HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

ANA -- STL -- Your Team (if you want Barret Jackman)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-31-2009, 05:16 AM
  #1
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
ANA -- STL -- Your Team (if you want Barret Jackman)

Anaheim trades:
--one year of Chris Pronger (1 yr, 6.25M) to STL
--conditional 1st in 2011 ONLY IF Pronger re-signs in Anaheim summer 2010 (to STL)

Anaheim acquires:
--your team's young skilled roster forward (or something Anaheim wants instead)
--STL's conditional 1st in 2010 ONLY IF Pronger extends with Blues

St. Louis trades:
--Barret Jackman to your team
--conditional 1st in 2010 if Pronger extends with Blues (to ANA)

St. Louis acquires:
--Chris Pronger
--ANA's conditional 1st in 2011 ONLY IF if Pronger returns to Ducks in free agency

Your team trades:
--Something Anaheim wants, probably a young established roster forward, maybe someone you're worried about re-signing

Your team acquires:
--Barret Jackman (3 yrs, 3.625M cap hit per)

Now, you might say, why not just try for Pronger if you're the 3d team instead of Jackman? Well, Pronger has a short list of places he wants to play beginning in 2010. St. Louis is on it, but is not the only team. If your team is NOT on that list, you don't want to trade for only one year of a guy, instead you'll take a 28yo Jackman under a decent contract for three years.

The Blues make the trade because it is believed if the Blues acquired him he'd very likely sign an extension, but this way they don't have to bear all of that risk. The Blues don't want to part with (and shouldn't part with) Berglund, Oshie, Perron, Backes, etc. They should move Jackman before they move one of those guys, except Jackman probably isn't what Anaheim wants.

In all likelihood, the Blues give up Jackman and a 1st for Pronger. They only add 2.5M to their cap this year in that exchange. Pronger then likely extends and mentors EJ/Pietrangelo. The Ducks likely acquire a solid young forward and a first for Pronger, and probably save money while still competing now and later, which is pretty good value. And the third team acquires a well-established top-4 young veteran character d-man (Jackman) under contract for 3 yrs for a forward they might not be able to keep.

In the event Pronger doesn't re-sign with the Blues, the Ducks get the forward but not the pick, which seems fair and a condition any other potential Pronger trade partner might ask for. If Pronger, who likes SoCal, comes back to Anaheim, Anaheim has to give up a 1st. Which is fair because they'd have both players in 2010 and beyond.

If Pronger signs with a 3d team in UFA, nobody gives up a pick.

So this also a "value of" thread. If you're the 3d team and you want Jackman, offer up something (1) that's fair value and (2) that Anaheim would want (probably established roster forward but Ducks fans will say).

Don't know if this can work or not, figured I'd try it.

EDIT: Probably have to be Anaheim's 1st in 2011, maybe Blues too since 2010 draft comes before 2010 free agency. However, 2010 1st from Blues would get triggered the moment Pronger extends which would almost certainly come well before late June 2010.


Last edited by PocketNines: 05-31-2009 at 05:36 AM.
PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:43 AM
  #2
Jwm1986
Registered User
 
Jwm1986's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 1,893
vCash: 500
this is very confusing..

Jwm1986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 05:47 AM
  #3
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
What are you confused about?

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 06:01 AM
  #4
Jwm1986
Registered User
 
Jwm1986's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 1,893
vCash: 500
haha i guess i had that coming to me.. its probably confusing because im up at 3 am half asleep.. im sure it will make sense tomorrow

Jwm1986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 06:17 AM
  #5
The Grouch
Enraged
 
The Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,713
vCash: 500
I'm not sure that I like this. It seems like a step backwards for the Blues. Basically you are trading at least 3 years of Jackman(probably more as Jackman will play for the Blues as long as they'll have him) who is just entering his prime, for one year of Chris Pronger(an aging player who makes twice as much as Jackman does). Then if Pronger resigns with St. Louis they lose a first round pick.

It doesn't make sense to me to give up our young veteran second/third best defenseman and a first round pick for basically one year(they could potentially sign him as a FA following next season and not have to give up a 1st) of Chris Pronger, when the Blues may not even be a legitimate cup contender next season. This kind of reminds me of a move the previous ownership regime would make.

The Grouch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 06:53 AM
  #6
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oscar the Grouch View Post
I'm not sure that I like this. It seems like a step backwards for the Blues. Basically you are trading at least 3 years of Jackman(probably more as Jackman will play for the Blues as long as they'll have him) who is just entering his prime, for one year of Chris Pronger(an aging player who makes twice as much as Jackman does). Then if Pronger resigns with St. Louis they lose a first round pick.

It doesn't make sense to me to give up our young veteran second/third best defenseman and a first round pick for basically one year(they could potentially sign him as a FA following next season and not have to give up a 1st) of Chris Pronger, when the Blues may not even be a legitimate cup contender next season. This kind of reminds me of a move the previous ownership regime would make.
Well, of course the bolded point doesn't make sense -- that was the point. The bolded scenario cannot possibly happen. By definition. That was part of the premise.

Also, Pronger doesn't make twice as much as Jackman. I'm fully aware that Jackman would be a Blue as long as possible. But I also fully reject the whole Pronger's old/not dominant anymore argument. How many elite Ds play into their late 30s or beyond nowadays with the conditioning? Pronger's 34. Lidstrom's what, 38? If the Blues have him for 5 years it spans a time when he could mentor Pietrangelo and EJ, and the Blues really need that to work out; obviously Pronger does that much better than Jackman.

This what the Blues' beat reporter said this week on Pronger when prompted why he was hearing Pronger was interested in St. Louis (he had previously reported what he was hearing about Pronger's interest in signing in summer 2010):

Quote:
Jeremy Rutherford:
Here are the facts:

- Pronger has never told me he wants to come back. I don't even know him. He has told others that St. Louis is one of the spots he would love to play.
- I don't know what's going to happen with Niedermayer, therefore I don't know what the Ducks' plans are with Pronger this summer.
- If Pronger became available via trade this summer, I believe the Blues would put together a trade proposal and push very hard to get him.
- I'm sure if the Blues traded for him, he would sign an extension here, but I don't know that as a fact.
- If Pronger makes it to free agency in 2010, the Blues would be on a short list of teams for Pronger, but I can't say he would come here for sure.
If the Blues were putting together a serious package for Pronger but protecting Berglund, Oshie, Perron (as I think they will and should), what would that trade reasonably look like? Also keep in mind that if they were to trade a young player, they're adding 5M+ to their cap. If they move Jackman, they only add 2.5M to their cap, and that's a lot more manageable.

But, either way, if they only get one year of Pronger, they only lose Jackman and no picks. So the Blues are bearing some risk that Pronger doesn't return. But if Pronger extends, then you're paying a 1st round pick to upgrade Jackman into Pronger, and that's pretty fair.

Blues would have:
09-10
EJ-Pronger
Colaiacovo-Polak
McKee-Brewer/Junland/Strachan
7th: Pietrangelo

10-11
EJ-Polak
Pronger-Pietrangelo
Cole-Brewer or Colaiacovo depending on Brewer's health
7th: Junland/depth guys

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 07:12 AM
  #7
Shaun_W_W
Registered User
 
Shaun_W_W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
I don't think Anaheim goes anywhere near this trade, and I don't think St. Louis needs to be a part of it if it went down. How are Jackman and Pronger worth the same?

Shaun_W_W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 07:44 AM
  #8
The Grouch
Enraged
 
The Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,713
vCash: 500
I want to throw it out there that I don't believe Pronger is washed up(I'm not sure if that was directed at me but that was not what I said). I like Pronger as much as anyone and would love to have him back in St. Louis. However as I mentioned he is an aging player(probably has at least 3 seasons left, maybe as many as 5-6). Meaning he doesn't have a lot of years left in him. How many of the years that he has left will he be a better player than Barret Jackman?

Quote:
Well, of course the bolded point doesn't make sense -- that was the point. The bolded scenario cannot possibly happen. By definition. That was part of the premise
Actually it can happen.

Scenario 1:
St. Louis trades Barret Jackman to Team X
Team X trades player X to Ducks
Ducks trade Chris Pronger to St. Louis
St. Louis resigns Chris Pronger in 2010
St. Louis loses 1st rd. pick

Scenario 2:
St. Louis signs UFA Chris Pronger in 2010

The difference between Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 from the Blues' perspective is one season of Chris Prongers services.




I see what you are trying to do with this trade. The Blues trade future assets(that may not even be needed to win a cup) to make their team better over the next few seasons, and while I wouldn't personally make this trade, I wouldn't be super upset if it happened.

The Grouch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 07:44 AM
  #9
Paul4587
Moderator
 
Paul4587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,016
vCash: 500
The Ducks would require at least an NHL ready young top 6 foward for Pronger, and the team that is giving them the return only gets Jackman in return??

Paul4587 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 08:34 AM
  #10
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
For Anaheim, there is a 70-95% likelihood Pronger extends with St. Louis if he's traded there, simply because St. Louis is already known as a team that's on his short list.

That means there's a 70-95% likelihood Anaheim trades Pronger for a young top-6 roster forward PLUS a 1st round pick, they just get them from different teams. But if Pronger doesn't extend with the team that trades for him they get just the roster player (whose rights they would presumably own for longer than Pronger).

The team that's getting Jackman only gives away the top-6 forward because they don't have to give up the top-6 forward and a pick that they would have to get Pronger instead.

@Oscar: there may be a 50% likelihood Pronger signs with Blues as UFA in summer 2010. Let's just assume that is true. But let's assume that if the Blues traded for him earlier, there's a much higher % chance Pronger extends for the rest of his career. In your equation, your conclusion only applies if Pronger coming in UFA is 100%. Part of what the Blues are buying is the upgrade in likeliness of signing Pronger for after 2010. You haven't accounted for that.

Were that true that he'd sign 100%, then I'm with you, let's wait and trade nothing. But if the Blues make a hard pitch as the beat reporter thinks they would if Pronger comes available at the draft, what would be in that hard pitch that works on all the levels (salary for 09-10, needing to give away actual value without touching the young forward core, and yet making sure Anaheim gets the value they seek).

Also, you asked a question and the answer is that 100.000% of the remaining years Pronger plays he will be better than all remaining years of Barret Jackman. Not that Jackman's bad, Pronger is just better at everything. Jackman cannot be a #1 successfully. They're just different players, on different levels and with different impacts to their teams.

However, in value of Barret Jackman threads, and what we know of all the times the Blues have turned down offers involving him, he could return a top-6 forward. Top-3 dman under reasonable contract for top-6 forward? That's not a hard deal.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 09:51 AM
  #11
SLAPSHOT723
Moderator
Johnny Rockets
 
SLAPSHOT723's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Long Island
Posts: 17,076
vCash: 500
The Islanders definitely have interest in Jackman, he would pair very well with Streit.

Martinek and TOR 2nd for Jackman would work I think.

SLAPSHOT723 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 11:30 AM
  #12
snarktacular
Moderator
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,864
vCash: 500
Somehow I doubt that the caliber of a young top-6 forward that another team would give for Jackman straight up would be enough to entice Anaheim to move Pronger (with only a 90% 1st rounder as sweetener, AND the chance of losing their 1st).

snarktacular is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 02:39 PM
  #13
duckyman
Registered User
 
duckyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 342
vCash: 500
How about Jackman, Perron and a first for Pronger and the Ducks 2010 2nd rounder, if Pronger doesn't resign the Ducks also give up their 2011 2nd.

duckyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 02:46 PM
  #14
Randall Ritchey
HockeyBuzz Blues
 
Randall Ritchey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 10,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by duckyman View Post
How about Jackman, Perron and a first for Pronger and the Ducks 2010 2nd rounder, if Pronger doesn't resign the Ducks also give up their 2011 2nd.
How about Barret Jackman for Bobby Ryan?

Randall Ritchey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 02:57 PM
  #15
Varius
Registered User
 
Varius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,956
vCash: 500
While I think Anaheim holds on to Pronger no matter what Nieds does (and I think he'll sign for one last run), this trade seems overly complicated.

Why not either a) Ducks and STL deal straight up or b) Ducks and team x deal straight up and they get Pronger instead of Jackman for their great top-6 guy.

Varius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 04:23 PM
  #16
trublu16
Registered User
 
trublu16's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 762
vCash: 500
Does the Blues really need Pronger?

Now if you are going to say that you need him to teach these young defensemen how to play better in the the NHL. Then what is Al McInnis? chop liver? Much rather have Al teaching these kids how to play defense than the guy who uses his size/elbow to knock people unconscious (McAmmond). Al is still in the organization, and currently getting EJ ready for the up and coming season. But then you want an upgrade on the ice right? How about an EJ who has spent the last year preparing himself for this season, ohh yeah an Pietroangelo who is more than likely going to make this team this year. A full year of not having to regain from his bout with mono, I think that was what wrong with last year.

And possible the best thing, no Brewer to screw things up!!!!

Pronger can stay in CA or anywhere he wants, just not in St. Louis.

trublu16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 04:28 PM
  #17
The Grouch
Enraged
 
The Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,713
vCash: 500
Pocket: I think you and I are on the same page but yet come out on different ends of the argument. I did take into consideration that Pronger may not sign here in 2010, that being said I think Blues have as good of a chance as anyone. The reason I didn't mention it is because I think Pronger is a luxury for the Blues, not a necessity. If a Pronger-like defensemen was currently a serious need for the Blues they would make a serious effort to sign Jay Bouwmeester, I think you'll agree that won't happen. If you strike out with Pronger in 2010 the Blues are still looking at one of the best young defense corps in the league...

Barret Jackman - Erik Johnson
Eric Brewer - Roman Polak
Ian Cole - Alex Pietrangelo

and perhaps Carlo Colaiacovo if he resigns.

That is five top 4 defensemen, with a very good potential for two more(Cole, Petro).

I guess my point is why give up two players(Jackman + 1st) who are able to grow with the very young team we have now for a player that may be retired when our young nucleus is just reaching their prime years. If you can sign Pronger in 2010 that's just a(very huge) bonus.

The Grouch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 06:29 PM
  #18
Bluester
Registered User
 
Bluester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Kansas City, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trublu16 View Post
Does the Blues really need Pronger?

Now if you are going to say that you need him to teach these young defensemen how to play better in the the NHL. Then what is Al McInnis? chop liver? Much rather have Al teaching these kids how to play defense than the guy who uses his size/elbow to knock people unconscious (McAmmond). Al is still in the organization, and currently getting EJ ready for the up and coming season. But then you want an upgrade on the ice right? How about an EJ who has spent the last year preparing himself for this season, ohh yeah an Pietroangelo who is more than likely going to make this team this year. A full year of not having to regain from his bout with mono, I think that was what wrong with last year.

And possible the best thing, no Brewer to screw things up!!!!

Pronger can stay in CA or anywhere he wants, just not in St. Louis.
He's great for the offensive side of the game. However he can't help out during games. Pronger would have the most benefit on Petro. Petro has a early Pronger syndrome of not liking to use his size.

Bluester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 06:29 PM
  #19
Bluester
Registered User
 
Bluester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Kansas City, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by duckyman View Post
How about Jackman, Perron and a first for Pronger and the Ducks 2010 2nd rounder, if Pronger doesn't resign the Ducks also give up their 2011 2nd.
Dream much?

Bluester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 06:42 PM
  #20
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by duckyman View Post
How about Jackman, Perron and a first for Pronger and the Ducks 2010 2nd rounder, if Pronger doesn't resign the Ducks also give up their 2011 2nd.
Take out the STL first and the conditional pick and it's fair. I don't like Perron that much, a combination of overrated and undersized isn't that appealing but value-wise it's fair.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oshniak View Post
How about Barret Jackman for Bobby Ryan?
No.

Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 09:33 PM
  #21
Vipers31
Moderator
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 11,794
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oshniak View Post
How about Barret Jackman for Bobby Ryan?
"You made a proposal that was benefiting your team in value so I'm making a ridiculous counterproposal so that you see how wrong I think you were..."

Nice.

Vipers31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 09:58 PM
  #22
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talentless Practise View Post
Take out the STL first and the conditional pick and it's fair. I don't like Perron that much, a combination of overrated and undersized isn't that appealing but value-wise it's fair.

No.
[Warning: this reply will be long as there is a lot to cover.]

You don't have to like Perron much because the Blues and their fans love him. They should absolutely not trade this kid. Perron is great.

The whole point of engineering a more complicated 3-team trade is that the Blues (1) need to keep their young forward core but also (2) would have to trade some value off the roster. Moving Jackman accomplishes both task and is a realistic moving of value.

Now, Anaheim may trade with someone besides the Blues or not trade at all (frankly if I were Anaheim I'd keep Pronger but they're the ones rumbling with moving him under certain circumstances), but if it's going to be the Blues -- and there has been a lot of talk about this possibility in STL including the quoted and linked beat reporter comments from Thursday captioned above -- this is the most realistic way I can come up with. I really don't see the Blues moving Oshie, Berglund, Perron or Backes. And really, forward-wise, they can't really afford to subtract anyone off the current roster (Anaheim wanting an established NHL-er and not a prospect). Even McDonald, as he was consistently the best Blues forward in the playoffs, and the Blues should hold onto such players.

You know, I read all these trade Pronger threads. In all these threads I see Anaheim fans somewhat foolishly IMO asking for as much or more than they gave up to acquire Pronger... and Pronger only has one year left. I don't think people are correctly valuing how much this brings down his trade value... the one guy who chimed in late on the Pronger to Philly thread about how Anaheim fans are going to get much less has it right IMO. When Pronger was acquired by Anaheim one of his big attracting features was that he was under contract for four years. That's so much more significant than one year.

Another way to think of it might be
--Lupul
--Smid
--a 1st
--a 2d
--and a conditional 29th/30th overall (making Cup finals)

FOR

--a legit skilled top-6 forward
--a conditional 1st (very likely) AND
--three freaking years of one of the best D-men in the game, the Cup, etc. (in turn, the value of the franchise attracted guys like Hiller, who signed with Cup champ Ducks over Blues, for example)

This boils down to Lupul and the top-6 forward more or less canceling out, the likely conditional first from Blues being somewhere between the guaranteed 07 1st and the conditional 29th/30th overall... so it becomes:

--three prime years of an elite NHL star/Hall of Fame D-man that results in:
--Cup Finals appearance (that triggers the 29th/30th mentioned just below)

FOR

--high prospect Smid
--a 2d
--losing three years of the Lupul-caliber player (but that also gives your up-and-comers ice time)
--and the remainder of the 1st round value that isn't quite equivalent (guaranteed value of 1st + conditional value of 29th/30th... minus the value of the Blues' likely 1st round pick)

That's a more accurate capture of what this trade would be in transitive value for Anaheim. Few would hesitate to give up a strong prospect and the picks for an impact player who helps you to a Cup.

Here's the biggest key to all of this one-year value business. It's about whether the trading partner has a realistic shot of extending Pronger or not. The Blues very much do, many other franchises have little to no shot. That radically changes the value IMO.

You can obviously get more value out of trading him to a team that's on Pronger's short list because he would then presumably extend. If Pronger extends with the next team, then Anaheim is justified in getting more value out of a trade. Pronger is a proven "businessman" when it comes to picking his spot. So this is a very legit sticking point in designing any trade and makes conditional picks very wise IMO.

[Obviously this is all if Niedermayer re-signs and Pronger is expendable, something very much in doubt right now. If I were Anaheim I'd try to keep Pronger. But they're the ones talking about dealing him, so that's why we're all talking about it.]

My deal was a bit more complex, as is the nature of 3-team trades, but I think the values are pretty darn close. When you add Perron to the mix, that is not "pretty close" to the original offer. That, in fact, defeats the original offer and undermines the point of doing it this way.

The guy who said Jackman for Bobby Ryan was likely mocking this Perron addition as if it were just some trivial add-on. (If the Blues were getting Ryan, I'd move any one of Berglund, Oshie or Perron in that deal, for example, and probably give Anaheim more, though not two of those players. But then we're talking about "untouchable young forwards" for "untouchable young forwards" as the centerpieces so it's a whole different kind of deal.)

As for Anaheim fans wondering why they'd do this, I am going off all the other trade threads where Ducks fans say, we want X young top-6 Blues (or other team's) forward and a 1st round pick. Because that is what you're getting in this deal. A top-6 forward who is roster ready so the Ducks can keep winning now, and a very good chance at a 1st round pick.

Anaheim fans, what does it matter if you say you'd like getting Perron and a Blues 1st for Pronger in other threads, if Perron is replaced with a similar player from a 3d team and that 3d team is getting fair value for that player? The Blues already turned down an Oshie-for-Pronger deal at the deadline, and Perron's second half and playoffs pushed him into that category of no-deal also. Again, if you're trading with the Blues, this three-way is probably the most sensible way to get Anaheim what it wants and also fit the Blues' master plan.

Also, it is really unlikely Pronger would ditch extending with the Blues, but what if, since Pronger loves SoCal, Neidermayer plays one more year and retires/leaves, then Pronger comes back to Anaheim in summer 2010? I am guessing Anaheim is on Pronger's short list also. It's not super far-fetched. If he'd be willing to come back to St. Louis (which he reportedly is) then why wouldn't he also be willing to come back to Anaheim where he has a happy lifestyle?

The way I have designed it, if this scenario happened, Anaheim is getting some top-6 forward, only losing Pronger for a year while their D remains strong with Niedermayer, then they get Pronger and the forward going into the future.

Should they also get the Blues' 1st round pick in tht scenario though? Of course not, they should pay the Blues a first in that scenario and then the deal becomes Anaheim's late first rounder (in the next draft after Pronger signs in July 2010, which would be 2011) for a top-6 forward and the loss of one year of Pronger. That seems kind of fair.

I am looking for what's fair. We can tweak all this, but we're trying to put the conditions and risks in the right places. Adding Perron is not a tweak. A middling prospect or a middling pick going to some team or other is a tweak. Changing the conditions of the 1st rounders is a tweak.

So,

Anaheim fans who want to work within this concept: Try and think of a top-6 forward you want from another team besides the Blues and ask yourselves, would that team trade that player for Jackman straight up? Jackman obviously has the established value to return a top-6 forward on his own, that isn't debatable. And his contract is pretty straightforward and shouldn't mess up anyone's cap if they're subtracting a roster forward of similar value. That part of the equation is much more about finding the right trading partner and situation than it is about debating the value of Jackman.

Other teams' fans: You have to think of, if you like Barret Jackman, who do you have who is an established NHLer top-6 forward that Anaheim would like along with a very probable 1st round pick from the Blues as a package for Pronger.

Blues fans: If you want to get Pronger, not touch the roster forwards nor raid the prospect stable, but are realistic about giving to get and valuing maybe the difference between 95% having Pronger but giving up assets and maybe 50% having Pronger for only UFA money, maybe you can think of a good 3d team situation. And don't try to pile McKee in there and stuff like that. Anaheim fans and the 3d team fans will come in and justifiably rip that kind of stuff.

I could start throwing out names but I'd probably not know the situations with the 3d team and what Anaheim wants as good as fans of those teams.

Potentially, the Jackman-for-top-6 forward could be slightly beefed up. Maybe the Blues add in a prospect and the 3d team gives the Blues something back also. For example, if it were the Isles, you could trade them Jackman and the 17th pick for the 26th and 31st to the Blues plus the roster forward going to Anaheim, the only problem in that being who would the Ducks accept? But that kind of beefing-up idea is what I'm getting at. (I certainly don't think it's necessary and the Blues could just trade 17 for 26 and 31 as a whole separate stand-alone trade. I'm just saying, if you feel compelled to tweak, that's the kind of stuff Blues fans should think about.)

I can say from the Blues' standpoint that losing Jackman and a probable first for an extended Pronger is a deal the team would and should do. The fans would be good with it. It's giving value to get value, and it strikes a nice balance between preserving the young forward core that other teams are always asking for in trades and not taking the risk of Pronger extending with a different short-list team in 2010 summer.

As for the Bouwmeester comments, the Blues would actually have a tougher time adding him if they can't subtract salary than they would adding Pronger but subtracting Jackman. I have a lot of fondness for Jackman. I value him highly. But Pronger's an upgrade in every area. Pronger at 38 will be better than Jackman's every NHL year, and that is not dissing Jackman.

And, if you think about signing Bouwmeester or Pronger, each would need to be replaced in 3-5 years. Now, you could replace Bouwmeester with Bouwmeester on a 2d contract whereas you can't likely replace Pronger with Pronger, but 3-5 years from now, who's to say what (1) has happened with top-end talents EJ and Pietrangelo or some other breakthrough prospect the Blues have developed; (2) who will be the young 27-30yo UFA defensemen available, etc. Hell, why not sign Pronger for 3-5 years and then catch JayBo at the end of the deal he signs this summer? He'll be 31 in summer 2014, for example. And with the lower UFA age, there will be other options once we're at 2013, 2014, etc.

I personally value Pronger's age 35-38 years (to the Blues and their situation) more than Bouwmeester's age 26-29 years. I might get derision and criticism for that, but the point is I'm not overlooking going a different route, I've actually given it thought and concluded that Pronger is the specific guy I want mentoring Pietrangelo rather than Bouwmeester.

I also have a high degree of confidence Pronger will be still a top d-man at age 38 if he wants to keep playing that long. (Maybe more than most people, and Oscar-tG, that comment seeming to attribute to you the idea Pronger's in decline is only a generalized comment to other Blues fans who seem to hold that minority yet oft-voiced opinion.) Pronger made Todd Rierden look good, so I like him mentoring Pietrangelo. And the commenter who said Pietro reminds him of how early-age Pronger was criticized on intensity is right on, IMO. MacInnis really mattered to Pronger, and Al Mac was only two years younger than Pronger would be with Pietrangelo when he started mentoring Pronger. JayBo (or similar) at age 26 isn't the same mentoring value IMO as the older elite D-man.

To remind Blues fans: the Blues lose Jackman, and it's no small loss, but they'd have a 5-player d-core of Pronger, EJ, Pietrangelo, Polak and Cole for a LOT of d-minutes for probably 5 more years (the NHL body-ready Cole joining the roster in 10-11 after three solid development years as Notre Dame's #1 d-man). The offensive transition and powerplay capabilities as well as great skating, size and toughness is pretty damn great in that group.

By keeping the young forward core intact, losing Jackman is the lesser of the evils. They'd lose a 2010 first rounder (likely a 20th-ish overall pick), but they're so loaded they can absorb this loss pretty easily and still have lots of assets for adding an elite G or elite scoring winger in another trade.

The whole point in coming up with these is try and have every team happy and an efficient exchange of value, right? Also balancing risk is critical. Nobody's getting a "steal" in this scenario.

Tampa? Vancouver? Phoenix? Boston? Pittsburgh? San Jose? Someone's gotta need Jackman and is willing to part with a top-6 forward, value-for-value.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 11:13 PM
  #23
caliamad
Registered User
 
caliamad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,818
vCash: 500
Pocket I respect the logic you have outlined in this thread, but fundamentally, your trading Pronger for Jackman with some conditional 1st going either way based on where Pronger resigns.

To me, the ducks can get more for Pronger + chance of extending him.

I understand your basically saying that they can flip pronger for a top 6 fowrard, but who are you thinking they could get for him? I just dont like it.

Maybe we won't get the ridiculous offers listed in some other threads, but I think valuewise it would be more than Jackman.

If the ducks don't get a offer they are happy with they can always wait for the deadline too. Eventualy someone will give them a more valuable offer... call it a mistake, but plenty are made every year.

My 2 cents anyways.

caliamad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 12:03 AM
  #24
trublu16
Registered User
 
trublu16's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluester View Post
He's great for the offensive side of the game. However he can't help out during games. Pronger would have the most benefit on Petro. Petro has a early Pronger syndrome of not liking to use his size.
If I am not mistaken, isn't that what the veterans on defense right now suppose to be doing? I guess Polak has turned into a average defensemen, or actually has he turned into more of a gem? EJ was on vacation this year, and Pietroangelo was in juniors.

Absolutely DO NOT want a guy like Pronger teaching theses young kids how to play that position in the NHL. I would prefer for them to follow the teaching of a very classy and respected HOF defenseman. Everyone wants Al to coach, so let him have these kids (EJ, Pie) to teach, and then we will see how good of a coach he really can be.

Don't want nothing to do with 44 being back in a Blues uni.

trublu16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 12:04 AM
  #25
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliamad View Post
Pocket I respect the logic you have outlined in this thread, but fundamentally, your trading Pronger for Jackman with some conditional 1st going either way based on where Pronger resigns.

To me, the ducks can get more for Pronger + chance of extending him.

I understand your basically saying that they can flip pronger for a top 6 fowrard, but who are you thinking they could get for him? I just dont like it.

Maybe we won't get the ridiculous offers listed in some other threads, but I think valuewise it would be more than Jackman.

If the ducks don't get a offer they are happy with they can always wait for the deadline too. Eventualy someone will give them a more valuable offer... call it a mistake, but plenty are made every year.

My 2 cents anyways.
Thx, and like I said, if I were Anaheim I'd keep Pronger if I could. He clearly is comfortable out in Orange County.

On the other hand, if they know they're not keeping him, I guess it really depends on which teams would offer what for Jackman, and whether that plus a first is a quality return for Pronger from Anaheim's standpoint, provided that Anaheim has inside knowledge he's not going to be a Duck after next summer no matter what.

I also acknowledge that some team could probably overpay for a rental so I don't begrudge Anaheim holding out for better. That would work for us too, since that makes it more likely the acquiring team will be the best bidder and not necessarily a team on Pronger's short list. More likely we get him for no assets besides all the available cash Blues have next summer.

Any team that thinks, like the Blues think, that they're on Pronger's short list, is disincentivized from overpayment for that reason. So, yeah, if I'm Anaheim I either keep him or try to trade him to a team he WON'T extend with, and hope that team isn't aware they're not on his short list so that they overpay. If I'm Anaheim I want to keep conditional picks out of it because they likely only hurt the Ducks' value. But unless the Ducks are just killing some team in the trade the other team is going to want to manage the risk.

This is more one of those deals that, if Pronger is made available at this year's draft, this is probably the best the Blues could do. Could they send someone like Phil McRae (a quality but expendable skilled forward prospect) to the 3d team along with Jackman to beef up the quality of player being sent back Anaheim's way? I suppose. But I do think Jackman holds some value. Blues fans are always hearing about the great deals Jackman could have been the centerpiece in and the Blues didn't pull the trigger. Maybe his value has secretly plummeted, but he's 28 and under a reasonable 3-year deal for this stage of his career. He improves any team's D-corps and doesn't kill its cap.

I just see all these "young 1st line (top-3) forward + 1st" for one year of Pronger (and no conditions on the pick) type deals Anaheim is expecting. I just don't see how those are realistic unless the acquiring team has him locked up in advance (which is impossible), and again, the teams like the Blues get to a certain point and say, no thanks, we're on the UFA short list, we'll take our chances with getting him for giving up nothing. I'm more than happy for the Blues to go that route.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:38 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.