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.

Ballard, Robidas, Hamonic to Colorado

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-21-2013, 11:36 AM
  #76
Ajackalit
Registered User
 
Ajackalit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockies94 View Post
I'd take him.

Our defense is atrocious, 7 bottom pairing guys and a number 1.
Who might that be?

Ajackalit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 11:38 AM
  #77
IWantSakicAsMyGM
Registered User
 
IWantSakicAsMyGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,770
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
Just out of curiosity - what would Avs fans want for the rights to ROR from Vancouver?

Extremely unlikely I know, and we may not have the pieces to get it done. Keep in mind that a holdout RFA's rights are worth less than the signed player....
The Avs main need is a top pairing LHD. The Canucks just resigned a player that can fill that need.

ROR, Wilson/Gaunce/etc, pick

for

Edler, late round pick

IWantSakicAsMyGM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 11:45 AM
  #78
casualkev
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bennett View Post

to col: Ballard, Ebbett, 4th round pick

to VAN: Landasbog, Paranteau, 1st round pick
LOL this is a joke right?

casualkev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 11:45 AM
  #79
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Most likely Vancouver would want O'Brien back but a straight O'Brien for Ballard swap could work. Vancouver would save $2.2M/year for the next two and a half season and get a third pairing guy back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs44 View Post
No, he is pretty much always like that. He is incredibly underrated around here. Trading him for Ballard does not really help us IMO. Would rather not trade him.




And Freudian, I don't think anyone wants O'Brien
least of all AV, who couldn't wait to get rid of SOB.

someone upthread said the avs had a #1 (presumably EJ) and seven bottom pairing guys. but i guess o'byrne isn't truly redundant? seems like o'byrne is basically the same player as hejda and zanon, only with a RH shot (and obviously way more size than zanon). but as i said he looked impressive to me so i can see why you would want to keep him.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 11:47 AM
  #80
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IWantSakicAsMyGM View Post
The Avs main need is a top pairing LHD. The Canucks just resigned a player that can fill that need.

ROR, Wilson/Gaunce/etc, pick

for

Edler, late round pick
if AV turned around and traded edler for anybody, even a massive overpayment like duchene or landeskog, that would be terrible for the organization. the guy just signed to a massive hometown discount, giving up more than a million dollars/year and term. you negotiate those deals with good faith, and you reward that loyalty with loyalty from the organization, or our guys will stop signing these sweetheart deals.

plus, i don't think it's been officially announced, but i think edler has a NTC.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:00 PM
  #81
Ajackalit
Registered User
 
Ajackalit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
if AV turned around and traded edler for anybody, even a massive overpayment like duchene or landeskog, that would be terrible for the organization. the guy just signed to a massive hometown discount, giving up more than a million dollars/year and term. you negotiate those deals with good faith, and you reward that loyalty with loyalty from the organization, or our guys will stop signing these sweetheart deals.

plus, i don't think it's been officially announced, but i think edler has a NTC.
Won't kick in until July 2013....at the earliest

Ajackalit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:09 PM
  #82
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IWantSakicAsMyGM View Post
The Avs main need is a top pairing LHD. The Canucks just resigned a player that can fill that need.

ROR, Wilson/Gaunce/etc, pick

for

Edler, late round pick
1) Doubt the team moves Edler for the reasons the other poster has addressed.

2) I don't think a signed Edler is fair value for the rights to an unsigned RFA in Russia. If Edler was still an upcoming UFA - this is a fair trade. As of now though it's lopsided in Colorado's favour.

As for defenceman - the obvious LHD that the Canucks can move is Ballard. Is there anything the team can add to Ballard (who admittedly would only be a 2nd pairing LHD)?

Our better prospects are Jensen, Connauton, Corrado, Lack and Gaunce. A forwards that the AVs might like are Hansen (very poor man's Landeskog).

Diamonddog01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:28 PM
  #83
Freudian
Patty likes beef
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 29,010
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
1) Doubt the team moves Edler for the reasons the other poster has addressed.

2) I don't think a signed Edler is fair value for the rights to an unsigned RFA in Russia. If Edler was still an upcoming UFA - this is a fair trade. As of now though it's lopsided in Colorado's favour.

As for defenceman - the obvious LHD that the Canucks can move is Ballard. Is there anything the team can add to Ballard (who admittedly would only be a 2nd pairing LHD)?

Our better prospects are Jensen, Connauton, Corrado, Lack and Gaunce. A forwards that the AVs might like are Hansen (very poor man's Landeskog).
If Avs trade O'Reilly they'll get full value because the other team will know exactly what it would take to sign him and be willing to pay him that amount.

Avs have all the time in the world to wait for a deal they like, should they decide to trade O'Reilly. He's Avs property until he is 27 years old.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:34 PM
  #84
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
If Avs trade O'Reilly they'll get full value because the other team will know exactly what it would take to sign him and be willing to pay him that amount.

Avs have all the time in the world to wait for a deal they like, should they decide to trade O'Reilly. He's Avs property until he is 27 years old.
Not sure about that. Holdouts almost never get traded for full value. A comparable situation might be Kessel - who was traded for two 1sts and a 2nd. That trade ended up being lopsided in Boston's favour, but the package (prior to anyone knowing the value of the picks) was among the better returns for an RFA's rights that the NHL has seen.

So...good prospect, Ballard and a late 1st would be comparable.

Diamonddog01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:38 PM
  #85
Avs44
Registered User
 
Avs44's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,593
vCash: 3319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
1) Doubt the team moves Edler for the reasons the other poster has addressed.

2) I don't think a signed Edler is fair value for the rights to an unsigned RFA in Russia. If Edler was still an upcoming UFA - this is a fair trade. As of now though it's lopsided in Colorado's favour.

As for defenceman - the obvious LHD that the Canucks can move is Ballard. Is there anything the team can add to Ballard (who admittedly would only be a 2nd pairing LHD)?

Our better prospects are Jensen, Connauton, Corrado, Lack and Gaunce. A forwards that the AVs might like are Hansen (very poor man's Landeskog).
I completely undestand if the Canucks don't want to move Edler. Just don't expect ROR.



No, unsigned Edler would not be fair. Teams don't trade top young players for upcoming UFAs. The Avs control ROR until he is 27. Unsigned RFAs hold far more value than unsigned UFAs.



No. The Avs would give up a mid pick/prospect for Ballard. Anything based around Ballard for ROR is laughable, regardless of the prospects you throw in on top. I'm not a huge fan of any of the Canucks prospects. You don't even get close to ROR if all you're offering is an overpaid mediocre
defensman+spects.


As already said, the Avs will demand full value in a trade for ROR. The team that trades for him will obviously know and be willing to pay what O'Reilly wants. We won't trade him for something as laughable as Ballard+futures, especially to a division rival.

Avs44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:39 PM
  #86
S E P H
@Krzysztof_WHL
 
S E P H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Avs Country!
Country: Poland
Posts: 4,398
vCash: 50
Would islander fans do

ROR (signed on the condition of trade) for Hamonic?

S E P H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:41 PM
  #87
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs44 View Post
I completely undestand if the Canucks don't want to move Edler. Just don't expect ROR.



No, unsigned Edler would not be fair. Teams don't trade top young players for upcoming UFAs. The Avs control ROR until he is 27. Unsigned RFAs hold far more value than unsigned UFAs.



No. The Avs would give up a mid pick/prospect for Ballard. Anything based around Ballard for ROR is laughable, regardless of the prospects you throw in on top. I'm not a huge fan of any of the Canucks prospects. You don't even get close to ROR if all you're offering is an overpaid mediocre
defensman+spects.


As already said, the Avs will demand full value in a trade for ROR. The team that trades for him will obviously know and be willing to pay what O'Reilly wants. We won't trade him for something as laughable as Ballard+futures, especially to a division rival.
You might demand that, doubt you'll get that. The only comparable RFA I can think of off the top of my head is Phil Kessel, a good young forward comparable in age to ROR.

An impeding Edler (who is arguably worth more than ROR all other things being equal) is completely fair value for a holdout ROR. Sorry, apart from AVs fans I don't think this remotely debatable.

Diamonddog01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:42 PM
  #88
Freudian
Patty likes beef
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 29,010
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
Not sure about that. Holdouts almost never get traded for full value. A comparable situation might be Kessel - who was traded for two 1sts and a 2nd. That trade ended up being lopsided in Boston's favour, but the package (prior to anyone knowing the value of the picks) was among the better returns for an RFA's rights that the NHL has seen.

So...good prospect, Ballard and a late 1st would be comparable.
If Avs were shopping O'Reilly, that wouldn't even be close to the best offer. Half the teams in the league would be interested.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:43 PM
  #89
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
If Avs were shopping O'Reilly, that wouldn't even be close to the best offer. Half the teams in the league would be interested.
I'm sure there would be interest - I'm far less sure you're going to get fair value for a player who is in the KHL and with whom negotiations have become toxic.

There aren't a lot of comparable scenarios here, but again the Kessel one is close. You had two 1sts and a 2nd, the 1sts being unknown at the time.

Diamonddog01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:46 PM
  #90
RDRR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS19 View Post
Your offer is bad and you should feel bad. You're terribly overrating Ballard considering the Canucks usually run Hamhuis - Bieksa and Edler - Garrison (IIRC), therefore Ballard hasn't even seen much top-4 time and is regularly playing as bottom pairing d-man. And you have the audacity to say he would be "a great addition to an optimistic Avalanche team?" (especially when you're trading garbage for Avalanche's Calder winner Captain and a decent forward?)

Look at his post history. I think he's playing a character.

RDRR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:47 PM
  #91
Avs44
Registered User
 
Avs44's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,593
vCash: 3319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
You might demand that, doubt you'll get that. The only comparable RFA I can think of off the top of my head is Phil Kessel, a good young forward comparable in age to ROR.

An impeding Edler (who is arguably worth more than ROR all other things being equal) is
completely fair value for a holdout ROR. Sorry, apart from AVs fans I don't think this remotely debatable.
What part of we don't want/have to trade ROR do you not get?? If we don't get what we want, he is more than welcome to stay in Russia. Go read through some of the other threads. We have had far better offers than Ballard+ I would give you a 3rd round pick for Ballard. Your delusional if you think a deal based around Ballard interests the Avs. Do you know how many teams could use a young top 6 center who is great defensively?? I think we would get far better offers than what you out together. Oh, and the Canucks would be about the last team we would trade ROR to. You guys would have to pay more than worse/teams outside the division would.

Avs44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:50 PM
  #92
deckercky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,660
vCash: 500
I wish these threads had obvious trolling and the reactions to it removed. There's actually decent discussion buried in the thread if you dig through it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by S E P H View Post
Would islander fans do

ROR (signed on the condition of trade) for Hamonic?
Doubt it. Even though I'm sure the Isles would love ROR on their second line, they're just as thin on defence as Colorado currently. They have some nice prospects, but most are a few years away, and a few of the solid pieces on their back-end are older and aren't likely to be impact players anymore when most of the roster is ready to compete. Hamonic is one of the rocks that team will depend on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yossarian54 View Post
Ballard

for

Cameron Gaunce
Quote:
Originally Posted by S E P H View Post
I understand that Canuck fans want young promising players, but Ballard just isn't worth that much IMO.

I was thinking in the lines of a centre and defenseman.

Olver
Wilson
Those two offers seem to be decent value to build a deal around.

deckercky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:52 PM
  #93
Avs44
Registered User
 
Avs44's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,593
vCash: 3319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
I'm sure there would be interest - I'm far less sure you're going to get fair value for a player who is in the KHL and with whom negotiations have become toxic.

There aren't a lot of comparable scenarios here, but again the Kessel one is close. You had two 1sts and a 2nd, the 1sts being
unknown at the time.
Unknown, yes. But the Leafs had a horrible roster. Far far worse than the Canucks roster now. Their 1sts at the time, even though unknown, held far more value than a Canucks 1st right now. The fact that you think a prospect, Ballard, and a late 1st is equivalent to what Kessel got is pathetic. You can't just say, oh, 1st=1st, Ballard+spect=1st+2nd. The Leafs 1sts, even while unknown, held far more value than a Canucks 1st

Avs44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:56 PM
  #94
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs44 View Post
Unknown, yes. But the Leafs had a horrible roster. Far far worse than the Canucks roster now. Their 1sts at the time, even though unknown, held far more value than a Canucks 1st right now. The fact that you think a prospect, Ballard, and a late 1st is equivalent to what Kessel got is pathetic. You can't just say, oh, 1st=1st, Ballard+spect=1st+2nd. The Leafs 1sts, even while unknown, held far more value than a Canucks 1st
You are looking at the trade in hindsight though. Those firsts could've been anywhere from 1st overall to 20th overall.

I wouldn't say they held far more value, but they certainly held more value. Lets say the Canucks first is around 25th overall this year, Ballard (who has more value than a 3rd, despite what you personally would offer for him) and one of our top 3 prospects (all of whom would be comparable to a 1st round pick) is equal to the Boston trade at the time of the trade. I also think that was a bad trade when it happened, and Toronto overpaid at the time before Seguin even entered the conversation. They wanted Kessel though, and were threatening an offersheet, which compounded matters.

Diamonddog01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:58 PM
  #95
deckercky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
I'm sure there would be interest - I'm far less sure you're going to get fair value for a player who is in the KHL and with whom negotiations have become toxic.

There aren't a lot of comparable scenarios here, but again the Kessel one is close. You had two 1sts and a 2nd, the 1sts being unknown at the time.
There would be much more value than Turris got, and not as much as Kessel got. If Ballard is worth roughly a second round pick (that's all he's worth now), then you need to add two non-playoff first round picks to equal what Toronto gave up for Kessel (turned out to be much worse picks than anticipated but they didn't expect to be giving up that much).

I think Ballard and 2 Canucks firsts for ROR may be in the range.

deckercky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:59 PM
  #96
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,740
vCash: 500
Isles are looking to add young, cornerstone players, not trade a 22 yr old core player away.

I don't see them looking to move Hamonic, their best blueliner.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 01:00 PM
  #97
CoachBadkitten
Matt Hunwick
 
CoachBadkitten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,047
vCash: 500
I'd definitely be more interested in Robidas and Hamonic than Ballard. Hamonic would be a great fit.

CoachBadkitten is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 01:02 PM
  #98
S E P H
@Krzysztof_WHL
 
S E P H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Avs Country!
Country: Poland
Posts: 4,398
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by deckercky View Post
I wish these threads had obvious trolling and the reactions to it removed. There's actually decent discussion buried in the thread if you dig through it.



Doubt it. Even though I'm sure the Isles would love ROR on their second line, they're just as thin on defence as Colorado currently. They have some nice prospects, but most are a few years away, and a few of the solid pieces on their back-end are older and aren't likely to be impact players anymore when most of the roster is ready to compete. Hamonic is one of the rocks that team will depend on.





Those two offers seem to be decent value to build a deal around.
It probably would be ROR+ROB+prospect/pick for Hamonic+Nielsen

I would Olver, but the defenseman majority of Avs want to trade is SOB, something Canuck fans probably do not want.

S E P H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 01:03 PM
  #99
S E P H
@Krzysztof_WHL
 
S E P H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Avs Country!
Country: Poland
Posts: 4,398
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Isles are looking to add young, cornerstone players, not trade a 22 yr old core player away.

I don't see them looking to move Hamonic, their best blueliner.
I understand Islanders not wanting to trade away their best blue liner, but how does ROR not fit this description?

S E P H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 01:05 PM
  #100
TOGuy14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seatoo View Post
Lets build something around Ballard and/or Tanev+ (+?) for the rights to ROR
There is no way that Ballard or Tanev would be a base for ROR considering I ahve seen Tornot fans willing to start with Gardiner +

TOGuy14 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 12:48 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.