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
01-17-2008, 10:00 PM
  #101
jake1970*
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 167
vCash: 500
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.
Why would Boston give up all of those players for Lundqvist when they habe Thomas who is better than Lundqvist?

jake1970* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 10:03 PM
  #102
jake1970*
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR425 View Post
why is it laughable..... Gretzky was traded, Espo was traded, Messier and coffey were traded. I think the problem is Hank is a rock star, and NY loves rock stars. this is and only should be about making the Rangers better.
comparing Lundqvist to Gretzky, Messier...etc is laughable. Lundqvist is not a superstar player - his value is being exaggerated. He is highly tradeable.

jake1970* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 10:08 PM
  #103
jake1970*
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsychoDad View Post
Sorry, an answer from a Bruins fan...

Big NO for this offer, keep Lundquist, we have absolutely no need for him and asking basically for all our top prospects and a 1st for him ist just nuts, really. Timmah is playing better than Lundquist this season and next season with Fernandez healthy we got one of the best goalie pairings in the league, in 2 years Rask, the best goalie prospect in the world together with Price, will be close to be ready for the starting job. So no, thx. Rask + 1st for Lundquist, maybe with a prospect like Hunwick added would be the only offer Boston would make.
I am a Ranger fan and
I agree with you 100% - I am one of the few on this site who thinks Lundqvist is overrated.

jake1970* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 10:13 PM
  #104
jake1970*
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMetalChick View Post
Wow. I just... WOW.
Well, good for Boston, then!
And to think of the fans in NY thinking their teams have good goalies. FOOLS!


If it aint Thomas, its crap. Or Fernandez. Apparently.
You missed his point - he is saying that Lundqvist is not worth all of the player's referenced. Tim Thomas is playing very well - why in hell would they trade all of that talent for Lundqvist? It makes no sense to anyone but unrealistic Ranger fan's on this site. Lundqvist is a good goalie - not great - we are seeing that right now - I would trade him easily for the right deal.

jake1970* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 10:15 PM
  #105
FutureGM97
Registered User
 
FutureGM97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Connecticut, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,832
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FutureGM97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nich View Post
stastny and Wolski.....
to start

FutureGM97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 10:23 PM
  #106
Allen Degenerate
Rookie User
 
Allen Degenerate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Denver
Country: Albania
Posts: 4,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FutureGM97 View Post
to start
Ha.

Haha.

Hahaha.

We'll take our chances with Budaj/Theodore.

Allen Degenerate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 10:27 PM
  #107
dubey
Cookie Powered
 
dubey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Hackey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,745
vCash: 500
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.
There's a joke somewhere in this post I missed, right? Because I honestly hope for your sake that no thought was put into it. I think you'd go over well in the trade rumour/free agent board, much like Montreal Canadiens and Edmonton Oilers proposals.

dubey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-17-2008, 11:43 PM
  #108
dynamoovechkin
Registered User
 
dynamoovechkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SF Bay Area
Country: United States
Posts: 454
vCash: 500
Ludicrous. Laughable. Insane, Ridiculous.

To even think about trading Henke is an indication that you do not understand the soul of the New York Rangers.

This is a guy you build around: athletic, smart and plays with heart. Only an egocentric infant trades a goaltender of his stature (Keenan), or a total moron who would even think about moving the core of your franchise because he goes through a bad patch (Milbury).

Yeah, it could happen- if Sather suffered a cerebral hemorrage!

dynamoovechkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 12:36 AM
  #109
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,689
vCash: 500
so we're days away from signing hank to a long term deal and someone thinks we should trade him...our franchise player no less. come on.

broadwayblue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 01:08 AM
  #110
NHLhockey1234
 
NHLhockey1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake1970 View Post
I am a Ranger fan and
I agree with you 100% - I am one of the few on this site who thinks Lundqvist is overrated.
He's "overrated" for a reason.

Well, let's see, the following "in New York Rangers' 7th round choice ( 205th overall) in the 2000 NHL Entry Draft"

Two Vezina trophy nominations! One of the sexiest men in People Magazine? His stats are way beyond the initial expectations of him. I mean we grabbed him 7th round. I didn't see everyone up and over him initially as they were with Brodeur (1st round, 20th pick).

Now I'm going to dump some stats here:

2005-2006 Rangers 53 3,111 30 12 - 9 116 1,485 2 2.24 .922
2005-2006 Sweden Olympics 6 360 5 1 - 14 0 2.33 (Lundy got a gold medal for Sweden)
2006-2007 Rangers 70 4,108 37 22 - 8 160 1,927 5 2.34 .917
2007-2008 Rangers 41 2,444 20 17 - 4 96 1,032 6 2.36 .907

Brodeur's first three seasons with the Devils (Brodeur also won a couple of goals for Canada I think as well)

1993-1994 Devils 47 2,625 27 11 8 - 105 1,238 3 2.40 .915
1994-1995 Devils 40 2,184 19 11 6 - 89 908 3 2.44 .902
1995-1996 Devils 77 4,433 34 30 12 - 173 1,954 6 2.34 .911

Clearly you can see that Lundqvist isn't that overrated. Please go back to school.


Last edited by NHLhockey1234: 01-18-2008 at 01:13 AM.
NHLhockey1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 05:48 AM
  #111
klingsor
HFBoards Sponsor
 
klingsor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 14,106
vCash: 500
Trading Lundqvist might be right up there with the Habs trading Roy.

klingsor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 07:10 AM
  #112
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake1970 View Post
You missed his point - he is saying that Lundqvist is not worth all of the player's referenced. Tim Thomas is playing very well - why in hell would they trade all of that talent for Lundqvist? It makes no sense to anyone but unrealistic Ranger fan's on this site. Lundqvist is a good goalie - not great - we are seeing that right now - I would trade him easily for the right deal.

No, what he’s saying is that the B’s goaltending is good enough that it does not require an upgrade. Why give up all that talent for Lundqvist when their goaltending is getting the job done? Trading him “easily” is what’s unrealistic about this whole thread. I make no claims that HL is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but why trade a guy who has been one of the key components to our post-lock-out emergence as a playoff team, and who, in his brief career, has played as well as if not better than #35? Seems like more HF hysterics to suggest that a trade should be considered simply because he’s been rather “pedestrian” for the past month and a half. Richter put up a lot of stinkers in his career and still managed to get his number retired.

We’re not getting better than Hank in return. What we’ll get is the HF Members’ dream package of shiny picks and prospects brimming with potential. Meanwhile the Rangers plummet to the bottom of the league, much to the delight of some HF Faithful who would much rather pursue picks than Cups.


Last edited by Shadowtron: 01-18-2008 at 08:31 AM.
Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 07:58 AM
  #113
Jaysfanatic*
BJ Elitist/Hipster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Strathroy, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 62,898
vCash: 500
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.
really? Shanahan at 37 or however the hell old he is, is going to bring you back Logan Coutoure?? You think that Michael Rosizval is going to net Jack Skille and Jagr will get you one of Burglund or Hjalmarsson, but St. Louis has no need for Jagr. As for you Lundqvist trade, yeah, he's a good goalie, but you're asking for the moon from the B's and you're not going to get it. I give this proposal

* out of *****

Jaysfanatic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 08:27 AM
  #114
Melrose_Jr.
Registered User
 
Melrose_Jr.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Providence, RI
Country: United States
Posts: 10,692
vCash: 500
If your only comment about the topic is that "this thread sucks", spare us all your commentary.

Either add to the discussion or move on.

Melrose_Jr. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 09:07 AM
  #115
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,898
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose_Jr. View Post
If your only comment about the topic is that "this thread sucks", spare us all your commentary.

Either add to the discussion or move on.
Yeah, it's been getting ridiculous lately.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 09:23 AM
  #116
GarretJoseph*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 7,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by klingsor View Post
Trading Lundqvist might be right up there with the Habs trading Roy.
No way. Roy was a cup winning keeper and a legend and well on his way to breaking all the records.

The Devils trading Marty (2 seasons ago) would have comparisons to the Roy deal.

GarretJoseph* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 09:29 AM
  #117
klingsor
HFBoards Sponsor
 
klingsor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 14,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarretJoseph View Post
No way. Roy was a cup winning keeper and a legend and well on his way to breaking all the records.

The Devils trading Marty (2 seasons ago) would have comparisons to the Roy deal.
You know what? You're right.

klingsor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 09:49 AM
  #118
Jaysfanatic*
BJ Elitist/Hipster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Strathroy, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 62,898
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarretJoseph View Post
No way. Roy was a cup winning keeper and a legend and well on his way to breaking all the records.

The Devils trading Marty (2 seasons ago) would have comparisons to the Roy deal.
Two seasons ago?? It happened this year. The Devils Repairman suggested it.

Jaysfanatic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 10:37 AM
  #119
segmentation fault
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Jersey City
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimp View Post
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?
The "build team around a player" mentality bugs me. Not only will it put pressure on that one player, but I think we should build the team around a strategy, or a play style, and get players who fit that category. To be honest, I think that sort of thing is why the Devils have been doing so well.

segmentation fault is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 10:55 AM
  #120
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
The "build team around a player" mentality bugs me. Not only will it put pressure on that one player, but I think we should build the team around a strategy, or a play style, and get players who fit that category. To be honest, I think that sort of thing is why the Devils have been doing so well.
exactly. Same thing w/ the Red Wings and why they were so successful. Same thing w/ the Oilers dynasty, even the Islanders 4 cups in a row. Hell, Anaheim will be a force for many years because they are building around a type of game.

On the other hand I think that is what the Rangers are trying to do right now. They have a great goalie (wish he was just a tad bit more consistent), two great forwards (Drury, Gomez) who are in their prime. A core of young forwards who will be major contributors hopefully (Dubinsky, Ani, Chere, also Cally and Pruchs?), a core of young dmen (Tyuts, Staal, Sangs, also girardi & Sauer?).

Down in the AHL they are instilling a good gameplan of being defensively responsible while being able to score well. Also preaching good pp and Pk. They are instilling a type of play in the younger players heads that is obvious when they get called up. Once we get rid of the older school players (jags, shanny, straka, malik, mara) you will see Ranger Hockey Philosophy. We will add only a couple chips each year in free agency as we start developing better players in the AHL. It will take 3-4 years probably until we really see the fruits that are just beginning to sprout.

I think we are on the right gameplan right now and that's sort of why I wish to see many older players traded away and not even try to compete for the PO's this year. But get as many draft picks and young talented prospects and have them play and grow together to get an identity and develop a consistent style.

So I don't think that the Rangers are necessarily building around just lundy. They are more building around a core. Now if Lundy understands this than he won't ask for the moon in these contract negotiations. If he does than, trading away Lundy might actually benefit. Remember rebuilding doesnt happen overnight and unfortunately we half a$$ed it b/c of the success we had the first year post lockout.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 11:01 AM
  #121
Banger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 888
vCash: 500
I'm a Flyers fan and would take him in about 1/10000 of a second. He's the best player on your team and the reason you won most of your games early in the season. Even thinking of trading him is ridiculous.

Banger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 11:19 AM
  #122
Doctor House
Registered User
 
Doctor House's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,658
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by klingsor View Post
Trading Lundqvist might be right up there with the Habs trading Roy.
Nope. Roy asked to leave due to team mismanagement.

Doctor House is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 12:22 PM
  #123
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nich View Post
stastny and Wolski.....
that wouldn't even do it for me. he's untouchable

KreiMeARiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 12:50 PM
  #124
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by segmentation fault View Post
The "build team around a player" mentality bugs me. Not only will it put pressure on that one player, but I think we should build the team around a strategy, or a play style, and get players who fit that category. To be honest, I think that sort of thing is why the Devils have been doing so well.
Yeah, I'm sure having Brodeur has had nothing to do with it.

broadwayblue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-18-2008, 01:02 PM
  #125
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
Yeah, I'm sure having Brodeur has had nothing to do with it.
he had a major part, but having Scott Stevens, Rafalski, Niedermeyer, White, Daneyko on the bluelines doesn't hurt either.

Oh and they also had Madden and Pandolfo who play defense insanely well for forwards.

and they also played a great trap defense that limited the shots.

Brodeur is one of the best goalies ever... his defense infront of him also might have been one of the best ever.

DontStepanMe 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 09:17 PM.

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.