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.

Trade Idea (Tor/Van)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-21-2012, 11:05 AM
  #26
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeersHockey View Post
Kesler's value is (realistically) somewhere around what the Kings gave up for Richards.
I would agree with this, although the Canucks don't have a Claude Giroux waiting in the wings - the will be much more reticent to deal Kesler than the Flyers were to deal Mike Richards (and Jeff Carter) and any trade proposal that might get them to consider it would have to reflect this.

So basically take Ryan Kesler's value (which is close to Richards value) and add to it if you want a deal the Canucks would look hard at.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:23 AM
  #27
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,940
vCash: 5555
The only way we'd trade Kesler to Toronto is if Grabovski+++ were coming back. Something along the lines Luongo + Kesler for Grabovski + Kessel, or maybe Kesler + Ballard for Grabovski + Phaneuf. You won't get Kesler without giving up at least two core pieces.

We aren't trading a Selke calibre centre for futures.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:24 AM
  #28
internetdotcom
11 + 15 + 19 = 666
 
internetdotcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Capital O
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,558
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to internetdotcom Send a message via Yahoo to internetdotcom
The OP is just another 'trade us your good/great/elite center for the same spare parts thrown into every Leaf proposal' recycled thread. Let me preface this by saying how much I loathe both the Canucks and Kesler, but that being said, if you want Kesler, Kessel+ is going back, since Kesler is much better 2-way than Kessel (similar offensively, much better defensively), and you'd have to sweeten the pot to make up that difference and convince the Canucks to trade Kesler, which they have no desire or motivation to do. And all that to say nothing of the fact that even if the value of Kessel and Kesler were equal (it's not), center > winger.

Nucks pass quite easily.

internetdotcom is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:31 AM
  #29
blinkman360
Back to Basics
 
blinkman360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Guido Central
Country: United States
Posts: 8,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by internetdotcom View Post
The OP is just another 'trade us your good/great/elite center for the same spare parts thrown into every Leaf proposal' recycled thread. Let me preface this by saying how much I loathe both the Canucks and Kesler, but that being said, if you want Kesler, Kessel+ is going back, since Kesler is much better 2-way than Kessel (similar offensively, much better defensively), and you'd have to sweeten the pot to make up that difference and convince the Canucks to trade Kesler, which they have no desire or motivation to do. And all that to say nothing of the fact that even if the value of Kessel and Kesler were equal (it's not), center > winger.

Nucks pass quite easily.
Kessel > Kesler as far as value goes.

blinkman360 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:33 AM
  #30
Sundinisagod
@snizzbone
 
Sundinisagod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 7,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
The only way we'd trade Kesler to Toronto is if Grabovski+++ were coming back. Something along the lines Luongo + Kesler for Grabovski + Kessel, or maybe Kesler + Ballard for Grabovski + Phaneuf. You won't get Kesler without giving up at least two core pieces.

We aren't trading a Selke calibre centre for futures.
Yeah IMHO if leafs want Kesler they have to take Luongo, who will likely be harder to trade in the new bargaining agreement.

Luongo + Kesler FOR Grabo + Gardiner/Rielly + 1st pick ???

Sundinisagod is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:33 AM
  #31
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,940
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by blinkman360 View Post
Kessel > Kesler as far as value goes.
Not to us.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:34 AM
  #32
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blinkman360 View Post
Kessel > Kesler as far as value goes.
I don't see how you can make an absolute statement like that, it's pretty well arguable one way or the other.

That being said for a team like the Canucks Kesler is a vastly better fit than Kessel (if you can only have one) so to them there's no question RK's value is significantly higher than PK's.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:37 AM
  #33
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,940
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundinisagod View Post
Yeah IMHO if leafs want Kesler they have to take Luongo, who will likely be harder to trade in the new bargaining agreement.

Luongo + Kesler FOR Grabo + Gardiner/Rielly + 1st pick ???
It's a bit too future-centred, I think. If we were trading Kesler it would have to be for a clear improvement to our roster now.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:45 AM
  #34
mriswith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 347
vCash: 500
There really is no way Kesler gets traded. We have no one who can replace him. We're already missing a 3c as it is, trading Kesler just doesn't make sense. It would have to be something like Grabovski + Kessel, which obviously wouldn't happen.

mriswith is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:57 AM
  #35
blinkman360
Back to Basics
 
blinkman360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Guido Central
Country: United States
Posts: 8,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
I don't see how you can make an absolute statement like that, it's pretty well arguable one way or the other.

That being said for a team like the Canucks Kesler is a vastly better fit than Kessel (if you can only have one) so to them there's no question RK's value is significantly higher than PK's.
I just never saw Kesler as more than a very good 2nd line center. IMO, Kessel is a 1st line player with game-breaking potential. Kesler has the defensive edge(by a good amount), but IMO he doesn't really come close to Kessel's offensive ability.

...and no, I'm not basing that judgement on this past season alone. I think when it comes down to it, more teams would take Kessel if given the choice.

blinkman360 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:09 PM
  #36
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,680
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by blinkman360 View Post
I just never saw Kesler as more than a very good 2nd line center. IMO, Kessel is a 1st line player with game-breaking potential. Kesler has the defensive edge(by a good amount), but IMO he doesn't really come close to Kessel's offensive ability.

...and no, I'm not basing that judgement on this past season alone. I think when it comes down to it, more teams would take Kessel if given the choice.
You would be surprised. Granted, Kesler's scoring consistency remains to be seen but until his recent injury woes. He was being compared to Toews by a number of people and analysts. Obviously, Toews has long run ahead in that race but if Kesler's gets back to scoring near or above 30 goals. It would be hard to argue he isn't better than Kessel seeing the vast difference in their defensive abilities more than makes up for Kessel scoring 5-10 more goals.

Either way, to use. Kesler's value is that of the Sedins, if not greater. It would require an insane and near roster damaging trade to make us move him.

Bourne Endeavor is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:11 PM
  #37
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 6,747
vCash: 500
To TOR:
Kesler
Luongo

To VAN:
Kessel
Grabovski

That's about as fair as I can come up with, & sorta works cap-wise.

Oates2Neely is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:12 PM
  #38
GordieHoweHatTrick
Registered User
 
GordieHoweHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,724
vCash: 500
Keep Kesler and his attitude in Vancouver, please and thank you

GordieHoweHatTrick is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:18 PM
  #39
gooilgo
Fehr is a reptile
 
gooilgo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Area 51
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,353
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I saw it as they add more depth for their "win now" mode. Bozak is capable of replacing Kesler on the 2nd line (albeit not as dominant), but able to post similar numbers point wise to that of Kesler last year.

MacArthur is capable of scoring timely goals and is a conistient threat.

Franson has all the tools to be that top 4 dman.

Colborne is ready and should be able to contribute.

1st round draft picks are always enticing and worth their weight in gold.
How often do you see these quality for quantity deals, when the quality is moving from a contender to a basement team, granted one that wants to improve? - pretty much never.
Kesler for Bozak is a huge downgrade and even though there are some decent if not spectacular assets going the other way, the best asset going to Van is the 1st which does not help them in the short term neither does Colborne.
Adding depth is fine but that does not put Vancouver over the top, they need to add 1 or 2 top end players to do that without giving up an elite player like Kesler. They have shown they can add depth players like Higgins and Lapierre without giving up significant assets.
I cannot agree with the selling Franson as a top 4 d man, it's harsh to say he would be #7 but he is a bottom pairing guy who contributes on the PP, however Vancouver already has a top pp, they already added Garrison so I doubt the Canucks are too desperate to add Franson.
It's well documented that the Leafs need a top center. It's also documented that #1C's are rarely traded. The Leafs 1st rounder could probably be top 5 and there are some really decent centers in the next draft, McKinnon, Monahan, Barkov, Lazar etc, why not hang onto that 1st rounder and draft and develop one of those guys? Just a thought.

gooilgo is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:24 PM
  #40
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,287
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
Alright guys. What would it take for Kesler than if I am so way off? Not trying to start anything here other than a civilized conversation.
I don't think Toronto has the assets to acquire Kesler. This is just a horrible proposal.

The Canucks could counter with Higgins, Raymond, Schroeder, Tanev and a 1 for Phil Kessel.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:26 PM
  #41
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blinkman360 View Post
I just never saw Kesler as more than a very good 2nd line center. IMO, Kessel is a 1st line player with game-breaking potential. Kesler has the defensive edge(by a good amount), but IMO he doesn't really come close to Kessel's offensive ability.

...and no, I'm not basing that judgement on this past season alone. I think when it comes down to it, more teams would take Kessel if given the choice.
I think Kessel has an edge on Kesler in the offensive end of the rink - you can't really argue that he doesn't as a matter of fact.

But keep in mind that Kesler's offensive production has come largely from his deployment as a second liner (ie. lots of tough defensive assignments, not getting the real prime offensive opportunities that have been going to the Sedins, tons of PK ice time where there's no real offensive chances) and until his 41 G season he never played on the first powerplay unit.

Kesler basically put up first line numbers with second line minutes, something you just don't see very often in this league. By comparison you can't fault Phil Kessel for putting up slightly better numbers with significantly more opportunity, and like I said he is clearly a more effective offensive player, but I don't think the gap is huge.

I do think the gap between the players in other aspects of the game is significant. Kesler is a defensive beast who can physically impose his will on the game - he routinely wins his matchups with some of the league's best players (Crosby, Ovechkin, Thornton, Toews, etc) and when he's not matched up against great players he is capable of simply running roughshod over opponents like in the Predators series in 2011. If that wasn't "game breaking" I don't know what is he literally took that series over.

Anyway as I said, you could make a case for either player. What you can't make a case for is the idea that the Canucks could give up Ryan Kesler and expect to replace him permanently with what they've got in the organization now - which means that dealing him for Phil Kessel would be a major downgrade.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oates2Neely View Post
To TOR:
Kesler
Luongo

To VAN:
Kessel
Grabovski

That's about as fair as I can come up with, & sorta works cap-wise.
Interesting. I think the Canucks would need something else coming back but that's pretty close.

(And I'm sure Leafs fans hate this deal already and would scream bloody murder if their team dealt their two best forwards and another player for Kesler and Luongo, but there you go.)

Even then I'm not sure I'd be happy with the deal... but it would be pretty fair.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:30 PM
  #42
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
The Canucks could counter with Higgins, Raymond, Schroeder, Tanev and a 1 for Phil Kessel.
Please stop with this stupid bull****. We all know the OP's proposal was bad, and we all know that the trademark HF "your proposal is so bad, here is my revenge proposal" does absolutely nothing other than undermine attempts at reasonable discussion, so just stop it already.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:50 PM
  #43
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,136
vCash: 500
Which of these available assets could get a deal done for Kesler....

Bozak
MacArthur
Kulemin
Colborne
Kadri
Ashton
Biggs
D'Amigo
McKegg
Ross
Franson
Percy
Blacker
Holzer
Finn
Liles
1st


And yes I would part with Phaneuf if need be, but would try and 1st dangle the above assets.

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:56 PM
  #44
RandV
It's a wolf v2.0
 
RandV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,261
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I saw it as they add more depth for their "win now" mode. Bozak is capable of replacing Kesler on the 2nd line (albeit not as dominant), but able to post similar numbers point wise to that of Kesler last year.
Bozak posted his points last year playing inbetween Kessel and Lupul. He would not post similar points to Kesler playing between Booth and Higgins.

Bozak fits the mold of being a cheaper defensively responsible center that can play between two scoring wingers, but his ability to create offense on his own is questionable.

RandV is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:57 PM
  #45
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
Which of these available assets could get a deal done for Kesler....

Bozak
MacArthur
Kulemin
Colborne
Kadri
Ashton
Biggs
D'Amigo
McKegg
Ross
Franson
Percy
Blacker
Holzer
Finn
Liles
1st


And yes I would part with Phaneuf if need be, but would try and 1st dangle the above assets.
Okay, you're not reading responses to your original post I guess.

No combination of those assets would be enough. The Canucks would two of the Leafs highest-quality players to even consider trading Ryan Kesler, not a grab bag of retreads and non-roster players like you have repeatedly suggested.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:58 PM
  #46
Tim Vezina Thomas
Dougie Time
 
Tim Vezina Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,864
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
Which of these available assets could get a deal done for Kesler....

Bozak
MacArthur
Kulemin
Colborne
Kadri
Ashton
Biggs
D'Amigo
McKegg
Ross
Franson
Percy
Blacker
Holzer
Finn
Liles
1st


And yes I would part with Phaneuf if need be, but would try and 1st dangle the above assets.
Vancouver is a CONTENDER, if theyre going to trade a key part of their team theyd need a reason to. There are five people on that list who are definite NHL players right now, Mac, Kulemin, Bozak, Liles and Franson. Those five players aren't nearly as good and/or valuable as Kesler, and none of them would make the Canucks a better team.

If Vancouver wanted to trade Kesler if they were struggling and in need of a rebuild, it would likely take an NHL player, top prospect and a 1st.

Lets say Kulemin, TOR 1st 2012 (not top ten protected) and pick one of the good prospects.

You're trying to get one of Vancouvers best players without giving up any of your best assets (Kessel, Gardiner, Rielly, etc). It doesnt work like that.

Tim Vezina Thomas is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:59 PM
  #47
Prongo
Beer
 
Prongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 13,858
vCash: 500
The Mike Richards trade would be a good starting point for a trade for Kesler. They are similar players to a degree.

Prongo is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 01:01 PM
  #48
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Na'ē panjā
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,757
vCash: 500
Quantity for quality only works if the player is a pending UFA.

Kesler is paid 5M until 2015, the value is so far off it isn't funny

VinnyC is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 01:06 PM
  #49
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,136
vCash: 500
I'd be content with a "Mike Richards" type package, I'd even up the ante to make it happen.

Kulemin + Kadri + ???

Thoughts

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 01:11 PM
  #50
Tim Vezina Thomas
Dougie Time
 
Tim Vezina Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,864
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I'd be content with a "Mike Richards" type package, I'd even up the ante to make it happen.

Kulemin + Kadri + ???

Thoughts
Except Vancouver doesnt WANT TO TRADE Kesler.

Trading Kesler for anything on the Leafs roster except maybe a combo of Kessel/Gardiner/Phaneuf wouldn't make a lick of sense for them.

Would you trade Kessel for Mason Raymond, Kassian and ???

Tim Vezina Thomas 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 05:57 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.