Thread: Proposal: Philly TB Minn
View Single Post
05-11-2009, 10:30 PM
State of Hockey
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 11,373
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
So the trade comes down to our 09 1st for Harding and a fourth? A first is a too much to pay for a goalie that played 11 games last year on a team known for making their goalies look good (Harding is also an RFA that you probably aren't resigning). A fourth is not making up that value difference IMO. Particularly since the depth of this year's draft makes that first pick more valuable than usual.
No, a first is borderline not enough. Harding is a former high 2nd rounder that's developed, ready, and has been highly successful at every level so far. Are you telling me that an unproven, not ready, no-guarantee-at-all late 1st rounder is worth more than a ready, proven, high 2nd rounder AND a 4th?

By the way, Minnesota goalies look good because they are good. Ask any Wild fan if Harding has had an easy time with the Wild. They'll all say that he has not. He commonly gets back-to-backs, a very high shot count, and little goal support. Last year Harding gave up 8 goals against Dallas and his coach thought he played a good game. Chew on that.

Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
We aren't dealing our 1st for Harding
Enjoy your continued goalie problems then.

Originally Posted by SHartnell19 View Post
Not fair for Philly at all.

Lupul is pretty much equal to PMB
That makes: Philly's 1st for a RFA goalie who has never been a starter...and a 4th.
Very fair for Philly. You should be jumping all over a goalie of Harding's caliber AND a draft pick for a low first.

Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514 View Post
Way too much value on Harding here.
Not enough value if history repeats itself.

Originally Posted by Flames Fanatic View Post

Minny gets Vinny for PMB, Harding, Gilles, 2010 1st, 4th round.

Call me crazy but isn't this one of those quantity for quality trades?
Almost any trade for quality ends up being that way. But that's a heckuva a lot of quality and quantity for Minnesota to give up.

Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514 View Post
It's not about him being a good goalie, it's about his trade value. Trade value for goalies who have proven little to nothing is....little to nothing...
Trade values for somewhat unproven goalies with high potential are huge. That's why they're not traded very often. They're that valuable. When they are, like Mike Smith or Vesa Toskala, the return is big.

State of Hockey is offline   Reply With Quote