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.

Dal-phi

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-08-2013, 01:06 PM
  #1
AJTSS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 10
vCash: 500
Dal-phi

Are we even close?

Daley, 10th overall 2013, 2nd rounder (40#) 2013 -> Flyers
Couturier -> Stars

AJTSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 01:08 PM
  #2
King Forsberg
21 68 88 16 44 28
 
King Forsberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 5,128
vCash: 300
I would prefer Oleksiak over Daley if The Flyers are giving up Couturier

King Forsberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 01:11 PM
  #3
Jray42
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 3,151
vCash: 91
Change Daley + the 2nd to something better.

Jray42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 01:17 PM
  #4
Mr Misty
The Irons Are Back!
 
Mr Misty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Forsberg View Post
I would prefer Oleksiak over Daley if The Flyers are giving up Couturier
Oleksiak is a non-starter. We need to move an NHL defenseman, probably Daley or Robidas.

Mr Misty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 01:22 PM
  #5
96
Esq.
 
96's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJTSS View Post
Are we even close?

Daley, 10th overall 2013, 2nd rounder (40#) 2013 -> Flyers
Couturier -> Stars
Honestly, speaking as a Flyers fan, I don't think that is all that close. Daley isn't really worth a whole lot to us. We have a ton of left-handed 2nd-pairing defensemen. Moreover, why would we trade Couturier, who we drafted only two years ago at 8th overall and stepped into a full-time NHL role immediately, for a later 1st rounder and a 2nd?

I think we would ask for Goligoski + 2nd or Oleksiak + 3rd. Even then, I think we'd more likely move Couturier for a more established player like Yandle.

96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 01:41 PM
  #6
NitHeel
Mucker/Grinder
 
NitHeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Reading, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Misty View Post
Oleksiak is a non-starter. We need to move an NHL defenseman, probably Daley or Robidas.
And the Flyers aren't moving Couturier for a mid pair d-man.

NitHeel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 01:41 PM
  #7
LatvianTwist
Global Moderator
 
LatvianTwist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Houston
Country: Tibet
Posts: 17,867
vCash: 157
Goligoski + 2nd works just fine now that we have Gonchar.

LatvianTwist is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 01:53 PM
  #8
Stizzle
Registered User
 
Stizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LatvianTwist View Post
Goligoski + 2nd works just fine now that we have Gonchar.
for Couturier? That's not even close.

Stizzle is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 01:58 PM
  #9
oconnor9sean
Benn & Seguin
 
oconnor9sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 2,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stizzle View Post
for Couturier? That's not even close.
Lololol. It might not be good enough, but it's close. Goligoski isn't just a throw in. He's proven himself as a very effective offensive defenseman. Couturier hasn't proven anything. Don't act like he has insane value.

oconnor9sean is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:08 PM
  #10
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,477
vCash: 500
It seems like Couturiers perceived value around here is ridiculously high for a guy who hasnt proven much.

txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:08 PM
  #11
NitHeel
Mucker/Grinder
 
NitHeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Reading, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oconnor9sean View Post
Lololol. It might not be good enough, but it's close. Goligoski isn't just a throw in. He's proven himself as a very effective offensive defenseman. Couturier hasn't proven anything. Don't act like he has insane value.
One of those statements is true and one of them is false.


Semantics aside, I can't see the Flyers moving Couturier for Goligoski and an OK pick.

NitHeel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:09 PM
  #12
Tripod
Registered User
 
Tripod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,605
vCash: 500
our 2 fanbases have already agreed that a fair deal for both teams would be:
Couts and 2nd(#41) for Goligoski and 1st(#10)

It hurts to do for both teams, yet serves the purpose of need.

Tripod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:11 PM
  #13
SolidusAKA
Registered User
 
SolidusAKA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 804
vCash: 500
Wasnt there a really awesome Gologoski package a month or so ago that worked well for Couts? Wasnt it like one of the rare cases where an HF proposal satisfied everyone?

Edit: ^^^^ This

SolidusAKA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:14 PM
  #14
Stizzle
Registered User
 
Stizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txomisc View Post
It seems like Couturiers perceived value around here is ridiculously high for a guy who hasnt proven much.
His value is "ridiculously high" for a reason. Don't just look at his G/A/P totals from his 19 and 20 year old seasons and think you have the full picture. If you put the original proposal in front of Ed Snyder, he would be insulted.

Stizzle is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:15 PM
  #15
AJTSS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 10
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripod View Post
our 2 fanbases have already agreed that a fair deal for both teams would be:
Couts and 2nd(#41) for Goligoski and 1st(#10)

It hurts to do for both teams, yet serves the purpose of need.
Would hurt to lose Goligoski, but still... Deal done

Really not sure, should we get rid of Goligoski. I like him alot. Beside the turnovers...

AJTSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:18 PM
  #16
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stizzle View Post
His value is "ridiculously high" for a reason. Don't just look at his G/A/P totals from his 19 and 20 year old seasons and think you have the full picture. If you put the original proposal in front of Ed Snyder, he would be insulted.
Thats fine you dont like the opening proposal, but your goligoski and a 2nd not even being close is absurd. You may not like those exact parts, but the value has to be close.

txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:20 PM
  #17
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJTSS View Post
Would hurt to lose Goligoski, but still... Deal done

Really not sure, should we get rid of Goligoski. I like him alot. Beside the turnovers...
Honestly I dont even really like that deal. The Stars would be better off just trying to add to the 10th overall to trade up and get Lindholm or Monahan, two players who could be just as good as he might.

txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:33 PM
  #18
Morry83
Registered User
 
Morry83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txomisc View Post
Honestly I dont even really like that deal. The Stars would be better off just trying to add to the 10th overall to trade up and get Lindholm or Monahan, two players who could be just as good as he might.
I agree with this, however I'd rather not lose the 10th. Draft Lindholm and Ristolainen, and we're golden.

Morry83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:46 PM
  #19
Stizzle
Registered User
 
Stizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txomisc View Post
Thats fine you dont like the opening proposal, but your goligoski and a 2nd not even being close is absurd. You may not like those exact parts, but the value has to be close.
The consensus seems to be add the 10th overall and then we are about fair. So yeah, your original proposal with a 2nd rounder in place of a high 1st isn't close. Just like I said all along.

Stizzle is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 02:58 PM
  #20
oconnor9sean
Benn & Seguin
 
oconnor9sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 2,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stizzle View Post
The consensus seems to be add the 10th overall and then we are about fair. So yeah, your original proposal with a 2nd rounder in place of a high 1st isn't close. Just like I said all along.
Not a chance I'd give up #10 + Goligoski for Couturier. He was the 8th pick and hasn't exactly blown anyone away, now he's worth the 10th pick in a better draft + a guy who'd be your best point getting defenseman? No way.

oconnor9sean is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 03:02 PM
  #21
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txomisc View Post
Thats fine you dont like the opening proposal, but your goligoski and a 2nd not even being close is absurd. You may not like those exact parts, but the value has to be close.
Goli + 2nd IS close but probably not incentive enough to get the Flyers to pull the trigger. As others have said, Goli + 10th OA for Coots + 41st OA is pretty close to the same value and THAT may be enough to get the Flyers to pull the trigger.

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 03:11 PM
  #22
oconnor9sean
Benn & Seguin
 
oconnor9sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 2,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlocky View Post
Goli + 2nd IS close but probably not incentive enough to get the Flyers to pull the trigger. As others have said, Goli + 10th OA for Coots + 41st OA is pretty close to the same value and THAT may be enough to get the Flyers to pull the trigger.
I'd pass on that as a Stars fan. We can get a hell of a player at pick #10, so including that and Goligoski for Couts and #41 isn't a good deal for Dallas.

oconnor9sean is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2013, 03:24 PM
  #23
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oconnor9sean View Post
I'd pass on that as a Stars fan. We can get a hell of a player at pick #10, so including that and Goligoski for Couts and #41 isn't a good deal for Dallas.
I completely understand that and if I were the Stars I probably wouldn't do it either. Again, as a Flyers fan I wouldn't do Goli + 2nd for Coots even if value-wise it's pretty close.

phlocky 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 09:49 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.