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.

Malkin for..?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-28-2005, 07:52 AM
  #51
Leaf Army
Registered User
 
Leaf Army's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 8,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
Your examples are selective and look almost random to me. Stevie Y drafted 4th overall? Who cares about that exactly? What does this have to do with Malkin?
It has a lot to do with Malkin.

The point is that if Pittsburgh thinks Malkin could be a superstar, they're not going to trade him unless they know they're getting another potential superstar in return. They can't take the chance.

Most of the trades here (as tends to be the case when proposals like this are made) are quantity for quality. Even if all of the players in those proposals become good NHL players, it could still look like a bad trade if Malkin went on to be a superstar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
Malkin is certainly not in Lindros's class as a prospect either.
I certainly don't disagree with that. But it does go to show what young potential superstar trades look like.

Forsberg was drafted only 5 spots behind Lindros. Plus Philly also had to throw in Mike Ricci (4th overall pick), Chris Simon (25th overall pick), 2 first rounders plus more stuff.

So you're right that Malkin wouldn't command that much. But it does show that if Pittsburgh were to trade Malkin, they'd want a very similar level prospect in return, plus more. None of the proposed trades have done that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
Here, let me try your example with another year, just for fun:

Put it this way, Jason Bonsignore was drafted 4th overall in 1994. The following 17 players drafted in the first round after him were...

5 Jeff O'Neill
6 Ryan Smyth
7 Jamie Storr
8 Jason Wiemer
9 Brett Lindros
10 Nolan Baumgartner
11 Jeff Friesen
12 Wade Belak
13 Mattias Ohlund
14 Ethan Moreau
15 Alexander Kharlamov
16 Eric Fichaud G
17 Wayne Primeau
18 Brad Brown
19 Chris Dingman
20 Jason Botterill
21 Evgeni Ryabchikov



Bonsignore has gone on to suck donkey balls and has become a stick boy in some stinkhole.

In retrospect, if you were Edmonton, would you trade Bonsignore for the rest of these guys?
This might be a good point if I had been trying to say that teams should never trade the 4th overall pick for the next 17 picks.

I just wonder what it would be like if this board was around back in the early 80's and people were making proposals for a guy like Yzerman. I bet it would be funny to read in retrospect. None of the proposals probably would have even come close to what his value ended up being. Which is why it's awful tough to put together a package that Pittsburgh would accept for Malkin.

If HF boards were around back then, some Detroit fan could have said I wouldn't trade Yzerman for the next 17 picks in the draft and he would have been laughed off the site. In the end though he might have not been that far off.

Some Buffalo fan could have offered a package of Adam Creighton, Phil Housley, John Tucker and their next two first rounders (Mikael Andersson and Calle Johansson).

Guaranteed other Buffalo fans would have shot him down saying "no way, you're trading away our entire future" or "that trade would set our rebuilding back 5 years".

But in retrospect would that have been a good trade for Buffalo? I'd say yes.

Leaf Army is offline  
Old
06-29-2005, 04:12 AM
  #52
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
I just wonder what it would be like if this board was around back in the early 80's and people were making proposals for a guy like Yzerman. I bet it would be funny to read in retrospect. None of the proposals probably would have even come close to what his value ended up being. Which is why it's awful tough to put together a package that Pittsburgh would accept for Malkin.

If HF boards were around back then, some Detroit fan could have said I wouldn't trade Yzerman for the next 17 picks in the draft and he would have been laughed off the site. In the end though he might have not been that far off.

Some Buffalo fan could have offered a package of Adam Creighton, Phil Housley, John Tucker and their next two first rounders (Mikael Andersson and Calle Johansson).

Guaranteed other Buffalo fans would have shot him down saying "no way, you're trading away our entire future" or "that trade would set our rebuilding back 5 years".

But in retrospect would that have been a good trade for Buffalo? I'd say yes.
I understand what you are saying but my point is, you're speaking from hindsight in Yzerman's case, just like I am speaking in hindsight in Bonsignore's case.

I would look carefully at a package for Malkin because I am not convinced he will be a great player and to tell you the truth, I rather like many of the names on this thread.

I think you are making him sound like he is in a special prospect class and I just don't see it.

There are only a few prospects in a class of their own that command a king's ransom. Guys like Kovalchuk, Lindros, Lecavalier did in the past. These are guys who were traded or have somewhat credible rumor of giganormous offers.

The category below that, even if somewhat elite, just doesn't get you all that much. Players such as Spezza, Pitkanen, Nash, etc.

Malkin, no matter how crappy or great he will turn out, firmly belongs in the second category.

I'm sure Pittsburgh is not entertaining offers and they like what they have in Malkin. But I just doubt strongly that teams would go as far as offering the type of packages I have seen. A couple of first rounders and quality prospects? That's a lot for a guy like Malkin.

I think any team would be crazy not to consider it seriously. I'd consider half of that seriously because you can literally come off as the winner hands down if you play your cards right.

Vlad The Impaler is offline  
Old
06-29-2005, 04:55 AM
  #53
Captain Conservative
Registered User
 
Captain Conservative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: My Blue Heaven
Country: Spain
Posts: 3,827
vCash: 500
This offer is dependant on the caps getting a top 5 pick in the 2005 draft to replenish our right side. To me, it looks like your right side is weak. Morozov has skill, but is far from a first line RW. Also, sans Malkin, you're weak down the middle as well. With that in mind, heres the offer from the Caps:

Eric Fehr
Dainus Zubrus
Jeff Halpern
2006 1st round pick

for

Evgeni Malkin



What you think of that package depends greatly on your opinion of Jeff Halpern. To me, he's worth as much as any other piece of the package.

Captain Conservative is online now  
Old
06-29-2005, 06:34 AM
  #54
arnie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 520
vCash: 500
Look, look the only thing that anyone can give the Pens is either 1) prospects/draft choices or 2) proven players. Why would anyone give the Pens better package of prospects than they are getting in Malkin? They would be just be getting back what they are giving up, so it makes no s sense. Why would the Pens want proven players, now? They can go out and get them on the free agent market at this point withiout giving up their blue chip prospect. No, there is no Malkin deal to be made.

arnie is offline  
Old
06-29-2005, 07:48 AM
  #55
Leaf Army
Registered User
 
Leaf Army's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 8,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
I understand what you are saying but my point is, you're speaking from hindsight in Yzerman's case, just like I am speaking in hindsight in Bonsignore's case.
Of course I'm speaking from hindsight. I'm not pretending otherwise. If I had a 4th overall pick, would I trade it for the next 17 picks? Hell yes. Every single time.

I was just showing how careful a team would need to be when trading a Malkin-type prospect. The fact that some people think Jeff Halpern could be a deal breaker just demonstrates my point further.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
I would look carefully at a package for Malkin because I am not convinced he will be a great player and to tell you the truth, I rather like many of the names on this thread.

I think you are making him sound like he is in a special prospect class and I just don't see it.
It has nothing to do with my (or your) opinion of Malkin. I'm just going by what I hear from the majority other fans- particularly Pittsburgh fans. A lot of people seem to think he's got superstar potential.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
There are only a few prospects in a class of their own that command a king's ransom. Guys like Kovalchuk, Lindros, Lecavalier did in the past. These are guys who were traded or have somewhat credible rumor of giganormous offers.
Once again, I wasn't saying Malkin would command what Lindros did.

I used the Lindros trade as example to demonstrate that when young players with a ton of potential get traded, at least one player player of similar calibre has to be going the other way for the team to consider it.

So if you're putting together a proposal for Malkin, your proposal should have another prospect going the other way that is close to Malkin's level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
I'm sure Pittsburgh is not entertaining offers and they like what they have in Malkin. But I just doubt strongly that teams would go as far as offering the type of packages I have seen. A couple of first rounders and quality prospects? That's a lot for a guy like Malkin.
There's that old saying that the winner of the trade is the team who gets the best player. I don't always believe that's true, but I do believe that it's true in this case.

What if Malkin has the potential to be a superstar and one of Pittsburgh's all-time greats?

Now in your proposal, let's say one of the first rounders is a bust and the other three players go on to be solid, but unspectacular, NHL players.

Is it still worth it? I don't think so. I think Pittsburgh would end up looking stupid.

Leaf Army is offline  
Old
06-29-2005, 11:06 AM
  #56
Kenadyan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Asheboro, NC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
I'm not even going to suggest an offer because anything close to value will be rejected by Pittsburgh fans as not enough.

Kenadyan is offline  
Old
06-29-2005, 05:54 PM
  #57
aragorn
YES WE CAN
 
aragorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Azores
Posts: 10,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mat
not enough
malkin is gonna be a superstar, and malone should be a quality top 6 guy
volchenkov and whitney nullify eachother
and we have no need for prusek

so basicly havlat and kigorodov or malkin and malone
so NO
Well, in our opinion Havlat is a lot closer to being a superstar than Malkin and I'm sure you are aware that Kaigorodov played centre ahead of Malkin on the same team in Russia. Kaigorodov is being compared to Larionov and could also be a superstar, he lead the league in scoring until the last week. I agree that Volchenkov and Whitney nullify each other but Whitney is a right handed shot, something we need to play with Redden. I think this is a fair deal but I would imagine there are some Sens fans that think the Sens give too much here.

Are you sure you don't need Prusek, I don't see that Fleury is doing all that well. Fleury kinda reminds me of a couple of guys we had Lajeunesse and Chouinard who we drafted twice, what a mistake that was. Prusek is a pretty good goaltender now but with Hasek playing next year and Emery the guy pegged for the future and Prusek's age he will get caught in the numbers and eventually be traded.

Kaiser, you've seen both Malkin and Kaigorodov play, who is the better centre?

aragorn is online now  
Old
06-29-2005, 06:34 PM
  #58
Don'tcry4mejanhrdina
Registered User
 
Don'tcry4mejanhrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: This space.
Country: Poland
Posts: 9,059
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragorn
Whitney is a right handed shot
No he isn't.

Don'tcry4mejanhrdina is offline  
Old
06-29-2005, 07:07 PM
  #59
craig1
Registered User
 
craig1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnie
Look, look the only thing that anyone can give the Pens is either 1) prospects/draft choices or 2) proven players. Why would anyone give the Pens better package of prospects than they are getting in Malkin? They would be just be getting back what they are giving up, so it makes no s sense. Why would the Pens want proven players, now? They can go out and get them on the free agent market at this point withiout giving up their blue chip prospect. No, there is no Malkin deal to be made.
arnie, I've warned you about trying to be rational and make sense. By doing so, you force me to agree with you, which in turn leads to anarchy in the streets and a fear of a coming apocolypse.

craig1 is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 05:40 AM
  #60
arnie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig1
arnie, I've warned you about trying to be rational and make sense. By doing so, you force me to agree with you, which in turn leads to anarchy in the streets and a fear of a coming apocolypse.
Having you agree with me means that I must have been wrong. I take back everything I said. Malkin is gone.

arnie is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 07:45 AM
  #61
trentmccleary
Registered User
 
trentmccleary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alfie-Ville
Posts: 18,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
I used the Lindros trade as example to demonstrate that when young players with a ton of potential get traded, at least one player player of similar calibre has to be going the other way for the team to consider it.
The Lindros trade is representative of nothing. Lindros was a man among boys who had already starred with NHL'ers on international ice before the trade. Every prospect since has merely been a slightly better boy among boys.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
What if Malkin has the potential to be a superstar and one of Pittsburgh's all-time greats?

Now in your proposal, let's say one of the first rounders is a bust and the other three players go on to be solid, but unspectacular, NHL players.

Is it still worth it? I don't think so. I think Pittsburgh would end up looking stupid.
I'm not sure you understood the Bonsignore reference, because you continue to ignore the potential failings of Malkin.
Everything you've posted sounds like:
... what if Malkin leads the league in scoring for 20 straight seasons and leads his team to 10 Stanley Cups?
... what if Pittsburgh only gets twenty 1st round picks, then hires the entire scouting staff of the New York Rangers and they blow every single pick?

There's inherent risk in any trade. You make the deal when there is a good probability that you will come out even or on top. Not when the other GM has caved in to every single one of your phobias and offered you all 699 remaining NHL players for the one guy you're afraid to trade because "he could turned out to be just like Gretzky and Lemieux duct taped to one another."

You went through draft records to find out who was chosen in 1984... go through some more records to find out what usually becomes of high draft picks. I think you'll find it 100 times more likely that Malkin turns into something resembling Gomez, Morrison, Nylander... than it is that he will ever live up to the Montreal package posted at the begining of this thread.

trentmccleary is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 08:10 AM
  #62
Wisent
Registered User
 
Wisent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Mannheim
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacobv2
More than fair value-wise, but the Penguins need quality, not quantity.
Actually I think you have both here, quantity and quality.

Wisent is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 08:17 AM
  #63
Leaf Army
Registered User
 
Leaf Army's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 8,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
The Lindros trade is representative of nothing. Lindros was a man among boys who had already starred with NHL'ers on international ice before the trade. Every prospect since has merely been a slightly better boy among boys.
I brought up the Lindros trade to demonstrate one point.

Any trade for Malkin has to have a similar calibre prospect going back the other way. I stand by that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
There's inherent risk in any trade. You make the deal when there is a good probability that you will come out even or on top.
Here's where you're wrong.

Pittsburgh will not trade Malkin if there's any risk at all. Any trade of Malkin would have to be risk free from the Penguins perspective. That's all I've been trying to say.

There's no way the Penguins would trade Malkin for a "good probability to come out even". That's ridiculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
You went through draft records to find out who was chosen in 1984... go through some more records to find out what usually becomes of high draft picks. I think you'll find it 100 times more likely that Malkin turns into something resembling Gomez, Morrison, Nylander... than it is that he will ever live up to the Montreal package posted at the begining of this thread.
I understand the Bonsignore reference perfectly. I already said that I would never ever suggest a team keep a 4th overall pick instead of the next 17 picks. I would trade a 4th overall pick for the next 17 picks 100 times out of a 100. As would anyone else with half a brain.

I feel like I'm repeating myself, but I was just demonstrating on how careful a team has to be when trading a Malkin level prospect. They're not going to trade him just for the first "fair" offer that comes along.

Malkin could turn into a Gomez, Morrison or Nylander type player I guess. But that would be a surprise to most people. It's certainly not an accurate reflection his value right now.

Leaf Army is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 08:21 AM
  #64
Wisent
Registered User
 
Wisent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Mannheim
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army

So you're right that Malkin wouldn't command that much. But it does show that if Pittsburgh were to trade Malkin, they'd want a very similar level prospect in return, plus more. None of the proposed trades have done that.



.
If they would want a similar prospect in return, they wouldn't trade Malkin and if a team would have a similar prospect they don't need him.

Wisent is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 08:23 AM
  #65
Leaf Army
Registered User
 
Leaf Army's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 8,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisent
If they would want a similar prospect in return, they wouldn't trade Malkin and if a team would have a similar prospect they don't need him.
Exactly.

Which is why prospects like Malkin aren't traded. Also explains why no one in this thread will come up with a trade that satisfies both teams.

Leaf Army is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 08:54 AM
  #66
octopi
Registered User
 
octopi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 30,495
vCash: 703
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
I don't think there's been one offer in this thread that could land Malkin.

People make the same mistake every time with these kinds of proposals. Malkin is a potential superstar. In order for him to be traded, Pittsburgh has to know that they're going to get at least one player of similar calibre in return.

While that Montreal proposal looks okay, in reality none of those players are Malkin calibre and none of them are probably good enough to justify the trade.

Put it this way, Steve Yzerman was drafted 4th overall in 1983. The following 17 players drafted in the first round after him were...

5. Tom Barrasso
6. John MacLean
7. Russ Courtnall
8. Andrew McBain
9. Cam Neely
10. Normand Lacomb
11. Adam Creighton
12. Dave Gagner
13. Dan Quinn
14. Bobby Dollas
15. Bob Errey
16. Gerald Diduck
17. Alfie Turcotte
19. Bruce Cassidy
20. Jeff Beukeboom
21. David Jensen
22. Nevin Markwart

Yzerman has gone on to lead Detroit to three Stanley Cups and has become a franchise legend.

In retrospect, if you were Detroit, would you trade Yzerman for the rest of these guys? Despite the fact that there are a number of very solid NHL players (including Hall-of-Famer Cam Neely) on that list, I'm not sure I would do it.

So when you see that it wouldn't have even made sense for Detroit to trade Yzerman for 17 first round picks that year, you can maybe see why it's pretty tough to put a package together that Pittsburgh would actually consider.

The only time trades like this work is like when Quebec traded Lindros and got Forsberg in return. Forsberg was only drafted five spots behind Lindros and Philly still had to throw in a crapload of other top prospects and draft picks.
Sheesh, just when I didn't think I could be down on my kneees in thanks any more times because Yzerman's a Wing, along comes this


As far as Forsberg and Lindros goes, I'd say most people would rather have Forsberg. I wonder if a day goes by Philly doesn't kick themselves for that one.

octopi is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 09:33 AM
  #67
trentmccleary
Registered User
 
trentmccleary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alfie-Ville
Posts: 18,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Pittsburgh will not trade Malkin if there's any risk at all.

I understand the Bonsignore reference perfectly.
No, I still don't think you do.
Trading Malkin = risk... Keeping Malkin = risk
The only benefit a GM derives by not making the trade is that his failure to make (what could turn out to be) the right decision is hidden.

Similar prospect in return... Wisent might have been trying to point out that no team would be stupid enough to trade the same prospect and more for Malkin because he has a different name.

To peg the value of a prospect like Malkin, start with those 1st rounders of the past that became something. On average, the better 1st rounders will be your garden variety 1st line scorer (but not HoF'ers). Now subtract a substantial portion of that value (say 1/3) of what you would have been willing to give up for a young 1st liner because of the risk involved in any prospect. The result will always be much less than the crazy packages thrown around here.

It's not popular on a prospect website, but it looks a hell of a more like reality.

A few prospect & youngsters that were traded early in their careers:
Spezza = a fraction of Yashin (maybe 50% at the time)
Kilger = 1/2 of Selanne
Pitkanen = Fedotenko, two 2nd's (amazing return actually)
Iginla = Nieuwendyk
Pronger = Shanahan
K.Beech = 1/3 of Jagr
R.Torres = Niinimaa (depending on how you break down the deal)

There are lots more and none of them resemble anything like the Lindros deal.
No team "needs to overpay"... because no team will need Malkin that much.

trentmccleary is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 09:48 AM
  #68
Leaf Army
Registered User
 
Leaf Army's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 8,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
No, I still don't think you do.
Trading Malkin = risk... Keeping Malkin = risk
The only benefit a GM derives by not making the trade is that his failure to make (what could turn out to be) the right decision is hidden.
That's not how GMs think.

If he turns down a good deal for Malkin now most people (especially fans) wouldn't even know.

Trading Malkin and having him turn into a superstar would destroy a General Managers reputation unless he got a fantastic return. Keeping him and having him turn into a bust would be unfortunate, but isn't going to ruin anyone's reputation.

There's much more risk trading him than keeping him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
Similar prospect in return... Wisent might have been trying to point out that no team would be stupid enough to trade the same prospect and more for Malkin because he has a different name.
Yeah, which as I explained is why Malkin type prospects are rarely traded.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
To peg the value of a prospect like Malkin, start with those 1st rounders of the past that became something. On average, the better 1st rounders will be your garden variety 1st line scorer (but not HoF'ers). Now subtract a substantial portion of that value (say 1/3) of what you would have been willing to give up for a young 1st liner because of the risk involved in any prospect. The result will always be much less than the crazy packages thrown around here.

It's not popular on a prospect website, but it looks a hell of a more like reality.

A few prospect & youngsters that were traded early in their careers:
Spezza = a fraction of Yashin (maybe 50% at the time)
Kilger = 1/2 of Selanne
Pitkanen = Fedotenko, two 2nd's (amazing return actually)
Iginla = Nieuwendyk
Pronger = Shanahan
K.Beech = 1/3 of Jagr
R.Torres = Niinimaa (depending on how you break down the deal)

There are lots more and none of them resemble anything like the Lindros deal.
No team "needs to overpay"... because no team will need Malkin that much.
First of all, I've already said it about five times but I guess I have to again, I realize that Malkin wouldn't garner anywhere near what Lindros did.

Secondly, I haven't seen any Yashin, Selanne, Shanahan or Jagr calibre players in any of the proposals in this thread.

In fact this pretty much proves what I've been saying. Malkin calibre prospects are not traded unless the team is relatively certain they're getting an equal or better player in return.

Selanne and Jagr are certainly better than Kilger and Beech. Nieuwendyk propelled Dallas to a Stanley Cup.

Meanwhile the Yashin and Shanahan trades don't look too bright in hindsight do they? So why would you think they're good examples?

I have no idea why you thought this helped your argument.

Leaf Army is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 10:08 AM
  #69
trentmccleary
Registered User
 
trentmccleary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alfie-Ville
Posts: 18,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
That's not how GMs think.

If he turns down a good deal for Malkin now most people (especially fans) wouldn't even know.

Trading Malkin and having him turn into a superstar would destroy a General Managers reputation unless he got a fantastic return. Keeping him and having him turn into a bust would be unfortunate, but isn't going to ruin anyone's reputation.

There's much more risk trading him than keeping him.
You disagree with me and then basically repost what I said?
The benefit for a GM not to risk the deal is plausible deniability. There's risk either way... but he doesn't get flack if he makes the wrong decision in keeping the prospect.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Secondly, I haven't seen any Yashin, Selanne, Shanahan or Jagr calibre players in any of the proposals in this thread.
Havlat was mentioned... as part of a package . IMO, he's worth more than a holding out Yashin, constantly injured Selanne or salary dump Jagr. Which is what all of those players were when they were traded.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Selanne and Jagr are certainly better than Kilger and Beech. Nieuwendyk propelled Dallas to a Stanley Cup.

Meanwhile the Yashin and Shanahan trades don't look too bright in hindsight do they? So why would you think they're good examples?

I have no idea why you thought this helped your argument.
My point is to prove that prospects (even high picks) aren't worth a kings ransom.
Not that the deals are better for either team. But again... you automatically side with the team trading the prospect. As if every team would certainly be trading away 20 years of a Hall of Famers career. Some teams will end up trading Pronger and Spezza, while others will trade away Kilger and Beech.

trentmccleary is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 12:01 PM
  #70
Leaf Army
Registered User
 
Leaf Army's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 8,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
You disagree with me and then basically repost what I said?
The benefit for a GM not to risk the deal is plausible deniability. There's risk either way... but he doesn't get flack if he makes the wrong decision in keeping the prospect.
Exactly. So there's more risk in trading him then keeping him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
Havlat was mentioned... as part of a package . IMO, he's worth more than a holding out Yashin, constantly injured Selanne or salary dump Jagr. Which is what all of those players were when they were traded.
Yeah Havlat was offered.

And all Pittsburgh had to do was throw in Malone and Whitney- two of their best young players. Funny how you left that part out.

The trade that the Penguins fan countered with is much more realistic- once Malone and Whitney were removed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
My point is to prove that prospects (even high picks) aren't worth a kings ransom.
I'm not saying they're worth a "kings ransom". But it's pretty clear that any time a prospect is traded another player or prospect of similar calibre is going back the other way.

That's all I've been saying and you've shown nothing to disprove that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
you automatically side with the team trading the prospect. As if every team would certainly be trading away 20 years of a Hall of Famers career.


How did I do that? I said trading Spezza and Pronger were dumb moves in retrospect while trading Beech and Kilger were good moves in retrospect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
Some teams will end up trading Pronger and Spezza, while others will trade away Kilger and Beech.
True. But when Kilger and Beech were traded, both Winnipeg and Washington recieved a superstar in return. Therefore helping to limit the risk in trading them.

Which does not contradict what I've been saying at all.

Leaf Army is offline  
Old
06-30-2005, 01:10 PM
  #71
trentmccleary
Registered User
 
trentmccleary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alfie-Ville
Posts: 18,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Yeah Havlat was offered.

And all Pittsburgh had to do was throw in Malone and Whitney- two of their best young players. Funny how you left that part out.

The trade that the Penguins fan countered with is much more realistic- once Malone and Whitney were removed.
The 2nd deal in which it is clearly implied that Havlat is worth much, much less than Malkin? Are you nuts?

The first deal... Volchenkov was a part of and cancels out either Whitney or Malone (depending on how you value them). Kaigodorov isn't blue chip by any means... but has a lot of talent and in the hypothetical deals you seem to be referring to; should be that "similar prospect in return". If the prospect is any better, what the heck is the point of getting Malkin? Or giving up anything else if you do?
Prusek may not have been any use, but he has value and could have been substituted for something of equal value.

IMO, Havlat's value seems low in both deals. If I'm hoping that Malkin ever becomes a PPG player. If I realize that it might take 3-4 years for that to happen. And I'm already giving up that same player while he's still young and just starting to reach his peak... well, logically I just can't imagine any deal involving Havlat/Malkin as centrepieces where Pittsburgh isn't giving up more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
I'm not saying they're worth a "kings ransom". But it's pretty clear that any time a prospect is traded another player or prospect of similar calibre is going back the other way.
There is nothing in the list of trades I posted to suggest that. The only one you've shown is the Lindros deal. Which has proven to be an aberation, not a precedent.


Last edited by trentmccleary: 06-30-2005 at 01:33 PM.
trentmccleary 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 02:58 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.