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.

Girardi to Edmonton

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-23-2013, 06:11 PM
  #51
HeavyHitter99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawson624 View Post
No **** your going to have a worse shooting percentage when u have a broken finger it's not just regressing to the mean. I don't think eberle is going to shoot at 18% but I think 14-15% isn't unreasonable for a player like him. Another reason his points regressed was that Krueger played him on a tough minute line starting as much in the O zone as the D, while renney gave 60% zone starts against easy competition, so he had to adjust. Also his shooting rate is up so it is entirely conceivable that he could put up similar points to his 11-12 season
Don't bother man. No point. He doesn't get it

HeavyHitter99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 06:14 PM
  #52
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,742
vCash: 500
Eberle is absolutely a 1st line winger.

Lundsanity30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 06:17 PM
  #53
EvilCorporateLawyer
Very slippery slope
 
EvilCorporateLawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Country Roads
Country: United States
Posts: 75,161
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to EvilCorporateLawyer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roof Daddy View Post
Rather just offersheet McDonagh. 5 years, 6.2 per. If the Rangers match, then Girardi likely hits UFA next off-season.
And why would McDonagh sign an offersheet with Edmonton?

__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB
"Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
"Used to be only Twinkies and cockroaches could survive a nuke. I'd add Habs to that. I'm convinced the CH stands for Club du Hypocrisy." - Gee Wally
EvilCorporateLawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 06:19 PM
  #54
Trafalgar Law
Waive Dallas Eakins
 
Trafalgar Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
And why would McDonagh sign an offersheet with Edmonton?
To play with fellow Wisconsin Badger Justin Schultz.

I'm only half sarcastic about that.

Trafalgar Law is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 06:20 PM
  #55
Matt4776
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Matt4776's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,663
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trafalgar Law View Post
To play with fellow Wisconsin Badger Justin Schultz.

I'm only half sarcastic about that.
But then he'd be abandoning fellow Wisconsin Badger Derek Stepan.

Matt4776 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 06:22 PM
  #56
BOLD MacT Trade
GoldMoldisMacTBold
 
BOLD MacT Trade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Bottom of Conference
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerGuru View Post
Maybe value wise but the Rangers would never do it. McDonagh is too important to the team. He is the last defenseman they'd trade and one of the most untouchable players on the team. He should be locked up long term this offseason and not simply given a bridge contract.
That's fair, I understand that point of view. But value wise it's pretty close.

BOLD MacT Trade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 06:54 PM
  #57
hockeyjack89
R.I.P. Thrashers
 
hockeyjack89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dethomas07 View Post
i think hes the perfect dman rangers need sorry youd have to give us a lot to get him.. like Hall..

hes to valuable for rangers.. and is an allstar top 4 rhd man.. and the only one we have.. not replaceable and youd have to give up a lot to get him..

if we're talking MDZ then we can work with that..


FYI stop with these girardi threads.. he honestly would be the last dman moved.. bc that particular position is the hardest to get besides a number 1c..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt4776 View Post
But then he'd be abandoning fellow Wisconsin Badger Derek Stepan.
Would you rather have a forward and defenseman who played together? Or two defenseman who together from the same school/team who would probably have chemistry?

hockeyjack89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 07:01 PM
  #58
hockeyjack89
R.I.P. Thrashers
 
hockeyjack89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dethomas07 View Post
i think hes the perfect dman rangers need sorry youd have to give us a lot to get him.. like Hall..

hes to valuable for rangers.. and is an allstar top 4 rhd man.. and the only one we have.. not replaceable and youd have to give up a lot to get him..

if we're talking MDZ then we can work with that..


FYI stop with these girardi threads.. he honestly would be the last dman moved.. bc that particular position is the hardest to get besides a number 1c..

So Rakell, Smith-Pelly, Lindholm and Gibson are better than Musil, Gernat, Klefbom, Belov, Schultz, Paajarvi and Yakupov? Get your facts straight. Don't get me wrong those four Ducks prospects are good but they don't compare to the Oilers prospects. And what makes me think that the Oilers have a better future than the Ducks is Justin Schultz, three 1st overall picks in a row, and the 7th overall pick this year.


Last edited by spiny norman: 06-24-2013 at 12:21 AM. Reason: qdp
hockeyjack89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 07:28 PM
  #59
AngelDuck
Registered User
 
AngelDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyjack13 View Post
So Rakell, Smith-Pelly, Lindholm and Gibson are better than Musil, Gernat, Klefbom, Belov, Schultz, Paajarvi and Yakupov? Get your facts straight. Don't get me wrong those four Ducks prospects are good but they don't compare to the Oilers prospects. And what makes me think that the Oilers have a better future than the Ducks is Justin Schultz, three 1st overall picks in a row, and the 7th overall pick this year.
Rakell, Etem, Gibson, Lindholm, Vatanen, Karlsson, Kerdiles >>>> the overrated Edmonton prospects, yes.

AngelDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 07:33 PM
  #60
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,760
vCash: 500
Clearly no one of top #1s drafted except MAYBE Yak would come over if Rangers added significantly.

I don't agree with the philosophy that you allow balance to dictate getting the proverbial horses if you are short. In other words would rather have, for example, Hedman and Hedman -- L + L --- and more talent, than high talent in Staal + Girardi, a L-R pair.

That said, there may still be a way to thread this needle.
If J Schultz comes back, you don't have the hole for moving Girardi! Of course this requires serious add, so go full tilt, and come up with:

Stepan + MDZ + Moore + Girardi + Andersson to Oilers
for
7th overall, Yakupov + J. Schultz + Marancin + Gernat

Stepan = great passing solid C makes balance of Fs more productive
get 3 established Ds + a good 4th round prospect D for 1 D + 1 good 2nd round prospect D
losing Yak hurts a little, but still plenty of firepower

Rangers 1 top righty D to pair w/McD, have Staal for 2nd pair + Marincin should be ok on 3rd pair to start.
This assumes you are locked in and do not trade, like Staal for the 5th overall, or McD for the 1st overall.
But Rangers get Yak for top 6 LW

Both teams hurt a bit, but get enough to do the deal anyway.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 08:15 PM
  #61
hockeyjack89
R.I.P. Thrashers
 
hockeyjack89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
Clearly no one of top #1s drafted except MAYBE Yak would come over if Rangers added significantly.

I don't agree with the philosophy that you allow balance to dictate getting the proverbial horses if you are short. In other words would rather have, for example, Hedman and Hedman -- L + L --- and more talent, than high talent in Staal + Girardi, a L-R pair.

That said, there may still be a way to thread this needle.
If J Schultz comes back, you don't have the hole for moving Girardi! Of course this requires serious add, so go full tilt, and come up with:

Stepan + MDZ + Moore + Girardi + Andersson to Oilers
for
7th overall, Yakupov + J. Schultz + Marancin + Gernat

Stepan = great passing solid C makes balance of Fs more productive
get 3 established Ds + a good 4th round prospect D for 1 D + 1 good 2nd round prospect D
losing Yak hurts a little, but still plenty of firepower

Rangers 1 top righty D to pair w/McD, have Staal for 2nd pair + Marincin should be ok on 3rd pair to start.
This assumes you are locked in and do not trade, like Staal for the 5th overall, or McD for the 1st overall.
But Rangers get Yak for top 6 LW

Both teams hurt a bit, but get enough to do the deal anyway.
Believe it or not I actually like that deal for both teams. It's beneficial on both sides. But is there anyone besides Hall or Eberle that you would take instead of J. Schultz? Can be a combination of players and prospects too not just one particular player.

hockeyjack89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 08:21 PM
  #62
BOLD MacT Trade
GoldMoldisMacTBold
 
BOLD MacT Trade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Bottom of Conference
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
Clearly no one of top #1s drafted except MAYBE Yak would come over if Rangers added significantly.

I don't agree with the philosophy that you allow balance to dictate getting the proverbial horses if you are short. In other words would rather have, for example, Hedman and Hedman -- L + L --- and more talent, than high talent in Staal + Girardi, a L-R pair.

That said, there may still be a way to thread this needle.
If J Schultz comes back, you don't have the hole for moving Girardi! Of course this requires serious add, so go full tilt, and come up with:

Stepan + MDZ + Moore + Girardi + Andersson to Oilers
for
7th overall, Yakupov + J. Schultz + Marancin + Gernat

Stepan = great passing solid C makes balance of Fs more productive
get 3 established Ds + a good 4th round prospect D for 1 D + 1 good 2nd round prospect D
losing Yak hurts a little, but still plenty of firepower

Rangers 1 top righty D to pair w/McD, have Staal for 2nd pair + Marincin should be ok on 3rd pair to start.
This assumes you are locked in and do not trade, like Staal for the 5th overall, or McD for the 1st overall.
But Rangers get Yak for top 6 LW

Both teams hurt a bit, but get enough to do the deal anyway.
We can't trade schultz, we need him too much. Maybe Klefbom+ instead and remove schultz.
Edit:Nevermind that wouldn't even it out.


Last edited by BOLD MacT Trade: 06-23-2013 at 08:27 PM.
BOLD MacT Trade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 08:45 PM
  #63
hockeyjack89
R.I.P. Thrashers
 
hockeyjack89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,434
vCash: 500
Klefbom, Musil and Rajala? Just value wise

hockeyjack89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 09:02 PM
  #64
HitmanKiller12
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 80
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HankTheTankYoLo View Post
Eberle is good yes, but he is not a TRUE 1st wing.

your argument with that he has 76 points in a bad team is just ****..

Clarke MacArthur was 2 points from winning the leafs points in one season, doesnt mean he is amazing just becuase of that.

Eberle is good, but he is small and imo he will be around 70 points mark, not over 80
Since when is 70 points in the modern NHL not a 1st line winger?

HitmanKiller12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2013, 09:27 PM
  #65
Matt4776
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Matt4776's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,663
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
Clearly no one of top #1s drafted except MAYBE Yak would come over if Rangers added significantly.

I don't agree with the philosophy that you allow balance to dictate getting the proverbial horses if you are short. In other words would rather have, for example, Hedman and Hedman -- L + L --- and more talent, than high talent in Staal + Girardi, a L-R pair.

That said, there may still be a way to thread this needle.
If J Schultz comes back, you don't have the hole for moving Girardi! Of course this requires serious add, so go full tilt, and come up with:

Stepan + MDZ + Moore + Girardi + Andersson to Oilers
for
7th overall, Yakupov + J. Schultz + Marancin + Gernat

Stepan = great passing solid C makes balance of Fs more productive
get 3 established Ds + a good 4th round prospect D for 1 D + 1 good 2nd round prospect D
losing Yak hurts a little, but still plenty of firepower

Rangers 1 top righty D to pair w/McD, have Staal for 2nd pair + Marincin should be ok on 3rd pair to start.
This assumes you are locked in and do not trade, like Staal for the 5th overall, or McD for the 1st overall.
But Rangers get Yak for top 6 LW

Both teams hurt a bit, but get enough to do the deal anyway.
I'll entertain the fact that both GMs would be willing to pull off this type of mega-blockbuster that involves the swapping of essentially our entire rosters.

Our team would be what?

Zuccarello-Brassard-Nash
Kreider-xx-Yakupov
Hagelin-Lindberg-Callahan
Nystrom/Pyatt/UFA-Boyle-Dorsett

McDonagh-Schultz
Staal-Stralman
Marincin-McIlrath/Eminger/UFA?

Are you praying we draft a C with the #7 and he can step in right away? We are already hoping Lindberg can take the #3 spot.

Not a fan of trading away our first homegrown #1 C in a long long time, never mind trading away (literally) half of our defense.

I like:

Kreider-Stepan-Nash
xx-Brassard-Zuccarello
Hagelin-Lindberg-Callahan
Nystrom-Boyle-Dorsett

McDonagh-Girardi
Staal-Stralman
Moore-McIlrath/Zidlicky/UFA

where xx= a top 6 forward that we get in a MDZ trade

much much more than your scenario above.

EDIT:

Obviously, prospects shouldn't stop you for making a trade for a player of Yakupov's caliber, but when the strengths of our prospect pool lies on the RW, it makes your scenario even more unattractive.

Matt4776 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 01:51 PM
  #66
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyjack13 View Post
...
Quote:
Believe it or not I actually like that deal for both teams.
Thanks.

Quote:
It's beneficial on both sides.
Concur and thank you for noticing.
Some who don't always agree w/me tend to say my props favor Rangers too much, yet my own base often complains.
Win win is hard, glad you agree this was one such instance.

Quote:
But is there anyone besides Hall or Eberle that you would take instead of J. Schultz?
No, unfortunately it has to be a package deal.
Rangers do not have excess righty D, and are giving up their first pair RD in this deal. J Schultz must come on the return.

Quote:
Can be a combination of players and prospects too not just one particular player.
Just to be clear, if for some reason you wanted
Brassard and X or Miller and X instead of Stepan, that is something where alternate resources are in place to consider such discussion.
But there would be no substitute for J. Schultz in this scenario.

One wonders why he didn't elect to NYR on first chance, and my thinking is Torts.
That uncomfortable impediment is now gone.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 02:41 PM
  #67
bucks_oil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelDuck View Post
Eberle for McD would be completely awful for NYR. McD is a top pairing d-man. You don't trade those guys for fringe first line wingers.
I agree it would be tough/impossible for NYR to trade their best dman for a winger... period. That said....

Fringe? It's hard to fathom that a 76 point scoring RW who just finished his 22-year season would be considered a "fringe" top line winger.

There were a grand total of 3 LW and 2 RW who scored more than him in his second season in the league.

This year he had a slump and there were still only 9 RW who outscored him.

I guess league MVP, Corey Perry, also a RW, whom Eberle outscored in BOTH of those years is also a fringe first line winger?

bucks_oil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 02:48 PM
  #68
bucks_oil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HankTheTankYoLo View Post
Eberle is good yes, but he is not a TRUE 1st wing.

your argument with that he has 76 points in a bad team is just ****..

Clarke MacArthur was 2 points from winning the leafs points in one season, doesnt mean he is amazing just becuase of that.

Eberle is good, but he is small and imo he will be around 70 points mark, not over 80
What kind of argument is that!?! Clarke MacArthur had 62 points in 82 games. That's a far cry from 76 in 78.

76 points is something he actually achieved... in his second year. That year he was the 3rd highest scoring RW in the league. This year, what with his "unsustainable" slump, he was still 10th in the league.

But he's a "Fringe" top-line player.

bucks_oil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 02:53 PM
  #69
Neatman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,501
vCash: 500
The only thing funnier than the idea that the Oil would give up one of the big 4 for Giardi is the fact that some Rangers fans actually think that's reasonable. After watching Giardi's work in the playoffs, Im not impressed.

Honestly, you'd think your team had 4 #1Ds....

Neatman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 03:03 PM
  #70
hockeyjack89
R.I.P. Thrashers
 
hockeyjack89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
Thanks.


Concur and thank you for noticing.
Some who don't always agree w/me tend to say my props favor Rangers too much, yet my own base often complains.
Win win is hard, glad you agree this was one such instance.


No, unfortunately it has to be a package deal.
Rangers do not have excess righty D, and are giving up their first pair RD in this deal. J Schultz must come on the return.


Just to be clear, if for some reason you wanted
Brassard and X or Miller and X instead of Stepan, that is something where alternate resources are in place to consider such discussion.
But there would be no substitute for J. Schultz in this scenario.

One wonders why he didn't elect to NYR on first chance, and my thinking is Torts.
That uncomfortable impediment is now gone.
What if instead of Girardi, we put in Kreider and instead of J. Schultz, we put in, Hemsky and a 2nd or 3rd?

hockeyjack89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 03:08 PM
  #71
No Good Names Left
Registered User
 
No Good Names Left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelDuck View Post
Might want to check his completely unsustainable shooting percentage...

I think he's more of the player you saw this year than in 2011-2012. This year, he had a shooting percentage that you'd expect from him. He had some insane puck luck in 2011-2012. I really wouldn't be surprised if he never has another season like that again.
He played most of the year with a broken finger...tough to shoot

No Good Names Left is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 03:09 PM
  #72
AlowlyOilersfan
Comrade
 
AlowlyOilersfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,737
vCash: 168
would love to get a top 4 defender, but like others have mentioned, it might be a high price to nab Girardi.

AlowlyOilersfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 05:19 PM
  #73
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyjack13 View Post
What if instead of Girardi, we put in Kreider and instead of J. Schultz, we put in, Hemsky and a 2nd or 3rd?
1. As a general rule, Kreider off limits except for ridiculous overpayment. Torts screwed w/his head, and the few times in playoffs he was unleashed, we saw what he could do.
As a general rule, you would be entitled to expect to see some correlation of performance to gearing value as you offer price. The variable is potential. Kreider's last season was an aberration. Let's see what he can do, and then Rangers can honestly have an idea of what he's worth, and those interested can assess if overpayment is worth it.

2. J. Schultz is the one clear non-negotiable lynchpin in this deal, esp. for Rangers from Oilers.
I prefer Yak as is in the scenario suggested. But if there was a specific reason YOU wanted to substitute
Hall or RNH instead of Yak and Rangers add
OR
Eberle or Gagner instead of Yak and Edmonton adds
those are theoretically do-able moves.

There is no substitute for J. Schultz.

As I took pains to note, it was a good deal that helped both sides more than it hurt.
But you gotta give to get.

3. Hemsky do not want. Injury history; overpriced contract.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 05:43 PM
  #74
Matt4776
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Matt4776's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,663
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyjack13 View Post
Would you rather have a forward and defenseman who played together? Or two defenseman who together from the same school/team who would probably have chemistry?
That's a ridiculous statement. They never played together at Wisconsin, and I guarantee I saw way more Badgers games than you have as a past CCHA (and current Big 10) season ticket holder. They were on the same team for one year. He was teammates with Stepan for two years.

Colton Orr and JVR are both on the same team now. If they each become UFAs x amount of years from now, they should totally sign together because they have some unreal chemistry!

That's like saying

Matt4776 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 06:02 PM
  #75
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt4776 View Post
...
Quote:
I'll entertain the fact that both GMs would be willing to pull off this type of mega-blockbuster
thank you

Quote:
that involves the swapping of essentially our entire rosters.
Not quite, and really this is just like double a regular trade of a coupla guys for coupla guys.

Quote:
Our team would be what?

Zuccarello-Brassard-Nash
Kreider-xx-Yakupov
Hagelin-Lindberg-Callahan
Nystrom/Pyatt/UFA-Boyle-Dorsett


McDonagh-Schultz
Staal-Stralman
Marincin-McIlrath/Eminger/UFA?
Making no immediate other moves except sign UFA Stalberg, our team would be:
Yakupov-Brassard-Nash
Kreider--Lindberg-Stallberg
Hagelin-Miller-Callahan
Fast-Boyle-Dorsett

Zuccarello Yogan

McDonagh-Schultz
Staal-Stralman
Marincin-McIlrath/Eminger

Zuc has great vision, passing, and might be a fit at C, though I'm not confident he has size and adequate speed for NHL game; but as a stop gap, okay.
Remember Kreider also has prior experience at C, and while I'm not saying we completely abandon him at LW, if he clicks a few shifts per game with speed Ws, that's another extra couple of minutes you are getting.

We also have Yogan, and I, the same guy who said Miller might need more seasoning but he was physically ready to play here now, am telling you depending upon who is in camp Yogan will compete for the 4th and MAYBE, if the comp is thin, third C.


Quote:
Are you praying we draft a C with the #7 and he can step in right away? We are already hoping Lindberg can take the #3 spot.
I would like to note that it appears (according to the boards) the Wild have Zenon Konopka up for grabs, relatively cheap, [like Bourque and a future 5th or 4th pick] cause they need cap. that would be our 4C who is great on draws, and helps out with enforcement.

I have other plans that I would make to juggle things further until we get the totally best combo overall.

This could include McDonagh and Noreau and conditional 2018 first for the 1st overall and LD Duncan Siemens. we use the pick on McKinnon.

Then, if we flip Staal to Car for 5th overall, which at the moment I don't see happening, as they seem to want to send us Skinner instead, but if we can, then we can bundle the 5th and the 7th overall and something minor for 2nd overall = Jones.

So that cannibalize our LD for RD and a franchise 1C (and a good prospect LD who is not far off). So if Siemens + Marancin are here soon enough, we are ultimately really only out just a top LD, and in exchange we got all these other aspects addressed.

Very importantly, we got younger, and shed cap in the process.
So we can pick up that LD. Maybe/maybe not Yandle. And I agree they don't come along on trees. But we'd get somebody.

Quote:
Not a fan of trading away our first homegrown #1 C in a long long time, never mind trading away (literally) half of our defense.
Fair enough. But I ask you to look at the totality of what is surrendered and what is returned.

Quote:
I like:

Kreider-Stepan-Nash
xx-Brassard-Zuccarello
Hagelin-Lindberg-Callahan
Nystrom-Boyle-Dorsett

McDonagh-Girardi
Staal-Stralman
Moore-McIlrath/Zidlicky/UFA

where xx= a top 6 forward that we get in a MDZ trade

much much more than your scenario above.

EDIT:

Obviously, prospects shouldn't stop you for making a trade for a player of Yakupov's caliber, but when the strengths of our prospect pool lies on the RW, it makes your scenario even more unattractive.
Zidlicky as a 1 yr rental is fine. Think he's a 35 going into 36 yr, so has to be minimum length

You do not have JT MIller listed.

Otherwise, fair enough, we agree to disagree.

IMO, we need a large, sweeping process of several moves, preferably with substance.

a piecemeal approach, one here, and maybe one there, is not gonna cut it.

Rangers are a good team, with outside shot at cup.
But if we are gonna compete, we need to add more horses, more quality horses. Yesterday.

Would rather wind up with 2 hedman, both L, playing out of position, and better talent, than a matched L-R pair of good talent.

And finally, we have additional options for more moves.
But this is the first trade we should do.

bernmeister 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 07:45 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.