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.

Luongo to Flyers?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-16-2009, 04:21 PM
  #126
JojoTheWhale
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 147
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlocky View Post
Also, to the part you just added, I don't think that the other poster was saying that Lupul + Carle/Jones or Briere would be the center pieces or the entire deal, I think he was just stating that for the money to work these players MUST be included. To them I think you'd be adding in others to the deal. If it's Carle and Lupul, they are quality young players who are still getting better each year so the Philiiy 1st or a quality (though NOT blue chip) prospect would e included (say Marshall of Bourdon)
This. I know HF-speak says Lupul and Carle are unbelievably terrible, but they both play significant minutes for a pretty good team. Those teams generally don't give up such players for no value. It doesn't mean Vancouver has to give value for them, it means the Flyers can't move them without getting value in return. If they moved something like Lupul/Carle/JVR/1st, which is basically what Vancouver is asking for, they have to replace a top-6 winger and a top-4 defensemen while still taking on Luongo's cap hit and not having the assumed next-in-line to Lupul's spot in JVR. They'd be significantly downgrading two key roster spots for an upgrade elsewhere. Those roster spots would still need to be filled somewhere, and at a cap cost.

JojoTheWhale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:23 PM
  #127
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JojoTheWhale View Post
They would have an interest because he's a significant upgrade to Biron, but Vancouver (or its fans, in this case) seems unwilling to take on contracts in return. I'm not saying the actual team would agree or disagree with that stance, but it's what makes the entire deal a non-starter. My best guess is that they'd have legitimate talks and never come to any sort of agreement if the Vancouver front office sentiments are echoed by the fanbase here.
Thankfully for us, the GMs don't share the same views as the fans. I'm not saying they would be interested in taking salary back, but I don't think it's as impossible as Vancouver fans make it out to be. I also don't think they'll get as much back in a deal that Vancouver fans think they will. The reality is most franchise players don't get equal value in return for whatever reason. Usually you see a lot of quantity going back in these deals but not equal quality.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:28 PM
  #128
JojoTheWhale
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 147
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
Thankfully for us, the GMs don't share the same views as the fans. I'm not saying they would be interested in taking salary back, but I don't think it's as impossible as Vancouver fans make it out to be. I also don't think they'll get as much back in a deal that Vancouver fans think they will. The reality is most franchise players don't get equal value in return for whatever reason. Usually you see a lot of quantity going back in these deals but not equal quality.
I agree completely. I think the key to any possible Philly-Van deal is Lupul. Briere won't be a Canuck for about a billion reasons, from both sides. If Vancouver thinks Lupul has value, then there's a slight chance a deal could be made, imo. If not, I think both teams agree to simply walk away from the talks.

JojoTheWhale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:29 PM
  #129
CloutierForVezina
Registered User
 
CloutierForVezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlocky View Post
Of course Philly has interest in Luongo, it would just be damned tough to make it work. With us having Carter, Richards and Giroux as young centers I think that if we could get Briere to waive his NMC and Vanc was willing to take him AND Luongo agreed to an extension in Philly then I think we'd be willing to include JVR as a main piece in the deal. I can't see how Luongo would be worth Briere (he doesn't have negative value but you could always sign your departing UFA's without giving up anything so Briere doesn't hold very much value as a trading piece), JVR and a 1st but maybe a young roster player like Nodl (he'll be a decent roster player next season for us or you if he's traded) and a prospect like either Marshall or Bourdon (both still progressing like they will be quality 2nd paring dmen in a few years, different types of dmen depending upon your need), and maybe a late pick.
It honestly sounds like philly and vancouver just wouldn't fit well as trading partners, they both have peices the other one wants but the salary cap is getting in the way. I'm not sure about other canucks fans, but I personally don't want to touch Briere, Lupul or Carle. Don't get me wrong - all of them are good players - but none are really on the same level as luongo and all of them carry significant negative impact on a team's salary cap. Taking them on as a significant portion of luongo's return value just wouldn't make sense, I'd rather have 4 extra million to throw at Bouwmeester or Gaborik or sign Gustavsson long term with Schneider.

CloutierForVezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:35 PM
  #130
Payaso619*
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Mexico
Posts: 4,136
vCash: 500
Here's hopefully a more realistic proposal:

Carter, Lupul/Hartnell, JVR, 1st09: Salary = 9.250

Luongo, Raymond, 1st09: Salary = 7.633

Payaso619* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:35 PM
  #131
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 15,363
vCash: 500
Briere and Lupul would be non starters for Vancouver. Philadelphia could try and dump these playewrs elsewhere if need be.

Matt Carle has no value but he'd be more palatable than the afformentioned players. Carle is a project that Vancouver might think they could turn into a player.

If it's for a re-build Giroux's in the deal or there's no discussion whatsoever.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:36 PM
  #132
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JojoTheWhale View Post
I agree completely. I think the key to any possible Philly-Van deal is Lupul. Briere won't be a Canuck for about a billion reasons, from both sides. If Vancouver thinks Lupul has value, then there's a slight chance a deal could be made, imo. If not, I think both teams agree to simply walk away from the talks.
Hartnell could be a key piece that everyone is overlooking. Ideally the Flyers would like to keep him, but if we have to give up something of value if we want Luongo. I know he is not the piece Vancouver fans would want, but I think realistically a deal would likely be centered around a Hartnell rather than a Carter or Richards.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:42 PM
  #133
JojoTheWhale
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 147
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Payaso619 View Post
Here's hopefully a more realistic proposal:

Carter, Lupul, JVR, 1st09: Salary = 9.250

Luongo, Raymond, 1st09: Salary = 7.633
It's not a question of value. It's more that teams really don't move a 24-year-old who scored 46 times the year before and seems to have turned the corner as a pro. I understand the mentality of asking for Carter in the deal, as it makes complete sense from a Vancouver point of view. Unfortunately, it also probably means there's no deal to be made between these teams.

Beyond that, I don't think there's any way under the sun the Flyers move three significant forwards in the same deal. Again, this has nothing to do with value.

JojoTheWhale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:49 PM
  #134
CloutierForVezina
Registered User
 
CloutierForVezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Payaso619 View Post
Here's hopefully a more realistic proposal:

Carter, Lupul/Hartnell, JVR, 1st09: Salary = 9.250

Luongo, Raymond, 1st09: Salary = 7.633
Take out the 1st's, make it Lupul over Hartnell (I believe flyer fans like hartnell a fair bit more) and I could see this being good from a vancouver perspective, not sure if philly would want to do this though. Philly would probably say this trade hinges on luongo signing long term, though.


Kind of an aside, what do philly fans want to do with Jeff Carter? He's going to be due a decent pay raise (~7m/year?) in 2 years, would you be able to afford that? Can you afford 19mill tied up in the centre position? Might be stuck in a pittsburgh kind of situation with no really lights out wingers, except you'd be slightly worse down the middle. Thoughts?

CloutierForVezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 05:03 PM
  #135
JojoTheWhale
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 147
vCash: 500
Quote:
Kind of an aside, what do philly fans want to do with Jeff Carter? He's going to be due a decent pay raise (~7m/year?) in 2 years, would you be able to afford that? Can you afford 19mill tied up in the centre position? Might be stuck in a pittsburgh kind of situation with no really lights out wingers, except you'd be slightly worse down the middle. Thoughts?
The two advantages they have is that Carter will be an RFA instead of a UFA when his deal is up and that, at 26, you can sign him to a front-loaded deal to lower the overall cap hit with less risk of deterioration than some of the other deals we've recently seen.

The most likely options at that point are some combination of converting Briere to the wing full-time, moving Gagne (or even letting him walk -- he's up the same year as Carter), and/or starting to look at buyouts. One way or another, Carter won't be lost for nothing. My best guess is that Briere is a full-time winger as long as he remains a Flyer, barring injury. Giroux looks ready to be a key contributor.

JojoTheWhale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 05:05 PM
  #136
4thliner*
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,135
vCash: 500
Flyers should have gone after an injured Pascal Leclair when he was there to be had.

I doubt Vancouver would move Luango because they need him to have a chance to win next year and the will have a contending team. And if they did decide to move him, they would want a King's ransom back, not Briere's contract.

4thliner* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 05:23 PM
  #137
Red
Registered User
 
Red's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: VanCity
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,081
vCash: 500
Briere + JVR is just not enough from Vancouver's perspective. Briere has an albatross of a contract from my POV until he's 37 years old, has an injury history, and is not the type of center the Canucks need at all. His contract is brutal for any team taking it on and can potentially handcuff a team and will handcuff the Flyers when the salary cap goes down. I would honestly rather overpay Luongo at 7.5m than trade him for a 6.5m Briere + JVR because he's a more important piece. The Canucks are willing to take on salary but there has to be value in that salary and Briere just doesn't have it. I'd want nothing to do with him and wouldn't trade a lesser player for him, not to mention Luongo. Hartnell++ may be a better starting point than Briere IMO.

Just as a note and the Flyers considering who they are trading based on an unsigned Luongo. Luongo has a NTC. I don't see any reason he would waive it at this point. Thus, if Luongo is being moved and DOES waive his NTC, I think it's safe to assume he's re-signing with the team he's traded to.

Just throwing this out there from a Vancouver fan. I'm guessing these teams don't make a trade unless one of the GMs is willing to compromise, and I'd hope it wouldn't be Gillis because one year of Luongo is worth more to us than Briere + JVR.

Red is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 05:25 PM
  #138
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 40,161
vCash: 500
i am heartened. if vancouver would consider Briere for Luongo, there is a reasonable chance they would take Nylander as part of a package for Luongo. Cool.

txpd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 05:35 PM
  #139
JojoTheWhale
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 147
vCash: 500
Quote:
Briere + JVR is just not enough from Vancouver's perspective. Briere has an albatross of a contract from my POV until he's 37 years old, has an injury history, and is not the type of center the Canucks need at all. His contract is brutal for any team taking it on and can potentially handcuff a team and will handcuff the Flyers when the salary cap goes down. I would honestly rather overpay Luongo at 7.5m than trade him for a 6.5m Briere + JVR because he's a more important piece. The Canucks are willing to take on salary but there has to be value in that salary and Briere just doesn't have it. I'd want nothing to do with him and wouldn't trade a lesser player for him, not to mention Luongo. Hartnell++ may be a better starting point than Briere IMO.

Just as a note and the Flyers considering who they are trading based on an unsigned Luongo. Luongo has a NTC. I don't see any reason he would waive it at this point. Thus, if Luongo is being moved and DOES waive his NTC, I think it's safe to assume he's re-signing with the team he's traded to.

Just throwing this out there from a Vancouver fan. I'm guessing these teams don't make a trade unless one of the GMs is willing to compromise, and I'd hope it wouldn't be Gillis because one year of Luongo is worth more to us than Briere + JVR.
It's completely reasonable for Vancouver to not want Briere or Lupul as part of the value in a Luongo deal. I don't think the Flyers particularly want to move Briere either. I believe they're happy with the contract that he's played up to, when healthy. I think all of those things mean there isn't a Philly-Vancouver deal to be made, as much fun as it may be to kick around.

I do also agree that a Luongo deal would be contingent upon a new deal for it to be equitable for both sides. My one question is exactly which team can and would meet the demands for Luongo? I can't come up with a solid match that fits Vancouver's needs, can take on the salary, and would view a goalie as the last piece they need.

JojoTheWhale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 06:10 PM
  #140
jumptheshark
Give the dog a bone
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,408
vCash: 1429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Payaso619 View Post
Here's hopefully a more realistic proposal:

Carter, /Hartnell, JVR, 1st09: Salary = 9.250

Luongo, Raymond, : Salary = 7.633

fixed

__________________
not sure how--but the fish just jumped in the boat and put the hook in it's mouth
52299/14814
The twenty year rebuild is on!!! Embrace the suck
jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 06:12 PM
  #141
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Vagabond View Post
fixed
Keep deaming.

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 06:24 PM
  #142
NOTENOUGHBREWER
Registered User
 
NOTENOUGHBREWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,673
vCash: 500
Wasnt the idea behind Brieres contract that it was a massive cap hit, but the actual dollars paid are dropping each year? In 2 or 3 years if the economy doesnt recover it might be attractive for a team in dire financial trouble to get a first line player that helps them hit the salary floor without spending much actual dollars?

People keep talking about how the cap is going down and his contract will be an albatross but we'll also be looking at many teams who dont give a damn about the cap but just want to reduce the actual dollars being spent.

NOTENOUGHBREWER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 06:40 PM
  #143
CloutierForVezina
Registered User
 
CloutierForVezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JojoTheWhale View Post
I do also agree that a Luongo deal would be contingent upon a new deal for it to be equitable for both sides. My one question is exactly which team can and would meet the demands for Luongo? I can't come up with a solid match that fits Vancouver's needs, can take on the salary, and would view a goalie as the last piece they need.
I think the answer to this will lie in what teams do what in free agency this summer. For example, if edmonton signs Jagr to the rumoured 2 year deal he was on the verge of signing, I can see them making a move for luongo.

Ottawa is right up against the cap right now but you have to imagine that is Leclaire doesn't pan out they would definately have to consider moving one of their big 3 (Probably Spezza) for a peice like luongo, dependant on luongo signing long term with ottawa.

I'm 100% alright with sitting on luongo for another year, there's really no rush to trade him from a vancouver perspective. Obviously it would be better to get something back for him rather than him just walking away but I'd rather have a year of luongo than have my salary cap handcuffed for the next several.

CloutierForVezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 06:46 PM
  #144
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOTENOUGHBREWER View Post
Wasnt the idea behind Brieres contract that it was a massive cap hit, but the actual dollars paid are dropping each year? In 2 or 3 years if the economy doesnt recover it might be attractive for a team in dire financial trouble to get a first line player that helps them hit the salary floor without spending much actual dollars?

People keep talking about how the cap is going down and his contract will be an albatross but we'll also be looking at many teams who dont give a damn about the cap but just want to reduce the actual dollars being spent.
He has a no movement clause which likely rules out a trade to any team that needs to hit the salary floor. His salary also doesn't drop until his final 2 years when he is 36 or 37 when he's unlikely to be a 1st line player by then. He will still receive a big salary the next 4 years.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 11:53 PM
  #145
JojoTheWhale
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 147
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloutierForVezina View Post
I think the answer to this will lie in what teams do what in free agency this summer. For example, if edmonton signs Jagr to the rumoured 2 year deal he was on the verge of signing, I can see them making a move for luongo.
The only question I have about Edmonton is are the teams willing to make such a deal within their own division? I mean if you're asking for Carter and a 1st (with some even adding in JVR), what are you asking for from Edmonton? Gagner, Gilbert, and a 1st? The same people that would want JVR too would want Eberle thrown in.

Quote:
Ottawa is right up against the cap right now but you have to imagine that is Leclaire doesn't pan out they would definately have to consider moving one of their big 3 (Probably Spezza) for a peice like luongo, dependant on luongo signing long term with ottawa.
I thought about Ottawa too, but in the end, I think Leclaire will be given more than at least a full year unless he fails spectacularly, considering they just gave up Vermette for him. It certainly wouldn't be the first time I was wrong about an impatient front office though.

Quote:
I'm 100% alright with sitting on luongo for another year, there's really no rush to trade him from a vancouver perspective. Obviously it would be better to get something back for him rather than him just walking away but I'd rather have a year of luongo than have my salary cap handcuffed for the next several.
I think you have it exactly right here. They're probably better off just letting it ride. I can't see any likely scenario where they aren't better off keeping Luongo and moving Schneider to the highest bidder.

JojoTheWhale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2009, 12:00 AM
  #146
JohnHodgson
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,210
vCash: 500
From a Vancouver's POV, the only players we'd be interested are:

Carter
Richards
JVR
Giroux

Even for one year of Luongo, you will have to overpay... unless you want to live with an average goaltender. As Canuck fans we'd know how the mediocre goaltending worked out... (WCE)

JohnHodgson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2009, 12:13 AM
  #147
CloutierForVezina
Registered User
 
CloutierForVezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JojoTheWhale View Post
The only question I have about Edmonton is are the teams willing to make such a deal within their own division? I mean if you're asking for Carter and a 1st (with some even adding in JVR), what are you asking for from Edmonton? Gagner, Gilbert, and a 1st? The same people that would want JVR too would want Eberle thrown in.
I don't really see gagner going anywhere, he's pretty much edmonton's future. I'd imagine something like Gilbert, Eberle and a 1st, I'm really not sure though. Edmonton has basically been stuck on the playoff fringe for a few years now, meaning they're never really a competitor (Except 2006 where they got every bounce except in the SCF) and they've never really been bottom feeders, which has really messed with their ability to actually rebuild with some top end talent.

Any basis for a trade would definately centre around one of their D men being moved, especially if the j-bo to edmonton (His home town) rumours are true. Either gilbert or vishnovsky are the most likely, I don't see them parting ways with sourray.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JojoTheWhale View Post
I thought about Ottawa too, but in the end, I think Leclaire will be given more than at least a full year unless he fails spectacularly, considering they just gave up Vermette for him. It certainly wouldn't be the first time I was wrong about an impatient front office though.
I think it will really depend on how he does. I personally don't have much faith for ottawa or leclaire this coming season. Leclaire has been average except for one good season and it doesn't sound like ottawa is going to make any major changes over their season because they've been tricked into thinking they can work with no real puck moving D-men by their strong finish.

CloutierForVezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2009, 12:38 AM
  #148
twenty2
 
twenty2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 966
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnHodgson View Post
From a Vancouver's POV, the only players we'd be interested are:

Carter
Richards
JVR
Giroux

Even for one year of Luongo, you will have to overpay... unless you want to live with an average goaltender. As Canuck fans we'd know how the mediocre goaltending worked out... (WCE)
Then consider our discussions over.

twenty2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2009, 12:59 AM
  #149
JojoTheWhale
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 147
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloutierForVezina View Post
I don't really see gagner going anywhere, he's pretty much edmonton's future. I'd imagine something like Gilbert, Eberle and a 1st, I'm really not sure though. Edmonton has basically been stuck on the playoff fringe for a few years now, meaning they're never really a competitor (Except 2006 where they got every bounce except in the SCF) and they've never really been bottom feeders, which has really messed with their ability to actually rebuild with some top end talent.

Any basis for a trade would definately centre around one of their D men being moved, especially if the j-bo to edmonton (His home town) rumours are true. Either gilbert or vishnovsky are the most likely, I don't see them parting ways with sourray.
You can easily substitute "Carter" for "Gagner" here and keep the same, correct meaning. Why, then, do people think they can get Carter? For all of Gagner's promise, Jeff Carter was the second-leading goal scorer (to what sure looks like a true generational talent in Ovechkin) in the NHL at 24. Potential is a wonderful thing, but there really is no substitution for proving you can do it on the NHL level. It's not about expanding the deal on both sides to some bloated monstrosity chock full of draft picks and filler to try to even out someone's idea of value. It's that those types of players simply don't get traded unless those players give the team no other choice. It's exactly the same condition that would have to be met (and we still don't know if it will be) for Vancouver to even consider moving Luongo in the first place -- he won't resign, thereby giving them a reason to shop him. Without that, there's no way in the world they consider moving him. He won't return a Carter because Carter hasn't given the Flyers the first reason to move him.

What was the last player to perform at the NHL level the way Carter did last year to be moved the following year, let alone a player in his early-mid 20s? The closest things I can come up with all had the kind of circumstance that doesn't exist with Carter -- Thornton being labeled a playoff choker, the Heatley car accident, Hossa headed to arbitration, Wirtz not wanting to pay Roenick, Jagr going from Pitt to Washtington, Selanne's injury problems in Winnipeg, etc. The Greztky trade, like Gretzky himself, is in a separate class from almost everyone in the history of organized hockey.

It's not reasonable to ask for Jeff Carter in any deal right now because any player he would be moved for is essentially untradeable for the exact same reasons. You don't take successful, elite NHL performers off your team unless they force your hand. It just doesn't happen in the modern NHL.

Quote:
I think it will really depend on how he does. I personally don't have much faith for ottawa or leclaire this coming season. Leclaire has been average except for one good season and it doesn't sound like ottawa is going to make any major changes over their season because they've been tricked into thinking they can work with no real puck moving D-men by their strong finish.
I don't have the slightest idea how Leclaire and a 2nd returned Vermette either, but I think it does marry the franchise to him for at least the near future.

JojoTheWhale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2009, 01:29 AM
  #150
CloutierForVezina
Registered User
 
CloutierForVezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JojoTheWhale View Post
You can easily substitute "Carter" for "Gagner" here and keep the same, correct meaning. Why, then, do people think they can get Carter? For all of Gagner's promise, Jeff Carter was the second-leading goal scorer (to what sure looks like a true generational talent in Ovechkin) in the NHL at 24. Potential is a wonderful thing, but there really is no substitution for proving you can do it on the NHL level. It's not about expanding the deal on both sides to some bloated monstrosity chock full of draft picks and filler to try to even out someone's idea of value. It's that those types of players simply don't get traded unless those players give the team no other choice. It's exactly the same condition that would have to be met (and we still don't know if it will be) for Vancouver to even consider moving Luongo in the first place -- he won't resign, thereby giving them a reason to shop him. Without that, there's no way in the world they consider moving him. He won't return a Carter because Carter hasn't given the Flyers the first reason to move him.

What was the last player to perform at the NHL level the way Carter did last year to be moved the following year, let alone a player in his early-mid 20s? The closest things I can come up with all had the kind of circumstance that doesn't exist with Carter -- Thornton being labeled a playoff choker, the Heatley car accident, Hossa headed to arbitration, Wirtz not wanting to pay Roenick, Jagr going from Pitt to Washtington, Selanne's injury problems in Winnipeg, etc. The Greztky trade, like Gretzky himself, is in a separate class from almost everyone in the history of organized hockey.

It's not reasonable to ask for Jeff Carter in any deal right now because any player he would be moved for is essentially untradeable for the exact same reasons. You don't take successful, elite NHL performers off your team unless they force your hand. It just doesn't happen in the modern NHL.
The main difference I see between the two clubs is with their offense in general. Although it would undoubtedly hurt the flyers to lose Carter, it would be dealing from a position of strength to help a position of weakness. Even without Carter their top 6 would be something like:
Hartnell - Richards - Gagne
Lupul - Giroux - Briere

Unless if I'm mistaken on how the flyers offense is setup (I could be, correct me if the lines look way off, I know knuble is probably leaving and he used to be top 6) and Giroux isn't quite ready to take on top 6 minutes and the responsibility that goes with it, it doesn't exactly leave you in the poor house, you'd still have a formidable top 6 to be envied by many clubs.

Edmonton on the other hand is extremely hurting for top 6 guys. The only legitamate top 6'rs I'd give them would be Hemsky, Gagner and Horcoff, with Penner and Cogliano fringe top 6 players. Renney (Potential new head coach) has talked about what he would do with our lineup and basically said that Horcoff would be demoted to basically centering the checking 3rd line. Dustin Penner has been a miserable failure so far, O'Sullivan hasn't proven he can produce on the oilers and I sincerely doubt Kotalik will be resigned. Let's go off the assumption Kotalik is resigned and Gagner is traded, what do the oilers top 6 look like?
Hemsky - Horcoff - O'Sullivan
Kotalik - Cogliano - Penner

Not really a lineup I'd be comfortable making a stab at lord stanley's cup with, even with Luongo backstopping them.

Now, on the other hand, the defensive corps is the major strength of the oilers and a position I can see them dealing from to aid their goaltending, as well as needing to shed the cap hit of one of their big blue liners. Lubo has the skill needed to be an elite offensive defenceman, in the same ballpark as carter. Maybe not quite the same level, but 67 points as a D-man is nothing to be scoffed at.


Last edited by CloutierForVezina: 05-17-2009 at 01:45 AM.
CloutierForVezina 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 08:57 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.