Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
C'mon. Because an armchair gm wants Snow to make a move, doesn't mean Snow is looking to make that move. I've been posting that I want Snow to pickup a Morrow/Cleary/Malholtra type leader for the youngsters... doesn't mean Snow's in agreement
The reason I asked about the # of contracts is most teams are relatively close to the limit and trades are typically close to the same # of players on both teams moving. The Islanders on the other hand can pick up more players. If the scenario went down between the Coyotes and Islanders, I would expect something like Nielson for Torres, Summers, the rights to Tikhonov, maybe Schlemko or Bissonette. BTW, I wouldn't consider Summers a developing Prospect. It would allow the prospects on defense to develope in the "A".
Some of the Coyote faithful have advocated trading Klesla instead of Summers because of his relative low trade value/exposure/contract. I like Klesla's pk ability and do not advocate trading Klesla.
I think the isles planned to have 35/36 yr old pmds Vis and Streit, mentor the rookie pmds De Haan/Donovan/Ness.
Trading a 1st rounder + Nielsen for a pair of 30+ something yr olds, who'll be on the 3rd pairing behind Hamonic/Streit/MacDonald/Vis, is not a Snow type move.
That's more a Milbury type blunder
I agree. That's pretty terrible regardless of where that 1st ends up. If it's top-10 we could probably get a legit top-4 without having to include Nielsen. No thanks to that one.
The reason I asked about the # of contracts is most teams are relatively close to the limit and trades are typically close to the same # of players on both teams moving. The Islanders on the other hand can pick up more players. If the scenario went down between the Coyotes and Islanders, I would expect something like Nielson for Torres, Summers, the rights to Tikhonov, maybe Schlemko or Bissonette. BTW, I wouldn't consider Summers a developing Prospect. It would allow the prospects on defense to develope in the "A".
.
Snow imo does not want to trade 1 player and bring back 3-4 pieces because he has a glut of prospects. Isles fans can't agree about the rumored offered to Columbus at the 2012 draft: all 7 NYI picks for the 2nd overall. But, I think it kind of makes sense because Snow has that glut of youngsters and really only so many roster spots available.
We are more likely to see Snow package an nhl roster player+ 1st rounder+ top prospect in a major move, then see him trade one of those trade chips to add depth.
I agree. That's pretty terrible regardless of where that 1st ends up. If it's top-10 we could probably get a legit top-4 without having to include Nielsen. No thanks to that one.
Not only do the isles give up the two most valuable pieces : Nielsen+ 1st rounder, but the poster had the isles adding something else
If it's not an NHL player then I would definitely offer something up for Hjamlarsson.
Anders Lee and a 2nd in 2014?
If Hammer is moved ,, I think that would be fair deal although Hawks would probably want 2013 2nd rounder given the Hawks lack of 2nd/3rd rounder this coming draft
If Hammer is moved ,, I think that would be fair deal although Hawks would probably want 2013 2nd rounder given the Hawks lack of 2nd/3rd rounder this coming draft
Anaheim has the isles 2013 2nd rounder (Vis trade).
If we get the lockout settled, get the season underway and the wheels fall off for the NYI, I'd expect impending ufas like Streit and Vis to be shopped at the trade deadline, so the isles could have a 2nd rounder before the season ends.
I don't see Snow picking up Hammer and his $3.5m salary for the 3rd pairing, so any trade would likely come after Streit/Vis are off the books.
How many playoff games in an Isle jersey, have we had with Hamonic, JT and Moulson?
All of those players, with the exception of Tavares, have been put into roles above their current skill level. Which is why the Islanders stink. MacDonald is the same thing. Yes, MacDonald plays in the top 4, but it's mostly because the alternative is Jurcina and Mottau. It's doesn't make him a top 4 defenseman.
If Morgan Rielly is ready for the 2013-2014 season and Franson is still around I could see John-Michael Liles being made available.
Also, if one of Streit/Visnovsky sign elsewhere or retire in the upcoming off-season a guy like Liles would be an ideal replacement.
I'd do Liles for Nielsen in the summer.
But all Isles fans would not.
I still don't get why we should trade Frans for a defenseman. His value to us is higher than his value to other teams. What Garth would want for Frans is not what other teams are willing to give up.
All of those players, with the exception of Tavares, have been put into roles above their current skill level. Which is why the Islanders stink. MacDonald is the same thing. Yes, MacDonald plays in the top 4, but it's mostly because the alternative is Jurcina and Mottau. It's doesn't make him a top 4 defenseman.
Moulson's scored somewhere around 97 or 98 goals over the last 3 seasons. That's playing above his skill level?
Last month an opposing scout described Hamonic as a beast according to Friedman. Another player put in a role above his skill level ?
We won't change each other's mind about MacDonald. I'm actually more comfortable counting on Hamonic+ MacDonald, then any of the NYI other blueliners.
Moulson's scored somewhere around 97 or 98 goals over the last 3 seasons. That's playing above his skill level?
Again, Moulson's a nice player, but he's not a clear cut 1st liner. So, yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW
Last month an opposing scout described Hamonic as a beast according to Friedman. Another player put in a role above his skill level ?
That's nice, but meaningless. Hamonic was thrust into a top pairing role before he was ready for it. He's done well, all things considered, but there's no way hes a 1st pairing defenseman.
Quote:
We won't change each other's mind about MacDonald. I'm actually more comfortable counting on Hamonic+ MacDonald, then any of the NYI other blueliners.
Me too. That doesn't make them top 2 defensemen on a good team. It makes them top 2 on the Islanders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blinkman360
I think he's a good #4. A guy who could play effectively in a 2nd pairing role if need-be, but probably a guy you'd rather have holding down your 3rd pairing.
That's about where I sit with him as well. The Isles need serious upgrades on D if they care to go anywhere (and there's no evidence to suggest that they care to). Their D is garbage right now.
Last edited by Richie Daggers Crime: 12-30-2012 at 09:23 PM.
For the package mentioned the Isles would want a very good, young yet experienced Dman and I would think there'd be a lot of teams interested in that package.
Again, Moulson's a nice player, but he's not a clear cut 1st liner. So, yes.
That's nice, but meaningless. Hamonic was thrust into a top pairing role before he was ready for it. He's done well, all things considered, but there's no way hes a 1st pairing defenseman.
.
I'm not gonna bother checking to see, how many 1st liners have scored a combined 97/98 goals over the last 3 yrs. It's a pretty good guess, that Moulson's outscored many of them. Does it matter that he's not the sexy name, not gonna be named to all-star teams, when he's producing like that?
If Strome, a 5th overall pick, scored a combined 97 goals over 3 straight yrs, we'd call him a 1st liner. Moulson, a 9th rounder, does it and he's considered a borderline 1st liner, not really a first liner.
As for the scout's statement about Hamonic...I'll disagree with you again. It's not that it's a nice compliment, it's that disinterested 3rd parties don't see Hamonic as being tossed in over his head or playing over his head.
If Strome, a 5th overall pick, scored a combined 97 goals over 3 straight yrs, we'd call him a 1st liner. Moulson, a 9th rounder, does it and he's considered a borderline 1st liner, not really a first liner.
Please, my opinion has nothing to do with his draft position. It's because he's a limited player on a bad team.
Quote:
As for the scout's statement about Hamonic...I'll disagree with you again. It's not that it's a nice compliment, it's that disinterested 3rd parties don't see Hamonic as being tossed in over his head or playing over his head.
Hamonic is playing 1st pairing minutes and he's not a 1st pairing defenseman, at least not yet. That is all.
Jurcina was not resigned. De Haan was injured in the 5th game of Bridgeport's season and is missing the entire season once again. This is the second time he will miss more than half the season due to a shoulder injury... Streit is 35, Visnovshy is 36.... MacDonald is a good 3rd pairing D man............................... That leaves us........
Travis Hamonic......
if you think macdonald is a 3rd pairing dman i can't consider the rest of what you have said to be credible
if you think macdonald is a 3rd pairing dman i can't consider the rest of what you have said to be credible
I think whether A-Mac is a second or third defense pairing is besides the point. The question is how much better this team is when he is playing in the third pair in the future because others have passed him on the depth chart.
I certainly see him as a trade chip down the line when we are looking for that last piece. Certainly he could be packaged in a deal for a goalie if Nilsson and Poulin do not pan out. Do we really see him on this team four years from now? If so, we really wasted a lot of picks on defensemen that didn't pan out.
Would we not want to see some sort of combo like this four years from now?
AMac is an above average #4/5. He has great ability to cover higher spots but you either want him bringing up the slack on the second pair or leading the third pair. He is a great team player and greating for filling a spot due to injury. Yes ideally you hope that you have enough talent for him to be pushed to the 3rd pairing but he is more than acceptable as a second pairing shut down role.
