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.

LA-Boston Proposal

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-31-2009, 03:42 PM
  #26
LAX attack*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Danger Zone
Country: United States
Posts: 14,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LAX attack*
As for the original trade proposal, Rask really isn't much better (and far less NHL proven) than Quick, we have a multitude of other goaltending prospects, we don't need a guy like Ference, and Frolov is simply much, much better than Kobasew.

Not to mention that you throw Johnson in as well

Simply a terrible proposal, really really bad. Like, probably the worst I have seen that was a serious poster

LAX attack* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 04:03 PM
  #27
Dr Quincy
Registered User
 
Dr Quincy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loktionov View Post

Quincey I can read. Nonetheless the add (pick?? prospect??) in a deal you should understand that the Kings are not interested in a deal where Rask is a center piece of a deal and the Kings send Doughty, Kopitar or Brown the other way.
1) I said the original deal, involving Rask, was a no go for LA. As you (and I) said, there is no need for a goaltending prospect when they already have one.

2) I never said nor implied that LA would deal any of Doughty, Kopitar or Brown for Rask.

What I said was that THAT was what it would take from Boston to deal Rask. To illustrate that point, I pointed out that several Kings fans have said in the past that there are players on their own team who they have no interest in deal, and thus if a team wanted those players they would have to overpay for them.

That was my point. Boston has no reason to trade Rask nor should they. If they were going to deal him it would take an overpayment. This doesn't mean that LA is the team to make that overpayment.

Whatever Rask's value on the open market or around the league is of little importance. His value to the Bruins is insanely high since they have not developed a young goalie in the last 35 years.

Dr Quincy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 04:06 PM
  #28
VictoryRose
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Probably the worst lineage of deals I've ever seen tagged with Los Angeles.

Honestly guys, why waste the time?

VictoryRose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 04:07 PM
  #29
Dr Quincy
Registered User
 
Dr Quincy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doughty Number 8 View Post
As for the original trade proposal, Rask really isn't much better (and far less NHL proven) than Quick, we have a multitude of other goaltending prospects, we don't need a guy like Ference, and Frolov is simply much, much better than Kobasew.

Not to mention that you throw Johnson in as well

Simply a terrible proposal, really really bad. Like, probably the worst I have seen that was a serious poster
Read it again. I didn't propose it, and I agree with most of what you say.

My one difference is on the Quick/Rask comparison. Quick does have more NHL experience, but I do think Rask will be a better goalie. Look, I like Quick a lot and have for years. He played prep school very close to where relatives of mine live so I've been aware of him since then. Plus he played college hockey at my alma mater. I like him a lot. However, I do think Bernier is the better long term prospect and i think Rask is (slightly) better than Bernier.

That's my opinion.

Dr Quincy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:12 PM
  #30
Knight of the Realm
Champs Again!
 
Knight of the Realm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Westeros
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 5,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Quincy View Post
Read it again. I didn't propose it, and I agree with most of what you say.

My one difference is on the Quick/Rask comparison. Quick does have more NHL experience, but I do think Rask will be a better goalie. Look, I like Quick a lot and have for years. He played prep school very close to where relatives of mine live so I've been aware of him since then. Plus he played college hockey at my alma mater. I like him a lot. However, I do think Bernier is the better long term prospect and i think Rask is (slightly) better than Bernier.

That's my opinion.
I need to see Quick another year but he was really very good and the majority of NHL fans have not realized it.

Knight of the Realm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:19 PM
  #31
VictoryRose
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
The best thing about JQ is that his game evolved while he was here.

a lot of goalies come up, play huge, and flame out.

The opposite happened here, his game, despite whatever ancillary **** was going on with the team, got better as the season went on.

VictoryRose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:23 PM
  #32
Shellz
Registered User
 
Shellz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: California
Posts: 17,313
vCash: 500
Quick is a special guy. He sings songs to keep his mind in the game. He shows affection when he lets one in. Which I love to see.. but, he doesn't let it get to him. I would love to see him take the number one spot but that won't be determined for awhile. A lot of people were surprised by him because not too many people followed the guy because they were too busy drooling over Bernier, not saying it's a bad thing... but I would love to see Jon (Quick) take that spot

Some King fans disagree because they want to see Bernier number one.

Shellz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:27 PM
  #33
VictoryRose
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shelle121 View Post

Some King fans disagree because they want to see Bernier number one.
Any Kings' fan I have ever met simply wants a stable #1 goaltender to last a few years and be fairly reliable.

they aren't terribly concerned with which one of the prospects make it (Martin Jones and Jeff Zatkoff say hi) but just as long as one of them does.

VictoryRose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:35 PM
  #34
Shellz
Registered User
 
Shellz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: California
Posts: 17,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VictoryRose View Post
Any Kings' fan I have ever met simply wants a stable #1 goaltender to last a few years and be fairly reliable.

they aren't terribly concerned with which one of the prospects make it (Martin Jones and Jeff Zatkoff say hi) but just as long as one of them does.

That's one thing we can all agree on. But, If they were to choose, a number already told me Bernier. But, this was before Quick came into play.

Don't forget Linden Rowat!

Shellz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:36 PM
  #35
WBC8
Registered User
 
WBC8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: HFL 4 Life
Country: United States
Posts: 35,808
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to WBC8
What about Kessel, Ference, #25 and a 2010 2nd for Simmonds, Johnson and the #5?

Top four wings, Brown, Williams, Frolov and Kessel....Some star power there.

WBC8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:44 PM
  #36
Moses Doughty
LA's offense offends
 
Moses Doughty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Drewbacca
Country: United States
Posts: 8,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhamBamCam8 View Post
What about Kessel, Ference, #25 and a 2010 2nd for Simmonds, Johnson and the #5?

Top four wings, Brown, Williams, Frolov and Kessel....Some star power there.
First, Kessel would have to already be signed to a contract longer than 1 year, preferably 3-4 years. And what position is he?

Moses Doughty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:47 PM
  #37
Shellz
Registered User
 
Shellz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: California
Posts: 17,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhamBamCam8 View Post
What about Kessel, Ference, #25 and a 2010 2nd for Simmonds, Johnson and the #5?

Top four wings, Brown, Williams, Frolov and Kessel....Some star power there.

What about Moller instead of Simmonds?

Shellz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:50 PM
  #38
WBC8
Registered User
 
WBC8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: HFL 4 Life
Country: United States
Posts: 35,808
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to WBC8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Foley View Post
First, Kessel would have to already be signed to a contract longer than 1 year, preferably 3-4 years. And what position is he?
He plays center and RW for the Bruins, but can play LW. I'd put Williams on his left with Kopitar centering and him playing RW.

He's an RFA. Give him 4 years, 18 mil and he'll bite.

WBC8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:51 PM
  #39
WBC8
Registered User
 
WBC8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: HFL 4 Life
Country: United States
Posts: 35,808
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to WBC8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shelle121 View Post
What about Moller instead of Simmonds?
Nope, I have a huge man crush on Simmonds....reminds me of old time Bruins hockey!

WBC8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:53 PM
  #40
Shellz
Registered User
 
Shellz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: California
Posts: 17,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhamBamCam8 View Post
Nope, I have a huge man crush on Simmonds....reminds me of old time Bruins hockey!

Sorry buddy, not gonna happen. He wants to win a cup with the Kings (whenever that may be) he said so himself.

Shellz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 06:55 PM
  #41
Kurrilino
Go Stoll Go
 
Kurrilino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,533
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Kurrilino
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Quincy View Post
This deal was proposed in the Bruins forum (not by me). Please gauge:

1) the fairness of this deal 2) the likelihood of either team actually doing this.

To LA: RASK (3.2), KOBASEW (2.3) and FERENCE (1.4) (total 6.9)

To Boston: JOHNSON (at no more then 2.5), BERNIER (850 k) and FROLOV (2.9)

Just for the record I said LA gets ripped off and would have no interest.


uuhmmmmm

usually i ask for staying away from the crack pipe...
but that couldn't even be a pipe dream....

i pull my head for the guy who posted that... no doubt that is a gem and could enter the "Hall of Fame" of failed offers....

good job buddy........ thank god you wrote in self defense that isn't your post

Kurrilino 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 11:16 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.