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.

Your Young Future Top Defenseman To Philly

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-03-2012, 01:00 AM
  #76
TorontoTrades
Registered User
 
TorontoTrades's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TorontoTrades View Post
what would Philly want for Simmonds and Read package.

obviously the untouchables are: 5th overall, Kessel, Lupul, Gardiner, Phanuef (not by me but Burke wouldn't do it)

bump

TorontoTrades is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 01:24 AM
  #77
LordClaudeAlmighty28
I believe in G-sus
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Giroux-salem
Country: Israel
Posts: 163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TorontoTrades View Post
bump
2 firsts and a second. Each.

LordClaudeAlmighty28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 01:52 AM
  #78
CobraAcesS
Registered User
 
CobraAcesS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 4,070
vCash: 500
I might get smoked by my own fan base for this (Avs fans) but I would probably do..

Elliott + Siemens

for

JVR + 1st 2013

I ask for the first because at worst those two could become a dominant second pair. Siemens has top pairing potential with Elliott being a little more of a question because of his size. He does have the frame though at 6'1" just needs some weight only being listed at 180lbs. I read that Siemens is closer to 6'4" 200 now.

The 2013 draft maybe far off but it's suppose to be a fairly deep draft. So even with it probably being the 29th or 30th pick it would probably be worth it.

JVR really does fit a strong need we have for a top 6 RW to grow with the core of the team.

CobraAcesS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 01:57 AM
  #79
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,743
vCash: 50
Watch this get torn to shreds:

Something around Edler for Hartnell?

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 02:13 AM
  #80
vBurmi
Blue-Line Dekes
 
vBurmi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Greater Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,427
vCash: 5949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
Watch this get torn to shreds:

Something around Edler for Hartnell?
How am I supposed to hate Philly if they hypothetically trade away Hartnell, traded Richards, and possibly won't have Pronger anymore?

vBurmi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 02:21 AM
  #81
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,743
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by vBurmi View Post
How am I supposed to hate Philly if they hypothetically trade away Hartnell, traded Richards, and possibly won't have Pronger anymore?
Hate the Canucks instead, everyone else does

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 02:36 AM
  #82
exporta
Registered User
 
exporta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kulemon View Post
No thanks. No point in trading our 21 year old future number 1 D.
If Murray falls to us, and trading Gardiner means bringing in a long coveted centre I do that deal every day of the week.

Seemingly PHI isn't interested, but from a Leafs perspective he's on the table for Schenn or Couturier.

exporta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 07:34 AM
  #83
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CobraAcesS View Post
I might get smoked by my own fan base for this (Avs fans) but I would probably do..

Elliott + Siemens

for

JVR + 1st 2013

I ask for the first because at worst those two could become a dominant second pair. Siemens has top pairing potential with Elliott being a little more of a question because of his size. He does have the frame though at 6'1" just needs some weight only being listed at 180lbs. I read that Siemens is closer to 6'4" 200 now.

The 2013 draft maybe far off but it's suppose to be a fairly deep draft. So even with it probably being the 29th or 30th pick it would probably be worth it.

JVR really does fit a strong need we have for a top 6 RW to grow with the core of the team.
JVR is left-handed, and I believe has generally played on the left side (which I thought was Colorado's weakness--Landeskog plays the off wing, right? Everyone else (Jones, Mueller, Hejduk, etc.) are naturally right-sided players. (Forgive me if my NHL12 is showing).

On the proposed deal, it is really interesting. On the one hand, the Flyers were high on Siemens, and Elliott looks a promising piece; the deal would allow the Flyers to let Carle walk and preserve a nice balance between youth and veterans, while increasing short-term cap-space to replace JVR.

On the other hand, I'm not sure either is really in that "1D" mold--they probably project as good top-4 players--and Siemens might have top-pairing upside.

I'm not sure--which is more than I can say for most of the proposals.

Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 07:48 AM
  #84
Ivan13
Avs/Habs fan
 
Ivan13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 13,489
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
JVR is left-handed, and I believe has generally played on the left side (which I thought was Colorado's weakness--Landeskog plays the off wing, right? Everyone else (Jones, Mueller, Hejduk, etc.) are naturally right-sided players. (Forgive me if my NHL12 is showing).

On the proposed deal, it is really interesting. On the one hand, the Flyers were high on Siemens, and Elliott looks a promising piece; the deal would allow the Flyers to let Carle walk and preserve a nice balance between youth and veterans, while increasing short-term cap-space to replace JVR.

On the other hand, I'm not sure either is really in that "1D" mold--they probably project as good top-4 players--and Siemens might have top-pairing upside.

I'm not sure--which is more than I can say for most of the proposals.
I can assure you that the Avs would never do that trade. Siemens fills a big hole in their system, Elliot is going to be really good down the road in terms of offense from the back end while playing decent defensivly.

Siemens is big, mean shut down D-man, LH-shot (which is something Avs lack outside of him and Gaunce) and a terrific skater for his size.

I'd say Eliot has 50 point potential, he's a terrific skater, he has extremely high hockey IQ, he has the frame to bulk up physically and his wrister is just beautiful.






Ivan13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 07:56 AM
  #85
fedfed
Moderator
@FedFedRMNB
 
fedfed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow City
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 3,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlocky View Post
To Wash: Simmonds + Meszaros
To Phil: Mike Green (+ 2nd to even it out??)
I think it's a bad deal for the Caps. If you're trading for Mike Green, you better send a centerman back to Washington. You have plenty of them.

fedfed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 08:03 AM
  #86
thadd
Oil4Life
 
thadd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: China
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,059
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to thadd
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwedeSpeedBackstrom View Post
Schenn for Simmonds straight up sounds pretty fair.

No telling what kind of stability you'll have with two brothers on the same team. Luke and Brayden might want to be Flyers till they're 40.
Their style of play certainly matches the vintage Philly style.

thadd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 08:27 AM
  #87
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,326
vCash: 50
Just a question, why is Philly looking for a "future" top defenseman?

I can see the allure of wanting to get a defeneman to match up with the age's of Couturier, Schenn, JVR, Voracek, Simmons, Read, Wellwood, etc.

But I think that logic would apply mostly to a team that had young players and because of having a team of mostly young players wasn't competing for the cup.

But Philly is competing for the cup, even with all the young players they have.

So my question is, why would Philly be more interested in a defenseman who "could" be a top defenseman one day, as opposed to a defenseman (men), who "are" top defensemen now (in case Philly loses Pronger, Carle, and Kubina)?

Huffer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 08:37 AM
  #88
gabeliscious
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by exporta View Post
If Murray falls to us, and trading Gardiner means bringing in a long coveted centre I do that deal every day of the week.

Seemingly PHI isn't interested, but from a Leafs perspective he's on the table for Schenn or Couturier.
i agree in the general sense that if the proper center would be coming the other way gardiner would be in play. i think more specifically i would only put gardiner in play for b schenn, not for couturier. i think he is awsome but i feel like b schenn has a higher offensive ceiling.

i would be surprised if philly would even discuss moving either but for the sake of argument i think i would rather move gardiner now for a center who is the same age and level of devlopment. if burke is worried about missing his defenseman there are plenty great ones who will be available with the 5th overall.

next season.....


lupul bozak kessel
frattin grabs mac
kulemin schenn kadri
brown steckel armstrong
crabb

phaneuf gunnarson
liles schenn
komisarek franson
holzer

gabeliscious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 08:41 AM
  #89
NitHeel
Mucker/Grinder
 
NitHeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Reading, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
Just a question, why is Philly looking for a "future" top defenseman?

I can see the allure of wanting to get a defeneman to match up with the age's of Couturier, Schenn, JVR, Voracek, Simmons, Read, Wellwood, etc.

But I think that logic would apply mostly to a team that had young players and because of having a team of mostly young players wasn't competing for the cup.

But Philly is competing for the cup, even with all the young players they have.

So my question is, why would Philly be more interested in a defenseman who "could" be a top defenseman one day, as opposed to a defenseman (men), who "are" top defensemen now (in case Philly loses Pronger, Carle, and Kubina)?

Because the cost of an established #1 DMan would be through the roof, if one is even available. And with Timonen, Coburn, Meszaros and Grossmann all under contract for next year and Bourdon, Gustaffson able to fill out the bottom pair, the current core is able to absorb a guy who's NHL ready now, but potentially great in a couple years. Ryan Suter could change that of course, but I'm thinking there might be another team or two interested in him.

NitHeel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:01 AM
  #90
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,326
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by NitHeel View Post
Because the cost of an established #1 DMan would be through the roof, if one is even available. And with Timonen, Coburn, Meszaros and Grossmann all under contract for next year and Bourdon, Gustaffson able to fill out the bottom pair, the current core is able to absorb a guy who's NHL ready now, but potentially great in a couple years. Ryan Suter could change that of course, but I'm thinking there might be another team or two interested in him.
I don't know if that is entirely true. In Winnipeg's case, you might be able to get a guy like Enstrom if he wasn't looking to stay here. And the cost to acquire him while high, would be less than trying to get Bogosian.

I'm sure there must be similar examples on other teams.

Huffer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:07 AM
  #91
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabeliscious View Post
i agree in the general sense that if the proper center would be coming the other way gardiner would be in play. i think more specifically i would only put gardiner in play for b schenn, not for couturier. i think he is awsome but i feel like b schenn has a higher offensive ceiling.

i would be surprised if philly would even discuss moving either but for the sake of argument i think i would rather move gardiner now for a center who is the same age and level of devlopment. if burke is worried about missing his defenseman there are plenty great ones who will be available with the 5th overall.

next season.....


lupul bozak kessel
frattin grabs mac
kulemin schenn kadri
brown steckel armstrong
crabb

phaneuf gunnarson
liles schenn
komisarek franson
holzer
So you want to move our absolute BEST defensive prospect/young player for a #3C? Meant to be sarcastic!!


Last edited by Liferleafer: 05-03-2012 at 09:15 AM.
Liferleafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:10 AM
  #92
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,296
vCash: 500
Delete


Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 05-03-2012 at 09:18 AM.
Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:13 AM
  #93
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
Why would his team have anything to do with it?

I never said that either Kulikov or Gudbranson are "sure-fire" 1Ds, but I think that both are better positioned to develop into that (or something close to that) than Gardiner.

I like Gardiner--I just think he's more likely to top-out as a good second pairing defenseman on a playoff caliber team. I'm not completely sold on his ability to shut down an opposing team's top line, which is an important part of the "1D" package, IMO.

On the flip-side, Gudbranson is well-positioned to contribute at a high level at both ends of the ice, while also bringing superior physicality, etc.

Kulikov is the most rounded of the three, but perhaps doesn't have elite potential at either end of the ice. He might be the least likely to reach "franchise cornerstone" status, but the safest bet to play top-pairing minutes for the next decade.

If Gudbranson never develops an elite offensive game, he's Braydon Coburn. If Gardiner never develops a superior defensive game, he's Matt Carle (albiet with a better shot). Ask Flyers fans who is more valuable.

I know you probably didn't watch many Leaf games, but if you had, you would understand why i totally disagree. While playing 75 games as a ROOKIE, he got 30 points averaging 20+ minmutes a game, killed penalties and played against top lines. He ended the season a -2 which on a team that was horrid in defence makes him a dam sight better than a "possible" Matt Carle.

Liferleafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:13 AM
  #94
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan13 View Post
I can assure you that the Avs would never do that trade. Siemens fills a big hole in their system, Elliot is going to be really good down the road in terms of offense from the back end while playing decent defensivly.

Siemens is big, mean shut down D-man, LH-shot (which is something Avs lack outside of him and Gaunce) and a terrific skater for his size.

I'd say Eliot has 50 point potential, he's a terrific skater, he has extremely high hockey IQ, he has the frame to bulk up physically and his wrister is just beautiful.
Ironically, this is almost an exact description of what the Flyers don't need--see Coburn, Grossmann--and given his value to Colorado, his inclusion might not make sense.

Perhaps something more focused on Elliott? Again, he doesn't necessarily fit the bill as the future top defenseman, but he fills several needs (offensive, puck mover, PP specialist, RH shot).

I don't know about JVR for Elliott--I think that Colorado would have to add quite a bit. Perhaps another wing from Philadelphia? Simmonds, Voracek, Read, etc.?

Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:14 AM
  #95
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
...Schenn projects higher than Bozak, so I suppose that makes him a 1C?

Couturier is currently centering the Flyers 4th line--does that make him a 4C?
After i posted, i noticed i forgot the sarcasm face. Wasn't trying to be a doosh. More making fun of the leaf fan man crush on Schenn.

Liferleafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:17 AM
  #96
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
I know you probably didn't watch many Leaf games, but if you had, you would understand why i totally disagree. While playing 75 games as a ROOKIE, he got 30 points averaging 20+ minmutes a game, killed penalties and played against top lines. He ended the season a -2 which on a team that was horrid in defence makes him a dam sight better than a "possible" Matt Carle.

GP G A P +/-
77 11 31 42 9

75 7 23 30 -2


(One of those is Matt Carle's stat-line as a 21 year-old rookie; the other is Jake Gardiner's stat line as a 21 year-old rookie).

I'm not saying he won't be better than Carle--but the comparison really, really isn't that absurd.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
After i posted, i noticed i forgot the sarcasm face. Wasn't trying to be a doosh. More making fun of the leaf fan man crush on Schenn.
Makes sense. Edited my post for deletion.

Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:22 AM
  #97
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
GP G A P +/-
77 11 31 42 9

75 7 23 30 -2


(One of those is Matt Carle's stat-line as a 21 year-old rookie; the other is Jake Gardiner's stat line as a 21 year-old rookie).

I'm not saying he won't be better than Carle--but the comparison really, really isn't that absurd.





Makes sense. Edited my post for deletion.
Not that i want to argue, but that was on a team that finished with 107 points and second in the west (i believe). Not really the same as the Leafs of this past season.

Liferleafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:26 AM
  #98
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Not that i want to argue, but that was on a team that finished with 107 points and second in the west (i believe). Not really the same as the Leafs of this pat season.
I know--and that obviously explains the gap in +/-. On the other hand, Carle was competing for ice time on a better team as well, so it works both ways.

Again, please don't get me wrong, I think Matt Carle is a very valuable piece. He looked spectacular when paired with Pronger at times, and he's an asset any team would like to have (at the proper price, in the proper role, etc.) However no one would confuse him with a franchise defenseman.

Who would you compare Jake Gardiner to at this point, in terms of his potential / projection?

Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:38 AM
  #99
Ivan13
Avs/Habs fan
 
Ivan13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 13,489
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
Ironically, this is almost an exact description of what the Flyers don't need--see Coburn, Grossmann--and given his value to Colorado, his inclusion might not make sense.

Perhaps something more focused on Elliott? Again, he doesn't necessarily fit the bill as the future top defenseman, but he fills several needs (offensive, puck mover, PP specialist, RH shot).

I don't know about JVR for Elliott--I think that Colorado would have to add quite a bit. Perhaps another wing from Philadelphia? Simmonds, Voracek, Read, etc.?
Elliot might turn out as #2 in the future and I would say he's a lock for a top 4 unit in the NHL. He has the IQ and size to play on the top pairing as the primary puck carrier. He isn't a guy that likes to use his body and he doesn't initiate contact, but he also isn't a pushover when it comes to puck battles. His main attributes when it comes to play in his own zone are his ability to read plays, positioning and speed. He needs to gain experiance to adjust to the speed of the pro game (and in the end the speed of the NHL) in the coming season(s). He was comapred to Tomas Kaberle by the late EJ McGuire before he was drafted and some comapared him to Mike Green when it comes to offensive play, he isn't just some ordinary run of the mill PMD prospect.

If you ask me trading him would be a massive mistake on Colorado's part given his value ATM and his potential ceiling and I wouldn't be interested in trading him.

I also find it hard to believe that Flyers fan value JVR more than Voracek.

Ivan13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:39 AM
  #100
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
I know--and that obviously explains the gap in +/-. On the other hand, Carle was competing for ice time on a better team as well, so it works both ways.

Again, please don't get me wrong, I think Matt Carle is a very valuable piece. He looked spectacular when paired with Pronger at times, and he's an asset any team would like to have (at the proper price, in the proper role, etc.) However no one would confuse him with a franchise defenseman.

Who would you compare Jake Gardiner to at this point, in terms of his potential / projection?
I hate trying to compare, i can't remember which broadcaster said it so i can't post any link, but they said he reminded them of a young Niedermeyer. That is EXTREMELY lofty in my opinion (although i would be thrilled). Lets just say this, his offensive game didn't really show up until after about 35-40 games and he is not really physical but is a VERY intelligent PMD. He seems to have great patience and good under pressure. Do i think he'll be top pairing eventually?? Maybe, depending on his partner. I think he has the capability to become a consistant 50+ point guy while being very good on defence.

Liferleafer 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 03:25 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.