HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Anaheim Ducks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Nashville/Flyer Trade

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-18-2007, 10:32 PM
  #1
Duck Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Laguna Hills, CA
Posts: 480
vCash: 500
Nashville/Flyer Trade

At first glance, not being an Eastern Team fan, I thought, OMG, is Nashville crazy.

My next reaction was that I am sorry for "Greed Boy" who still has one year left on his contract.

B/T/W- Did Nashville get back the pick they gave the Flyers in the Forsberg trade? If so, it must be like the 25th pick.

Duck Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 10:34 PM
  #2
Ducksforcup
Registered User
 
Ducksforcup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Anaheim, California
Country: United States
Posts: 10,581
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duck Fan View Post
At first glance, not being an Eastern Team fan, I thought, OMG, is Nashville crazy.

My next reaction was that I am sorry for "Greed Boy" who still has one year left on his contract.

B/T/W- Did Nashville get back the pick they gave the Flyers in the Forsberg trade? If so, it must be like the 25th pick.
Yeah, Nashville got their pick back.

Anyway, I think it is a great trade for the Flyers. The salaries are a little wee high, but still really awesome. Their GM Holmgren is doing a good job so far. Gutsy moves. Nashville didn't do too shabby either. It wasn't like they were going to re-sign these guys (news reports indicated this) and now they get a first round pick out of it.

Ducksforcup is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 10:54 PM
  #3
Snap Wilson
Registered User
 
Snap Wilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,838
vCash: 500
I'm going to disagree. I think they're terrible signings. Timonen and Hartnell are good players, but they're not enough to make Philly a good team again, and both of those contracts will be albatrosses in a couple of years. I realize why they did it (season ticket renewal boost), but they're in the wrong position to be signing those contracts, and even if they were, the length for both players is ludicrous.

Snap Wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 11:12 PM
  #4
Ducksforcup
Registered User
 
Ducksforcup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Anaheim, California
Country: United States
Posts: 10,581
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneyp View Post
I'm going to disagree. I think they're terrible signings. Timonen and Hartnell are good players, but they're not enough to make Philly a good team again, and both of those contracts will be albatrosses in a couple of years. I realize why they did it (season ticket renewal boost), but they're in the wrong position to be signing those contracts, and even if they were, the length for both players is ludicrous.
The lengths of the contracts are a little odd, but I think these signings will end up working out pretty well. Remember, Timonen's contract is front-loaded. By the sixth year, he will only be making three million.

We'll see. Even if it doesn't work out, I like the fact that Holmgren is taking a huge risk. Gutsy.

Ducksforcup is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 11:28 PM
  #5
iLau
Always Mighty
 
iLau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,394
vCash: 500
This trade pretty much set the market for a solid top forward at a little over 4 million. If the Ducks want to upgrade in the offense, its going to be pricey.

iLau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 11:34 PM
  #6
Snap Wilson
Registered User
 
Snap Wilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducksforcup View Post
The lengths of the contracts are a little odd, but I think these signings will end up working out pretty well. Remember, Timonen's contract is front-loaded. By the sixth year, he will only be making three million.
Which means what, that they save less when the exercise the buyout option in four years? The cap hit's still the same throughout. Who picks that deal up? Either Timonen doesn't suck and the Flyers stick with him, or he does and nobody else wants to take him.

Quote:
We'll see. Even if it doesn't work out, I like the fact that Holmgren is taking a huge risk. Gutsy.
It's "gutsy" when your team's future looks bleak and you have no direction to look but up. Remember the Fedorov signing? Gutsy! The Flyers may need to work to get Doug MacLean a job again. Speaking of which, have the Ducks sent him his playoff share yet?

Aww, that was mean. I really should stop making fun of the man. He was a nice guy, just not a good GM.

Snap Wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 11:43 PM
  #7
mmbt
Cheeky Monkey
 
mmbt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 9,259
vCash: 500
Is it just me, or does it seem to anyone else that had they offered those two players those contracts during free agency in a couple weeks, they likely would have outbid everyone else anyway? Would anyone else have really paid Pronger/Niedermayer type money for Timonen? Seems like pretty wishful thinking to expect those two to live up to those contracts.

mmbt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 12:04 AM
  #8
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmbt View Post
Is it just me, or does it seem to anyone else that had they offered those two players those contracts during free agency in a couple weeks, they likely would have outbid everyone else anyway? Would anyone else have really paid Pronger/Niedermayer type money for Timonen? Seems like pretty wishful thinking to expect those two to live up to those contracts.
I dunno about that. It seems weird to give Timonen more than Pronger, but, the market exploded after Pronger inked that deal. Timonen is a very good defenseman, and, considering Kubina got like 5 million, and Chara got 7ish, I'd say Timonen fits right in with the market value.

Hartnell, though, I'm not sure of. He's a great player, but, $4 million? I dunno, we'll have to see about that one.

Gibsons Finest is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 12:18 AM
  #9
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneyp View Post
and both of those contracts will be albatrosses in a couple of years.
You can't be serious. Hartnell is 25, 31 in six years. Even if his remaining upside remains untapped, a guy good for 25-30 goals a year with good physical presence and solid all-around game at 4.2 million is nothing compared to the true albatross contracts out there. (Khabibulin, Fedorov, Näslund) Obviously it's not cheap but an albatross it ain't.


Last edited by Talentless Practise*: 06-19-2007 at 12:24 AM.
Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 12:30 AM
  #10
markzab
Registered User
 
markzab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA.
Country: United States
Posts: 4,368
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to markzab
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan Darsh View Post
I dunno about that. It seems weird to give Timonen more than Pronger, but, the market exploded after Pronger inked that deal. Timonen is a very good defenseman, and, considering Kubina got like 5 million, and Chara got 7ish, I'd say Timonen fits right in with the market value.

Hartnell, though, I'm not sure of. He's a great player, but, $4 million? I dunno, we'll have to see about that one.

Pronger was given that money when the cap was at 39m. He would be making well over that amount if he was a free agent with the cap set to be around 49m.

markzab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 12:32 AM
  #11
markzab
Registered User
 
markzab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA.
Country: United States
Posts: 4,368
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to markzab
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneyp View Post
Which means what, that they save less when the exercise the buyout option in four years? The cap hit's still the same throughout. Who picks that deal up? Either Timonen doesn't suck and the Flyers stick with him, or he does and nobody else wants to take him.
What many people don't know or fail to realise is that since Timmonen has signed the contract before the age of 35, in his final years if he sucks we have the option to send him to the farm and not have his salary count towards the cap. The Flyers would have to pay him his money which wouldn't be great but it wouldnt count where it hurts the team the most. Front loading, a thing of beauty.

markzab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 12:49 AM
  #12
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markzab View Post
Pronger was given that money when the cap was at 39m. He would be making well over that amount if he was a free agent with the cap set to be around 49m.
That's exactly what I'm saying. It feels weird, but, in reality, we just got really, really lucky that the two defensemen signed their deals before the market went berserk. Well, it's also good that 'ol Burkey figured out that adding big name FAs in this market is only asking for trouble(he added S.Nieds, but, he did that before the market went insano, so I don't count it; he was very smart to not break the bank for any free agent last offseason).

Gibsons Finest is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 01:05 AM
  #13
Hank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan Darsh View Post
Well, it's also good that 'ol Burkey figured out that adding big name FAs in this market is only asking for trouble(he added S.Nieds, but, he did that before the market went insano, so I don't count it; he was very smart to not break the bank for any free agent last offseason).
Burke had the luxury of a strong farm system that gave him the resources to acquire the defenseman he needed in a trade rather than on the open market. Not all teams and GMs are in that position.

I don't like the Hartnell deal much, but we see some bloated contracts come out of free agency every year.

Hank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 07:11 AM
  #14
Snap Wilson
Registered User
 
Snap Wilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonkers View Post
You can't be serious. Hartnell is 25, 31 in six years.
Yeah, and he's already got a pretty solid injury history as well. The track record of guys who rely on a physical game and frequently get hurt isn't good. Check back with us in a couple of years.


Last edited by Snap Wilson: 06-19-2007 at 07:29 AM.
Snap Wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 07:28 AM
  #15
Snap Wilson
Registered User
 
Snap Wilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markzab View Post
What many people don't know or fail to realise is that since Timmonen has signed the contract before the age of 35, in his final years if he sucks we have the option to send him to the farm and not have his salary count towards the cap. The Flyers would have to pay him his money which wouldn't be great but it wouldnt count where it hurts the team the most. Front loading, a thing of beauty.
I get the general concept, I just don't think it's going to work out the same way you do. You're thinking it would be more palatable to send Timonen down if he's only making three million, but look at what the Flyers were paying Nedved and they still brought him up on recall waivers and absorbed the cap hit. Paying guys millions of dollars to languish in the minors isn't good business, even if you're as rich as Comcast.

And the issue isn't really him sucking in the final year of his contract, but when he's 35 or 36 (when most players hit the wall) and you're still looking at three or four years left. I'm not saying that it will definitely happen to Kimmo, but it DOES happen to most players. Not everyone can be Nicklas Lidstrom.

Snap Wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 07:31 AM
  #16
Mooseduck
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,015
vCash: 500
I think this a stupid or (pre-planned) move by the Flyers.

These were not great contracts, do why not hold onto the pick and negotiate with these same numbers? C'mon who else will offer 6 year deals (lol NY)?

Really, this is another fishy deal that the league should examine.

BTW, anyone notice all the Euros that Nashville has been signing? Looks like a classic and massive salary dump may be on the horizon.

Mooseduck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 08:49 AM
  #17
fighterflea1*
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 277
vCash: 500
To me it gets down to the character of the players involved in the signings. Timonen was the captain in Nashville which makes a statement right there. Hartnell is a gritty and, by all accounts, team-oriented guy. I think these type of players can justify long term contracts.

Markov at $5.75 million a year offered a home team discount to the Habs. No realist could suppose that Timonen would get less than $6 million a year if, as is clear, he wasn't going to re-sign in Nashville. I think the Flyers' overpayment of Timonen was small in the current market.

Hartnell clearly is a guy 'at play' in the current market, a young power forward with goal scoring capability and a two-way game. As a third liner in Nashville, his value is a bit limited but as a second liner in Philly or elsewhere, you have to value him at somewhere in the $3.25 - 4 million dollar a year range. Again a slight overpayment.

In return for that and Matt Ellison (traded by the Flyers to Nashville for the right to negotiate with the two) and the #23 pick, offered now that agreements have been reached, the Flyers go into free agency with the peace of mind of having all but their need for a first line centerman taken care of.

This deal was an insurance policy and seen from that light, the price is about right.

fighterflea1* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2007, 09:00 AM
  #18
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneyp View Post
Yeah, and he's already got a pretty solid injury history as well. The track record of guys who rely on a physical game and frequently get hurt isn't good.
So? if he's forced to retire, no cap hit. If he's injured alot, they put him on LTIR and get injury relief to the cap
Nevermind the fact that he has lost 19 games during the last 2 seasons. Pronger has lost 18, worried about his injury history?
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneyp View Post
Check back with us in a couple of years.
Us who?


Last edited by Talentless Practise*: 06-20-2007 at 09:12 AM.
Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2007, 09:28 AM
  #19
Snap Wilson
Registered User
 
Snap Wilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonkers View Post
Nevermind the fact that he has lost 19 games during the last 2 seasons. Pronger has lost 18, worried about his injury history?
Us who?
Constantly, but he isn't on the hook for six years and he's Chris Pronger, not Scott freaking Hartnell. That's an acceptable risk.

Snap Wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2007, 09:34 AM
  #20
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
Remember guys, by front loading contracts and making sure to sign players before they turn 35 the Flyers are exploiting every possible loophole. These contracts will never be burdens. The Cap will rise at least every other year and, as stated above, since the contracts are front-loaded, it makes the players really easy to trade or send down to the minors when in the last year or so of their contracts. When Timonen starts to decline we just dump him off at the trade deadline or in the offseason to a team that needs a #4 D-man for cheap.

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2007, 01:50 PM
  #21
caliamad
Registered User
 
caliamad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,676
vCash: 500
Yeah, actually it makes more sense after i read up on it... cap number is 6+ / year but they are actually front loading the contracts.

This way they are easier to trade to team's that want to back and payroll but have cap space.

Also if they send these guys to the minors, they won't take the cap hit. Instead of paying them 6 mil cap hit, they will be paying about 3 mil for timoen and like 2 for hartnell & not take any cap hit. Not a bad idea for a rich team.

They might also be able to sign a top forward if they get Rathje on long term injury... that nets them 3.5 million.

caliamad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2007, 02:10 PM
  #22
Snap Wilson
Registered User
 
Snap Wilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,838
vCash: 500
The point is that the team who gets him still has to accept the $6.3 million cap hit, regardless of the actual salary. Will a team that needs a #4 defenseman (as hypothesized) do that? Of course not.

And as much as Philly fans want to think, well, we can just dump them in the minors if it doesn't work out..." It doesn't work that way. Otherwise we would never have heard from Petr Nedved again. How much did they pay him to play for Edmonton? And you think they're just going to write off Hartnell's four million if it doesn't work out? That's not going to happen.

Snap Wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2007, 12:26 AM
  #23
Winston Wolf
Registered User
 
Winston Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Oahu, HI
Posts: 7,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneyp View Post
The point is that the team who gets him still has to accept the $6.3 million cap hit, regardless of the actual salary. Will a team that needs a #4 defenseman (as hypothesized) do that? Of course not.
Many teams, such as Washington, Edmonton, Buffalo, etc. "small market" teams. They can take the $6.3 million cap hit because they won't spend to the cap anyways, but still can afford to pay the actual lower salary.

Winston Wolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2007, 12:58 AM
  #24
snarktacular
Moderator
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,422
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winston Wolf View Post
Many teams, such as Washington, Edmonton, Buffalo, etc. "small market" teams. They can take the $6.3 million cap hit because they won't spend to the cap anyways, but still can afford to pay the actual lower salary.
But they'll likely only do it if they are making a playoff run. Why else would you want a 35 year old defenseman with declining skills (if his skills weren't declining he wouldn't be on the block)? And teams on playoff runs are normally near the cap limit, where 6.3 million wouldn't be so easy to swallow. And Buffalo was pretty much at the cap this year.

snarktacular is online now   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 05:50 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.