HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
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.

Garrioch Writes that Avs are Quietly Shopping O'Reilly

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-27-2013, 12:16 PM
  #126
Empros*
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 336
vCash: 500
I think Edmonton can best any offer without losing our top 5 guys.

Gagner + 2nd + 3rd

Empros* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:19 PM
  #127
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Remember that time when Avs and Sens traded (Anderson for Elliott) and the relentless Ottawa Sun reporter predicted it because he had such good connections?

Good times.
Bruce Garrioch should be on the same ban list as Hockeybuzz. He's such a clown.

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:19 PM
  #128
chet1926
Registered User
 
chet1926's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 3,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empros View Post
I think Edmonton can best any offer without losing our top 5 guys.

Gagner + 2nd + 3rd
Sorry...I much rather have Zibanejad or Schwartz or Baertshi (spelling) and 2nd. When will EDM learn that Gagner is just not that great. He's a tolerable 40-50 pts center, that's it. I much rather take my chances on a younger player that has higher potential like the above mentioned players.

chet1926 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:22 PM
  #129
Njoy Oilers
Registered User
 
Njoy Oilers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Southern Alberta.
Posts: 3,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empros View Post
I think Edmonton can best any offer without losing our top 5 guys.

Gagner + 2nd + 3rd
Oil don't have a 3rd. Used it on Fistric.

Thank you come again!

Njoy Oilers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:23 PM
  #130
Avs44
Registered User
 
Avs44's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,572
vCash: 3319
This is the guy who said a couple years ago the Sens had hired Peter DeBoer as their head coach, only to have them turn around and hire Hartsburg. He also claimed at the 2008 draft, Shero offered Malkin for the 2nd overall pick and "possibly" Cammalleri" and that the Kings turned it down. The guy is an idiot. How this is even a thread is beyond me.

Avs44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:23 PM
  #131
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExJbeck View Post
It would obviously be a center for center swap and the only + they would get is picks. I think RoR can play better in STL then Berglund. A change of scenery might be nice. I obviously wouldn't do the trade if I didn't think it makes us a better team.

If Berglund can play better 5-on-5 then I would rather have him, but he has done nothing to show me he is getting better. Maybe that is because Stewart is on his line and both are better shooting then passing. I didnt even see that you said Bergy is the perfect #3C, have you ever watched RoR? I mean I wouldn't think twice about who would be better in that role lol
Again; we're already a center short(Steen has not been impressive), why on earth would we even think about dealing one of the 2 actual centers that we have?

Dealing Berglund only makes sense if we're getting a legit #1 center coming back(even then it isn't a great option; our depth on the wing should be the first option). RoR is NOT that kind of guy.

IF the Blues were to explore dealing for RoR; the goal is to get us set down the middle with Backes, RoR and Berglund. Dealing Berglund would be counter-productive.

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:25 PM
  #132
Pierce Hawthorne
Formerly Avsare1
 
Pierce Hawthorne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Caverns of Draconis
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empros View Post
I think Edmonton can best any offer without losing our top 5 guys.

Gagner + 2nd + 3rd
He said jokingly....

At least I sure hope. Terrible offer. Not even close.

Pierce Hawthorne is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:26 PM
  #133
Brian28
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empros View Post
I think Edmonton can best any offer without losing our top 5 guys.

Gagner + 2nd + 3rd
We might be able to but it would cost more than that. Replace 2nd and 3rd with one of the D prospects like Klefbom or Marincin and Colorado might strongly consider it.

Brian28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:28 PM
  #134
ExJbeck
Registered User
 
ExJbeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
Again; we're already a center short(Steen has not been impressive), why on earth would we even think about dealing one of the 2 actual centers that we have?

Dealing Berglund only makes sense if we're getting a legit #1 center coming back(even then it isn't a great option; our depth on the wing should be the first option). RoR is NOT that kind of guy.

IF the Blues were to explore dealing for RoR; the goal is to get us set down the middle with Backes, RoR and Berglund. Dealing Berglund would be counter-productive.
I completely disagree and I would love to hear that other people actually think that Bergy>RoR. You obviously disagree but I think our center depth would be better with RoR instead of Bergy. Definitely wouldn't be counter-productive in my eyes.

Were not going to get a #1 center unless it through the draft, it is nice to think about though. Hell the Blues probably can't afford one without dismantling the team. That would be counter-productive.

You are correct that we should be looking for RoR, Backes and Bergy, i was just looking at it from center for center swap. If they would rather have a winger i am all for it.

ExJbeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:37 PM
  #135
tsujimoto74
Registered User
 
tsujimoto74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 8,693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbo Slice View Post
Tyler Ennis, a 2nd, and a 3rd?
I'd be all over that as a Sabres fan.

tsujimoto74 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:37 PM
  #136
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExJbeck View Post
I completely disagree and I would love to hear that other people actually think that Bergy>RoR. You obviously disagree but I think our center depth would be better with RoR instead of Bergy. Definitely wouldn't be counter-productive in my eyes.

Were not going to get a #1 center unless it through the draft, it is nice to think about though. Hell the Blues probably can't afford one without dismantling the team. That would be counter-productive.

It's not about Berglund; it's about Steen.
Steen's defensive game has gone to crap since moving to center, he is bad in the FO dot and, despite picking up 4 assists, his offensive game has suffered big time( he isn't getting his shots off even remotely like he did on the wing). Right now; Steen is clearly the 3rd wheel on his line and IMO that is hurting us at even strength.

RoR is clearly a more skilled player than Berglund. My position has nothing to do with that. What I am saying is that in order to improve the team, we need to get Steen out of the mix. Dealing Berglund for RoR doesn't do anything to fix that issue. The goal of a trade for RoR should be to get Steen back on the wing. Involving Berglund means we're still running with only 2 top 9 quality centers and that simply isn't good enough.

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:42 PM
  #137
tsujimoto74
Registered User
 
tsujimoto74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 8,693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan13 View Post
Don't want Ennis, we need to get bigger and tougher to play against, not the other way around.
What about Ennis + McNabb (figure he's worth about a 2nd) for ROR? I know a lot of COL fans don't like him after that hit on Hishon, but he is big and tough.

tsujimoto74 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:53 PM
  #138
A1LeafNation
Thanks Boston.
 
A1LeafNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,722
vCash: 566
Talk about your beggars being choosers.

Avs want to trade ROR, but you want someone better than him...

A1LeafNation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:54 PM
  #139
Bubba Thudd
Moderator
#AvsNewAge
 
Bubba Thudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Avaland
Posts: 12,416
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsujimoto74 View Post
What about Ennis + McNabb (figure he's worth about a 2nd) for ROR? I know a lot of COL fans don't like him after that hit on Hishon, but he is big and tough.
The same McNabb that cheap-shotted Joey Hishon? Hell no.

Bubba Thudd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:54 PM
  #140
ExJbeck
Registered User
 
ExJbeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
It's not about Berglund; it's about Steen.
Steen's defensive game has gone to crap since moving to center, he is bad in the FO dot and, despite picking up 4 assists, his offensive game has suffered big time( he isn't getting his shots off even remotely like he did on the wing). Right now; Steen is clearly the 3rd wheel on his line and IMO that is hurting us at even strength.

RoR is clearly a more skilled player than Berglund. My position has nothing to do with that. What I am saying is that in order to improve the team, we need to get Steen out of the mix. Dealing Berglund for RoR doesn't do anything to fix that issue. The goal of a trade for RoR should be to get Steen back on the wing. Involving Berglund means we're still running with only 2 top 9 quality centers and that simply isn't good enough.
The trade makes us better. It not like Steen is set in stone playing center anyway, nor is he playing bad defensively. Obviously face-offs are key part of the defensive game but his positioning is fine. If we traded Bergy for RoR, Amac would be taking FO's and Steen play the position like he is now or Oshie could give it another try. The entire teams offensive game has been crap 5-on-5, not just Steen, I find that to be a moot point.

If your point is that we should be try to keep Bergy and Backes while still acquiring RoR, how can I disagree with that? My point is that it still makes us a better team, which apparently you disagree with lol. If Avs offered RoR for Bergy + 2nd please tell me you would take that.

ExJbeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:58 PM
  #141
IKEA
Registered User
 
IKEA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 303
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahleezer View Post
Getting value for an unsigned player is very difficult.

The other teams either take advantage of you or either gamble but conservatively.

If I were the Avs I wait as teams get more and more desperate in order to get best return, otherwise I let O'Reilly rot at home until he's old enough for UFA.
What about Burke's famous pursuit for P. Kessel?

IKEA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:58 PM
  #142
Goulet17
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by A1LeafNation View Post
Talk about your beggars being choosers.

Avs want to trade ROR, but you want someone better than him...
It is more a situation that if he is traded, a big if, the Avs would likely seek a youngish player/prospect with at least the upside to eventually be comparable to O'Reilly.

Certainly, they would not be looking to trade a core player for something a marginal player/prospect. What exactly would be the point? GMs normally do not look to make their team worse both short and long terms with trades.

And Colorado still has all the leverage in the world in this situation if they simply want to wait.

Goulet17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 01:01 PM
  #143
A1LeafNation
Thanks Boston.
 
A1LeafNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,722
vCash: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goulet17 View Post
It is more a situation that if he is traded, a big if, the Avs would likely seek a youngish player/prospect with at least the upside to eventually be comparable to O'Reilly.

Certainly, they would not be looking to trade a core player for something a marginal player/prospect. What exactly would be the point? GMs normally do not look to make their team worse both short and long terms with trades.

And Colorado still has all the leverage in the world in this situation if they simply want to wait.
Then sign him... oh yeah...right.

A1LeafNation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 01:05 PM
  #144
Freudian
Patty likes beef
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 28,681
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by A1LeafNation View Post
Then sign him... oh yeah...right.
Avs don't want to pay him Komisarek money yet.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 01:09 PM
  #145
njdevils6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 178
vCash: 500
Josefson/Tedenby+ Tallinder/Volchenkov+1st

njdevils6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 01:13 PM
  #146
Goulet17
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by A1LeafNation View Post
Then sign him... oh yeah...right.
You can't possibly be that myopic in your perspective.

Goulet17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 01:15 PM
  #147
Avs44
Registered User
 
Avs44's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,572
vCash: 3319
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsujimoto74 View Post
What about Ennis + McNabb (figure he's worth about a 2nd) for ROR? I know a lot of COL fans don't like him after that hit on Hishon, but he is big and tough.
Keep McNabb far away from this team.

Avs44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 01:17 PM
  #148
JoemAvs
Registered User
 
JoemAvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,822
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by njdevils6 View Post
Josefson/Tedenby+ Tallinder/Volchenkov+1st
Aside from the fact that this is absolutely terrible for the Avs , can NJ really trade their 1st this year? Don't they have to give up one soon?

Was the deadline 2014 ? And is Lou really going to wait it out and see what happens in 2014?

I mean I really could not believe that they chose to not forfait last years 29th pick.

Big headscratcher.

JoemAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 01:25 PM
  #149
cgf
Registered User
 
cgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,469
vCash: 500
Pretty sure the Devils are just waiting until the league forgets about that pick.

cgf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 01:25 PM
  #150
Girgenburger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 895
vCash: 500
Stafford, Sekera, 1st

That's a top 6 forward, a top 4 D, and most likely a mid-range 1st round pick. Aves fans would say otherwise, but I think that's the most anyone should ever offer for ROR.

Edit: Is ROR really a core player to Colorado at this point? Hasn't even played for you guys this year. You've got Landeskog, Duchene, Stastny, McGinn, etc. The top two center spots are occupied.

Girgenburger 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 09:11 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.