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 use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

flames and caps proposal

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-27-2003, 06:59 AM
  #1
the future
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 274
vCash: 500
flames and caps proposal

caps get: gauthier, lydman,

flames get: gonchar

caps save 700,000 and pick up two capable defenseman. flames would have to sign gonchar to an extension. say 4 years @5mil per season. pre cba , gonchar might bite. then trade a saprykin for a pick for budget reasons.

let me have it!!

the future is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 07:12 AM
  #2
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 30,706
vCash: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by the future
caps get: gauthier, lydman,

flames get: gonchar

caps save 700,000 and pick up two capable defenseman. flames would have to sign gonchar to an extension. say 4 years @5mil per season. pre cba , gonchar might bite. then trade a saprykin for a pick for budget reasons.

let me have it!!

$7m for ignila
$4m for Turek
$5m for Goncher

I'm doubt the Flames want to tie up $16m in 3 players with a cap coming.

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 07:32 AM
  #3
Ozy_Flame
Registered User
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW
$7m for ignila
$4m for Turek
$5m for Goncher

I'm doubt the Flames want to tie up $16m in 3 players with a cap coming.
Gonchar is at $3.65 million. Gauthier and Lydman combined are $3 million. Turek's salary is also being covered by insurance right now, so they save some cash there. Financially it is feasible.

Ozy_Flame is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 07:55 AM
  #4
Stifler
Registered User
 
Stifler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Driving in Vice City
Posts: 362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by the future
caps get: gauthier, lydman,

flames get: gonchar

caps save 700,000 and pick up two capable defenseman. flames would have to sign gonchar to an extension. say 4 years @5mil per season. pre cba , gonchar might bite. then trade a saprykin for a pick for budget reasons.

let me have it!!
This is a horrible proposal. You should be ashamed.

Stifler is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 07:55 AM
  #5
Flames Draft Watcher
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
Turek's salary is also being covered by insurance right now, so they save some cash there. Financially it is feasible.
Nope, insurance doesn't kick in until he misses 30 games.

We could afford Gonchar this year if we gave up those two salaries but I can't see affording him down the line. Doesn't make much sense for Calgary, I think Sutter will build with the young defense we already have.

Flames Draft Watcher is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 08:14 AM
  #6
the future
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
Nope, insurance doesn't kick in until he misses 30 games.

We could afford Gonchar this year if we gave up those two salaries but I can't see affording him down the line. Doesn't make much sense for Calgary, I think Sutter will build with the young defense we already have.
my idea is too sign iggy to an extension before the end of this year maybe another 3 years at 5 million. ramholt, phaneuf and commodore are all projected to be young dmen capable of filling in the next couple years. one thing they are missing is a go to guy this year and next on the pp while leopold develops. that leaves

iggy: 5mil
gonch:5 mil
turek: 4mil

with a hard cap a possibility of anywhere around 31 to 37 miliion. that leaves enough room in my opinion

the future is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 09:31 AM
  #7
kolanos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,515
vCash: 500
I like Gonchar, but I think this is an overpayment by the Flames for a guy who will be 31 at the end of next season. Lydman could very well develop into a defenceman on par with Gonchar, I am not suggesting that Lydman will be as productive on offense as Gonchar, but I do think he will be of the same calibre in 2-3 years.

The Flames could just as well trade Gauthier for an asset they need and not have to add any additional salary.

kolanos is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 09:49 AM
  #8
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 43,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolanos
I like Gonchar, but I think this is an overpayment by the Flames for a guy who will be 31 at the end of next season. Lydman could very well develop into a defenceman on par with Gonchar, I am not suggesting that Lydman will be as productive on offense as Gonchar, but I do think he will be of the same calibre in 2-3 years.

The Flames could just as well trade Gauthier for an asset they need and not have to add any additional salary.
Talk about these trades all you like. Make proposals that will never happen. Its fun. BUT don't delude yourself that Lydman could very well develope into a defenseman on par with Gonchar. You throw up that disclaimer about not suggesting that Lydman will be as productive on offense as Gonchar and say that the Lydman and Gonchar will be the same caliber player in 2-3 years. Thats ridiculous!! With MacInnis gone Gonchar is head and shoulders above any defenseman in the NHL on the offensive side of the game. His defense has improved to the point that he can at minimum hold his own against the best forwards in the NHL. He is a one of a kind player. Yea...Lydman might become a Wade Redden quality player. But he is not going to be a Rob Blake quality player much less a Sergei Gonchar. Gonchar is in a class by himself offensively and is in a group of ten defensemen, tops, in combined offensive and defensive ability. Do you really think that Lydman is "very likely" to be a Norris trophy candidate? That is not very likely with any player that has not already reached that level. Sometimes I read these trades involving Gonchar and you talk about him like he is Andy freaking Delmore or Tomas Kaberle.

txpd is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 10:41 AM
  #9
kolanos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd
With MacInnis gone Gonchar is head and shoulders above any defenseman in the NHL on the offensive side of the game.
Who's really the deluded one here? That comment alone blows your, what I would call extreme bias out of the water. I could name atleast 20 defenceman in the league that I consider equal or better than Gonchar -- he's a great defenceman, but lets not kid ourselves -- he is definately not the best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd
His defense has improved to the point that he can at minimum hold his own against the best forwards in the NHL.
I was alluding to the defensive side of the game as to where Lydman would eventually catch up (IMO) to Gonchar value-wise. Lydman is already very solid defensively and has a respectable offensive game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd
He is a one of a kind player. Yea...Lydman might become a Wade Redden quality player. But he is not going to be a Rob Blake quality player much less a Sergei Gonchar. Gonchar is in a class by himself offensively and is in a group of ten defensemen, tops, in combined offensive and defensive ability.
I would actually say Redden (underrated) is on par with Gonchar and Blake is easily better overall. And sorry to inform you, but Gonchar is not a one of a kind player, there are a number of players who play a similiar style -- some that even do it better than he does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd
Do you really think that Lydman is "very likely" to be a Norris trophy candidate? That is not very likely with any player that has not already reached that level. Sometimes I read these trades involving Gonchar and you talk about him like he is Andy freaking Delmore or Tomas Kaberle.
You're not making sense anymore. So Lydman cannot be a Norris candidate because he hasn't "already reached that levle"? When Gonchar was Lydman's age he wasn't nearly as effective defensively as he is today, and I still think there is plenty of room for improvement. Seems very narrow-minded. There are plenty of defenceman between the ages of 21-25 that I can see being Norris trophy candidates at some point in their careers. Lydman is no different in my opinion, especially the way he's improved defensively over the past couple years.

Sutter won't touch Gonchar at that price. And neither would I.

kolanos is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 01:04 PM
  #10
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 43,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolanos
Who's really the deluded one here? That comment alone blows your, what I would call extreme bias out of the water. I could name atleast 20 defenceman in the league that I consider equal or better than Gonchar -- he's a great defenceman, but lets not kid ourselves -- he is definately not the best.


I was alluding to the defensive side of the game as to where Lydman would eventually catch up (IMO) to Gonchar value-wise. Lydman is already very solid defensively and has a respectable offensive game.


I would actually say Redden (underrated) is on par with Gonchar and Blake is easily better overall. And sorry to inform you, but Gonchar is not a one of a kind player, there are a number of players who play a similiar style -- some that even do it better than he does.


You're not making sense anymore. So Lydman cannot be a Norris candidate because he hasn't "already reached that levle"? When Gonchar was Lydman's age he wasn't nearly as effective defensively as he is today, and I still think there is plenty of room for improvement. Seems very narrow-minded. There are plenty of defenceman between the ages of 21-25 that I can see being Norris trophy candidates at some point in their careers. Lydman is no different in my opinion, especially the way he's improved defensively over the past couple years.

Sutter won't touch Gonchar at that price. And neither would I.
1. Gonchar was voted by the players 2nd team allstar defenseman last year. Lidstrom/MacInnis-Hatcher/Gonchar. That would be in the top 4.
if you think Gonchar is merely a top 20 NHL defenseman, then that is not even allstar game allstar caliber. eh?

2. To be the equal of Gonchar based on his defense, Lydman would have to be a dominant defensive zone player that his above average on the offensive side of the game. Gonchar is above average on defense and is a dominant force on the offensive side. I am delusional? Gonchar leads NHL defensemen in points by a bucket load after 20 games. At this rate he will lead NHL defensemen by 20 pts by season's end. Last year he was one point behind Al MacInnis and lead defensemen in goals. He leads defensemen in goals over the last 5 years. He is dominant. Do you visualize Lydman as a dominant player defensively in the next couple of years? If your answer is yes and you are correct in your evaluation, then maybe 30% of players like him ever realize their full potential. IF he achieves Wade Redden stature he will be very successful.

txpd is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 01:21 PM
  #11
Oiltalk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolanos
Who's really the deluded one here? That comment alone blows your, what I would call extreme bias out of the water. I could name atleast 20 defenceman in the league that I consider equal or better than Gonchar -- he's a great defenceman, but lets not kid ourselves -- he is definately not the best.


I was alluding to the defensive side of the game as to where Lydman would eventually catch up (IMO) to Gonchar value-wise. Lydman is already very solid defensively and has a respectable offensive game.


I would actually say Redden (underrated) is on par with Gonchar and Blake is easily better overall. And sorry to inform you, but Gonchar is not a one of a kind player, there are a number of players who play a similiar style -- some that even do it better than he does.


You're not making sense anymore. So Lydman cannot be a Norris candidate because he hasn't "already reached that levle"? When Gonchar was Lydman's age he wasn't nearly as effective defensively as he is today, and I still think there is plenty of room for improvement. Seems very narrow-minded. There are plenty of defenceman between the ages of 21-25 that I can see being Norris trophy candidates at some point in their careers. Lydman is no different in my opinion, especially the way he's improved defensively over the past couple years.

Sutter won't touch Gonchar at that price. And neither would I.
Gonchar is far better than Blake. Neither of them are exceptional defensively, but Gonchar will put up far more pts. on a team that will be lucky to make the playoffs.

Oiltalk is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 01:22 PM
  #12
kolanos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,515
vCash: 500
txpd, I am not trying to discount Gonchar's abilities. Don't get me wrong. I consider top 20 to be an elite class, and Gonchar is definately there. But he isn't the best, he still occassionally gets caught deep and hurts his team -- he handles that better than say Zubov for example, but he still has a lot of room to improve in that regard. Lydman on the other hand has a very strong positional game and is very rarely caught out of position -- this conservative play takes a toll on his offensive game, but there's a reason why 'defence' is in the term defenceman, Lydman plays defence first.

I think Lydman's potential is on par value-wise with where Gonchar is today, and for that reason, doubled with the fact that the Flames would have to add salary just to acquire Gonchar -- I wouldn't make the deal.

Lydman has improved in leaps and bounds over the past three years and gets better everyday. I don't think it is a stretch to say that when Lydman is 29 he could be considered a top 20 defenceman in the NHL.

kolanos is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 01:26 PM
  #13
kolanos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oiltalk
Gonchar is far better than Blake. Neither of them are exceptional defensively, but Gonchar will put up far more pts. on a team that will be lucky to make the playoffs.
I disagree. While Blake isn't spotless defensively, I still believe him to be a more signifigant precense in his own zone -- especially his physical play, something that Gonchar shies away from even though he has the size.

kolanos is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 02:03 PM
  #14
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 30,706
vCash: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
Gonchar is at $3.65 million. Gauthier and Lydman combined are $3 million. Turek's salary is also being covered by insurance right now, so they save some cash there. Financially it is feasible.

the original proposal called for giving Goncher a $5m a yr extension.

Doesn't Turek have 2 more yrs after this one on his current deal?

That'd be 2 yrs paying out $16m to 3 players, under a cap.I'm not saying the Flames couldn't do it.

I questioned if they'd want to tie up that much in 3 players.

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 03:18 PM
  #15
CapitalsCupFantasy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CapitalsCupFantasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 29,567
vCash: 500
Laughable....someone just lost their credibility

[QUOTE=Kolanos]Who's really the deluded one here? That comment alone blows your, what I would call extreme bias out of the water. I could name atleast 20 defenceman in the league that I consider equal or better than Gonchar QUOTE]


That's is one of the most absurd statements I've seen here in a long time. I mean everyone had their own opinion...but come on.

I bet you couldn't find 2 more people here that would agree with that statement.

CapitalsCupFantasy is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 03:20 PM
  #16
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 43,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolanos
I disagree. While Blake isn't spotless defensively, I still believe him to be a more signifigant precense in his own zone -- especially his physical play, something that Gonchar shies away from even though he has the size.
Rob Blake's backing up hip checks are certainly more of a force than anything that Gonchar does. But what that gives you is a defenseman who takes chances in the offensive zone and the defensive zone. Gonchar doesn't throw big hits, except against Toronto, But neither does Lidstrom. There was a comment earlier about Gonchar still getting caught deep. That's true. Its part of his job description to jump into the play. He goes places that most defensemen don't because he has the skill to do something with it. Unless he scores he will get caught.
All the best offensive defensemen, get caught now and then. Jumping into the play is a calculated risk and isn't successful every time. Just as stepping up to make a center ice hit or laying a hip check is a risk. even a successfull open ice hit leaves the defenseman out of the play if it continues. Gonchar is far from reckless and irresponsible in his choices to jump into the play. Neither is Blake when he steps into the player or steps up for a big hit. either way he is out of the play once he has done it.

txpd is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 03:23 PM
  #17
CapitalsCupFantasy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CapitalsCupFantasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 29,567
vCash: 500
Nobody and I mean

Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd
Rob Blake's backing up hip checks are certainly more of a force than anything that Gonchar does. But what that gives you is a defenseman who takes chances in the offensive zone and the defensive zone. Gonchar doesn't throw big hits, except against Toronto, But neither does Lidstrom. There was a comment earlier about Gonchar still getting caught deep. That's true. Its part of his job description to jump into the play. He goes places that most defensemen don't because he has the skill to do something with it. Unless he scores he will get caught.
All the best offensive defensemen, get caught now and then. Jumping into the play is a calculated risk and isn't successful every time. Just as stepping up to make a center ice hit or laying a hip check is a risk. even a successfull open ice hit leaves the defenseman out of the play if it continues. Gonchar is far from reckless and irresponsible in his choices to jump into the play. Neither is Blake when he steps into the player or steps up for a big hit. either way he is out of the play once he has done it.
Nobody "activates" (Joe B word) like Gonch from the point.

CapitalsCupFantasy is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 05:07 PM
  #18
kolanos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanwon
That's is one of the most absurd statements I've seen here in a long time. I mean everyone had their own opinion...but come on.

I bet you couldn't find 2 more people here that would agree with that statement.
Correction: I probably couldn't find 2 more Caps fans that would agree.

But that's to be expected. I don't think the rest of the league values Gonchar as highly (ie. the best defenceman in the league) as Caps fans do.

If you want me to name them, you'll have to ask.

kolanos is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 05:11 PM
  #19
kolanos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd
Rob Blake's backing up hip checks are certainly more of a force than anything that Gonchar does. But what that gives you is a defenseman who takes chances in the offensive zone and the defensive zone. Gonchar doesn't throw big hits, except against Toronto, But neither does Lidstrom. There was a comment earlier about Gonchar still getting caught deep. That's true. Its part of his job description to jump into the play. He goes places that most defensemen don't because he has the skill to do something with it. Unless he scores he will get caught.
All the best offensive defensemen, get caught now and then. Jumping into the play is a calculated risk and isn't successful every time. Just as stepping up to make a center ice hit or laying a hip check is a risk. even a successfull open ice hit leaves the defenseman out of the play if it continues. Gonchar is far from reckless and irresponsible in his choices to jump into the play. Neither is Blake when he steps into the player or steps up for a big hit. either way he is out of the play once he has done it.
Again, not making sense. When Blake gives a guy a big hit, at the very least he succeeds in taking a body out of the play. When Gonchar gets caught deep, he leaves his team in the very best case at a 4-on-5 disadvantage on the rush. I'd take the Blake scendario ten times out of ten.

kolanos is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 05:15 PM
  #20
andora
Registered User
 
andora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Illuminating Prince
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,052
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to andora
Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd
Talk about these trades all you like. Make proposals that will never happen. Its fun. BUT don't delude yourself that Lydman could very well develope into a defenseman on par with Gonchar.


Sometimes I read these trades involving Gonchar and you talk about him like he is Andy freaking Delmore or Tomas Kaberle.
this is some of the worst ignorant rhetoric i've ever read on here. the first blurb is pathetic, while the second one groups kaberle with delmore..

Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd
1. Gonchar was voted by the players 2nd team allstar defenseman last year. Lidstrom/MacInnis-Hatcher/Gonchar. That would be in the top 4.
if you think Gonchar is merely a top 20 NHL defenseman, then that is not even allstar game allstar caliber. eh?
big *** deal, i'd take scott niedermayer, scott stevens, adam foote *to name three* over hatcher/macinnis/gonchar.. without a second thought.. he got some recognition, good for him, he deserves it. niedermayer and foote hardly get the recognition they deserve, while stevens still goes on as one of the best..

top four.. very very very debatable, i remember the thread in the NHL board awhile back, listing peoples' top 10 dmen.. gonchar i think appeared above 5 only a couple times, and on lots of lists not even in the top 10..

andora is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 08:28 PM
  #21
CapitalsCupFantasy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CapitalsCupFantasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 29,567
vCash: 500
Waiting

Quote:
Originally Posted by kolanos
Correction: I probably couldn't find 2 more Caps fans that would agree.

But that's to be expected. I don't think the rest of the league values Gonchar as highly (ie. the best defenceman in the league) as Caps fans do.

If you want me to name them, you'll have to ask.

For everyone else to pile on and say Gonchar isn't in the top 25 in the NHL. Lets see, leading all defensemen in points, 2nd in total ice time, 1st in assists. The 21st ranked defenceman in the NHL doesn't put up those numbers, ON THE WORST TEAM in the NHL!!!


"Again, not making sense. When Blake gives a guy a big hit, at the very least he succeeds in taking a body out of the play. When Gonchar gets caught deep, he leaves his team in the very best case at a 4-on-5 disadvantage on the rush. I'd take the Blake scendario ten times out of ten."

More nonsense. I'd take Gonchar at $3.65 mil over Blake at $8 mil any day. I'm sure most other people would too.

"top four.. very very very debatable, i remember the thread in the NHL board awhile back, listing peoples' top 10 dmen.. gonchar i think appeared above 5 only a couple times, and on lots of lists not even in the top 10.."

Start it up again if you're so confident. I gaurantee Gonchar would be top 5 on most of the posters.

CapitalsCupFantasy is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 08:56 PM
  #22
andora
Registered User
 
andora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Illuminating Prince
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,052
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to andora
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanwon

"top four.. very very very debatable, i remember the thread in the NHL board awhile back, listing peoples' top 10 dmen.. gonchar i think appeared above 5 only a couple times, and on lots of lists not even in the top 10.."

Start it up again if you're so confident. I gaurantee Gonchar would be top 5 on most of the posters.
yeah whatever, nice flex.. start it up yourself..

my point is that he isn't a LOCK for one of the top four dmen in the game.. i mean most would likely take pronger and lidstrom over gonchar.. then, there is a great long list of dmen on the same level of gonchar in terms of overall all round package and worth to a team...

just to name a few, foote/blake/zubov/hatcher/hamrlik/redden/macinnis/niedermayer/jovanovski/ohlund ...
and gonchar belongs right in there with them

like i said, it's very very debatable..

andora is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 09:41 PM
  #23
CapitalsCupFantasy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CapitalsCupFantasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 29,567
vCash: 500
That's more reasonable

Quote:
Originally Posted by andora

my point is that he isn't a LOCK for one of the top four dmen in the game.. i mean most would likely take pronger and lidstrom over gonchar.. then, there is a great long list of dmen on the same level of gonchar in terms of overall all round package and worth to a team...

just to name a few, foote/blake/zubov/hatcher/hamrlik/redden/macinnis/niedermayer/jovanovski/ohlund ...
and gonchar belongs right in there with them

like i said, it's very very debatable..
Would I take Pronger or Lidstrom over Gonchar? Sure...at $3.65 mil. Not at $8 mil. But now you've suddenly gone from saying he's not in the top 20 in the NHL to comparing him to a perennial Norris candidate, winner, and likely HOF. Hardly the same argument but nice transistion on the sly.

BTW I doubt many Stars/Blues fans would take Zubov and his ZERO goals over Gonchar right now, or an injured/seriously aging Macinnis.

Macinnis in his prime I could agree with.

Believe me, I'm not one of those fans who thinks all their players are the best. 2 seasons ago, Gonchar was terrible in his own end. He was servicable last season, and has been pretty solid this year. Although there have been a few gaffs here and there, but s**t happens.

CapitalsCupFantasy is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 09:49 PM
  #24
andora
Registered User
 
andora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Illuminating Prince
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,052
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to andora
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanwon
But now you've suddenly gone from saying he's not in the top 20 in the NHL to comparing him to a perennial Norris candidate, winner, and likely HOF. Hardly the same argument but nice transistion on the sly.
.
where did i say that he wasn't in the top twenty dmen? you slyly just put that out there

andora is offline  
Old
11-27-2003, 10:55 PM
  #25
Evil Sather
YOU KILL THE JOE
 
Evil Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YOU MAKE SOME MO
Posts: 2,011
vCash: 500
The original argument was Gonchar is unbelievable on the offensive end and that was the huge attraction -- he is, no one comes close. Who can lead the rush like Gonchar? Leetch every so often can pull an end to end out of the mothballs, Niedermeyer and Lidstrom could if they were cut loose, but really who else could do it as consistently and consistently well? Gonchar is a rare, rare defenseman. Coffey level skillset back there. I find Lydman overrated and it's highly doubtful for even his biggest fans to say he'll approach what Gonchar is now, in addition to Gauthier who I see in proposals probably twice a week. There are problems with the proposal but *value* isn't one of them. Whether someone would take a Foote type over him is comparing apples to oranges, but he's the pre-eminent offensive defenseman today, and that's gonna command a serious return.

Evil Sather 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 02:31 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.