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.

Two Ottawa trades, Oilers & Panthers

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-03-2012, 01:48 PM
  #26
ChocolateLeclaire
Registered User
 
ChocolateLeclaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,479
vCash: 500
No...just no.

These deals where you offer a series of player prospects for one or two proven players will never be accepted because the other team, despite trying to sound knowledgeable, has no concept or grasp on what the real value of those prospects are, because they've never seen them play a game.

ChocolateLeclaire is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 01:54 PM
  #27
5RingsAndABeer
John MacKinnon Fan
 
5RingsAndABeer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 10,914
vCash: 1220
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
Another handful of nickels for a quarter proposal. These rarely go over well.

No from Edmonton. I wouldn't trade either of Gagner or Hemsky for that package.
100% agreed. If you want quality, you have to overpay. If you don't think Hemsky has the potential to return to form, then there's no trade to be made. If you don't appreciate Gagner's grit and 2C offensive production because he's not 6'3", 220lbs, then there's no trade to be made.

5RingsAndABeer is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 02:21 PM
  #28
Jaromir Jagrbombs
Registered User
 
Jaromir Jagrbombs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 482
vCash: 500
Big no to the first trade, and like others have stated not enough for Florida to move Gudbranson.

Jaromir Jagrbombs is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 02:40 PM
  #29
Eskimo44
Registered User
 
Eskimo44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,431
vCash: 500
The Edmonton trade is a big no. We don't need defense prospects, like not at all. Bishop and a 4th round pick is meh. We have a starter and two good prospects in net. Zack Smith is a good young 3rd liner, but he's not even close to being worth Gagner. Trading our 2nd line center for a 3rd line center is a very bad idea. Hemsky himself isn't worth this package IMO. Other than Smith we don't need any of the pieces in the deal, and Smith is obviously worth much less than Gagner. Even removing one of the Oilers from the deal i wouldn't do it.

Eskimo44 is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 02:45 PM
  #30
danishh
Dat Stache
 
danishh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: mtl/ott/somewhere
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,654
vCash: 50
i'd rather have zack smith as our #3 center than sam gagner.

the second one is doable but i doubt tallon bites.

__________________
RIP Kev.
danishh is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 02:52 PM
  #31
MeestaDeteta
Registered User
 
MeestaDeteta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Saskazoo
Posts: 7,523
vCash: 139
As an Oiler fan, I have no interest in your proposal.

MeestaDeteta is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 02:53 PM
  #32
The Nuge
Farewell Smytty
 
The Nuge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,977
vCash: 1026
The Edmonton deal is just brutal

The Nuge is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 02:56 PM
  #33
Marvelous Manked
Ooh to be a Gooner
 
Marvelous Manked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sudbury/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,358
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by flapanthersfan View Post
the florida deal is laughably terrible. how about matthias, ellerby and mcfarland for zibenejad? scraps for a potential star deals dont work.

edmonton deal doesnt look much better.
It's laughable for us too, we give up our valued depth for a #3 or #4 Defenceman.

I can see why you don't do it, but neither do we.

Lose-Lose trade.

Marvelous Manked is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 03:08 PM
  #34
HarveySpecter
Registered User
 
HarveySpecter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,929
vCash: 500
I don't know what people see in Gudbranson, I've never been impressed with him. I don't think he'll ever be more than a 3rd/4th defenseman.

HarveySpecter is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 03:19 PM
  #35
Greeningfan14
Registered User
 
Greeningfan14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,716
vCash: 500
Wouldnt do either deal

Greeningfan14 is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 03:35 PM
  #36
s7ark
LeonTheProfessional
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpezDispenser View Post
He said he wouldn't do Hemsky OR Gagner for that package, nevermind that neither Hemsky or especially Gagner don't fit what Ottawa's going for.
And I wouldn't. Imo, a bottom 6 C, a D prospect with bottom 4 potential and a maybe goalie isn't worth a top 6 player, let alone two.

I'm glad the trade doesn't address your needs, because it certainly doesn't address ours.

s7ark is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 03:41 PM
  #37
SufferingCatFan
Registered User
 
SufferingCatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: fort lauderdale
Country: United States
Posts: 1,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intangibles View Post
I don't know what people see in Gudbranson, I've never been impressed with him. I don't think he'll ever be more than a 3rd/4th defenseman.
I do not know what you do not "see." Did you watch the Panther/New Jersey series? If so, please tell us that you were not "impressed." BTW please read what the Devils had to say about him after the series. Not too shabby for a 19 year old...

SufferingCatFan is online now  
Old
08-03-2012, 03:58 PM
  #38
SpezDispenser
Registered User
 
SpezDispenser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 14,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
And I wouldn't. Imo, a bottom 6 C, a D prospect with bottom 4 potential and a maybe goalie isn't worth a top 6 player, let alone two.

I'm glad the trade doesn't address your needs, because it certainly doesn't address ours.
If you wouldn't do that package for Gagner, then...no words really come to mind other than lol.

SpezDispenser is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 04:08 PM
  #39
Jepprey
Creeper
 
Jepprey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpezDispenser View Post
If you wouldn't do that package for Gagner, then...no words really come to mind other than lol.
I wouldn't. How exactly does that help the Edmonton Oilers?

You're making a trade scenario for the Sens needs, but that package does not help the other team. It's another quantity vs quality deal that HF surely loves.

Jepprey is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 04:09 PM
  #40
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpezDispenser View Post
If you wouldn't do that package for Gagner, then...no words really come to mind other than lol.
It's not really that enticing of a package, and I could certainly see the Oilers rejecting it very quickly, whether Gagner, Hemsky, or both.

Basically it comes down to Smith and Borowiecki for Gagner. Bishop and the 4th a throw-ins. Doesn't look very impressive.

Seachd is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 04:11 PM
  #41
s7ark
LeonTheProfessional
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpezDispenser View Post
If you wouldn't do that package for Gagner, then...no words really come to mind other than lol.
Gagner is a better player than the HF hivemind would have you believe. Lol away if you like, doesn't bother me in the slightest.

s7ark is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 04:32 PM
  #42
zeus3007*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Red Deer, Alberta
Posts: 13,228
vCash: 500
Not interested in any of those pieces from Ottawa.

zeus3007* is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 04:33 PM
  #43
zeus3007*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Red Deer, Alberta
Posts: 13,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocolateLeclaire View Post
No...just no.

These deals where you offer a series of player prospects for one or two proven players will never be accepted because the other team, despite trying to sound knowledgeable, has no concept or grasp on what the real value of those prospects are, because they've never seen them play a game.
This, and we have tons of young players and prospects developing already. The Oil need NHL quality players, not more prospect, so trading NHLers for prospects is counter-productive.

zeus3007* is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 04:37 PM
  #44
The Bored Man
#94
 
The Bored Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,415
vCash: 537
Edmonton's 2-4 centre depth after this trade: Horcoff, Belanger, VandeVelde.

Ouch. I'm not much of a Gagner fan but this trade is terrible.

The Bored Man is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 04:38 PM
  #45
SpezDispenser
Registered User
 
SpezDispenser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 14,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jepprey View Post
I wouldn't. How exactly does that help the Edmonton Oilers?

You're making a trade scenario for the Sens needs, but that package does not help the other team. It's another quantity vs quality deal that HF surely loves.
I wouldn't do it as a Sens fan. The need is a high scoring winger, not a soft C and not an over paid injury prone winger. I already outlined why the Sens wouldn't do this. The reason we made the playoffs was depth and a fierce hunger to win. Neither Gagner nor Hemsky have that, so we'll gladly pass.

SpezDispenser is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 04:43 PM
  #46
WeridAl
YuckaFlux
 
WeridAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: 10ft of Snow
Posts: 1,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bored Man View Post
Edmonton's 2-4 centre depth after this trade: Horcoff, Belanger, VandeVelde.

Ouch. I'm not much of a Gagner fan but this trade is terrible.
They have Tyler Pitlick, but he's a couple of years away and he might end up as a RW. The thought of Horcoff playing 2nd line C again , might give me nightmares. I like VandeVelde over Belanger, but only as a 4th line C.

WeridAl is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 04:46 PM
  #47
Turrican*
Not a homer
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Stabmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpezDispenser View Post
I don't really think we do personally. I think we need a guy who is a hybrid of offence and defence. I'm a big fan of Bogosian - although I know he's not moving. He's the kind of D-man we need. That said, we literally just drafted Ceci who'll be a strong offensive D-man/puck mover, so maybe we need nothing at all (except for a highly talented scoring winger, but who doesn't...)
The Oilers.

Turrican* is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 04:53 PM
  #48
Dick Whitman
Registered User
 
Dick Whitman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,341
vCash: 500
As a Sens fan, I have no interest in the Oilers deal. We're soft enough after losing Konopka, Carkner and Foligno. Then losing Smith, who makes for a better 3C than Gagner does and Borocop? No thanks.

The Gudbranson deal on the other hand is interesting. Someone mentioned that Zibby or Silfverberg would have to be going back to Florida in any deal for Gudbranson. I'd definitely consider that, for sure. Not sure what else the Panthers would want but Zibby+ for Gudbrandson sounds good to me.

Dick Whitman is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 05:11 PM
  #49
Sureves
Registered User
 
Sureves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 7,089
vCash: 500
Realistically neither the Oils or the Panthers would do those trades. They just don't get anything of value in any of those trades.

Let's really break it down, the only thing of decent value in the Oil proposal is Bishop and I can't really think of any precedent that has been set for goalie prospects having high, or even moderate value. I don't think they are going to send Hemsky for a package that is centered around Bishop - and I don't blame them. Boro is an okay player, but he's like the Jesse Blacker of the Senators: no one is willing to actually give anything for a player like that. I don't think there's much difference in value between Smith and Gagner, so it really comes down to Boro+Bishop for Hemsky: not something I'd do as an Oilers fan. From a Sens POV, it would also suck to lose one of the only gritty guys we have left.

The Florida one is bordering on terrible to be harshly honest.


Last edited by Sureves: 08-03-2012 at 05:18 PM.
Sureves is offline  
Old
08-03-2012, 06:24 PM
  #50
Lukus
Registered User
 
Lukus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
Seems like quantity for quality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
Another handful of nickels for a quarter proposal. These rarely go over well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
As an oiler fan I won't comment on that deal. But sens need to add for the second. It is quantity for quality
I cringe everytime I see comments like those. The majority of trades involving multiple players fall into the "quantity for quality" category. The "one for one" type deals happen far less often.

In a "one for one" trade, teams usually swap players of similar caliber to address each team's need.

In a multi-player (quantity for quality) deal, a team is trying to address a desperate need or wants to acquire a coveted player who will have a considerable impact but only has or is only willing to offer several potentially good pieces. The team entertaining the offer is often in a dispute with the said coveted player (ie: Heatley) or has so many needs that it is worth gambling on the potential of turning that one asset into multiple NHL caliber players (now or near future).

The prevailing logic on HF is that all deals must fall in the "caliber for caliber" category. Thankfully most GMs subscribe to the "your offer must address my need(s)" mentality.

This is a corny analogy but hopefully illustrates my point:

You, your wife and kid are facing a vending machine on a really hot day and all you have in your pocket is a $10 silver coin which the machine won't accept. Someone offers you three $2 coins for your $10 coin. Hardly fair value yet it would address your need to acquire 3 bottles of water which you desperately need. The other guy gets the one coin that is missing in his collection.

BTW, my comment is not specifically targeting the proposal made in this thread as I have no comment on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShootIt View Post
Does Ottawa really need Gudbranson? I thought they had a nice pool of NHL ready/close to ready defensemen.
No, au contraire, the defense is the only weakness we have, in terms of prospects that is.

Lukus is offline  
Closed Thread

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 06:24 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.