HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Nashville Predators (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=33)
-   -   Lombardi Playing Tonight: Re-Evaluating the Trade? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=995251)

AEM6729 10-01-2011 05:11 PM

Lombardi Playing Tonight: Re-Evaluating the Trade?
 
According to Elliotte Friedman's Twitter, Lombardi is playing tonight against Detroit.


WTF? In my eyes that makes trading him look less like a smart salary-dumping move and more like a total head-scratcher.

Although I have the feeling that whatever we were clearing cap space for with that trade hasn't totally panned out yet...whether it's resigning the Big Three, or bringing a bona fide offensive threat in. So maybe we should reserve judgment.


Thoughts?

dulzhok 10-01-2011 05:29 PM

We'll see if he plays most of the year...

If he does, it will be one of the worst trades in recent memory. Not that we gave up Lombardi for nothing, but mainly that we gave up our most tradable non-core asset for nothing and took on more salary in Lebda.

I don't know what the rush to trade him was... it's not like we were paying him over the summer. We should have at least held out until training camp to see if he made any progress before giving away assets to dump him.

Nitrous Mafia 10-01-2011 05:43 PM

If Weber ends up walking or some scenario where that money is not used then that will suck. Just wait and see.

Soundgarden 10-01-2011 06:30 PM

Eh, We had acquired Fisher when Lombardi was traded, there was no room for someone who hasn't skated in a year. Franson was a throw in, a nice shiny PPQB throw in, but a throw in none the less.

But, like brah said, if we don't use the money on something like re-signing the main three, or acquiring someone so that we can re-sign the main three it'll be considered a bad trade.

Enoch 10-01-2011 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dulzhok (Post 37336201)
We'll see if he plays most of the year...

If he does, it will be one of the worst trades in recent memory. Not that we gave up Lombardi for nothing, but mainly that we gave up our most tradable non-core asset for nothing and took on more salary in Lebda.

I don't know what the rush to trade him was... it's not like we were paying him over the summer. We should have at least help out until training camp to see if he made any progress before giving away assets to dump him.

I have said this from the beginning. Agreed. The money has not been used. Lombardi is actually playing. We gave up our most tradeable asset in a defenseman starved league for Robert Slaney and a likely 4th round pick. Happy days. The sad part of this whole ordeal, is that there was literally no risk on the Leafs part. They get a former 50 point guy who if he doesn't play, they can LTIR AND receive a draft pick in compensation. Additionally, they get Cody Franson who is playing a top 3 role for them thus far. Meanwhile, we get....a 4th round pick if the player we traded away plays and....Slaney.

We took all the risk, gave up the two most valuable pieces, and essentially acquired cap room that we are not using, may not use at all this year.

maplepred 10-01-2011 08:14 PM

Very well put.

I agree with first post as well about why didn't we just wait to see how Lombardi was at camp??

We best be bringing in a top 3 forward to bury the puck or, as most have already pointed out, makes deal look a lot worse.
Poile knows this as well
Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch (Post 37341575)
I have said this from the beginning. Agreed. The money has not been used. Lombardi is actually playing. We gave up our most tradeable asset in a defenseman starved league for Robert Slaney and a likely 4th round pick. Happy days. The sad part of this whole ordeal, is that there was literally no risk on the Leafs part. They get a former 50 point guy who if he doesn't play, they can LTIR AND receive a draft pick in compensation. Additionally, they get Cody Franson who is playing a top 3 role for them thus far. Meanwhile, we get....a 4th round pick if the player we traded away plays and....Slaney.

We took all the risk, gave up the two most valuable pieces, and essentially acquired cap room that we are not using, may not use at all this year.


TootooTrain 10-01-2011 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch (Post 37341575)
Additionally, they get Cody Franson who is playing a top 3 role for them thus far.

I'm not disagreeing with anything you said, but I just want to clarify since I live in toronto and get the full brunt of their news. Franson will not see icetime in the top 2 pairs . He'll be a 3rd pairing guy, utilized on the pp. Might even have to sit a couple nights.

gopreds19 10-01-2011 10:59 PM

Oh no. Another limbo Franson thread. The poster a few posts ago said it best......we traded two roster pieces for cap space, which we have yet to spend, and look less likely to spend with each passing moment.

cleangene 10-01-2011 11:25 PM

Is this going to start AGAIN??????????????

PredsV82 10-01-2011 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cleangene (Post 37354339)
Is this going to start AGAIN??????????????

agreed.

:deadhorse

lets see how the season goes.

Jarnberg 10-02-2011 01:27 AM

Still a terrible trade. The Predators give up a potential 50 point player and a young defenseman for nothing except cap space (which hasn't been used yet) and Slaney.

People quickly defended the trade saying a deal wassoon coming to replace the salary; yet here we are..

Some now will defend it as giving the younger players a chance but you don't trade guys for nothing to give others a chance.

101st_fan 10-02-2011 02:19 AM

We moved an uninsured contract for a player who showed little potential of playing when the deal was made. If he plays, great for him. Right move based on available info.

glenngineer 10-02-2011 06:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch (Post 37341575)
I have said this from the beginning. Agreed. The money has not been used. Lombardi is actually playing. We gave up our most tradeable asset in a defenseman starved league for Robert Slaney and a likely 4th round pick. Happy days. The sad part of this whole ordeal, is that there was literally no risk on the Leafs part. They get a former 50 point guy who if he doesn't play, they can LTIR AND receive a draft pick in compensation. Additionally, they get Cody Franson who is playing a top 3 role for them thus far. Meanwhile, we get....a 4th round pick if the player we traded away plays and....Slaney.

We took all the risk, gave up the two most valuable pieces, and essentially acquired cap room that we are not using, may not use at all this year.

That's the thing, they can put him on LTIR, we couldn't. If he had taken another monster hit and been out for another season or two then people would ask for Poile's head that we signed a guy with concussion history and he's sitting on the bench using up valuable cap space.

Until we see how the cap space we received is used, it's hard to analyze this trade fully. From the outside looking in, it doesn't look very good but we gave up a guy we didn't have play for us last year, albeit 4 periods, a third pairing defenseman and we received some cap relief. We'll see how it goes from here.

Roman Yoshi 10-02-2011 07:21 AM

I honestly can't believe some people are still defending this trade. If Poile had something lined up directly after the trade, then some of us wouldn't be upset, but as of now he has done nothing with this genius move some of you believe in. To further complicate things, fisher is still not ready to play and we may see Oreilly as our starting center.

RollingPredFan 10-02-2011 07:32 AM

No amount of spin exists in the universe to make this trade look good. Poile is a good GM, but this is and was a stupid, STUPID panic move.

101st_fan 10-02-2011 07:48 AM

When Poile doesn't make a move ... complaints. When Poile does make a move ... complaints. At least one thing is constant. :rolleyes: If we still had Lombardi's contract on the books, our salary would be higher than last year's. (We're within $3.5mil of last season's $50.9mil end of season number)

When we traded him it looked like no chance of him playing this season. Couple that with the uninsured contract and it made sense to move it based on available information.

Maybe this is us getting fleeced, maybe Lombardi remains made of glass and dumping his $3.5mil salary turns out to be a wise move. So far it seems that Lombardi has undergone a great change in his motivation level and is on the path to possibly contributing but it's too early to know if he's truly back or not.

Hindsight isn't available to make decisions.

token grinder 10-02-2011 08:12 AM

it was a bad trade from an nhl 12 standpoint, but a necessary one in real life.

i don't understand how you can overlook:

1) we were on the hook for 2 more years with 7 million dollars owed on a contract that was unisured.
2) the minute we acquired fisher, lombardi was redundant, esp with the center depth we have. while it may not be sexy, we can roll solid centers n every line.
3)cody franson is a third pair dman. we have replaced him with a third pair dman in hillen. and even with franson being 6-4 or whatever and hillen being 5-7 or whatever, the physical presence is about the same. do we lose out on the pp? our power play sucked with him. at worst it sucks without him.
4)this was a cya trade. poile didn't want to be on the hook for the money if lombardi got hurt again. while matt may be a good player, he is a hit away from being marc savard, and we can't afford that.
5) cody is an rfa after this year as well i think. i would guess he would command 2 million or so. why would we want to pay him that when we have 1 million dollar options in house? plus we have more important rfas to worry about, and not weber-sk, wilon, blum, etc.

lstcyr 10-02-2011 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch (Post 37341575)
I have said this from the beginning. Agreed. The money has not been used. Lombardi is actually playing. We gave up our most tradeable asset in a defenseman starved league for Robert Slaney and a likely 4th round pick. Happy days. The sad part of this whole ordeal, is that there was literally no risk on the Leafs part. They get a former 50 point guy who if he doesn't play, they can LTIR AND receive a draft pick in compensation. Additionally, they get Cody Franson who is playing a top 3 role for them thus far. Meanwhile, we get....a 4th round pick if the player we traded away plays and....Slaney.

We took all the risk, gave up the two most valuable pieces, and essentially acquired cap room that we are not using, may not use at all this year.

I wouldn't consider $3.5 million a year for two years for a player who might not play no risk.

Roman Yoshi 10-02-2011 08:51 AM

This is going to continue to be a hotly contested debate until Poile uses that cap space. I think more than anything, there is a lot of bitter disappointment in management not putting their money where their mouth is. We knew Weber was going to make $7M+

They haven't put up the money to improve the team from last years team. Notice, I am not saying at all costs, simply saying I think Poile could be doing more to actively go out and try to find some forward talent. We have a lot of redundant pieces that should be moveable.

And before anyone jumps down my throat, Franson to me, brought a unique skill set of being able to get the puck on the net as well as could've developed into a power play QB. I also feel like having a center lineup of Lombardi, Fisher, Legwand is absolutely outstanding. All three of these guys are great defensively, good offensively, and can work PK and PP. I don't understand what is wrong with having that kind of depth? Sure Lombardi was a question, but if we were going to move franson and him for peanuts the least we could've done is use the money we saved.

101st_fan 10-02-2011 08:57 AM

Would people be happier if we'd simply kept Lombardi (and the inherent risks) just so we'd be spending more now than we did on last season?

101st_fan 10-02-2011 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joetimo (Post 37360485)
This is going to continue to be a hotly contested debate until Poile uses that cap space. I think more than anything, there is a lot of bitter disappointment in management not putting their money where their mouth is. We knew Weber was going to make $7M+

They haven't put up the money to improve the team from last years team. Notice, I am not saying at all costs, simply saying I think Poile could be doing more to actively go out and try to find some forward talent. We have a lot of redundant pieces that should be moveable.

And before anyone jumps down my throat, Franson to me, brought a unique skill set of being able to get the puck on the net as well as could've developed into a power play QB. I also feel like having a center lineup of Lombardi, Fisher, Legwand is absolutely outstanding. All three of these guys are great defensively, good offensively, and can work PK and PP. I don't understand what is wrong with having that kind of depth? Sure Lombardi was a question, but if we were going to move franson and him for peanuts the least we could've done is use the money we saved.

Franson lacked the puck passing skills to be a QB. Yes, he had a great snapshot, but that was it offensively and that skill doesn't translate to becoming a QB. Defensively he was an extremely redundant player in our system and less skilled in his own end than a lot of the guys we have fighting for spots right now. We got rid of a 3rd pairing guy who was easily replaced from within the organization, period.

Bergfors (career best 21g, 44pts) is 1/6th the cost of Lombardi (career bests 20g and 53 points in separate seasons)... Smith is 1/5th the cost. Both are much lower risk than Lombardi with his concussion history. There are a lot of unproven players on our roster, but their potential upside is equal or greater than what we moved out with less risk and a lower cost.

Spending more money does not equal icing a better team.

weeze 10-02-2011 10:03 AM

Moving ML's contract was a necessity! Not sure he really wanted to be here! (Before trade there was not much info sying he may be healthy enough or at all to consider playing this year or at all, since trade he has gotten so much better so fast that he now can play.... Hmmmm makes me wonder!) I liked Franson (as did Weber) but we have several others that are just as good or better, so no loss (except for Weber). I like what we did, as long as it helps us gets us a better player or retain Weber, Suter and Rinne. I think that will happen.

token grinder 10-02-2011 10:23 AM

if we had kept him, we were screwed if someone goes down with injury as far as taking on money, or bringing in someone else at some point. i think that point isn't driven home enough

TMI 10-02-2011 10:46 AM

I told myself I would only post once in this thread, and I hope to keep that promise. Having said that...

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...DdyPNm6CbQ57gA

Another topic that chips away the paint to show the cracks in our fan base. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing. Sometimes two sides bitterly disagree even though technically they are both right. This is one of those times. You have one side saying, "Bad move by Poile. There were other options. Why did he even take a risk on Lombardi to begin with?" There is another side saying, "This move had to be done. Lombardi's salary was stagnate for an entire season, and he showed no signs of improving. Franson was expendable. You have to give to get in this situation."

Yes, it was a bad trade. It was an absolutely terrible trade if you look at the assets going each way. Matthew Lombardi, a guy who might not be a legitimate top six center, but a guy who is talented nonetheless. He is among the fastest skaters in the league. He is responsible in his own end. He may not put up a ton of points, but he is certainly a good player. Franson has his flaws, but he does what he does effectively. He is young. He is cheap. He can put up points from the blueline. Meanwhile, Slaney will probably never play in the NHL, and Lebda may never play in the NHL again. Even if he does he will remain one of the worst defensemen in the league. There is no polishing that piece of **** and calling it gold.

Where I think some people are wrong is when they say things like, "Poile should have waited until camp and preseason started before having to give up Franson." The idea itself isn't ridiculous at all. Why not wait? Waiting could have made the trade better or unnecessary. It looks like that may be the way it goes. Waiting also could have made the trade even worse. If Poile waits until camp and Lombardi doesn't come back, the cost to dump his salary likely increases. At the beginning of July there was still the possibility that he is ready by the middle of September. By the middle of September the possibility of a still-injured Lombardi being ready by the beginning of October is very low. Then, concerns about whether or not he will play at all begin to arise. Toronto wanted Franson because they were taking on a risk, and having to pay that risk. The risk wasn't as big on July 3rd as it would have been on September 16th.

Of course, it looks like Lombardi would have at least been able to play in a preseason game for us. Hypothetically speaking, if he comes back, plays in our final preseason game, and takes a blow to the head that puts him out again what do you think the likelihood of us jettisoning that contract is? Hell, I don't even think you can trade a player on LTIR. We would be spending more money than last season, but $3.5m of that would again be sitting in a dark room unable to watch the game without throwing up. Most of what I just said is purely hypothetical, but when considering a move that has risks most of what you take into account is hypothetical. These are things that had to be thought of before the trade was made.

And, of course, those saying the salary dump was a good thing are also right. Contracts sometimes have to go. Dumont's was one of them. Lebda's was one of them. Way back when, Mason's was one of them. If Lombardi's didn't fall into that category by Christmas, it did as soon as Mr. and Mrs. Underwood's plane landed in Nashville. Lombardi is certainly a third line center on a team with good center depth, but the way Trotz was giving out ice time last season Lombardi is as likely to play on a fourth line as anywhere else. That's $3.5m to play ~12 minutes per night, and that's with PK time. And guys like Smith and Geoffrion nipping right on your heels, making less money, and lacking the injury concerns. Even if that money isn't used until February, spending it on a guy who is effectively your number 3/4 center is irresponsible for any team really. Similar to how spending $3m for Joel Ward is irresponsible. Having money doesn't make something less irresponsible, but it does take away some of the bruising when the consequences smack you in the face. Unfortunately, this team does not have the luxury of having money to cover irresponsibility. I say this fully of aware of the opinion that getting Lombardi in the first place was irresponsible, but that isn't the discussion here. I don't think anyone was upset when he signed.

After the smoke settled, and it settled a loooong time ago, I think the only way to really look at this trade completely was to realize that it was a terrible move that came about out of a terrible situation, but it had to be done. "Making the hard choice. It's one of the burdens of command."

codeyh 10-02-2011 03:57 PM

Hindsight is 20/20.

The money was moved off the books (or into Weber's pocket), and Nashville's going to be just fine.

Do we have a shortage of D prospects to replace Franson? Absolutely not.
Did we go out and get another top 6 to replace Lombardi? Yes, Mike Fisher.

How are we any worse for wear? We're not. As someone else has stated:

:deadhorse Enough already.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:04 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.