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.

Col-Ana

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-04-2010, 03:15 AM
  #26
Ulic
Registered User
 
Ulic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stories View Post
Is Mueller + Shattenkirk or Elliott close-ish?
Closer, but not close enough for the Ducks. I really don't see them trading down with Ryan. You would need to find a team with an equal level defenseman and do a swap.

Ulic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 03:25 AM
  #27
Charlie Milles*
Uh... Go Canucks?
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,831
vCash: 500
Ryan & a 3rd for Shattenkirk, Cuminskey.

Charlie Milles* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 03:34 AM
  #28
TheStranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Milles View Post
Ryan & a 3rd for Shattenkirk, Cuminskey.
And the new worst proposal goes to...

Even if you took out the 3rd and had Colorado giving a 1st, it would be bad.

TheStranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 03:38 AM
  #29
Charlie Milles*
Uh... Go Canucks?
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheStranger View Post
And the new worst proposal goes to...

Even if you took out the 3rd and had Colorado giving a 1st, it would be bad.


Anahiem need defensemen. Colorado can't afford giving up much more than their best prospect and a top-4 defenseman. Maybe Kyle Quincey in place of Cuminskey.

Charlie Milles* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 03:43 AM
  #30
TheStranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Milles View Post


Anahiem need defensemen. Colorado can't afford giving up much more than their best prospect and a top-4 defenseman. Maybe Kyle Quincey in place of Cuminskey.
Quincey would definitely make it closer yes. And just because Colorado can't do much better than a certain deal doesn't mean that the best they can offer is good enough. Maybe they're just not a suitor?

Edit: Anyway, taking the draft pick out would also be a start.

TheStranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 03:43 AM
  #31
ManOnTheMoon
Hejdas Gonna Hejd
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Country: United States
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Milles View Post


Anahiem need defensemen. Colorado can't afford giving up much more than their best prospect and a top-4 defenseman. Maybe Kyle Quincey in place of Cuminskey.
Then Colorado doesn't get Ryan? Just because the Avs can't give up anymore doesn't mean that it'll land Ryan. The Duchene comparison is a good one. Think of what it would take to get Duchene from Colorado, that's what we'd be giving up for Ryan. And Cumiskey is only a top-4 d-man on Colorado's laughable defense. He still has a long way to go before he can be considered a solid NHLer.

ManOnTheMoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 03:51 AM
  #32
Charlie Milles*
Uh... Go Canucks?
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexyz2618 View Post
Then Colorado doesn't get Ryan? Just because the Avs can't give up anymore doesn't mean that it'll land Ryan. The Duchene comparison is a good one. Think of what it would take to get Duchene from Colorado, that's what we'd be giving up for Ryan.
The Duchene comparison is a great one. Duchene is Colorado's guy. Ryan is second to Getzlaf, at the very least. If the Ducks didn't bite on a proposal involving Shattenkirk and Quincey, they'd be making a mistake.

Quote:
And Cumiskey is only a top-4 d-man on Colorado's laughable defense. He still has a long way to go before he can be considered a solid NHLer.
Not that I disagree, but if Colorado's defense is laughable, Anaheim's defense is spit-out-drink hilarious.

Charlie Milles* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 04:01 AM
  #33
ManOnTheMoon
Hejdas Gonna Hejd
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Country: United States
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Milles View Post
The Duchene comparison is a great one. Duchene is Colorado's guy. Ryan is second to Getzlaf, at the very least. If the Ducks didn't bite on a proposal involving Shattenkirk and Quincey, they'd be making a mistake.


Not that I disagree, but if Colorado's defense is laughable, Anaheim's defense is spit-out-drink hilarious.
Point taken. But ask yourself this-- is one more fringe NHLer/6-7 d-man (disregarding his potential since Anaheim needs help icing their D this year) really going to entice Anaheim to part with Ryan? (I'm speaking of Cumiskey, of course, not Shattenkirk or Quincey.) I'd be surprised if all Colorado had to give was Kirk or Quincey, and that alone is more than I'm really wanting to give up.

I really like Ryan, but it's just one of those positions where the cost would be greater than the value. Same with Duchene, and every other Weber/Parise/Keith/Eriksson in the league. They're very rarely traded for that precise reason, you have to cripple your team just to acquire them, and suddenly the hole they fill in in the roster is surrounded by three or four more glaring ones.

ManOnTheMoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 04:20 AM
  #34
Charlie Milles*
Uh... Go Canucks?
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexyz2618 View Post
Point taken. But ask yourself this-- is one more fringe NHLer/6-7 d-man (disregarding his potential since Anaheim needs help icing their D this year) really going to entice Anaheim to part with Ryan? (I'm speaking of Cumiskey, of course, not Shattenkirk or Quincey.) I'd be surprised if all Colorado had to give was Kirk or Quincey, and that alone is more than I'm really wanting to give up.

I really like Ryan, but it's just one of those positions where the cost would be greater than the value. Same with Duchene, and every other Weber/Parise/Keith/Eriksson in the league. They're very rarely traded for that precise reason, you have to cripple your team just to acquire them, and suddenly the hole they fill in in the roster is surrounded by three or four more glaring ones.
Ryan is a very hard guy to trade and is very close to being an 'untradeable' for Anaheim. That said, if he were to be traded, the Ducks would need a twenty-plus minute-per-game defenseman and a prospect in the same position. I do think that, in this proposal, Colorado would end up losing more than they'd gain, for the reasons you stated. It would take Shattenkirk and, at the very least, Quincey to interest Anaheim. Besides, as good as Ryan is, Colorado is OK with Hejduk as their number one right-winger for the short-term. I didn't much like the initial proposal, as it didn't make much sense but if these two teams were trading partners and Ryan was the primary asset, Shatternkirk and either Wilson, Cuminskey or Quincey would have to go the other way. I guess that was the point I was getting at with my counter-proposal.

Charlie Milles* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 04:22 AM
  #35
Vipers31
Moderator
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 11,105
vCash: 500
The Ducks don't need defensive prospects, at all, since they are loaded there. So, since Colorado doesn't have a young top-pairing defender close to Ryan, it would have to include a forward center piece. I just don't see a realistic proposal with the Avs.

Vipers31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 04:22 AM
  #36
voxel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 10,826
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ovechkin007 View Post
To Colorado:
Bobby Ryan

To Anaheim:
Kyle Cumiskey
Peter Budaj
2nd Rounder

Close or brutal?
Brutal.

To Colorado:
Bobby Ryan

To Anaheim:
Kyle Quincey
Ryan O'Reilly
1st Rounder 2011 or 2012

If I were the Ducks and I could not get a deal under $5.5M/yr for Ryan, I might consider the above.

voxel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 04:24 AM
  #37
Vipers31
Moderator
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 11,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Milles View Post
Ryan is a very hard guy to trade and is very close to being an 'untradeable' for Anaheim. That said, if he were to be traded, the Ducks would need a twenty-plus minute-per-game defenseman and a prospect in the same position.
Why would we need more defensive prospects? Ryan would create a huge hole in our top6.

Vipers31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 04:36 AM
  #38
ManOnTheMoon
Hejdas Gonna Hejd
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Country: United States
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Milles View Post
Ryan is a very hard guy to trade and is very close to being an 'untradeable' for Anaheim. That said, if he were to be traded, the Ducks would need a twenty-plus minute-per-game defenseman and a prospect in the same position. I do think that, in this proposal, Colorado would end up losing more than they'd gain, for the reasons you stated. It would take Shattenkirk and, at the very least, Quincey to interest Anaheim. Besides, as good as Ryan is, Colorado is OK with Hejduk as their number one right-winger for the short-term. I didn't much like the initial proposal, as it didn't make much sense but if these two teams were trading partners and Ryan was the primary asset, Shatternkirk and either Wilson, Cuminskey or Quincey would have to go the other way. I guess that was the point I was getting at with my counter-proposal.
I understand. And for the record, Stewart is our number 1 RW, Hejduk is on the second line. So even more, Ryan is not a necessity. If he was a natural LW, I can almost see Colorado moving the pieces around to make it happen, but that's not the case. Colorado doesn't have any top pairing d-men they're looking to unload, and Ryan isn't demanding a trade out of Anaheim, so the whole deal is a bit of a non-starter.

ManOnTheMoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 04:36 AM
  #39
Charlie Milles*
Uh... Go Canucks?
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipers31 View Post
Why would we need more defensive prospects?
Don't want Shattenkirk? The problem with Anaheim's defense isn't that it's young and experience thus bad, the problem is that it's simply bad. The average age, currently, on the back-end for the Ducks is over 30. Far from ancient but far from blooming. Sbisa and Gardiner are great to look forward to but hardly enough.

Quote:
Ryan would create a huge hole in our top6.
If Selanne stays, the hole isn't that big.

Perry
Selanne
Lupul

Better than a lot of teams.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexyz2618 View Post
I understand. And for the record, Stewart is our number 1 RW, Hejduk is on the second line. So even more, Ryan is not a necessity. If he was a natural LW, I can almost see Colorado moving the pieces around to make it happen, but that's not the case. Colorado doesn't have any top pairing d-men they're looking to unload, and Ryan isn't demanding a trade out of Anaheim, so the whole deal is a bit of a non-starter.
Yup, agreed.

Charlie Milles* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 04:47 AM
  #40
Vipers31
Moderator
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 11,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Milles View Post
Don't want Shattenkirk?
It's not that I don't want him, it's that we are trading Bobby Ryan. Our defensive prospect pool with Sbisa, Fowler, Gardiner, Clark, Vatanen (and maybe even Mitera and Newton) doesn't need an upgrade.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Milles View Post
The problem with Anaheim's defense isn't that it's young and experience thus bad, the problem is that it's simply bad. The average age, currently, on the back-end for the Ducks is over 30. Far from ancient but far from blooming. Sbisa and Gardiner are great to look forward to but hardly enough.
Look above, there's more than that coming. Shattenkirk's going to be good, but we don't really need more defensive prospects, as good as they may be, in a deal for Ryan. Eiter we can get an established and still (at least relatively) young great defenseman, or we need to look at other issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Milles View Post
If Selanne stays, the hole isn't that big.

Perry
Selanne
Lupul

Better than a lot of teams.
If Selanne stays, we're delaying the problem a year. Lupul is coming back from major back surgery - I like what he can do, but right now, it would not be wise to count on him as a go-to guy.

Vipers31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 04:51 AM
  #41
Ulic
Registered User
 
Ulic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by voxel View Post
To Colorado:
Bobby Ryan

To Anaheim:
Kyle Quincey
Ryan O'Reilly
1st Rounder 2011 or 2012

If I were the Ducks and I could not get a deal under $5.5M/yr for Ryan, I might consider the above.
Much better. I just don't see either team biting unprovoked though.
With the Avs young and still somewhat unstable team, I think it would have to be a 2012 pick. That gives them a little more breathing room to solidify the lineup.

Even with getting a player as great as Ryan, I feel like the Avs wouldn't want to part with two pieces who are integral to team success. I agree that if he played LW, it would give the Avs a greater degree of incentive.

As much as I would love Ryan on the Avs, I just don't think the two teams make good trading partners. The Ducks should just keep him. Even if he is expensive, he's damn good.

Ulic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 04:56 AM
  #42
Charlie Milles*
Uh... Go Canucks?
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipers31 View Post
It's not that I don't want him, it's that we are trading Bobby Ryan. Our defensive prospect pool with Sbisa, Fowler, Gardiner, Clark, Vatanen (and maybe even Mitera and Newton) doesn't need an upgrade.


Look above, there's more than that coming. Shattenkirk's going to be good, but we don't really need more defensive prospects, as good as they may be, in a deal for Ryan. Eiter we can get an established and still (at least relatively) young great defenseman, or we need to look at other issues.
Colorado has a great young defenseman in Ryan Wilson but not enough for Ryan, of course. Anaheim is really leaning on guys like Sbisa and Gardiner (forgetting Fowler was a brain fart). They're going to inherit quite a bit of responsibility with Visnovsky and Lydman being their predecessors in the twenty-plus minute role. This, of course, doesn't necessarily mean adding another prospect but it does, undoubtedly, mean adding a defenseman of Quincey's caliber and presence.

Quote:
If Selanne stays, we're delaying the problem a year. Lupul is coming back from major back surgery - I like what he can do, but right now, it would not be wise to count on him as a go-to guy.
Fragile, definitely but, for the 2010-11 season, Anaheim's right-side isn't in shambles if Ryan moves on. Going forward: well, who's to say? Lots can get done in twelve months or so.

Charlie Milles* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 08:33 AM
  #43
Force951
Registered User
 
Force951's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Posts: 2,354
vCash: 50
Quantity /= Quality, these 3-4 for 1 deals don't have the value in it for a young player like Ryan. Start with Duchene and add a good prospect like Shattenkirk for the Ducks to even consider it.

Force951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 08:59 AM
  #44
EdAVSfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Force951 View Post
Quantity /= Quality, these 3-4 for 1 deals don't have the value in it for a young player like Ryan. Start with Duchene and add a good prospect like Shattenkirk for the Ducks to even consider it.
Lol.

So you tell everyone their proposals are no good, and then you throw a terrible one out yourself.

Way to look like an NHL 10 GM.

EdAVSfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 09:09 AM
  #45
airforceones25
Registered User
 
airforceones25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 3,287
vCash: 500
Unfortunately Colorado doesn't have a defenseman that would spark immediate interest in any Ryan trade... So any trade would have to look like this..

Duchene +
Stewart +
Galiardi ++

+ includes top prospects (Shattenkirk/Elliot) or 1st round picks..

From my perspective I don't see AVS inclined to make such a move. So it's a no go for a Ryan trade to the Colorado IMO

airforceones25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 09:50 AM
  #46
Force951
Registered User
 
Force951's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Posts: 2,354
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieAVS View Post
Lol.

So you tell everyone their proposals are no good, and then you throw a terrible one out yourself.

Way to look like an NHL 10 GM.
How is that a horrible proposal? Ryan was a 2nd OA pick, so you can't throw out draft position as a reason. Duchene scored 24-31-55 81GP in his rookie year, while Ryan scored 31-26-57 64 GP his rookie year. The ducks know what they have in Ryan, which is a high scoring big bodied wing who fits in great with Getzlaf and Perry, or carrying his own line. So if they are gonna trade Ryan for a similar or slightly lower scoring player then your gonna have to entice them which would take someone like Shattenkirk or a 1st.

Ducks don't want to and don't need to trade Ryan so unless your filling a big hole (young top pairing defender) then your gonna have to overpay.

Force951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 10:26 AM
  #47
Goulet17
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by airforceones25 View Post
Unfortunately Colorado doesn't have a defenseman that would spark immediate interest in any Ryan trade... So any trade would have to look like this..

Duchene +
Stewart +
Galiardi ++

+ includes top prospects (Shattenkirk/Elliot) or 1st round picks..

From my perspective I don't see AVS inclined to make such a move. So it's a no go for a Ryan trade to the Colorado IMO
If Colorado offered Duchene or Stewart for Ryan (not that they ever would), Colorado would not have to offer more.

Sorry, but Ryan has not suddenly morphed into Crosby or Ovechkin overnight.

Goulet17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 10:29 AM
  #48
thedoctor
                    
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by airforceones25 View Post
Unfortunately Colorado doesn't have a defenseman that would spark immediate interest in any Ryan trade... So any trade would have to look like this..

Duchene +
Stewart +
Galiardi ++

+ includes top prospects (Shattenkirk/Elliot) or 1st round picks..

From my perspective I don't see AVS inclined to make such a move. So it's a no go for a Ryan trade to the Colorado IMO
Duchene+ Try Ryan+.

this whole discussion is moot anyways because the 2 teams have similar needs and don't want to move their young guys.

thedoctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 10:31 AM
  #49
S E P H
@Krzysztof_WHL
 
S E P H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Avs Country!
Country: Poland
Posts: 4,512
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by airforceones25 View Post
Unfortunately Colorado doesn't have a defenseman that would spark immediate interest in any Ryan trade... So any trade would have to look like this..

Duchene +
Stewart +
Galiardi ++

+ includes top prospects (Shattenkirk/Elliot) or 1st round picks..

From my perspective I don't see AVS inclined to make such a move. So it's a no go for a Ryan trade to the Colorado IMO
Ah Ryan is fantastic, but he isn't Ovechkin, Crosby good. Duchene+ and Stewart+ is just ridiculous. And to add a 1st or one of our best prospects too is beyond reality.

S E P H is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2010, 10:32 AM
  #50
Christian Litscher
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,032
vCash: 500
I don't see why Anaheim would want Shattenkirk when they have Fowler, and both might not be ready for another year(Fowler maybe 2?). And for people having Quincey it would take much much more than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by airforceones25 View Post
Unfortunately Colorado doesn't have a defenseman that would spark immediate interest in any Ryan trade... So any trade would have to look like this..

Duchene +
Stewart +
Galiardi ++

+ includes top prospects (Shattenkirk/Elliot) or 1st round picks..

From my perspective I don't see AVS inclined to make such a move. So it's a no go for a Ryan trade to the Colorado IMO
If that's what it would honestly take then no way a deal would ever be done.

Christian Litscher 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 11:12 PM.

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.