HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Notices

Official (Draft)Trade Proposal thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-28-2004, 02:40 AM
  #1
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
Official (Draft)Trade Proposal thread

I thought I'd start a thread where we can suggest different trade scenerios within the draft. I've got 2.....

CuSa_1 is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 02:41 AM
  #2
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
Proposal W/ Washington

Our 1st rounder for Washington's first rounder (27th) and the opportunity to switch 1st rounders next year, we'll throw in another pick if need be. Then hopefully Lukas Kasper will be around for the 27th pick.

Or we could pick up their 2nd rounder (51st)

I don't know, just bored and seeing if anything sticks to the wall.

Any thoughts?

CuSa_1 is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 02:43 AM
  #3
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
Proposal w/ Florida

I posted the following on a Panthers (not HF) message board:

Want toughness eh?

How about Tkachuk or Weight for all three of your 2nd rounders???

---Are Tkachuk and Weight's contracts too high for FLA?

Tkachuk makes 10 mill next season (04-05)
9 the year after that (05-06)
and for the 06-07 season makes only 5 million

Weight made 8.5 this year
7 next year and (04-05)
7.5 the year after that (05-06)


I got a response from a poster with 1063 posts FWIW:

Well, Panthers owner Alan Cohen said in the Keenan/Martin press conference that he would spend $10 million in free agency to improve the team this offseason, but I'm sure he would adjust his plans in order to accomodate a big trade if he approved of it and thought it would be beneficial for the team.


Never really said whether or not he liked the deal, only that Florida would be willing to take on the contract of a Tkachuk/Weight. Would 3 2nd rounders be enough for you "we aren't rebuilding" type? I think it'd be pretty sweet to have 4 2nd rounders, then if we trade our first rounder for a later 1st and a 2nd, that's 5 2nd rounders, ok now I'm wandering. Thoughts?

CuSa_1 is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 07:30 AM
  #4
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
I have no desire to trade down to get Kaspar. I dont know why everyone on this particular board seems to be so high on him, but I haven't heard anyone else outside of this board [read: Blues board] suggest that he's a diamond in the rough. From the scout reports that I've read, Zakharov seems like a much better player than him.

degroat* is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 07:31 AM
  #5
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Ideally, I'd like to see the Blues get one young scorer that's NHL ready or at least close to it if they traded one of their 3 big forwards. But... with the number of UFA's on the market this year, I could handle trading Weight for 3 2nd rounders.

degroat* is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 12:41 PM
  #6
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
Stich, if all else was equal, would you rather deal Tkachuk or Weight?

CuSa_1 is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 01:03 PM
  #7
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuSa_1
Stich, if all else was equal, would you rather deal Tkachuk or Weight?
If the return was equal and we didn't have to pick up any part of their salaries, I'd still deal Weight.

degroat* is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 02:23 PM
  #8
Frenzy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,788
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stich
If the return was equal and we didn't have to pick up any part of their salaries, I'd still deal Weight.
I would also dump Weight. Shoot, trade him for Husileus and their 1st 2nd. Trade him for a puck bag....

Frenzy1 is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 10:35 PM
  #9
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,621
vCash: 500
In the interest of fairness, Valeev plays LW also and he could probably make the BLues lineup out of camp next season(he almost made the team last year). Also, Rycroft is listed as a RW but for most of the year he played on the left side(mostly because Low has established himself as the fourth lines RW). That is two more guys that should be added between Zakharov and King. It still isn't that impressive.

We do need to draft scoring LW's but trading DOWN? NO. If we do anything with our first(other than giving it a little friend) it better be to trade UP so we can have a shot at Picard or Olesz. Trading DOWN to get a player is dumb. If you want a player then DRAFT THE GUY, don't trade down and risk losing him.


Last edited by Prussian_Blue: 05-30-2004 at 08:26 AM.
kimzey59 is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 01:53 AM
  #10
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59

We do need to draft scoring LW's but trading DOWN? NO. If we do anything with our first(other than giving it a little friend) it better be to trade UP so we can have a shot at Picard or Olesz. Trading DOWN to get a player is dumb. If you want a player then DRAFT THE GUY, don't trade down and risk losing him.
We're gonna have to agree to disagree. Reaching for a player is a big pet peeve of mine. I wouldn't mind trading up (in fact I'd prefer it), however if Kasper is the guy Jarmo wants and he knows he'll be taken between the 27-32 range, I really hope Pleau tries to trade down to the 22-25 range. Therefor leaving a pretty good "safe zone" that another team won't reach on him and we'll pick up a 2nd 3rd or 4th rounder.

CuSa_1 is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 07:35 PM
  #11
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuSa_1
We're gonna have to agree to disagree. Reaching for a player is a big pet peeve of mine. I wouldn't mind trading up (in fact I'd prefer it), however if Kasper is the guy Jarmo wants and he knows he'll be taken between the 27-32 range, I really hope Pleau tries to trade down to the 22-25 range. Therefor leaving a pretty good "safe zone" that another team won't reach on him and we'll pick up a 2nd 3rd or 4th rounder.
I don't like reaching for players either, but as an organization we cannot afford to be taking lesser players at this point(I'm not talking about going with the BPA method, I'm talking about getting the best player available in one of our need area's(LW and Center)). If we trade down we risk having a guy like Chipchura(who IMO is the guy we should be targeting with our first rounder(assuming he really does drop to the 15-20 range)) still being available at number 17 and not being able to draft him. I am very much against that kind of scenario. If Kaspar has so many cons that he would drop to the bottom of the first there is a chance that he could drop even further and still be avialable for our second round pick. Even if HE doesn't drop that far a guy with similar ability will be available for us to take. The players in this draft are all pretty similar after the top 10.

kimzey59 is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 07:48 PM
  #12
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,621
vCash: 500
Stich, the problem the Blues have at LW is this: the top 2 prospects(Sejna and Zakharov) are hit or miss and the next best propect at that position is a 3rd liner at best(Valeev). No, we don't have a real top liner on RW or D, but we do have a lot of 2nd line caliber players. In this draft there aren't really any top end RW's or D men that will be available at number 17. At best we'd be looking at a slight upgrade in the position. IMO we would be better off getting a "safe bet" player at the LW or at center(where we do have some issues) that can play on a scoring line.


Oh, and the deepest position we have prospect wise is in goal. Barulin and Nissenen have starter potential and we have another 3 guys(Rudkowsky, Sanford and Beckford-Tseu(who should be ranked right between those two)) that project as NHL backups.

kimzey59 is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 10:53 PM
  #13
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Kimsey, I disagree that "there aren't really any top end RW's or D men that will be available at number 17".

At 17 we're pretty much guaranteed Smid, Green, or O'Neill (all of which arguably have top pairing potential, IMO) and if all 3 are gone then someone else good is going to fall to the Blues.

degroat* is offline  
Old
05-30-2004, 09:12 AM
  #14
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
First of all, I've removed all traces of the shouting match between Stich and me.

I disagree with most of the points he made, as he disagrees with mine, but on further review, I've decided that it's not worth ruining a thread over.

There's enough other good stuff here that this thread can live on its own merits, without personal sniping between Stich and me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stich
Kimsey, I disagree that "there aren't really any top end RW's or D men that will be available at number 17".

At 17 we're pretty much guaranteed Smid, Green, or O'Neill (all of which arguably have top pairing potential, IMO) and if all 3 are gone then someone else good is going to fall to the Blues.
Personally, I don't like O'Neill as a first-round pick, and from what I read, his stock has dropped somewhat. I think it's fair to point out that Central Scouting had O'Neill ranked #19 in North America at mid-term, and he's since dropped to #23 in their final rankings.

Smid or Green, I could live with. For Smid to be a top-pair defenseman, however, he'd have to be paired with a defenseman that has some offensive capability, because everything I read about Smid suggests that he's a stay-at-home, defense first type, and having two of those as your top pairing isn't necessarily what you want.

The Blues currently have two young NHL defensemen who have real offensive skills -- Pronger and Backman. So for Smid to be most effective as a top-pair defenseman, he'd have to be paired with one or the other of those two, which certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility. Or he could be paired with Belle in the long term, a combination that could be tremendously effective if both pan out as they are expected to.

Green has offensive upside and takes care of business in his own end, so he could be paired with any of Pronger/Backman/Belle and be effective, or he could be the offensive dynamo in a future pairing with Jackman, Byrne or FitzGerald.

These are all exciting possibilities for the future, but if you look at the players the Blues already have in the system on defense, you'll see that they have seven legitimate NHL players/prospects already, and all are young enough to form the totality of the Blues' defense for the next decade:

Pronger
Jackman
Backman
Walker
Belle
Byrne
FitzGerald

There's a gap in NHL-readiness between the first four and the last three, but there are enough veterans either already here, or available through free agency, to bridge that gap until Belle, Byrne and FitzGerald are ready.

What about RW's? Following are the highly-ranked RW's who should be available when the Blues pick:

Blake Wheeler (#17 North America, per Central Scouting)
Enver Lisin (#13 Europe, per Central Scouting)

Central Scouting's final rankings also show Lukas Kaspar as a RW, not a LW as he was in the mid-term ranking, and he's ranked 14th in Europe.

Lauri Tukonen (5th Europe) and Alexander Radulov (9th Europe) will probably both be gone when the Blues pick, as will Drew Stafford (9th North America).

So the $64,000 Question is: Do the Blues take a defenseman, a position in which they're pretty well-stocked in the organization already? Or do they "reach" for a forward (at a need position) who would probably be available if they were able to trade down?

And if they could trade down and add another pick in the second round (above their own pick at #47), are either Smid or Green worth passing up the chance to add another fairly high pick?

In other words, are either Smid or Green at #17 the equal of two players at around #25 and #40 (EDIT: I don't have a specific team in mind that has these specific draft spots, so let's just say "trade down for a late first-round pick and an early second-round pick")?

If you like O'Neill, for example, it's certainly probable that he'd be available at around #40; Roman Tesliuk, Brett Carson, Kyrill Lyamin and Oscar Hedman also project to be available there as well.

So you could draft a forward late first round and a defenseman early in the second, and then with the Blues' own second-round pick at #47, draft a goalie from out of a group of available goalies that should include:

Magnus Akerlund, HV 71 (Sweden -- 2nd Europe)
Michal Valent, Martin (Slovakia -- 3rd Europe)
David Shantz, Mssissauga (OHL -- 3rd North America)
Justin Peters, Toronto (OHL -- 4th North America)
Jeff Glass, Kootenay (WHL -- 5th North America)

That's the potential benefit of trading down.

Personally, and for the long-term benefit of the Blues' organization, I'd prefer a result of:

Kaspar @ around #25 (or Wheeler, or Lisin...)
O'Neill @ around #40 (or Tesliuk, or Carson, or Lyamin, or Hedman...)
Shantz #47 (or Akerlund, or Valent, or Peters, or Glass...)

To a result of:

Green #17 (or Smid...)
Shantz #47

This is, of course, all predicated on trading down and getting both a late first-rounder and a high second-rounder. But if that's possible, I think it's something that the Blues should seriously consider.


Last edited by Prussian_Blue: 05-30-2004 at 10:10 AM.
Prussian_Blue is offline  
Old
05-30-2004, 10:20 AM
  #15
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Brian,
The difference in our opinions really begins with the fact that I don't think anything at the NHL level should be considered when making a draft pick. Things certainly appear to be set on the blueline for some time, but things can change and they can change quickly. Look at where we were at center a few years ago... Turgeon, Handzus, Conroy. In the matter of a day both Handzus and Conroy were gone and we were left with Turgeon, Reasoner, and I dont even remember who. Then not too long later we had Weight, Demitra, and Cajanek down the middle.

My 'philosophy' is to add to the organization based on what's in the farm system. Looking at the farm system alone, IMO, the positions that we should avoid in the 1st are LW, RW, and Goaltending. I say that, but if there was a considerably better player available at one of those positions, I wouldn't avoid that player to meet a need.

This, combined with the fact that the Blues as an organization have shown a great ability to develop defensemen, is why I want to go defense in the 1st round. Also, I'm not really sold on either Stafford or Chipchura.

Assuming you're going D, Green is the obvious choice if he happens to fall to 17 (which I dont think he will).

I, like you, am I little down on O'Neill with how much he's falling in the rankings. That said, McKeens still has him pretty high up there.

As far as Smid, I disagree with the assessment that he's primarily a defensive defenseman. Here is McKeen's scouting report:

"Slick Czech defensemen strongest assets are arguably his exceptional puckhandling ability and a special knack for weaving his way through heavy traffic. A terrific stickhandler, he is also very adept at making accurate, precisely-timed outlet passes. However, Ladislav Smid does tend to overhandle the puck at times, which can get into hot water. His solid slapshot contributes to his offensive flair, although Smid needs to release it more frequently. On the defensive aspect of his game, he is positionally sound, relying more on his good vision and reading of plays than on toughness."

I read "terrific stickhandler" and "accurate, precisely-timed outlet passes" and "On the defensive aspect of his game, he is positionally sound, relying more on his good vision and reading of plays than on toughness" and immediately think Nik Lidstrom.

Obviously he'd probably never turn into Lidstrom, but the skillset is similar.

degroat* is offline  
Old
05-30-2004, 11:25 AM
  #16
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stich
Brian,
The difference in our opinions really begins with the fact that I don't think anything at the NHL level should be considered when making a draft pick. Things certainly appear to be set on the blueline for some time, but things can change and they can change quickly. Look at where we were at center a few years ago... Turgeon, Handzus, Conroy. In the matter of a day both Handzus and Conroy were gone and we were left with Turgeon, Reasoner, and I dont even remember who. Then not too long later we had Weight, Demitra, and Cajanek down the middle.
I understand where you're coming from, and agree that things can change quickly. But the Blues' position on defense now is a little different from their position at center a few years back, in that there are more NHL-caliber guys available on defense now (4: Pronger, Backman, Jackman, Walker) than there were at center back then (3).

Also, the players are younger now. In 2000-01, when both were here, Turgeon and Conroy were already over thirty. None of the defensemen I mentioned is over thirty yet; Pronger won't be thirty until October.

That said, again, I understand where you're coming from. I just feel that the Blues' situation on defense is not as likely to be changed as the Blues situation at center three seasons ago, and thus, defense shouldn't be as high a priority on draft day this year.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stich
My 'philosophy' is to add to the organization based on what's in the farm system. Looking at the farm system alone, IMO, the positions that we should avoid in the 1st are LW, RW, and Goaltending. I say that, but if there was a considerably better player available at one of those positions, I wouldn't avoid that player to meet a need.
I understand this as well, but...

If you look at the actual "farm system" as being only the players now playing pro at Worcester or Peoria, the Blues are awfully short at LW, where there are only Sejna and Valeev as prospects with any real shot at making the NHL. Evans and Hemingway may be the only RW prospects with legitmate NHL aspirations... add Glumac if the Blues decide to offer him a contract.

On defense, Byrne and MacKenzie have legitimate NHL aspirations; Scheffelmaier is, IMO, a depth type who probably won't ever wear an NHL uniform, although I'd like to be wrong about that, and would welcome 210's input since he sees Scheffelmaier regularly.

Pohl and McClement at center, Sanford and Divis in goal.

To make a long story short, the Blues current "farm system" has really only a dozen guys -- tops -- who have legitimate NHL aspirations, a couple at every position. None of the forwards currently playing pro, with the exception of Sejna, projects to be more than a third-line forward, and no defenseman except Byrne projects to be more than a fourth or fifth d-man.

They have guys coming up just behind them, however, who are within a year or two of making the jump to the AHL, and of those guys, the prospects at defense, center, and in goal (Belle, FitzGerald, Jonsson, Troliga, Troy Riddle, Nissinen) may be a little ahead of the next wave of prospects on the wings (Maiser, King, Zakharov, Shkotov) as a group.

Belle projects to be a top-pairing defenseman if he fulfills his vast potential. Troliga's upside is a Michal Handus, which could be as high as a second-line center. Nissinen could well be the Blues' "goalie of the future," and is quite probably the best of any goalie prospect below Sanford and Divis on the depth chart (Barulin has tons of potential as well; Nissinen is, however, a little further along in his development path, thanks to two years experience in the top league in Finland.).

Thus, I'd like to see the Blues add size and skill on the wings -- either side would be fine -- in the draft.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stich
This, combined with the fact that the Blues as an organization have shown a great ability to develop defensemen, is why I want to go defense in the 1st round. Also, I'm not really sold on either Stafford or Chipchura.
On this we fully agree. The Blues have indeed shown a great capacity to develop defensemen. That's why I'd like to have them prioritize on the guys they already have, although I fully understand the desire to add more riches to that particular treasure chest.

I think it's interesting how the same tendency -- a demonstrated ability to develop defensemen -- can be used to support either side of this debate.

I'm not really sold on Stafford or Chipchura, either. If it came down to one of them vs. Green or Smid, I'd probably go with Green or Smid. I know that there are several teams who like Stafford, though, and some Islander fans are positively salivating over Chipchura.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stich
Assuming you're going D, Green is the obvious choice if he happens to fall to 17 (which I dont think he will).
Maybe... he's the ninth-ranked prosect in North America, and I can see sixteen guys taken ahead of him. Ovechkin, Malkin, Olesz, Ladd, Barker, Picard, Schwarz, Wolski, Tukonen, Meszaros, Radulov, Valabik, Stafford, Smid, Chipchura, Montoya (not necessarily in that order). Bolland and Dubnyk are also possiblities to go in the top sixteen, and of course, Green is as well.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stich
I, like you, am a little down on O'Neill with how much he's falling in the rankings. That said, McKeens still has him pretty high up there.

As far as Smid, I disagree with the assessment that he's primarily a defensive defenseman. Here is McKeen's scouting report:

"Slick Czech defensemen strongest assets are arguably his exceptional puckhandling ability and a special knack for weaving his way through heavy traffic. A terrific stickhandler, he is also very adept at making accurate, precisely-timed outlet passes. However, Ladislav Smid does tend to overhandle the puck at times, which can get into hot water. His solid slapshot contributes to his offensive flair, although Smid needs to release it more frequently. On the defensive aspect of his game, he is positionally sound, relying more on his good vision and reading of plays than on toughness."

I read "terrific stickhandler" and "accurate, precisely-timed outlet passes" and "On the defensive aspect of his game, he is positionally sound, relying more on his good vision and reading of plays than on toughness" and immediately think Nik Lidstrom.

Obviously he'd probably never turn into Lidstrom, but the skillset is similar.
Thanks for that, as I don't have access to McKeen's scouting reports. That's something I still need to talk the wife into letting me spend money on...

Since I don't have those scouting reports, I tend to go by demonstrated performance (statistics) in making my assessments, and I see Smid with one goal, two points, and 51 PIM in 45 games with Liberec. He might be a great stickhandler with great passing abilities and a great shot, but he hasn't gotten a lot of tangible results with them as yet. And again, without the scouting reports, tangible results are really all I have to go on.

That said, as I mentioned above, if the Blues developed a one-two future punch of Smid and Belle on the blueleine, I'd be overjoyed. That'd be two kids each with size, skill, offensive upside, and maybe something of a mean streak as well.

I just can't help wondering, however, if the Blues couldn't get a similar player in the second round, from among the guys I mentioned in my earlier post (Tesliuk, Carson, Lyamin, Hedman).

IMO, the lack of a real blue-chip scoring forward prospect in the Blues system is what keeps them ranked in the bottom third of the league as far as development of prospects. People see Jackman and Backman and say, "that's great, but we like the 'sexy,' high-scoring forwards."

I'm really not all that concerned with how the Blues are seen by fans, but I can't help wishing that we could draft and develop a Havlat or a Richards or a Vasicek (all drafted in previous drafts, after the Blues made their first selection) to go along with the Backmans and Jackmans.


Last edited by Prussian_Blue: 05-30-2004 at 11:33 AM.
Prussian_Blue is offline  
Old
05-30-2004, 11:50 AM
  #17
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,370
vCash: 500
I feel like the guy on PTI...

Conroy was 29 during the entire 2000-01 season (his birthday is 9/4?/1971)
Evans plays LW, not RW.

As for Scheffelmaier...write this season off for him. He was injured for huge chunks of it and because of that was off his game when he was playing. Next season will be a much better indicator for him.

And it's funny that you say that you only see "dozen guys -- tops -- who have legitimate NHL aspirations" because that's at least as many (if not more) then any other organization has right now. It's the lack of the "sexy point scoring forward" that's the cause of the Blues ranking being so low.

But that's a horse I've beaten so many times it's hamburger now...

210 is offline  
Old
05-30-2004, 02:34 PM
  #18
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210
Conroy was 29 during the entire 2000-01 season (his birthday is 9/4?/1971)
I stand corrected. The major point, however, was that the Blues' NHL-caliber defensemen now are somewhat younger as a group than the Blues' NHL centers in 2000-01. And I think that point is still valid.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 210
Evans plays LW, not RW.
I'll defer to your personal observation. Evans is listed in the NHL Guide and Record Book as a right-handed shot, so I assumed he'd be playing RW if he wasn't playing center (which is his listed position).


Quote:
Originally Posted by 210
As for Scheffelmaier...write this season off for him. He was injured for huge chunks of it and because of that was off his game when he was playing. Next season will be a much better indicator for him.
Here's hoping he does well. He's got NHL size, for sure. If he can develop and maintain an NHL talent and motivation level, that would be great.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 210
And it's funny that you say that you only see "dozen guys -- tops -- who have legitimate NHL aspirations" because that's at least as many (if not more) then any other organization has right now. It's the lack of the "sexy point scoring forward" that's the cause of the Blues ranking being so low.
I don't disagree with any of this. I've always felt that the Blues, on balance, had at least as many prospects with legitimate NHL shots as any other franchise, and I've always felt that the Blues' inability to develop a "sexy point-scoring forward" has been the reason why they don't get more respect as an organization.

They really haven't built a scoring forward from the ground up since Bernie Federko. And that's why I'm so keen on seeing them get one with this pick, the highest first-rounder they've had in almost a decade.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 210
But that's a horse I've beaten so many times it's hamburger now...
More like dog food.


Last edited by Prussian_Blue: 05-30-2004 at 02:38 PM.
Prussian_Blue is offline  
Old
05-30-2004, 05:56 PM
  #19
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,370
vCash: 500
I understood your point about Conroy and the fact he was 29 doesn't change anything...his birthday is the same as a buddy of mine so I just happened to know his age.

Evans is a right shot that plays LW when not at center. He's pretty decent at it too, which is why I think he has a shot at making the Blues next season.

210 is offline  
Old
05-30-2004, 07:30 PM
  #20
Senor Rational
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 501
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Senor Rational
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210
I understood your point about Conroy and the fact he was 29 doesn't change anything...his birthday is the same as a buddy of mine so I just happened to know his age.

Evans is a right shot that plays LW when not at center. He's pretty decent at it too, which is why I think he has a shot at making the Blues next season.
210, could you compare Evans to any player currently playing in the NHL? A friend of mine says Evans reminds him of Conroy, can you put in your 2 cents? Thank you

Senor Rational is offline  
Old
05-30-2004, 08:19 PM
  #21
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,370
vCash: 500
I'm not a fan of saying "player so-in-so is just like player X", but a comparison to Conroy certainly wouldn't be out of line...

210 is offline  
Old
05-31-2004, 06:13 AM
  #22
Frenzy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,788
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stich
Brian,
The difference in our opinions really begins with the fact that I don't think anything at the NHL level should be considered when making a draft pick. Things certainly appear to be set on the blueline for some time, but things can change and they can change quickly. Look at where we were at center a few years ago... Turgeon, Handzus, Conroy. In the matter of a day both Handzus and Conroy were gone and we were left with Turgeon, Reasoner, and I dont even remember who. Then not too long later we had Weight, Demitra, and Cajanek down the middle.
Our biggest problem w/ the farm system is that the losses for our 1st rounders have really hampered the team. I know it was 10 years ago, but those losses could have been 1st line players. So instead of developing, we have had to go gain top end tallent via trades. Which is why our C changed over the course of 2 years. If we had players w/in the system, then we may not have had to make those trades or those trades wouldn't have drained our top 6/top 4 depth.

I can't wait for the 25th. It is kind of like Xmass.

Edit:

Sorry, as for trades, I would Dump Weight for a late 1st, Mid level prospect and a 4th. (Lang Trade). But I also thing we could get something out of LA for him (Brown) or use him to grab a kid and move up (swap of 1st w/ LA).

Depending on what is available, I would talk Washington and see if they have any interest in moving up, dumping both of their late first to do so.


Last edited by Frenzy1: 05-31-2004 at 06:22 AM.
Frenzy1 is offline  
Old
06-02-2004, 07:40 PM
  #23
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenzy1
Sorry, as for trades, I would Dump Weight for a late 1st, Mid level prospect and a 4th. (Lang Trade). But I also thing we could get something out of LA for him (Brown) or use him to grab a kid and move up (swap of 1st w/ LA)
For the record...before Detroit acquired Lang I thought of suggesting we offer Weight and about $6-9 million to the Red Wings in exchange for a mid-level pick in '04, a mid-level prospect and a 1st round pick in '05. But...they pulled the trigger on Lang before I could get back here to suggest it.

Irish Blues is offline  
Closed Thread

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 09:16 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.