Nobody ever said that. Only your rampant imagination did. I and others have talked of the possibility that the Oilers might want him in a package for Cole, but don't let the exageration kill you. It wouldn't be a pity tho.
Oh and BTW, just so you don't confuse things, its not Bryan Burke who traded for Whitney today.
You said Laraque + for Cole. Usually the first guy you mention is the major part of the deal, not the "+". Anyone who thinks the Oilers would need Laraque right now, obviously hasn't seen them play.
Olli represents a gamble but a potential home run as well. He scored 90 on a Florida team without much of a supporting cast. Has wilted in the desert so the value is down, but that is why he is available. He would otherwise be out of the Habs price range. Unless this club wants to be a floormat for the Bruins they could use him. He has much more left in the tank than Sundin did when they went after him. He is not going to be as cheap as some fans fantisize but they can definitely get him without emptying the cupboard. This could make them a whole different team.
Are you certain of this Ozy? Not that I'm doubting you, but logically, it wouldn't make much sense. You are replacing apples with oranges. I'm under the impression that you can replace Lang's 4M annual salary with another guy who has up to a 4M annual salary, and not replace Lang's 4M with a guy whose prorated amount is up to 4M. I could be wrong, I just always assumed it was like that, and that is how it makes sense in my mind.
Well, I had the same exact impression that you did, and its still not 100% clear to me. I do find it illogical, but when you look at the several CBA clauses that have to do with this, I don't know how else to put it.
First they say that teams have to calculate on a daily basis what the entire roster amounts to, in terms of yearly salary. I once thought that they calculated this with a prorated amount for each single game, salary divided by 82, but its not the case.
Then, on the LTIR clause, they say that a team with an injured player on LTIR will be able to add the amount of the player's cap hit to their cap, in effect, extending their cap by this amount. Which is fine, because it is still on the same basis as calculating the daily cap, they use yearly numbers.
But then, when they speak of transactions/trades, they say teams only recieve the prorated amount of the cap hit, and also EXCHANGE the rest of the prorated amount of the cap hit of the players we send. (an example of this would be Rivet, we had to include, in the daily calculations after he was gone, the prorated amount of Rivet's contract that he spent with us, even tho he was gone). Anyway, this is how I understood it. At first I thought only the payable salary was prorated, but that the cap remained the same, but it seems BOTH are prorated. So this means with Bouillon being on LTIR, we can put Schneider's prorated cap hit of 1,6 under Bouillon's total cap hit of 1,85.
Anyway, I'm not saying this is gospel truth, but from the many many discussions i've had with many people and the many readings I did of the CBA, this seems to be the case, altho I entirely agree that I might be mistaken, as this CBA is really not good at providing GOOD examples of complicated situations that mixes many clauses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany
You said Laraque + for Cole. Usually the first guy you mention is the major part of the deal, not the "+". Anyone who thinks the Oilers would need Laraque right now, obviously hasn't seen them play.
Stortini, MaCintyre, Strudwick...
That's your interpretation. Also I didn,t say +. I said Laraque+ somethingsomething.... meaning it would take much more than Laraque. I know I might be asking too much of your brain with this, but don't you realize I just didn't care who was included in the rest of the deal, that the point was to have a deal that included both Cole and Laraque? That it might be why I added somethingsomething.... Also, the point of not putting a + after Cole should be indicative that HE was the major piece in the trade. But I guess this logical deduction is way too much to ask from you.
But its way easier for you to interpret it this way, so you might try to make me look bad. Try all you want, I don't care, people around here know me and know I don't make half-assed proposals. Only those who put words in my mouth end-up thinking that.
And its not a question of needing him, but a question of wanting him, those are two different things, and neither you nor I know the true philosophy proned by Lowe and his thoughts. He might just want one more big guy.
Now repeat after me, Burke wasn't the one who traded for Whitney today. Burke wasn't the one who traded for Luongo either. Come on, you'll get it.
Last edited by Habs10Habs: 02-27-2009 at 08:07 AM.
That's your interpretation. Also I didn,t say +. I said Laraque+ somethingsomething.... meaning it would take much more than Laraque. I know I might be asking too much of your brain with this, but don't you realize I just didn't care who was included in the rest of the deal, that the point was to have a deal that included both Cole and Laraque? That it might be why I added somethingsomething.... Also, the point of not putting a + after Cole should be indicative that HE was the major piece in the trade. But I guess this logical deduction is way too much to ask from you.
But its way easier for you to interpret it this way, so you might try to make me look bad. Try all you want, I don't care, people around here know me and know I don't make half-assed proposals. Only those who put words in my mouth end-up thinking that.
And its not a question of needing him, but a question of wanting him, those are two different things, and neither you nor I know the true philosophy proned by Lowe and his thoughts. He might just want one more big guy.
Now repeat after me, Burke wasn't the one who traded for Whitney today. Burke wasn't the one who traded for Luongo either. Come on, you'll get it.
Sure, that's what you meant. Is that what "you" would give for Cole?
Hang on, you spout off here claiming to know Gainey's thoughts. Anyone who knows anything about hockey (that's not you) would know that the Oilers have no use for Laraque right now.
Sure, that's what you meant. Is that what "you" would give for Cole?
Did I ever say that? No. Keep trying little man. I said Laraque+somethingsomething for Cole. That seems pretty wide open.
Quote:
Hang on, you spout off here claiming to know Gainey's thoughts. Anyone who knows anything about hockey (that's not you) would know that the Oilers have no use for Laraque right now.
Dude you are really frustrated about me handing your ass to you in the past two weeks. You know it isn't good to hold a grudge. It doesn,t help your stress level, and than anybody who is too stressed while start babbling stupid stuff on and on and on. Better go see a shrink about that little buddy. Also, all this hatred and whinning about Gainey and the Habs, it doesn't help either. You should find more productive ways to fend off that anger and frustration.
Yeah, I think most here would agree that I know far more about hockey than you do, Mister BurketradedforLuongo.
And I never said I knew what Gainey thought, but I did show the logic behind many of his moves, while you jsut pretended to simplistic 1+1s that don't add up to much in reality.
Right, I shouldn,t expect much, you're the same guy who thought critical thinking was mainly defined as being a critic.... ahem
Now stop harrassing me like you had such a desperate need for attention, you're embarassing yourself.
i'm not as sold on Jokinen as I use to be.. The guy seems to have issues on both teams he has been on so far. He seems like a risky proposition. Seems like a guy with attitude problems and he has never won anything in the NHL before. Rumbles of him being selfish have been heard before..
The pot calling the kettle black? You're the one asking where I am after a win. Trust me, I don't think about you while watching the Habs.
Now continue with your 15 posts per day average. Get a life, dude.
Really? I challenge anyone to go look at all the posts Nittany has quoted me in the first place today and yesterday. He's hounding me because he's totally po'ed that I showed how little he knows.
oh, and its actually 50 posts per day, only 2 days per week... that's 5 days where I don't have to read your stupid comments. Anyway, your post is the perfect example of someone who doesn't have anything more to say. Get a clue, I think its time for you to skiddoo... and never come back.
if we could somehow manage to squeeze Kevin Porter out of PHX as well... he's a little smallish, but had amazing chemistry with Max down in Michigan. Having him and Maxwell duel it out for Koivu's spot down the road would be fine by me
jokinen and Morris would be solid additions if we could swing something with PHX...
to Mtl: Jokinen, Morris
to Phx: Pleks, O'Byrne, Carle, one of the KHL Russian assets
Why the hell would the Coyotes trade Olli Jokinen and Derek Morris for basically Tomas Plekanec.
I mean, really... there's no point in making a trade offer post if you're not even gonna bother to look at the other team and what they would want/need.
This isn't even close to being realistic from a Phoenix perspective.
Hell, this wouldn't even work in NHL 09. This is just awful.
Gainey just told the Gazette he's looking for a "depth centreman".
and on habsinsideout for a depht center... a checkin center and a solid stay at home d would be fine with me. maybe the rumor on the isles board of higgins+ for weight and witt is true.
The trade proposals in this thread don't appeal to me because for the most part they're expensive short-term fixes. If Gainey can't get a center in his 20's I'd rather wait and sign Lang to a one- or two-year contract.
and on habsinsideout for a depht center... a checkin center and a solid stay at home d would be fine with me. maybe the rumor on the isles board of higgins+ for weight and witt is true.
I would hope not. Witt is terrible now, and Weight is a rental. **** that ****. No need to sell on Higgins low.
Olli Jokinen is the only big name we should be going after. Smyth doesn't make sense with the salary cap, a first for Antropov is an atrocious overpayment.. etc. etc. I don't know what it would cost but if it only cost picks and prospects..
Olli Jokinen is the only big name we should be going after. Smyth doesn't make sense with the salary cap, a first for Antropov is an atrocious overpayment.. etc. etc. I don't know what it would cost but if it only cost picks and prospects..
The trade proposals in this thread don't appeal to me because for the most part they're expensive short-term fixes. If Gainey can't get a center in his 20's I'd rather wait and sign Lang to a one- or two-year contract.
I wouldn't mind a rental. The East is so wide open this season, and if you get to the finals, anything could happen, especially if our goaltending gets hot. I think Reinprecht or Weight could be a big help, taking some of the load off Saku's shoulders.
and on habsinsideout for a depht center... a checkin center and a solid stay at home d would be fine with me. maybe the rumor on the isles board of higgins+ for weight and witt is true.
I really hope that doesn't happen,and after what Witt did last night,he might be out for a while and I don't want him on this team
They even mention HF !!
