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.

"We can't trade him in the conference"

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-04-2014, 08:26 AM
  #51
acr*
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: My Pit of Danger
Country:
Posts: 47,532
vCash: 500
Peter Chiarelli has made a living trading with divisional rivals.

He's made several deals with the Leafs, got Paille from Buffalo and Kelly from Ottawa, in addition to minor deals like Daugavins last year.

acr* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 08:42 AM
  #52
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,239
vCash: 500
You make a trade because you think it's going to make your team BETTER.

To win the SC, you're going to HAVE to beat a couple of legitimate SC contending teams in the playoffs. Your best chance at doing that is to get the best trade returns possible.

416Leafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 08:44 AM
  #53
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
KingsFan7824's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,940
vCash: 500
It's not just the head-to-head games, it's all of the games. You don't normally make trades with teams that you're fighting with for a playoff spot/division title.

There are enough teams and talent from each conference that you can make an equal deal to anything a division/conference rival might toss out there, and at the same time decrease the risk factor of it coming back to bite you down the line. Unless the team in your division/conference just has a flat out better deal on the table.

KingsFan7824 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 08:44 AM
  #54
Drew311
Van Man
 
Drew311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great 88 View Post
Seriously, this is the stupidest logic I've ever heard. And it's not just fans who say this **** too, cause I know for a fact that GMs think like this, but why? Why does it ****ing matter?

You play a division rival 6 times over an 82 game season. That's 7.3% of your games over a season...does it really matter that much?

No, it ****ing doesnt. The difference that that player makes is probably going to be small for 1 or 2 of those games, even if it's Crosby. So, why should a GM be afraid to trade a player in the division if it's only really going to matter for 4 or maybe 5 games? It's such silly logic, I know, but this kind of **** actually prevents GMs from making better trades. Not to mention we're talking divisional trades here, what about in the conference? In the ****ing conference? What ****ing difference does it really make if you play against that player 1 time or 3 times? Very very little.

Not to mention, you should be trading a player for other useful players who will hurt the other team to give up. So, even if you guys meet in the playoffs; it shouldn't make a huge negative difference. Certainly not enough for a team to turn down a trade which they consider to have better value.
Most GM's have massive egos and don't like to see former players light up their team on a regular basis. They likely think it's not good for their reputation.

Drew311 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 08:51 AM
  #55
Gibsons Finest
R-E-L-A-X
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,703
vCash: 500
I believe that was Kevin Lowe's reasoning when he pulled the Comrie deal to Anaheim and sent him to Philly. Comrie was shortly traded to the West anyways and Edmonton missed out on Corey Perry. On the other hand, sometimes you get burnt. If im5 a GM, a close deal goes to the East or out of division, but if I'm confident about a deal being the right one, I probably just take that chance.

Gibsons Finest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 09:11 AM
  #56
colchar
The Keon Curse Lives
 
colchar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great 88 View Post
And it's not just fans who say this **** too, cause I know for a fact that GMs think like this, but why?

Really? And GMs have told you this have they?



Quote:
You play a division rival 6 times over an 82 game season. That's 7.3% of your games over a season...does it really matter that much?

If it could mean the difference between making the playoffs or not making the playoffs, yes.



Quote:
Not to mention, you should be trading a player for other useful players who will hurt the other team to give up.
Trades do not, necessarily, have to involve players that it will hurt the other team to give up.

colchar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 09:15 AM
  #57
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
You make a trade because you think it's going to make your team BETTER.

To win the SC, you're going to HAVE to beat a couple of legitimate SC contending teams in the playoffs. Your best chance at doing that is to get the best trade returns possible.
Look at the Bishop/Conacher trade with 20/20 hindsight. In the Atlantic division, Tampa is going to make the play-off's with Bishop being a HUGE contributor and IMO the biggest reason for Tampa not falling apart when Stamkos went down. Conacher is struggling to define a role in OTT, and they're fighting for a play-off spot.

If OTT was to trade Bishop outside the division, it's very possible that OTT makes the P/O's and Tampa it on the outside looking in. There is obviously a HUGE amount of conjecture there, and it's very possible that SY makes a different deal to add a goalie if he doesn't land Bishop last year, but that trade has really come back to bite OTT in the arse at this point in time. I would say that OTT would have been better off trading Bishop outside the Atlantic and taken a slightly lesser return.

I do think that the above example is a perfect storm, because goalie trades are typically hard to evaluate. Goalies have the largest ability to impact the game, but that rarely translates into the a players trade value.

Other example is the Kipper trade to SJ. How many times do you think that SJ management heard how they only got a 2nd rounder for Kipper, and he went on to be an elite goalie. More recent example would be Scrivens. What if he turns into a legit #1 in EDM, and the Kings are fighting against the Oilers for the 4th spot going forward? That's a pretty solid possibility with the strength of the Pacific division. EDIT: Almost forgot the Rask deal for the Leafs. Those type of deals really have to sting.


Last edited by Beukeboom Fan: 03-04-2014 at 09:29 AM.
Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 09:27 AM
  #58
Moore Money
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,526
vCash: 500
I agree completely OP

trading should be about maximizing your return not being a scared little *****.

Moore Money is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 09:36 AM
  #59
grits207
Registered User
 
grits207's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Posts: 679
vCash: 500
If I were trading a superstar I would prefer to trade him outside the conference but ultimately if a team in your conference offers you something that is clearly better than what teams in the other conference are offering you need to take it. Trading a star to a division rival would take a serious overpayment though.

However, if I were trading a non-key player I would simply take the best offer and not worry about what team the player is going to.

grits207 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 09:52 AM
  #60
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Agreed 100%. It's stupid and immature to punish your own team so another particular team doesn't get better. You make the best deal, period. And because of this stupid and misguided perception exists, you will likely get the best deal within your conference so take advantage of that and exploit it for your own gain.


Last edited by digdug41982: 03-04-2014 at 09:57 AM.
digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 09:57 AM
  #61
Mac Man
Registered User
 
Mac Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great 88 View Post
Seriously, this is the stupidest logic I've ever heard. And it's not just fans who say this **** too, cause I know for a fact that GMs think like this, but why? Why does it ****ing matter?

You play a division rival 6 times over an 82 game season. That's 7.3% of your games over a season...does it really matter that much?

No, it ****ing doesnt. The difference that that player makes is probably going to be small for 1 or 2 of those games, even if it's Crosby. So, why should a GM be afraid to trade a player in the division if it's only really going to matter for 4 or maybe 5 games? It's such silly logic, I know, but this kind of **** actually prevents GMs from making better trades. Not to mention we're talking divisional trades here, what about in the conference? In the ****ing conference? What ****ing difference does it really make if you play against that player 1 time or 3 times? Very very little.

Not to mention, you should be trading a player for other useful players who will hurt the other team to give up. So, even if you guys meet in the playoffs; it shouldn't make a huge negative difference. Certainly not enough for a team to turn down a trade which they consider to have better value.
It can matter and anger management...you should really look into the latter...just sayin

Mac Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 10:00 AM
  #62
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Man View Post
It can matter and anger management...you should really look into the latter...just sayin
Why? He's just passionate about the subject. I don't see the problem. It's also a topic that doesn't come up a lot. Nobody wants to hear your dumb peanut gallery comments. Start focusing on improving yourself and let others worry about themselves. Time to ****ing grow up, ok?

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 10:04 AM
  #63
VinnyC
Rangers fan I SWEAR
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 新香
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by acr View Post
Peter Chiarelli has made a living trading with divisional rivals.

He's made several deals with the Leafs, got Paille from Buffalo and Kelly from Ottawa, in addition to minor deals like Daugavins last year.
That's why PC is one of the league's top GM's.

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 10:05 AM
  #64
magic school bus
***********
 
magic school bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,910
vCash: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoolChamp View Post
I agree completely OP

trading should be about maximizing your return not being a scared little *****.
Yup. GM's are big scardy cats and it shows with how prevalent and unchallenged this logic is.

magic school bus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 10:17 AM
  #65
Moore Money
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by magic school bus View Post
Yup. GM's are big scardy cats and it shows with how prevalent and unchallenged this logic is.
yup agree.

Moore Money is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 10:25 AM
  #66
deckercky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,011
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SANTArelli25 View Post
This. This. This.

Cory Schneider comes to mind. There were rumours Edmonton was offering stuff up for him, but the whole time I was hoping we didn't take any of their offers. Getting a franchise goaltender would have been a huge step for that team and that could have hurt the Canucks.
Well, the rumour was 1st (slightly better, but seems like the team was targeting Horvat) + Klefbom (possibly a 2nd there too?)

If there was the second there, that's pretty much double the value the Canucks got. I think the Canucks should have taken that, or at least gotten a 2nd or decent prospect added from the Devils. That difference in value was too much.

deckercky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2014, 10:34 AM
  #67
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by deckercky View Post
Well, the rumour was 1st (slightly better, but seems like the team was targeting Horvat) + Klefbom (possibly a 2nd there too?)

If there was the second there, that's pretty much double the value the Canucks got. I think the Canucks should have taken that, or at least gotten a 2nd or decent prospect added from the Devils. That difference in value was too much.
Exactly. The Canucks have enough problems in their own back yard. What difference does it make whether Edmonton is good or not if Vancouver is worse off?

digdug41982 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 06:54 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.