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.

Chi - SJ

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-16-2012, 09:49 PM
  #1
TurdFerguson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 883
vCash: 500
Chi - SJ

Actually just copy pasting a trade I thought up a while back and put on each team board, but now posting up on the main one for other fans to see now that I'm no longer a rookie user.

Chi gets: Pavelski

SJ gets: Bolland, Stalberg

In looking at the needs of both teams, Hawks need a 2nd line center who can win faceoffs. Also a bonus that he's a righty.

SJ needs a better 3rd line and gets arguably the best 3rd line shutdown center in the game. They also get Stalberg, who has the speed and size to chase down the puck in the corner. Not saying he's a legitimate 1st line winger, but he'd likely make his biggest impact with Thornton.

All of these players can score goals, Pavelski obviously being the best at it so far.

When I posted this before, I had a mixed reaction from both fan bases because both teams are giving up a core player. I would say I had (slightly) more negative responses from SJ fans. So if you believe there should be a + from Chicago's end, what should it be? My guess is an NHL ready prospect who could slot on a 3rd line wing (Ben Smith?).

TurdFerguson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 09:52 PM
  #2
Spitsfan67*
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurdFerguson View Post
Actually just copy pasting a trade I thought up a while back and put on each team board, but now posting up on the main one for other fans to see now that I'm no longer a rookie user.

Chi gets: Pavelski

SJ gets: Bolland, Stalberg

In looking at the needs of both teams, Hawks need a 2nd line center who can win faceoffs. Also a bonus that he's a righty.

SJ needs a better 3rd line and gets arguably the best 3rd line shutdown center in the game. They also get Stalberg, who has the speed and size to chase down the puck in the corner. Not saying he's a legitimate 1st line winger, but he'd likely make his biggest impact with Thornton.

All of these players can score goals, Pavelski obviously being the best at it so far.

When I posted this before, I had a mixed reaction from both fan bases because both teams are giving up a core player. I would say I had (slightly) more negative responses from SJ fans. So if you believe there should be a + from Chicago's end, what should it be? My guess is an NHL ready prospect who could slot on a 3rd line wing (Ben Smith?).
Good Proposal, helps Both teams!

Spitsfan67* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 10:05 PM
  #3
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,141
vCash: 500
No from San Jose. Only way Pavelski goes there is if we get Kane or Sharp coming back.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 10:06 PM
  #4
JS19
Four Kicks
 
JS19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Shark Tank
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,861
vCash: 500
Giving up a top-6 player for depth players? Isn't that something we don't want to do at all? No disrespect to Bolland, but I'm not going to give up a top-6 player for a third-liner.

JS19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 10:10 PM
  #5
Leafs For Life*
Nothing
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
No from San Jose. Only way Pavelski goes there is if we get Kane or Sharp coming back.
Ya. That'll happen.

Leafs For Life* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 10:28 PM
  #6
TurdFerguson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS19 View Post
Giving up a top-6 player for depth players? Isn't that something we don't want to do at all? No disrespect to Bolland, but I'm not going to give up a top-6 player for a third-liner.
Based on watching SJ games, I feel as though trading for depth is an avenue SJ should explore. The Sharks have 2 great lines, but can't trust anyone in their bottom 6 to play any kind of challenging minutes. This becomes a much bigger problem in away games when they can't get the match-ups they want.

TurdFerguson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 10:34 PM
  #7
Victorious Secret
Eyebrows Defcon 1
 
Victorious Secret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Arkansas
Country: Ireland
Posts: 11,817
vCash: 500
Not too bad of a deal from an outside team fan.

Victorious Secret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 10:34 PM
  #8
JS19
Four Kicks
 
JS19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Shark Tank
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurdFerguson View Post
Based on watching SJ games, I feel as though trading for depth is an avenue SJ should explore. The Sharks have 2 great lines, but can't trust anyone in their bottom 6 to play any kind of challenging minutes. This becomes a much bigger problem in away games when they can't get the match-ups they want.
It doesn't make sense at all to tear up 2 great lines to build a third line that we're not even sure is going to yield similar results. And you spoke of match-ups, an imbalanced top-6 is definitely something that opponents will take advantage of.

JS19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 10:45 PM
  #9
DKQ
Generic User Title
 
DKQ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Press Box
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,129
vCash: 500
As a neutral party, I'm not sure Chicago does this. They solve one problem (scoring depth) by creating another (an elite shutdown guy). Pavelski is also a good shutdown guy, but I don't think he's good enough to be the go-to defensive guy as well as a good secondary scoring provider

DKQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 10:53 PM
  #10
TurdFerguson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DropkickQuinn View Post
As a neutral party, I'm not sure Chicago does this. They solve one problem (scoring depth) by creating another (an elite shutdown guy). Pavelski is also a good shutdown guy, but I don't think he's good enough to be the go-to defensive guy as well as a good secondary scoring provider
Admittedly, it does create this problem for Chicago. As a result, pressure would be put on some of their young guys to step up. Kruger would have to step up as the third line center in the short term, and either him, Danault or McNeill would take that roll long term. Kruger played as 2C for parts of last year but....sucked. He's much more defensive oriented and could potentially become an elite 3C. Saad would be relied upon heavily to step up and replace Stalberg in the top 6.

TurdFerguson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 11:02 PM
  #11
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 500
Hmm seems pretty even. I think Bolland is too important for Chicago though to trade away.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 11:39 PM
  #12
thadd
Oil4Life
 
thadd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: China
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,665
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to thadd
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
No from San Jose. Only way Pavelski goes there is if we get Kane or Sharp coming back.
I think that's overvaluing little Joe. I know he pitches in big time in the playoffs, but he's still just a second line player. A damn fine one at that, but still a second line player.

Little Joe reminds me of Mule before he signed that long contract. His value to Wings fans and tons of Hfboards who were fans of other teams were unrealistically high.

thadd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 12:18 AM
  #13
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
What a funny proposal. Chicago theoretically deals away their quality depth forwards to stack their top 6, while San Jose deals away part of their stacked top 6 to add 2 quality depth forwards.

Some people will inevitably say it makes sense for both sides, but TBH I don't think it makes sense for either side.

StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 12:41 AM
  #14
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DropkickQuinn View Post
Pavelski is also a good shutdown guy, but I don't think he's good enough to be the go-to defensive guy as well as a good secondary scoring provider
Quote:
Originally Posted by thadd View Post
I think that's overvaluing little Joe. I know he pitches in big time in the playoffs, but he's still just a second line player. A damn fine one at that, but still a second line player.
He's a first-line winger no question and he's already the go-to guy defensively on the Sharks. Pavelski and Thornton face some of the toughest competition in the league yet still manage to put up great points and great possession numbers. Pavelski is also the best PKer on the team.
HF really undervalues Pavelski (hence why the majority of the people think Couture is better).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaffan16 View Post
Ya. That'll happen.
Obviously. So there is no trade that needs to be discussed here. The Sharks aren't going to move Pavelski for a 3rd line C (despite how good Bolland is) and a complementary piece that will be an UFA in a year.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 01:09 AM
  #15
DKQ
Generic User Title
 
DKQ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Press Box
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,129
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
He's a first-line winger no question and he's already the go-to guy defensively on the Sharks. Pavelski and Thornton face some of the toughest competition in the league yet still manage to put up great points and great possession numbers. Pavelski is also the best PKer on the team.
HF really undervalues Pavelski (hence why the majority of the people think Couture is better).



Obviously. So there is no trade that needs to be discussed here. The Sharks aren't going to move Pavelski for a 3rd line C (despite how good Bolland is) and a complementary piece that will be an UFA in a year.
I love Pavelski as a player, but having him carry a line as he would in Chicago (whereas in SJ he plays with a great center who takes some of the defensive pressure off due to the greater defensive responsibilities that come with being a C vs a wing) would result in either lower production due to him having to focus on defense, or poorer defensive play based on him having to carry a greater offensive burden (Hossa is about equivalent to Jumbo, but Saad is nowhere near Marleau/Couture/Clowe atm). Same reason why a lot of people think that Seguin should stay wing for a while, so he can continue to put up great numbers while Bergeron watches his back defensively a little.

DKQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 02:43 AM
  #16
crackerjack
Registered User
 
crackerjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 16
vCash: 500
As a Sharks fan I would definitely do this.

crackerjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 02:48 AM
  #17
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,970
vCash: 1379
No. If it were a better piece than Stalberg coming back or maybe a spec in addition, maybe, but I don't think dealing Pavelski is the answer. He's a better player than Couture.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 03:23 AM
  #18
PierreMcGuire*
How dissapointing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,750
vCash: 500
No from the Sharks, Bolland is a good player, but Pavelski is better, and Stalberg isn't nearly enough to make the difference between Pavelski and Bolland.

PierreMcGuire* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 04:36 AM
  #19
Dr Danglefest
Vindication
 
Dr Danglefest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beantown
Country: United States
Posts: 2,288
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DropkickQuinn View Post
As a neutral party, I'm not sure Chicago does this. They solve one problem (scoring depth) by creating another (an elite shutdown guy). Pavelski is also a good shutdown guy, but I don't think he's good enough to be the go-to defensive guy as well as a good secondary scoring provider
Like a Bergeron/Kesler ? Yeah I don't see him in that role either

Dr Danglefest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 06:23 AM
  #20
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,502
vCash: 500
fill a hole by creating 2 others?

that's too much for me. We have nobody to replace Stalberg and we´ve seen that Krüger can't replace what Bolland brings in the POs. This all to add more offense - something we don't really need this much.

and yes, Bollands D is better than Pavelskis D. I'd love to add Joe to the Hawks, just would want to keep Bolland.
Krüger/Pirri + Stalberg + GOOD value for Pavelski would make more sense for the Hawks

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 09:50 AM
  #21
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,621
vCash: 500
I think SJ would be about the same if not a tiny bit deeper and I think Chicago would be much better off.

The problem is that I think the market value for a legitimate top 6 center is worth much more than a couple good players like Bolland and Stalberg. I'm a Chicago fan but I would not make this trade if I was Wilson, ignoring the inter-conference issue that would kill the deal anyway.

I like all the players involved, but forwards that can play and stay on the top 2 lines are too difficult to replace and I think there would be a better bidder out there for Pavelski.

hockeydoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 09:59 AM
  #22
Leaf Rocket
Leaf Fan Till I Die
 
Leaf Rocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: India
Posts: 71,548
vCash: 500
I'd think the sharks want someone else than Stalberg but a very good proposal.

__________________
Leaf Rocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 10:38 AM
  #23
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DropkickQuinn View Post
I love Pavelski as a player, but having him carry a line as he would in Chicago (whereas in SJ he plays with a great center who takes some of the defensive pressure off due to the greater defensive responsibilities that come with being a C vs a wing) would result in either lower production due to him having to focus on defense, or poorer defensive play based on him having to carry a greater offensive burden (Hossa is about equivalent to Jumbo, but Saad is nowhere near Marleau/Couture/Clowe atm). Same reason why a lot of people think that Seguin should stay wing for a while, so he can continue to put up great numbers while Bergeron watches his back defensively a little.
Pavelski wouldn't be carrying his line in Chicago - he'd have at least one of Sharp, Kane, or Hossa on his wing (most likely one of the latter two, since they're both right wingers).

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 12:53 PM
  #24
Zippy316
Registered User
 
Zippy316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 4,224
vCash: 500
Value is even, neither side wants to give up the pieces proposed.

Next.

Zippy316 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 01:14 PM
  #25
DKQ
Generic User Title
 
DKQ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Press Box
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,129
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Pavelski wouldn't be carrying his line in Chicago - he'd have at least one of Sharp, Kane, or Hossa on his wing (most likely one of the latter two, since they're both right wingers).
Good centers always carry a line either offensively or defensively. Most important offensive position in hockey due to the necessary two-way pedigree

DKQ 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 01:24 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.