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 use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

Tyler Myers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-25-2012, 08:12 PM
  #201
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 19,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErikKarlsson View Post
I haven't seen a ton of Scandella but every time I see him play he just screams steady top 4 d-man to me. Maybe I only see his best games?
I think at best he'll be a top 4 but given Minnesota has a glut of steady defensemen like Scandella, nothing really jumps out. He's kind of like Schultz. He's a steady defenseman but nothing special.

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 11:59 PM
  #202
Minnesota
Global Moderator
L'Étoile du Nord
 
Minnesota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Country: United States
Posts: 17,991
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by the8bandarmadillo View Post
While Scandella is young, he is just getting beaten out by those in front of him. I don't see Gilbert, Brodin, Suter being on a third pairing. You also have Spurgeon as well. I don't see a lot in Scandella and the fact he's been meh in the AHL when he should be one of the top defensemen (As he has had NHL experience).
He's consistently playing on Houston's top pairing against the toughest competition. Defensemen take a while to develop.

Quote:
So Clutterbuck's name hasn't come up in almost every trade proposal and most Minnesota fans haven't said they see him as being moved?
Everyone WANTS Clutterbuck, I've never been under the impression Minnesota fans want him gone.

Quote:
Zucker was drafted in 2010. At best he'll see the NHL in 2013. He was three years removed from his draft year. Lucia at best can take that route if one of the prospects busts but I see a long road ahead for Lucia. Getting him to a team like Sabres might be best for his development.
Buffalo's loaded with forward prospects. Again, why's it bad to have depth?

Quote:
Because if they crater out, at least you get some value out of them.
Very little value... And if they develop into a decent player, you look like a fool for trading them away.

Quote:
Myers. As well, Minnesota isn't rebuilding. If they were rebuilding they wouldn't have signed Suter or Parise. They are retooling and having Myers would be a tremendous boost to that retooling process.
We signed Suter and Parise because of our prospect pool, management, and current team. We're absolutely rebuilding, but that doesn't mean we're not going to sign free agents.

Quote:
And if that 1st rounder ends up in the 20s?
Realistically, our pick will end up roughly the same as last season.

Minnesota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 03:14 AM
  #203
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 55,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
C'mon. You really think Buffalo wants to trade Myers, in a trade to improve depth?

Petry: the most interesting trade chip offered.

Hemsky: after 2 straight injury filled, disappointing seasons, he needs to show thw injuries are behind him and he's worth that $5m+ per salary.

Paajarvi: a solid rookie season, followed by 2 disappointing seasons. Has the size, but not the sandpaper the Sabres want.

Gagner: Sabres management has said they want to get bigger, grittier. Would they really be in the mix for non-physical Gagner?

Picks: I would rather have the 22/23 yr old Myers, then picks who are likely several yrs from contributing.
And again I said that we wouldn't be able to get that trade done based on what I offered. I realize that he is worth more than that, but that is his value to our team at this point in our rebuild IMO. If not for Schultz' emergence I probably would've offered more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cramdizzl View Post
I like this to start, but I'd really wanna see Klefbom in this instead of two of those three.
My dilemma would be that we would then be lacking a potential top pairing LD, a 2C with more strength/grit, and size/grit at forward after this trade was pulled and basically all of our trading chips that are worth a damn which we'd part with are now in Buffalo. As much as I like Myers I think that we'd be in trouble long term if we include Klefbom into the deal as it sits right now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by couture23 View Post
Yeah you're substituting draft picks with prospects which is not necessarily bad, but Klefbom would have to be included since we wouldn't get an Eberle or Schultz.
I can understand that seeing as guys like Myers aren't moved for spare parts, but if we were to move Klefbom I'd prefer to have our 2013 1st off the table which likely doesn't fit very well with Buffalo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
I read what he said, before pointing out why it was a wet dream proposal. Sabres aren't dealing Myers imo unless they get a stud player back.Oilers don't want to move their top youngsters for Myers in a quality for quality trade ? That's fine, that simply points out why the 2 teams are bad trade partners.
The OP asked what his value was IIRC, I can only speak for my team and that type of a deal is what I would see offered. Does that deal that I proposed get the job done? Doubtful, but as good as Myers is I wouldn't gut our team for him based on what our team needs.

__________________
Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Bryanbryoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 01:51 PM
  #204
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 30,920
vCash: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post


The OP asked what his value was IIRC, I can only speak for my team and that type of a deal is what I would see offered. Does that deal that I proposed get the job done? Doubtful, but as good as Myers is I wouldn't gut our team for him based on what our team needs.
I can see why you wouldn't want to gut the Oilers. They are a team with some very impressive, young talent.

I just don't see the Sabres moving Myers, to add 3 lesser pieces which the oft injured Hemsky, Gagner, Petry or picks would be. Gotta give up something the other gm wants badly, to get him to bite.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 04:15 PM
  #205
couture23
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
 
couture23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: GTA/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
My dilemma would be that we would then be lacking a potential top pairing LD, a 2C with more strength/grit, and size/grit at forward after this trade was pulled and basically all of our trading chips that are worth a damn which we'd part with are now in Buffalo. As much as I like Myers I think that we'd be in trouble long term if we include Klefbom into the deal as it sits right now.


I can understand that seeing as guys like Myers aren't moved for spare parts, but if we were to move Klefbom I'd prefer to have our 2013 1st off the table which likely doesn't fit very well with Buffalo.
Completely understood. But if Myers was going to be shipped to Edmonton, we would either need to get a top forward prospect back or a top defensive prospect along with added pieces. It just seems like it wouldn't work between us. I really don't find Edmonton being a suitable trading partner with anyone.

couture23 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 01:54 AM.

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.