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.

boston - calgary

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-14-2013, 01:11 PM
  #26
F l a m e s
#winitforgio
 
F l a m e s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Moose Jaw
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,832
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Looks like a solid deal to me.
Absolutely. The value is there, but I don't think the Flames do it (for the reasons I stated above).

But still one of the better proposals on HFb.

F l a m e s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 01:24 PM
  #27
InfinityIggy
No Longer Flammable
 
InfinityIggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,920
vCash: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballershotcaller12 View Post
It's more than fair
Disagree.

Iggy + 3rd for Krejci + Knight, is fair.

GlenX for a very late 1st? No thanks.

InfinityIggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 01:27 PM
  #28
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,254
vCash: 500
would not do that from a Bruins pov...

if that deal were on the table today (can't see why Boston would do it), Calgary would be nuts not to be all over that.

Iggy was great, is still very good, but he is a diminishing asset at this point.

He'll be more and more dependant on playing with an elite playmaker (as opposed to in his prime, where he made average playmakers look like all-stars), and that will make it harder to justify the $$ he's still likely to command on his next contract.

if he has a good/great year, then the flames are likely doing well, which means trading him at the deadline is virtually impossible.

if he's having an average or worse season, and he hasn't signed an extension, Flames would be smart to move him, but then fat chance the return is as good as the one posted here.

first + a much lesser player than Krecj (or a decent prospect) is probably the best the Flames can expect at this point, he should have been extended or traded last year prior to the deadline.

glencross is probably worth a bit more than Knight, but overall the difference is a lot more than a 3rd from Cgy.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 01:32 PM
  #29
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Two years ago maybe.

If they're moving Krejci it won't be for a 1 year rental, especially if they have to package him with a 1st and solid prospect to do so. No real interest in Glencross either, reminds me of a Nik Hagman for some reason.

Kaoz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:20 PM
  #30
F l a m e s
#winitforgio
 
F l a m e s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Moose Jaw
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,832
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Two years ago maybe.

If they're moving Krejci it won't be for a 1 year rental, especially if they have to package him with a 1st and solid prospect to do so. No real interest in Glencross either, reminds me of a Nik Hagman for some reason.
I'm sorry but that has to be the worst player to player comparison I've heard. Not even remotely similar.

F l a m e s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:38 PM
  #31
topcat986*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haatley View Post
Lol keep dreaming. krejci is a second line centre and iginla id stil one hell of a player.

Krecji would be Calgary's #1 and many other teams #1 also take into addition he led all Bruins in playoff points in there cup year, Knight is a good kid who crashes the net and has Marchand like traits. Truth be told no way I would want the Bruins doing this Deal and I love Iggy hell of a player but the age is starting to show a little bit.

topcat986* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:41 PM
  #32
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,219
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucicfist View Post
Krecji would be Calgary's #1 and many other teams #1 also take into addition he led all Bruins in playoff points in there cup year, Knight is a good kid who crashes the net and has Marchand like traits. Truth be told no way I would want the Bruins doing this Deal and I love Iggy hell of a player but the age is starting to show a little bit.
I am not arguing that Krejci would be our number 1 center but its not hard to beat out Stajan and Backlund, Knight isn't that great of a player he projects to be a third liner if he reaches his potential.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:45 PM
  #33
topcat986*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGleninator View Post
I am not arguing that Krejci would be our number 1 center but its not hard to beat out Stajan and Backlund, Knight isn't that great of a player he projects to be a third liner if he reaches his potential.
There is no deal that would make this trade possible in my estimated opinion. Knight is a ways off but I hope Boston does keep him as I do view him as a possible line 2 guy or likely a line 3 energy player. Truth be told I do not see Boston Dealing Krecji any time soon to be honest.

topcat986* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:48 PM
  #34
IceDaddy
24 and Counting
 
IceDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,916
vCash: 500
No way Boston does this one.

IceDaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:50 PM
  #35
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wally31 View Post
I'm sorry but that has to be the worst player to player comparison I've heard. Not even remotely similar.
Perhaps, I don't obviously watch 82 games of either player each season to say for sure. From the games I have seen of both however, and remembering back to when Hagman had his breakouts on the crappy Leafs....

Both late bloomers who underwhelmed early in their careers, neither ultra skilled or excellent at any one thing, both with decent speed, both get by on work ethic, both inconsistent, yadda yadda yadda.

When I look at this scouting report I'm hard pressed to determine which is which:

Quote:
ASSETS: Is an industrious, physical forward who usually keeps the game as simple as possible. With good speed, he can score goals in bunches and is a solid role player. Takes care of his end, and can even contribute on the penalty kill.

FLAWS: Will always need to outwork opponents, as he can't make it on pure talent alone. Inconsistency has plagued him, especially early on in his career. Can occasionally take a bad penalty that hurts his team.

CAREER POTENTIAL: Gritty two-way winger.
Again, Glencross just doesn't float my boat. Neither does Iginla on a 1 year deal at he cost of one of the Bruins core players. I'd sooner they just keep Krejci rather then go for that package and I'm one of the guys who think Krejci should be moved for an improvement.

Kaoz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:55 PM
  #36
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,219
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Perhaps, I don't obviously watch 82 games of either player each season to say for sure. From the games I have seen of both however, and remembering back to when Hagman had his breakouts on the crappy Leafs....

Both late bloomers who underwhelmed early in their careers, neither ultra skilled or excellent at any one thing, both with decent speed, both get by on work ethic, both inconsistent, yadda yadda yadda.

When I look at this scouting report I'm hard pressed to determine which is which:



Again, Glencross just doesn't float my boat. Neither does Iginla on a 1 year deal at he cost of one of the Bruins core players. I'd sooner they just keep Krejci rather then go for that package and I'm one of the guys who think Krejci should be moved for an improvement.
Glencross is anything but inconsistent, Glencross is quiet like Burrows Hagman is not as physical and is not as comfortable driving to the net as Glencross. Glencross is a better pk'er as well.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:56 PM
  #37
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,219
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucicfist View Post
There is no deal that would make this trade possible in my estimated opinion. Knight is a ways off but I hope Boston does keep him as I do view him as a possible line 2 guy or likely a line 3 energy player. Truth be told I do not see Boston Dealing Krecji any time soon to be honest.
That's fine I wouldn't want Knight.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:57 PM
  #38
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGleninator View Post
Glencross is anything but inconsistent, Glencross is quiet like Burrows Hagman is not as physical and is not as comfortable driving to the net as Glencross. Glencross is a better pk'er as well.
That was Glencross' scouting report btw.

Kaoz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:58 PM
  #39
roflstomper
I don't row.
 
roflstomper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,867
vCash: 500
I'd have a hard time doing Krejci straight up for 48 games of Iginla.

roflstomper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:58 PM
  #40
topcat986*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGleninator View Post
That's fine I wouldn't want Knight.
Understandable as Calgary has enough wing prospects going forward right now.

topcat986* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 04:10 PM
  #41
PatriceBergeronFan
Dismayed B's Fan
 
PatriceBergeronFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,439
vCash: 500
No chance in hell. As someone said, if Iginla was 5 years younger and not a UFA, sure. As it stands now, terrible for Boston. Brutal.

PatriceBergeronFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 04:50 PM
  #42
nmbr_24
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,682
vCash: 500
Apparently Iginla is rumored to be re-signing with the Flames to finish his career there.

That's great, I hope he has continued success and now maybe we can stop having Iginla to Boston threads! Please

nmbr_24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 08:09 PM
  #43
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,219
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
That was Glencross' scouting report btw.
I am telling you it is wrong it must have been written 3 years ago because that isn't the same player.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 08:17 PM
  #44
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 8,799
vCash: 500
IF Iginla were traded it would be to a contender needless to say. No contender is going to trade a top-6 player for a rental,, never mind it's 1st line center.

It's cool to see you Flames fans support Iggy and defend his honor, but the truth is he won't net any top-6 talent. It would be a package of picks/ prospects. Anybody who's a realist knows this.

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 08:32 PM
  #45
unifiedtheory
Twitter: @ut_pez
 
unifiedtheory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Burnaby, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,332
vCash: 500
Nope. Let the Flames battle for 8th and continue on the merry-go-round of "should we or shouldn't we rebuild". The Bruins should not be helping other teams rebuild.

unifiedtheory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 09:32 PM
  #46
Devonator
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Proud Darul Harbian
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,289
vCash: 500
Not a bad deal but risky for the Bruins is Iggy does not sign with them afterwords.....one wonders of Iggy resigns with Calgary for a few more years, then that would likely make him much more attractive for trade bait......I can't see Boston giving that much up for a few months of Iggy though...from a Flames perspective, I think they would jump on it....

Devonator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 10:40 PM
  #47
Johnny Hoxville
Moderator
Dust Buster
 
Johnny Hoxville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,017
vCash: 2403
Value is okay I guess, but Glencross is virtually untouchable to the Flames. He has arguably has the best contract in the NHL in a salary cap era and he would almost with 100% certainly veto any trade.

Iggy to Boston is a whole other story, but Glencross needs to be left out of the deal.

Johnny Hoxville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 10:44 PM
  #48
nmbr_24
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVW View Post
Value is okay I guess, but Glencross is virtually untouchable to the Flames. He has arguably has the best contract in the NHL in a salary cap era and he would almost with 100% certainly veto any trade.

Iggy to Boston is a whole other story, but Glencross needs to be left out of the deal.
Claude Giroux has hands down the best contract value wise in the NHL, he only makes about $1 million more than Glencross.

nmbr_24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 11:01 PM
  #49
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,219
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmbr_24 View Post
Claude Giroux has hands down the best contract value wise in the NHL, he only makes about $1 million more than Glencross.
Not entirely true as he makes 1 million more this season and then double what Glen does next season. Also I MVW ment he signed knowing he was giving his team one of the best contracts Giroux hadn't broken out into a top line player at the time and was an RFA, Glencross was coming off his 3rd straight season of above .5ppg proving he was a 2nd line winger and was proving to be a top penalty killer and still signed an extremely team friendly deal. I agree Giroux has the best contract but I think Glencross is still one of the best.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 11:05 PM
  #50
PatriceBergeronFan
Dismayed B's Fan
 
PatriceBergeronFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVW View Post
Value is okay I guess, but Glencross is virtually untouchable to the Flames. He has arguably has the best contract in the NHL in a salary cap era and he would almost with 100% certainly veto any trade.

Iggy to Boston is a whole other story, but Glencross needs to be left out of the deal.
Tavares.

PatriceBergeronFan 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 04:02 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.