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.

Phil Kessel for Corey Perry?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-02-2013, 10:28 AM
  #101
CellarDweller0
Registered User
 
CellarDweller0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gradeAducksfan View Post
Any team that doesn't throw in there 1st in the deal has zero chance of getting Perry.

END OF STORY!!!! There is 29 teams that would KILL for Perry.

Perry for Kessel is just crazy talk. Kessel is no where near the level that Perry plays.
No one is going to give you a 1st unless he is signed.

CellarDweller0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 10:38 AM
  #102
Gentle Ben Kenobi
That's no moon......
 
Gentle Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tatooine
Posts: 21,260
vCash: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by CellarDweller0 View Post
No one is going to give you a 1st unless he is signed.
Perry is going to fetch far more than just a first
Look at prior deadline deals, Johnny Oduya fetched a second and a third, Pahlsson got two 4ths.

Arnott was traded two years ago for Steckel and a second rounder
Kaberle was traded for a 1st, a conditional 2nd, and Colborne




Perry is an elite forward that playoff bound teams will KILL to acquire

Gentle Ben Kenobi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 10:43 AM
  #103
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerkini View Post
I haven't kept up with this thread, but is the general consensus that Anaheim could fetch a better return than Phil Kessel? Because that is so laughable.
If you honestly think that an elite, proven scorer with Stanley Cup pedigree would not be able to fetch a better return then a skilled one-way forward a year away from unrestricted free agency I really don't know what you are laughing at.

If the Ducks have to deal Perry - and that's a big "if" despite Leaf fan pipe dreams - they will absolutely fetch a better return then a pending UFA forward. They will receive a high end prospect, a 1st round draft pick and a roster player most certainly, which is light years better.

FerrisRox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 10:48 AM
  #104
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CellarDweller0 View Post
No one is going to give you a 1st unless he is signed.
Right.

Of course, history shows us that UFA players get traded for 1st rounders fairly routinely at the trade deadline, but now, cause you say so, it's not gonna happen. You realize that pending UFA Andrei Kostitsyn was dealt for a 2nd rounder and a 5th rounder last year, right?

So you're saying that Kostitsyn and Perry have the same value at the trade deadline? Do you really expect anybody to take that seriously?

FerrisRox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 10:57 AM
  #105
david999
Registered User
 
david999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Are people here nuts? Kessel is the Leafs most talented player. Why would anybody consider trading your signed star player for an impending free agent star player? Rumor has it that Perry already has turned down a long term big money deal from the Ducks prior to the lockout. My guess is the the Ducks keep him and try to sign him again, but it looks like he will try to test free agency this summer.

david999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 10:59 AM
  #106
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmbt View Post
A potential Cup contender doesn't dismantle its team. Reducing your chances this year only to end up in the same spot next year (when according to your argument they should just trade kessel for a lesser player) is true incompetence. Basically you're saying two years of mediocrity is better than going for the Cup.

Better to rebuild after a Cup run than to never have a run at all, and then be forced to rebuild just one year later anyway. Asset management is a means to an end (ie Cup contention) ... it is not the end itself.
A potential cup contender is usually in a position to resign it's most valuable players, and if there's somebody that has to go afterwards, it's the periphery players, which is fine.

You never put all your eggs in one basket. The Stanley Cup playoffs are far too unpredictable to make such a shortsighted move. If Anaheim cannot resign Corey Perry, they've gotta trade him, bottom line. Just like the Leafs would have to trade Phil Kessel at next year's deadline if they couldn't sign him and were dumb enough to begin the season with him unsigned.

I'm saying that keeping yourself in a position to be a cup contender year after year is important.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmbt View Post
So you should never have any star free agents? I guess the Ducks should have traded Selanne and Giguere instead of winning the Cup in 2007 then. Maybe Niedermayer too since he was considering retirement .... After all why let him retire for nothing when you can secure your long term future?
No, you should be signing them in the offseason before they become UFAs, if in fact they are your star players. The middle-of-the-lineup guys are who you should need some time to make decisions on. Obviously, the guys considering retirement are a little bit different, when they're more valuable to you than they are somebody else (there's an understanding that if they play next year, it will most likely be for you again).

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 11:12 AM
  #107
mmbt
Cheeky Monkey
 
mmbt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 9,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
A potential cup contender is usually in a position to resign it's most valuable players, and if there's somebody that has to go afterwards, it's the periphery players, which is fine.

You never put all your eggs in one basket. The Stanley Cup playoffs are far too unpredictable to make such a shortsighted move. If Anaheim cannot resign Corey Perry, they've gotta trade him, bottom line. Just like the Leafs would have to trade Phil Kessel at next year's deadline if they couldn't sign him and were dumb enough to begin the season with him unsigned.

I'm saying that keeping yourself in a position to be a cup contender year after year is important.
How does downgrading from Perry to Kessel put them in a position to contend either this year OR next year OR beyond? It's not like Kessel is dirt cheap, any savings they might have next year wouldn't exactly allow the team to go sign a major impact player. It'd be one thing if we were truly talking about a long-term asset in exchange for Perry, even if it were a slight downgrade. But we're talking one whole season's worth of difference.

Quote:
No, you should be signing them in the offseason before they become UFAs, if in fact they are your star players. The middle-of-the-lineup guys are who you should need some time to make decisions on. Obviously, the guys considering retirement are a little bit different, when they're more valuable to you than they are somebody else (there's an understanding that if they play next year, it will most likely be for you again).
So then you are in fact asserting that the right move in '07 would have been for the Ducks to trade Giguere and Selanne, seeing as how they were the team's star players yet were pending UFAs. Gotcha. So by your argument, the Ducks winning the Cup was a sign of incompetence ... what they should have been doing was stockpiling for some hypothetical future dynasty.

The problem with your line of reasoning is that even if you build a deep, loaded team, you're still going to be faced with SOMEONE coming up on UFA status at some point. In a capped league you can never keep every impact player forever.

mmbt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 11:18 AM
  #108
Alexander Edler*
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 177
vCash: 500
The casual Laff fans who keep making these threads gotta stop before you embarrass the real fans to the point of hiding forever.

Alexander Edler* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 11:27 AM
  #109
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmbt View Post
How does downgrading from Perry to Kessel put them in a position to contend either this year OR next year OR beyond? It's not like Kessel is dirt cheap, any savings they might have next year wouldn't exactly allow the team to go sign a major impact player. It'd be one thing if we were truly talking about a long-term asset in exchange for Perry, even if it were a slight downgrade. But we're talking one whole season's worth of difference.



So then you are in fact asserting that the right move in '07 would have been for the Ducks to trade Giguere and Selanne, seeing as how they were the team's star players yet were pending UFAs. Gotcha. So by your argument, the Ducks winning the Cup was a sign of incompetence ... what they should have been doing was stockpiling for some hypothetical future dynasty.

The problem with your line of reasoning is that even if you build a deep, loaded team, you're still going to be faced with SOMEONE coming up on UFA status at some point. In a capped league you can never keep every impact player forever.
They're not downgrading from Perry to Kessel, they're upgrading from nothing to Kessel. That whole season of difference is substantially better than the Ducks can expect for an impending UFA. He is a major impact player. You seem to be struggling with the concept that this entire thread is based on Perry not wanting to resign in Anaheim.

I'm asserting that the right move would've been to sign Giguere prior to the deadline. Selanne didn't matter as much, because he didn't hold any more value to any other team, as he was only going to play in Anaheim, if he did play.

Losing players to UFA is fine. Losing your 2 best players at the age of 27 is not.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 11:30 AM
  #110
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
A potential cup contender is usually in a position to resign it's most valuable players, and if there's somebody that has to go afterwards, it's the periphery players, which is fine.

You never put all your eggs in one basket. The Stanley Cup playoffs are far too unpredictable to make such a shortsighted move. If Anaheim cannot resign Corey Perry, they've gotta trade him, bottom line. Just like the Leafs would have to trade Phil Kessel at next year's deadline if they couldn't sign him and were dumb enough to begin the season with him unsigned.

I'm saying that keeping yourself in a position to be a cup contender year after year is important.



No, you should be signing them in the offseason before they become UFAs, if in fact they are your star players.
The middle-of-the-lineup guys are who you should need some time to make decisions on. Obviously, the guys considering retirement are a little bit different, when they're more valuable to you than they are somebody else (there's an understanding that if they play next year, it will most likely be for you again).
except in reality it never works this way. It's all good in theory, but then why do teams that are in the playoffs NEVER trade their star upcoming UFAs instead of keeping them for the playoffs and taking their chances after?

Maybe because there's a huge variable here which it seems that fans are completely oblivious to - playoff revenue!

Why weren't Parise or Suter traded? Parise was hesitant in his future and maybe Jersey thought there was a chance they'd retain him, but Suter made his intentions pretty clear. Who was the last star or even above average soon to be UFA that was dealt from a playoff team?

Why do teams in the playoffs regularly give up good assets for rental players? Shouldn't, according to your logic, they not give up their 1st rounders or more, for rental players? After all, they just acquired a guy who's about to hit FA and gave up quality future pieces for - like we saw with Hossa or Kovalchuk - who signed in the offseason, with no guarantees of extension when the trade happened - or Hossa, who made his intentions to test FA clear both times he was traded as a rental player. Hell teams will give up a 1st rounder for rentals like Guastaud!

Given Anaheim's situation, they are just more likely to keep Perry for a Cup run. They'll take their chances and lose him for nothing if they think he can help them in the playoffs. This is the reality of what happens with every team, every season. Teams that are in the playoffs don't prioritize their future over current possibilities - and yes, it's only a possibility they win the Cup, and chances are much higher they don't, yet every year we see playoff teams keep their star rentals, while other playoff teams give up quality futures to acquire star rentals with no guarantees of future commitment.

Given the obvious history we see here with all teams, every year, I find it pretty silly that people still seem to suggest that teams will give more value to their 1st rounders or prospects, or trade their star rentals because there are no guarantees to sign them. Maybe because it's HF boards, that people are so focussed on the future they can't see the reality of the NHL right in front of them?

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 11:39 AM
  #111
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
except in reality it never works this way. It's all good in theory, but then why do teams that are in the playoffs NEVER trade their star upcoming UFAs instead of keeping them for the playoffs and taking their chances after?

Maybe because there's a huge variable here which it seems that fans are completely oblivious to - playoff revenue!

Why weren't Parise or Suter traded? Parise was hesitant in his future and maybe Jersey thought there was a chance they'd retain him, but Suter made his intentions pretty clear. Who was the last star or even above average soon to be UFA that was dealt from a playoff team?

Why do teams in the playoffs regularly give up good assets for rental players? Shouldn't, according to your logic, they not give up their 1st rounders or more, for rental players? After all, they just acquired a guy who's about to hit FA and gave up quality future pieces for - like we saw with Hossa or Kovalchuk - who signed in the offseason, with no guarantees of extension when the trade happened - or Hossa, who made his intentions to test FA clear both times he was traded as a rental player. Hell teams will give up a 1st rounder for rentals like Guastaud!

Given Anaheim's situation, they are just more likely to keep Perry for a Cup run. They'll take their chances and lose him for nothing if they think he can help them in the playoffs. This is the reality of what happens with every team, every season. Teams that are in the playoffs don't prioritize their future over current possibilities - and yes, it's only a possibility they win the Cup, and chances are much higher they don't, yet every year we see playoff teams keep their star rentals, while other playoff teams give up quality futures to acquire star rentals with no guarantees of future commitment.

Given the obvious history we see here with all teams, every year, I find it pretty silly that people still seem to suggest that teams will give more value to their 1st rounders or prospects, or trade their star rentals because there are no guarantees to sign them. Maybe because it's HF boards, that people are so focussed on the future they can't see the reality of the NHL right in front of them?
Parise and Suter weren't traded because their teams **** up.

There's nothing wrong with giving up 1sts and more for rental players. The picks are generally in the bottom 3rd, which is something like a 40% chance at a top 6 forward/top 4 defenceman. You get a shot at a playoff run, and the edge on resigning the player. But, when a guy has been with your team for years, and flat-out refuses to resign prior to the deadline, there's not much value in that edge on resigning the player to you.

Given Anaheim's situation, they can't afford to do it. Their fanbase is fragile. They come and go as does the success of the team. They saw what happened with Nashville last year, and unlike the Preds, both of these guys are unrestricted. If the Ducks trade Perry and bring in a talent like Kessel, they'll show Getzlaf that they're still committed to winning. If they trade him for picks, that obviously sends a different message. If they do nothing at all, it probably sends an even worse message -- that we've given no thought to being a cup contending team for the years that we want you to committ to staying in Anaheim.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 11:40 AM
  #112
Gliff
Wild Bill
 
Gliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 9,033
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
A top heavy, budget team, cannot afford to go past the deadline with it's 2 best players being impending UFAs.
We have the the second best offense int he league and our goal scoring leader is Getzlaf with 7

Ya top heavy....

Gliff is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 12:06 PM
  #113
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Parise and Suter weren't traded because their teams **** up.

There's nothing wrong with giving up 1sts and more for rental players. The picks are generally in the bottom 3rd, which is something like a 40% chance at a top 6 forward/top 4 defenceman. You get a shot at a playoff run, and the edge on resigning the player. But, when a guy has been with your team for years, and flat-out refuses to resign prior to the deadline, there's not much value in that edge on resigning the player to you.

Given Anaheim's situation, they can't afford to do it. Their fanbase is fragile. They come and go as does the success of the team. They saw what happened with Nashville last year, and unlike the Preds, both of these guys are unrestricted. If the Ducks trade Perry and bring in a talent like Kessel, they'll show Getzlaf that they're still committed to winning. If they trade him for picks, that obviously sends a different message. If they do nothing at all, it probably sends an even worse message -- that we've given no thought to being a cup contending team for the years that we want you to committ to staying in Anaheim.
okay, so according to you, which team hasn't "**** up" when dealing with their upcoming UFAs?

Can you give me any examples of any team in a playoff position that did what you're suggesting they should do? Give me a single example of a team in a playoff position that dealt their star or impact player who was heading to FA when their team was in a playoff position?

Or do you think that no teams out there, ever, know what they're doing and they're all "******* up", while you're the only bright individual that has considered all factors, including playoff revenue impact to ownership, and are just smarter than all the GMs that have run teams in the NHL?

Again, give me an example of a team that did it the way you're suggesting should be done - while being in a playoff position, they dealt their star or impact soon to be UFA to get something for them instead of seeing them walk in FA. Parise and Suter aren't the only examples, as we see star UFAs on the market in any given year. So I guess all these teams are idiots and ownerships around the league should be lining up to offer you a job?

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 12:09 PM
  #114
Rare Jewel
Patience
 
Rare Jewel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Leaf Land
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gliff View Post
I doubt Kessel would play with Getzlaf. He doesnt have the physical style beeded. Teemu is very similar to Kessel and Teemu and Getzlaf suck together.
That doesn't mean Kessel and Getzlaf wouldn't work.

Man oh man. That combination has been the wet dream of most leaf fans over the few years.

Rare Jewel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 12:14 PM
  #115
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
okay, so according to you, which team hasn't "**** up" when dealing with their upcoming UFAs?

Can you give me any examples of any team in a playoff position that did what you're suggesting they should do? Give me a single example of a team in a playoff position that dealt their star or impact player who was heading to FA when their team was in a playoff position?

Or do you think that no teams out there, ever, know what they're doing and they're all "******* up", while you're the only bright individual that has considered all factors, including playoff revenue impact to ownership, and are just smarter than all the GMs that have run teams in the NHL?

Again, give me an example of a team that did it the way you're suggesting should be done - while being in a playoff position, they dealt their star or impact soon to be UFA to get something for them instead of seeing them walk in FA. Parise and Suter aren't the only examples, as we see star UFAs on the market in any given year. So I guess all these teams are idiots and ownerships around the league should be lining up to offer you a job?
All of the teams who let their star players walk as UFAs ****** up.

When you're multiplying it by 2 guys, in a fragile hockey market, that's a way to ruin a franchise.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 12:15 PM
  #116
RomanianLeafs
Registered User
 
RomanianLeafs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Country: Romania
Posts: 2,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gradeAducksfan View Post
Any team that doesn't throw in there 1st in the deal has zero chance of getting Perry.

END OF STORY!!!! There is 29 teams that would KILL for Perry.

Perry for Kessel is just crazy talk. Kessel is no where near the level that Perry plays.
yeah and perry would not re-sign in anaheim so he can go to columbus from those 29 teams that would kill to have perry i can assure you there are 6 teams max he would accept to go to and that 1st rd pick is not a top 15 pick right now...montreal boston philly detroit ottawa and leafs, it's between this 6 if he leaves anaheim...

RomanianLeafs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 12:25 PM
  #117
RomanianLeafs
Registered User
 
RomanianLeafs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Country: Romania
Posts: 2,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OccupySheen View Post
we have the 2nd best record in the league, if the leafs were in the same position would you trade Kessel?
if he's in the last year of contract and the rumors would be he want to leave ? yes..anyway i love the ducks fan base, they learn nothing from the schultz story or the gardiner trade...even if perry does not come to the leafs it will be so funny see the ducks losing perry for nothing...

RomanianLeafs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 12:28 PM
  #118
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
All of the teams who let their star players walk as UFAs ****** up.

When you're multiplying it by 2 guys, in a fragile hockey market, that's a way to ruin a franchise.
or maybe you just don't understand the full impact of playoff revenue at all, and like most fans can't appreciate the financial impact this has on ownership?

You'd think that if it was so obvious that all teams "**** up" when they let their star players walk via FA, there would be some team out there - even one single team in the history of this game - that would understand something that you think is so obvious and we'd see one single example of a playoff team EVER that is then smart enough to trade their upcoming FA for something in return instead of seeing them walk for nothing.

But no, in REALITY (yea, I know a foreign concept to many here), NO TEAM that is in a playoff position EVER does this. Do you think there might be a reason for this, other than sheer stupidity by the entire collective NHL here throughout history?

But maybe you're right. Every GM, every team, every ownership group, are all a bunch of morons for operating this way, while you're the only bright guy around here that sees how things really should operate?

Or maybe, there's a better chance that GMs and teams have more information than you do on the impact of playoff revenues, and thus feel that the smarter thing to do is to hold on to their star FA, even if they lose them, because of whatever impact they can have for their organization, even if they walk for nothing?

Nah, can't be. Every GM, team and ownership group are obviously idiots, while you're the only one that understands how hockey should work!

Think about it for a second... maybe there's a reason why NO TEAM EVER that is in a playoff position deals their star upcoming UFA just to get something for them instead of losing them for nothing, when they can have an impact in the playoffs. When there's such an overwhelming list of examples, so much so that we see EVERY TEAM operate the same way with every one of their star soon to be UFAs, maybe there's something that you don't understand here, that pro team GMs and ownerships seem to?

Again, please give me ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE here to support what you're suggesting, or do you really believe that you're the only one that knows how things should work, while all GMs and teams are morons?

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 12:32 PM
  #119
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
or maybe you just don't understand the full impact of playoff revenue at all, and like most fans can't appreciate the financial impact this has on ownership?

You'd think that if it was so obvious that all teams "**** up" when they let their star players walk via FA, there would be some team out there - even one single team in the history of this game - that would understand something that you think is so obvious and we'd see one single example of a playoff team EVER that is then smart enough to trade their upcoming FA for something in return instead of seeing them walk for nothing.

But no, in REALITY (yea, I know a foreign concept to many here), NO TEAM that is in a playoff position EVER does this. Do you think there might be a reason for this, other than sheer stupidity by the entire collective NHL here throughout history?

But maybe you're right. Every GM, every team, every ownership group, are all a bunch of morons for operating this way, while you're the only bright guy around here that sees how things really should operate?

Or maybe, there's a better chance that GMs and teams have more information than you do on the impact of playoff revenues, and thus feel that the smarter thing to do is to hold on to their star FA, even if they lose them, because of whatever impact they can have for their organization, even if they walk for nothing?

Nah, can't be. Every GM, team and ownership group are obviously idiots, while you're the only one that understands how hockey should work!

Think about it for a second... maybe there's a reason why NO TEAM EVER that is in a playoff position deals their star upcoming UFA just to get something for them instead of losing them for nothing, when they can have an impact in the playoffs. When there's such an overwhelming list of examples, so much so that we see EVERY TEAM operate the same way with every one of their star soon to be UFAs, maybe there's something that you don't understand here, that pro team GMs and ownerships seem to?

Again, please give me ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE here to support what you're suggesting, or do you really believe that you're the only one that knows how things should work, while all GMs and teams are morons?
Playoff revenue is undoubtedly important, but so are season tickets. Swapping Perry for Kessel isn't going to dramatically impact their ability to obtain playoff revenue.... it will impact their season tickets though.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 12:38 PM
  #120
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Playoff revenue is undoubtedly important, but so are season tickets. Swapping Perry for Kessel isn't going to dramatically impact their ability to obtain playoff revenue.... it will impact their season tickets though.
as I've asked several times now, could you please give me an example of any team ever that has done it "the right way" according to you. And I'm looking for a comparable example here - a team that is in a playoff position, that deals one of their star soon to be UFAs that same season.

Surely when something is so stupid to not do, as you're suggesting, there must be some examples of a smart GM that did it the right way?

So can you provide any examples from any teams in such situations?

Or are you suggesting that every GM in this position (playoff team with star upcoming UFA) is an idiot?

edit: just to add to that, when it comes to season ticket revenues, most of the impact happens prior to the start of the season. Do you think the Ducks season ticket base is better off having a better shot at the Cup (which Perry no doubt gives them over a guy like Kessel), or having another asset for the following season? Perry has won a Cup with the Ducks. Kessel's entire playoff history is unproven and so is his chemistry with the Ducks to begin with, where we know Perry fits that team well. I think most people would argue that the Ducks have a much better chance at advancing further with Perry than they do with Kessel. So how do ticket sales get impacted say if the Ducks make it to the conference finals, and then lose, and then lose Perry the following year, vs losing in the first round with Kessel, but having him the following year?

My guess is that season ticket sales will be higher after a conference finals season than a 1st round exist, regardless of who's back for another season and who hits FA, again given how a huge majority of season ticket sales actually happen prior to the start of any season.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 12:49 PM
  #121
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
You seem to be struggling with the concept that this entire thread is based on Perry not wanting to resign in Anaheim.
Actually, the entire thread is based on a Leaf fan pretending that Perry does not want to resign in Anaheim.

FerrisRox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 12:52 PM
  #122
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Parise and Suter weren't traded because their teams **** up.
Yeah, right.

The Devils kept their best player instead of trading him, went all the way to the Cup Final and nearly won it all. What a massive **** up.

If Lou could do it all again, i assure you he would keep Parise and try to win the Cup again. That is, after all, the ultimate goal. How you can call that a **** up is beyond me.

FerrisRox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 01:46 PM
  #123
CellarDweller0
Registered User
 
CellarDweller0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dingo View Post
Perry is going to fetch far more than just a first
Look at prior deadline deals, Johnny Oduya fetched a second and a third, Pahlsson got two 4ths.

Arnott was traded two years ago for Steckel and a second rounder
Kaberle was traded for a 1st, a conditional 2nd, and Colborne




Perry is an elite forward that playoff bound teams will KILL to acquire
I meant with a Kessel like player as part of the offer which is what seemed to be implied. I don't think "throwing it in" to a deal means it is the main part of the deal.

CellarDweller0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 02:06 PM
  #124
Gliff
Wild Bill
 
Gliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 9,033
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rare Jewel View Post
That doesn't mean Kessel and Getzlaf wouldn't work.

Man oh man. That combination has been the wet dream of most leaf fans over the few years.
Then you dont watch enough of Getzlaf.

Lets look at the linemates Getzlaf has had over the years and tell me what they have in common.

Penner
Perry
Ryan
Beleskey
Palmieri
Hagman


They all go to dirty areas of the ice. Kessel has an amazing shot and is fast (sound anything like Teemu?), But he doesnt go to the areas that those guys go.

Gliff is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 04:05 PM
  #125
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 25,220
vCash: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomanianLeafs View Post
if he's in the last year of contract and the rumors would be he want to leave ? yes..anyway i love the ducks fan base, they learn nothing from the schultz story or the gardiner trade...even if perry does not come to the leafs it will be so funny see the ducks losing perry for nothing...
You want to tell me how Gardiner or Schultz is at all relevant?

Sojourn 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 01:25 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.