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.

Vancouver - Columbus

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-22-2012, 02:33 PM
  #26
Vankiller Whale
Win it for AV
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,164
vCash: 1675
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Yes, but Johansen (20yo) and Murray (18yo) are too young to fit the bill of "similar player."

Lets find a 26yo player with few NHL experience but showing big potential.
Well, I don't know if Columbus cares that much about the age difference. We still haven't had any Columbus fans post, so I guess we'll see.

I think the title would have been better as "Value of: Cory Schneider to Columbus."

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:38 PM
  #27
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
Bobrovsky has had two seasons as a minor backup goalie on a team that has not relied on having anything but a mediocure goal tending system. Not only are Cory or Luongo better than Bobrovsky, they are in the elite first string goalie class while Bobrovsky at best is still an average NHL backup goalie.

As for Columbus addressing their goal tending problems through the draft, have you any idea how many years it takes to develop a goalie just drafted until, if successful, he could be considered even an average first string goalie in the NHL? Cory Schneider was a first round draft pick, so was considered to have a pretty good chance to make it compared to most and Cory is now just entering his 9th year of development and his first year as a number 1 goalie.
You know before acquiring Brobovsky, Colombus surely made a call to Vancouver about their goalies. (as Yzerman surely did before Acquiring Lindback. I remember Yzerman publicly said he was looking for a "young" goalie. Taking Luongo and Schneider out of his possible list.)

You cant denies that Colombus judged that Brobovsky for a 2nd and 2 x 4th Was a better option than trading for Schneider or Luongo for whatever asking price Vancouver wanted at the time.

If Colombus really thought Luongo or Schneider was a better option, why didnt they trade for them instead? (Of course Luongo could have used is NTC to refuse to go to Colombus and Schneider maybe refused to extend his contract there. Both possibility rendering any trade talk useless anyway)


Last edited by palindrom: 09-22-2012 at 02:46 PM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:53 PM
  #28
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,185
vCash: 50
Yeah, they dont make good trading partners now that Bobo is there (plus BJs have plenty of D.)
Not to rehash an old arguement, but Ballard has in fact been a top 4 dman for the entirety of his career, before coming to Van, getting injured and getting stuck behind Edler and Hamhuis on the left side. I wont argue that his value is low right now, but really he's not a top 4 in van like staal wasnt a top 2 center in pitt ..more of a situational thing... I'd bet there are GMs out there who would value him somewhat...more than a 7th anyway

NYVanfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:56 PM
  #29
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYVanfan View Post
Yeah, they dont make good trading partners now that Bobo is there (plus BJs have plenty of D.)
Not to rehash an old arguement, but Ballard has in fact been a top 4 dman for the entirety of his career, before coming to Van, getting injured and getting stuck behind Edler and Hamhuis on the left side. I wont argue that his value is low right now, but really he's not a top 4 in van like staal wasnt a top 2 center in pitt ..more of a situational thing... I'd bet there are GMs out there who would value him somewhat...more than a 7th anyway
Then why not trading Edler or Hamhuis instead to allow Ballard to step up in a role of a top 4 defenseman and shine in Vancouver?

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:57 PM
  #30
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
You know before acquiring Brobovsky, Colombus surely made a call to Vancouver about their goalies. (as Yzerman surely did before Acquiring Lindback. I remember Yzerman publicly said he was looking for a "young" goalie. Taking Luongo and Schneider out of his possible list.)

You cant denies that Colombus judged that Brobovsky for a 2nd and 2 x 4th Was a better option than trading for Schneider or Luongo for whatever asking price Vancouver wanted at the time.

If Colombus really thought Luongo or Schneider was a better option, why didnt they trade for them instead? (Of course Luongo could have used is NTC to refuse to go to Colombus and Schneider maybe refused to extend his contract there. Both possibility rendering any trade talk useless anyway)
Well if you're going to post garbage like this, insinuating that Yzerman wasn't interested in Schneider because he's too old, then allow me to add another reason why this trade wouldn't work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom
Compare apple with apple. I strongly believe Mason at 28yo will be a better goalie than Schneider at 28yo.

Against, where was Schneider at 23yo? Nothing close to 195gp and a vezina nomination.

StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:58 PM
  #31
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Then why not trading Edler or Hamhuis instead to allow Ballard to step up in a role of a top 4 defenseman and shine in Vancouver?
Let the Edler proposals begin! Or continue, I suppose

StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:01 PM
  #32
Vankiller Whale
Win it for AV
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,164
vCash: 1675
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Then why not trading Edler or Hamhuis instead to allow Ballard to step up in a role of a top 4 defenseman and shine in Vancouver?
Because Hahmhuis is a defensive D who plays the shut down pairing really well with Bieksa. Ballard is more of an offensive D, but I doubt he will ever be as good as Edler. And you don't think we should be making Edler proposals anyways.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:07 PM
  #33
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
Well if you're going to post garbage like this, insinuating that Yzerman wasn't interested in Schneider because he's too old, then allow me to add another reason why this trade wouldn't work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom
Compare apple with apple. I strongly believe Mason at 28yo will be a better goalie than Schneider at 28yo.

Against, where was Schneider at 23yo? Nothing close to 195gp and a vezina nomination.
Well, come back to me in 2017 about this! Mason will have played his 28yo season and we will be able to make the comparison.

I believe the reason why Yzerman did want a "young" goalie was about making the gamble to get a good goalie performance at a cheap salary. This way they wont have to make cut elsewhere in their lineup to make room for the new Goalie salary.

At 4 000 000$ Schneider didn't fit this bill.

Else How do you explain Yzerman acquired Lindback instead of any other option, like Luongo ?


Last edited by palindrom: 09-22-2012 at 03:15 PM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:16 PM
  #34
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
Well if you're going to post garbage like this, insinuating that Yzerman wasn't interested in Schneider because he's too old, then allow me to add another reason why this trade wouldn't work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom
Compare apple with apple. I strongly believe Mason at 28yo will be a better goalie than Schneider at 28yo.

Against, where was Schneider at 23yo? Nothing close to 195gp and a vezina nomination.
Was that his exact quote or did you exaggerate it? I highly doubt someone would say that.

nhlfan9191 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:18 PM
  #35
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhlfan9191 View Post
Was that his exact quote or did you exaggerate it? I highly doubt someone would say that.
i didn't verify it, but i remember it beeing my exact quote.

As i say before, lets wait until 2017, once Mason will be 28yo to make the comparison, its way too early.


Last edited by palindrom: 09-22-2012 at 03:23 PM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:24 PM
  #36
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhlfan9191 View Post
Was that his exact quote or did you exaggerate it? I highly doubt someone would say that.
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...079099&page=28

Post #683

StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:24 PM
  #37
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
i didn't verify it, but i remember it beeing my exact quote.

As i say before, lets wait until 2017, once Mason will be 28yo to make the comparison, its way too early.
Mason will be nothing but a memory in a couple years if he doesn't straighten himself out.

nhlfan9191 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:27 PM
  #38
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Else How do you explain Yzerman acquired Lindback instead of any other option, like Luongo ?
He said he wanted a young goalie to grow with Stamkos and Hedman IIRC. Nothing about salary. I believe he went with Lindback because:

A) He and/or his scouts were high on him.

B) The asking price for Schneider was too high.

As for the Luongo situation it was pretty clear all along that Yzerman wasn't interested in the guy.


Off topic, but your English has gotten quite a bit better in the last 6 months. Kudos.

StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:31 PM
  #39
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhlfan9191 View Post
Mason will be nothing but a memory in a couple years if he doesn't straighten himself out.
Unless he do better next season, if we have one. I really doubt Colombus will give him a qualifying offer.

If there is not too many change in the new CBA, Mason should then become UFA in 2013. At a cheap salary, i really think a team will give a chance to a 25yo goalie with more than 220 game experience and a vezina nomination.

At the same salary, would you rather have a ''prospect with his future in front of him" Ben Bishop (25yo) or and ''old veteran'' like Steeve Mason (24yo) ?

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:36 PM
  #40
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Unless he do better next season, if we have one. I really doubt Colombus will give him a qualifying offer.

If there is not too many change in the new CBA, Mason should then become UFA in 2013. At a cheap salary, i really think a team will give a chance to a 25yo goalie with more than 220 game experience and a vezina nomination.

At the same salary, would you rather have a ''prospect with his future in front of him" Ben Bishop (25yo) or and ''old veteran'' like Steeve Mason (24yo) ?
I'd take Ben Bishop everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. After four seasons in the league, we've seen what Mason can do. And it's not good. He had a terrific year, but that was four years ago. And everything we've seen since points to him being a flash in the pan. Ben Bishop isn't proven. But sometimes that's a good thing. I'd rather have someone whose still unproven than a guy who has proven he's not that good.

nhlfan9191 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:36 PM
  #41
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
i didn't verify it, but i remember it beeing my exact quote.

As i say before, lets wait until 2017, once Mason will be 28yo to make the comparison, its way too early.
Do we need to wait until 2017 to see that basically everything else you've said about Vancouver goalies has been incorrect?

First it was Schneider will be dealt for sure... Then Schneider won't sign an extension until Luongo is dealt and should be treated as a 1yr rental hitting UFA status in a year.. And then Lack has no value because he won't sign an extension in Vancouver unless he has a spot (one of Lu or Schneids is dealt). Even when Canucks fans brought up Schneider's signing history when he could have taken shorter deals to hit UFA status and didn't, it was supposedly all in the past and things are different now.

Have you been correct in anything you've ever said about any Vancouver goalie? You seem to love discussing it and arguing with anyone over why you think they have little to no value, but all your premises that you base that on keep getting proven wrong. Should we just take whatever you say about Canuck goalies and assume the opposite? Cause that's how it's usually turned out with your arguments.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:39 PM
  #42
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
He said he wanted a young goalie to grow with Stamkos and Hedman IIRC. Nothing about salary. I believe he went with Lindback because:

A) He and/or his scouts were high on him.

B) The asking price for Schneider was too high.

As for the Luongo situation it was pretty clear all along that Yzerman wasn't interested in the guy.

Off topic, but your English has gotten quite a bit better in the last 6 months. Kudos.
Well, thank for the compliment about my English, i am doing my best.

Well, even if the asking price for Schneider was high, he could had judged it worth it and paid this high asking price.

But no, he judged a young and cheap$ Lindback for 2 x 2nd round and a 3th was his best options around the league.

Colombus probably did the same shopping and settled with Brobovsky. Making a Schneider to Colombus thread a bit irrelevant as Colombus probably already inquired for Schneider and whatever the reason, they choose to go with Brobovsky. And nothing changed since then!

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:41 PM
  #43
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhlfan9191 View Post
I'd take Ben Bishop everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. After four seasons in the league, we've seen what Mason can do. And it's not good. He had a terrific year, but that was four years ago. And everything we've seen since points to him being a flash in the pan. Ben Bishop isn't proven. But sometimes that's a good thing. I'd rather have someone whose still unproven than a guy who has proven he's not that good.
Well, Bishop wasnt good enough to be in the league before 25yo.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:43 PM
  #44
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
Do we need to wait until 2017 to see that basically everything else you've said about Vancouver goalies has been incorrect?

First it was Schneider will be dealt for sure... Then Schneider won't sign an extension until Luongo is dealt and should be treated as a 1yr rental hitting UFA status in a year.. And then Lack has no value because he won't sign an extension in Vancouver unless he has a spot (one of Lu or Schneids is dealt). Even when Canucks fans brought up Schneider's signing history when he could have taken shorter deals to hit UFA status and didn't, it was supposedly all in the past and things are different now.

Have you been correct in anything you've ever said about any Vancouver goalie? You seem to love discussing it and arguing with anyone over why you think they have little to no value, but all your premises that you base that on keep getting proven wrong. Should we just take whatever you say about Canuck goalies and assume the opposite? Cause that's how it's usually turned out with your arguments.
I agree Schneider extending in Vancouver while Luongo is still there took me by surprise.

Its possible that there are some secret inside knowledge i wasn't aware off, something like promising Schneider to have a shot as #01 or that Luongo could be deal.

Well, i was right about one thing: No teams ever paid yet the asking price we have seen in a ton of proposal for any of Vancouver goalie.


Last edited by palindrom: 09-22-2012 at 06:22 PM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:43 PM
  #45
Ludicrous Speed
Registered User
 
Ludicrous Speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Killumbus
Country: Micronesia
Posts: 11,130
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Schneider for a 40ish point forward is far from fair.
Brassard and Schneider are somewhat comparable as far as their potentials and stages of their careers. Brassard had something like 25 points in his last 32 games or so (don't have time right now to look it up) after Arniel was fired and was given free reign to be creative. He's always had potential to be a #1 center. Similarly, Schneider only has around 65 games in the NHL and looks to be a solid option as a starting goalie, but he's played behind an elite team and has only proven so much.

I wouldn't deal Brass straight up for Schneider, but it has more to do with team needs. We have little in the way of a #1 center, and guys like Dubi or AA seem to be better wingers. Johansen is still a ways out too. However, I believe Schneider currently has a hair more value to his name over Brassard if traded in a vacuum.

Ludicrous Speed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:43 PM
  #46
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Well, Bishop wasnt good enough to be in the league before 25yo.
Lol Tim Thomas wasn't good enough to be in the league until he was 31. Nabokov won the Calder when he was 25. Belfour was over 25 too. How about Nik Backstrom in Minny. He was 30. And Kipper in Calgary. What does that matter?

nhlfan9191 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:55 PM
  #47
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhlfan9191 View Post
Lol Tim Thomas wasn't good enough to be in the league until he was 31. Nabokov won the Calder when he was 25. Belfour was over 25 too. How about Nik Backstrom in Minny. He was 30. And Kipper in Calgary. What does that matter?
Yes it does when comparing their performance.

Just imagine we Switch Bishop and Mason from 20 to 23yo (mason turned 24 in may)

From 20 to 23yo Mason played 219 regular NHL game.

from 20 to 23yo Bishop did play 70+ game for the university of maine and 50+ AHL game

At 23yo Bishop was a AHL goalie with around .900, he had a breakout in his AHL performance once turning 24-25yo

Mason just turned 24, can we give him a chance to have his breakout too?

The main problem now about Mason is his salary.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 04:09 PM
  #48
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Yes it does when comparing their performance.

Just imagine we Switch Bishop and Mason from 20 to 23yo (mason turned 24 in may)

From 20 to 23yo Mason played 219 regular NHL game.

from 20 to 23yo Bishop did play 70+ game for the university of maine and 50+ AHL game

At 23yo Bishop was a AHL goalie with around .900, he had a breakout in his AHL performance once turning 24-25yo

Mason just turned 24, can we give him a chance to have his breakout too?

The main problem now about Mason is his salary.
So then in your opinion development has no real impact on realizing potential?

If all players where thrown into the NHL at 18, and didn't have any development time in the CHL or AHL, they would develop the same way, because it's all based on age only?

Because the Canucks took their time developing Schneider slowly - with 4 full years in the NCAA followed by multiple seasons in the AHL where he started as a backup and earned his starter role - and then earned an NHL role after being the AHL's top goalie and then had to earn his way to a starter role, after spending a lot of time developing, this makes no difference to his overall development compared to someone like Mason, who was thrown into the fire early, had tremendous pressure to perform on a bad team, behind a bad defense?

If Schneider was put through the same quick path to starter in the NHL that Mason was, would he be as good as he is now. If Mason was developed slowly like Schneider was would he be as bad today?

We've been hearing for decades (maybe generations) how developing players slowly is better for their overall development (now often labeled as the Red Wings strategy), and yet you suggest there's nothing to this and it's simply about age. Maybe the reality is that the Jackets just screwed up Mason's development and he'll never be as good as he was once projected - as we see so often through NHL history? Maybe when you take your time and develop prospects slowly with patience, it actually helps their development and they exceed the expectations that was once speculated.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 04:14 PM
  #49
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Yes it does when comparing their performance.

Just imagine we Switch Bishop and Mason from 20 to 23yo (mason turned 24 in may)

From 20 to 23yo Mason played 219 regular NHL game.

from 20 to 23yo Bishop did play 70+ game for the university of maine and 50+ AHL game

At 23yo Bishop was a AHL goalie with around .900, he had a breakout in his AHL performance once turning 24-25yo

Mason just turned 24, can we give him a chance to have his breakout too?

The main problem now about Mason is his salary.
Judging from the past three years, Steve Mason won't be having a breakout. His breakout year was in 2009. Every goaltender is differen't. Steve Mason is not getting better every year. He's getting worse. That one great year might be his downfall because he'll spend the rest of his professional career living in his own shadow. Ask Jose Theodore what that's like. I'm sure he'll tell you it's not fun.

nhlfan9191 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 04:16 PM
  #50
Fraser Read
Registered User
 
Fraser Read's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cairns
Country: Australia
Posts: 3,729
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Yes it does when comparing their performance.

Just imagine we Switch Bishop and Mason from 20 to 23yo (mason turned 24 in may)

From 20 to 23yo Mason played 219 regular NHL game.

from 20 to 23yo Bishop did play 70+ game for the university of maine and 50+ AHL game

At 23yo Bishop was a AHL goalie with around .900, he had a breakout in his AHL performance once turning 24-25yo

Mason just turned 24, can we give him a chance to have his breakout too?

The main problem now about Mason is his salary.
The main problem with Mason is his lack of confidence. Confidence is such a huge part of goaltending, the way Schneider was developed allowed him to be dominant at every level he played at gradually building his confidence to allow him to gradually reach his potential. With Mason he was brought in too early, he had all the potential in the world, and his first season was complete proof of that. But he wasn't mentally prepared for when things went wrong, and after his first season he had way more pressure and higher expectations than any young goal tender should have, and over the past few years his confidence has been completely shattered. And once you lose it its hard to get it back, see Andrew Raycroft.

Fraser Read 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 07:51 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.