HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Trade COL #3 '09 Pick for LA #5 '09 Pick +

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-06-2009, 05:06 PM
  #1
KingsCrown
Registered User
 
KingsCrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
Trade COL #3 '09 Pick for LA #5 '09 Pick +

COL #3 Overall Pick 2009

for

LAK #5 Overall pick 2009, '09 2nd Round #35 Overall, Jeff Zatkoff

Colorado moves only two spots down, where they can still pick a very good player (Kane, MPS, Schenn), gets an extra 2nd rounder in a deep draft, and a good goaltending prospect in Zatkoff.

You would then have #5 LAK, #33 COL, #35 LAK, #48 MON in the first two rounds to restock your system and rebuild.

Fair??


Last edited by KingsCrown: 05-06-2009 at 05:35 PM.
KingsCrown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 05:07 PM
  #2
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
 
BrindamoursNose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,793
vCash: 500
I'd think LA would say no. They're in no hurry to move 2 draft slots.

BrindamoursNose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 05:08 PM
  #3
Kingjordan
Registered User
 
Kingjordan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,560
vCash: 500
Why are the Kings doing this again? No reason to give up a 2nd and a Very Solid Golie prospect to move up 2 spots.

Kingjordan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 05:14 PM
  #4
KingsCrown
Registered User
 
KingsCrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingjordan View Post
Why are the Kings doing this again? No reason to give up a 2nd and a Very Solid Golie prospect to move up 2 spots.
When your talking about the difference between Duchene and lets say Schenn, Id say thats a big difference. We still have a wealth of goaltending prospects with another draft year coming up. Dont get me wrong there is no problem with having a stock of goalies, but its getting crowded in the minors and there will always be more to draft.

Bernier
Zatkoff
Taylor
Rowat
Jones

There are only so many goal nets to fill.

KingsCrown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 05:31 PM
  #5
Zal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrindamoursNose View Post
I'd think LA would say no. They're in no hurry to move 2 draft slots.
Exactly.

There are two realistic options.

1) Draft at the 5th spot.

2) Trade the pick/players for a proven talent.

Zal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 05:36 PM
  #6
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
 
BrindamoursNose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsCrown View Post
When your talking about the difference between Duchene and lets say Schenn, Id say thats a big difference. We still have a wealth of goaltending prospects with another draft year coming up. Dont get me wrong there is no problem with having a stock of goalies, but its getting crowded in the minors and there will always be more to draft.

Bernier
Zatkoff
Taylor
Rowat
Jones

There are only so many goal nets to fill.
Then they should trade their assets (which is goaltender), for things they need, rather than moving up 2 draft slots

It's just not logical for the Kings in any way really.. they can get a possible offensive dynamo like MSP or Schenn with their pick alone.

Also, why would LA have to throw in a 2nd rounder too? It's just too much to move up 2 draft spots for a team that doesn't really need to.

BrindamoursNose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 05:40 PM
  #7
Dr Quincy
Registered User
 
Dr Quincy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,524
vCash: 500
Sounds like a fair deal to me. Maybe change the second to a little later of a pick. I know some are saying, "Why would LA want to move up they can stay where there they are and pick from..."

But after watching the way the N.E. Patriots operate I can tell you that if there is a player they really like they don't sit ideally by and see if he's there. They control the draft by using their assets (usually multiple picks). LA has a surplass of young goalies. Trading one to get a player that they REALLY want (assuming there is one) seems to me to be very Patriot-like.

Dr Quincy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 05:41 PM
  #8
Isles_Guy*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: long Island
Posts: 6,237
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Isles_Guy*
colorado would never do this, nor should they

Isles_Guy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 05:44 PM
  #9
kingpest19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,850
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Quincy View Post
Sounds like a fair deal to me. Maybe change the second to a little later of a pick. I know some are saying, "Why would LA want to move up they can stay where there they are and pick from..."

But after watching the way the N.E. Patriots operate I can tell you that if there is a player they really like they don't sit ideally by and see if he's there. They control the draft by using their assets (usually multiple picks). LA has a surplass of young goalies. Trading one to get a player that they REALLY want (assuming there is one) seems to me to be very Patriot-like.
I think there is and they are going to wait to see how the first 3 picks go. If it all goes according to teams and need theres a good chance the Kings will end up with who they want. I think the wild card in all of this is going to be ATL.

kingpest19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 05:44 PM
  #10
Zal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,281
vCash: 500
The Kings need top 3 talent in the following positions:

LW
Defensive D-man

Nope, none of the proposed deal fills the Kings' immediate needs.

Losing additional prospects for 2 spots in the draft isn't realistic for the Kings' franchise.

Zal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 06:07 PM
  #11
KingsCrown
Registered User
 
KingsCrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zal View Post
The Kings need top 3 talent in the following positions:

LW
Defensive D-man

Nope, none of the proposed deal fills the Kings' immediate needs.

Losing additional prospects for 2 spots in the draft isn't realistic for the Kings' franchise.
You dont fill immediate needs with the draft. Last year was a very special draft that comes along very rarely. You fill immediate needs with FA or trades. LW/RW is the least valuable position according to DL value of players. Defensive D-man, we have them: Green, Teubert, Drewiske, Cambell.

KingsCrown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 06:14 PM
  #12
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
 
BrindamoursNose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsCrown View Post
You dont fill immediate needs with the draft. Last year was a very special draft that comes along very rarely. You fill immediate needs with FA or trades. LW/RW is the least valuable position according to DL value of players. Defensive D-man, we have them: Green, Teubert, Drewiske, Cambell.
OK, then why trade up using two top-35 picks just to move up two slots if that #3 pick won't have any more of an immediate impact than the #5?

BrindamoursNose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 06:34 PM
  #13
NHL33*
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 7,873
vCash: 500
Avs would pass. Rather go with Duchene's upside.

NHL33* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 06:42 PM
  #14
Kurrilino
Go Stoll Go
 
Kurrilino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,530
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Kurrilino
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsCrown View Post
COL #3 Overall Pick 2009

for

LAK #5 Overall pick 2009, '09 2nd Round #35 Overall, Jeff Zatkoff

Colorado moves only two spots down, where they can still pick a very good player (Kane, MPS, Schenn), gets an extra 2nd rounder in a deep draft, and a good goaltending prospect in Zatkoff.

You would then have #5 LAK, #33 COL, #35 LAK, #48 MON in the first two rounds to restock your system and rebuild.

Fair??
For sure not.
We get exactly the player we want in Kane or MPS, so there is no need to trade up and do other teams favors.

Kurrilino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 06:44 PM
  #15
Kurrilino
Go Stoll Go
 
Kurrilino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,530
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Kurrilino
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsCrown View Post
You dont fill immediate needs with the draft. Last year was a very special draft that comes along very rarely. You fill immediate needs with FA or trades. LW/RW is the least valuable position according to DL value of players. Defensive D-man, we have them: Green, Teubert, Drewiske, Cambell.
Yes you do.
The Kings was in the position, when no player wants to join us.
So, we was forced to fill our holes with fraftees.
Now we enjoy the fruits

Kurrilino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 06:50 PM
  #16
thedoctor
                    
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,639
vCash: 500
no from CO, Duchene is what we need.

We'd be interested in trading some of our winger depth for your goaltender prospects though.

thedoctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 06:55 PM
  #17
PeterTheGreat
Registered User
 
PeterTheGreat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 7,052
vCash: 500
I think this is one of those deals neither team does. Avs need high end talent, and Duchene is a perfect fit (being an Avs fan and with Joe Sakic's likely departure he fits that mold). LA is giving up alot to move up only 2 spots so they probably wouldn't do it either.

PeterTheGreat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 07:06 PM
  #18
JDM
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoctor View Post
no from CO, Duchene is what we need.

We'd be interested in trading some of our winger depth for your goaltender prospects though.
Ersberg + Teubert for
Wolski + 4th? Not sure what the value would be, but I like Wolski. Would Svatos be cheaper? Straight up for Ersberg?

As for 3rd for 5th overall, no reason to do that in my mind. Although, all of the Kings fans speculation on who we want to draft is BASELESS. For all we know Lombardi will do everything he can to trade up in the draft. But if he were to trade up, I would think he'd go after Atlanta's pick to ensure he gets the of Kane, Duchene, Schenn.

He also might trade down for someone, but that would dissapoint me greatly.

JDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 07:07 PM
  #19
Dr Quincy
Registered User
 
Dr Quincy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,524
vCash: 500
I don't know. I see Duchene as much better than Kane/MSP/Schenn. In 3 years if you had Duchene I doubt you'd deal him for a 2nd.

For instance Kings fans, last year you took Doughty. Do you think it would have been a mistake for STL to trade a 2nd and a prospect who probably isn't in their long range plans for Doughty?

Would you trade Doughty right now for Pieterangelo and a 2?

Now, if you happen to think that there isn't much difference between 3-5 I can see your point. I just happen to think that 1 of those guys is going to be a demonstrably better player, and I'd give up a 2nd for that every day of the week.

Dr Quincy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 07:29 PM
  #20
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
 
BrindamoursNose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Quincy View Post
I don't know. I see Duchene as much better than Kane/MSP/Schenn. In 3 years if you had Duchene I doubt you'd deal him for a 2nd.

For instance Kings fans, last year you took Doughty. Do you think it would have been a mistake for STL to trade a 2nd and a prospect who probably isn't in their long range plans for Doughty?

Would you trade Doughty right now for Pieterangelo and a 2?

Now, if you happen to think that there isn't much difference between 3-5 I can see your point. I just happen to think that 1 of those guys is going to be a demonstrably better player, and I'd give up a 2nd for that every day of the week.
To be fair, all of this is based off of potential (Duschene being better than MSP or Kane or Schenn). The way I see it...3rd overall or 5th, you're getting a very good player for the future...adding in the goalie and the 2nd is too much.

BrindamoursNose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 08:02 PM
  #21
funky
Registered User
 
funky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Saskatoon, Sask
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,056
vCash: 500
if you believe the rumors that the Isle are going to pass on JT and go for Hedman and that Tampa has no interest in JT either I would say wait for draft day and have a package ready for the #2 if that is the case.

#5
Stoll
Hickey

a lot to move up 3 picks but it could be a franchise center.

funky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 08:07 PM
  #22
PeterTheGreat
Registered User
 
PeterTheGreat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 7,052
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDM View Post
Ersberg + Teubert for
Wolski + 4th? Not sure what the value would be, but I like Wolski. Would Svatos be cheaper? Straight up for Ersberg?

As for 3rd for 5th overall, no reason to do that in my mind. Although, all of the Kings fans speculation on who we want to draft is BASELESS. For all we know Lombardi will do everything he can to trade up in the draft. But if he were to trade up, I would think he'd go after Atlanta's pick to ensure he gets the of Kane, Duchene, Schenn.

He also might trade down for someone, but that would dissapoint me greatly.
I don't think Ersberg is that much of an upgrade over Budaj to give up Wolski. Teubert is nice, but he's not the reason we're trading Wojtek.

Something around Bernier+ for Wolski is possible. Not sure who you'd have to add, because Bernier is unproven and not worth Wolski straight up. Bernier and Teubert for Wolski I would definately do, but I don't think LA would. Maybe Bernier and your 2nd rounder (35th) for Wolski is closer.

PeterTheGreat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 08:30 PM
  #23
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,753
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTheGreat View Post
I don't think Ersberg is that much of an upgrade over Budaj to give up Wolski. Teubert is nice, but he's not the reason we're trading Wojtek.

Something around Bernier+ for Wolski is possible. Not sure who you'd have to add, because Bernier is unproven and not worth Wolski straight up. Bernier and Teubert for Wolski I would definately do, but I don't think LA would. Maybe Bernier and your 2nd rounder (35th) for Wolski is closer.
Bernier for Stewart.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 09:45 PM
  #24
LAKings4ever
Registered User
 
LAKings4ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by funky View Post
if you believe the rumors that the Isle are going to pass on JT and go for Hedman and that Tampa has no interest in JT either I would say wait for draft day and have a package ready for the #2 if that is the case.

#5
Stoll
Hickey

a lot to move up 3 picks but it could be a franchise center.
I like the thinking here, but would prefer to keep Hickey - what about:

#5 + Moeller + Boyle for #2

It would have to be done after the #1 pick was in, if JT was off the board then it wouldn't make sense for us.

LAKings4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 09:47 PM
  #25
PeterTheGreat
Registered User
 
PeterTheGreat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 7,052
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
Bernier for Stewart.
Not a chance. Stewart is the real deal. He's a budding powerforward who hits, fights, skates well and can score goals. He would have been on pace for around 20 goals if he played the whole year. And thats on the worst offensive club in the league.


Bernier for Hensick is more realistic.

PeterTheGreat 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 09:28 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.