HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Alex Edler

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-17-2013, 12:55 PM
  #251
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,791
vCash: 500
To people who argue Gillis won't move Edler before his NTC kicks in, solve me this logic puzzle:

1. Gillis has promised to "reset the organization" and "re-invent ourselves". This suggests more significant changes than have been made in the past 5 years. While this could refer exclusively to a coaching change, that would be a fairly weak interpretation of "resetting" and "re-inventing". A more moderate interpretation is that there will be some change to the core, specifically the top 6 forwards and/or top 4 defense.

2. Players with NTCs include Sedins, Kesler, Bieksa, Hamhuis, and Garrison. This leaves Kassian and Booth as top 6 forwards (?) and Edler as a top 4 defenseman without an active NTC.

3. Weak UFA crop and declining cap suggest a limited ability to re-invent or reset the team through that avenue. There are few legitimate top 6 forwards or top 4 D available that route, nor do we have much in the way of cap room - even after dumping Booth/Ballard/Luongo - to be adding one of the few top end guys (i.e. Horton).

So given the stated intent to make meaningful changes to the team, and given the limited options to trade most of our core due to NTCs or add significant pieces via UFA, how likely is it that Edler is considered completely off the table by Gillis due to the points raised above (recent signing, left money on table, NTC to kick in)?

While it may be uncomfortable, I don't see how Gillis has any other option to do what he stated his intentions should he not explore moving players like Edler or perhaps players who have active NTCs (Bieksa?). There simply aren't any other moves available - that I can see anyway - that can meet the goals of a reset/reinvention. Does that mean dumping him off to Florida or Columbus? No, I believe he could have a discussion with Edler and understand what teams he would be amenable to go to without destroying the goodwill of Edler and future players. Players by and large understand hockey is a business, and as long as you treat them respectfully and honestly, I don't think are necessarily "offended" by attempts to move them in the best interests of the team.

CanaFan is online now  
Old
05-17-2013, 01:01 PM
  #252
Alan Jackson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
While it may be uncomfortable, I don't see how Gillis has any other option to do what he stated his intentions should he not explore moving players like Edler or perhaps players who have active NTCs (Bieksa?). There simply aren't any other moves available - that I can see anyway - that can meet the goals of a reset/reinvention.
I agree with you, but Gillis' definition of "reset" may be different than yours or mine.

He claims he "reset" the organization 5 years ago, but what did he do, really? He kept Vigneault, kept the scouting staff, he kept most of the core group of players.

Hiring a couple of assistant coaches and claiming Kyle Wellwood off of waivers doesn't really fit my definition of a reset, but who knows?

Alan Jackson is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 01:04 PM
  #253
luongo321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 9,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
To people who argue Gillis won't move Edler before his NTC kicks in, solve me this logic puzzle:

1. Gillis has promised to "reset the organization" and "re-invent ourselves". This suggests more significant changes than have been made in the past 5 years. While this could refer exclusively to a coaching change, that would be a fairly weak interpretation of "resetting" and "re-inventing". A more moderate interpretation is that there will be some change to the core, specifically the top 6 forwards and/or top 4 defense.

2. Players with NTCs include Sedins, Kesler, Bieksa, Hamhuis, and Garrison. This leaves Kassian and Booth as top 6 forwards (?) and Edler as a top 4 defenseman without an active NTC.

3. Weak UFA crop and declining cap suggest a limited ability to re-invent or reset the team through that avenue. There are few legitimate top 6 forwards or top 4 D available that route, nor do we have much in the way of cap room - even after dumping Booth/Ballard/Luongo - to be adding one of the few top end guys (i.e. Horton).

So given the stated intent to make meaningful changes to the team, and given the limited options to trade most of our core due to NTCs or add significant pieces via UFA, how likely is it that Edler is considered completely off the table by Gillis due to the points raised above (recent signing, left money on table, NTC to kick in)?

While it may be uncomfortable, I don't see how Gillis has any other option to do what he stated his intentions should he not explore moving players like Edler or perhaps players who have active NTCs (Bieksa?). There simply aren't any other moves available - that I can see anyway - that can meet the goals of a reset/reinvention. Does that mean dumping him off to Florida or Columbus? No, I believe he could have a discussion with Edler and understand what teams he would be amenable to go to without destroying the goodwill of Edler and future players. Players by and large understand hockey is a business, and as long as you treat them respectfully and honestly, I don't think are necessarily "offended" by attempts to move them in the best interests of the team.
Gillis is all talk. He'll Fire AV, get rid of raymond, trade luongo, get rid of ballard and maybe booth. He will talk like these are massive moves, but they all could have been done for the last year. Trading one of our goalies is a big move, but it was going to happen sooner or later.

luongo321 is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 01:06 PM
  #254
Wheatley
We Rabite You
 
Wheatley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,230
vCash: 500
Watching Ottawa play this year, and Karlsson in particular, you can really see how far Edler still has to go before ever being this "perennial Norris Trophy candidate" so many here hope that he'll be.

No matter how hard you look watch Karlsson, looking for mistakes, you'll be hard pressed to find any. With Edler, sometimes it seems like he's making some boneheaded play every other shift.

Wheatley is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 01:07 PM
  #255
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Jackson View Post
I agree with you, but Gillis' definition of "reset" may be different than yours or mine.

He claims he "reset" the organization 5 years ago, but what did he do, really? He kept Vigneault, kept the scouting staff, he kept most of the core group of players.

Hiring a couple of assistant coaches and claiming Kyle Wellwood off of waivers doesn't really fit my definition of a reset, but who knows?
Quote:
Originally Posted by luongo321 View Post
Gillis is all talk. He'll Fire AV, get rid of raymond, trade luongo, get rid of ballard and maybe booth. He will talk like these are massive moves, but they all could have been done for the last year.

I understand this is a possibility - it is my biggest fear actually - and so I've based the argument on taking Gillis at face value. If he wants to make meaningful changes, then I believe he has to at least *look* at Edler, despite the potential ramifications that many posters have discussed. If he handles it right, I don't believe it will necessarily be viewed as a negative.

Of course Gillis may actually do nothing, which of course puts his a$$ even more on the line if 2013-14 results in another poor showing in the first round...

CanaFan is online now  
Old
05-17-2013, 01:09 PM
  #256
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
If you thought, 'reset' meant 'shake-up' or 'blow up the core' than you're going to be disappointed. He would have said that if that's what he meant.

As it is, are we going to pretend "He'll Fire AV, get rid of raymond, trade luongo, get rid of ballard and maybe booth," isn't a significant amount of change?

Wisp is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 01:12 PM
  #257
Alan Jackson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
If you thought, 'reset' meant 'shake-up' or 'blow up the core' than you're going to be disappointed. He would have said that if that's what he meant.

As it is, are we going to pretend "He'll Fire AV, get rid of raymond, trade luongo, get rid of ballard and maybe booth," isn't a significant amount of change?
Well, considering none of Luongo, Ballard or Booth were in the lineup for the playoffs, it's not really that much of a change, is it?

Alan Jackson is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 01:26 PM
  #258
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
If you thought, 'reset' meant 'shake-up' or 'blow up the core' than you're going to be disappointed. He would have said that if that's what he meant.

As it is, are we going to pretend "He'll Fire AV, get rid of raymond, trade luongo, get rid of ballard and maybe booth," isn't a significant amount of change?

Sorry, I don't agree trading ONE core player - be it Edler or Bieksa - is anywhere near "blowing up the core". Blowing up the core is dealing Edler, Kesler, and/or the Twins. Never said I expected that. Secondly, a GM would never actually say "I intend to blow up the core of this team". That is something fans say in internet chat forums, not GMs.

Firing AV is somewhat significant I'll agree, but I don't see it as being equivalent to any of MG's statements ("resetting", "reinventing"). That suggests player changes must be a part of the plans this summer. I assume/expect all of the players you listed above to leave at a minimum. Absolutely. But seeing as how they all have minimal value, I don't see how they bring any players back in their place. At best they will return low picks and maybe B-level prospects. Therefore you can get rid of them, but this is still the *same* team until you add something, esp. when you consider that Booth and Ballard didn't even play in the 1st round. So unless you use their cap space to lure a significant UFA to the team (of which there are almost none this year), I don't understand how that can be perceived as making the team any better ...

CanaFan is online now  
Old
05-17-2013, 01:36 PM
  #259
BC Ben
Registered User
 
BC Ben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: True North
Country: Canada
Posts: 794
vCash: 500
I hate to compare to Calgary, but it has become abundantly clear that they waited far too long to move the key players for quality returns... Their thought process was that they remained a playoff calibre squad and, once there, anything could happen. At this point, the Flames are going down in proverbial flames.

I understand that finding that moment to begin the rebuild, versus the retool, is a fine line. Maybe the Canucks are there and maybe they aren't... but what I have seen is that we made some mistakes in keeping players and finding thin reasoning as to why (see Luongo).

We need to get top value for our players, and Edler is one of those guys that could net us that value without creating a huge hole (though that is arguable).

SO tough!

BC Ben is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 02:13 PM
  #260
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Flames comparisons? The Flames rode their franchise goalie until his 40s and flipped their young offensive defenseman after signing him longterm.

Basically the Flames thing to do would be to keep Luongo and trade Edler.

Wisp is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 02:14 PM
  #261
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BC Ben View Post
I hate to compare to Calgary, but it has become abundantly clear that they waited far too long to move the key players for quality returns... Their thought process was that they remained a playoff calibre squad and, once there, anything could happen. At this point, the Flames are going down in proverbial flames.

I understand that finding that moment to begin the rebuild, versus the retool, is a fine line. Maybe the Canucks are there and maybe they aren't... but what I have seen is that we made some mistakes in keeping players and finding thin reasoning as to why (see Luongo).

We need to get top value for our players, and Edler is one of those guys that could net us that value without creating a huge hole (though that is arguable).

SO tough!
Agree with all of that. The thing is, when you trade a top player you ALWAYS create a hole to some degree, unless you trade position-for-position. But the idea of a *hole* is really a fan-constructed illusion, since it assumes a static team where each player is a set part of the system, like an car engine. Teams are more dynamic than that and are a combination of many players contributions and mistakes. Take out one player and other players step into their roles or their role is diffused among many players. When Pittsburgh traded Jordan Staal it created a hole but they team adapted both directly with Sutter but also indirectly with other players stepping into his roles and opportunities...

CanaFan is online now  
Old
05-17-2013, 02:21 PM
  #262
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
Sorry, I don't agree trading ONE core player - be it Edler or Bieksa - is anywhere near "blowing up the core". Blowing up the core is dealing Edler, Kesler, and/or the Twins. Never said I expected that. Secondly, a GM would never actually say "I intend to blow up the core of this team". That is something fans say in internet chat forums, not GMs.

Firing AV is somewhat significant I'll agree, but I don't see it as being equivalent to any of MG's statements ("resetting", "reinventing"). That suggests player changes must be a part of the plans this summer. I assume/expect all of the players you listed above to leave at a minimum. Absolutely. But seeing as how they all have minimal value, I don't see how they bring any players back in their place. At best they will return low picks and maybe B-level prospects. Therefore you can get rid of them, but this is still the *same* team until you add something, esp. when you consider that Booth and Ballard didn't even play in the 1st round. So unless you use their cap space to lure a significant UFA to the team (of which there are almost none this year), I don't understand how that can be perceived as making the team any better ...
I don't think your preconceptions of what a 'reset' means lines up with Mike Gillis' MO to date at all. You're going to be disappointed.

Wisp is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 02:24 PM
  #263
Alflives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
Agree with all of that. The thing is, when you trade a top player you ALWAYS create a hole to some degree, unless you trade position-for-position. But the idea of a *hole* is really a fan-constructed illusion, since it assumes a static team where each player is a set part of the system, like an car engine. Teams are more dynamic than that and are a combination of many players contributions and mistakes. Take out one player and other players step into their roles or their role is diffused among many players. When Pittsburgh traded Jordan Staal it created a hole but they team adapted both directly with Sutter but also indirectly with other players stepping into his roles and opportunities...
If Edler is the 'man out' of the core group, where does he go and for what? Would he garner the 2nd or 3rd pick in the coming draft? Could he return a big and young power foward type? Or, does he go for a latteral move, like Meyers?

Alflives is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 02:31 PM
  #264
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
I don't think your preconceptions of what a 'reset' means lines up with Mike Gillis' MO to date at all. You're going to be disappointed.

I understand that is a possibility, just as I don't need to be constantly told "I'll be disappointed" by ever poster who disagrees with me. I don't end every post with, "If you want to win the cup, you'll be disappointed". /rant

Back on point, we'll obviously see what a "reset" looks like after the summer so no point debating something that none of us can speak to (unless you are actually MG himself, in which case I retract my statement).

What we *can* debate however - since this is a hockey forum set up for such things - is what we think *should* be done. I've certainly stated my case and I'm fine if people disagree with it. But to be constantly told "Nope, Gillis won't ever do that" sort of defeats the purpose of this forum...

CanaFan is online now  
Old
05-17-2013, 02:38 PM
  #265
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alflives View Post
If Edler is the 'man out' of the core group, where does he go and for what? Would he garner the 2nd or 3rd pick in the coming draft? Could he return a big and young power foward type? Or, does he go for a latteral move, like Meyers?

Well, IF he is the man out I would look at two different options:

1. Trade Edler for an established top-line forward of similar age and ability. Best candidate that I can see right now is Bobby Ryan in Anaheim. Similar cap hit, similar age, similar "value" as I see it (top line winger = top pairing defenseman). I think Ryan would fit in well with the Sedins and, failing that, would also be a good fit with Kesler esp. to get Kesler out of his recent "one-man-show" style.

2. Trade Edler for the #3 pick in the draft - assuming TB values Edler sufficiently - and take whomever remains of McKinnon/Drouin or consider Barkov as well. This shifts the time frame a bit, as neither players will be an impact player next year but should be in the line-up by 2014-15 and would be ideal to tutor under Sedins (assuming they resign) and Kesler for the next few years until they reach 21-22 and can contribute at a higher level. Short term loss, long term gain.

I wouldn't trade Edler for another defenseman, like Myers, simply because I feel we have too many assets on D and not enough on forward. If it was a D for D trade, I would probably prefer to keep Edler ...

CanaFan is online now  
Old
05-17-2013, 03:24 PM
  #266
Grumbler
Registered User
 
Grumbler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,571
vCash: 500
Edler is a bonehead to go through with that hit on Stall, just like himself. We should not keep him next year, his gaffes will continue to cost us playoff games.

Grumbler is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 03:38 PM
  #267
stickside
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
If you thought, 'reset' meant 'shake-up' or 'blow up the core' than you're going to be disappointed. He would have said that if that's what he meant.

As it is, are we going to pretend "He'll Fire AV, get rid of raymond, trade luongo, get rid of ballard and maybe booth," isn't a significant amount of change?
I agree with this. I think when Gillis said reset, he meant his first five years are up so it's time to focus on the next five years.

He seems like a business minded type of GM, so he's following the five year plan template alot of business leaders follow

stickside is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 03:39 PM
  #268
notsocommonsense
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 49
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BC Ben View Post
I hate to compare to Calgary, but it has become abundantly clear that they waited far too long to move the key players for quality returns... Their thought process was that they remained a playoff calibre squad and, once there, anything could happen. At this point, the Flames are going down in proverbial flames.

I understand that finding that moment to begin the rebuild, versus the retool, is a fine line. Maybe the Canucks are there and maybe they aren't... but what I have seen is that we made some mistakes in keeping players and finding thin reasoning as to why (see Luongo).

We need to get top value for our players, and Edler is one of those guys that could net us that value without creating a huge hole (though that is arguable).

SO tough!
I think the Flames comparisons are ridiculous. Our core players are not on the wrong side of 30 and we haven't missed the playoffs for the last 4 straight years with nothing to show for it.

While Van has been knocked out in the 1st round the last 2 years, it's not like they've missed the show entirely.

That said, the time is definately now to begin to make those moves, starting with Edler. High profile D-men have proven over the past few years to bring great returns. There should be plenty of teams interested (Philly and Detroit spring immediately to mind) that would likely make quality offers.

I've always liked Edler and the potential we've all seen in him. But I've grown increasingly tired of the bonehead "what the hell is he doing????" plays that he doesn't seem able to overcome.

If we don't start to make some moves now, we may very well be making the Calgary comparisons 3-4 years from now.

To suggest we're already there is a serious exageration.

notsocommonsense is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 03:42 PM
  #269
Alflives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
Well, IF he is the man out I would look at two different options:

1. Trade Edler for an established top-line forward of similar age and ability. Best candidate that I can see right now is Bobby Ryan in Anaheim. Similar cap hit, similar age, similar "value" as I see it (top line winger = top pairing defenseman). I think Ryan would fit in well with the Sedins and, failing that, would also be a good fit with Kesler esp. to get Kesler out of his recent "one-man-show" style.

2. Trade Edler for the #3 pick in the draft - assuming TB values Edler sufficiently - and take whomever remains of McKinnon/Drouin or consider Barkov as well. This shifts the time frame a bit, as neither players will be an impact player next year but should be in the line-up by 2014-15 and would be ideal to tutor under Sedins (assuming they resign) and Kesler for the next few years until they reach 21-22 and can contribute at a higher level. Short term loss, long term gain.

I wouldn't trade Edler for another defenseman, like Myers, simply because I feel we have too many assets on D and not enough on forward. If it was a D for D trade, I would probably prefer to keep Edler ...
Thank you for the insight. You seem to have a good understanding of the team. If Edler could return Ryan, that would be excellent. I wonder how long the Sedins can be effective, and at what cost?

Alflives is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 04:00 PM
  #270
goodluckchuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 449
vCash: 500
Let's be realistic. No one will be willing to trade for Edler.

1. He's not very good to be worth 5+ mill and also have a NTC on top of that. No team will be ready to take that responsibility, otherwise they'll be stuck with him.
2. He always has mental breakdown, and we've seen it enough times
3. His hit on Stall just killed whatever value he had remaining.

Now i'm not saying that he's completely un-tradeable. He just won't get a big return as some of you are suggesting.

goodluckchuck is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 04:02 PM
  #271
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
I haven't gone back to the old posts to calibrate the correlation - are the people suggesting we could get a 2nd or 3rd overall pick for Edler the same people who suggested we were getting a 1st round pick + roster player + prospect for Luongo?

 
Old
05-17-2013, 04:06 PM
  #272
ItsAllPartOfThePlan
Registered User
 
ItsAllPartOfThePlan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodluckchuck View Post
Let's be realistic. No one will be willing to trade for Edler.

1. He's not very good to be worth 5+ mill and also have a NTC on top of that. No team will be ready to take that responsibility, otherwise they'll be stuck with him.
2. He always has mental breakdown, and we've seen it enough times
3. His hit on Stall just killed whatever value he had remaining.

Now i'm not saying that he's completely un-tradeable. He just won't get a big return as some of you are suggesting.
This might be the worst thing I've read. You are nuts. Edler is on a great contract and if he is on the block, half the league will be giving Gillis a call.

ItsAllPartOfThePlan is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 04:13 PM
  #273
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodluckchuck View Post
Let's be realistic. No one will be willing to trade for Edler.

1. He's not very good to be worth 5+ mill and also have a NTC on top of that. No team will be ready to take that responsibility, otherwise they'll be stuck with him.
2. He always has mental breakdown, and we've seen it enough times
3. His hit on Stall just killed whatever value he had remaining.

Now i'm not saying that he's completely un-tradeable. He just won't get a big return as some of you are suggesting.
Would you consider Bobby Ryan too "big" of a return? Because I think that is about Edler's equivalent value. $5M isn't an unreasonable contract for a top pairing D and is exactly what Ryan (a top line forward) earns. Yes he has his warts, but name a player outside of Nik Lidstrom who doesn't. He's still a legit top pair dman in a league where those are valued commodities. I wouldn't advocate trading him for anything less than fair value back in the form of a forward. He won't get traded otherwise. The hit on Staal will have no bearing on his value, outside of Carolina. Why would it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
I haven't gone back to the old posts to calibrate the correlation - are the people suggesting we could get a 2nd or 3rd overall pick for Edler the same people who suggested we were getting a 1st round pick + roster player + prospect for Luongo?
If you are referring to me, I was definitely not one of those posters. I was always realistic re: Luongo due to the limited market for goalies in general, esp. ones in their early 30's with 10 year contracts.

If Gillis decides to entertain trades for Edler, he will have no shortage of teams expressing interest. Have no idea if they will meet what MG wants but I am confident anywhere from 5-10 teams would easily express strong interest in adding Edler. You can't say the same for Luongo, even if we offered to give him away for free.

Re: value. I never suggested Edler to Florida for the #2 pick. I don't see that as a direction they would go in. However is he worth the #3 pick? Hard to say, depends what TB values at the moment. Another young kid who is 2-3 years away from making a real impact, or a top pairing Dman who will contribute next year? I'm not Stevey Y so I don't know his plan, but I think in terms of *value* it is pretty close. Any discrepancies either way can be ironed out with draft 2nd or 3rd round picks.

CanaFan is online now  
Old
05-17-2013, 04:24 PM
  #274
goodluckchuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan View Post
This might be the worst thing I've read. You are nuts. Edler is on a great contract and if he is on the block, half the league will be giving Gillis a call.
Please name me half the teams and who would they be willing to give up for the great Edler?

goodluckchuck is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 04:25 PM
  #275
goodluckchuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
Would you consider Bobby Ryan too "big" of a return? Because I think that is about Edler's equivalent value. $5M isn't an unreasonable contract for a top pairing D and is exactly what Ryan (a top line forward) earns. Yes he has his warts, but name a player outside of Nik Lidstrom who doesn't. He's still a legit top pair dman in a league where those are valued commodities. I wouldn't advocate trading him for anything less than fair value back in the form of a forward. He won't get traded otherwise. The hit on Staal will have no bearing on his value, outside of Carolina. Why would it?



If you are referring to me, I was definitely not one of those posters. I was always realistic re: Luongo due to the limited market for goalies in general, esp. ones in their early 30's with 10 year contracts.

If Gillis decides to entertain trades for Edler, he will have no shortage of teams expressing interest. Have no idea if they will meet what MG wants but I am confident anywhere from 5-10 teams would easily express strong interest in adding Edler. You can't say the same for Luongo, even if we offered to give him away for free.

Re: value. I never suggested Edler to Florida for the #2 pick. I don't see that as a direction they would go in. However is he worth the #3 pick? Hard to say, depends what TB values at the moment. Another young kid who is 2-3 years away from making a real impact, or a top pairing Dman who will contribute next year? I'm not Stevey Y so I don't know his plan, but I think in terms of *value* it is pretty close. Any discrepancies either way can be ironed out with draft 2nd or 3rd round picks.
Obviously the canucks would jump at the opportunity. But it takes two teams to make a trade. Would Anaheim do it? That should be the question we should be asking.

goodluckchuck is offline  
Closed Thread

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 07:56 PM.

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.