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-Detroit

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-04-2012, 01:40 AM
  #76
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 18,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
Kronwall is good... But I think most would agree Edler is better (and again younger).

And like I said, the trade doesnt make sense. Detroit has few expendable assets that hold good value.
Edler is younger and has more potential, but better is well an argument.

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1299475

In point of fact he just beat him in a poll for Sweden's #3 D-man.

Kronwall is also locked in for 9 years at 4.75 million. Doubt Edler's cap hit comes in that cheap either.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 01:44 AM
  #77
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
Not that they're shopping the guy, but seconded.

Helm and Filppula? If contract talks go poorly, let's go back to that.
Why exactly is Detroit trading Helm AND Filppula for Edler again?

Scenario 1: Detroit doesn't trade, has Helm, and could have neither, one, or both of Filppula and Edler.

Scenario 2: Detroit trades, doesn't have Helm, and could have neither, one, or both of Filppula and Edler.

What does Detroit gain exactly? Oh right. Nothing. Actually, they do gain something. A roster spot and cap space. That's it. No better than waiving Helm.

Perhaps something around Edler+Booth/Kassian for Filppula/Franzen+Quincey?

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 02:38 AM
  #78
Back in 94
In Gillis I trust
 
Back in 94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,546
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Why exactly is Detroit trading Helm AND Filppula for Edler again?

Scenario 1: Detroit doesn't trade, has Helm, and could have neither, one, or both of Filppula and Edler.

Scenario 2: Detroit trades, doesn't have Helm, and could have neither, one, or both of Filppula and Edler.

What does Detroit gain exactly? Oh right. Nothing. Actually, they do gain something. A roster spot and cap space. That's it. No better than waiving Helm.

Perhaps something around Edler+Booth/Kassian for Filppula/Franzen+Quincey?
No thanks. IMO we give up the best player in Edler as well as the best secondary piece in Booth/Kassian. We'd fill a hole by creating a new one.

Back in 94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 02:53 AM
  #79
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Why exactly is Detroit trading Helm AND Filppula for Edler again?

Scenario 1: Detroit doesn't trade, has Helm, and could have neither, one, or both of Filppula and Edler.

Scenario 2: Detroit trades, doesn't have Helm, and could have neither, one, or both of Filppula and Edler.

What does Detroit gain exactly? Oh right. Nothing. Actually, they do gain something. A roster spot and cap space. That's it. No better than waiving Helm.

Perhaps something around Edler+Booth/Kassian for Filppula/Franzen+Quincey?
Don't worry, you won't be.

StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 04:20 AM
  #80
Anchor Town
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Why exactly is Detroit trading Helm AND Filppula for Edler again?

Scenario 1: Detroit doesn't trade, has Helm, and could have neither, one, or both of Filppula and Edler.

Scenario 2: Detroit trades, doesn't have Helm, and could have neither, one, or both of Filppula and Edler.

What does Detroit gain exactly? Oh right. Nothing. Actually, they do gain something. A roster spot and cap space. That's it. No better than waiving Helm.

Perhaps something around Edler+Booth/Kassian for Filppula/Franzen+Quincey?
Both teams would be doing that trade under the assumption (as in they have a 90+% idea) that the player would resign with them.

Anchor Town is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 10:46 AM
  #81
Wingsfan2965*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
Kronwall is good... But I think most would agree Edler is better (and again younger).

And like I said, the trade doesnt make sense. Detroit has few expendable assets that hold good value.
Edler's better offensively, Kronwall defensively.

And I'd venture to say that if Kronwall had as much PP time as Edler last year, they'd nearly be on par offensively.


Last edited by Wingsfan2965*: 12-04-2012 at 10:58 AM.
Wingsfan2965* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 11:20 AM
  #82
jroc86
Registered User
 
jroc86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 338
vCash: 500
Hes going to UFA. This thread is meaningless.

jroc86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 02:45 PM
  #83
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jroc86 View Post
Hes going to UFA. This thread is meaningless.
There's a very good chance that he's going to RFA, actually. Out of all of the owner's contract demands in the next CBA, this is one I don't think the players will argue against too strongly. The age of UFA will likely be moved forward a year making Edler a RFA.

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 02:47 PM
  #84
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6 View Post
There's a very good chance that he's going to RFA, actually. Out of all of the owner's contract demands in the next CBA, this is one I don't think the players will argue against too strongly. The age of UFA will likely be moved forward a year making Edler a RFA.
Plus I really doubt he ditches the Canucks, and vice versa. I see a life contract if their allowed, or the 5/6 year limit if not.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 04:16 PM
  #85
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jroc86 View Post
Hes going to UFA. This thread is meaningless.
Haha thanks for clearing that up for all of us.

StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 04:26 PM
  #86
Wingsfan2965*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
Plus I really doubt he ditches the Canucks, and vice versa. I see a life contract if their allowed, or the 5/6 year limit if not.
It'll be difficult if the NHL gets their way in the CBA.

Wingsfan2965* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 05:03 PM
  #87
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,938
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedWings19405 View Post
Edler is younger and has more potential, but better is well an argument.

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1299475

In point of fact he just beat him in a poll for Sweden's #3 D-man.

Kronwall is also locked in for 9 years at 4.75 million. Doubt Edler's cap hit comes in that cheap either.
I thought super long-term contracts means a player has negative value?

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 05:09 PM
  #88
Wingsfan2965*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I thought super long-term contracts means a player has negative value?
His contract is only seven years long, and that's a pretty good price for him.

Wingsfan2965* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 05:41 PM
  #89
blankall
Registered User
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I thought super long-term contracts means a player has negative value?
Kronwall's contract is not that long. It's 6 more years after this, and the last 2 are "retirement" years. So it only brings him until age 36. For the game Kronwall brings and the low risk, that's a bargain. Also big difference between skaters and goalies. A Kronwall at 80% is still quite usefull as a #4/5 guy. Any goalie at 80% causes your team to lose every night.

blankall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2012, 06:24 PM
  #90
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 18,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
His contract is only seven years long, and that's a pretty good price for him.
Yeah my bad went with what Zetterberg has left if I remember right, point was he is signed at a very good number even if the cap is lowered.

The Zetterberg Era 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 07:55 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.