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.

Phi - mtl

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-01-2012, 12:18 AM
  #1
Scuba-Steve
Registered User
 
Scuba-Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Québec
Posts: 776
vCash: 500
Phi - mtl

To Philly :

- Andrei Markov

- 2nd round MTL 2013 ( conditional if Markov plays less than 40 games in 12-13 )


To Montreal :

- Scott Laughton

- 1st round PHI 2013 ( conditional if Markov play more than 60 games in 12-13 )



The Flyers need a 1st pairing defensemen and this is a low risk / high reward deal for them . They are already stacked on offense so losing Laughton wouldn't hurt them that much . The Habs are rebuilding and that deal would help them going in that way .

Scuba-Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 12:25 AM
  #2
LatvianTwist
Global Moderator
 
LatvianTwist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Houston
Country: Tibet
Posts: 18,465
vCash: 500
Don't see them giving up Laughton. Read makes more sense for Both sides, as he's a bottom 6 center for Montreal which they could use, and is less important to the Flyers.

That said, don't think Montreal wants to move Markov.

LatvianTwist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 12:34 AM
  #3
Pierre Dagenais
RIP Mr. Hockey
 
Pierre Dagenais's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,658
vCash: 500
No way...

If Markov plays 60+ games then he is worth more than Laughton + a 1st

Pierre Dagenais is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 12:37 AM
  #4
tsujimoto74
Registered User
 
tsujimoto74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 9,430
vCash: 500
There is absolutely no reason for Montreal to do this. Unless they're unhealthily invested in Philadelphia's success.

tsujimoto74 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:01 AM
  #5
hockeyguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 336
vCash: 500
i think the flyers would be hesitant to move a first for an aging defenseman that hasnt played more than 10 games the last 2 years

hockeyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:03 AM
  #6
Vikke
FHM 13 researcher
 
Vikke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bustoville
Country: Sweden
Posts: 13,105
vCash: 500
There are better D-men to be had for that package. A lot healthier ones, too.

Vikke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:10 AM
  #7
BlueMapleDawg
Registered User
 
BlueMapleDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 792
vCash: 500
Terrible for the Flyers. Pretty much giving up two 1st round picks for Markov? Is that a f***ing joke?

Markov is donezo. Hate to break it to you Habs fans.

I can't believe there are Habs fans who wouldn't make this trade.

BlueMapleDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:12 AM
  #8
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,085
vCash: 500
65 games for markov in the last 3 years?

We'll pass

Krishna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:21 AM
  #9
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,537
vCash: 500
I understand the injury concerns, but you're only giving up the 1st IF markov plays 60+ games. So doesn't that mean the injury is irrelevant at that point? That being said, it's not worth it as there's still an initial risk that laughton will be traded for say 5 games of markov.

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:26 AM
  #10
Scuba-Steve
Registered User
 
Scuba-Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Québec
Posts: 776
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
I understand the injury concerns, but you're only giving up the 1st IF markov plays 60+ games. So doesn't that mean the injury is irrelevant at that point? That being said, it's not worth it as there's still an initial risk that laughton will be traded for say 5 games of markov.
If Markov play only 5 games they have a 2nd round pick , probably in the 30 - 40 range in a deep draft .

I don't understand why you guys says this deal sucks ... In the worst case scenario , the Flyers get Andrei Markov for let's say 30 games and a high 2nd round pick in 2013 for Scott Laughton . In the best case Markov stays healthy and we all know what a healthy Markov can do .


Last edited by Scuba-Steve: 08-01-2012 at 01:33 AM.
Scuba-Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:28 AM
  #11
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
I understand the injury concerns, but you're only giving up the 1st IF markov plays 60+ games. So doesn't that mean the injury is irrelevant at that point? That being said, it's not worth it as there's still an initial risk that laughton will be traded for say 5 games of markov.
The most likely scenario is that Markov misses the mark and we end up trading Laughton for a 2nd rounder next year. However, if Markov plays 60 games (even if he's a shell of his former self) we pay Laughton AND another first.

The only scenario where we get fair value is Markov playing and looking like he did in his prime. Seems to me like that's a tough gamble for us to take.

If the caliber of picks were flopped (Mtl's conditional being a first, Flyers a second), we might be talking about getting closer to reasonable value, but I still don't know that I'd play russian roulette with the contract.

Broad Street Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:32 AM
  #12
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scuba-Steve View Post
If Markov play only 5 games they have a 2nd round pick , probably in the 30 - 40 range in a deep draft .
True, but then what's incentive for montreal? I mean, say markov plays 39 games, habs trade him for free.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
The most likely scenario is that Markov misses the mark and we end up trading Laughton for a 2nd rounder next year. However, if Markov plays 60 games (even if he's a shell of his former self) we pay Laughton AND another first.

The only scenario where we get fair value is Markov playing and looking like he did in his prime. Seems to me like that's a tough gamble for us to take.

If the caliber of picks were flopped (Mtl's conditional being a first, Flyers a second), we might be talking about getting closer to reasonable value, but I still don't know that I'd play russian roulette with the contract.
Montreal's first would be way too high. lol

Imagine, habs give up Markov + 7th overall for Laughton. Ouch.

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:35 AM
  #13
Clipitar
Registered User
 
Clipitar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
The most likely scenario is that Markov misses the mark and we end up trading Laughton for a 2nd rounder next year. However, if Markov plays 60 games (even if he's a shell of his former self) we pay Laughton AND another first.

The only scenario where we get fair value is Markov playing and looking like he did in his prime. Seems to me like that's a tough gamble for us to take.

If the caliber of picks were flopped (Mtl's conditional being a first, Flyers a second), we might be talking about getting closer to reasonable value, but I still don't know that I'd play russian roulette with the contract.
Well, then you wouldn't get him for Laughton and a potentially late 1st. Not even remotely. Markov at his best is worth much more than that.

Clipitar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:37 AM
  #14
Scuba-Steve
Registered User
 
Scuba-Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Québec
Posts: 776
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
True, but then what's incentive for montreal? I mean, say markov plays 39 games, habs trade him for free.:
That's a risk the Habs would have to take . And i don't think they're gonna be in the playoffs even with a healthy Markov so it helps the rebuild .

Scuba-Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:40 AM
  #15
Scuba-Steve
Registered User
 
Scuba-Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Québec
Posts: 776
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
The most likely scenario is that Markov misses the mark and we end up trading Laughton for a 2nd rounder next year. However, if Markov plays 60 games (even if he's a shell of his former self) we pay Laughton AND another first.

The only scenario where we get fair value is Markov playing and looking like he did in his prime. Seems to me like that's a tough gamble for us to take.

If the caliber of picks were flopped (Mtl's conditional being a first, Flyers a second), we might be talking about getting closer to reasonable value, but I still don't know that I'd play russian roulette with the contract.
If Markov ends up playing like he did in his prime you guys got a very nice deal . A prime Markov is worth a lot more than 2 late 1st . A LOT more !

Scuba-Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 01:41 AM
  #16
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scuba-Steve View Post
That's a risk the Habs would have to take . And i don't think they're gonna be in the playoffs even with a healthy Markov so it helps the rebuild .
The key part here is "would have to take". Habs don't really need to trade the longest serving hab on the team. Everybody likes markov. I mean, maybe at deadline, we can see a deal but I don't see habs pushing him out the door just yet. They really have no incentive to trade him asap.

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:21 AM
  #17
LatvianTwist
Global Moderator
 
LatvianTwist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Houston
Country: Tibet
Posts: 18,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vikke View Post
There are better D-men to be had for that package. A lot healthier ones, too.
Better, absolutely not.

LatvianTwist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:40 AM
  #18
Prongo
Beer
 
Prongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 14,213
vCash: 500
Why would any GM include that conditional pick in there is beyond me. It's not like adding a conditional on making the Cup Finals. Every team's goal is to make the Finals, so a team would have no problem throwing that in there. Throwing it in there for a guy to make the 60 game mark is crazy. Imagine if Holmgren throws that in there and Markov plays 60 games and the Flyers miss the playoffs because Giroux goes down for an extended period. We would be screwed, and that's why that conditional pick would never happen. You generally want to put those conditionals on the performance of the team, and not a single player.

I would rather package that 1st and Scott Laughton along with another piece and try to get Yandle. Is that possible? I doubt it, but we won't be trying to acquire another aging defenseman who has played 65 games in the last three years. At least not for that package I would think.

With that contract and his significant injuries he has suffered the last couple of years, I don't really see Markov going anywhere. I hope he recovers and plays like he did when he was able to, Montreal would be a treat to watch again.

Prongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:47 AM
  #19
Intense Rage
Registered User
 
Intense Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,729
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clipitar View Post
Well, then you wouldn't get him for Laughton and a potentially late 1st. Not even remotely. Markov at his best is worth much more than that.
I don't think anyone even remembers Markov at his best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scuba-Steve View Post
If Markov play only 5 games they have a 2nd round pick , probably in the 30 - 40 range in a deep draft .

I don't understand why you guys says this deal sucks ... In the worst case scenario , the Flyers get Andrei Markov for let's say 30 games and a high 2nd round pick in 2013 for Scott Laughton . In the best case Markov stays healthy and we all know what a healthy Markov can do .
Who knows... We havent seen a healthy Markov for a long time.

Intense Rage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 11:22 AM
  #20
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prongo View Post
Why would any GM include that conditional pick in there is beyond me. It's not like adding a conditional on making the Cup Finals. Every team's goal is to make the Finals, so a team would have no problem throwing that in there. Throwing it in there for a guy to make the 60 game mark is crazy. Imagine if Holmgren throws that in there and Markov plays 60 games and the Flyers miss the playoffs because Giroux goes down for an extended period. We would be screwed, and that's why that conditional pick would never happen. You generally want to put those conditionals on the performance of the team, and not a single player.

I would rather package that 1st and Scott Laughton along with another piece and try to get Yandle. Is that possible? I doubt it, but we won't be trying to acquire another aging defenseman who has played 65 games in the last three years. At least not for that package I would think.

With that contract and his significant injuries he has suffered the last couple of years, I don't really see Markov going anywhere. I hope he recovers and plays like he did when he was able to, Montreal would be a treat to watch again.
I doubt you'd feel any more comfortable with the condition being philly makes playoffs or 2nd round. Especially if markov plays 0 games. At this point, the biggest question is his health, you can make it a team thing, but you might get shafted more.

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 11:26 AM
  #21
vokiel
I hate blind passes
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Montréal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 7,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LatvianTwist View Post
Don't see them giving up Laughton. Read makes more sense for Both sides, as he's a bottom 6 center for Montreal which they could use, and is less important to the Flyers.

That said, don't think Montreal wants to move Markov.
In what dimension? We've got plenty of those already.

This trade addresses nothing for Montreal, pass.

vokiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 11:27 AM
  #22
Sureves
Registered User
 
Sureves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 7,131
vCash: 500
Am I the only one who doesn't even remember if Markov was good because it was so long ago?

Sureves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 11:31 AM
  #23
habs03
Subban #Thoroughbred
 
habs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sureves View Post
Am I the only one who doesn't even remember if Markov was good because it was so long ago?
Before his injury, a for sure top 10 D-men in the league, in the 6-7 range I'd say.

habs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 11:31 AM
  #24
YuioIklo
Registered User
 
YuioIklo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Quebec
Country: Martinique
Posts: 1,519
vCash: 500
Why would the Flyers trade their 2012 1st rounder for a guy who will probably be injured?

YuioIklo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 11:35 AM
  #25
Clipitar
Registered User
 
Clipitar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prongo View Post
Why would any GM include that conditional pick in there is beyond me. It's not like adding a conditional on making the Cup Finals. Every team's goal is to make the Finals, so a team would have no problem throwing that in there. Throwing it in there for a guy to make the 60 game mark is crazy. Imagine if Holmgren throws that in there and Markov plays 60 games and the Flyers miss the playoffs because Giroux goes down for an extended period. We would be screwed, and that's why that conditional pick would never happen. You generally want to put those conditionals on the performance of the team, and not a single player.

I would rather package that 1st and Scott Laughton along with another piece and try to get Yandle. Is that possible? I doubt it, but we won't be trying to acquire another aging defenseman who has played 65 games in the last three years. At least not for that package I would think.

With that contract and his significant injuries he has suffered the last couple of years, I don't really see Markov going anywhere. I hope he recovers and plays like he did when he was able to, Montreal would be a treat to watch again.
You bring some really good points, but there's no way you can get Yandle for this package unless the added piece is one you wouldn't want to part with (Simmonds or Hartnell?).

I'd assume the Yotes ask for Couturier+ for their best OFD.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Intense Rage View Post
I don't think anyone even remembers Markov at his best.

Who knows... We havent seen a healthy Markov for a long time.
Have you started following hockey 2 years ago?

Clipitar 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 02:01 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.