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
Notices

Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

Chicago-San Jose

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-03-2013, 08:58 AM
  #1
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,473
vCash: 50
Chicago-San Jose


Harri Sateri


Michael Frolik

Just a simple hockey deal. Sharks get someone for their third line, Hawks clear a little cap and get someone to compete for the backup job. With Greiss and Stalock, Sateri seems expendable to me.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 09:41 AM
  #2
Falco5
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 363
vCash: 500
With Sateri the youngest, it would probably be Greiss or Stalock that gets traded if anyone at all.

Falco5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 09:44 AM
  #3
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,987
vCash: 500
I don't see San Jose as eager to take on overpaid depth guys for prospects, depending on how far the cap comes down that is.


Last edited by StringerBell: 01-03-2013 at 09:52 AM.
StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 10:54 AM
  #4
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falco5 View Post
With Sateri the youngest, it would probably be Greiss or Stalock that gets traded if anyone at all.
What would we need to give in order to get Greiss?

Sevanston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 11:53 AM
  #5
CBJenga
Registered User
 
CBJenga's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
What would we need to give in order to get Greiss?
Honestly, it's probably less than to get Sateri/Stalock. Nothing that the org has done has shown any faith in Greiss, whereas they've heaped praise on both those prospects heavily and seem to think that one or the other is the heir-apparent.

EDIT: Specifically I think the org views it Stalock >~ Sateri >>> Greiss, but they want the first two to develop, and thus they're better off in the minors.

CBJenga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 12:07 PM
  #6
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,473
vCash: 50
Well, Greiss works out better for us anyway so sounds like a good deal. We just want a backup that can push Crawford and Greiss can be that guy.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 12:15 PM
  #7
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,383
vCash: 500
Greiss isn;t going to push Crawford anymore than Emery has, we need someone better than Greiss and Emery if we are keeping Crawford.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 12:26 PM
  #8
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,473
vCash: 50
Well, we disagree there. Greiss is a definite improvement to the backup spot, not the one we need necessarily, I agree with you there, but it is nonetheless an improvement and a guy who comes pretty cheap too. Then maybe we move Crawford and use the space we have after buyouts to sign Backstrom.

Backstrom
Greiss

That's a hell of an improvement to the goaltending situation.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 12:30 PM
  #9
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Greiss isn;t going to push Crawford anymore than Emery has, we need someone better than Greiss and Emery if we are keeping Crawford.
Greiss has been better than Emery over the last two years.

I don't really mind Emery, he's not a horrible backup. But Greiss is better. He's a decent upgrade for a low cost.

That said, I don't see any of the three being complete solutions to the starting goalie situation.

Sevanston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 12:44 PM
  #10
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 131,780
vCash: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Well, we disagree there. Greiss is a definite improvement to the backup spot, not the one we need necessarily, I agree with you there, but it is nonetheless an improvement and a guy who comes pretty cheap too. Then maybe we move Crawford and use the space we have after buyouts to sign Backstrom.

Backstrom
Greiss

That's a hell of an improvement to the goaltending situation.
Hawks cant afford a big $$$ goalie going forward with cap declining

Also simple fact is that we are stuck with Emery for this year (He is signed to 1 yr deal)

And if Hawks traded for a goalie I would imagine the Hawks would be looking for a more longterm solution (Bernier for example)

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 12:47 PM
  #11
Juxtaposer
Window: Closed
 
Juxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bay Area
Country: United States
Posts: 33,580
vCash: 50
I'd probably move Greiss for Frolik. I like Frolik, and I also think Stalock is ready for an NHL backup job.

Juxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 01:20 PM
  #12
DuckEatinShark
GET ALL THE PPs!!!!
 
DuckEatinShark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Jose
Posts: 6,065
vCash: 500
Greiss for Frolik, done.

Sateri for Frolik, I can live with that too.

It's time we trade our position of strength (goalie prospect pool) into something we can actually use. We can put Frolik on our 3rd line with Wingels and Galiardi.

DuckEatinShark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 02:17 PM
  #13
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
Greiss has been better than Emery over the last two years.

I don't really mind Emery, he's not a horrible backup. But Greiss is better. He's a decent upgrade for a low cost.

That said, I don't see any of the three being complete solutions to the starting goalie situation.
I'm not arguing that he's better, but not that much better that he will push Crawford anymore than Emery did. We need a big improvement, not a minor one.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 02:34 PM
  #14
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,473
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
I'm not arguing that he's better, but not that much better that he will push Crawford anymore than Emery did. We need a big improvement, not a minor one.
Agreed, but let's take the minor one while we look for a major one. Then if we have the problem of having too many quality goalies, we can start waiving / dealing them off. We are far from that right now though, hence why we should take what we can. We want to clear Frolik's cap, have a ton of forwards, weak on goaltending, San Jose is the exact opposite. Seems like a logical trade.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 04:48 PM
  #15
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Agreed, but let's take the minor one while we look for a major one. Then if we have the problem of having too many quality goalies, we can start waiving / dealing them off. We are far from that right now though, hence why we should take what we can. We want to clear Frolik's cap, have a ton of forwards, weak on goaltending, San Jose is the exact opposite. Seems like a logical trade.
I just dont see the point. Greiss will get us maybe 2 or 3 more wins a year, and if he's the starter in the playoffs, we are in as much trouble as we are with the other 2 goalies.

Burn it down at the end of this season and bring in a quality starter.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 05:35 PM
  #16
WTFetus
Moderator
Marlov
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 13,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
I'd probably move Greiss for Frolik. I like Frolik, and I also think Stalock is ready for an NHL backup job.
I would too. But as you've noted in the other topics, the Sharks aren't really in a position to add 2+ million in salary. Though I guess we can gauge the problem better when the new CBA comes out.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 11:30 PM
  #17
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 46,433
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
I just dont see the point. Greiss will get us maybe 2 or 3 more wins a year, and if he's the starter in the playoffs, we are in as much trouble as we are with the other 2 goalies.

Burn it down at the end of this season and bring in a quality starter.
I think if you put Greiss in with Crawford and give him opportunities to take the job, he eventually will and will flourish. He's got solid starter potential in him. He just needs to be given a real chance, imo.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 11:36 PM
  #18
WTFetus
Moderator
Marlov
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 13,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I think if you put Greiss in with Crawford and give him opportunities to take the job, he eventually will and will flourish.
What are you basing this on? Crawford already has two seasons under his belt of being a starter vs. Greiss' 0. He has just as good of a chance, if not better, of having a bounce back season.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 11:50 PM
  #19
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 46,433
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
What are you basing this on? Crawford already has two seasons under his belt of being a starter vs. Greiss' 0. He has just as good of a chance, if not better, of having a bounce back season.
Based on what I believe the ceilings are for both individuals and who would be better if given the same opportunities. I see more potential in Greiss than I do in Crawford but Greiss has to be in the right situation for him to realize that potential. I doubt it happens in San Jose with McLellan at the helm. He needs a coach more willing to give him chances now and again rather than falling back to riding the #1 guy every time regardless of the situation.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 11:54 PM
  #20
WTFetus
Moderator
Marlov
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 13,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Based on what I believe the ceilings are for both individuals and who would be better if given the same opportunities. I see more potential in Greiss than I do in Crawford but Greiss has to be in the right situation for him to realize that potential. I doubt it happens in San Jose with McLellan at the helm. He needs a coach more willing to give him chances now and again rather than falling back to riding the #1 guy every time regardless of the situation.
But that's your personal bias.
I know you like Greiss, and you probably haven't seen Crawford enough to compare their ceilings.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 12:16 AM
  #21
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 46,433
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
But that's your personal bias.
I know you like Greiss, and you probably haven't seen Crawford enough to compare their ceilings.
Uh...all of a sudden you know what I probably have or haven't seen? Look, I know it's not the most logical argument based on statistics but goalies at their age isn't really about that. If anything, there hasn't been enough of Greiss to see his ceilings considering his sporadic usage by his coaches that are doing him a disservice since he's earned more than he's gotten with them.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 12:34 AM
  #22
Any Colour You Like
Lose my worried mind
 
Any Colour You Like's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 6,971
vCash: 2293
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Well, we disagree there. Greiss is a definite improvement to the backup spot, not the one we need necessarily, I agree with you there, but it is nonetheless an improvement and a guy who comes pretty cheap too. Then maybe we move Crawford and use the space we have after buyouts to sign Backstrom.

Backstrom
Greiss

That's a hell of an improvement to the goaltending situation.
Greiss is OK but your burning hate for Emery undoubtedly plays the biggest factor into your statement here. COULD Greiss be an improvement? Absolutely. IS he a definite improvement over Emery? That's a bit of a stretch.

Any Colour You Like is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 01:04 AM
  #23
WTFetus
Moderator
Marlov
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 13,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Uh...all of a sudden you know what I probably have or haven't seen? Look, I know it's not the most logical argument based on statistics but goalies at their age isn't really about that. If anything, there hasn't been enough of Greiss to see his ceilings considering his sporadic usage by his coaches that are doing him a disservice since he's earned more than he's gotten with them.
Yeah, you probably haven't seen enough of Crawford. That's a pretty safe bet in my opinion.
All I'm saying is that you seem awfully sure of yourself with the "he eventually will and will flourish". Even you just said that there hasn't been enough of Greiss to see his ceiling, so how do you know he has a higher ceiling than Crawford? I'm just getting the facts straight before Blackhawks fans start calling you out for saying a goalie who played 38 games in the NHL will take the starting role from a goalie who was their starter for 2 seasons (and stood on his head in the 10-11 playoffs).

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:18 AM
  #24
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 46,433
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Yeah, you probably haven't seen enough of Crawford. That's a pretty safe bet in my opinion.
All I'm saying is that you seem awfully sure of yourself with the "he eventually will and will flourish". Even you just said that there hasn't been enough of Greiss to see his ceiling, so how do you know he has a higher ceiling than Crawford? I'm just getting the facts straight before Blackhawks fans start calling you out for saying a goalie who played 38 games in the NHL will take the starting role from a goalie who was their starter for 2 seasons (and stood on his head in the 10-11 playoffs).
Are you kidding me with this? I'm not the one using words like probably and safe bet when it comes to someone you don't even know. You conveniently left out that that line was preceded by "I think" rather than this assumptive garbage you've been putting out here over what I've seen.

Keep your baseless opinions about what anyone else that isn't you has seen to yourself because it is useless conjecture, and in this instance, is simply wrong.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 03:10 PM
  #25
WTFetus
Moderator
Marlov
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 13,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Are you kidding me with this? I'm not the one using words like probably and safe bet when it comes to someone you don't even know. You conveniently left out that that line was preceded by "I think" rather than this assumptive garbage you've been putting out here over what I've seen.

Keep your baseless opinions about what anyone else that isn't you has seen to yourself because it is useless conjecture, and in this instance, is simply wrong.
"I think" doesn't make it any less of a personal guarantee in this case. In your previous post, you said yourself that you haven't seen enough of Greiss to judge his ceiling. Again, if that's the case, how do you know Greiss has a higher ceiling than Crawford? Your personal bias is getting in the way, which honestly isn't a surprise. You're putting him on a pedestal and you're giving Crawford the short end of the straw.


Last edited by WTFetus: 01-04-2013 at 03:19 PM.
WTFetus 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 11:58 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.