HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Eklund: Rangers-Canucks

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-24-2011, 01:28 PM
  #1
Rust Heisenberg
Registered User
 
Rust Heisenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,146
vCash: 50
Eklund: Rangers-Canucks

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Eklun...ackets/1/33113

It's Eklund though. However, it's worth noting. Usually, his posts say not imminent, or "it's close", however this one said "nearly complete".

We would be getting a defenseman and a forward. The source he received this information from said its win-win for both teams.

We'd be getting 2 players, they would be getting 1.

Bieska comes to mind as a defenseman and I don't know who it would be for a forward.

Rust Heisenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:30 PM
  #2
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
 
I Eat Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 6,042
vCash: 500
Salo and Samuelsson for Drury please

I Eat Crow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:31 PM
  #3
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjets36 View Post
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Eklun...ackets/1/33113

It's Eklund though. However, it's worth noting. Usually, his posts say not imminent, or "it's close", however this one said "nearly complete".

We would be getting a defenseman and a forward. The source he received this information from said its win-win for both teams.

We'd be getting 2 players, they would be getting 1.

Bieska comes to mind as a defenseman and I don't know who it would be for a forward.
I'm pretty sure Bieksa just got hurt.

I dont believe in eklund though I do read his twitter updates when I'm bored. I guess we can ponder this one. But I really dont know what we would be getting that would be valuable from a team that is 1st in the conference, if not the league? I'm not sure on that but they are definitely up there.

RGY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:33 PM
  #4
Darrelle Lundqvist
Swagelin
 
Darrelle Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,781
vCash: 500
i'd love to get our hands on bieksa, however I don't know what it will cost

Darrelle Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:34 PM
  #5
MSG the place to be*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,783
vCash: 500
If this was legitimate he would announce it loud and proud. He wouldn't attach it to another bogus rumor (Enstrom).

MSG the place to be* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:35 PM
  #6
The Perfect Paradox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,495
vCash: 50
Don't think it makes a difference, he's wrong a majority of the time. Hope this isn't true, I like the team the way it is now; we just need to get healthy again.

The Perfect Paradox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:35 PM
  #7
Darrelle Lundqvist
Swagelin
 
Darrelle Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSG the place to be View Post
If this was legitimate he would announce it loud and proud. He wouldn't attach it to another bogus rumor (Enstrom).
Ya very true, couldn't tell you the last time a team in the playoff hunt traded one of thier all star defenseman

Darrelle Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:36 PM
  #8
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,980
vCash: 500
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=350813

Bieksa got beat up in a fight but thats about it. I just dont see Vancouver dealing him

I also dont see sather making a deal on the day of a game.

I'd rather be patient and go for Weiss or Olesz. Maybe even Hemsky if he is available. Then grab a cheap vet defenseman or a solid one with an expiring contract.

RGY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:39 PM
  #9
Riche16
Pessimistic-Realist
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,432
vCash: 500
Am I wrong in thinking that I'd rather have it be us getting one and giving up two players? Seems like I'd rather give quantity and gain quality not the other way around.

Riche16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:41 PM
  #10
asparkoflife
Registered User
 
asparkoflife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Patterson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,446
vCash: 500
Oh, this is interesting

asparkoflife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:41 PM
  #11
I Am Chariot
One shift at a time
 
I Am Chariot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 14,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjets36 View Post
We'd be getting 2 players, they would be getting 1.

Henrik and Daniel for Redden


seems fair


I Am Chariot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:41 PM
  #12
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,980
vCash: 500
He has us recieving two "solid" players yet we are dealing a "bigger forward" in return. LOL what "bigger" forwards do we have to offer? Gaborik? W2? Theres no way in hell sather would deal the kids. We're not dealing Gaborik. And W2 has been solid for us. Stupid rumor.

RGY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:43 PM
  #13
asparkoflife
Registered User
 
asparkoflife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Patterson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,446
vCash: 500
Gaborik for erhoff and kesler? Haha

asparkoflife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:44 PM
  #14
LamoTheKid
Registered User
 
LamoTheKid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 1,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagr68NYR94Leetch View Post
He has us recieving two "solid" players yet we are dealing a "bigger forward" in return. LOL what "bigger" forwards do we have to offer? Gaborik? W2? Theres no way in hell sather would deal the kids. We're not dealing Gaborik. And W2 has been solid for us. Stupid rumor.
Boyle?

LamoTheKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:44 PM
  #15
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,163
vCash: 500
The only person who I can think that the Canucks might have interest in, who would fit salary wise is Fedotenko. Obviously we'd have interest in Dubinsky or Callahan but I seriously doubt they'd be going anywhere for anyone we'd be willing to offer.

Canucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:45 PM
  #16
The Perfect Paradox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,495
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
The only person who I can think that the Canucks might have interest in, who would fit salary wise is Fedotenko. Obviously we'd have interest in Dubinsky or Callahan but I seriously doubt they'd be going anywhere for anyone we'd be willing to offer.
Fedotenko is hurt (just like the rest of the team ).

The Perfect Paradox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:52 PM
  #17
Pruch025
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 420
vCash: 500
I always wondered why people post Eklund rumors, then always say "it's Eklund". If you don't believe this guy (and I don't), why post it to begin with?

Pruch025 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:54 PM
  #18
MSG the place to be*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,783
vCash: 500
If your holding your breath for a pending trade you must be new to the internet.

MSG the place to be* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:54 PM
  #19
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,047
vCash: 500
Didn't click on the link because I'm not contributing to Hockeybuzz ad revenue....

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:56 PM
  #20
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,358
vCash: 500
At first, I thought a 2 for 1 seemed ridiculous given our depth but then I remembered that we have a bajillion injuries. Well this rumor sounds more credible than his ridiculous Calgary-NJ / Tor-Dal post.

Outside of Drury, I can't think of any uninjured players I would want to 2-for-1 for. Would Vancouver take any of our injured players? I think Fedotenko is the player highest on the depth chart I'd be willing to deal. Prospal shouldn't even be an option. I doubt they'll want EC.

OT: EC, MZA, Wolski will be a sweet shoot out trio.

n8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:56 PM
  #21
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 7,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pruch025 View Post
I always wondered why people post Eklund rumors, then always say "it's Eklund". If you don't believe this guy (and I don't), why post it to begin with?

Eklund serves a purpose: after reading his rumors, we know for a fact who we will NOT be trading with.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:57 PM
  #22
LetsGoBlueshirts
Registered User
 
LetsGoBlueshirts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Joisey
Country: United States
Posts: 499
vCash: 500
Can't say I can think of a deal mutually beneficial for the Rangers/Nucks.

However, I love the rumors this time of year, it should get very interesting in the next month!

LetsGoBlueshirts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:57 PM
  #23
asparkoflife
Registered User
 
asparkoflife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Patterson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pruch025 View Post
I always wondered why people post Eklund rumors, then always say "it's Eklund". If you don't believe this guy (and I don't), why post it to begin with?
Because this is a discussion board and this starts discussions. If you didn't believe it why'd you even bother?

asparkoflife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:58 PM
  #24
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
Guys, please talk about the rumor, not the source. Peoples' dubious reaction to Eklund is well traveled material.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 02:01 PM
  #25
NYR94
Registered User
 
NYR94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,685
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to NYR94
With all the Rangers' injuries and scoring problems I don't know what forward they'd trade that would bring back a forward and a defenseman, especially a name like Bieksa.

One thing I noticed looking over Vancouver's stats the other day is that Keith Ballard's average time on ice is down almost 7 minutes from his usual career average. I don't know if he's had injury problems or an off year or he's just lower on the depth chart because he's on a much better team than Phoenix or Florida, but he's playing about 15 minutes a game as opposed to 22. But this is not enough to make me think he's available. I always thought Gillis made those moves this offseason to significantly upgrade his depth on defense, so I don't think he'll undo it now by moving one of them. That Vancouver defense corps is much improved. The one thing I could think of is maybe his salary is prohibiting them from doing something else so they're entertaining the thought of moving it?

Without following Vancouver much this year I'd say Ballard probably just ended up being the one very solid defenseman they're forced to put on the third pair. Someone has to play there. And Bieksa from what I've heard has been very good this year so I doubt they're moving him. At least not for what the Rangers could offer.

If I had to guess I'd wager that the defensemen in this rumor could be names like Alberts or Rome. Is Ryan Parent's back healthy?

I don't know who the forward could be. Maybe Raymond.

NYR94 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 08:08 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.