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.

Patrick Sharp

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-09-2012, 05:30 PM
  #26
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
 
KingCanadain1976's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Thunder Bay Ont. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,035
vCash: 500
La would be very interested in getting Sharp Not sure they have the peices thou gagne lokti bernier + i dunno

KingCanadain1976 is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 05:49 PM
  #27
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Saskatoon, Sk
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYVanfan View Post
really?

then I'm convinced
Good! It's about time

nhlfan9191 is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 05:53 PM
  #28
sabrescupbound
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
To Buffalo: Patrick Kane + VAN 1st + Niklas Hjalmarsson
To Chicago: A certain goalie + Manny Malhotra + Robyn Regehr
To Vancouver: Thomas Vanek + CHI 2nd
prepare to feel the wrath of Chicago fans everywhere

It would be closer in value if Miller went to Chicago and a certain goalie went to Buffalo. Still don't think Chicago fans will like it and probably not a lot of Sabre fans either.


Last edited by sabrescupbound: 10-09-2012 at 06:07 PM.
sabrescupbound is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 05:56 PM
  #29
Stop Winnin
TANK ON BOYS
 
Stop Winnin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Buffalo
Posts: 8,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
To Buffalo: Patrick Kane + VAN 1st + Niklas Hjalmarsson
To Chicago: A certain goalie + Manny Malhotra + Robyn Regehr
To Vancouver: Thomas Vanek + CHI 2nd
LOL, Buffalo makes out like bandits, Chicago gets ass ****ed, Vancouver comes out decently I guess.

Stop Winnin is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:01 PM
  #30
zytz
lumberjack
 
zytz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingCanadain1976 View Post
La would be very interested in getting Sharp Not sure they have the peices thou gagne lokti bernier + i dunno
Richards and Bernier would get it done

zytz is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:03 PM
  #31
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,227
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kishire View Post
LOL, Buffalo makes out like bandits, Chicago gets ass ****ed, Vancouver comes out decently I guess.
I actually think its a good deal all around. I'd prefer Kane in Vancouver to Vanek, but the reality is Kane is from the Buffalo area and probably would want to play there so it's doubtful he would re-sign in Vancouver anyways. It's a deal that addresses every teams needs.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:05 PM
  #32
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,517
vCash: 500
Sharp's value to Chicago exceeds the return he could get on the market.

billybudd is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:08 PM
  #33
Sevanston
Moderator
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I actually think its a good deal all around. I'd prefer Kane in Vancouver to Vanek, but the reality is Kane is from the Buffalo area and probably would want to play there so it's doubtful he would re-sign in Vancouver anyways. It's a deal that addresses every teams needs.
Yeah, it addresses every team's needs except Chicago's.

Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:11 PM
  #34
fedfed
Moderator
@FedFedRMNB
 
fedfed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow City
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 3,494
vCash: 500
Something around Sharp for Marcus Johansson?
You don't need d-men, right?

fedfed is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:23 PM
  #35
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,227
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
Yeah, it addresses every team's needs except Chicago's.
Except Chicago's need for a goalie....

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:27 PM
  #36
Chris Hansen
Team Tyrion
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I actually think its a good deal all around. I'd prefer Kane in Vancouver to Vanek, but the reality is Kane is from the Buffalo area and probably would want to play there so it's doubtful he would re-sign in Vancouver anyways. It's a deal that addresses every teams needs.
That is an absolutely terrible deal for Chicago, don't kid yourself.

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:28 PM
  #37
Chris Hansen
Team Tyrion
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fedfed View Post
Something around Sharp for Marcus Johansson?
You don't need d-men, right?
A deal with those main pieces? Sharp's value would entail a hell of a + on the Caps side.

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:31 PM
  #38
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,826
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fedfed View Post
Something around Sharp for Marcus Johansson?
You don't need d-men, right?
Are you adding Alzner or something?

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:35 PM
  #39
Sevanston
Moderator
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Except Chicago's need for a goalie....
Chicago's need for a goalie shouldn't cost them Patrick Kane unless they're getting Jonathan Quick.

Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:36 PM
  #40
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,830
vCash: 5555
What about something around Miller for Sharp, if Buffalo manages to find a certain goalie elsewhere?

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:37 PM
  #41
TurdFerguson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 744
vCash: 500
Yup, lets trade a guy who is our only right handed top 6er and who just signed a long term contract with a NMC.

Crawford can be a good goalie, as any goalie at the NHL level can be, when a strong team defence is played in front of him. This is clearly what Chicago is trying to accomplish with their recent, albeit small, moves.

TurdFerguson is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:37 PM
  #42
sabrescupbound
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybudd View Post
Sharp's value to Chicago exceeds the return he could get on the market.
Say for the sake of argument it went like this,

To Buffalo- Sharp, Malhotra, a certain goalie, Chi 2nd

To Chi- Miller, Leopold, Adam, Vans 1st

to Van- Vanek, Buf 3rd

Is this getting closer?

sabrescupbound is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:41 PM
  #43
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,830
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabrescupbound View Post
Say for the sake of argument it went like this,

To Buffalo- Sharp, Malhotra, a certain goalie, Chi 2nd

To Chi- Miller, Leopold, Adam, Vans 1st

to Van- Vanek, Buf 3rd

Is this getting closer?
Change our 1st to a 2nd and I'd do it. Sharp + 2nd shouldn't return Miller, Leopold, Adam, and a 1st.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:48 PM
  #44
sabrescupbound
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Change our 1st to a 2nd and I'd do it. Sharp + 2nd shouldn't return Miller, Leopold, Adam, and a 1st.
Yeah but figure it this way, your getting Vanek and a third for Luo, Malhotra and a first. Your making out like bandits IMO

Your losing a contract you don't want, losing a forth line center third at best, and changing a first to a third. And with the talent on your first line Vanek becomes a 40 goal scorer again easy. Which reminds me, Who would want to play against the Sedin twins and Vanek. That would suck


Last edited by sabrescupbound: 10-09-2012 at 06:57 PM.
sabrescupbound is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:50 PM
  #45
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,830
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabrescupbound View Post
Yeah but figure it this way, your getting Vanek and a third for Luo and a first. Your making out like bandits IMO
And Malhotra, and the difference between Luongo and Vanek is definitely not a 1st. Our prospect pool is still fairly shallow, and I don't think Chicago is that interested in futures anyways.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 07:01 PM
  #46
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
Chicago's need for a goalie shouldn't cost them Patrick Kane unless they're getting Jonathan Quick.
I know its not eactly what you said, but do you honestly think you would get Quick for Kane?

Who's next on your goalie list?

DJOpus is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 07:04 PM
  #47
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,227
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabrescupbound View Post
Say for the sake of argument it went like this,

To Buffalo- Sharp, Malhotra, a certain goalie, Chi 2nd

To Chi- Miller, Leopold, Adam, Vans 1st

to Van- Vanek, Buf 3rd

Is this getting closer?
Sharp and a 2 for Ryan Miller, Jordan Leopold, Luke Adam and a 1? Don't know how Chicago fans would dislike that.

Honestly I like the trade from Vancouver's end (must be the first time I've said this lol). Hurts adding the 1, but getting back a 3 helps and getting rid of Malhotra's $2.5M salary helps too. Nice proposal.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 07:06 PM
  #48
sabrescupbound
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
And Malhotra, and the difference between Luongo and Vanek is definitely not a 1st. Our prospect pool is still fairly shallow, and I don't think Chicago is that interested in futures anyways.
I just don't get it. So your telling me, although good, you still have a 34 yo goalie that you don't need, with a huge salary until he's 40, and the price between him and one of the best scoring wingers of the NHL isn't sliding from a 1st to a third?

I totally give up. I don't ever want to hear that freaken goalies name again. I tried, I've said my piece, I will never put him in a trade scenario again. He's obviously worth way to much for my taste.

EDIT: Sorry, lost my cool for a second. But if that don't work for the Nuck's, nothing will.


Last edited by sabrescupbound: 10-09-2012 at 07:12 PM.
sabrescupbound is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 07:07 PM
  #49
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,830
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Sharp and a 2 for Ryan Miller, Jordan Leopold, Luke Adam and a 1? Don't know how Chicago fans would dislike that.

Honestly I like the trade from Vancouver's end (must be the first time I've said this lol). Hurts adding the 1, but getting back a 3 helps and getting rid of Malhotra's $2.5M salary helps too. Nice proposal.
We're not giving up a 1st in this draft. If we want any chance of landing future talent to supplant our core, this is the draft to do it.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 07:10 PM
  #50
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,830
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabrescupbound View Post
I just don't get it. So your telling me, although good, you still have a 34 yo goalie that you don't need, with a huge salary until he's 40, and the price between him and one of the best scoring wingers of the NHL isn't sliding from a 1st to a third?

I totally give up. I don't ever want to hear that freaken goalies name again. I tried, I've said my piece, I will never put him in a trade scenario again. He's obviously worth way to much for my taste.
1) Luongo's 33.
2) He's probably a better player than Vanek.
3) He's on a much cheaper cap hit than Vanek
4) Why don't we see if Chicago fans are okay with a 2nd instead of a first before blasting me. We need to get future talent to help supplant our core, and currently Chicago has a much better prospect pool than us. It holds more value to us than it does to them, so it makes no sense to include it.

Vankiller Whale 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 04:27 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.