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/Blues

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-08-2012, 10:54 AM
  #26
Izzy
Moderator
FollowmeonInstagram!
 
Izzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,260
vCash: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Wait... so you'd trade Halak for Rynnas, a 2nd and a 4th??? Where do we sign?

As for the rest of your comment. Gunnarsson is far more valuable to the Leafs than Stewart would be, and with Rattie, you're comparing a project to a player who's 1 year removed from 30 goals in the NHL combined with being one of the best defensive forwards on the team.
Not exactly, maybe if Jake Allen could prove to be able to handle NHL play but not right now when Elliot would be our starter. In the future possibly.

Izzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 10:57 AM
  #27
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fst6 View Post
Not exactly, maybe if Jake Allen could prove to be able to handle NHL play but not right now when Elliot would be our starter. In the future possibly.
Then why did you say Halak = Rynnas + 2nd + 4th?

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 10:59 AM
  #28
Izzy
Moderator
FollowmeonInstagram!
 
Izzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,260
vCash: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Then why did you say Halak = Rynnas + 2nd + 4th?
I meant they were equal in value, but not an option for us right now considering the other goaltending on our team.

Izzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:03 AM
  #29
BlueSinceBirth
Registered User
 
BlueSinceBirth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fst6 View Post
I meant they were equal in value, but not an option for us right now considering the other goaltending on our team.
They are not equal in value. Halak is on a pretty nice contract for a starting goalie and draft picks are a crapshoot. We have quite a few prospect goalies so Rynnas doesn't do much either.

BlueSinceBirth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:03 AM
  #30
Bluester
Registered User
 
Bluester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Kansas City, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 960
vCash: 500
Dear Toronto fans please find another teams fanbase to bug with your trade offers. The ones with St. Louis are always a no from us...yes that's still a big fat NO from us once again.

Bluester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:11 AM
  #31
Izzy
Moderator
FollowmeonInstagram!
 
Izzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,260
vCash: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueSinceBirth View Post
They are not equal in value. Halak is on a pretty nice contract for a starting goalie and draft picks are a crapshoot. We have quite a few prospect goalies so Rynnas doesn't do much either.
The prospect goalies we have are what make this trade eventually doable though. Soon one of these goalies is eventually going to be starter quality and once that time hits we can get picks for a goalie to make room for another.

That's why I said it's not a trade we'd do right now, but possibly in the future

Izzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:30 AM
  #32
grabo84
Registered User
 
grabo84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Atlantic Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Grouch View Post
I'm not disputing Gunnarson's abilities, I think he is a very good defenseman. However, I'm not sold on the idea that he is what the Blues need to fill their top pairing LD position. Also, if this thread is a guide, it appears the price to obtain him would be pretty steep.
It'd be really tough to get him, since the Leafs have nobody else to fill his role. He's the best two way defenceman on the team, by a wide margin.

grabo84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:52 AM
  #33
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 20,492
vCash: 50
Well this are always somewhat entertaining.

bleedblue1223 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:58 AM
  #34
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fst6 View Post
I meant they were equal in value, but not an option for us right now considering the other goaltending on our team.
If a deal like that doesn't work for St. Louis, then they're not equal in value. To be equal in value, a team would have to be indecisive to making the trade.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 12:01 PM
  #35
BudMovin*
Mung Dealer
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Q'onoS
Country: Canary Islands
Posts: 2,100
vCash: 500
Hahaahahhhahaha.

BudMovin* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 12:02 PM
  #36
SIDGENO8771
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fst6 View Post
Halak=Rynnas&2ndpick&4thpick
Stewart>>>Gunnarson
Ty Rattie?Kulemin (hard to say, =?)

Anyway trade is already favoring the leafs without the pick. The only think here useful is Gunnarson because hes a lefty but this trade is an absolute no-go
Nope

Halak= Rynnas + 2nd + 4th
Gunnarsson>>>Stewart
Kulemin>Rattie

SIDGENO8771 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 12:03 PM
  #37
Izzy
Moderator
FollowmeonInstagram!
 
Izzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,260
vCash: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIDGENO8771 View Post
Nope

Halak= Rynnas + 2nd + 4th
Gunnarsson>>>Stewart
Kulemin>Rattie
Funniest joke I've heard all day

Izzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 12:06 PM
  #38
Community
Former TMLKesselftw
 
Community's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Darkest Timeline
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,686
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Robot View Post
Or how about you offer pieces that wont just be AHL depth to St. Louis for Stewart? The only assets Toronto has that hold value to STL are
1) Kessel(but not as much as you think since we are loaded with wingers)
2) Gardiner if he players the left side could develop into a good Coliacovo replacement.

And right now we aren't really interested in moving roster players to fill holes so if you want to trade Gardiner for a first and third just let us know.

Can we stop with the "Toronto has no assets" crap

In addition to Kessel and Gardiner, I'm sure the Blues would be interested in other players such as: Phaneuf, Rielly, Kadri, Grabovski, Kulimen, Gunnarson, Lupul, etc. Every team in the league has valuable assets, so can we stop saying Toronto doesn't?

Community is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 12:08 PM
  #39
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 20,492
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMLKesselftw View Post
Can we stop with the "Toronto has no assets" crap

In addition to Kessel and Gardiner, I'm sure the Blues would be interested in other players such as: Phaneuf, Rielly, Kadri, Grabovski, Kulimen, Gunnarson, Lupul, etc. Every team in the league has valuable assets, so can we stop saying Toronto doesn't?
Do you have anyone that can be a #1 center for us? How bout a top pairing defenseman that can fit into our salary structure?

There are very few players around the league that fit what we need.

bleedblue1223 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 12:10 PM
  #40
Vladys Gumption
Moderator
Trap City
 
Vladys Gumption's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 7,082
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMLKesselftw View Post
Can we stop with the "Toronto has no assets" crap

In addition to Kessel and Gardiner, I'm sure the Blues would be interested in other players such as: Phaneuf, Rielly, Kadri, Grabovski, Kulimen, Gunnarson, Lupul, etc. Every team in the league has valuable assets, so can we stop saying Toronto doesn't?
Maybe that gets said because Toronto fans always make insane proposals that land them star players without giving up significant assets? The blues get bent over hardcore in this proposal. I wouldn't trade Halak for that entire package, let alone throw in Stewart and Rattie. Quantity does not equal quality

Vladys Gumption is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 12:25 PM
  #41
MattyMo35
Moderator
Schwartz Be With You
 
MattyMo35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 7,278
vCash: 50
This is another bad proposal. Please, Leaf fans, stop including the Blues in your proposals. We just aren't good trading partners at this time.

MattyMo35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 12:53 PM
  #42
Community
Former TMLKesselftw
 
Community's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Darkest Timeline
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,686
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedBlue247 View Post
Maybe that gets said because Toronto fans always make insane proposals that land them star players without giving up significant assets? The blues get bent over hardcore in this proposal. I wouldn't trade Halak for that entire package, let alone throw in Stewart and Rattie. Quantity does not equal quality
I wasn't talking about the original proposal, I think it is pretty bad too... And there are sooooo many leafs fans on this board, you don't think we'll have a few more bad proposals from our fans then a team like Phoenix's fans?

Community is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 12:59 PM
  #43
Community
Former TMLKesselftw
 
Community's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Darkest Timeline
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,686
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue1223 View Post
Do you have anyone that can be a #1 center for us? How bout a top pairing defenseman that can fit into our salary structure?

There are very few players around the league that fit what we need.
A remark like this makes a lot more sense, instead of "The only assets Toronto has that hold value to STL are:"

To me what you're saying is equivalent to TOR fans saying we don't need to trade for a RWer like Marian Hossa because we have Kessel and it would cost to much. While what was said before is more like "Marian Hossa would not help Toronto" which is not true... maybe I misread it, but that's how I took the statement.

Community is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 01:09 PM
  #44
trublu16
Registered User
 
trublu16's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMLKesselftw View Post
Can we stop with the "Toronto has no assets" crap

In addition to Kessel and Gardiner, I'm sure the Blues would be interested in other players such as: Phaneuf, Rielly, Kadri, Grabovski, Kulimen, Gunnarson, Lupul, etc. Every team in the league has valuable assets, so can we stop saying Toronto doesn't?
It has nothing to do with if your organization has any assets or not. It has to do with what the team you are dealing with needs. And do you have what they need or desire to have on their team. As it has been said before #1 center and #2 LHD dman to partner with Petro, those would be the needs of the Blues. Now I get that someone may think that you have that, but the Blues do not think you have those pieces. Hence the denial every time that you guys keep trying to pawn off Gunnarson onto the Blues. Personally, I am so sick of the actually crap offers that keep sending Gunnarson over to St. Louis. Here is an idea, if we, as a a fan base, have said no to a certain player before. Don't try to keep forcing him down our throats. We have said no to Gunnarson before and apparently we have to say it again.

At this time, we make HORRIBLE trading partners!!

trublu16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 01:22 PM
  #45
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
cmon man

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 01:48 PM
  #46
TimtheDJ84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,421
vCash: 560
Short answer no..long answer nooooooooooooo. Seriously though, Halak is on a good contract and Elliott is the perfect number 2. No desire to trade him.

TimtheDJ84 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 01:51 PM
  #47
ManyIdeas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 1,989
vCash: 1152
Counter garbage proposal, kessel for cstew and a 3rd. Basically the concept of garbage we've been proposed.

ManyIdeas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 01:55 PM
  #48
Izzy
Moderator
FollowmeonInstagram!
 
Izzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,260
vCash: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
If a deal like that doesn't work for St. Louis, then they're not equal in value. To be equal in value, a team would have to be indecisive to making the trade.
If Halak was still in Montreal, this trade would make sense for them since they have price. So yes.

Izzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 02:06 PM
  #49
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fst6 View Post
If Halak was still in Montreal, this trade would make sense for them since they have price. So yes.
But he's not...We're talking reality here.

Furthermore, if he were in Montreal, it wouldn't make sense for them, because they can do better.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 02:10 PM
  #50
FormerRedwingFan
Sarcastic User Name
 
FormerRedwingFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: MI
Posts: 1,382
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMLKesselftw View Post
Can we stop with the "Toronto has no assets" crap

In addition to Kessel and Gardiner, I'm sure the Blues would be interested in other players such as: Phaneuf, Rielly, Kadri, Grabovski, Kulimen, Gunnarson, Lupul, etc. Every team in the league has valuable assets, so can we stop saying Toronto doesn't?
My take on this isn't that Toronto "Doesn't have assets" I think Burke is doing an OK job of improving the depth and prospect pool. Its that Toronto fans seem to think: hey this guy is 8th 9th on our depth chart so I will propose for the 7th 8th guy on your depth chart, not seeming to understand that the depth charts for your team are not equal to most other teams. Lots of mismanagement for many years have left you with a lot of boom bust players or players with horrid contracts that other teams do not value. A lot of proposals also seem to return no value or make little sense for the other team. Unless you guys are going to include some significant assets like Kessel Gardiner in your proposal instead of depth players on a team with depth issues I don't think you should be surprised by the response.

FormerRedwingFan 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 02:36 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.