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.

Leafs have 16 players without contracts next year...why no fuss from Maguire etc

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-23-2009, 04:11 PM
  #101
zeke
#freewilly
 
zeke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 30,201
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinsButton View Post
Two-way players are more valuable that one-way players.
top 1st line scorers are much more valuable than solid two-way 2nd liners or "shutdown" 3rd liners.

zeke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 04:15 PM
  #102
BIG
Registered User
 
BIG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeke View Post
top 1st line scorers are much more valuable than solid two-way 2nd liners or "shutdown" 3rd liners.
It's not about 1st liners vs 2nd liners, 2 way players > 1 dimensional players

BIG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 04:17 PM
  #103
zeke
#freewilly
 
zeke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 30,201
vCash: 500
yeah, too bad about your Sedin twins, then.

or his Marc Savard.

zeke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 04:58 PM
  #104
Leafidelity
Registered Leafs Fan
 
Leafidelity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,861
vCash: 1775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
Sorry. Nice try.

Kessel may be able to score a bunch of goals but he is essentially a one-dimensional player (Did someone say somewhere that he only had 6 hits last season?) who is definitely not worth what Burke paid.
Yeah, nobody wants Dany Heatley type players.

Leafidelity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 05:12 PM
  #105
Default101
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,064
vCash: 500
I think this is exactly what Brian Burke wants. He wants to clear house and bring in his own players. He's already done that a bit, but next off season will really be his chance to dismantle the leafs, and put up his team. I think almost everyone on that team has the opportunity to earn a job with the leafs next year, but Burke will likely be looking at it like that. I'm sure he doesn't dislike EVERYONE he inherited and is taking a special interest in those pending FA's

Default101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 05:39 PM
  #106
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punch Imlach View Post
Yeah, nobody wants Dany Heatley type players.
I didn't say I wouldn't want a player like this on my team. I am saying I wouldn't trade 2 high 1st rounders and a second rounder for one. How many teams backed away from Heatley when they found out what Murray was asking? I dare say a few.

Mike Jones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 05:43 PM
  #107
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeke View Post
And the more his team struggles, the less consolation there is in having two or three prospects who might help his team out 3 or 4 or 5 years from now.
If I'm Chiarelli and have a struggling team I'm looking to do one thing: Trade as many players as possible to lower rung teams hoping that this will strengthen them enough to do better than the Leafs.

I'd love to be a GM in his situation. He's currently sitting on two potentially high draft picks (One he received in exchange for a player he probably couldn't have signed anyway) and the potential for more resulting from the trading deadline.

It may not have been a part of his team's overall plan but we have to recognize a very good thing when we see it.

Mike Jones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 05:50 PM
  #108
canuckulous
 
canuckulous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 1,737
vCash: 500
Its a big of a stretch calling these guys "players".

canuckulous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 05:52 PM
  #109
Keeping it Blue
Registered User
 
Keeping it Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
If I'm Chiarelli and have a struggling team I'm looking to do one thing: Trade as many players as possible to lower rung teams hoping that this will strengthen them enough to do better than the Leafs.
You're kidding, right? If you were a GM you'd trade away a bunch of your players within the conference/division [presumably with no return other than prospects/draft picks] so that those teams would become better than a division rival? Really?

Keeping it Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 06:05 PM
  #110
dredeye
BJ Elitist/Hipster
 
dredeye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by canuckulous View Post
Its a big of a stretch calling these guys "players".
wow how insightful.

dredeye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 06:11 PM
  #111
grabo84
Registered User
 
grabo84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Atlantic Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
If I'm Chiarelli and have a struggling team I'm looking to do one thing: Trade as many players as possible to lower rung teams hoping that this will strengthen them enough to do better than the Leafs.

I'd love to be a GM in his situation. He's currently sitting on two potentially high draft picks (One he received in exchange for a player he probably couldn't have signed anyway) and the potential for more resulting from the trading deadline.

It may not have been a part of his team's overall plan but we have to recognize a very good thing when we see it.
One of the strangest ideas ever floated around here, and thats saying a lot.

grabo84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 06:15 PM
  #112
My Sweet Shadow
Registered User
 
My Sweet Shadow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sioux Lookout, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
If I'm Chiarelli and have a struggling team I'm looking to do one thing: Trade as many players as possible to lower rung teams hoping that this will strengthen them enough to do better than the Leafs.

I'd love to be a GM in his situation. He's currently sitting on two potentially high draft picks (One he received in exchange for a player he probably couldn't have signed anyway) and the potential for more resulting from the trading deadline.
I don't think Chiarelli "loves" the situation he's in. Sure, the prospect pool should be very healthy for the next few years, and some of those prospects should develope into good players eventually, but he just went from cup contender, to potential lottery contender in a matter of a month.

My Sweet Shadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 06:18 PM
  #113
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,704
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Transplanted Caper View Post
Leafs with no contract next season:

Kulemin
Wallin
Mitchell
Stajan
Ponikarovsky
Primeau
Mayers
Stempniak
Wallin
Van Ryn
Exelby
White
Toskala
Gustavsson
MacDonald


No Komisarek, Koivu or Kovalev among them. Nobody would command a big pay day. The situations are completely different. Kulemin, White, Mitchell and Gustavsson are only ons I'd bet money on returning.
Burkie probably wishes all 23 didn;t have contracts past this year...

BLONG7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 07:14 PM
  #114
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keeping it Blue View Post
You're kidding, right? If you were a GM you'd trade away a bunch of your players within the conference/division [presumably with no return other than prospects/draft picks] so that those teams would become better than a division rival? Really?
I didn't say the deals would be within the division exclusively. Division standings don't necessarily dictate the lottery draft order. I said I would help teams in the race for last with the Leafs. It wouldn't matter which division they were in. The goal would be to keep the Leafs in last place overall so that the lottery odds would be through the roof.


Last edited by Mike Jones: 10-23-2009 at 07:19 PM.
Mike Jones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 07:17 PM
  #115
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by My Sweet Shadow View Post
I don't think Chiarelli "loves" the situation he's in. Sure, the prospect pool should be very healthy for the next few years, and some of those prospects should develope into good players eventually, but he just went from cup contender, to potential lottery contender in a matter of a month.
Considering the cap issues and challenges with the roster, was the decline really unexpected?

Maybe "love" was a strong word to use but a person would have to be in a positive frame of mind to be in a position where you have four really high draft picks (Not to mention an extra high second round choice) over two seasons.


Last edited by Mike Jones: 10-23-2009 at 08:07 PM.
Mike Jones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2009, 07:29 PM
  #116
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by grabo84 View Post
One of the strangest ideas ever floated around here, and thats saying a lot.
Back in the 70's Montreal did something similar. I think they made two deals where contributing roster players (I think the players were Berenson and Carr but I can't really be sure) were literally given to teams close to the league basement. The Habs had made a trade for one of the bottom team's first round draft choices and were ensuring that pick would wind up being the first overall.

So my suggestion is based on something that worked.

Mike Jones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2009, 01:43 AM
  #117
RogerRoeper*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 21,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
Sorry. Nice try.

Kessel may be able to score a bunch of goals but he is essentially a one-dimensional player (Did someone say somewhere that he only had 6 hits last season?) who is definitely not worth what Burke paid.
Kessel was a lottery pick. He also was the second highest goal scoring under 23 player begind Ovechkin.

To try to make him sound like he's just not that good is ridiculous. He is a terrific top pick already.

RogerRoeper* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2009, 11:31 AM
  #118
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerRoeper View Post
Kessel was a lottery pick. He also was the second highest goal scoring under 23 player begind Ovechkin.

To try to make him sound like he's just not that good is ridiculous. He is a terrific top pick already.
Yes to all of these things. He is one lottery pick who is an extremely good player.

But he is not worth 2 lottery picks and a second round choice that will be high enough to be one or two spots out of the first round.

Mike Jones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2009, 01:02 PM
  #119
grabo84
Registered User
 
grabo84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Atlantic Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
Back in the 70's Montreal did something similar. I think they made two deals where contributing roster players (I think the players were Berenson and Carr but I can't really be sure) were literally given to teams close to the league basement. The Habs had made a trade for one of the bottom team's first round draft choices and were ensuring that pick would wind up being the first overall.

So my suggestion is based on something that worked.
I'm well aware of the Guy Lafleur situation, but thats such an exceptional scenario that it scarcely bears mentioning. There are absolutely no teams in the NHL right now that have the surplus players that Montreal did back then - the salary cap and parity has ensured that.

In the modern NHL, the suggestion that Boston would subtract roster players from their lineup and trade them to basement teams in hopes of improving their odds of drafting first overall is insane. That will never happen. The other problem is that there's no head and shoulders first overall pick - its not like this is the Lindros or Lemieux draft year. There's really no incentive for doing that.

Not to mention that absolutely no self-respecting GM would turn a cup contending team into an also-ran just to improve his odds of getting two high draft picks marginally.

grabo84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2009, 01:07 PM
  #120
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by grabo84 View Post
The other problem is that there's no head and shoulders first overall pick - its not like this is the Lindros or Lemieux draft year. There's really no incentive for doing that.
You want incentive? I think most of the league would give their eye teeth to watch the look on Burke's face when the Bruins use the Leafs first overall choice in '10.

And the Canadians only traded two roster players so it is not that insane. If a team is out of playoff contention then it could be a decent use of resources.

Mike Jones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2009, 01:40 PM
  #121
grabo84
Registered User
 
grabo84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Atlantic Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
You want incentive? I think most of the league would give their eye teeth to watch the look on Burke's face when the Bruins use the Leafs first overall choice in '10.

And the Canadians only traded two roster players so it is not that insane. If a team is out of playoff contention then it could be a decent use of resources.
You shouldn't defend this. It makes absolutely no sense. Chiarelli has one job, and thats to make the Boston Bruins a better team. Dealing away the roster players that helped make them cup contenders does nothing to help him do that. All Chiarelli will do is try to keep his team a cup contender, and let the chips fall where they may with Toronto.

grabo84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2009, 02:12 PM
  #122
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by grabo84 View Post
You shouldn't defend this. It makes absolutely no sense. Chiarelli has one job, and thats to make the Boston Bruins a better team. Dealing away the roster players that helped make them cup contenders does nothing to help him do that. All Chiarelli will do is try to keep his team a cup contender, and let the chips fall where they may with Toronto.
Well, it worked for the Habs. That's good enough for me.

Mike Jones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2009, 02:19 PM
  #123
Leafidelity
Registered Leafs Fan
 
Leafidelity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,861
vCash: 1775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
Well, it worked for the Habs. That's good enough for me.
There was also 14 teams in the NHL at the time.

Leafidelity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2009, 02:24 PM
  #124
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punch Imlach View Post
There was also 14 teams in the NHL at the time.
They weren't all fighting for the last spot. The concept works in the 30 team league too. All you need is to target the weaker teams most likely to compete with the Leafs for the bottom. There are no guarantees but sending out a couple of veterans if the playoff chances are looking bad shouldn't hurt.

Mike Jones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2009, 02:33 PM
  #125
grabo84
Registered User
 
grabo84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Atlantic Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
Well, it worked for the Habs. That's good enough for me.
The league was completely different then, and the Habs had only recently lost the chance to keep sponsored (or whatever they called it) players. The depth these teams had in comparison to expansion franchises was mind-blowing. Boston has absolutely zero expendable players that are good enough to improve a basement team dramatically - if they're that good, Boston needs them.

And by the same token, I doubt very much that basement teams will want to pay any sort of price for players that Boston deems expendable. It seems more likely that playoff teams would be the ones bidding on those players.

grabo84 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 09:44 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.