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.

Gaborik Available; Canucks interested (Per HNIC)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-17-2013, 11:54 PM
  #251
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,323
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
Sure. Whatever you say.

42 goals is a waste of money now.
He had 42 goals then 22 then 41 now 8 on pace for 24 goals in an 82 game season. That's a 32 goal average over his time with rangers. Do you honestly believe a player this inconsistent is worth 7.5 million?

Numbers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2013, 11:58 PM
  #252
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,323
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwayry View Post
So many things factually wrong with this post.
Gaborik will not be waived, you are confused.
And out of curiosity, Of the 2 teams who do you think has more cap problems?
Hint, Rangers can fit Gaborik, Richards and Nash's salaries next season without any issues.
Never said he would get waived, just said it would be bad for Cnucks next season to pick him up fr free. Regardless who you think has more cap problems the Rangers have 4 players being paid over 6.5 million. That's crazy how top heavy their salary structure is. Oh well it's hard to explain this to Ranger fans because you guys have been doing this for decades and everyone always is excited when a big name player comes no matter the cost.

Numbers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2013, 11:59 PM
  #253
Lord Flacko*
Down to let it go
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
lol.

The Canucks are paying over 9mil for two goalies. They're paying 4mil for a bottom pair d-man in Ballard and 4.2mil for an enigmatic David Booth. If anything, I question the Canucks roster buildup more than the Rangers. A lot more deadweight capspace. Especially with little to no young players on ELC contributing now. (Tanev on bottom pair is the lone exception)

The Canucks window to compete imo is >2 yrs. Adding a Gaborik helps their lack of secondary scoring.
The Canucks could easily buy out Ballard and Booth. We have both our buyouts remaining. That's 8.25m right there. If we trade Schneider, that's 12.25m in total. If we trade Luongo instead, that's about 13.8m gone. The Canucks salary problems are nowhere close to the Rangers. The Canucks have 2 overpaid players and 2 buyouts remaining. The Rangers have 3 overpaid players and 1 buyout. And the difference between the Canucks and the Rangers is that the Canucks overpaid players are minor pieces that could easily be replaced. Our core (Sedins, Kesler, Edler, Hamhuis, Schneider/Lu) have taken discounts to stay here. The same can't be said about the Rangers..

And atleast we have a window to compete..

Lord Flacko* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 12:00 AM
  #254
Virtanev
★★★
 
Virtanev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 39,824
vCash: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
lol.

The Canucks are paying over 9mil for two goalies. They're paying 4mil for a bottom pair d-man in Ballard and 4.2mil for an enigmatic David Booth. If anything, I question the Canucks roster buildup more than the Rangers. A lot more deadweight capspace. Especially with little to no young players on ELC contributing now. (Tanev on bottom pair is the lone exception)

The Canucks window to compete imo is >2 yrs. Adding a Gaborik helps their lack of secondary scoring.
Wow the irony of a Rangers fan talking about "bad contracts" a team which signed Chris Drury, Scott Gomez and Wade Reddan the 3 worst post lockout signings in the league. Booth despite not being productive actually played quite well so far looking at the UFA list last year most of the players who signed for around 4 million are similar to Booth. Ballard is being treated terribly in Van, he's having his best season as a Canuck was one of the Canucks top D-Man yet AV still plays Andrew Alberts over him. I feel bad for the guy, seems to not do anything right in AV's book with a new coach, I could see that doing wonders to Ballard's game. No point in arguing about the goalies because me and you both know they're much more than "dead weight"

Virtanev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 12:04 AM
  #255
Lord Flacko*
Down to let it go
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,399
vCash: 500
17.2m for the Sedins and Kesler or 22m for Nash, Gaborik and B. Richards? I know who I would take.

Lord Flacko* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 12:07 AM
  #256
Net Front Presence
Harvester of Sorrow
 
Net Front Presence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 6,129
vCash: 1230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
He had 42 goals then 22 then 41 now 8 on pace for 24 goals in an 82 game season. That's a 32 goal average over his time with rangers. Do you honestly believe a player this inconsistent is worth 7.5 million?
.46 Goals per game over his time with the Rangers. That's 38 goals over 82 games. How many other players have an average like that?

And he's only had 1 significant injury during his time there, for which he missed 20 games in 10-11. It's pretty safe to say he would have scored at least 30 goals during that season if he played those games, so he's not as inconsistent as you're saying.

Net Front Presence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 12:09 AM
  #257
wunderpanda
sabre of damocles
 
wunderpanda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,170
vCash: 500
No offense to Gaborik fans, but he does seem like a risky guy to give up much for. He has a history of groin injuries before the Rangers, hip surgery and his shoulder issues the last couple seasons. He makes 7.5 million next season and has been called streaky and lazy while playing on the 3rd line or left wing.

Seems like a spare part salary dump if the Rangers are trying to move him.

wunderpanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 12:31 AM
  #258
DingoAteMyBaby
Registered User
 
DingoAteMyBaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Flacko View Post
17.2m for the Sedins and Kesler or 22m for Nash, Gaborik and B. Richards? I know who I would take.
Nash, Gaborik and Richards obviously.

DingoAteMyBaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 12:33 AM
  #259
Kwayry
Registered User
 
Kwayry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Plano
Country: United States
Posts: 2,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wunderpanda View Post
No offense to Gaborik fans, but he does seem like a risky guy to give up much for. He has a history of groin injuries before the Rangers, hip surgery and his shoulder issues the last couple seasons. He makes 7.5 million next season and has been called streaky and lazy while playing on the 3rd line or left wing.

Seems like a spare part salary dump if the Rangers are trying to move him.
Links?

Kwayry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 12:41 AM
  #260
wunderpanda
sabre of damocles
 
wunderpanda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,170
vCash: 500
I said IF the Rangers are trying to move him, and check the Rangers boards for lazy and streaky comments. Maybe the Gaborik for an airline sandwich thread.

wunderpanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 12:46 AM
  #261
Kwayry
Registered User
 
Kwayry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Plano
Country: United States
Posts: 2,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wunderpanda View Post
I said IF the Rangers are trying to move him, and check the Rangers boards for lazy and streaky comments. Maybe the Gaborik for an airline sandwich thread.
Then your post is invalid if the Ranger are NOT trying to move him.

And since you are referring to HF boards for objective analysis, your credibility just took a big hit.

Kwayry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:20 AM
  #262
DevilChuk*
(not that -chuk)
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 7,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Net Front Presence View Post
.46 Goals per game over his time with the Rangers. That's 38 goals over 82 games. How many other players have an average like that?

And he's only had 1 significant injury during his time there, for which he missed 20 games in 10-11. It's pretty safe to say he would have scored at least 30 goals during that season if he played those games, so he's not as inconsistent as you're saying.
Well.. he did tear his labrum last year and if it were not for the lockout, would've missed roughly 40 games..

so... 2 significant injuries..

just saying

DevilChuk* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:24 AM
  #263
GranvilleIsland
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Gaborik still plays hockey? Thought he was just sticking around to collect his pay cheques... Canucks need consistent secondary offense after the Sedins. Gaborik supplies inconsistent elite offense. We all know Gaborik is an amazing offensive player but giving up on Kesler after a couple injuries would be worse then the Rangers giving up on Gaborik now (if there's any truth to the trade rumours). Since Kesler is the heart and soul that drives the Canucks when he is a at his best...

GranvilleIsland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:27 AM
  #264
knoxdown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Flacko View Post
17.2m for the Sedins and Kesler or 22m for Nash, Gaborik and B. Richards? I know who I would take.
Or even better. Sedin, Sedin, Kesler, Burrows for 21.7M Next year.

knoxdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:33 AM
  #265
Vankiller Whale
Bow down
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,037
vCash: 1666
Man, I don't know why everyone is so down on Gaborik.

He's streaky, but he's still a great player, and if Gillis said he had zero interest in adding him, I would question whether he's fit to be GM.

Of course Gaborik will garner a high return, and I wouldn't mind if it's the Canucks who provide it, if the pieces are right.

Vankiller Whale is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:40 AM
  #266
Linden
[hello] :)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 49,284
vCash: 50
I would love to get Gaborik, he's an amazing player, just dont see it in the cards for the Canucks atm.

Linden is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:40 AM
  #267
knoxdown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 229
vCash: 500
Agreed. As a Canuck's fan I would love him on this team. With him on the roster Burrows and Kesler can be reunited.

Sedin-Sedin-Gaborik
Burrows TRADE-Kesler (in my ideal world he would play wing)


The only thing is what would go back in the deal. Personally I see Higgins/Lapierre/Raymond/Hansen as pieces that need to stick around for a cup run leaving very little to trade with. Ballard is not an attractive trade piece. Maybe Edler could be enticing though. As much as I would hate to lose him maybe:

Edler + Kassian

Gaborik+3rd

knoxdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:42 AM
  #268
keslerburrows
Registered User
 
keslerburrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vernon, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by knoxdown View Post
Agreed. As a Canuck's fan I would love him on this team. With him on the roster Burrows and Kesler can be reunited.

Sedin-Sedin-Gaborik
Burrows TRADE-Kesler (in my ideal world he would play wing)


The only thing is what would go back in the deal. Personally I see Higgins/Lapierre/Raymond/Hansen as pieces that need to stick around for a cup run leaving very little to trade with. Ballard is not an attractive trade piece. Maybe Edler could be enticing though. As much as I would hate to lose him maybe:

Edler + Kassian

Gaborik+3rd
No... Just no.

keslerburrows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:45 AM
  #269
Linden
[hello] :)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 49,284
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by gordie View Post
Aren't the Canucks soft enough already?
We definitely were when we went on our run to the finals, but we have made significant strides into becoming a bigger and tougher team. We lost guys like Samuelsson, Ehrhoff, and Hodgson and replaced them with Booth, Kassian, and Garrison. We have also been drafting a lot bigger and tougher which is reflected in our prospect pool. Not saying we are a really tough team, but we arent near as soft as we once were.

Linden is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:48 AM
  #270
BoHorvatFan
Registered User
 
BoHorvatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
lol.

The Canucks are paying over 9mil for two goalies. They're paying 4mil for a bottom pair d-man in Ballard and 4.2mil for an enigmatic David Booth. If anything, I question the Canucks roster buildup more than the Rangers. A lot more deadweight capspace. Especially with little to no young players on ELC contributing now. (Tanev on bottom pair is the lone exception)

The Canucks window to compete imo is >2 yrs. Adding a Gaborik helps their lack of secondary scoring.
You are a very astute fan my friend, I completely agree. Canucks don't need another higgins or raymond they need a legit first line player like Gaborik, a pure scorer. He'd be perfect IMO but the cap hit is huge. Obviously we can lose Booth and Ballard and be the same as we are now so we could always dump that dead weight, and a goalie, like you said we have over 12 million dollars in basically dead cap space, completely wasted by out overrated GM.

BoHorvatFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:50 AM
  #271
BoHorvatFan
Registered User
 
BoHorvatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by live playoff hockey View Post
We definitely were when we went on our run to the finals, but we have made significant strides into becoming a bigger and tougher team. We lost guys like Samuelsson, Ehrhoff, and Hodgson and replaced them with Booth, Kassian, and Garrison. We have also been drafting a lot bigger and tougher which is reflected in our prospect pool. Not saying we are a really tough team, but we arent near as soft as we once were.
We have made significant strides to becoming a much worse, less skilled hockey team that needs a big move, a big boost to avoid another early exit like last year, that is of course providing we actually make the playoffs.

BoHorvatFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 01:56 AM
  #272
Linden
[hello] :)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 49,284
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by NugentHopkinsfan View Post
We have made significant strides to becoming a much worse, less skilled hockey team that needs a big move, a big boost to avoid another early exit like last year, that is of course providing we actually make the playoffs.
you missed the point entirely, the person I quoted commented on our toughness, not our skill. I provided instances where we rplaced some softer players for tougher player. I agree that we have gotten worse because of it, but you cannot deny that we have gotten tougher. I think the intent of the person I had previously quoted was to question if the Canucks could handle a soft player while assuming that we were already very soft. I believe we do have the size and toughness to handle another soft player, I just dont see us getting Gaborik because I think other teams will pretty easily outbid us. The only players we have that would be a main piece would be Kesler or Kassian +1st and I for one don't feel like giving up that much of our future. The team with arguably the worst prospect pool doesnt trade first rounders and young players, that's beyond idiotic

Linden is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 02:12 AM
  #273
Virtanev
★★★
 
Virtanev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 39,824
vCash: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by warmplate View Post
Nash, Gaborik and Richards obviously.
Okay you do that. We'll take the two players with Art Ross trophies and the other one who's won a Selke. Wow what a joke.

Virtanev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 02:15 AM
  #274
Virtanev
★★★
 
Virtanev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 39,824
vCash: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by knoxdown View Post
Agreed. As a Canuck's fan I would love him on this team. With him on the roster Burrows and Kesler can be reunited.

Sedin-Sedin-Gaborik
Burrows TRADE-Kesler (in my ideal world he would play wing)


The only thing is what would go back in the deal. Personally I see Higgins/Lapierre/Raymond/Hansen as pieces that need to stick around for a cup run leaving very little to trade with. Ballard is not an attractive trade piece. Maybe Edler could be enticing though. As much as I would hate to lose him maybe:

Edler + Kassian

Gaborik+3rd
Wouldn't move Edler straight up for Gabo. TBH I wouldn't even move Edler for Gabo+ so adding Kassian is just insulting.

Virtanev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 02:16 AM
  #275
BoHorvatFan
Registered User
 
BoHorvatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by live playoff hockey View Post
you missed the point entirely, the person I quoted commented on our toughness, not our skill. I provided instances where we rplaced some softer players for tougher player. I agree that we have gotten worse because of it, but you cannot deny that we have gotten tougher. I think the intent of the person I had previously quoted was to question if the Canucks could handle a soft player while assuming that we were already very soft. I believe we do have the size and toughness to handle another soft player, I just dont see us getting Gaborik because I think other teams will pretty easily outbid us. The only players we have that would be a main piece would be Kesler or Kassian +1st and I for one don't feel like giving up that much of our future. The team with arguably the worst prospect pool doesnt trade first rounders and young players, that's beyond idiotic
Well they shouldn't even be mentioning toughness, it doesn't even matter.

But you are right we are tougher now but not as successful.

BoHorvatFan 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 03:53 PM.

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.