HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Trade lundqvist ??????

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-16-2008, 03:21 PM
  #76
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
Unfortunately there are people who ponder this because, for whatever reason, HF has this uncanny knack for luring people with more interest in--as you say--"shiny futures" than Stanley Cups.
What makes such mentality even more insufferable is that in the case of Henrick Lundqvist, you are talking about your team's future! As in: present AND FUTURE.

Mind-boggling. Truly.

Trottier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2008, 03:22 PM
  #77
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,518
vCash: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR425 View Post
Before you all go nuts, this is a question. Would it be in our best interest to move Hank and some others at the deadline and free up big bucks. We are not a Cup contender now as constructed, and have no cap room. Say we can move Hank to Boston for Kessel, Stuart, Hamil, Rask and a #1. Stuart gives us a physical dman, and Kessel and Hamil some O, Rask another Goaltending prospect. Then we look to move Jagr, Shanny, Straka, Rosie, Leak and Mara. We could maybe send Rosie to Chicago for Skille, then Shanny to San Jose for Couture. Jagr to St.Louis for Burglund and Hjalmarsson. Just a thought but I think it has to be considered. Don't know who would want these players even, but would like to know what you think. The goal is to
build a team that will be a cup contender for a decade or more. Just think Hank will cost so much against the cap, and I believe Montoya is the real deal also. Since he is cheaper for a few years we should give it a shot.
You should be dragged out and beaten for even propsing the idea (that's a joke)!

Seriously though, you must have forgotten what is was like when Dunham was this teams best goalie....Montoya isn't the real deal until he plays in the NHL and starts getting serious conciderations for the Allstar game or a Vezina. The only real thing he's proven is that he's injury prone...not something you want from a goalie.

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2008, 03:31 PM
  #78
AlwaysARanger
Schwing!
 
AlwaysARanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oslo
Country: Norway
Posts: 492
vCash: 500
Trade The New York Rangers... err.. Lundqvist?.

AlwaysARanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2008, 03:52 PM
  #79
Chimp
Registered User
 
Chimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my food garden.
Country: Sweden
Posts: 10,476
vCash: 500
Suggesting to trade Lundqvist for the sake of the future feels as smart as spending your $10 million fortune on lottery tickets, in an attempt to get rich. If some fans feel we truly don't suck enough these days, here's a great attempt at turning us into a copy of Tampa Bay Lighting, only with worse forwards. Here's some news for you: They haven't had that much fun since they lost Khabibulin.


Last edited by Chimp: 01-16-2008 at 04:00 PM.
Chimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2008, 03:53 PM
  #80
Stoney La Rock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 906
vCash: 500
Where is that Chris Crocker person when you need him? Leave Lundqvist alone!!!!!

Stoney La Rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2008, 03:59 PM
  #81
segmentation fault
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Jersey City
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier View Post
What makes such mentality even more insufferable is that in the case of Henrick Lundqvist, you are talking about your team's future! As in: present AND FUTURE.

Mind-boggling. Truly.
Whats really mind-boggling is everyone putting all their eggs in one basket. Yeah I really want to rely on a goalie that consistently lets goals in from behind the goal line.

In fact, I think a MAJOR part of our problem is the fact that we rely too much on Lundqvist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimp View Post
If some fans feel we truly don't suck enough these days, here's a great attempt at turning us into a copy of Tampa Bay Lighting, only with worse forwards. They've done splendid since they traded Khabibulin.
A) The fact that they arent doing well might not be a direct result of the trade.
B) Even if it was, one bad trade doesnt mean they all are.

segmentation fault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2008, 04:03 PM
  #82
OSUlakers
Registered User
 
OSUlakers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VisionQuest View Post
As much as I love the rangers, this board drives me ****ing nuts.

Trade Lundqvist. Yeah. Right.

jesus ****ing christ.
agreed.

sometimes the "speculation" is just past laughable

OSUlakers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2008, 04:19 PM
  #83
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,233
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR425 View Post
Before you all go nuts, this is a question. Would it be in our best interest to move Hank and some others at the deadline and free up big bucks. We are not a Cup contender now as constructed, and have no cap room. Say we can move Hank to Boston for Kessel, Stuart, Hamil, Rask and a #1. Stuart gives us a physical dman, and Kessel and Hamil some O, Rask another Goaltending prospect. Then we look to move Jagr, Shanny, Straka, Rosie, Leak and Mara. We could maybe send Rosie to Chicago for Skille, then Shanny to San Jose for Couture. Jagr to St.Louis for Burglund and Hjalmarsson. Just a thought but I think it has to be considered. Don't know who would want these players even, but would like to know what you think. The goal is to
build a team that will be a cup contender for a decade or more. Just think Hank will cost so much against the cap, and I believe Montoya is the real deal also. Since he is cheaper for a few years we should give it a shot.
I read through the post and I would have to say that Boston is not the team I target with Hank.

I'm looking directly west to LA.

Alex Frolov, Jack Johnson and the LA 1st in this year draft for Lundqvist is a deal worth looking into and even then I'm not sure I take that either

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2008, 04:25 PM
  #84
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,345
vCash: 500
I only have one thing to say to anyone who would seriously consider trading Lundqvist at this point in time:

I'm glad your name isn't Glen Sather. Doing so would set the organization back YEARS. We finally manage to find a young #1 goaltending stud and people want to trade him because of some inconsistent play for a team that has been (at best) downright brutal this year? This place is really unbelievable sometimes.

HatTrick Swayze is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2008, 04:29 PM
  #85
Chimp
Registered User
 
Chimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my food garden.
Country: Sweden
Posts: 10,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by segmentation fault View Post
Whats really mind-boggling is everyone putting all their eggs in one basket. Yeah I really want to rely on a goalie that consistently lets goals in from behind the goal line.

In fact, I think a MAJOR part of our problem is the fact that we rely too much on Lundqvist.



A) The fact that they arent doing well might not be a direct result of the trade.
B) Even if it was, one bad trade doesnt mean they all are.
Is it mind-boggling that everyone want all their eggs in one basket? Excuse me, but... WHAT? First, you argument to go big time lottery on this team, by trading quality for quantity (which is considered a bad trade proposal over at the trade boards) in an attempt to make the skill level on the team even out. Then you're defending it with that it's a lottery to have a few star players? I won't even start on the logic to "trade Lundqvist away because we rely too much on him."... I'm sorry, but I miss words. Really.

And who are we going to have in net? Joe Average? Cujo? Valiquette? "I haven't played a NHL game yet" Montoya? And nevermind that it would cost us alot to trade for a goalie to replace Lundqvist, if we even could get anything more than a backup on another team, because no team is insane enough to trade their clear #1 goalie for a couple of players. This isn't the 80's, you need a frigging goalie to win something.

I'm done with this discussion. This is ridiculous.

Chimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 01:47 AM
  #86
NHLhockey1234
 
NHLhockey1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 451
vCash: 500
I am about to throw up. Darnit, there's no puking smilies on here

NHLhockey1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 03:25 AM
  #87
Forever Blue
Registered User
 
Forever Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 1,042
vCash: 500
We get our first great goaltender since Richter and now we want to trade him because we have a guy who MIGHT be as good as Henrik? Yuck.

Unless you're getting back Luongo, there's no point. Get all the forwards and draft picks you want, you go nowhere without a franchise stopper. We have one. There's a VERY GOOD chance that Montoya, at his absolute best, will only be EQUAL to what we currently have. And I wouldn't say the odds are all that great and absolute that he'll reach that type of peak.

No thanks.

Forever Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 03:29 AM
  #88
Darius Dangleaitis
Padowan Kovalchuk
 
Darius Dangleaitis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Morristown, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 20,828
vCash: 500
Trade him.

For George Parros.

Darius Dangleaitis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 02:36 PM
  #89
GregNYR19
agitator
 
GregNYR19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fair Lawn, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,059
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to GregNYR19
trading him would be absolutely nuts..he wouldnt come back. hes more valuable than any of those players. hes the franchise goalie uve seen what he does...im hoping for another 30 win season at least

GregNYR19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 02:53 PM
  #90
segmentation fault
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Jersey City
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimp View Post
Is it mind-boggling that everyone want all their eggs in one basket? Excuse me, but... WHAT? First, you argument to go big time lottery on this team, by trading quality for quantity...
When did I say that? I am merely saying that, if a good deal comes along, it would be stupid to not go for it. And the only reason i would say go for it, is if it improves us in offense or defense, but especially defense. With a good defensive mind, you wont need the highest quality goaltender. Not to mention our current D isnt that great.

segmentation fault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 03:13 PM
  #91
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by segmentation fault View Post
When did I say that? I am merely saying that, if a good deal comes along, it would be stupid to not go for it. And the only reason i would say go for it, is if it improves us in offense or defense, but especially defense. With a good defensive mind, you wont need the highest quality goaltender. Not to mention our current D isnt that great.
you have to understand that people on this board get attached to people and don't understand that there is no such thing as an untouchable person. Jeez it took half a season for some to realize Prucha isn't going to be a 30-40 goal scorer every season. There is always a trade to be made that can better your team. Look the best goalie ever was traded once (Roy). The best hockey player of all time (Gretzky) was traded 2x. People get traded and sometimes it actually makes your team better. It is possible. But you better make sure that what your getting would better the team for a long time, and have a good backup plan.

I don't want to trade Lundy but if somebody would make me an offer that would make this team much better (for the longrun as well) than why wouldn't I at least listen to the offer.

And if you still don't understand its called synergy. Definition - A mutually advantageous conjunction where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

Many good-great young players could could have a better effect than 1 amazing player.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 03:26 PM
  #92
tjs252
Registered User
 
tjs252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 489
vCash: 500
The concept of synergy doesn't work in pro sports, except perhaps basketball.

In the NFL you can't win without a QB. You don't trade a franchise QB.

In baseball, you can't win without good pitching. Sure, you can try, but ask the Mets what a great lineup without solid pitching does. The '96-'03 Yankees proved this. The lineup can be interchangeable save for one or two key pieces. You win with pitching.

In hockey, you can't win without a good goalie. You can try, but the Rangers teams of the not so distant past show that no matter how good the rest of the team is, a bad goalie dooms you.

You can argue synergy all you want, but it can't happen by weakening the key position on the team.

tjs252 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 03:41 PM
  #93
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjs252 View Post
The concept of synergy doesn't work in pro sports, except perhaps basketball.

In the NFL you can't win without a QB. You don't trade a franchise QB.

In baseball, you can't win without good pitching. Sure, you can try, but ask the Mets what a great lineup without solid pitching does. The '96-'03 Yankees proved this. The lineup can be interchangeable save for one or two key pieces. You win with pitching.

In hockey, you can't win without a good goalie. You can try, but the Rangers teams of the not so distant past show that no matter how good the rest of the team is, a bad goalie dooms you.

You can argue synergy all you want, but it can't happen by weakening the key position on the team.

NFL - synergy is important try not having a good offensive line... doesn't make a difference who your QB is if they can't protect your a$$. Ask Carr, Pennington, Favre, Brady, Manning, Clemens, Rivers, anybody from Arizona. Bad line=bad QB no matter what. Good line= a good chance the QB will succeed. Same thing on defense if you don't have a good line the rest of the d will suffer. ask the Jets - conversely ask the Giants what a good d-line will do for a not so great secondary. Same w/ the Patriots when they won the SB (they were using WR's in the secondary). so right off the bat you're an idiot.

MLB there is a small one between pitching and defense. also between offense and pitching. but baseball isn't like most sports as the defense puts the ball into play and there is no continuity to it.

NHL - a great goalie and a horrible defense - see Rangers from 1997-2003. Also see current slump. conversely a see Caronlina's cup win. Ward isn't the greatest goalie but the team played great defense in front of him. Also see Rangers earlier this year and the end of last year. A good defense will always make the goalie that much better. Also if you have the ability to score more (or easier) you can than focus more on defense and help a goalie out. See Ottawa, and Buffalo last year. So yes synergy does exist.



again let me reiterate that I do not want to trade Lundy. But if somebody throws at you an absolutely incredible offer you would be dumb not to at least listen/entertain the idea.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 04:00 PM
  #94
tjs252
Registered User
 
tjs252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 489
vCash: 500
You simply don't trade a goalie playing at an elite level at a young age.

Ask Florida how the Luongo trade worked out. Ask New Jersey or the Island if they're glad they hung onto Brodeur and DiPietro while letting forwards come and go.

You can trade forward X or defenseman Y for forwards A & B and defenseman C and say you got better and arguably that could be true.

Just look at Vancouver and tell me that giving up a whole mess of players for a great goalie is a bad idea. And since the team getting the elite goalie makes the trade 9 out of 10 times, why would you ever think that it would be a good idea to be on the giving end.

tjs252 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 06:05 PM
  #95
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjs252 View Post
You simply don't trade a goalie playing at an elite level at a young age.

Ask Florida how the Luongo trade worked out. Ask New Jersey or the Island if they're glad they hung onto Brodeur and DiPietro while letting forwards come and go.

You can trade forward X or defenseman Y for forwards A & B and defenseman C and say you got better and arguably that could be true.

Just look at Vancouver and tell me that giving up a whole mess of players for a great goalie is a bad idea. And since the team getting the elite goalie makes the trade 9 out of 10 times, why would you ever think that it would be a good idea to be on the giving end.
I never said I would want to trade Lundy or that it is a good idea. I am just stating that it is possible to trade him and end up a better team. That's the thing about synergy say you do a 3 for 1 trade and 1 of those players flops. Chances are the trade will go down as a bust for you. It is very risky as everything has to work out as planned.

By the way how many Stanley cups has Vancouver won since they got Luongo? Also how many SC's did FLA get while having Luongo? How many SC's did the NYI get since they got Dipietro? The answer for all is none.

And also I don't think anybody thought that FLA got a good deal as soon as the trade. Everybody knew that VAN won that trade as soon as it was announced. FLA didn't really get any type of return at all. That was a trade that I never would have done.

Having an elite goaltender doesn't mean jack s*** if you dont have the correct supporting cast around you. That my friend is synergy. The players as a whole are more important and will carry a team further than 1 player.

It would be extremely hard for the Rangers to get a good trade for Lundy, and chances are to make the risk worth while the Rangers would have to ask for too much in return that the other team wouldn't do it. Unless Milbury is the GM. Therefore Lundy won't get traded, but to say that no matter what you wouldn't trade him or listen for any trades would be assinine.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 06:11 PM
  #96
Chimp
Registered User
 
Chimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my food garden.
Country: Sweden
Posts: 10,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by segmentation fault View Post
When did I say that? I am merely saying that, if a good deal comes along, it would be stupid to not go for it. And the only reason i would say go for it, is if it improves us in offense or defense, but especially defense. With a good defensive mind, you wont need the highest quality goaltender. Not to mention our current D isnt that great.
I'm drunk and need to get sober before going to bed, so... just what did you mean with "bad having all eggs in one basket" then, if not that it's a big gamble?

If a good deal comes along? You mean something like alot better than the stupid proposals made in this thread, with a bunch of lottery prospects that just might turn out fine... as for "good offense and defense can cover for mediocre goaltending"... you aim for drawing the Carolina *cough*Vancouver*cough* lottery ticket, or building a dynasty? Are you hoping for drawing maximum profit by going on an incredible collective hot streak, or actually having a good shot (every year)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rags225 View Post
you have to understand that people on this board get attached to people and don't understand that there is no such thing as an untouchable person. Jeez it took half a season for some to realize Prucha isn't going to be a 30-40 goal scorer every season. There is always a trade to be made that can better your team. Look the best goalie ever was traded once (Roy). The best hockey player of all time (Gretzky) was traded 2x. People get traded and sometimes it actually makes your team better. It is possible. But you better make sure that what your getting would better the team for a long time, and have a good backup plan.

I don't want to trade Lundy but if somebody would make me an offer that would make this team much better (for the longrun as well) than why wouldn't I at least listen to the offer.

And if you still don't understand its called synergy. Definition - A mutually advantageous conjunction where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

Many good-great young players could could have a better effect than 1 amazing player.
Way to have Roy and Gretzky as examples, that just happened to have nothing to do with logic in sports. Roy was traded because he demanded it and Gretzky was traded because his owner needed a bunch of money (that he got). Tell me, what's our backup plan for trading Lundqvist? Joe Average in net?

And how many times have the team offering quality for quantity won? How many times have that bunch of players - that would only be worth it if almost all turned out to bloom - been deemed better than the quality player the team gave up for them? I can tell you the most usual outcome: busts and eternal agony for the team that gave up the quality player.
Quote:
NHL - a great goalie and a horrible defense - see Rangers from 1997-2003. Also see current slump. conversely a see Caronlina's cup win. Ward isn't the greatest goalie but the team played great defense in front of him. Also see Rangers earlier this year and the end of last year. A good defense will always make the goalie that much better. Also if you have the ability to score more (or easier) you can than focus more on defense and help a goalie out. See Ottawa, and Buffalo last year. So yes synergy does exist.
So, one example with Carolina in 100 years makes a perfect example of how you should build a team? How about looking at how the true dynasties in NHL were built instead of the one playoff hot streak wonders? How many of the cup winning teams won with mediocre goaltending? If you want stronger defense, trading your goalie is probably not a good way of enhancing it.

And "synergy" is only great to quote if it actually happened to work (Buffalo and Ottawa did not) and could actually relate to something. I don't think a tank would think it's that effective without its armour plating or gun turret. I'm going out on a limb here, but who isn't?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rags225
...again let me reiterate that I do not want to trade Lundy. But if somebody throws at you an absolutely incredible offer you would be dumb not to at least listen/entertain the idea.
If some incredibly mindblowing trade proposal from another team is offered - that would cripple them - let's take it from there, ok?

And tell me: How many times have the team proposing the trade been the winners? "Uhm, we think Lundqvist is part of the problem, because we rely too much on him, so we expect to get maximum ridiculous profit from him by proposing to other teams we don't want him, and therefore show those teams we think he's worth alot of value (by offering him), which we absolutely shouldn't do if we want alot of value from him."

But by all means, keep going. I'm sure you have something going here. At the very least, you could have the fame of being responsible for going into the top10 list of "The worst trades ever made", along with Luongo/Jokinen for Kvasha and Parrish. Or if that feels like too much quality for quality, let's top the Thornton trade Boston made for a bunch of trash (that just happened to not turn out like they were supposed to. Huge surprise there).


Last edited by Chimp: 01-17-2008 at 06:48 PM.
Chimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 06:25 PM
  #97
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,381
vCash: 500
Chimp, again I stated I don't want to trade him. I just said that you don't just say nobody is untouchable. You are also forgetting that all dynasties have excellent dmen and forwards in front of them. A great goalie and crap dmen or no scoring will not win you a championship either. You need balance.

Put it this way we'll use a scale from 1-10.

Lundy is a 9,
Prucha is a 6
Malik is a 4

You trade Lundy and Prucha for a forward rated an 8, a dman rated a 7.5, and a goalie rated a 7. your team in theory should get a little bit better.

Like I said it would be really tough to make it work out. There are too many factors and variables that come in play. But to not listen to anybody would be ridiculous.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 06:35 PM
  #98
Nich
Registered User
 
Nich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Wantagh
Country: Croatia
Posts: 6,895
vCash: 500
nope...sorry i don't do crack....

Nich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 06:42 PM
  #99
thomascal377
 
thomascal377's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,060
vCash: 500
colorado will take him off your hands

thomascal377 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 07:02 PM
  #100
Nich
Registered User
 
Nich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Wantagh
Country: Croatia
Posts: 6,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thomascal377 View Post
colorado will take him off your hands
stastny and Wolski.....

Nich is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:43 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.