HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Reaction to Gainey's moves today as a whole....Part II

View Poll Results: What is you take!
I'm all for the youth movement and happy about the move 19 51.35%
I would had liked to keep(Huet) or gane a vet(Hossa a side) 3 8.11%
Wanted more things to happen and strongly belive the Habs made the wrong move 2 5.41%
Wa unhappy at first. Now glade because I like the team to start with 13 35.14%
Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-27-2008, 06:02 PM
  #51
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamp9post View Post
It wouldn't be accepted, and Gainey would have failed in his objective to move Huet.
The Caps trade the Habs a 2nd round pick.

If they re-sign Huet they give up a first, if they don't they give up nothing.

WHY wouldn't they accept that?

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:06 PM
  #52
Fido22
Registered User
 
Fido22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
The Caps trade the Habs a 2nd round pick.

If they re-sign Huet they give up a first, if they don't they give up nothing.

WHY wouldn't they accept that?
Conditional upgrade from 2nd to first upon signing doesn't sound like a deal breaker if they were keen on Huet, but who knows really. It could have been. Did they negotiate it or simply take the best offer? I have no idea. Maybe the 2nd rounder they got was after squezzing the Caps up from a 3rd rounder. A first might have been absolutely out of the picture. We don't know.

Fido22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:15 PM
  #53
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fido22 View Post
Conditional upgrade from 2nd to first upon signing doesn't sound like a deal breaker if they were keen on Huet, but who knows really. It could have been. Did they negotiate it or simply take the best offer? I have no idea. Maybe the 2nd rounder they got was after squezzing the Caps up from a 3rd rounder. A first might have been absolutely out of the picture. We don't know.
You're right, we don't know.

But yesterday Gainey said he didn't care what the return was and he'd have done it for a 5th... that doesn't make sense to me.

Moreover, I don't see how in the world a condition like re-signing would be a deal breaker when its entirely up to the Caps as to whether or not to exercise it or not. They get a free shot at the playoffs with a low 2nd round pick and if they want to keep the 1st they let Huet walk. There's no logical reason why we couldn't have at least put this into the deal.

Bottom line is that Bob could've done better here. We gave Washington a huge piece of their puzzle and got nothing back in return. In my books, that's a bad deal.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:22 PM
  #54
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
The fact is goaltenders don't have a large market. Huet is not an elite goaltender, so therefore a 2nd is in order. People act like a 2nd is nothing and a 1st is god. However, a 2nd round pick is 30 or less players from thier 1st rounder.
Look at these REGULAR players taken AFTER the first round:

Plekanec
Markov
Streit
Ryder
Latendresse
S. Kostitsyn
Dandenault
Lapierre
Kostopoulos
Brisebois
Begin
Bouillon (undrafted)
Gorges (undrafted)
O'Byrne
Grabovski
Halak

BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:23 PM
  #55
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
You're right, we don't know.

But yesterday Gainey said he didn't care what the return was and he'd have done it for a 5th... that doesn't make sense to me. Moreover, I don't see how in the world a condition like re-signing would be a deal breaker when its entirely up to the Caps as to whether or not to exercise it or not. They get a free shot at the playoffs with a low 2nd round pick and if they want to keep the 1st they let Huet walk. There's no logical reason why we couldn't have at least put this into the deal.

Bottom line is that Bob could've done better here. We gave Washington a huge piece of their puzzle and got nothing back in return. In my books, that's a bad deal.
I think something's lost in the translation here. Didn't he say more along the lines that an extra 5th wouldn't have changed anything ?

I think you dismiss the 2nd too easily here. 2nd's matter, they're hardly nothing.

The other issue is the perception of Huet around the league. Makes me wonder if he was as highly regarded outside Habland.

mcphee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:23 PM
  #56
habsfan44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamp9post View Post
Read my post. I said "GIVEN THAT DECISION". I did not say it was the right decision, but the organization believes that it is.

Therefore, with the assumption that Price/Halak is better than Price/Huet going forward, why not get a 2nd for Huet?
i have no problem with the decision , i think everybody would have agreed on monday past that price was the future of this franchise , well the future is now for price . he needs to perform in pressure situations(because there is no substitute for experience) like the upcoming stretch drive for the play-offs and then get his feet wet in the "second season" and he needs to do this with the knowledge that he is the go to guy because this is when he plays his best hockey , see the world junior championships and the AHL play-offs , now he has the chance to do it at the NHL level . BTW if last years stretch run is to be used as a measuring stick then i think halak is a really good plan "B" , so if price should falter jaroslav has the ability to step up and and give us great goaltending as good as or better than what huet would have provided . the more i think about this trade the more i like it . ballsy move by gainey ! year four of the five year plan and all is well .

habsfan44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:23 PM
  #57
Fido22
Registered User
 
Fido22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
But yesterday Gainey said he didn't care what the return was and he'd have done it for a 5th... that doesn't make sense to me.
I think he said something like "prices can move during the day......maybe if we waited we could have gotten an additional 5th, no big diff". That's a bit different. My personal impression is that Hossa was priority No.1 for the day.....Huet was dealt to an offer they felt acceptable (ie. not worth diverging attention from the Hossa deal to maximize as the margin is minimal). That's just my feeling though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Moreover, I don't see how in the world a condition like re-signing would be a deal breaker when its entirely up to the Caps as to whether or not to exercise it or not. They get a free shot at the playoffs with a low 2nd round pick and if they want to keep the 1st they let Huet walk. There's no logical reason why we couldn't have at least put this into the deal.

Bottom line is that Bob could've done better here. We gave Washington a huge piece of their puzzle and got nothing back in return. In my books, that's a bad deal.
Makes sense to me. If it was possible, they should have had somebody pushing it. Maybe the Caps where discussing Huet and Roloson or something......"Bob, it's a second that's my price......this is a busy day.....I'm sorry but it's take it or leave it......we have other options at that price and I'm not changing my offer".

If you WANT to deal Huet and you're pursuing Hossa, you take it?

My beef is with dealing Huet in the first place for a pick. I feel the dowside is way too steep for the gain.

Fido22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:25 PM
  #58
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,521
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
The goalie market is limited, fair enough. Nobody disputes this.

But that doesn't mean they don't have value, esp for teams with goaltending issues. Huet represents tremendous value for the Caps and we gave him to them for next to nothing. Its a bad deal.
So if the Caps did not offer anything more than what they did, are you saying we should have kept Huet and gotten zippo for him? It's pretty clear after Bob's comments we had no interest in resigning him.

If people are PO'd we got a 2nd rounder, imagine what would be said if we kept him and got squat (see Souray discussions last year)

JrHockeyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:25 PM
  #59
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
You're right, we don't know.

[B]But yesterday Gainey said he didn't care what the return was and he'd have done it for a 5th... that doesn't make sense to me. [B]
That's not what Bob said. He said, in poor French, that had he wanted to at the last minute he might have got an ADDITIONAL 5th or 6th round pick, but that he had already decided that he wanted the destination to be Washington.

I agree. It would be less preferable to send Huet to Ottawa even if they were to spend a 2nd PLUS a 5th choice.

BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:31 PM
  #60
Habs
Registered User
 
Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Size on the wings?

Andrei Kostitsyn -- 6'0", 201 lbs.
Alex Kovalev -- 6'1", 224 lbs.
Christopher Higgins -- 6'0", 199 lbs.
Sergei Kostitsyn -- 5'11", 196 lbs.
Guillaume Latendresse -- 6'2", 222 lbs.
Michael Ryder -- 6'0", 186 lbs.

They're not huge but this isn't a lineup of midgets by any stretch of the imagination, and you don't see a guy there that will shy away from laying a hit.
We are soft on the wings, generally speaking. None of the above players are notorious for frightening the opposition when going into the offensive zone.

We play a perimeter game, rarely creating traffic in front of the net. Its worked thus far, I'm curious to see how it works when the second season arrives and the checking gets harder and more intense.

Obviously BG thinks we are physical enough for the playoffs, I have some doubts.

Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:33 PM
  #61
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcphee View Post
I think something's lost in the translation here. Didn't he say more along the lines that an extra 5th wouldn't have changed anything ?
I think he said "it wouldn't have mattered"

Basically, he gave up on Huet and I'm fine with that. That doesn't mean he didn't warrant a better return.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcphee View Post
I think you dismiss the 2nd too easily here. 2nd's matter, they're hardly nothing.
Sure they matter. But Huet's worth more than Hal Gill isn't he? I mean seriously, if you were a Washington fan wouldn't you feel like you just robbed somebody blind?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcphee View Post
The other issue is the perception of Huet around the league. Makes me wonder if he was as highly regarded outside Habland.
A conditional trade would've addressed that. Fine, if he's not worth a 1st, don't re-sign him. But I think Huet is going to make a huge difference to that team and I think they can re-sign him for cheap. I don't see how that doesn't warrant a mid to low 1st rounder.

Regardless, we gave him away for too little.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:34 PM
  #62
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs View Post
We are soft on the wings, generally speaking. None of the above players are notorious for frightening the opposition when going into the offensive zone.
Maybe not physically, but when Kostitsyn had the puck behind the net and Kovalev waltzed to the top of the crease, the Thrashers looked frightened to me...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs View Post
Obviously BG thinks we are physical enough for the playoffs, I have some doubts.
Montreal is something like 2nd in the league for hits. Even accounting for arena bias, I think it's clear the Habs don't shy away from initiating contact, at least.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:36 PM
  #63
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,521
vCash: 500
I think BG explained what the logic was behind his moves pretty well. Taken one step at a times it just makes sense.

Atlanta simply wanted more than what he thought we should pay. Pittsburgh paid WAY too much for somebody who did not improve that team enough to win the cup as I see it.

Whether Hossa decides to sign with the Pens or not is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with what they paid to get his services for the remainder of this season. Montreal would have been in the same boat.

If we really want Hossa and he is willing to come here the man will be up for bids in July without giving up players and picks.

JrHockeyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:36 PM
  #64
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan View Post
So if the Caps did not offer anything more than what they did, are you saying we should have kept Huet and gotten zippo for him? It's pretty clear after Bob's comments we had no interest in resigning him.
Yes. You don't give up an asset like that for nothing.

And besides, I don't see how Washington would turn down the deal I suggested. Its the same deal only with the condition that they have to pay more IF they re-sign him. I have yet to see a valid argument as to why they wouldn't do this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan View Post
If people are PO'd we got a 2nd rounder, imagine what would be said if we kept him and got squat (see Souray discussions last year)
Souray was a different story. We were in a nosedive and Huet had just gone down with an injury. We could've gotten a lot for him and it was pretty clear that we were going to miss the playoffs. The only reason it was even close was because Halak came in from out of nowhere and played really well.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:43 PM
  #65
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs View Post
We are soft on the wings, generally speaking. None of the above players are notorious for frightening the opposition when going into the offensive zone.

We play a perimeter game, rarely creating traffic in front of the net. Its worked thus far, I'm curious to see how it works when the second season arrives and the checking gets harder and more intense.

Obviously BG thinks we are physical enough for the playoffs, I have some doubts.
I agree to a point. I don't think we have guys shy about the heavy traffic, but a few that just ca't get thru it. The younger Kostitsyn gets praised, as he should, for being willing to get his nose in there, but sometimes he just can't.

I think they didn't want to sacrifice guys they developed, or skill, to acquire slight upgrades on Kostopolous. I guess the thinking could be that as Price has to develop on the job, the same applies to Lats,Lapierre and a few others.

mcphee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:43 PM
  #66
Fido22
Registered User
 
Fido22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I have yet to see a valid argument as to why they wouldn't do this.
You are quite right, maybe the Habs could have squezzed more. A valid argument as to why the Caps wouldn't do this is that they already had other deals close where they would pay less. Roloson, for example. Maybe they weren't ready to pay more for Huet. Low demand. Higher offer.

Buffalo last year held on and held on and held on to Biron. In the end, he was traded for a 2nd. I think the Sabres tried to squeze what they could for Biron. That was that.

Your idea makes sense to me. Maybe it's not market though.

Fido22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:45 PM
  #67
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,521
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Yes. You don't give up an asset like that for nothing.

And besides, I don't see how Washington would turn down the deal I suggested. Its the same deal only with the condition that they have to pay more IF they re-sign him. I have yet to see a valid argument as to why they wouldn't do this.

Souray was a different story. We were in a nosedive and Huet had just gone down with an injury. We could've gotten a lot for him and it was pretty clear that we were going to miss the playoffs. The only reason it was even close was because Halak came in from out of nowhere and played really well.
Sorry but I respectfully disagree. There is nothing to suggest that the Caps would have accepted a conditional offer. They have just as much chance as anyone to sign Huet in July without offering anything extra, so why consent to strings attached? It is not the "same" deal. It is a 1st rounder vs a second for a player they may have no interest in signing.

In any case, the rental agreement has nothing to do with signing the guy unless strings are attached, so why would they complicate it. They didn't even offer us their own 2nd round pick, it is Anaheim's I believe.

Anyway, I think it is a safe bet that haggling went on and that is all they wanted to give up. End of story

Whether the Souray story is "different" from a circumstances consideration does not matter to those who expected to get something in stead of nothing. There was a lot of talk about that last year after the fact

JrHockeyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:46 PM
  #68
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaseballCoach View Post
That's not what Bob said. He said, in poor French, that had he wanted to at the last minute he might have got an ADDITIONAL 5th or 6th round pick, but that he had already decided that he wanted the destination to be Washington.

I agree. It would be less preferable to send Huet to Ottawa even if they were to spend a 2nd PLUS a 5th choice.
I thought he said that, I was wondering if I heard wrong or whether he said it in English or not. I took it to mean that, yeah, maybe I could've gotten a bit more,but not anything significant.

mcphee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:46 PM
  #69
znk
Registered User
 
znk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Right, because the conditional trade idea is terrible.

Instead of the insults, tell us what you think is wrong with it? Give us an actualy argument here.
I refuse this deal.

znk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 06:58 PM
  #70
yukoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobak View Post
You mean 25th. And 24th if the Stanley Cup winner isn't a division champion.

Edit: Or what the other guy said if that's how it works. I can't find a place that says who had the original picks in a given draft to check.
A number one goalie. For a 2nd round draft pick.

Repeat that in your head.

This is nothing short of a rip off, and Lafluers is bang on on this one. And this is a guy I argued about for weeks because he wanted to trade Huet, and even he thinks this was a stupid trade!

Bottomline: Almost everyone who thinks this was a 'good' trade is either
a) In love with Carey Price
b) Never liked Huet in the first place or
c) Has no belief in this team this year, despite us sitting 3pts out of first for the first time in 15 years.

For everyone else, who actually greatly valued Huet, and believed in our Team's chances in the Playoffs with a Huet-Price tandem, this is horrible.

I could swallow it with even a moderate return, but a late 2nd round pick?? For our #1!? WHAT?

And gainey said he based it on the last 3 weeks. That's 8 games. He traded him because of 8 games. WHat about his previous 10 Bob? What about his previous 30? His previous 100?


Last edited by yukoner: 02-27-2008 at 07:03 PM.
yukoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 07:05 PM
  #71
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan View Post
Sorry but I respectfully disagree. There is nothing to suggest that the Caps would have accepted a conditional offer. They have just as much chance as anyone to sign Huet in July without offering anything extra, so why consent to strings attached? It is not the "same" deal. It is a 1st rounder vs a second for a player they may have no interest in signing.
A couple of reasons.

1. If they trade for him they have a much better chance at signing him than everyone else.

2. He gives them a legit shot at the playoffs and going much further into the postseason than they otherwise would.

3. If he's not worth it, they just paid a late 2nd rounder for a rental. There's absolutely no risk here.

4. We could've told them that other teams were interested and leveraged that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan View Post
In any case, the rental agreement has nothing to do with signing the guy unless strings are attached, so why would they complicate it. They didn't even offer us their own 2nd round pick, it is Anaheim's I believe.
They'd complicate it so that we could actually get some value out of Huet. We didn't do this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan View Post
Anyway, I think it is a safe bet that haggling went on and that is all they wanted to give up. End of story
Except that this thread is about whether or not we felt that Gainey did well yesterday. The results aren't good and I think Gainey could've done much better and if this was all he was offered we should've walked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan View Post
Whether the Souray story is "different" from a circumstances consideration does not matter to those who expected to get something in stead of nothing. There was a lot of talk about that last year after the fact
I criticized him for not trading him. I can understand why Gainey didn't do it but I disagreed.

Look, this is a hockey forum and its a place to have your say. I think Gainey's great but he's not infailable. There are too many people here who argue that he does everything right or everything wrong... that's not the case. I think Gainey's doing a good job, but he didn't get what he should've yesterday.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 07:08 PM
  #72
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by znk View Post
I refuse this deal.
Great argument.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 07:09 PM
  #73
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcphee View Post
I thought he said that, I was wondering if I heard wrong or whether he said it in English or not. I took it to mean that, yeah, maybe I could've gotten a bit more,but not anything significant.
Is that what he said? Sorry, my french isn't the greatest. I'll take your word for it.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 07:09 PM
  #74
yukoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Except that this thread is about whether or not we felt that Gainey did well yesterday. The results aren't good and I think Gainey could've done much better and if this was all he was offered we should've walked.
Totally. If he had floated this 2-3 weeks ago with other GM's, there's no way in hell we would've got only a 2nd rounder. He could've done better.

And for the life of me, I can't figure out the rationale of waiting until this late in the season to make this decision.

Carey Price didn't prove anything, and we're only 18 games away from the big show...

I just hope he can pull the weight now, what's done is done.

I think Halak is a big factor here. Gainey had to get him in and raise his trade value, and also see his potential as a #1. He took a big risk, but it just may pay off.

yukoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2008, 07:10 PM
  #75
Fido22
Registered User
 
Fido22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by yukoner View Post
A number one goalie. For a 2nd round draft pick.

Repeat that in your head.

This is nothing short of a rip off, and Lafluers is bang on on this one. And this is a guy I argued about for weeks because he wanted to trade Huet, and even he thinks this was a stupid trade!

Bottomline: Almost everyone who thinks this was a 'good' trade is either
a) In love with Carey Price
b) Never liked Huet in the first place or
c) Has no belief in this team this year, despite us sitting 3pts out of first for the first time in 15 years.

For everyone else, who actually greatly valued Huet, and believed in our Team's chances in the Playoffs with a Huet-Price tandem, this is horrible.

I could swallow it with even a moderate return, but a late 2nd round pick?? For our #1!? WHAT?

And gainey said he based it on the last 3 weeks. That's 8 games. He traded him because of 8 games. WHat about his previous 10 Bob? What about his previous 30? His previous 100?
Strange to trade your veteran keeper weeks prior to the playoffs, even if you want to play the young guy ain't it. Strange that the Habs have more confidence in Halak than in Huet for the playoffs. That's what it is nonetheless.

The sale price is what the market offered. Doesn't make it more understandable to trade Huet to me though, still I can't say we got stiffed on sale price. Try selling your house in a downmarket for what you think it is worth. It's never anything else than offer and demand in play.

Fido22 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 05:46 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.