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.

Canucks - Flyers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-01-2012, 01:25 AM
  #1
MISC*
Negged.
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,691
vCash: 500
Canucks - Flyers

To Philly:

Edler, Alexander

To Canucks:

Hartnell, Scott


Why?

Philly desperately needs to address the defensive core of this team. Edler will replace a much needed high end d-man who can QB a PP and log 22-24min.

Vancouver needs toughness and grit up front. Hartnell can play in front of the goalie on the PP and on the 2nd line with Kesler. Can keep defenders busy while the skill guys do there thing.

Both players have 1 year left and both cap hit's are pretty close.

MISC* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:27 AM
  #2
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MISC View Post
To Philly:

Edler, Alexander

To Canucks:

Hartnell, Scott


Why?

Philly desperately needs to address the defensive core of this team. Edler will replace a much needed high end d-man who can QB a PP and log 22-24min.

Vancouver needs toughness and grit up front. Hartnell can play in front of the goalie on the PP and on the 2nd line with Kesler. Can keep defenders busy while the skill guys do there thing.

Both players have 1 year left and both cap hit's are pretty close.
No thanks!

Vancouver needs Edler more then they need Hartnell.

Scottrockztheworld* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:27 AM
  #3
DropIt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Red Deer, AB
Posts: 1,663
vCash: 500
I feel the hole Edler leaves isn't worth the one Hartnell fills for Vancouver

DropIt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:29 AM
  #4
JS19
Four Kicks
 
JS19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Shark Tank
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,780
vCash: 500
Better get the flame shields ready...

Just because Weber didn't sign the offer sheet, it doesn't mean that Philly is in deep trouble with their defensive core. They have a steady core, adding Edler at the expense of Hartnell will hurt their offense.

Same with Vancouver, Edler is practically their #1 offensive D and losing him for Hartnell isn't going to improve their subpar D (one of the reasons why they lost in the playoffs).

JS19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:32 AM
  #5
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS19 View Post
Better get the flame shields ready...

Just because Weber didn't sign the offer sheet, it doesn't mean that Philly is in deep trouble with their defensive core. They have a steady core, adding Edler at the expense of Hartnell will hurt their offense.

Same with Vancouver, Edler is practically their #1 offensive D and losing him for Hartnell isn't going to improve their subpar D (one of the reasons why they lost in the playoffs).
The Canucks have sub-par D? Haha ok there buddy.

CommonMeans* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:34 AM
  #6
BlackRedYellow
Registered User
 
BlackRedYellow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS19 View Post
Better get the flame shields ready...

Just because Weber didn't sign the offer sheet, it doesn't mean that Philly is in deep trouble with their defensive core. They have a steady core, adding Edler at the expense of Hartnell will hurt their offense.

Same with Vancouver, Edler is practically their #1 offensive D and losing him for Hartnell isn't going to improve their subpar D (one of the reasons why they lost in the playoffs).
Without Edler the Canucks have Garrison, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Ballard, Tanev, Connauton, Alberts, and a few others. How is that subpar?

BlackRedYellow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:36 AM
  #7
JS19
Four Kicks
 
JS19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Shark Tank
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CommonMeans View Post
The Canucks have sub-par D? Haha ok there buddy.
Well they got so far in the playoffs with that D now didn't they? (Note I'm talking before Garrison/whatever changes they made happened)

JS19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:38 AM
  #8
DropIt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Red Deer, AB
Posts: 1,663
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedYellow View Post
Without Edler the Canucks have Garrison, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Ballard, Tanev, Connauton, Alberts, and a few others. How is that subpar?
Its not great, average at best

DropIt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:39 AM
  #9
KISSland
Registered User
 
KISSland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS19 View Post
Well they got so far in the playoffs with that D now didn't they? (Note I'm talking before Garrison/whatever changes they made happened)
Yeah, cause that was the problem...

Anyways, no thanks from Canucks. Edler holds too much value to this team.

KISSland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:42 AM
  #10
phlla12
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 51
vCash: 500
It's not the worst trade ever proposed, but the timing is bad.

1) Hartnell is loved; which equals $$$ for franchise
2) We can't lose Hartnell + JVR + Jarg upfront in one offseason
3) Our D is not that bad... (some of us, not me) think we're better now that we lost Carl (/laugh)

phlla12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:44 AM
  #11
GTopCheese
Registered User
 
GTopCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,109
vCash: 500
^ We are better without Carle. So sick of him.

GTopCheese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:47 AM
  #12
YouCantYandleThis*
Moustache Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DropIt View Post
Its not great, average at best
It's certainly not great, but it's absolutely above average. Edler, Hamhuis, Bieksa, and Garrison are all legitimate top 2/3/4 Defensemen, and Ballard and Tanev are both nipping on their heels as well. It's a well-rounded D-core that provides ample offense as well as some occasionally inconsistent defense. Thankfully we have good goaltenders.

I'd say it's a good defence. Not top 5 in the league or anything, but top 10-15? absolutely.

YouCantYandleThis* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:48 AM
  #13
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS19 View Post
Well they got so far in the playoffs with that D now didn't they? (Note I'm talking before Garrison/whatever changes they made happened)
Nonsensical argument. That is, it does not follow. Nice try though. Maybe if you actually watched the Canucks you'd understand that the Canucks didn't lose in the playoffs 'cause of their D. If you do watch the Canucks then maybe you should pick up a new sport to engage in; obviously hockey isn't "sinking" in.

CommonMeans* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:52 AM
  #14
JS19
Four Kicks
 
JS19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Shark Tank
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CommonMeans View Post
Nonsensical argument. That is, it does not follow. Nice try though. Maybe if you actually watched the Canucks you'd understand that the Canucks didn't lose in the playoffs 'cause of their D. If you do watch the Canucks then maybe you should pick up a new sport to engage in; obviously hockey isn't "sinking" in.
Maybe your reading comprehension needs some help, I said ONE of the reasons. I know scoring was also a problem, but you're in denial if you think your D core was set to take on the West in the playoffs (Edler had a bad playoff series, Bieksa was very average to poor, Hamhuis was a non-factor). Why else were people so open to the idea of getting Garrison in the first place?

JS19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:55 AM
  #15
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS19 View Post
Maybe your reading comprehension needs some help, I said ONE of the reasons. I know scoring was also a problem, but you're in denial if you think your D core was set to take on the West in the playoffs (Edler had a bad playoff series, Bieksa was very average to poor, Hamhuis was a non-factor). Why else were people so open to the idea of getting Garrison in the first place?
So basically the Canucks won the West the year before 'cause of Erhoff? Or is it possible the team as a whole just sucked. What you state DOES NOT FOLLOW. Goodnight.

CommonMeans* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:55 AM
  #16
aandbreatheme
Registered User
 
aandbreatheme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,239
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS19 View Post
Maybe your reading comprehension needs some help, I said ONE of the reasons. I know scoring was also a problem, but you're in denial if you think your D core was set to take on the West in the playoffs (Edler had a bad playoff series, Bieksa was very average to poor, Hamhuis was a non-factor). Why else were people so open to the idea of getting Garrison in the first place?
There was no way Salo was going to play 2nd pairing minutes next season.

aandbreatheme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:09 AM
  #17
JS19
Four Kicks
 
JS19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Shark Tank
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CommonMeans View Post
So basically the Canucks won the West the year before 'cause of Erhoff? Or is it possible the team as a whole just sucked. What you state DOES NOT FOLLOW. Goodnight.
Way to conveniently gloss over that I said there are other problems on top of crappy defensive play. But sure, live in your own denial then...because that defense is totally Stanley Cup/Norris worthy.

JS19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:19 AM
  #18
gsharpe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 561
vCash: 500
Go ahead and name 4 better defensive groups. Im curious.

gsharpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:19 AM
  #19
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,767
vCash: 500
I feel partly responsible for this, bringing back the Edler thread. We aren't actively looking to move him.

I like Hartnell, but he isn't as valuable as us as Edler, and he's definitely not as valuable to us as he is to the Flyers. We'd need more back, a lesser top 4 dman from somewhere on the roster, would be a minimum addition, and I know Flyers fans won't start down that path.

I don't think their D is that bad either...Prongers out, but that's still Timonen, Schenn, Mezaros, Coburn and even Grossman, Lilja and Gervais to lesser or larger extents make a decent core. Edler, or Weber, or any other top 20 Dman would take it from above average on paper to phenomenal. The first 5 guys I listed are all solid top 4 defenders...if the defence isn't working, it might be the strategy more then the pieces...like ours.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:22 AM
  #20
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS19 View Post
Way to conveniently gloss over that I said there are other problems on top of crappy defensive play. But sure, live in your own denial then...because that defense is totally Stanley Cup/Norris worthy.
Norris is individual, but nice.

Our defenders themselves aren't bad at all, Edler or no. I think our system is flawed defensively, asking far too much individual effort, and results in injuries (see Hamhuis and Ballard having ironman streaks ruined on our team, Bieksa's freak injuries, etc), a lack of support if we're heavily pressured (see L.A., Boston, Chicago) and other areas that need support/changes. Playing Rome like a top four and leaving Ballard to languish on the bench also messes things up, and that's not the players, thats coaching.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:30 AM
  #21
Derp Kassian
Registered User
 
Derp Kassian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,288
vCash: 500
Imo Canucks would rather add Doan or give a shot to Kassian/Jensen then trade a potential Norris candidate for Scott Hartnell. Hartnell would fit well with the Sedins but I'm not sure if he'd do well with Kesler since Kes likes to be more of a puck carrier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JS19 View Post
Way to conveniently gloss over that I said there are other problems on top of crappy defensive play. But sure, live in your own denial then...because that defense is totally Stanley Cup/Norris worthy.
It is cup worthy, severely decimated the same 4/6(hamhuis got injured) defenseman got to within 1 game of the cup. Top 4 is easily in the middle of the top10.

Derp Kassian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:36 AM
  #22
VanFan101
Registered User
 
VanFan101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 128
vCash: 500
Ah HF, one poster makes an uneducated statement, and then instead of correcting themselves, they defend it over and over and successfully derail an entire thread.

VanFan101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:47 AM
  #23
LeX4cavalier
Registered User
 
LeX4cavalier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tampa
Country: United States
Posts: 1,030
vCash: 500
Lol at the guy who thinks the Canucks have a subpar d, it's easily better than the Flyers, and it's probably top 5 in the NHL. To the trade, no thank you from the Canucks. Edler's a ufa in 1 year, but so is Hartnell. Edler is much younger, and a better player.

LeX4cavalier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:50 AM
  #24
Reverend Mayhem
CRJ + RNH = Sex
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,377
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by DropIt View Post
I feel the hole Edler leaves isn't worth the one Hartnell fills for Vancouver
That's really all there is to this thread, as much as I like Hartsy.

Reverend Mayhem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 03:03 AM
  #25
professorchaos
Registered User
 
professorchaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Langley
Country: Canada
Posts: 285
vCash: 500
Hartnell is one of my fave players in the NHL. I would gladly give up Edler for him if we had the defensive depth and Philly had the offensive depth for this move to work.

professorchaos 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 03:51 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.