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.

Flames offer all three first rounders to Avalanche

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-16-2013, 07:10 AM
  #76
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,799
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan13 View Post
HFBoards: where there's people who think trading away a potential franchise player for depth makes sense.
I agree. It's a lot easier to get solid players then a franchise player.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 07:44 AM
  #77
AslanRH
Part of the Plan
 
AslanRH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Wyoming, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,441
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renegade Stylings View Post
Avs want something much more proven. Include a guy like Baertschi or Brodie along with 6 and 22 and then we'll get to talking.
I agree with RS. Any trade would need to involve some young NHL talent (Baertschi/Brodie) in place of one of the late 1sts. Avs would want at least some assurance of NHL ability over the later 1st(s).

Some crazy (over)values thrown around on these boards for picks, but real world history of value/offers seems Baertschi/Brodie + 6 + 22 would be close to doable. Maybe some detail pieces on each side like a David Jones, O'Brien, Hunwick, or Zanon dump coming from the Avs for an additional mid to late pick/prospect


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan13 View Post
HFBoards: where there's people who think trading away a potential franchise player for depth makes sense.
I think it depends on where the team feels they are in a rebuild or need for potential franchise talent.
As an example:
One could argue that if Edmonton was at #2 and Jones was off the board, they may be better served trading away the #2 for 2-3-4 pieces to add to their existing pool of players. If they are satisfied with their big 4/5 forwards and do not see the #2 as being a significant upgrade moving that pick could easily be more valuable to the franchise than keeping it merely for the sake of not wanting to lose a potential "franchise" player.

Avs have a pretty solid young core (similar if not better than EDM) as well as more insight of where the futures lie for Stastny & O'Reilly resigning etc. if the powers that be in the organization (Pracey, Roy, Sakic) were to determine that the pieces coming back would benefit more than the 1 player, I'll trust them to make that decision.

__________________
"There's a point, far out there when the structures fail you, and the rules aren't weapons anymore, they're... shackles letting the bad guy get ahead. One day... you may face such a moment of crisis." - Jim Gordon
AslanRH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 07:52 AM
  #78
AtlantaWhaler
Moderator
Thrash/Preds/Sabres
 
AtlantaWhaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 11,435
vCash: 500
Pretty weak offer, IMO. I don't see a reason the Avs would trade a #1 for three lesser picks. I'm sure the #6 will be a good player, but the two late firsts is the incentive? Easy pass.

AtlantaWhaler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 07:54 AM
  #79
nmbr_24
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,451
vCash: 500
I think the Flames might be better off keeping the three picks. It looks like they could end up with 3 NHL players from the first round. This draft is supposed to be extremely deep, I have read that it is supposed to be 50 players deep that have first round talent.

Some people say there is more of a drop off after the top 4 than there will be from #5-50. SO while there aren't likely to be any superstars in Calgary's draft position, it might be filled with 2nd and 3rd liners and Calgary looks to me like they need a lot of players and this is a good chance to fill three spots. Calgary looks like they will have a shot at the top pick next year and maybe for a couple of years.

nmbr_24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 07:56 AM
  #80
mapes
Registered User
 
mapes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Halifax
Posts: 21,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckJet View Post
Not nearly as dumb as NYI trying to trade all of their draft picks to move up 2 spots. They should have just drafted Trouba :p

Or Rielly. Or Lindholm.
But that isn't worth it. The chances anyone after the second round makes it is slim to say the least.

No way Avs move down to 6th for picks not even in the top 20. They'd be lucky to get 3rd overall. The top 3 is crazy good

mapes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 08:13 AM
  #81
CreeksideStrangler
Registered User
 
CreeksideStrangler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: London, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnHodgson View Post
Kane > Giroux

Just because somebody doesn't pick your favourite player doesn't mean they're insane.
Agreed. I think Giroux is overrated, but most people would rather have Kane.

CreeksideStrangler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 08:17 AM
  #82
Colorado Avalanche
Registered User
 
Colorado Avalanche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lieto
Country: Finland
Posts: 15,523
vCash: 500
Easy no. Possible franchise players are hard to get. You have to suck real bad the whole season to make it.

Colorado Avalanche is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 08:37 AM
  #83
Hasbro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Hasbro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: South Rectangle
Country: Sami
Posts: 29,885
vCash: 500
In this case a half season.

Hasbro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 08:43 AM
  #84
1972
Registered User
 
1972's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,013
vCash: 500
I don't think that offer is all that overwhelming, while it's 3 first round picks two of them are late. This deal does not help the Avs get better any time soon also.

1972 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 08:48 AM
  #85
Gnashville
Never trade Weber
 
Gnashville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 4,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty10 View Post


Still makes me laugh. That organization can be pretty funny at times.
Didn't they draft only defensemen last year.

Gnashville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 08:52 AM
  #86
4ORRBRUIN
Registered User
 
4ORRBRUIN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: boston
Country: United States
Posts: 2,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dethomas07 View Post
thoughts are calgary is a team with no plan or direction.. scary their gm still has a job..

isnt this considered to be one of the deepest drafts all time? why would trade all those first rounders for 1pick.. who cares if its first overall.. 3 picks are better then one and with a deep draft.. you should have good scouts and PD to get multiple pieces to build a team!

especially when they offer sheeted ROR and didnt even know he couldve been lost via waivers...

I feel for you Calgary fans, as a ranger fan with slats a the helm early on with the rangers he was brutal.. glad we made some changes with PD and bringing in Gorton as agm otherwise we'd continue to be even more of a laughing stock of the league with some of the deals we have made..
I have a sneaky suspicion that the flames and bruins do something .

4ORRBRUIN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 08:53 AM
  #87
BROOKLYnKNIGHTS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,518
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Moss View Post
Really? Where'd you hear that? I could have sworn the Islanders were really high on Murray and the deal didn't happen because Columbus wanted him.
From what I heard the story was false.

BROOKLYnKNIGHTS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:07 AM
  #88
MoreGore
Registered User
 
MoreGore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,125
vCash: 500
Dumb move by Calgary. The Flames are a team that needs to have depth. 3 Picks in the top 30 this year could go a long way to making that happen. Having a stud player surrounded by mediocre talent is not a recipe for success. Look up north. Edmonton is 4 years down Calgary`s intended road.

MoreGore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:10 AM
  #89
tony d
The franchise
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,197
vCash: 500
A team like Calgary needs as much young talent as possible, no way should they even contemplate trading all 3 of their 1st round picks to get just 1 in return.

__________________
tony d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:11 AM
  #90
Analyzer
#WeAreBoston
 
Analyzer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Renfrew, ON.
Country: Canada
Posts: 41,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnashville View Post
Didn't they draft only defensemen last year.
Yup, 7 D

If I were the Avalanche I wouldn't either. Draft Jones and this will make Johnson expendable in the near future if you need to acquire something other than dman.

EJ, Duchene, Landeskog, probably Jones and others. If Colorado isn't good in 2 years then there's something majorly wrong in Colorado.

Analyzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:14 AM
  #91
Ashasx
Registered User
 
Ashasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GRECOHAB View Post
Feaster typical...
Do people even think before they post? What's wrong with this offer?

If Feaster is so dumb, why did Colorado reject the offer?

Ashasx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:22 AM
  #92
Hesher
down on the upside
 
Hesher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: middle of nowhere
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 1,929
vCash: 2000
The Avs would have been stupid to take it.

Hesher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:24 AM
  #93
OilChuck
Clutch and Crutch
 
OilChuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moneybags
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,234
vCash: 500
Colorado will not make a trade for the first with a team i their own division. Maybe Buffalo gets a look but Calgary needs to keep their picks. They have zero depth right now. These pick will go a long way to help with the rebuild.....er....I mean the reconfiguration of the Flames.

OilChuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:38 AM
  #94
Oilersfan2487
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Montreal
Posts: 24
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SickHandsNoShot View Post
I would do it from a Flames perspective. There was a Thread a while ago about trading 3 picks for the First overall. Using roughly where the Flames would pick. Basically every season the first overall was substantially better than the 3 combined.
Hey, I am not a Flams fan but I think that trade is crazy. the Flames have depth issues, they took a flyer with their first round pick last year. They have to stop rolling the dice and fill the cupboard with solid prospects....Abbotsford is almost empty!

But, if you Flames fans are happy to sell the store for nothing, go for it!

Oilersfan2487 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:39 AM
  #95
Ashasx
Registered User
 
Ashasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilersfan2487 View Post
Hey, I am not a Flams fan but I think that trade is crazy. the Flames have depth issues, they took a flyer with their first round pick last year. They have to stop rolling the dice and fill the cupboard with solid prospects....Abbotsford is almost empty!

But, if you Flames fans are happy to sell the store for nothing, go for it!
Rolling the dice? You roll the dice on late 1st round picks. MacKinnon is almost guaranteed.

Would you rather have a 1st line centre, or a 2nd line centre and 2 depth players?

This would have been a very good trade for the Flames and you can see why Colorado rejected it.

Ashasx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:39 AM
  #96
Green Blob*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by boredmale View Post
You do realize that trading down was on condition Yakupov was available at #2
That was never reported. They wanted Murry.

Green Blob* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:40 AM
  #97
Ivan13
Avs/Habs fan
 
Ivan13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 13,488
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analyzer View Post
Yup, 7 D

If I were the Avalanche I wouldn't either. Draft Jones and this will make Johnson expendable in the near future if you need to acquire something other than dman.

EJ, Duchene, Landeskog, probably Jones and others. If Colorado isn't good in 2 years then there's something majorly wrong in Colorado.
Only way EJ becomes expendable is if all of Siemes, Barrie and Elliott reach expectations set before them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OilChuck View Post
Colorado will not make a trade for the first with a team i their own division. Maybe Buffalo gets a look but Calgary needs to keep their picks. They have zero depth right now. These pick will go a long way to help with the rebuild.....er....I mean the reconfiguration of the Flames.
Flames aren't in our conf next season.


Last edited by Ivan13: 06-16-2013 at 09:45 AM.
Ivan13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 09:51 AM
  #98
OilChuck
Clutch and Crutch
 
OilChuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moneybags
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan13 View Post
Only way EJ becomes expendable is if all of Siemes, Barrie and Elliott reach expectations set before them.



Flames aren't in our conf nxt season.
You are correct...I forgot about realignment.

OilChuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 10:02 AM
  #99
palefire
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 372
vCash: 500
Let's see. In 2004, that would have meant Ovechkin for Montoya, Kaspar, and Fistric. In 2005 it's Crosby for Brule, Lashoff, and Niskanen. 2007 is Kane for Gagner, Pacioretty, and Petrecki. 2008 is Stamkos for Filatov, Eberle, and Tikhonov.

On the other hand 2003 is MAF for Milan Michalek, Marc-Antoine Pouliot, and Corey Perry. 2006 is Erik Johnson for Derick Brassard, Claude Giroux, and Nick Foligno.

So this does work out for the team trading away the #1 overall pick some of the time, but basically only when the top end of the draft is weak, and the rest of the time the team giving up the #1 pick gets completely screwed.

palefire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2013, 10:04 AM
  #100
boredmale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,205
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Blob View Post
That was never reported. They wanted Murry.
I posted an article on the first page that suggested they wanted Yak. Personally I think Friedman(who was the first to report the all for one deal) is a hack who would be better served writing for TMZ or Nation Enquirer. I seen many cases where he basically tells half a story or is completely wrong so I don't put much stock into what he reports

boredmale 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 02:35 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.