View Single Post
Old
07-08-2012, 07:15 PM
  #292
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
..
Quote:
I'd prefer if you'd try to keep things to one trade at a time. Try not to go over 5 players total.
I can't promise I can accommodate your preference.
This needed to be multi team process. Had to move Dubi, for example, to create space for Nash. And no, you can't assume you can --- or possibly may want to --- dump them in the same deal. (Chicago wants Dubi, will pay reasonably for him.)

Quote:
Identify a goal scorer if that's what you think we need the most--say someone like Michalek, Versteeg e.g. and try not to sell off absolutely key players that we have no replacements for.
I have mostly tried to do that, making exceptions sometimes under heading of you have to give to get, and don't want to give coke for pepsi.

Quote:
For instance Girardi is our only really fine right side defenseman. Not smart to trade.
If that is most dominant factor. But IMO, Staal is better, and if we need a sniper and Girardi must be sacrificed, I can't turn down a deal if the upgrade we get is better than what we've given up.

In my defense, most Girardi deals are for premium in return.

Quote:
Anisimov is not a good enough replacement for Stepan as 2nd line C.
Sorry but do not agree with you at all there. AA will make a boneheaded play, but he usually hustles, and is far more athletic than Stepan. If not constantly jerked around, AA would develop/flourish more quickly. I'm not giving Stepan away, but if there is a good return, I have no problem with AA as replacement.

Quote:
Consider cap figures and try to find an area the other teams might be looking for help.
Believe my proposal was cap compliant.
I specifically identified how these deals fit the other team -- CBH looking for grit, TML seeking wings w/possible pop, etc.

Quote:
Looking at the one proposal--you trade Vernace (no big loss for sure) but I suspect (I may be wrong) that you look at Vernace as 'Oh, he's got no chance at all of ever being an NHL'er so what good is he--get rid of him'. The thing is we won't have an AHL team churning out NHL caliber players if we're just playing rookies and second year players. You need veterans at that level too or those kids will get clobbered and a lot if not most will never amount to anything. There's a reason why they're there.
Can understand why you jumped to that line of thought, but no, it was not my thinking.
I thought, Vernace is a guy Edmonton MIGHT have use for, if the price is right, and he makes swallowing loss of Gernat/Marancin more easily, even though they should not be considered as actually here for 2ish years.

Quote:
I'm sure Cam Talbot thanks you for trading Biron though. The thing is Torts likes giving Henrik a rest now and again. If Talbot can't hold his own Henrik doesn't get his rest.
I believe Talbot has the reflexes to do the job. He needs poise and development. It is a fair question to ask if he gets more development playing as starter for Whale, OR.... if he is backup here, under eye of coaching staff to nip any technique issues in the bud, playing a third or so of the games, + getting tested by likes of the guys we have up here.

We are better served experimenting carefully with this now, as opposed to relying on Biron for another year or two or whenever his reflexes completely go. (Not sure he's got it for the playoffs, anymore, and as we all saw, not in dispute, Hank needs a game here and there at that point.) If Talbot completely craps the place, we can look at options.

I appreciate the outreach.
We are simply not seeing eye to eye, which is fine, as long as people can be civilized about that.

bernmeister is offline