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.

Giguere to Colorado?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-25-2009, 02:39 PM
  #26
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipers31 View Post
Stop it. Parros is a great guy to have in a organisation for his character and appreciation in the community, but it was a need we had, it was overpayment at the time and it remains overpayment now. It's not exactly rocket science.
This doesn't dispute what i said in any way. Parros continues to fill a need, whereas we have quite a few prospect with similar upside than Galiardi. Not exactly rocket science.

Edit. I must say it's a unique point of view that having two #1 goalies is being "screwed".

Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 02:55 PM
  #27
Vipers31
Moderator
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talentless Practise View Post
This doesn't dispute what i said in any way. Parros continues to fill a need, whereas we have quite a few prospect with similar upside than Galiardi. Not exactly rocket science.
That's what I said - Parros filled a need. Burke overpaid for him. While we now have a couple of decent offensive prospects, it's not like we have a ton, either. And the fact that this trade doesn't exactly haunt us doesn't say a lot, either. It was overpayment, Parros is not worth a 2nd rounder. No big deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talentless Practise View Post
Edit. I must say it's a unique point of view that having two #1 goalies is being "screwed".
If we're screwed, we're screwed because of our cap situation. Of course a not-clear-cut #1 goaltender on our team with a $6mio contract does not help the issue.

Vipers31 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 03:06 PM
  #28
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipers31 View Post
That's what I said - Parros filled a need. Burke overpaid for him. While we now have a couple of decent offensive prospects, it's not like we have a ton, either. And the fact that this trade doesn't exactly haunt us doesn't say a lot, either. It was overpayment, Parros is not worth a 2nd rounder. No big deal.
So what was your point again regarding The Ducks probably not trading George for Galiardi?

Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 03:19 PM
  #29
Vipers31
Moderator
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talentless Practise View Post
So what was your point again regarding The Ducks probably not trading George for Galiardi?
I said I believe if today they had a trade on the table to get Galiardi back for George, they would sure do it if only for hockey reasons. Of course, the whole community cornerstone persona of George makes it highly difficult to deal him for a prospect until it's severe overpayment, which is why he will not be traded...

Vipers31 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 03:52 PM
  #30
NHL33*
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 7,873
vCash: 500
Can't see Giguere being moved, sadly.

Would love to have him at the right price.

NHL33* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 03:59 PM
  #31
bohlmeister
Amazingly Randy
 
bohlmeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 14,129
vCash: 500
I was thinking a little more about it. Why would Roy want Giguere when he could have Emery? Emery has already shown he can take any goaltender in the league in a scrap, and has fought Peter's and an equipment manager.

bohlmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 04:21 PM
  #32
shadow1
Registered User
 
shadow1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 11,533
vCash: 500
Well, it's Pierre Lebrun, which means it'll never happen. Unless something changes and the cap sky rockets, the Avs can't afford to take on a 6 million dollar a season goalie.

So basically, Anaheim would have to take on at least 4 million for this to work.

shadow1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 04:26 PM
  #33
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,869
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Maybe the Kings revisit the talks they had with Colorado? Smyth for Bernier and some other prospect than Teubert?

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 04:32 PM
  #34
concept*
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Children's Hospital of Denver is ranked #7 in the Nation, while I believe Children's of Los Angeles is #9, so I wouldn't count on the "he'll stay for his child's health" excuse to be particularly valid.

There's no doubt in my mind that it would be an awesome upgrade for him. He's take the #1 spot, the Avs would finally have a #1 goalie, and he just seems like an Avs type of player. Especially if Roy is behind the bench.

Given that the benefit in the trade here would go to the Ducks moreso because of a salary dump and the options it gives them in terms of defensemen, I'd see the Avs getting him reasonably cheap. Not any huge prospect, nor a first rounder.

concept* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 04:34 PM
  #35
shadow1
Registered User
 
shadow1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 11,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
Maybe the Kings revisit the talks they had with Colorado? Smyth for Bernier and some other prospect than Teubert?
How about Hickey?

shadow1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 04:51 PM
  #36
danishh
Dat Stache
 
danishh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: mtl/ott/somewhere
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,710
vCash: 500
I was under the impression that Giguere needed to be in the LA area for his son, and i dont believe anything has changed.

Based on that, would the Kings ever consider him? It's a lot of salary, and the kings dont really have that much dead weight to trade back. What about if he came extremely cheap (in terms of trade value)?

I would envision a 3-way:

To Anaheim: JMFJ, TP

To LAK: Giguere, Smyth

To Colorado: Bernier, Handzus/Stoll (kings fans choice) + some prospect (not teubert, who else?)

The kings get a starting goalie and that 2nd top-6 LW they need. They lose some cap space, but i'm not sure that becomes a concern with their cap situation as there dont seem to be any key players to resign other than quincey next year. (frolov would presumably be replaced by smyth down the road, or resigned if the kings still have space after 2010 cap drop). I am not sure about how ownership feels about salary, however, so that could be a factor. They also get rid of a headache in Jack Johnson and save salary by not having to bury TP in the minors.

Colorado gets a young starting goalie going forward and a forward to replace Smyth. If Sakic retires, handzus would fit in nicely behind Statsny and Wolski, but there would be holes on the wing that would need to be filled later on.

Anaheim gets 2 defencemen that can play for their team next year while shedding unnecessary salary from their backup goaltender. Jack Johnson would hopefully resign at a reasonable rate there.

I know Colorado fans might want more, and that kings fans may balk at the whole idea of Giggy as their starter. Other than straight out saying no, what can fans of these teams suggest to make this 3-way feasible?

I believe this makes LA a playoff team, and also sets colorado in the right direction. Anaheim works towards filling the roster and cutting salary, 2 of their stated goals.

danishh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 04:52 PM
  #37
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by concept View Post
Children's Hospital of Denver is ranked #7 in the Nation, while I believe Children's of Los Angeles is #9, so I wouldn't count on the "he'll stay for his child's health" excuse to be particularly valid.
Little-Giggy sees an eye specialist at UCLA's Jules Stein Eye Institute, not a run of the mill childrens hospital.

Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 06:05 PM
  #38
caliamad
Registered User
 
caliamad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,822
vCash: 500
I recently was treated at Jules Stein. I had been struggling with an eye injury for 6 months that caused me to have constant tearing/sensitivity to bright lights.

I went through 4 ophthalmologists before finally get referred to someone in there. 1 month later, I'm completely healed.

I'm not sure about the complexities of Jiggy's son's condition, but if he needs constant treatment, I'd imagine he'd only consider a trade to city where they had an equally skilled school... and even then his family might be comfortable with their doctor and just veto any trade.

caliamad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 07:10 PM
  #39
Magnus Fulgur
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 7,354
vCash: 500
According to this survey:

http://www.usnews.com/directories/ho...ialty+REPOPHT/

Atlanta and Philly have good Eye Institutes. Hmmm.

Giggy to Atlanta makes a ton of sense: if not, Waddell has nightly dreams of trading for Pronger ever since he was given the Atlanta GM job.

I wouldn't be surprised if Trader Don slept with a Pronger Bobblehead doll.

Now then there's the issue of whether or not Mrs. Pronger would like Atlanta. I think she would.

Magnus Fulgur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2009, 09:58 PM
  #40
Huis Clos*
Creamy Hamstrings
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ballarado
Country: United States
Posts: 6,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow1 View Post
Well, it's Pierre Lebrun, which means it'll never happen. Unless something changes and the cap sky rockets, the Avs can't afford to take on a 6 million dollar a season goalie.

So basically, Anaheim would have to take on at least 4 million for this to work.
Pretty much. There's no way the Avs can take on Giguere without sending a significant amount of salary the other way.

Huis Clos* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2009, 01:43 AM
  #41
duckyman
Registered User
 
duckyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 342
vCash: 500
Giguere
#15

For.


Wolski
Salei
#3

?????

I'm thinking the Ducks would need to add to that. What do you Avs fans think? In terms of what the Ducks would need to add.


Last edited by duckyman: 05-26-2009 at 01:48 AM.
duckyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2009, 01:48 AM
  #42
shadow1
Registered User
 
shadow1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 11,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by duckyman View Post
Giguere
#15

For.


Wolski
Salei
#3

?????
Is more accurate.

shadow1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2009, 02:57 AM
  #43
Paul4587
Moderator
 
Paul4587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow1 View Post
Is more accurate.
Taking out both picks and adding a mid level prospect from Anaheim would be more accurate.

Paul4587 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2009, 03:03 AM
  #44
Avs_19
Peter the Great
 
Avs_19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 39,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by duckyman View Post
Giguere
#15

For.


Wolski
Salei
#3

?????

I'm thinking the Ducks would need to add to that. What do you Avs fans think? In terms of what the Ducks would need to add.
To get Wolski and the 3rd overall? I think the Ducks would need to add Getzlaf, Perry, or Ryan......

Avs_19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2009, 03:14 AM
  #45
Feed Me A Stray Cat
Registered User
 
Feed Me A Stray Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Feed Me A Stray Cat
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
I was under the impression that Giguere needed to be in the LA area for his son, and i dont believe anything has changed.

Based on that, would the Kings ever consider him? It's a lot of salary, and the kings dont really have that much dead weight to trade back. What about if he came extremely cheap (in terms of trade value)?

I would envision a 3-way:

To Anaheim: JMFJ, TP

To LAK: Giguere, Smyth

To Colorado: Bernier, Handzus/Stoll (kings fans choice) + some prospect (not teubert, who else?)

The kings get a starting goalie and that 2nd top-6 LW they need. They lose some cap space, but i'm not sure that becomes a concern with their cap situation as there dont seem to be any key players to resign other than quincey next year. (frolov would presumably be replaced by smyth down the road, or resigned if the kings still have space after 2010 cap drop). I am not sure about how ownership feels about salary, however, so that could be a factor. They also get rid of a headache in Jack Johnson and save salary by not having to bury TP in the minors.

Colorado gets a young starting goalie going forward and a forward to replace Smyth. If Sakic retires, handzus would fit in nicely behind Statsny and Wolski, but there would be holes on the wing that would need to be filled later on.

Anaheim gets 2 defencemen that can play for their team next year while shedding unnecessary salary from their backup goaltender. Jack Johnson would hopefully resign at a reasonable rate there.

I know Colorado fans might want more, and that kings fans may balk at the whole idea of Giggy as their starter. Other than straight out saying no, what can fans of these teams suggest to make this 3-way feasible?

I believe this makes LA a playoff team, and also sets colorado in the right direction. Anaheim works towards filling the roster and cutting salary, 2 of their stated goals.
Anaheim gives up Giguere and gets Jack Johnson in return? Color me skeptical.

Feed Me A Stray Cat 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 04:55 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.