HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
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.

What Would You Give-up For Niittymaki?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-14-2005, 04:01 PM
  #76
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick
Thanks for thinking of us, but we are anxiously awaiting Jimmy Howard to finish up at Maine (he has hinted at leaving early, you never know). That or Liv or MacDonald. As for trading to go straight to the big club we have Legace to hold down the fort until our younger guys step in (and if he didn't work out I'd rather get a cheap vet to do so rather than have all goalies in our system be 25 or younger).
There is absolutely no way the Wings go in that direction at this point in time. It would represent a 100% change in philosophy for that organization. Legace has been the epitome of what a backup goalie should be. There is no way in hell he could be a legitimate starter on a team that hopes to contend. He would be a great backup for Niity, though. The other guys you named are not close to the NHL. One hasn't even turned pro and the other hasn't even come to North America yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick
2nd rounders going into the new CBA are worth a hell of a lot more than they used to (particularly if the NHL is going to slowly up the draft age to 19 or higher).
Yes, 2nd rounders will carry a premium in the future. So will talented, cheap, young players - potential stars - like Niitty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick
Speaking as a Wing fan I'd think about the 2nd (provided it's isn't for this upcoming draft at least) but definitely no more than that unless you'd be interested in a second tier prospect/roster filler to go along with it.
There you go: 2nd rounder + 2nd tier prospect >2nd rounder.

salzy is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 04:01 PM
  #77
dolfanar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Like a midget at a urinal, I'm going to have to stay on my toes.
Posts: 2,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
Right. And as today is the 14th, I was technically right. Not sure why you wanted to nitpick like that, but there you have it. If you want, we can continue the discussion next Sunday, if it's that important to you.

Garon is 27. Antero is 24. No fudging or fooling necessary.
No... Antero is 4 days away from 25, and Garon was 26 when he was dealt. I remember someone mentioning comparing apples to oranges.

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
And Antero's numbers and age demonstrate a potential NHL star netminder.
As do Garon's, Macdonald, Finley, etc...

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
No, he wouldn't. HE'S THIRTY ONE YEARS OLD.
And I supposed Martin Brodeur's 2003-2004 stats are less valid than a younger goalie because of his age? Or could it be that NHL success is a bit more relavant to evaluating a player than AHL stats which really don't mean all that much in the end...

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
I think you mean none of their teams were lucky enough to have the Calder Cup MVP playing behind them. I'll give me that much.
You'd be the only one giving yourslef anything on this one...

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
And I already shot holes in all 4.
Hardly... Talk to a Nashville fan about giving up much to upgrade from Finley.

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
Actually, I already did. Feel free to read the thread. I mean, as long as your logged in anyway, you might as well. It'll save me typing it again.
What I said:

Still waiting for you to point to a single team where Niitymaki would be a significant enough upgrade to warrant anything more than a late 2nd rounder/early 3rd...

What you apparently read:

Still waiting for you to randomly point to teams who already either have established NHL goalies or have equivalent prospects loaded up and don't really need Niittymaki, though they would probably take him... for a late 2nd rounder/early 3rd...

dolfanar is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 04:03 PM
  #78
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dolfanar
Just continuing the Garon trade comparison for Salzy... equivalent deal would be Niitymaki and a 3rd to Detroit for Ray Whitney and our friend Marc Lamothe.
LMAO! And the fruit just keeps on coming.

salzy is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 04:11 PM
  #79
norrisnick
Registered User
 
norrisnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 16,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
There is absolutely no way the Wings go in that direction at this point in time. It would represent a 100% change in philosophy for that organization. Legace has been the epitome of what a backup goalie should be. There is no way in hell he could be a legitimate starter on a team that hopes to contend. He would be a great backup for Niity, though. The other guys you named are not close to the NHL. One hasn't even turned pro and the other hasn't even come to North America yet.

So would operating under a salary cap.

Yes, 2nd rounders will carry a premium in the future. So will talented, cheap, young players - potential stars - like Niitty.

I guess.

There you go: 2nd rounder + 2nd tier prospect >2nd rounder.
Sort of but not really. Example the Schneider trade a couple years ago. LA gave up Schneider. The Wings gave up a 1st and a 2nd (forget which drafts they went with) Sean Avery and Maxim Kuznetsov. Avery and Kuznetsov were worthless parts of that trade. Them being tossed in in no way added to the value of the trade being as they are worthless players (in fact they'd hurt your team more than help). That is what I'm talking about with 2nd tier prospects/roster fillers. There is "more" being traded but it isn't more. Make sense?

norrisnick is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 04:14 PM
  #80
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Well now wer're just talking in circles.

But you still haven't given me a list of teams that would be interested in Niittymaki and what they would give up.
I have to give you a list now!? Jeez, I gave you 2, now it's a list!? Doesn't it really only need to be ONE?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
You mentioned Toronto. Well let's anaylze this. Obviously Philly won't be trading anyone to Toronto, but we'll ignore that for now.

Could Toronto use a goalie prospect like Niittymaki? Sure. But let's face reality, we've got Belfour for at least next season so he certainly wouldn't be a starter for us. So I wouldn't be willing to give up more than a 2nd rounder for a backup goalie.
Right, if Belfour is in Toronto for another year, that makes Toronto and Niitty a perfect fit. He gets to play behind him for one year, get 25 - 30 games under his belt as a backup (against the league doormats), warm the bench for the playoffs for one year and take that all in, then he moves into the starters job the next year. A backup might not be worth more than a 2nd rounder, but a backup AND pending #1 certainly is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Now sure, Niitymaki could potentially be a future starter. But I wouldn't willing to invest much in a guy that might be a starter two or three years down the road.
I wouldn't think ANY team would trade for him if it was that far down the road. It's not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Especially with the UFA age coming down, there could be a lot good goalies on the market by then.
Yes, and you'd have to pay for them too. Niitty is locked in at under 500,000 under the rollback IIRC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
I'm not going to give up a top prospect or pick for Niittymaki only to have a chance to sign a better UFA goalie one year from now.
You're making a huge assumption there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Plus, if I'm the Leafs, before I pay a king's ransom for Niittymaki, I'd call Atlanta about Nurminen, San Jose about Toskala, the Rangers about Lundqvist, Buffalo about one of their three etc.... All further driving down Niittymaki's value.
You could do that, but you'd be getting either an older goalie, a goalie who's not as good, or a combination of the 2. None of the guys you listed have the value Niitty has. Lundqvist has never played in North America yet. Nurminen is unlikely to do so again!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
You'll find this scenario applies to most teams around the league. They're already set in goal and they're not going to give up much for a guy who may or may not be a starter one or two years from now.

That's why his value isn't too much and the Flyers are better off keeping him. It has nothing to do with what kind of season he had. It has more to do with circumstances.
You're barely going to recognize the NHL when it returns. Players like Niitty - with the combination of youth, talent and small contracts - are going to be highly coveted.

salzy is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 04:19 PM
  #81
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dolfanar
No... Antero is 4 days away from 25, and Garon was 26 when he was dealt. I remember someone mentioning comparing apples to oranges.
That's nice. But we're having the conversation TODAY. Garon is 27. Antero is 24. No fudging or fooling necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dolfanar
As do Garon's, Macdonald, Finley, etc...
Uhhh.. no. They don't. But regardless, Garon STILL garnered more than the 2nd rounder I'm being told Antero is worth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dolfanar
And I supposed Martin Brodeur's 2003-2004 stats are less valid than a younger goalie because of his age? Or could it be that NHL success is a bit more relavant to evaluating a player than AHL stats which really don't mean all that much in the end...
I already covered this. It's a combination of all those things. Not so much the stats, but the actual performance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dolfanar
You'd be the only one giving yourslef anything on this one...
That's your problem - you're taking this personally so it's affecting your ability to see clearly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dolfanar
Hardly... Talk to a Nashville fan about giving up much to upgrade from Finley.
I don't think I said Nashville would have an interest, did I?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dolfanar
What I said:

Still waiting for you to point to a single team where Niitymaki would be a significant enough upgrade to warrant anything more than a late 2nd rounder/early 3rd...

What you apparently read:

Still waiting for you to randomly point to teams who already either have established NHL goalies or have equivalent prospects loaded up and don't really need Niittymaki, though they would probably take him... for a late 2nd rounder/early 3rd...
I already named 2 teams, but you don't want to read the thread. Not sure why, but not much I can do about it.

salzy is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 04:23 PM
  #82
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick
Sort of but not really. Example the Schneider trade a couple years ago. LA gave up Schneider. The Wings gave up a 1st and a 2nd (forget which drafts they went with) Sean Avery and Maxim Kuznetsov. Avery and Kuznetsov were worthless parts of that trade. Them being tossed in in no way added to the value of the trade being as they are worthless players (in fact they'd hurt your team more than help). That is what I'm talking about with 2nd tier prospects/roster fillers. There is "more" being traded but it isn't more. Make sense?
Yes, what you said makes sense, but you're looking at it from a Wings point of view. Avery was expendable to them, so giving him up didn't hurt at all and wasn't a factor on their side of the trade. But I don't think LA minded getting him in the deal at all. Otherwise why would they. It's just a question of need. Like when the Flyers got Tony Amonte, they gave up Guillaume Lefebvre. I'm sure in the Flyers minds it was like signing Amonte as a UFA. But Phoenix had something to show for it, so I guess they were happy too.

salzy is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 04:34 PM
  #83
norrisnick
Registered User
 
norrisnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 16,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
Yes, what you said makes sense, but you're looking at it from a Wings point of view. Avery was expendable to them, so giving him up didn't hurt at all and wasn't a factor on their side of the trade. But I don't think LA minded getting him in the deal at all. Otherwise why would they. It's just a question of need. Like when the Flyers got Tony Amonte, they gave up Guillaume Lefebvre. I'm sure in the Flyers minds it was like signing Amonte as a UFA. But Phoenix had something to show for it, so I guess they were happy too.
I see your point, but that "something to show for it" isn't always positive. Sure the Kings got two players they could toss on their lineup but it wasn't two players that would help their team more than hurt it. Both players are huge liabilities (Maxim couldn't even stay on the Kings' roster).

norrisnick is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 04:57 PM
  #84
Leaf Army
Registered User
 
Leaf Army's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 8,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
I have to give you a list now!? Jeez, I gave you 2, now it's a list!? Doesn't it really only need to be ONE?
Not really because there is more than one good young goalie in the league who could potentially be available.

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
Right, if Belfour is in Toronto for another year, that makes Toronto and Niitty a perfect fit. He gets to play behind him for one year, get 25 - 30 games under his belt as a backup (against the league doormats), warm the bench for the playoffs for one year and take that all in, then he moves into the starters job the next year. A backup might not be worth more than a 2nd rounder, but a backup AND pending #1 certainly is.
Once again, if I'm an NHL General Manager I'm not going to give up too much for a potential number one goalie without knowing who could be on the market next year.

Chances are there'll be a UFA goalie out there a lot better than Niittymaki and I'd feel pretty stupid if I gave up a 1st round pick only to be stuck with a lesser goalie than those available.

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
I wouldn't think ANY team would trade for him if it was that far down the road. It's not.
Well there's your problem. It could very well be that far down the road.

And if you don't think any team would trade for him under those circumstances, then maybe you can see where I'm coming from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
Yes, and you'd have to pay for them too. Niitty is locked in at under 500,000 under the rollback IIRC.
If I'm willing to invest a lot of money in any one position, it's goalie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
You're making a huge assumption there.
I'm making a huge assumption in saying that there will be UFA goalies on the market? Are you kidding? That's not an assumption, that's a fact.

Why do you think it's okay for you to assume that Niittymaki will be a starter within a year or two? That's no guarantee.

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
You could do that, but you'd be getting either an older goalie, a goalie who's not as good, or a combination of the 2.
First of all that's debateable. Secondly if they're just going to sit on the bench as a backup for the year, what do I care?

Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
That's nice. But we're having the conversation TODAY. Garon is 27. Antero is 24. No fudging or fooling necessary.
This is perhaps the most bizarre thing you've posted.

Why in the world would we talk about Garon's age today? How old is Wayne Gretzky, 45 now?

Does that mean we should criticize the Kings for acquiring a guy who's 45 years old? With your reasoning it does.

Leaf Army is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 04:58 PM
  #85
zetterberg40
Registered User
 
zetterberg40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 21,187
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to zetterberg40
FYI, lamouthe hasent been in the organization for a year now

zetterberg40 is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 06:18 PM
  #86
Yertle The Turtle
Registered User
 
Yertle The Turtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Millville, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,225
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Yertle The Turtle Send a message via MSN to Yertle The Turtle Send a message via Yahoo to Yertle The Turtle
this thread has gone to hell ... But seriously Nitty is not going to get much... not even sure he would bring in a 2nd round pick but he is a very valuable asset to the flyers. They have no reason to trade him away.

Yertle The Turtle is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 06:23 PM
  #87
dolfanar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Like a midget at a urinal, I'm going to have to stay on my toes.
Posts: 2,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
That's nice. But we're having the conversation TODAY. Garon is 27. Antero is 24. No fudging or fooling necessary.
Okey dokey... I'm going to assume you've been drinking and leave it at that...

dolfanar is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 06:46 PM
  #88
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick
I see your point, but that "something to show for it" isn't always positive. Sure the Kings got two players they could toss on their lineup but it wasn't two players that would help their team more than hurt it. Both players are huge liabilities (Maxim couldn't even stay on the Kings' roster).
I agree with you on Kuznetsov, but I think they still see potential in Avery (for some reason?) The Kings obviously valued them or they wouldn't have been in the deal.

salzy is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 07:25 PM
  #89
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Not really because there is more than one good young goalie in the league who could potentially be available.

Once again, if I'm an NHL General Manager I'm not going to give up too much for a potential number one goalie without knowing who could be on the market next year.

Chances are there'll be a UFA goalie out there a lot better than Niittymaki and I'd feel pretty stupid if I gave up a 1st round pick only to be stuck with a lesser goalie than those available.

Well there's your problem. It could very well be that far down the road.
I think the problem is you are unaware that teams deal for potential all the time. In Niittymaki, a team would be getting at least a backup for now and the potential for more in the near future. It could be more than a year down the road, but from the way he's progressed, it's not likely to take that long.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
If I'm willing to invest a lot of money in any one position, it's goalie.
It's not a matter of being willing - it's a matter of being able to fit it under the cap. Niitty could and likely will prove to be a tremendous value on his current contract.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
I'm making a huge assumption in saying that there will be UFA goalies on the market? Are you kidding? That's not an assumption, that's a fact.
No, the assumption you're making is that they will be better than Niittymaki. And more importantly, better value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Why do you think it's okay for you to assume that Niittymaki will be a starter within a year or two? That's no guarantee.
Who guaranteed anything? It just seems highly likely when you look at his development so far. He's arguably ready now. He's going to be competing for the #1 in Philly next season.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
First of all that's debateable. Secondly if they're just going to sit on the bench as a backup for the year, what do I care?
First of all, with Belfour's age he's not going to sit on the bench for a year. He'll have to play at least 30 games. Second, because after that year (when Belfour is likely done) you won't have a guy capable of being a #1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
This is perhaps the most bizarre thing you've posted.

Why in the world would we talk about Garon's age today? How old is Wayne Gretzky, 45 now?

Does that mean we should criticize the Kings for acquiring a guy who's 45 years old? With your reasoning it does.
I didn't criticize the Kings for acquiring him. I just said that he was 27 years old. Which he is! For some reason that other guy wants to debate that minor point with me. Even if he was 26 when they got him, they knew damn well he'd be at least 27 by the time he ever wore a Kings uniform. Not sure why you guys want to turn this into a battle of semantics, but there you go.

salzy is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 07:27 PM
  #90
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dolfanar
Okey dokey... I'm going to assume you've been drinking and leave it at that...

salzy is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 07:46 PM
  #91
norrisnick
Registered User
 
norrisnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 16,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy
I didn't criticize the Kings for acquiring him. I just said that he was 27 years old. Which he is! For some reason that other guy wants to debate that minor point with me. Even if he was 26 when they got him, they knew damn well he'd be at least 27 by the time he ever wore a Kings uniform. Not sure why you guys want to turn this into a battle of semantics, but there you go.
Soooo, wouldn't that also apply to Antero who'd be 25 by the time he'd ever wear whatever jersey he'd be going to?

norrisnick is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 07:51 PM
  #92
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick
Soooo, wouldn't that also apply to Antero who'd be 25 by the time he'd ever wear whatever jersey he'd be going to?
I think that's a discussion you wanna have with Leafs Army and dolfanar. I just looked them up on hockeydb and figured out their ages. Like I said, I don't really want to get into a nitpicky argument of semantics.

salzy is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 08:02 PM
  #93
Roger's Pancreas*
 
Roger's Pancreas*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,363
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Roger's Pancreas*
No offence Salzy but why is it that every thread you touch turns into six+ pages of crap?

Roger's Pancreas* is offline  
Old
06-14-2005, 09:35 PM
  #94
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panasonic Youth
No offence Salzy but why is it that every thread you touch turns into six+ pages of crap?
LOL I guess it's just because only post in a few, but I'm passionate about the topics I decide to participate in.

salzy 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 10:00 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.