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
Notices

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.

Jets-Avalanche

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-03-2013, 09:29 PM
  #26
King Woodballs
Registered User
 
King Woodballs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Your Mind
Posts: 34,162
vCash: 375
I dont see either team doing this

King Woodballs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 09:44 PM
  #27
BlamBlam
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 613
vCash: 500
Something based around O`Reilly and Kane next year maybe?

BlamBlam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 10:07 PM
  #28
PAZ
.
 
PAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,392
vCash: 50
Both teams don't do this.

That being said, I think Kane is being underrated. Value wise it's pretty fair imo.

PAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 11:07 PM
  #29
veganhunter
Mexico City Coyotes!
 
veganhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,850
vCash: 891
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlamBlam View Post
Something based around O`Reilly and Kane next year maybe?
Not a chance in hell.

veganhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 11:21 PM
  #30
dahrougem2
Registered User
 
dahrougem2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 11,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetsfareast View Post
Jets need Kane way more than Landeskog

We already have Andrew Ladd

Kane has potential to pot 2 40 goal season, I am being modest. Landeskog? No
Landeskog maybe a better all around player
But jets need a game breaker which is Evander Kane
22 goals and 200+ hits in his rookie season as a 19 year old and becoming captain at the age of 20, and only had 5 less points than Kane did last season.

How can you say one player is a game breaker and the other is not? Because he scores more goals? So Michael Ryder is more of a game breaker than someone like Ryan Callahan or Dustin Brown because he can pot 30-35 goals?

Kane's a fantastic player don't get me wrong and I'm not comparing him to Ryder but saying he's a game breaker and Landeskog isn't, while also projecting at least two 40 goal seasons for Kane and none for Landeskog shows a lot of homerism on your part

dahrougem2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 10:43 AM
  #31
veganhunter
Mexico City Coyotes!
 
veganhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,850
vCash: 891
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
22 goals and 200+ hits in his rookie season as a 19 year old and becoming captain at the age of 20, and only had 5 less points than Kane did last season.

How can you say one player is a game breaker and the other is not? Because he scores more goals? So Michael Ryder is more of a game breaker than someone like Ryan Callahan or Dustin Brown because he can pot 30-35 goals?

Kane's a fantastic player don't get me wrong and I'm not comparing him to Ryder but saying he's a game breaker and Landeskog isn't, while also projecting at least two 40 goal seasons for Kane and none for Landeskog shows a lot of homerism on your part
Landeskog was never a big scorer and was never projected to be one. He was NHL ready while he was still playing in junior he had an extremely high floor but his ceiling was never expected to be much higher than his floor. IMO he probably becomes a 30-30 do it all guy like an Andrew Ladd is for us. Kane on the other hand was a big scorer in junior and was expected to be one at the NHL level. Kane even now is a little on the skinny side and probably wasn't ready to play in the NHL straight after the draft but Atlanta rushed all their first rounders. Now what I said doesn't necessarily prove anything but this trade would never happen so we will wait and see how their careers unfold. I would bet my house that Kane is a much big scorer than Landeskog though.

veganhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 10:57 AM
  #32
cgf
Fire Bednar
 
cgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: w/ Renley's Peach
Country: Germany
Posts: 27,361
vCash: 500
People still believe that about Landy?

cgf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 11:00 AM
  #33
klozge
Avs
 
klozge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Espelkamp, Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,491
vCash: 500
I love Kane but Avs have to keep Landeskog. Stastny and Jones on the other hand...

klozge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 11:35 AM
  #34
avsfan09
Registered User
 
avsfan09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by veganhunter View Post
Landeskog was never a big scorer and was never projected to be one. He was NHL ready while he was still playing in junior he had an extremely high floor but his ceiling was never expected to be much higher than his floor. IMO he probably becomes a 30-30 do it all guy like an Andrew Ladd is for us. Kane on the other hand was a big scorer in junior and was expected to be one at the NHL level. Kane even now is a little on the skinny side and probably wasn't ready to play in the NHL straight after the draft but Atlanta rushed all their first rounders. Now what I said doesn't necessarily prove anything but this trade would never happen so we will wait and see how their careers unfold. I would bet my house that Kane is a much big scorer than Landeskog though.
So he improves by about six points? In his last 33 games last year he had 29pts. That's almost a ppg pace. I don't know why people don't think he has ppg upside. Kane is a great player but no way in hell would I trade Landeskog for him and I think most GM's in the league would agree.

Have to add that using Junior scoring to determine offensive upside is terrible reasoning. Getzlaf scored below ppg in the WHL his draft year and O'reilly scored below ppg in his draft year both turned out as very good offensive players. Lucic scored below PPG too.

avsfan09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 01:05 PM
  #35
Flair Hay
Registered User
 
Flair Hay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,295
vCash: 50
Pretty silly prop, as no one would really improve by making this move.

Flair Hay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 01:54 PM
  #36
veganhunter
Mexico City Coyotes!
 
veganhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,850
vCash: 891
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsfan09 View Post
So he improves by about six points? In his last 33 games last year he had 29pts. That's almost a ppg pace. I don't know why people don't think he has ppg upside. Kane is a great player but no way in hell would I trade Landeskog for him and I think most GM's in the league would

Have to add that using Junior scoring to determine offensive upside is terrible reasoning. Getzlaf scored below ppg in the WHL his draft year and O'reilly scored below ppg in his draft year both turned out as very good offensive players. Lucic scored below PPG too.
Those are exceptions to the to the rule most guys don't put up numbers near as good as they do in junior nevermind eclipse them.

Also people much more knowledgable about hockey than either you or I have said Landeskog does not have elite offensive potential I'm putting more stock into that than a 33 game sample size.

veganhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 01:57 PM
  #37
Crisp Breakout
Registered User
 
Crisp Breakout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 5,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by veganhunter View Post
Those are exceptions to the to the rule most guys don't put up numbers near as good as they do in junior nevermind eclipse them.

Also people much more knowledgable about hockey than either you or I have said Landeskog does not have elite offensive potential I'm putting more stock into that than a 33 game sample size.
You should think for yourself, rather than rely on outdated opinions from "authority". I think his shot totals in combination with his shooting percentage are a very good indication of untapped offensive potential.

Crisp Breakout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 06:45 PM
  #38
veganhunter
Mexico City Coyotes!
 
veganhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,850
vCash: 891
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisp Breakout View Post
You should think for yourself, rather than rely on outdated opinions from "authority". I think his shot totals in combination with his shooting percentage are a very good indication of untapped offensive potential.
His shot totals at his age put him in company with Hawerchuk, Crosby, Gretzky, Bob Carpenter, and Sylvain Turgeon at the same age. Does that suggest to you he is in the same company as the first 3? Or perhaps and FAR more likely it was a fluke or a product of his NHL readiness and he far more similar to the latter 2.

And there is no shame in relying on expert opinion they may be wrong sometimes but they are far more knowledgable than any hockey fan on an internet forum.

veganhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 04:50 PM
  #39
avsfan09
Registered User
 
avsfan09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by veganhunter View Post
His shot totals at his age put him in company with Hawerchuk, Crosby, Gretzky, Bob Carpenter, and Sylvain Turgeon at the same age. Does that suggest to you he is in the same company as the first 3? Or perhaps and FAR more likely it was a fluke or a product of his NHL readiness and he far more similar to the latter 2.

And there is no shame in relying on expert opinion they may be wrong sometimes but they are far more knowledgable than any hockey fan on an internet forum.
Bump for this statement. Absolutely untrue, just because someone is considered an expert doesn't mean they are far more knowledgible than a hockey fan on an internet forum. I played hockey my whole life and because of that I have a great understanding of the game and of players potential.

If were talking about experts, look at the Oilers scouts. They said Landeskog would only be a good third liner. He proved that wrong in his rookie season. He also scored 29pts in 33 games down the stretch where most rookies falter. If he does that in the toughest section of the season it's hard to imagine that he won't surpass that sometime in his career.

avsfan09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 05:07 PM
  #40
Peter Tagli Eddie
All 3 of them?
 
Peter Tagli Eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 918
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsfan09 View Post
Bump for this statement. Absolutely untrue, just because someone is considered an expert doesn't mean they are far more knowledgible than a hockey fan on an internet forum. I played hockey my whole life and because of that I have a great understanding of the game and of players potential.

If were talking about experts, look at the Oilers scouts. They said Landeskog would only be a good third liner. He proved that wrong in his rookie season. He also scored 29pts in 33 games down the stretch where most rookies falter. If he does that in the toughest section of the season it's hard to imagine that he won't surpass that sometime in his career.
Soooo.... Scouts haven't played hockey their whole life?

You should apply for a job with an NHL team... Just write "I played hockey my whole life" on your resume.

Peter Tagli Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 06:13 PM
  #41
Crisp Breakout
Registered User
 
Crisp Breakout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 5,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by veganhunter View Post
His shot totals at his age put him in company with Hawerchuk, Crosby, Gretzky, Bob Carpenter, and Sylvain Turgeon at the same age. Does that suggest to you he is in the same company as the first 3? Or perhaps and FAR more likely it was a fluke or a product of his NHL readiness and he far more similar to the latter 2.

And there is no shame in relying on expert opinion they may be wrong sometimes but they are far more knowledgable than any hockey fan on an internet forum.
Did I make any comparison to any player? No. Did I suggest you look at who's around him in that category? No.

What I have suggested is that while he scored 22 goals in his rookie year, he did so without very much puck luck. He's going to learn over time what he needs to do to put the puck past an NHL netminder consistently. What you can take away from those stats is that his play is earning him a huge number of chances. The pucks will start going into the back of the net.

For him to reach 40 goals on a season like last year, he doesn't have to shoot a smidgen over 15%. That's not unrealistic once every 3 years.

So no, there's no shame in relying on expert opinions, but maybe you should find one that was given after they got a chance to see him in the NHL.

Crisp Breakout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 06:22 PM
  #42
jetsfan11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 12
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vBurmi View Post
Have you watched Kane play this year? He's scoring at a 40G pace, distributing the Puck far better than last year, has picked up his defensive game and is playing excellent on the PK. People want to judge him based on his head-down run-over-the-defender style from last year but fail to remember he's 21 and is still showing great growth in all areas of his game.

It's not "definitely" a loss for Colorado. It is a bad trade for both though - Kane is the Jets best forward and Landeskog is the Avs captain.
I live in Winnipeg and watch Kane play every night. The kid is unreal fast, amazing shot and only 22. There's no way this trade makes either team better.

jetsfan11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 07:09 PM
  #43
a mangy Meowth
#thestructure
 
a mangy Meowth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 4,490
vCash: 50
Bad idea

a mangy Meowth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 11:07 PM
  #44
avsfan09
Registered User
 
avsfan09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Tagli Eddie View Post
Soooo.... Scouts haven't played hockey their whole life?

You should apply for a job with an NHL team... Just write "I played hockey my whole life" on your resume.
Well thought out and reasoned response there. I gave an example of a scout who made a terrible assessment of a player.

I know scouts are generally better than most fans but it's not unreasonable to think that some fans have equal or better ability to assess talent. The person I quoted in my previous post used the word professionals. A professional called ROR a franchise player. Clearly all "professionals" are not of the same caliber.


Last edited by avsfan09: 03-05-2013 at 11:20 PM.
avsfan09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 04:14 AM
  #45
LandoClog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: California
Posts: 12
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by veganhunter View Post
Landeskog is the Avs captain and he is a phenomenal all around player. He isn't incredible offensively nor do I believe he was ever projected to be. Kane on the other hand is phenomenal offensively and has been at every level. His all around game isn't great yet he may get it one day or he may not. Neither team makes this trade it's just silly. From a Jets perspective I think the last thing we need to do is be taking any kind of downgrade offensively.
Yeah but you could use some more character! We have so much of it over here in Colorado. We just got $10 Million worth of it locked up...

But seriously this trade makes no sense what so ever...

LandoClog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 09:42 AM
  #46
Jetsfareast
Helly Yeah
 
Jetsfareast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Philippines
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,948
vCash: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by veganhunter View Post
Landeskog was never a big scorer and was never projected to be one. He was NHL ready while he was still playing in junior he had an extremely high floor but his ceiling was never expected to be much higher than his floor. IMO he probably becomes a 30-30 do it all guy like an Andrew Ladd is for us. Kane on the other hand was a big scorer in junior and was expected to be one at the NHL level. Kane even now is a little on the skinny side and probably wasn't ready to play in the NHL straight after the draft but Atlanta rushed all their first rounders. Now what I said doesn't necessarily prove anything but this trade would never happen so we will wait and see how their careers unfold. I would bet my house that Kane is a much big scorer than Landeskog though.
Cool you answered for me

Just to add on your explanation:

Someone can put up 60 points based on assists and goals that does not matter during games.
There are those who might score the same number of points with 35 goals and 25 assists.
10 game winning goals, and goals that changes the momentum of the game.

I guess this is the basic definition of a game breaker, it embodies Evander Kane in my opinion.

I wish Landeskog is on the Jets team also don't get me wrong. But I don't think he will be a captain at his age on 28 other teams, except maybe for Edmonton and Colorado. It is not a knock on him but I think avalanche maybe do not have another leader besides him and that sucks for an avalanche team.

Jetsfareast 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 08:14 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.