HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
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.

what would you offer for crosby??

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-28-2005, 08:04 AM
  #76
JimEIV
Registered User
 
JimEIV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 24,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChillyWilly
Crosby's already acting like a damn primadonna and he's not even in the NHL yet.

People thought Jagr was a cancer in the dressingroom? Crosby will be worse.
While I do think some of these offerings are crazy, I also don't think its fair to judge Crosby's character at 17 years old like that......A lot of us where aggrogant at 17 and grew into completely different people just a few years latter.

He's just a kid with life by the preverbal balls right now. Whatever he'll turn out to be, I'll bet he is not the same person at 17 as he will be when he is 25 and then 30 and so on.

JimEIV is online now  
Old
04-28-2005, 08:15 AM
  #77
Chimaera
same ol' Caps
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: La Plata, Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 21,549
vCash: 500
If the Caps get the first pick (and ultimately Crosby) I think they'd entertain some of the offers, but ultimately would make the selection.


It'd be difficult to pass up most of them, but adding a top of the line centerman would just make the Caps ridiculous. Although Crosby would be overkill at this point prospect wise, it would hopefully lead to a quick rebound into the playoffs. However, if the Caps are standing at 2 or 3, I'd see them being interested in fielding offers to move down.


I think some of these offers are intriguing, but they don't really get to what probably will be offered. There's probably going to be more offers that include a 'relative' star now along with picks/prospects. Like the Spezza deal to move Yashin, or the supposed Jagr offer a few years back. A building team (which is what whoever gets the pick should be) is going to want take a guranteed star in return for a probable one.

Chimaera is online now  
Old
04-28-2005, 10:12 AM
  #78
Wondercarrot
Classless
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Crosby's already acting like a damn primadonna and he's not even in the NHL yet.

People thought Jagr was a cancer in the dressingroom? Crosby will be worse.
lol....its one thing to project how a guy will turn out as a player. Now you are prognosticating on the attitude of a kid you have never met, has never said an unkind work about anyone in public since ....probably ever....
Is regularly congratulated for his level headedness and his ability to be a total team player despite his amazing ability.

What a stupid pile of nonsense in your post. We are all dumber for having read it.

Wondercarrot is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 10:48 AM
  #79
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wassup77
if I was the GM of redwings this is what I whould offer for Crosby...

JACK ****!
Every g.m in the league would be happy to hear that.One less franchise to compete with in terms of getting Crosby on their team.

espo* is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 11:16 AM
  #80
hfboardsuser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,282
vCash: 500
I'd offer:

Lynch or Woywitka
Dubnyk or Deslauriers
Torres
Reasoner
Isbister
Laraque
1st rounder 2005
1st rounder 2006


That way the team isn't depleted too badly...

Smyth-UFA-Pisani
York-Horcoff-Hemsky
Moreau-Stoll-Dvorak
Rita-Hunter/Pouliot/Crosby-Winchester

Brewer-Smith
Bergeron-Staios
Ulanov-Semenov

hfboardsuser is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 11:44 AM
  #81
wassup77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 918
vCash: 500
Tell me wich team that whould want to trade the next one for about 5-10 players who are not close to be as good as him?
There whouldn't be any room for that many players on the team...

wassup77 is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 11:58 AM
  #82
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
if the Crosby pick is moved, you can bet that whatever team will be considering dealing him would want 1 top asset coming back.

many teams will automatically be elimated and then will come down to the few that have the assets it takes.

Adding a bunch of players isn't going to make the offer better. Unless you're talking a large number of quality guys - but I don't think any team would make such an offer.

The teams I see as having the best chance:

1) Washington - pkg Ovechkin with another good asset or two - like Semin. Ovechkin is the closest thing to Crosby right now - a top young franchise level player, who could jump into the lineup now to make an impact.

2) Florida - pkg around Luongo, Bouwmesseter, Horton.

3) Ottawa - pkg would have to include Spezza

4) Chicago - pkg around Ruutu, Barker

or similar returns.

I don't see Crobsy getting dealt for future 1st rounders and established players, who's play is no where near the upside that Crosby could give a team.

I also don't see any team gutting their team to come up with a pkg to get him.

If a team doesn't want to give up their best young asset though to get Crosby, they aren't going to get him IMO. And that player needs to be a potential franchise player, or already one (ie. Kovalchuk, Heatley).

NFITO is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 01:39 PM
  #83
hfboardsuser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Tell me wich team that whould want to trade the next one
I think this whole post is sarcasm. It can't not be. No one would be stupid enough to actually think Crosby is the next Gretzky.

After thinking about it, I've changed the offer a bit:

Lynch or Woywitka
Hemsky or Schremp
Torres or Pouliot
Dubnyk or Deslauriers
Reasoner
1st rounder 2005


I'd say that's fair. One potential top-4 defender, 1 potential elite 2nd line/good 1st line winger, either one second-line power forward winger or a potential second-line center, a young checking center and a swap of first rounders this year.

The Oilers have Lynch, Woywitka, Greene, Semenov and Bergeron as young defenders coming up. Moving one won't hurt. Schremp and Hemsky are both incredibly gifted offensive players, one being a pure scorer and the other a playmaker. Torres and Pouliot are both tempting choices, depending on whether the GM wants a power forward or a 2-way center for his 2nd line. I could live with moving either, and the GM in posession of the 1st overall pick would have a tough choice to make. Reasoner's a valuable young checking center, and the swap of 1st rounders goes without saying.

If the GM chose (defenders notwithstanding) Hemsky and Torres, Dvorak and eventually Schremp would take Hemmer's place. York easily fits in where Torres was on the 2nd line. If it was Schremp and Pouliot, Hemsky goes in place of Schremp on our future 2nd line, and Horcoff retains the 2nd line pivot spot. Torres and Schremp are replaced by York and Dvorak/Hemsky.

If I were choosing, I'd take Schremp and Pouliot. Schremp's good enough to become a 1st line winger and Pouliot a modest 2nd-line centerman. I don't know if Hemsky can do what Schremp can in the future, but Hemmer could be primed to break out any time now. Obviously, if I were Lowe, I'd hate giving up Schremp the most.

hfboardsuser is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 01:48 PM
  #84
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bugg
If I were choosing, I'd take Schremp and Pouliot. Schremp's good enough to become a 1st line winger and Pouliot a modest 2nd-line centerman. I don't know if Hemsky can do what Schremp can in the future, but Hemmer could be primed to break out any time now. Obviously, if I were Lowe, I'd hate giving up Schremp the most.
If I were moving Crosby, the Oilers wouldn't even be on my list of options. There isn't anyone there that could entice me enough to move Crosby.

Unless you're moving a franchise level player or prospect back, moving Crosby makes little sense... and offers like the one above could get easily outmatched by better quality players elsewhere... if you don't have a franchise level young player (which Edmonton doesn't), then at least include Smyth and/or Brewer to make the pkg better.

Schremp would get little interest as well for Crosby... there are probably 20+ prospects I'd take over Schremp in a second, and again I don't see the point in moving Crosby without getting someone better back.

NFITO is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 01:54 PM
  #85
Matty
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Strawberry Fields
Posts: 2,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
if the Crosby pick is moved, you can bet that whatever team will be considering dealing him would want 1 top asset coming back.
Bingo.

I can think of two reasons why a team may decide to trade Crosby

1. The GM decides that Crosby is overhyped and wants to 'cash in'. In this case, likely the GM would be looking to move down in the draft one or two positions while gaining significant assets. Say Chicago landed the 2nd overall...Ruutu, 1st, & Bell may become the asking price.

2. Somehow a competitive team looking to fill holes lands Crosby. In this case the GM would be looking for significant players that could fill the holes immediately as well as probably one blue chip prospect. That's why I said if Van landed the pick they would likely want Theo, Zednik, and a 1st or Kostitsyn.

However, I can't see any GM making a trade that lands him 6 quality but not franchise players/prospects. It's not that Ryder and Zednik aren't players that a lot of teams wouldn't covet...they are...but you don't trade a 'franchise' pick who is being heralded as the next best prospect since Lindros for a package that does not contain at least one potential superstar.

Matty is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 02:45 PM
  #86
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,574
vCash: 500
i would probably trade him for any of the dalls, edm, flo, st. louis or montreal offers that have been listed. youd be a fool not to look at those deals. i disagree with nuckfan also, i wouldnt trade ovechkin for crosby...nope. im not getting into a pissing match about which one is better, it doesnt matter - they are both franchises....its good enough. i also wouldnt do your florida offer - though i would do the earlier one.

i know ill get flamed for this, but i wouldnt trade staal for him, let alone a package that included staal. this kids career is more likely than not to be a nightmare. unless he is playing on some nonexistent gretzky level and his team is going far into the playoffs every year - he will have failed expectations in some ridiculous way or another. i dont want crosby on the canes - he would be doomed to fail. i hope the canes merely end up in the top 10 (heaven would 2nd)- i wouldnt touch the crosby mess with a 10 foot pole - other than to maybe trade him.

bleedgreen is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 02:52 PM
  #87
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen
i would probably trade him for any of the dalls, edm, flo, st. louis or montreal offers that have been listed. youd be a fool not to look at those deals. i disagree with nuckfan also, i wouldnt trade ovechkin for crosby...nope. im not getting into a pissing match about which one is better, it doesnt matter - they are both franchises....its good enough. i also wouldnt do your florida offer - though i would do the earlier one.

i know ill get flamed for this, but i wouldnt trade staal for him, let alone a package that included staal. this kids career is more likely than not to be a nightmare. unless he is playing on some nonexistent gretzky level and his team is going far into the playoffs every year - he will have failed expectations in some ridiculous way or another. i dont want crosby on the canes - he would be doomed to fail. i hope the canes merely end up in the top 10 (heaven would 2nd)- i wouldnt touch the crosby mess with a 10 foot pole - other than to maybe trade him.

it's not that I said that Washington should trade Ovechkin (+) for Crosby... but that whichever team gets Crosby would want a deal like that back, otherwise there is no sense in dealing him.

Same thing happened last year with Ovechkin... rumours suggested the only team in the deal was Chicago, and they wouldn't put Ruutu into the pkg... Washington wouldn't move Ovechkin without Ruutu in the pkg.

The same thing should (and IMO will) happen with Crosby. 99% chance he doesnt' get dealt... but if he does, then whichever team holds his rights should want a franchise level player back, otherwise the risk isn't worth it to consider dealing him.

As a canucks fan, while center is the least of our worries, and we're in a win-now mode, more so than having the luxury to grow with Crosby - I still probably wouldn't deal Crosby if we got him. At least not if there isn't a franchise level player coming back the other way.

I don't see any team getting Crosby dealing him. That's why IMO only a franchise type player coming back would even get the team thinking of moving him.

NFITO is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 03:38 PM
  #88
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wassup77
Tell me wich team that whould want to trade the next one for about 5-10 players who are not close to be as good as him?
There whouldn't be any room for that many players on the team...
Well maybe not 5-10 players but i'm sure more then "jack ****" He's a phenomenal prospect.

espo* is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 04:41 PM
  #89
zetterberg40
Registered User
 
zetterberg40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 21,190
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to zetterberg40
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen
i disagree. if you hit it, your that guy. you have the ability to do it and may do it again. milan hejduk is a 50 goal guy, right? he only did it once. well then he is a 40 goal guy, right? well, he only hit that once, plus the 50 season - so what is he? a 30 guy? i think of milan as a 50 guy, one of the best in the league. if you did it once, thats who you are for your career. teemu selanne is a 76 goal man - and he never came close again. you shouldnt have to do something twice to get credit for it. if you only win the cup once - does it not count?
you hit 30 goals once and your automatically a 30 gl scorer? i guess we all have different takes, i see stuff as if someone hits it something over twice then they are considered "___" w/e it is...

zetterberg40 is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 04:44 PM
  #90
Habsaku
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,554
vCash: 500
I'd trade the farm for a player who can be the best guy in the league for 20 years with my team.

Habsaku is offline  
Old
04-28-2005, 04:48 PM
  #91
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zetterberg40
you hit 30 goals once and your automatically a 30 gl scorer? i guess we all have different takes, i see stuff as if someone hits it something over twice then they are considered "___" w/e it is...
just doesnt make sense to me. how are you not a 30 goal guy - if youve scored 30 goals? ive never to be one who clings only to stats - but this one is hard to argue. i could see a point with assists - you could argue that a large amount of 2nd assists meant something, but how can you argue such a set number. if a guy scored 30 goals one year - he is forever referred to as "former 30 goal scorer....". it shows you have the ability to accomplish the task - whether you do it again or not is always up for debate. there is no one who is a sure thing for 40 goals or 100 pts in the nhl. anything can happen. you wouldnt refer to the lightning to "not really a cup winner" would you? to me its the same thing. if the flames had one the cup, no one would consider them a dynasty but you would always refer to them as the 2004 cup winner, wouldnt you? its the same question, so you won the cup once and now your a cup winner? well...yes. to me geoff sanderson is a 40 goal guy. he did it twice for the whale when he was 21 years old, to me he is a forty goal guy even if he doesnt have that many the last three years combined.

bleedgreen is offline  
Old
04-29-2005, 03:27 AM
  #92
Arastiroth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Manhattan
Country: United States
Posts: 1,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen
just doesnt make sense to me. how are you not a 30 goal guy - if youve scored 30 goals? ive never to be one who clings only to stats - but this one is hard to argue. i could see a point with assists - you could argue that a large amount of 2nd assists meant something, but how can you argue such a set number. if a guy scored 30 goals one year - he is forever referred to as "former 30 goal scorer....". it shows you have the ability to accomplish the task - whether you do it again or not is always up for debate. there is no one who is a sure thing for 40 goals or 100 pts in the nhl. anything can happen. you wouldnt refer to the lightning to "not really a cup winner" would you? to me its the same thing. if the flames had one the cup, no one would consider them a dynasty but you would always refer to them as the 2004 cup winner, wouldnt you? its the same question, so you won the cup once and now your a cup winner? well...yes. to me geoff sanderson is a 40 goal guy. he did it twice for the whale when he was 21 years old, to me he is a forty goal guy even if he doesnt have that many the last three years combined.
Just because someone has scored a lot of goals or points at one point in their career doesn't make them a "___ point scorer". Juneau isn't a 100+ pt scorer. I'll agree he is a "former 100+ pt scorer", but saying he is a 100+ pt scorer implies that they have recently scored that. It implies the present. That's like saying "he's injured" because he was injured at some point in his career. I'm fine calling Sanderson a "former 40 goal scorer", because that's what he is. He isn't a 40 goal scorer now, though. It gives no meaning to the phrase "former 40 goal scorer" if that's the same thing as a "40 goal scorer". That's why people use former. Might as well then call someone like Trevor Linden or Joe Neiuwendyk a "1st line center" then. They were at one point in their career.

Arastiroth is offline  
Old
04-29-2005, 01:46 PM
  #93
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,574
vCash: 500
i agree with your point to an extent - i just think its ridiculous that someone has to do something twice before they've actually done it. its something that could be true only on these boards. if a guy scores a certain amount, i just dont see that he is something other than that.

bleedgreen 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 09:40 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.