Thread: Proposal: Trade Proposal: Anton Babchuk
View Single Post
Old
09-09-2009, 11:57 AM
  #55
Ludicrous Speed
Registered User
 
Ludicrous Speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Killumbus
Country: Micronesia
Posts: 11,052
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macster View Post
To me this issue is simple- every team interested in Babchuk has more leverage than Rutherford because the Canes have already made it known they want to get rid of him. If they want any sort of compensation they, not the teams trading for him, will have to bite the bullet a bit.

That said, he will still cost something. Trading Klesla for him just because you don't like Klesla is ridiculous. Klesla is worth more to this team than many know. His play in the playoffs were a great sign. Goloubef is a very strong prospect, and one the team can't and likely won't give up for a guy like Babchuk. Ruth maybe, because although he is a high-end prospect, he plays a hell of a lot like Methot, who obviously just re-signed. We need to keep the prospects who can move the puck, it's a severe deficiency in the organization.

Also, the team likely isn't willing to move a first or second rounder. Budget teams (like us) rely on those two rounds to re-stock the team. Now, if we are talking third or lower, yeah, that would make sense. It also fits in with Babchuk's current value.

I would think there are two options

Babchuk for Ruth OR Babchuk for a 3rd and 5th

ALL of that said, we would still need to move salary to accomodate him, so another move would need to take place (looking at you, Chimmer) Carolina is tight financially so a Chimmer for Babchuk trade probably wouldn't be in the cards. Basically unless ownership approves the additional salary, and Carolina accepts a trade for a prospect or a pick(s) then this trade likely won't happen.

You don't overypay to a team with minimal leverage.
Bang on.

Ludicrous Speed is offline   Reply With Quote