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.

Calgary - Toronto

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-08-2013, 11:27 AM
  #1
JackJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,330
vCash: 500
Calgary - Toronto



Gunnarrson (RFA)
Liles (3yrs @ $3,875,000)



Wideman (4yrs @ $5,250,000)

JackJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 11:29 AM
  #2
InfinityIggy
Moderator
No Longer Flammable
 
InfinityIggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,715
vCash: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackJ View Post


Gunnarrson (RFA)
Liles (3yrs @ $3,875,000)



Wideman (4yrs @ $5,250,000)
This is actually kind of interesting...id probably pass but Calgary would stand to gain another every-day D-man.

InfinityIggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 11:29 AM
  #3
dfunk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 382
vCash: 550
notta chance leafs do this, don't need em.

dfunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 11:30 AM
  #4
Dark Knight
Maple Leafs.
 
Dark Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,481
vCash: 500
Wideman is a righty which is attractive but he makes a tad too much for my liking.

I think the Leafs won't have a problem finding a taker for Liles if they want, but he's not a bad player and I don't mind giving him a spot.

Gunnarson is also one of our better blue liners who is still young. He was hurt all of last season. Leafs will be giving up quite a lot of potential in this deal with Gunnarson moving.

__________________
http://i1123.photobucket.com/albums/l553/noiseboi/William_Nylander_siggy2.png
Dark Knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 11:32 AM
  #5
Finnish your Czech
I miss Frank Corrado
 
Finnish your Czech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Finland
Posts: 61,970
vCash: 50
I wouldn't do it.

Gunnarsson is Phaneuf's defense partner, we'd have to find another player to put on the top pairing (not saying that Gunnarsson is a first line dman, though).

Finnish your Czech is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 11:45 AM
  #6
Chet Donnelly
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Chet Donnelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,158
vCash: 500
I think this deal works for both sides.

Chet Donnelly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 11:55 AM
  #7
JackJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,330
vCash: 500
Leafs POV:

Phaneuf Wideman
Gardiner Franson
Fraser/Holzer/Brennan

Wideman isn't the top defensive RHD we're looking for but both fit the Caryle system and are capable of playing two way hockey. Should the Phaneuf contract negotiations go south, we can take the hit with Wideman, Gardiner, and Franson within the top four and our cap situation becomes a bit more manageable.

Adding another ontario boy doesn't hurt

Flames POV:

Giordano
Liles
Gunnarsson
O'Brien
Butler
Brodie
Cundari

Liles gets the minutes he deserves.
Gunnar is a young defensive D that fits into any system.

JackJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:06 PM
  #8
Patmac40
BESTPOSTERINTHEGAME
 
Patmac40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,323
vCash: 500
It's intriguing from a Toronto standpoint because I really do like Wideman but I don't think it fixes what we need.

Yes, Wideman is a RHD that can play on the top pairing but Gunnarsson can do that as well and can develop his overall defensive game to a point where it's much better than Wideman's with good puck moving abilities.

We already have enough dmen who have an offensive mentality.


Last edited by Patmac40: 07-08-2013 at 12:26 PM.
Patmac40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:17 PM
  #9
Hotlanta
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 500
The problem is Gunnarsson's value is so hard to judge right now, if we are talking about 2011-2012 Gunnarsson, this trade would never happen. But, now we have to consider how healthy he will be for next season and what his contract demands are. In addition, he is Phaneuf's defensive partner and although not a #2D, he can play a solid 25 minute game without putting the team at a disadvantage.

Although I do not see Liles as having much value, he does not have negative value, someone will take him for a late pick or C-level Prospect. That means Gunnarsson for Wideman value wise, and if we are talking Gunnarsson at $3mil vs. Wideman at $5.25mil I would prefer to keep Gunnarsson till we figure out what we have in the system.

If Calgary wants Liles, I am sure Toronto would gladly trade him to you on the cheap.

Hotlanta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:19 PM
  #10
Hotlanta
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patmac40 View Post
It's intriguing from a Toronto standpoint because I really do like Wideman but I don't think it fixes what we need.

Yes, Wideman is a RHD that can play on the top pairing but Gunnarsson can do that as well and can develop his overall defensive game to a point where it's much better than Wideman's and is also a RHD with good puck moving abilities.

We already have enough dmen who have an offensive mentality.
Gunnarsson is a LHD. But the real question is, is the difference between the two worth an estimated $2.25 million? Like you said, the offense Wideman brings to the table doesn't add much value when we already have 5 offensive D/ two-way D on the team

Hotlanta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:23 PM
  #11
ChesapeakeRipper
Tres Comma Club
 
ChesapeakeRipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Toronto (Scar City)
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,929
vCash: 187
lol i wouldn't deal wideman straight up for gunnar. and you want us to add liles?

leafs don't touch this...

ChesapeakeRipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:23 PM
  #12
blankall
Registered User
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,061
vCash: 500
Lol at potential pairing of Wideman and Phaneuf.

Don't really like this from a Flames point of view. Never been a fan of Gunnarsson. This really looks like a case of the Flames trading the better defenceman for two lesser defenceman.

If the Flames are trading Wideman, it should be for pieces that will help them going forward. JML is older and certainly does not help. Gunnarsson is just not that good and not that young anymore.

blankall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:26 PM
  #13
Patmac40
BESTPOSTERINTHEGAME
 
Patmac40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,323
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hotlanta View Post
Gunnarsson is a LHD. But the real question is, is the difference between the two worth an estimated $2.25 million? Like you said, the offense Wideman brings to the table doesn't add much value when we already have 5 offensive D/ two-way D on the team
Oh sorry you're right. Not sure why I had him pegged as a RHD. But yeah, if we're getting a RHD, I'd want him to be a defensive/shut down player.

Patmac40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:27 PM
  #14
CreeksideStrangler
Registered User
 
CreeksideStrangler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenrikSedin33 View Post
I think this deal works for both sides.
How are we looking for another PMD?

CreeksideStrangler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:38 PM
  #15
Noori
Registered User
 
Noori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,729
vCash: 763
Interesting but it doesn't make sense for a rebuilding team. Acquiring two defensemen in exchange for one will take away opportunity from Cundari and Breen and possibly Wotherspoon and Ramage. The Flames are thin when it comes to top-4 defensemen, but we have lots and lots o depth defensemen.

Giordano, Wideman, and Brodie are legitimate top-4 guys.

After that we have Butler, O'Brien, Russell, Smith, Cundari, Breen and first year pros in Wotherspoon and Ramage.

Noori is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:39 PM
  #16
Hotlanta
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall View Post
Lol at potential pairing of Wideman and Phaneuf.

Don't really like this from a Flames point of view. Never been a fan of Gunnarsson. This really looks like a case of the Flames trading the better defenceman for two lesser defenceman.

If the Flames are trading Wideman, it should be for pieces that will help them going forward. JML is older and certainly does not help. Gunnarsson is just not that good and not that young anymore.
You can't base an opinion of Gunnarsson on last season. He played the entire season through a hip injury and is only 26 years old.

Hotlanta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:41 PM
  #17
InfinityIggy
Moderator
No Longer Flammable
 
InfinityIggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,715
vCash: 107
Since this is kind of interesting what would Gunnarsson cost straight across?

InfinityIggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:44 PM
  #18
Johnny Hoxville
Moderator
Tkachuk = Cowbell
 
Johnny Hoxville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,350
vCash: 2403
I pass on this.

Johnny Hoxville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:46 PM
  #19
blankall
Registered User
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hotlanta View Post
You can't base an opinion of Gunnarsson on last season. He played the entire season through a hip injury and is only 26 years old.
He'll be 27 near the start of next season, which isn't old, but that puts him close to his prime years.

The Flames aren't a team looking to compete now, so having guys in their prime really isn't a huge pull. We want guys who will hit their prime in 2-3 years.

If the Flames are giving up Wideman, I'd want draft picks or d-men aged 25 or younger.

Gunnarsson just really isn't what we are looking for anyways. Even ignoring this year, he seems to be pretty mediocre at scoring. Putting up 19 points in 2011/12 in Toronto's defensively lax system. He's also not that big shut down guy either.

Calgary really doesn't need depth guys. We need top pairing guys. The Flames are really just missing that #1 guy on defence. Gunnarsson and JML for Wideman gets them further away from that goal, not closer.

Plus, as others have posted, giving ice time to guys like Gunnarsson really makes no sense. The Flames have a crop of depth d-men they need to develop.

blankall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 12:52 PM
  #20
SaintMorose
Registered User
 
SaintMorose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,402
vCash: 50
It's an interesting idea. I'm not sure that we really get the quality back that we lose in Wideman Flames fans were very happy with him this last season I believe his corsi rating was above Gio's. I guess for us we're just trying to get younger?

I assume without further moves made you guys are running into next season with

Gunner Phanuef
Franson Gardiner
Liles - Percy/Koska/Reilly?

While Calgary will be

Brodie Wideman
Gio Russel
Cundari/SOB/Butler/Breen

Counter proposal

Wideman, Nemo
Gunner, Blacker, 2014 2nd

SaintMorose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 01:16 PM
  #21
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,714
vCash: 500
Wideman is garbage. Can't play defence at all. There's a reason he's bounced around 5 different teams over a 7 year period, and is now being thrown into a trade proposal only a year after signing in Calgary.

So what if he puts up points? We have Phaneuf, Gardiner, and Franson, with Rielly coming up. Not remotely a need. Gunnarsons defensive play is far more important.

416Leafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 01:19 PM
  #22
Tapu Debe
DBU
 
Tapu Debe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,480
vCash: 464
It's not a bad proposal by any means but we'd basically be trading half our top pairing (yeah, Wideman) for 3rd/4th defensemen. In the long run it probably makes the Flames better, presuming Gunnarson keeps improving, but it makes us worse now. Which I guess doesn't really matter since we're not competing, but I still wouldn't do it.

Tapu Debe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 01:20 PM
  #23
Tapu Debe
DBU
 
Tapu Debe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,480
vCash: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
Wideman is garbage. Can't play defence at all. There's a reason he's bounced around 5 different teams over a 7 year period, and is now being thrown into a trade proposal only a year after signing in Calgary.

So what if he puts up points? We have Phaneuf, Gardiner, and Franson, with Rielly coming up. Not remotely a need. Gunnarsons defensive play is far more important.
Not like it means much, but OP isn't from the Flames board, so we're not exactly "throwing Wideman" into anything.

Tapu Debe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 01:29 PM
  #24
blankall
Registered User
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
Wideman is garbage. Can't play defence at all. There's a reason he's bounced around 5 different teams over a 7 year period, and is now being thrown into a trade proposal only a year after signing in Calgary.

So what if he puts up points? We have Phaneuf, Gardiner, and Franson, with Rielly coming up. Not remotely a need. Gunnarsons defensive play is far more important.
There's also a reason that Wideman was a highly sought after commodity the moment he hit free agency. His inability to play defence is highly overated. He's much better in the defensive zone than either of Toronto's top pairing guys.

The only reason Flames fans are putting him in trades is because the Flames are rebuilding. If Wideman can be traded for younger players and picks, that makes more sense for the Flames going forward. We won't be competitive for at least 2-3 years. It makes little senes for us to hold onto a player in his prime now.

blankall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 01:37 PM
  #25
TorontoTrades
Registered User
 
TorontoTrades's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,742
vCash: 500
hmmm not a bad deal...

Gunnarsson basically equals Wideman and we move Liles contract.


Don't like Wideman's contract but Liles is worse as far as value so bad contracts cancel out... I like it for both teams.

TorontoTrades 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 12:06 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.