rome although I do keep track of prospects. In The Hockey News' s yearbook, he isn't even ranked as one of the Kings top 10 prospects. I don't see any indication that he is NHL caliber.

So if you want to acquire a quality, young, cheap NHL goalie to be your no1... you better be willing to part with a good player as are we.

edit: ok, I just realized Rome is a D. So those 9 goals don't seem too shabby if I take everything into consideration. But despite having just made a more extensive backround check, I still find that Garon for Rome isn't close to fair.

Blue chip means a can't miss prospect who WILL definitly make the NHL. And be a solid player. Tambellini and Boyd don't even fit that description.

not quite yoda 03-22-2004 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legionnaire
I personally don't think that Garon's value is that high. I would say that a second round pick, and or a second/third tier prospect would get it done. But, that is just my opinion.

If you're offering a 2nd round pick or a 3rd tier prospect (which is a youth who has no chance of making it)... well you're not going to get him. A 2nd round pick has no guarantee of making it. Garon WAS drafted in the 2nd round and HAS made it. That makes him worth more than your crapshoot pick. I mean, wasn't Chechmanek (who failed as a no1 in Philly) acquired for a 2nd rounder?

So no Garon for you.

If you want a no1 keeper (which is a huge chunk of your NHL lineup) you better give up a chunk too. If you'd like, you could instead try to land an over-the-hill 36 year old Kolzig. His salary is 6M$ and he should be retiring soon. He too will cost you more than a 2nd round pick.

Cerebral 03-22-2004 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by espion
If you're offering a 2nd round pick or a 3rd tier prospect (which is a youth who has no chance of making it)... well you're not going to get him. A 2nd round pick has no guarantee of making it. Garon WAS drafted in the 2nd round and HAS made it. That makes him worth more than your crapshoot pick. I mean, wasn't Chechmanek (who failed as a no1 in Philly) acquired for a 2nd rounder?

So no Garon for you.

If you want a no1 keeper (which is a huge chunk of your NHL lineup) you better give up a chunk too. If you'd like, you could instead try to land an over-the-hill 36 year old Kolzig. His salary is 6M$ and he should be retiring soon. He too will cost you more than a 2nd round pick.

I feel the need to come to the Kings fans' rescue here. Firstly, Garon is not a number one goaltender. You might think he is and he might have the potential to become one but he has played in less than 20 games this season. You are not going to get Grebs or Brown for a 26 year old Garon who is still stuck in a backup role. I personally wouldn't even move Tambellini for him and you claim Tambellini isn't even a bluechip prospect. If you're looking for a surefire NHL prospect (which means he was probably drafted in the top 16), you're likely not going to get it for Garon. Like a previous poster mentioned, the best you'll likely get is a 2nd rounder and medium range prospect. If the cost for Garon is one of the Kings' top prospects, I'd expect them to try and address their goaltending situation through the draft.

Randall Graves* 03-22-2004 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by espion
I am a Habs fan. Considering that we just acquired Danis and already have Halak and Michaud in the system... I figure that Garon is expendable.

He's 26, cheap (1.5M$) and prooving he can be effective no1 level keeper. He is putting up good numbers while being in only his first full NHL season. He deserves to be given a shot next season as a no1 but will never be able to here with Theodore firmly established.

I figure the Kings, Canucks, Rangers and Leafs may all be interested in him. I noticed that someone on this board offered up Palffy as trade bait but he commandsa hefty price tag and not many teams are looking to take on high salaries right now.

I was thinking along the lines of a 1 for 1 deal. A good 24 or under skater or blue chip prospect could do the trick. Looking at the Kings organization, I was think of D.Brown or D.Grebeshkov.

How does Garon for Grebeshkov sound? One for one.

Grebeshkov for Garon?Sorry but you are seriously OVERRATING Garon...that would never happen.

zeppelin97 03-22-2004 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by espion
I was thinking along the lines of a 1 for 1 deal. A good 24 or under skater or blue chip prospect could do the trick. Looking at the Kings organization, I was think of D.Brown or D.Grebeshkov.

How does Garon for Grebeshkov sound? One for one.

Why such stringent requirements for a Garon trade (must be under 24, must be a blue chip, must shave his chest regularly)? I mean seriously, montreal has a good group of young players already. How about adding a "veteran with experience".

Trade idea: kings fan favorite Anson Carter for Garon

ukyo 03-22-2004 02:15 AM

I think to most other teams, Garon would be very intriguing. Intriguing enough to offer up a top prospect. I have one reason that would make LA balk at the idea: Jamie Storr.

The problem I have with trading for a guy like Garon is that he hasn't played a full season as a #1 yet. For all intensive purposes, Garon right now isn't as good as a goaltender than Jamie Storr was (thought to be) three years ago. Storr has always been stellar as a backup or a split-start goalie, but once he was handed the #1 job, he folded like a house of cards. We have no way of knowing if the same thing will happen to Garon in LA.

When you look at Brown and Grebeshkov, you can tell they will, barring injury, both have stellar professional hockey careers. The Kings' track record for grooming young forwards and defensemen enhances their projections. Their track record for grooming goalies is the opposite. As such, while Garon for Brown or Grebs may make sense in absolute values, Brown and Grebeshkov are worth more in the Kings' system than Garon would be, at least in my opinion.

Why would the Habs want prospects in return anyways? Don't you guys have enough? I would think that sending over more veteran players like Straka, Modry, or Miller would make more sense from the Habs' point of view.

Legionnaire 03-22-2004 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by espion
If you're offering a 2nd round pick or a 3rd tier prospect (which is a youth who has no chance of making it)... well you're not going to get him. A 2nd round pick has no guarantee of making it. Garon WAS drafted in the 2nd round and HAS made it. That makes him worth more than your crapshoot pick. I mean, wasn't Chechmanek (who failed as a no1 in Philly) acquired for a 2nd rounder?

So no Garon for you.

If you want a no1 keeper (which is a huge chunk of your NHL lineup) you better give up a chunk too. If you'd like, you could instead try to land an over-the-hill 36 year old Kolzig. His salary is 6M$ and he should be retiring soon. He too will cost you more than a 2nd round pick.

How has Garon made it? He has played a grand total of 41 games in his NHL career.

2goodtimes 03-22-2004 08:38 AM

you're kidding, right?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by espion
Hehe... You gotta give something up to get something good. I am offering an established NHL keeper. If you have been watching him all year, you would believe me when I say that he does have no1 clout.

For a guy who has already been drafted, a 9 goal season in the high scoring WHL... not too impressive. Frankly, I never heard of Rome although I do keep track of prospects. In The Hockey News' s yearbook, he isn't even ranked as one of the Kings top 10 prospects. I don't see any indication that he is NHL caliber.

So if you want to acquire a quality, young, cheap NHL goalie to be your no1... you better be willing to part with a good player as are we.

edit: ok, I just realized Rome is a D. So those 9 goals don't seem too shabby if I take everything into consideration. But despite having just made a more extensive backround check, I still find that Garon for Rome isn't close to fair.

Blue chip means a can't miss prospect who WILL definitly make the NHL. And be a solid player. Tambellini and Boyd don't even fit that description.

Based on HF's assessment of weakness and strengths, i don't see the point in the Habs trading Garon anyway. One of your glaring weakness's (like the Kings) is in goal. Both teams lack a "blue chip" goalie prospects, so from the standpoint of who benefits, both teams will for the mid-range to short-term of period of things, while the Habs would be getting longer service from Rome. If you have turned down a grity, two-way qaulity defensemen for a career (41 games played) backup goalie then you are obviously placing higher value on him then what he deserves. In my assessment, you are reading to much into what other people are writing about the Kings and their prospects. They clearly should be in the top 10 with their depth and skill at each position. As of late we have 2 quality goalies at the collegiate level or in Juniors that are making a case of a "blue-chip" goalie prospect. So in essence, we do not make good trade partners if your going to try an over value a backup goalie for one of our promising young D prospects.

2gt

GKJ 03-22-2004 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by espion
How does Garon for Grebeshkov sound? One for one.

absolutely not

not quite yoda 03-22-2004 10:15 AM

Why acquire more prospects? The team is fine at present time, no need to add a veteran. There wouldn't be much room for a contract like Carter's anyways. Gainey has stated (and everybody knows) that the future of the team is with its prospects. Not with over priced veterans.

There is room for improvement in the prospect pool as far as gritty forwards and right handed Ds are concerned.

LA could use a new goalie. Montreal has two good ones. I figured that made for good trading partners.

punchy1 03-22-2004 10:22 AM

Here is my opinion and maybe it will stiffen things a bit.

The reason we would offer up Rome, likely as grand a defencive prospect for us as Gleason and Grebs were before this season (before we seen them play in the NHL) is that we have yet to sign him. So we have this great top prospect defenceman that we have until June to sign and would deal him, a real bluechip prospect that seems to be flying under HFs radar simply because of where he plays (or some reason thats a question to most who follow the lads) and a very likely NHL solid two way defenceman with bite who us fans would offer for your great young yet unproven as a #1 starter for a full season goalie.

Does that help? I still reckon that we would have to send more along with Rome but if I were Monts GM I would be looking in opposite to your idea. You have one of the top prospect pools in the game. Why add more youth. I would put the deal this way.

To Mont, Eric Belanger (French Can center 26 scored 30 points a fan fav until this season solid face off man clutch goal scorer) and Rome (see above) +5th rounder.

To LA, Garon (41 games played in the NHL and yet to establish his self as a true number one goalie) and Hainsey (a defenceman with nice upside that hasn't established his self with you yet).

We BOTH give up assets. We both get an NHL player back for our roster. We both remain with a defencive prospect.


That said, I would wait and see if there is a chane to nab Gerber from the fowlies first if I were trying to pick up a young goalie. Of the two, I would rather have him.

I think that it would be more important for us to try and pick up a more established young goalie who is ready to make the jump but, if we ended up with Garon, I wouldn't be upset about it. He is a SIGNIFICANT upgrade over what we have both on the KINGS and in the system so it could only help.

Ebell would be a nice fit for you lads as well.

2goodtimes 03-22-2004 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by espion
Why acquire more prospects? The team is fine at present time, no need to add a veteran. There wouldn't be much room for a contract like Carter's anyways. Gainey has stated (and everybody knows) that the future of the team is with its prospects. Not with over priced veterans.

There is room for improvement in the prospect pool as far as gritty forwards and right handed Ds are concerned.

LA could use a new goalie. Montreal has two good ones. I figured that made for good trading partners.


The Kings are currently trying to establish the same thing that the Habs are; great young core players to stabalize the future. The production from both Ryder and Ribeiro have taken your team to another level, thus the reason you think the Habs wouldn't need a veteran like a Carter or Belanger. We are in the same boat, so why would we give up the likes of promising talent, when we are on the same building plan the Habs are on? From both the tone and attitude of this conversation, we're better off going after Montoya in the first with the 13th-16th overall selection.

Old Hickory 03-22-2004 11:09 AM

I heard The Kings were looking in to Garon in the offseason and MTL wanted too much. Grebeshkov for Garon is a serious overpayment.
It's like asking you to give up Komisarek for Huet

2goodtimes 03-22-2004 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingsjohn
The Kings were trying to acquire Garon in the offseason and MTL wanted too much. Grebeshkov for Garon is a serious overpayment.
It's like asking you to give up Komisarek for Huet


Thanks for confirming the serious idiocy of this trade proposal, KJ

not quite yoda 03-22-2004 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2goodtimes
Thanks for confirming the serious idiocy of this trade proposal, KJ

ouch! About that Belanger proposal... He is a veteran who would havea tough time cracking our lineup. French Canadian or not.

2goodtimes 03-22-2004 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by espion
ouch! About that Belanger proposal... He is a veteran who would havea tough time cracking our lineup. French Canadian or not.


That's your thoughts on that one player and i respect that. However, it's not like he is the only player that we have. So long as your proposal makes sense, i wouldn't mind us moving a player to try and help both teams. Most people come on the board requesting Fro, Grebs or Brown and the answer is always the same- hell no, unless the commodity coming back is extremely large in upside or of immediate help.

That was my initial point.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:16 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.