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.

Edmonton, Phoenix, Pittsburgh

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-07-2012, 12:48 PM
  #51
Violent By Design
Registered User
 
Violent By Design's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 970
vCash: 500
Too all Edmonton fans complaining about Yakupov's perceived value...

Yakupov is VERY valuable, to Edmonton. Imagine you're Phoenix's GM, would you trade a 21 year old Norris caliber future franchise Dman for the 1st overall who hasn't proven himself in the NHL yet? And on top of that you also want Hanzal for Gagner?

It's too big of a risk on such a valuable asset. You can't expect to garner an established elite player for someone who might become an elite player. This is why the 1st overall is never traded.

Violent By Design is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 01:21 PM
  #52
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 23 17 23 View Post
Why is Pittsburgh involved? Doesn't make sense for them to move Sutter after just acquiring him.
Pretty much this. Not to mention, there's no other guy in the organization who can be a 3rd line center at this time, apart from Dupuis, who creates another hole at wing. They do have enough guys who can play wing in the top 6, some of them are just less than ideal.

Merits of Hemsky aside, this creates a bigger hole for Pittsburgh than it fills. Don't know what they would need Chipchura either.

billybudd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 01:25 PM
  #53
YotesFan47
Registered User
 
YotesFan47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, Arizona USA
Country: United States
Posts: 645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenbuis View Post
U should stick with the edm phoe portion of the deal Pitts will not even consider it u should also give up on trying to get something of significance for hemsky he would never last a round in todays playoffs
That's the problem, without Pittsburgh or some other team taking Hemsky and another piece so that Phoenix could get another center (shutdown), I wouldn't make the deal. Hanzal is valuable, as is Yandle, and while I could handle trading Yandle for improvements up front, Hanzal would need a replacement with a similar skill set but more suited for a 3rd line role. Hemsky would make a nice winger in Pittsburgh but apparently sutter's value is higher than I thought.

YotesFan47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 01:34 PM
  #54
Petro Points
Registered User
 
Petro Points's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,343
vCash: 885
Quote:
Originally Posted by YotesFan47 View Post
That's the problem, without Pittsburgh or some other team taking Hemsky and another piece so that Phoenix could get another center (shutdown), I wouldn't make the deal. Hanzal is valuable, as is Yandle, and while I could handle trading Yandle for improvements up front, Hanzal would need a replacement with a similar skill set but more suited for a 3rd line role. Hemsky would make a nice winger in Pittsburgh but apparently sutter's value is higher than I thought.
Counter: Gagner + Belanger for Hanzal

You get your 3rd line checking C

Petro Points is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 01:50 PM
  #55
YotesFan47
Registered User
 
YotesFan47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, Arizona USA
Country: United States
Posts: 645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petro Points View Post
Counter: Gagner + Belanger for Hanzal

You get your 3rd line checking C
I remember watching Belanger play in Phoenix 2 years ago, not exactly pretty. If I'm moving Hanzal and Yandle then I want a scoring 2nd line center, a scoring winger (no Hemsky doesn't count), and an extra chip to use to get a 3rd line center that can replace the defensive side of Hanzal's game. Maybe that's asking too much but we are a team that just made it to the WCF and while I do believe that was partially luck, I would like to see us get back there. Smith might not be as hot as he was this last playoffs which means we need to score a bit more while maintaining our defense first mentality. In my eyes Yak, Gags, and Hemsky like player is what it would take to get Hanzal and Yandle, if that's too much then there isn't a deal to be made.

YotesFan47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 02:34 PM
  #56
Chayos
Registered User
 
Chayos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Whitehorse, Yukon
Posts: 2,683
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YotesFan47 View Post
I remember watching Belanger play in Phoenix 2 years ago, not exactly pretty. If I'm moving Hanzal and Yandle then I want a scoring 2nd line center, a scoring winger (no Hemsky doesn't count), and an extra chip to use to get a 3rd line center that can replace the defensive side of Hanzal's game. Maybe that's asking too much but we are a team that just made it to the WCF and while I do believe that was partially luck, I would like to see us get back there. Smith might not be as hot as he was this last playoffs which means we need to score a bit more while maintaining our defense first mentality. In my eyes Yak, Gags, and Hemsky like player is what it would take to get Hanzal and Yandle, if that's too much then there isn't a deal to be made.
No deal, feel free to keep those 2 players.

Chayos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 03:06 PM
  #57
MonsterSurge
Registered User
 
MonsterSurge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,387
vCash: 500
Hemsky, random pick, and a crappy 'scrapper' for Sutter? Ha!

MonsterSurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 04:22 PM
  #58
rockinghockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,421
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thadd View Post
I'm pretty sure Edmonton takes this.

In fact, I'm positive Edmonton takes this.
I don't agree with you, yes we are getting a good big centreman but Yandle is not what we need on defense, we need a dman that a very good two way player with size. That is not Yandle in my eyes
Hemsky and Yak
for
Yandle and Sutter

Plus we give up Gagner. I am not quite sure who Brown is but that is way too much to give up for Yandle and Hanzel. No thank you. If we are that despert for a big centreman I am sure that Hemsky and Gagner alone could get one. I like Sutter but not giving up that much for him.

rockinghockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 04:28 PM
  #59
ManByng
Moroz fan
 
ManByng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: St. Albert, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TOGuy14 View Post
Phoenix wouldn't, you would have to add for sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom foolery View Post
Edmonton would have to add?, not likely, I don't think they would entertain the idea.
yup, i had to take a second look when i read the top statement. i wouldn't do Yak and Gags for Hanzal and Yandle let alone add to it from the Oilers side, i don't care how good Yandle is! i'd rather keep the two and see what Schultz can do this year...if there ever is one!

ManByng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 04:32 PM
  #60
DesertDawg
Registered User
 
DesertDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Superstition Mts
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
No from this Coyote fan,

I rather see the Coyotes try to repeat as division champs than watch if a Russian, who may defect anyways, develop into a star player. Anyways, I'm not sold that he is a Tippet kinda player.
Wouldn't mind Sutter...

DesertDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 04:33 PM
  #61
rockinghockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,421
vCash: 500
Plain and simple EDM is not going to trade Yak, listen to all the hype that they are saying about this kid on TSN and Sportsnet. You just don't trade that type of player away.

I do not consider Hanzel as a legit 2C, that is my opinion. He is big yes but he has to put up better numbers. Hanzel is a legit top 3C that can move up and play 2C when injuries occur.

I think Hemsky would look really good on the wing with Kunitz and Crosby. Hemsky is playing really well over seas not and is 100% healthy. I could see a deal working out with Pitts and EDM. Not sure what but obviously a dman would be coming back to EDM.

rockinghockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 04:38 PM
  #62
DesertDawg
Registered User
 
DesertDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Superstition Mts
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
Hanzal was the center for the #1 line that won their division and made it to the Conference finals. And to say that he is only a #3 on a team that continually gets the 1st overall pick? Talk about undervaluing...

DesertDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 04:40 PM
  #63
ManByng
Moroz fan
 
ManByng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: St. Albert, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thadd View Post
Amazing overall 2nd line pivot, a first pairing d-man and a bit of cap space? We could do worse. But like I said later, I'd do Yandle + Hanzal for Gagner + Yakupov.

Hall-Hopkins-Hemsky
MPS-Hanzal-Eberle

Nothing wrong with that top six.

Yandle-Schultz
Petry-Smid

Loving that top 4

Heck, if this year is written off add Marincin and Klefbom as the third pairing and I like the size, speed, scoring upside and athleticism we've got on the back end.

Hartikainen-Lander-Pitlick <<<--- That's a REAL checking line. Probably not NHL ready until the 14/15 season, thought. Till then sub Pitlick and Lander with Horcoff and Smyth.

IMO, that's a playoff team going forward. If Scultz, Klefbom, Hall, Eberle and Hopkins are for real, we've got nothing to worry about.
here's the thing, Thadd....the Oil promised to do what the fans apparently wanted and that was to build a team from the draft as much as possible and they are doing it and i thank them for it ! no more chasing big UFA's only to have them say "no thank you"....no more fruit baskets and discs on how lovely Edmonton is and no trading for star players who want out at years end. these boards are very entertaining to read, some of these proposals are ridiculous to say the least, but i'm glad we are being tight fisted with not only our current roster players but our draft choices and seeing what they can do before we go and make trades.

ManByng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 04:43 PM
  #64
DesertDawg
Registered User
 
DesertDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Superstition Mts
Posts: 4,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonsterSurge View Post
Hemsky, random pick, and a crappy 'scrapper' for Sutter? Ha!
...actually he is a good scrapper!
I'm hoping that Moss turns out to be comparable to Sutter. Hope he stays healthy...

DesertDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 05:52 PM
  #65
XX
... Waiting
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 48th State
Country: United States
Posts: 27,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by roboninja View Post

That's how potential is valued; it allows you to "potentially" get a great player for less. Sure, there is risk, but there's a saying about risks & rewards out there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilin Toronto View Post
That's exactly why you're getting him for a bargain basement price. After he scores 40 next year, you wouldn't get him for the Yandle, Hanzal, and OEL.
This is not a videogame. You do not trade established, young core pieces for just drafted unknowns. Doubly so when your team just won its division and went to the conference finals. There are other reasons, like Hanzal being the only reason the Coyotes even stand a chance in the Pacific, but that's besides the point.

If the Oilers went to the conference finals and had the makings of a perennial playoff team, breaking that up for an unproven commodity is not something you do. Your GM or Maloney makes that trade, you fire him on the spot. That is egregious unnecessary risk.

I don't care if Yakupov comes in the next year and scores 60. That is never a guarantee, despite the hype. You don't make that trade solely because of that risk. When you add in other considerations like the type of players involved (2 key cogs) and chemistry, it slants even more towards no. People need to understand that this is not a reflection on the value of Yakupov. It's the position GMs take when they have proven commodities.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamin View Post
I understand the reasoning of them being key cogs to the team and am not advocating that trade. I just hate how He hasnt played a shift in the NHL was an argument against Hall, against RNH and now Yak and each time it gets proven wrong. Just like Stamkos, tavaraes, Kane, Seguin, Landeskog, Duchene etc all "never played a shift", there is a reason elite prospects go first or second overall
And there's also a reason they are rarely traded before they ever take a shift for the team that drafted them. You build value by hanging on to those players and hoping they reach their potential. You're not going to get fair value from a team that understands that player is no sure thing. Even if you give credence to the idea that top picks are 'bust proof' it still doesn't make sense to take on so much risk for what is, at best, a sideways move.

Yakupov doesn't make the Coyotes better if it means Hanzal and Yandle leave. It makes them significantly worse.

XX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 06:11 PM
  #66
PaulSedin
#lydia2012
 
PaulSedin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,601
vCash: 500
this would be a very risky move for Phoenix but with their depth on D I think they would do something around Yandle for Yakupov

Yandle can still get better and might eventually become a top 5 defensman in the NHL but right now he is at least a top 15 defensman, top 10 on some lists

Yakupov on the other hand has never played in the NHL and has great potential but so far he hasn't proved anything in the NHL

PaulSedin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 07:50 PM
  #67
Rabbit
Captain Cook
 
Rabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Bay California
Country: United States
Posts: 4,319
vCash: 500
This thread and the EDM-PHX thread make me sick. Ednonton fans seem to think Yakupov is the best thing since sliced bread. But that's HF for ya. A player who hasn't even played a game in the NHL yet is considered way nore valuable to a number one defenseman and/or a number 2 center. Ridiculous. I realize the kid has potential, but ****. This isn't NHL 13. These GM's are professionals, not kids sitting in a bean bag chair playing Xbox. Proven talent is already PROVEN. No matter the hype, he's still not a sure thing.

Rabbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 10:32 PM
  #68
ManByng
Moroz fan
 
ManByng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: St. Albert, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,535
vCash: 500
^right, even though he has scored at every level he's played at so far...juniors, the KHL pro league and now the Russia/Quebec league series....yup, he's still unproven because he hasn't played in the NHL yet (through no fault of his own). the lack of respect for this guy is amazing. without playing a game in the NHL, i think he has proven a lot, and the consensus #1 pick overall isn't just some "unproven" player, as gets tossed around here all too often. unfortunately, as XX has mentioned, scoring 60 goals still isn't a guarantee of success so short on walking on water, i don't know what Nail can ever do to get some respect on these boards?

ManByng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 11:18 PM
  #69
Dylonus
Registered User
 
Dylonus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 10,365
vCash: 500
Why is Pittsburgh even involved in this? It's pointless.

Dylonus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 11:50 PM
  #70
CSimpson18
Registered User
 
CSimpson18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent By Design View Post
It's too big of a risk on such a valuable asset. You can't expect to garner an established elite player for someone who might become an elite player. This is why the 1st overall is never traded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit3119 View Post
But that's HF for ya. A player who hasn't even played a game in the NHL yet is considered way nore valuable to a number one defenseman and/or a number 2 center. Ridiculous. I realize the kid has potential, but ****. This isn't NHL 13. These GM's are professionals, not kids sitting in a bean bag chair playing Xbox. Proven talent is already PROVEN. No matter the hype, he's still not a sure thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
This is not a videogame. You do not trade established, young core pieces for just drafted unknowns. Doubly so when your team just won its division and went to the conference finals. There are other reasons, like Hanzal being the only reason the Coyotes even stand a chance in the Pacific, but that's besides the point.


And there's also a reason they are rarely traded before they ever take a shift for the team that drafted them. You build value by hanging on to those players and hoping they reach their potential. You're not going to get fair value from a team that understands that player is no sure thing. Even if you give credence to the idea that top picks are 'bust proof' it still doesn't make sense to take on so much risk for what is, at best, a sideways move.
These three quotes are awesome. This is the exact logic that kept Boston from trading Kessel for draft picks. Or Philadelphia from trading Carter for draft picks+.

Or, to carry on with the sarcasm, this is the exact logic that guaranteed that Toronto and Columbus won both of those deals, because they got the PROVEN talent in the trades rather than the magic beans...

Get it?

CSimpson18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 12:14 AM
  #71
ducky
Registered User
 
ducky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Home of Kokanee Beer
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,864
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petro Points View Post
Counter: Gagner + Belanger for Hanzal

You get your 3rd line checking C
Phoenix HAD Belanger and replaced him with Gordon, a better player. Why would they trade for him now, especially at the cost of Hanzal?

ducky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 12:49 AM
  #72
XX
... Waiting
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 48th State
Country: United States
Posts: 27,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSimpson18 View Post
These three quotes are awesome. This is the exact logic that kept Boston from trading Kessel for draft picks. Or Philadelphia from trading Carter for draft picks+.
In both cases there is outside motivation pushing those players out of their respective cities. It's not a comparable situation and I explained as much in the other EDM-PHX thread (seriously, wtf?). Hanzal and Yandle are core pieces and signed to long term deals. There are no personal issues, nor contractual ones. In Hanzal's case, Phoenix relies on him heavily to contest the Pacific division. To trade them for an unknown is to take on fully unnecessary risk, something that a team like Phoenix could not recover from if Yakupov does not pan out. It doesn't matter if there's a 90% chance he is better. That 10% keeps this trade from happening.

I am fully comfortable passing on Gagner and Yakupov for Hanzal and Yandle, even if Yakupov becomes a 40-40 or better type player.

XX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 01:54 AM
  #73
Violent By Design
Registered User
 
Violent By Design's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSimpson18 View Post
These three quotes are awesome. This is the exact logic that kept Boston from trading Kessel for draft picks. Or Philadelphia from trading Carter for draft picks+.

Or, to carry on with the sarcasm, this is the exact logic that guaranteed that Toronto and Columbus won both of those deals, because they got the PROVEN talent in the trades rather than the magic beans...

Get it?
Kessel and Carter are completely different situations, both were expendable to their franchises. OEL/Yandle/Hanzal are not. What incentive does Phoenix have to do this? You're blind if you cannot see this.

You don't trade vital pieces to your core for draft picks who are not proven, 1st overall or not. If the Oilers were to be interested in OEL/Yandle, Phoenix would ask for Hall/RNH/Eberle, not Yakupov. If Oil fans are so sold on Yakupov, they should have no problem swapping him in this deal with one of the other "big 4", no?

Violent By Design is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 02:24 AM
  #74
Rabbit
Captain Cook
 
Rabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Bay California
Country: United States
Posts: 4,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSimpson18 View Post
These three quotes are awesome. This is the exact logic that kept Boston from trading Kessel for draft picks. Or Philadelphia from trading Carter for draft picks+.

Or, to carry on with the sarcasm, this is the exact logic that guaranteed that Toronto and Columbus won both of those deals, because they got the PROVEN talent in the trades rather than the magic beans...

Get it?
Hey you, miss me? Different threads, same arguments
Different ballgames in those situations, buddy. Phoenix doesn't need to trade their PROVEN talent like Philly and company did. Maybe look at the fact that you are calling out multiple people who are preaching very similar arguments, and consider the fact that YOU may be the one with the broken logic.

Let me put myself in your shoes, CSimpson18. I like Gormley, obviously. I think he is going to be a stud when he gets to the NHL. Be that as it may, i don't expect to get an already established offensive forward for him..say David Kreji. Make sense?

Why? Because Boston doesn't NEED to trade Kreji, AND, they would be taking a huge risk...no matter how good they may think Gormley will turn out, he has yet to prove himself at a professional level.

See Hugh Jessiman.

I don't think you are naive, i just think you may be a tad too blinded by Yakupov's potential, which leads you to believe that opposing teams would be crazy not to accept a deal involving Yak. You just have to accept that GM's in most circumstances are more comfortable keeping what they already know works, instead of getting rid of it for something they hope will work better. With all that said, i think Nail would be a great player for Edmonton, and i think they should keep him instead if trying to trade him away.


Last edited by Rabbit: 11-08-2012 at 02:48 AM.
Rabbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 02:46 AM
  #75
CSimpson18
Registered User
 
CSimpson18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,236
vCash: 500
To the last 3 posters:

It is not uncommon or unthinkable to give up the only proven player in a deal and still win the trade in the long run.

Sure there's risk involved but it works both ways. Player could bust, team A loses. Player could turn into a superstar, team A wins bigtime. Not all NHL gms are as risk averse as you all imply, and Yakupov is certainly a very valuable asset despite never having played in the NHL. I'm positive gms would agree on that point at least.


Last edited by CSimpson18: 11-08-2012 at 02:53 AM.
CSimpson18 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 07:00 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.