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.

Dubinsky to MTL

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-04-2012, 05:09 PM
  #101
mytor4*
 
mytor4*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,175
vCash: 500
Actually i don't want Dubi .I mean who would he replace.He would end up plauing on our 3rd line.

mytor4* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 05:12 PM
  #102
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckface NYR View Post
You said it yourself, we are good enough to have a chance at this year's cup. Yet you continue to say that you would be ok with trading Dubinsky, our best LW for a pick. Not even a player who can replace him.

Just horrible. You'd think Rangers fans would finally be happy with a great team, but nope, some of them still want to ship out key pieces as if we are rebuilding. There is absolutely no rationale behind trading Dubinsky unless we are getting someone who can upgrade him or at the very least, replace what he brings.

None, zip, zilch, zippo.
If the Canadians actually put their 1st actually on the table, and demanded Dubinsky, and I could live with whatever else had to be put up now, if anything, or later, most likely, then yes, I'd let Dubinsky go.

Your win now at all costs, development be damned is the type of short sighted foolishness that would waste the oldest of our talent as we take 10 steps forward, 8 steps backward. We need a couple of more real assets to have enough depth to compete at the highest levels and dominate everybody else. Without that, we are just taking our chances.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 05:14 PM
  #103
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,411
vCash: 500
delete post


Last edited by bernmeister: 01-05-2012 at 10:49 AM. Reason: error
bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 05:25 PM
  #104
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsRock View Post
ok so just so I am clear.

for example lets say the deal was

Habs 1st for Player x + Player Y + Rangers 1st

His idea is to make the pick swap and just have a handshake deal that in the summer make the rest of the deal?



I see 2 MASSIVE problems with that.

1. Once The Habs give up the pick in the deal, what keeps NYR honest to give up the players in the summer?

2. What if Player x and Player y suffer massive career ending injuries playing for the Rangers in the POs??



Bold = an oversimplification, but that is one interpretation of the basic idea, one where even more should be due Montreal because they put their 1st actually at risk in the beginning, instead of doing it in stages.

I'm good either way that works as win win.

Underline;
1 = If Habs actually put up their first, not in stages, and Rangers are not giving up players (besides, say, Dubi) then they'd (NY would) have to give adequate picks and prospects.
2. = Either both sides agree to conditional risk in case of such injury, or not, and take their chances. Not a problem as to fairness if both sides on the same page.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 05:29 PM
  #105
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topdog View Post
Actually i don't want Dubi .I mean who would he replace.He would end up plauing on our 3rd line.
The OP suggested it.
I observed courtesy to respond in kind.

What I find more plausible is something like

something sending Dubi to Edmonton for something including Pajaarvi,
then MPS + Boyle + Rupp + Eminger + Stralman + X for Montreal 1st + Y.

That would give Habs some size and toughness you desperately want.
However, that's a lot of pieces to move now.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 05:29 PM
  #106
HankTheTankYoLo
Registered User
 
HankTheTankYoLo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topdog View Post
Actually i don't want Dubi .I mean who would he replace.He would end up plauing on our 3rd line.
I havent got any answer from you, you should name players from montreal that would improve rangers and why!

HankTheTankYoLo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 05:30 PM
  #107
HankTheTankYoLo
Registered User
 
HankTheTankYoLo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
The OP suggested it.
I observed courtesy to respond in kind.

What I find more plausible is something like

something sending Dubi to Edmonton for something including Pajaarvi,
then MPS + Boyle + Rupp + Eminger + Stralman + X for Montreal 1st + Y.

That would give Habs some size and toughness you desperately want.
However, that's a lot of pieces to move now.
No way rangers trade Rupp and Boyle, NYR loosing alot of toughness

HankTheTankYoLo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 05:44 PM
  #108
Clipitar
Registered User
 
Clipitar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
The OP suggested it.
I observed courtesy to respond in kind.

What I find more plausible is something like

something sending Dubi to Edmonton for something including Pajaarvi,
then MPS + Boyle + Rupp + Eminger + Stralman + X for Montreal 1st + Y.

That would give Habs some size and toughness you desperately want.
However, that's a lot of pieces to move now.
You know what Montreal desperately wants? To keep their 1st.

Clipitar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 08:20 PM
  #109
Mony01*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingAvtsin View Post
What would it take to land him in Montreal ?
Montreal doesnt have the parts even tho dubi isnt the greatest player lol

Mony01* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 11:11 PM
  #110
The Amity Affliction
Chasing Ghosts
 
The Amity Affliction's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 9,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topdog View Post
Some people have blinders on when putting a value on their own players .
They tend to take an average player and try to make him seem like a star.
No one is doing that, we're just not trading a player that's been playing very well lately and is under contract for a while at a reasonable price for what he can, and will put up in the future that fits this team like a glove unless it's for a SIGNIFICANT UPGRADE which Montreal CAN'T provide.

The guy who mentioned Pacioretty and Subban even acknowledged that the Rangers would have to add.

So instead of putting on your blinders, and reading selectively, how about taking a step back and actually analyzing the situation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
The OP suggested it.
I observed courtesy to respond in kind.

What I find more plausible is something like

something sending Dubi to Edmonton for something including Pajaarvi,
then MPS + Boyle + Rupp + Eminger + Stralman + X for Montreal 1st + Y.

That would give Habs some size and toughness you desperately want.
However, that's a lot of pieces to move now.
That's ridiculous. That's WAY TOO MANY pieces for a 1st round pick, and it depletes the depth of a team that's entering or is about to enter "Win Now" mode.

Neither of those deals help the Rangers, considering that MPS' value is at an all-time low right now.


Last edited by The Amity Affliction: 01-04-2012 at 11:12 PM. Reason: Grammar
The Amity Affliction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 12:36 AM
  #111
Clipitar
Registered User
 
Clipitar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldshot View Post
No one is doing that, we're just not trading a player that's been playing very well lately and is under contract for a while at a reasonable price for what he can, and will put up in the future that fits this team like a glove unless it's for a SIGNIFICANT UPGRADE which Montreal CAN'T provide.

The guy who mentioned Pacioretty and Subban even acknowledged that the Rangers would have to add.

So instead of putting on your blinders, and reading selectively, how about taking a step back and actually analyzing the situation?
They wouldn't have to add, they would have to start with someone else than Dubi.

Clipitar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 01:03 AM
  #112
ChrisKreider20
But y u mad?
 
ChrisKreider20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clipitar View Post
They wouldn't have to add, they would have to start with someone else than Dubi.
The premise of this thread is not what would NY need to offer to get Subban or MaxPac.
The premise is what would it take to get Dubinsky to MTL.
It would go down like this:

Gauthier: We want Dubinsky.
Sather: Give us Subban or Pacioretty & we can add a pick.
Gauthier: No.
Sather: We're done here. Click.

I'd also like to clarify for those who are saying Dubinsky isn't worth his contract, that is not true. He is a streaky scorer who will put up 45-65 points are a yearly basis (he is on pace to put up around 42 this year, but has been heating up), however, he is very good defensively, can PK, and also brings grit. He is worth his price.

ChrisKreider20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 01:51 AM
  #113
The Amity Affliction
Chasing Ghosts
 
The Amity Affliction's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 9,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clipitar View Post
They wouldn't have to add, they would have to start with someone else than Dubi.
This thread should just be closed, it's going nowhere.

The Rangers and Montreal just don't make sense as trade partners.

The Amity Affliction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 06:30 AM
  #114
Bacchus
Registered User
 
Bacchus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dickes B
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
The OP suggested it.
I observed courtesy to respond in kind.

What I find more plausible is something like

something sending Dubi to Edmonton for something including Pajaarvi,
then MPS + Boyle + Rupp + Eminger + Stralman + X for Montreal 1st + Y.

That would give Habs some size and toughness you desperately want.
However, that's a lot of pieces to move now.
That proposal is substracting FOUR players from our roster. For a pick. Do you really think this is a good idea?

Also, your assumption is that Montreal would part with their 1st for Dubinsky. They wouldn't. And rightfully so.

Bacchus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 11:06 AM
  #115
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldshot View Post
...
That's ridiculous. That's WAY TOO MANY pieces for a 1st round pick, and it depletes the depth of a team that's entering or is about to enter "Win Now" mode.

Neither of those deals help the Rangers, considering that MPS' value is at an all-time low right now.
1. Way too many pieces.
My bad for not being more redundant for the sake of being clearer.
Agree, it could be too much to pay for Montreal top pick, but (by extension)
Disagree, it's the [overpaid] price you have to fork over if you want that 1st, and all the potential that entails.

It's is prudent to question whether or not a serious blow should be paid to our win now effort for such a move, but unlike getting a rental, this payment
is a serious investment in the future. That aspect is what is being overly discounted, While such a move might cripple our run for the Cup this year, it could almost guarantee the Cup in 2-3 years.

Sure we could counter with trying this after the season, but then we would not have ideally Habs 1st or a strong lien against it, and if the Canadiens first is a lottery, there would be no chance to get it as the price would sky rocket.

2. MPS value at all time low. Yes, of course. I again acknowledge the technical error.
Original wording should have been more correct and precise:
"something sending Dubi **and X} to Edmonton for something including Pajaarvi **and Y}, "
that would have clarified it was not a 1 for 1, a bigger package with more going to Oilers but also us getting some bodies back.

Sorry, can't fix the '**'..........

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 11:11 AM
  #116
ChrisKreider20
But y u mad?
 
ChrisKreider20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
1. Way too many pieces.
My bad for not being more redundant for the sake of being clearer.
Agree, it could be too much to pay for Montreal top pick, but (by extension)
Disagree, it's the [overpaid] price you have to fork over if you want that 1st, and all the potential that entails.

It's is prudent to question whether or not a serious blow should be paid to our win now effort for such a move, but unlike getting a rental, this payment
is a serious investment in the future. That aspect is what is being overly discounted, While such a move might cripple our run for the Cup this year, it could almost guarantee the Cup in 2-3 years.

Sure we could counter with trying this after the season, but then we would not have ideally Habs 1st or a strong lien against it, and if the Canadiens first is a lottery, there would be no chance to get it as the price would sky rocket.

2. MPS value at all time low. Yes, of course. I again acknowledge the technical error.
Original wording should have been more correct and precise:
"something sending Dubi **and X} to Edmonton for something including Pajaarvi ** and Y}, "
that would have clarified it was not a 1 for 1, a bigger package with more going to Oilers but also us getting some bodies back.
You can never guarantee cup.
We have an amazing thing going right now. I don't want to trade for question marks right now. Who knows if Richards sustains an injury next year where he is never the same player again. If you're in first place you roll with it and add pieces that may help you. You don't trade those pieces for first round picks & underperforming previous first rounders. I have never seen such an amazing Rangers team, the work ethic is incredible and everyone buys in. This is something you don't mess with unless you are adding 1 very nice piece. TBH, I'd prefer we don't trade Dubinsky. All I really want to to do is trade a non-roster player, and maybe some picks for a nice rental that can cement aid us in our cup run. I don't really want to mess with the roster right now. Only guys I'd trade right now are Wolski & Christensen.

ChrisKreider20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 11:12 AM
  #117
Richiebottles
( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)
 
Richiebottles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 12,875
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Richiebottles
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRfan68 View Post
The premise of this thread is not what would NY need to offer to get Subban or MaxPac.
The premise is what would it take to get Dubinsky to MTL.
It would go down like this:

Gauthier: We want Dubinsky.
Sather: Give us Subban or Pacioretty & we can add a pick.
Gauthier: No.
Sather: We're done here. Click.

I'd also like to clarify for those who are saying Dubinsky isn't worth his contract, that is not true. He is a streaky scorer who will put up 45-65 points are a yearly basis (he is on pace to put up around 42 this year, but has been heating up), however, he is very good defensively, can PK, and also brings grit. He is worth his price.

Your phone does Click when you hang it up ?

Richiebottles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 11:15 AM
  #118
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacchus View Post
That proposal is substracting FOUR players from our roster. For a pick. Do you really think this is a good idea?

Also, your assumption is that Montreal would part with their 1st for Dubinsky. They wouldn't. And rightfully so.
Bold: reward-risk position discussed more fully in the post.
I understand it is trying to have our cake and eat it too.
I would lean towards some kind of downpayment that gives up one key player now for one corresponding first or a serious lien against that first. Then complete the deal after the season.

I reserve judgment on any variation of these approaches to actually see the actual proposal in final form before saying I agree or do not agree to it, or would suggest modification to it.

Underline: I didn't say anywhere that Dubi (and Dubi alone) = Montreal 1st.
I said in several variations Dubi (+ definitely something) = Montreal 1st (at minimum, depending upon the actual deal).

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 12:54 PM
  #119
Bacchus
Registered User
 
Bacchus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dickes B
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
While such a move might cripple our run for the Cup this year, it could almost guarantee the Cup in 2-3 years.
As others have pointed out, a 1st (even a high 1st) doesn't guarantee anything. Don't look any further then what the Rangers did on the 1999 draft...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
Underline: I didn't say anywhere that Dubi (and Dubi alone) = Montreal 1st.
I said in several variations Dubi (+ definitely something) = Montreal 1st (at minimum, depending upon the actual deal).
Sorry, I didn't word it properly. I doubt the bold as well. Dubinsky is not enough as the key part to Montreals 1st. That "definitely something" has to be. And it has to be something you don't wanna hear.


Last edited by Bacchus: 01-05-2012 at 01:03 PM.
Bacchus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 01:10 PM
  #120
iamitter
Thornton's Hen
 
iamitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
Bold: reward-risk position discussed more fully in the post.
I understand it is trying to have our cake and eat it too.
I would lean towards some kind of downpayment that gives up one key player now for one corresponding first or a serious lien against that first. Then complete the deal after the season.

I reserve judgment on any variation of these approaches to actually see the actual proposal in final form before saying I agree or do not agree to it, or would suggest modification to it.

Underline: I didn't say anywhere that Dubi (and Dubi alone) = Montreal 1st.
I said in several variations Dubi (+ definitely something) = Montreal 1st (at minimum, depending upon the actual deal).
You're subtracting 4 roster players for a 1st round pick. Half of all first rounders don't even make it to the NHL. That first rounder could not even make the NHL until 3 years from now, when our window is essentially closed.

iamitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 05:15 PM
  #121
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRfan68 View Post
You can never guarantee cup.
We have an amazing thing going right now. I don't want to trade for question marks right now. Who knows if Richards sustains an injury next year where he is never the same player again. If you're in first place you roll with it and add pieces that may help you. You don't trade those pieces for first round picks & underperforming previous first rounders. I have never seen such an amazing Rangers team, the work ethic is incredible and everyone buys in. This is something you don't mess with unless you are adding 1 very nice piece. TBH, I'd prefer we don't trade Dubinsky. All I really want to to do is trade a non-roster player, and maybe some picks for a nice rental that can cement aid us in our cup run. I don't really want to mess with the roster right now. Only guys I'd trade right now are Wolski & Christensen.
Bold = in fairness, my exact wording was:
"it could almost guarantee the Cup in 2-3 years"
Agreed = no guarantee.

Underline = I respect your position. While not suggesting you are close minded, I am a bit more flexible as to what develops.

If Sauer + acceptable assets = high first, I consider it.
If Dubi + acceptable assets = high first, I consider it.
One or two high firsts in a draft like this, with some of the kids we're adding in addition to guys like Hagelin who have made it already, that would be enough of a difference maker, IMO, to give us inside track at favorites for Cup in 2 years, while still having very strong showing + experience this year and next.

But it all depends upon what people want and when they want it.
No one will give us anything for Wolski/Christensen (except maybe as cap dumps).

We either run with the team we have --- a wholly respectable position --- or we invest in getting to that next FINAL level.

But let's not piss away any real assets for short term rentals for a little depth.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 05:20 PM
  #122
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacchus View Post
As others have pointed out, a 1st (even a high 1st) doesn't guarantee anything. Don't look any further then what the Rangers did on the 1999 draft...

Sorry, I didn't word it properly. I doubt the bold as well. Dubinsky is not enough as the key part to Montreals 1st. That "definitely something" has to be. And it has to be something you don't wanna hear. ;)
Bold = not fair or correct analogy. Not a given that Rangers will draft badly. Nothing certain here, but with the current braintrust and its track record, we are likely to draft better than in most other years under a less distinguished braintrust. But also, higher picks are worth more THIS year. But they are still just one player going to a team that is down, so the right package could work.

Underline: = no apology needed, just wanted to be clear and no confusion. As to what that price is, I expect we agree to disagree. Cheers all the same!

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 05:56 PM
  #123
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Cupcake schedule.
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SoutheastOfDisorder
Country: United States
Posts: 12,118
vCash: 50
The problem with these threads is that many times the player being traded which in this case is dubisky, is usually having an off year. So other fans expect him to come dirt cheap while home fans expect him to hold max value and neither are usually the case. Dubinsky is worth more then a 2 nd round pick but is not worth close to Subban.

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 09:31 PM
  #124
mytor4*
 
mytor4*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NvincentYvalentineR View Post
The problem with these threads is that many times the player being traded which in this case is dubisky, is usually having an off year. So other fans expect him to come dirt cheap while home fans expect him to hold max value and neither are usually the case. Dubinsky is worth more then a 2 nd round pick but is not worth close to Subban.
Totally agree.

mytor4* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2012, 09:24 AM
  #125
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,467
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
The OP suggested it.
I observed courtesy to respond in kind.

What I find more plausible is something like

something sending Dubi to Edmonton for something including Pajaarvi,
then MPS + Boyle + Rupp + Eminger + Stralman + X for Montreal 1st + Y.

That would give Habs some size and toughness you desperately want.
However, that's a lot of pieces to move now.
Gutting a team that's in first place? Interesting.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway 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 02:22 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.