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.

Leafs/Blues

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-27-2012, 11:40 AM
  #126
JustOneB4IDie
Everyone Overpayment
 
JustOneB4IDie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: St. Louis MO
Country: United States
Posts: 3,320
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by trublu16 View Post
Winner Winner Chicken Dinner!!

Toronto when you meet our needs, then we can talk. Until then we really have nothing to talk about.
Outstanding Ouote...

JustOneB4IDie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 11:56 AM
  #127
trublu16
Registered User
 
trublu16's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 762
vCash: 500
So let me get this right, because these two fan bases cannot agree on a trade. This thread has turned into a pissing match. It is not like a majority of the trade proposals on HF turn into nothing but fan bases arguing with each other. And this proposal is just like the majority of the rest of the proposals. A few things that amaze me about these proposals that include the Blues. First, it is very rare when you actually take the other team's needs in consideration. For example theses offers that offer up Bozak/Frattin/Gunner which the Blues have no need for. They are the wrong types of players or we have better players playing there position already on the Blues. Second, the fan base of the other team gets pissed off when we say we do not want your players/prospects/picks. Here is a crazy idea, we may be looking at the entire situation . For example, we are looking at the cap/talent/future of the player. Now that is not to say that we just make stupid statements to try to drive you crazy.

But in the long run, these two teams are not good trade partners. And to call all Blues fans obnoxious, is just down right dumb. We have been through this many of times with different fan bases. We are a team that have very specific needs and we are not going to settle for less than what we want. And again our needs are a #2 LHD d man to play longside of Petro. And even that the type of d man is still widely argued upon Blues fans themselves. This d man just needs to make room for Petro to be more offensive than he has been. And our 2nd need is a top 6 center upgrade, and not a subtraction. Preferably I would want a #1 center or #2A center to move Backes back to the wing, where I think he is more effective. But again, when we are looking at players that are being offered up. We have to consider the type of player and if that player is going to be effective in Hitch's system.

But again these two team do not match up well with each other as trade partners.

trublu16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 11:59 AM
  #128
Corn Baller
Registered User
 
Corn Baller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Kansas City, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HooliganX2 View Post
Why would he spin it though? What is the reason. No GM is going to give up the assets for Stewart as if he was the 28 goal 64 point forward he has been. No amount of lip service or spin is going to make another GM pay full price for a 64 point forward every GM is going to consider Stewart a reclamation project. Stewart is a risky player to trade for no matter what Armstrong says or spins. I know that and accept that.

With all that being said the Blues are in perfect position to take that risk. The Blues have a need for a top pairing LH defenseman. And debatably a true #1 center. Any other return will not fix our needs. Stewart obviously will not return a player to fill those needs. So you risk trading Stewart for a player we do not need and him Becoming a 70 point 30 goal scorer for another team. Or you hang on to him and hope he becomes the player we thought he would be. We lose nothing by hanging on to him.

Does anyone honestly think GM's are stupid enough to buy into another GM hyping a player and paying more for them.

I am hoping for the best with Stewart. We all know he's a better player then he was last season. We all know the talent and skills he has. Armstrong knows this as well. There are certain fans in our fan base that have a deep dislike or even hatred for Stewart because he under performed. It seems our fan base always needs a whipping boy Brewer, Jackman, Crombeen, Cola now it is Stewart. I think this dislike/hatred causes people to be blind to anything logical.

Like I said Armstrong is fully open to trading Stewart but it would only be if he could receive an equally young and talented player in return. A player comparable to the 64 point 28 goal Stewart. It could even be a player in a similar situation as Stewart who has proved they can perform in the past but had a down year this past season. By the makeup of our team it is doubtful that player will be a winger though.
I think he would do it to frame future dialogue. With that caveat, I agree with everything else you wrote.

Corn Baller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:50 PM
  #129
Vladys Gumption
Registered User
 
Vladys Gumption's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 6,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeleim View Post
I'd sure like to see Berglund on the Leafs or Jets...

Carl Gunnarsson, Tyler Bozak and Joe Colborne to the St. Louis Blues for Patrik Berglund and mid-round draft pick?
That's not even close. Neither Bozak or Colborne are an upgrade on Berglund, so that in itself is a no go. Plus Gunnarsson isn't the defenseman we would be looking for.

Vladys Gumption is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:06 PM
  #130
Mowerman
Registered User
 
Mowerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedBlue247 View Post
That's not even close. Neither Bozak or Colborne are an upgrade on Berglund, so that in itself is a no go. Plus Gunnarsson isn't the defenseman we would be looking for.
Who would you be looking for then? Gunnarsson is a smart, intelligent two way guy who thrives the more minutes he gets. He's eaten massive minutes at times in Toronto without looking worse for wear afterwards. I mean massive. There were times where he logged over 30 minutes.

Not that Gunnarsson is necessarily the guy Toronto is looking to move either. We were listening last year, and then Leafs management had to reevaluate his worth due to Aulie's lackluster play and, more importantly, Carl's exceptional play. I'm curious as to who you would reasonably want instead of Gunnarsson, and the assets you would reasonably think you would have to forfeit for a player of the calibre you are apparently after. Gun show seems to be exactly what fits your bill. A quiet, two way, solid LD that can eat big minutes and look no worse for wear because of it.

Mowerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:10 PM
  #131
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,722
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrontalLombardomy View Post
Who would you be looking for then? Gunnarsson is a smart, intelligent two way guy who thrives the more minutes he gets. He's eaten massive minutes at times in Toronto without looking worse for wear afterwards. I mean massive. There were times where he logged over 30 minutes.

Not that Gunnarsson is necessarily the guy Toronto is looking to move either. We were listening last year, and then Leafs management had to reevaluate his worth due to Aulie's lackluster play and, more importantly, Carl's exceptional play. I'm curious as to who you would reasonably want instead of Gunnarsson, and the assets you would reasonably think you would have to forfeit for a player of the calibre you are apparently after. Gun show seems to be exactly what fits your bill. A quiet, two way, solid LD that can eat big minutes and look no worse for wear because of it.
We can just have Cole fill that role. Unless we can get a legit top pairing dman or at least an upgrade over Berglund, we won't be interested. Those are our only 2 needs.

I like Gunnarsson, but if Petro ever got hurt, he wouldn't be able to take over for him in the short run. No point in giving up anything of significance for something that we don't really need and already have.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:10 PM
  #132
Corn Baller
Registered User
 
Corn Baller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Kansas City, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedBlue247 View Post
That's not even close. Neither Bozak or Colborne are an upgrade on Berglund, so that in itself is a no go. Plus Gunnarsson isn't the defenseman we would be looking for.
Yeah, since depth for depth's sake isn't a need for the Blues now, a trade involving Berglund would really have to include a player that's better than Berglund coming back, which this doesn't, IMO. There's also no great reason to include Gunnarsson in a deal because it's at least debatable that Cole is a better player.

Corn Baller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:13 PM
  #133
Mowerman
Registered User
 
Mowerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue1223 View Post
We can just have Cole fill that role. Unless we can get a legit top pairing dman or at least an upgrade over Berglund, we won't be interested. Those are our only 2 needs.

I like Gunnarsson, but if Petro ever got hurt, he wouldn't be able to take over for him in the short run. No point in giving up anything of significance for something that we don't really need and already have.
Well you'd better hope that Suter likes St Louis, eh?

Fair enough, I was just genuinely curious. Got the vibe that people are understating Gunnarsson's worth.

Mowerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:14 PM
  #134
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,722
vCash: 50
Honestly, the only players the Leafs have that I'd be interested in is Kessel and Phaneuf. Kessel obviously won't be traded, and we've already been amused at some of the asking prices of Phaneuf.

Everyone else either doesn't fit our salary structure, our needs, our style, or they would be redundant.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:27 PM
  #135
Mowerman
Registered User
 
Mowerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue1223 View Post
Honestly, the only players the Leafs have that I'd be interested in is Kessel and Phaneuf. Kessel obviously won't be traded, and we've already been amused at some of the asking prices of Phaneuf.

Everyone else either doesn't fit our salary structure, our needs, our style, or they would be redundant.
I don't think we're ideal trading partners either. Gunnarsson was the only asset I could see both teams being willing to entertain. Phaneuf has a very high price tag, the reasons being pretty clear from Toronto's perspective. A legitimate top pairing LD is one of our needs right now, which will hopefully be addressed from within the organization by the time we're ready to contend.

I apologize on behalf of my fellow fans, because you'll probably see quite a bit of this. We want you to take our scraps that you don't need because we want your assets. And what's the problem with that? You bleed blue after all!

Mowerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 02:03 PM
  #136
Vladys Gumption
Registered User
 
Vladys Gumption's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 6,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrontalLombardomy View Post
Who would you be looking for then? Gunnarsson is a smart, intelligent two way guy who thrives the more minutes he gets. He's eaten massive minutes at times in Toronto without looking worse for wear afterwards. I mean massive. There were times where he logged over 30 minutes.

Not that Gunnarsson is necessarily the guy Toronto is looking to move either. We were listening last year, and then Leafs management had to reevaluate his worth due to Aulie's lackluster play and, more importantly, Carl's exceptional play. I'm curious as to who you would reasonably want instead of Gunnarsson, and the assets you would reasonably think you would have to forfeit for a player of the calibre you are apparently after. Gun show seems to be exactly what fits your bill. A quiet, two way, solid LD that can eat big minutes and look no worse for wear because of it.
We would be looking for a legitimate top pairing defenseman to take some of the pressure off of Pietranelo. If we hadn't just re-signed Jackman, I would definitely be interested in Gunnarsson for the second pairing. I don't see us trading the assets that would be required to acquire the top pairing defenseman. I see Armstrong making a big push for either Garrison or Suter. I myself, see Garrison as the more realistic target.

Vladys Gumption is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 02:08 PM
  #137
Dolph Ziggler
Push ME
 
Dolph Ziggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 8,267
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrontalLombardomy View Post
Well you'd better hope that Suter likes St Louis, eh?

Fair enough, I was just genuinely curious. Got the vibe that people are understating Gunnarsson's worth.
Well Suter or Garrison lol.

I like Gunnarsson, but is he a good enough upgrade over Cole in order to give up real assets to get? Is Gunnarsson > Cole/Stewart?

I'd probably say no and Toronto obviously isn't going to just give him away, nor should they.

Dolph Ziggler 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 03:50 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.