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.

Top line offensive threat for Phoenix

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-20-2012, 07:11 PM
  #51
YotesFan47
Registered User
 
YotesFan47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, Arizona USA
Country: United States
Posts: 731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petro Points View Post
ouch..
Haha, I understand the dismay, I honestly think Yuks will be a talented scorer in the league so I don't mean that as a knock on him but there is nothing to prove it at this point. Gormley is no different, I think he will some day be a 1-2 D but again, aside from his "potential" there is nothing to say that its going to happen for sure, with out fail. Aside from that I was more referring to Gags, I would fear his defensive ability could become a problem in Tippett's system.

YotesFan47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 02:38 AM
  #52
letowskie
Registered User
 
letowskie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In your worst nighmare
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YotesFan47 View Post
Haha, I understand the dismay, I honestly think Yuks will be a talented scorer in the league so I don't mean that as a knock on him but there is nothing to prove it at this point. Gormley is no different, I think he will some day be a 1-2 D but again, aside from his "potential" there is nothing to say that its going to happen for sure, with out fail. Aside from that I was more referring to Gags, I would fear his defensive ability could become a problem in Tippett's system.
Yeah, we don't need Gagner, he's a liability when the team doesn't have possession. Either a bona fide topline scorer would be needed as a return, or someone with solid two way play would need to come back. Otherwise, there is no way Gormley or Rundblad would be dealt. If it's for someone of Gagner's ilk, I would maybe offer something around Murphy, if that.

letowskie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 02:40 AM
  #53
letowskie
Registered User
 
letowskie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In your worst nighmare
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rorschach View Post
Maybe the Yotes need to wait for a decent team to start the rebuild process. For example if Detroit rebuilds, maybe Zetterberg becomes available for a package around Gormley and Rundblad.
We definitely don't need Zet. Not that he isn't a great player and all, but too old, too brittle, and already seems to be on a gradual decline. We need someone in their mid-20s that can grow with the team and lead the future forwards core.

letowskie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 02:55 AM
  #54
letowskie
Registered User
 
letowskie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In your worst nighmare
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YotesFan47 View Post
Certainly, but those are the kinds of players I would be looking at. Honestly, good luck getting a majority of the players I listed off, those are valuable assets and some of them worth more to their own team then they would be for the Coyotes.
From that list, I think Pavelski, Zajac, Steen, Grabovski are semi-realistic targets, the rest seem would never be available given their importance to their respective teams.

I wonder what each of these would cost. Although i'm not sure if I would be comfortable to offer Gormley + for any of them. Pavelski's a very productive player, although I'm not sure how he would do if he becomes the top offencive threat on a team, the focus of the opponent's D. Zajac is a clutch player, although I'm not sure how much of his success was tied to having teammates like Parise, Elias, Kovalchuk, etc. Steen is a classic productive 2-way forward, but seems to be on the outs with Hichcock, reports that he has been demoted to 3rd line duty this season, so maybe the asking price wouldn't be too high here. Grabo is an OK player, but I honestly don't see him as a top offensive threat any time in the future.

letowskie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 03:03 AM
  #55
thadd
Oil4Life
 
thadd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: China
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,568
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to thadd
If the salary cap gets slashed and player's salaries don't go down I'm sure there's a move that could be made. Until then it's kinda hard to imagine.

thadd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 05:44 AM
  #56
DesertDawg
Registered User
 
DesertDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Superstition Mts
Posts: 4,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thadd View Post
If the salary cap gets slashed and player's salaries don't go down I'm sure there's a move that could be made. Until then it's kinda hard to imagine.
That scenario would greatly benefit the Coyotes. It would put them in a position where they could sign a top free agent during the off-season without giving up any assets. I also expect an amnesty buy-out as soon as they agree on a new CBA so some teams can reduce their cap #, but will end up scrambling to fill rosters.

DesertDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 06:16 AM
  #57
skip2mybordeleau
We're not that bad!
 
skip2mybordeleau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,474
vCash: 5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
Jordan Schroeder is far more talented than Andy Miele in my opinion. Jordan is far more versitile so can fit in where a team needs him where I see Andy mainly used as a depth scorer. Schroeder is a bit like Kyle Wellwood, but the player he reminds me the most of would be Cliff Ronning. Like both Ronning and Wellwood, Schroeder has that knack of knowing where to go on the ice when he doesn't have the puck and like them, he is an excellent playmaker as well as a super pest.

Rundblad I see eventually settling in as an honest, quality #3 NHL defenseman and someone the Canucks could really use even at the expense of having to trade Cliff Ronning #2.
i would say a super pest would have more than a season high of 18 pims in the ahl, i wondered why he fell in his draft year and his ahl performances have been a somewhat telling factor to me, i don't see where you get cliff ronning out of this guy, he reminds me more of a tj hensick type player.

skip2mybordeleau is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 08:44 PM
  #58
letowskie
Registered User
 
letowskie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In your worst nighmare
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connolly2Duchene View Post
i would say a super pest would have more than a season high of 18 pims in the ahl, i wondered why he fell in his draft year and his ahl performances have been a somewhat telling factor to me, i don't see where you get cliff ronning out of this guy, he reminds me more of a tj hensick type player.
Yeah, there is no way that the Yotes would give up either Gormley or Rundblad for someone like Schroeder. He's simply not the type of player that we need, and is 10,000 miles from a legit top-line threat that we would be looking for.

On Vancouver, the only player aside from Kesler that would interest us, would have been Hodgeson, had he not been deealt.

letowskie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 09:03 PM
  #59
letowskie
Registered User
 
letowskie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In your worst nighmare
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmbr_24 View Post
I think this is a pretty tough spot to fill if you are only talking about giving up a package of prospects.

Yandle is worth a lot, no doubt about it, but to get a top line player I suspect that a player like Yandle needs to be involved unless they were dealing with a team that was trying to rebuild. But it is highly unlikely that a team that is rebuilding is going to get rid of an under 27 year old top line forward.

If Yandle is expendable, there is the deal right there. Now you just need to find a team that wants D and has a top line forward 27 or under to spare.
You may have a valid point.

So assuming that Gormley develops as expected, and has somewhat close to the impact of Yandle, then we could afford to move Yandle. For Yandle, I think we would like to target someone like P. Kane. Of course some chicago fans are going to claim that someone Kane is worth more than a legit #1 D; but I hope that reason would prevail here.

Alternatively, we could go for someone slightly lesser skilled like Couture or Perron, but is still able to handle top-line duty. In that case, I think we would like to have some other smaller assets coming back in a package, something like Couture + Hertle, or Perron + Rattie/Jaskin coming back.

letowskie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 10:13 PM
  #60
Vladys Gumption
Moderator
Trap City
 
Vladys Gumption's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 8,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by letowskie View Post
From that list, I think Pavelski, Zajac, Steen, Grabovski are semi-realistic targets, the rest seem would never be available given their importance to their respective teams.

I wonder what each of these would cost. Although i'm not sure if I would be comfortable to offer Gormley + for any of them. Pavelski's a very productive player, although I'm not sure how he would do if he becomes the top offencive threat on a team, the focus of the opponent's D. Zajac is a clutch player, although I'm not sure how much of his success was tied to having teammates like Parise, Elias, Kovalchuk, etc. Steen is a classic productive 2-way forward, but seems to be on the outs with Hichcock, reports that he has been demoted to 3rd line duty this season, so maybe the asking price wouldn't be too high here. Grabo is an OK player, but I honestly don't see him as a top offensive threat any time in the future.
Who has said Steen is on the outs with Hitchcock? I don't think centering Andy McDonald and Vladimir Tarasenko is a demotion. The really isn't a first, second or third line on the Blues. The reason Steen is going to be on the "third" line is because he's our best option at center behind Backes and Berglund.

Vladys Gumption is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 01:41 AM
  #61
STC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Since when is Gagner a dynamic offensive centre?

when he's playing the Hawks?

STC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 02:27 AM
  #62
Hi-wayman
Registered User
 
Hi-wayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connolly2Duchene View Post
i would say a super pest would have more than a season high of 18 pims in the ahl, i wondered why he fell in his draft year and his ahl performances have been a somewhat telling factor to me, i don't see where you get cliff ronning out of this guy, he reminds me more of a tj hensick type player.
Wellword was considered a pest and never had a penalty called against him until late in the Canucks season and even that was questionable. I believe his record of games without a penalty still stands. You seem to rely too much on statistics and not on how the player plays on the ice. I consider Schnieder far more talented and versitile that Hensick. He out played Hodgson in last season's preseason and many of us were very surprised he didn't get Hodgson's roster spot. If it wasn't for the lockout, Schnieder likely would be taking Kesler's 2nd line centre roster spot while Kesler remains on the injured list.

Hi-wayman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 03:05 AM
  #63
CanadienShark
Registered User
 
CanadienShark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by letowskie View Post
You may have a valid point.

So assuming that Gormley develops as expected, and has somewhat close to the impact of Yandle, then we could afford to move Yandle. For Yandle, I think we would like to target someone like P. Kane. Of course some chicago fans are going to claim that someone Kane is worth more than a legit #1 D; but I hope that reason would prevail here.

Alternatively, we could go for someone slightly lesser skilled like Couture or Perron, but is still able to handle top-line duty. In that case, I think we would like to have some other smaller assets coming back in a package, something like Couture + Hertle, or Perron + Rattie/Jaskin coming back.
You want Couture, I want OEL. In other words, not happening pal.

CanadienShark is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 03:10 AM
  #64
GreatStateofHockey
Registered User
 
GreatStateofHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 1,127
vCash: 500
Boedker+pick for Michalek?

GreatStateofHockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 03:32 AM
  #65
Hi-wayman
Registered User
 
Hi-wayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by letowskie View Post
You may have a valid point.

So assuming that Gormley develops as expected, and has somewhat close to the impact of Yandle, then we could afford to move Yandle. For Yandle, I think we would like to target someone like P. Kane. Of course some chicago fans are going to claim that someone Kane is worth more than a legit #1 D; but I hope that reason would prevail here.

Alternatively, we could go for someone slightly lesser skilled like Couture or Perron, but is still able to handle top-line duty. In that case, I think we would like to have some other smaller assets coming back in a package, something like Couture + Hertle, or Perron + Rattie/Jaskin coming back.
There is no way that Kane is worth a legitimate NHL level #1 defenseman. They are too rare and few teams have one. At the same time there is no way Yandle is a legitimate NHL level #1 defenseman. Gormley is the only defenseman you have that has the potential to possibly develop into one but if he does, that won't happen for many years to come. There is a slight potential O.E.L. could change from a primarily offensive defenseman to a solid two way defenseman at franchaise level, but more likely he will round out as a legitimate NHL level #3.

Just because Yandle fills the team's #1 defenseman roster spot does not mean he has the same game influencing skills as true #1 defensemen such as Chara or Webber have. At NHL defenseman level, Yandle would be considered a legitimate #3 defenseman. A highly skilled, offensive oriented defenseman capable of playing big minutes. A #2 NHL defenseman is a soild two way defenseman who plays big minutes with relatively few mistakes and is usually the steadying influence of the defense core. A legitimate #1 NHL defenseman plays big minutes and though is as skilled as a #2 defenseman tend to take more chances but who's overall play can often influence the outcome of the game. Generally a legitimate #1 NHL defenceman is the team's franchiase player.

For example, the Canucks have five ligitimate top 4 defensemen on their roster and not one of them is a legitmate NHL #1 defenseman. Edler, if he continues to develop may develop into a #1 defenseman in 2 or 3 years if he is lucky and continues to improve.

Hi-wayman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 03:35 AM
  #66
Vankiller Whale
All hail WMD
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,963
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
There is no way that Kane is worth a legitimate NHL level #1 defenseman. They are too rare and few teams have one. At the same time their is no way Yandle is a legitimate NHL level #1 defenseman. Gormley is the only defenseman you have that has the potential to possibly develop into one but if he does, that won't happen for many years to come. There is a slight potential O.E.L. could change from a primarily offensive defenseman to a solid two way defenseman at franchaise level, but more likely he will round out as a legitimate NHL level #3.

Just because Yandle fills the team's #1 defenseman roster spot does not mean he has the same game influencing skills as true #1 defensemen such as Chara or Webber have. At NHL defenseman level, Yandle would be considered a legitimate #3 defenseman. A highly skilled, offensive oriented defenseman capable of playing big minutes. A #2 NHL defenseman is a soild two way defenseman who plays big minutes with relatively few mistakes and is usually the steadying influence of the defense core. A legitimate #1 NHL defenseman plays big minutes and though is as skilled as a #2 defenseman tend to take more chances but who's overall play can often influence the outcome of the game. Generally a legitimate #1 NHL defenceman is the tean's franchiase player.

For example, the Canucks have five ligitimate top 4 defensemen on their roster and not one of them is a legitmate NHL #1 defenseman. Edler, if he continues to develop may develop into a #1 defenseman in 2 or 3 years if he is lucky and continues to improve.
You seem to be confusing '#1' with 'franchise'. Yandle is definitely a #1 defenseman, he's one of the 15 best defensemen in the league, imo. Just because he's not Chara/Weber quality...However I don't think Chicago would trade Kane for Yandle. The value is close, but I just don't see them doing it.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 03:50 AM
  #67
YotesFan47
Registered User
 
YotesFan47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, Arizona USA
Country: United States
Posts: 731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
There is no way that Kane is worth a legitimate NHL level #1 defenseman. They are too rare and few teams have one. At the same time there is no way Yandle is a legitimate NHL level #1 defenseman. Gormley is the only defenseman you have that has the potential to possibly develop into one but if he does, that won't happen for many years to come. There is a slight potential O.E.L. could change from a primarily offensive defenseman to a solid two way defenseman at franchaise level, but more likely he will round out as a legitimate NHL level #3.

Just because Yandle fills the team's #1 defenseman roster spot does not mean he has the same game influencing skills as true #1 defensemen such as Chara or Webber have. At NHL defenseman level, Yandle would be considered a legitimate #3 defenseman. A highly skilled, offensive oriented defenseman capable of playing big minutes. A #2 NHL defenseman is a soild two way defenseman who plays big minutes with relatively few mistakes and is usually the steadying influence of the defense core. A legitimate #1 NHL defenseman plays big minutes and though is as skilled as a #2 defenseman tend to take more chances but who's overall play can often influence the outcome of the game. Generally a legitimate #1 NHL defenceman is the team's franchiase player.

For example, the Canucks have five ligitimate top 4 defensemen on their roster and not one of them is a legitmate NHL #1 defenseman. Edler, if he continues to develop may develop into a #1 defenseman in 2 or 3 years if he is lucky and continues to improve.
You have watched OEL play right? He is actually quite sound defensively... He is actually the best 2 way defenseman we have and he's still maturing. I would say OEL has the best chance to be a #1 defenseman on 25 of 30 teams in the next 2-4 years. Why do you think every one wants some OEL juice? Because the kids a stud.

YotesFan47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 06:04 AM
  #68
Rutkowski
Registered User
 
Rutkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 542
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeridAl View Post
Sam Gagner for Henrik Samuelsson
Yes because more dead weight aka Brule and O'Sullivan is exactly what Phoenix need.

Also, the notion that Yandle would be #3 D-man on any NHL team is kinda hilarious. I might forget a team or two but honestly what team have the depth in the D-corp that they can put an AT LEAST top 20 D-man on the second pairing?

EDIT: Oh yeah, it'd be if it's a 1A and 1B pairing on a team where the other great D-man is also an OFD.

Rutkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 10:28 AM
  #69
WeridAl
YuckaFlux
 
WeridAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: 10ft of Snow
Posts: 1,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutkowski View Post
Yes because more dead weight aka Brule and O'Sullivan is exactly what Phoenix need.

Also, the notion that Yandle would be #3 D-man on any NHL team is kinda hilarious. I might forget a team or two but honestly what team have the depth in the D-corp that they can put an AT LEAST top 20 D-man on the second pairing?

EDIT: Oh yeah, it'd be if it's a 1A and 1B pairing on a team where the other great D-man is also an OFD.
I would love to have Yandle on my team, but Yandle doesn't block a lot of shots and isn't that physical and only plays the PP. Is he a top 20 D is debatable, offensively he is, but not overall. Isn't he the #3D with Coyotes now behind OEL.

WeridAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 10:45 AM
  #70
TurdFerguson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 864
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
You seem to be confusing '#1' with 'franchise'. Yandle is definitely a #1 defenseman, he's one of the 15 best defensemen in the league, imo. Just because he's not Chara/Weber quality...However I don't think Chicago would trade Kane for Yandle. The value is close, but I just don't see them doing it.
You're right. Chicago wouldn't trade Kane for Yandle. Primary reason is that he's a similar player to Keith, and Keith is better. It makes no sense to fit him in at #3 since we just recently traded Campbell out of that spot for nothing. The top players Chicago would want are Hanzal and Smith, but then PHX would just be opening up holes on their roster rather than trading for a strength. We only make good trading partners in a prospect deal.

TurdFerguson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 04:01 PM
  #71
Boedker89
Registered User
 
Boedker89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeridAl View Post
I would love to have Yandle on my team, but Yandle doesn't block a lot of shots and isn't that physical and only plays the PP. Is he a top 20 D is debatable, offensively he is, but not overall. Isn't he the #3D with Coyotes now behind OEL.
Him and OEL are 1a and 1b, although an argument can be made for the opposite as well.

Boedker89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 04:10 PM
  #72
Gentle Jake Virtanen
canucks? time to go.
 
Gentle Jake Virtanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,754
vCash: 50
Hemsky for Korpikoski straight up.

You get a guy who can play on the first line but comes with a gamble, that being the injury risk. We get a guy destined for the third line, but at least we know he's good for at least 70 games. Plus he can eke out 40 points on a good year. Plus Korpikoski is an RFA upon completion of his contract.

It's time we started trading for actual players rather than just prospects.

I'd even do Hemsky and a guy like Gernat for Korpikoski


Last edited by Gentle Jake Virtanen: 12-22-2012 at 04:16 PM.
Gentle Jake Virtanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 04:12 PM
  #73
Rutkowski
Registered User
 
Rutkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 542
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeridAl View Post
I would love to have Yandle on my team, but Yandle doesn't block a lot of shots and isn't that physical and only plays the PP. Is he a top 20 D is debatable, offensively he is, but not overall. Isn't he the #3D with Coyotes now behind OEL.
He's #1 or #1b at worst. And he doesn't play on the PK because Phoenix got 15 other people that can do that job very well so why burn his energy on that? Better to save his icetime to when he can do the most damage to the opponents.

He does shot-blocking and is great at defending at 1-on-1s and 2-on-1s but yeah, his offensive play is his main upside. He isn't that physical because he rarely needs to since his pokechecking is so ****ing good.

Rutkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 07:52 PM
  #74
letowskie
Registered User
 
letowskie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In your worst nighmare
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
There is no way that Kane is worth a legitimate NHL level #1 defenseman. They are too rare and few teams have one. At the same time there is no way Yandle is a legitimate NHL level #1 defenseman. Gormley is the only defenseman you have that has the potential to possibly develop into one but if he does, that won't happen for many years to come. There is a slight potential O.E.L. could change from a primarily offensive defenseman to a solid two way defenseman at franchaise level, but more likely he will round out as a legitimate NHL level #3.

Just because Yandle fills the team's #1 defenseman roster spot does not mean he has the same game influencing skills as true #1 defensemen such as Chara or Webber have. At NHL defenseman level, Yandle would be considered a legitimate #3 defenseman. A highly skilled, offensive oriented defenseman capable of playing big minutes. A #2 NHL defenseman is a soild two way defenseman who plays big minutes with relatively few mistakes and is usually the steadying influence of the defense core. A legitimate #1 NHL defenseman plays big minutes and though is as skilled as a #2 defenseman tend to take more chances but who's overall play can often influence the outcome of the game. Generally a legitimate #1 NHL defenceman is the team's franchiase player.

For example, the Canucks have five ligitimate top 4 defensemen on their roster and not one of them is a legitmate NHL #1 defenseman. Edler, if he continues to develop may develop into a #1 defenseman in 2 or 3 years if he is lucky and continues to improve.
That's not exactly a statement that a sane person makes. If Yandle is only a #3 at the NHL level, then according to your own criteria (#1 has to be dominant on both ends of the ice while playing big share of minutes in a game, then there would be less than a handful of #1 D in the league, and even with top-pairing (#1 + #2), you would have about dozen around the league. So you are basically arguing that at least 25 of the 30 NHL teams do not have NHL-worthy D-corps. That is simply an oxy-moron statement that is demonstrably and false in terms of its material logic.

letowskie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 07:57 PM
  #75
letowskie
Registered User
 
letowskie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In your worst nighmare
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tangerine View Post
Hemsky for Korpikoski straight up.

You get a guy who can play on the first line but comes with a gamble, that being the injury risk. We get a guy destined for the third line, but at least we know he's good for at least 70 games. Plus he can eke out 40 points on a good year. Plus Korpikoski is an RFA upon completion of his contract.

It's time we started trading for actual players rather than just prospects.

I'd even do Hemsky and a guy like Gernat for Korpikoski
Hemsky is pretty tempting as a potential top-line skill without having to pay the full price; at the cost of some risks. The only issue is that he is a defensive liability, which I'm not sure would work at all in Tippet's system. If a system is more run-and-gun, then I can see him working out.

letowskie 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 02:35 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.