HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

The changing of the guard

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-06-2004, 01:18 AM
  #101
Gibsons Finest
R-E-L-A-X
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flame_Star_Devil
Oh my...



No longer with team? So what? Mogilny and Malakhov were the important pieces that won the cup in 2000! So what they're gone now. Someone else is in their spot.

Scott Stevens: essentially traded Brendan Shanahan for Stevens and like a million draft picks.

Scott Niedermayer: we needed to make a trade to get him, didn't we? That's where trading and drafting go hand in hand.... the one is much more effective with the other.

Claude Lemieux: got him back in 2000 to do his thing and win the cup with us. He was a great addition.

Grant Marshall: scored 6 playoff goals, including a series winner! He was KEY. Without him we do NOTHING. He helped win the cup!

The Arnott and Sykora deals.... not that special? I'd trade ANYTHING for the cup. ANYTHING.

Turner Stevenson - not special? You obviously didn't watch the game he returned in last years SCF. He may not be pretty, but he gets the job done.
The Arnott deal is one that was inevitable, as he wanted out, and Langenbrunner and Nieuwendyk were big parts of the cup run, but I'd say had you kept Sykora, and traded Commodore and Damphousse for Niedermayer, you'd have won a cup anyway. But then again, to quote the butterfly effect "Change one thing, change everything" so it could've been different.

Gibsons Finest is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 01:20 AM
  #102
Classic Devil
Moderator Emeritus
 
Classic Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 33,826
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ducksflytogether
The Arnott deal is one that was inevitable, as he wanted out, and Langenbrunner and Nieuwendyk were big parts of the cup run, but I'd say had you kept Sykora, and traded Commodore and Damphousse for Niedermayer, you'd have won a cup anyway. But then again, to quote the butterfly effect "Change one thing, change everything" so it could've been different.
No, we wouldn't have. Sykora was done here after 2002 and he refused to play on a tweaked ankle. Finished. He didn't fit into the new team structure - away from pure scoring and forechecking to more grit and defense. That's the transition I'm talking about - ebbing with the flow of the team to take advantage of your strengths. Maybe we would have won. I doubt it.

Classic Devil is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 02:37 AM
  #103
Traitor8
Registered User
 
Traitor8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Iraq
Posts: 4,914
vCash: 500
It's good to make sense sometimes..I didn't mention Fedorov has the face of Detroit's team...2nd ...without Blake,Forsberg...they avs haven't been the same..Sundin is a great player and ask any Leaf fan what Toronto looks without Sundin..you saw it in the playoffs against Ottawa...they were so bad offensively. and you keep sayiing that you need a core to win...like you stated with Pronger..I didn't say anything about that..All I said was that one player can BE HUGE! and that proves it in each one of those teams..and on purpose..I didn't pick a goalie to show you that a player can be huge in each team..

Look at how these players affect the outcome of the game ..the same with Stevens..some teams recover but it takes a while..

Thornton,Sundin,Koivu,Redden,Lidstrom,Pronger,Leet ch,Blake,Sakic,Forsberg,St-Louis,Chara,Fedorov,Yzerman,Lidstrom,Doan,Naslund, Bertuzzi,Iginla,Marleau,Modano,
Smyth,Jokinen,Gaborik,Palffy,Yashin,Lemieux,Heatle y,Francis(Carolina),Nash, Richards ..just to name some

and some might say that defense is more critical then offense so it takes even more time to replace a guy like Scott Stevens because even though you could get some solid players on the UFA market...nobody will fill it like Scott can. Think about it..now players can dump the puck and chase it..they can skate with the puck across the blue line

Traitor8 is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 03:29 AM
  #104
Ajacied
Remember #9
 
Ajacied's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Netherlands
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 23,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flame_Star_Devil
Neal Broten
Alexander Mogilny
Vladimir Malakhov
Scott Stevens (tradelike deal)
The pick we used to draft Scott Niedermayer
Claude Lemieux
Arnott for Nieuwendyk and Langenbrunner - brought us a cup, so WE WON, even if Dallas didn't lose
Sykora for Friesen and Tverdovsky - brought us a cup so WE WON, even if Anaheim didn't lose
Grant Marshall
Just because you won the cup doesn't mean you won the trade. That's like holding the aquired player responsible for the entire team. So if the team wins the Cup, the trade has panned out, regardless of the player's contributions, if not, then it is automaticly a lost trade, again regardless of his contributions? So say Mike Modano gets dealt during the next trade line, at the time Modano has 79 points in 61 games and is considered the frontrunner for the Heart at the moment, Dallas stands 1st in the entire league and is the clear cut favorite to win it all. Say the return is no-one less than Igor Larionov, the Stars go on to lose 50% of their games thereafter and make the playoffs coming in 5th in the West. They go on to beat everyone in 6 games to win their 2nd Cup in franchise history, without Larionov even registering a single point, nor providing any other attribute. Yet, according to your logic, the Stars win the trade? I know I exaggerated, but the more you exaggerate, the better you can prove your point. Unless the aquired player in question becomes a huge part of your team and eventually be one of the key reasons as of why you won the Cup, a trade is not always won when winning it all. I do agree that Langenbrunner and Nieuwendyk contributed enough to consider this a won trade.

Ajacied is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 07:45 AM
  #105
Classic Devil
Moderator Emeritus
 
Classic Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 33,826
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Modano = Dud
Just because you won the cup doesn't mean you won the trade. That's like holding the aquired player responsible for the entire team. So if the team wins the Cup, the trade has panned out, regardless of the player's contributions, if not, then it is automaticly a lost trade, again regardless of his contributions? So say Mike Modano gets dealt during the next trade line, at the time Modano has 79 points in 61 games and is considered the frontrunner for the Heart at the moment, Dallas stands 1st in the entire league and is the clear cut favorite to win it all. Say the return is no-one less than Igor Larionov, the Stars go on to lose 50% of their games thereafter and make the playoffs coming in 5th in the West. They go on to beat everyone in 6 games to win their 2nd Cup in franchise history, without Larionov even registering a single point, nor providing any other attribute. Yet, according to your logic, the Stars win the trade? I know I exaggerated, but the more you exaggerate, the better you can prove your point. Unless the aquired player in question becomes a huge part of your team and eventually be one of the key reasons as of why you won the Cup, a trade is not always won when winning it all. I do agree that Langenbrunner and Nieuwendyk contributed enough to consider this a won trade.

The thing is, though, that every one of those players pulled their weight when we won.


Last edited by Classic Devil: 06-06-2004 at 11:07 AM.
Classic Devil is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 10:46 AM
  #106
futurcorerock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
did he call it the Heart Trophy?



NJ isnt going away any time soon. Yeah, they lose their captain but Stevens isnt their definitive asset. They're in transition from a D to an O team, so its becoming irrelevant. And anyways, some of you calibrate his absence to Devils failure based on one playoff run? The flyers were damn good this season but ran into TB, needless to say that series ran a heavy length. The Devils are stacked so many ways that if one thing fails, they have many more to rely upon. Need i remind you they have arguably the best goaltender in the NHL today (based on skill, success)

futurcorerock is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 11:39 AM
  #107
kenabnrmal
Registered User
 
kenabnrmal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: the beach or rink
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,221
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Modano = Dud
Just because you won the cup doesn't mean you won the trade. That's like holding the aquired player responsible for the entire team. So if the team wins the Cup, the trade has panned out, regardless of the player's contributions, if not, then it is automaticly a lost trade, again regardless of his contributions? So say Mike Modano gets dealt during the next trade line, at the time Modano has 79 points in 61 games and is considered the frontrunner for the Heart at the moment, Dallas stands 1st in the entire league and is the clear cut favorite to win it all. Say the return is no-one less than Igor Larionov, the Stars go on to lose 50% of their games thereafter and make the playoffs coming in 5th in the West. They go on to beat everyone in 6 games to win their 2nd Cup in franchise history, without Larionov even registering a single point, nor providing any other attribute. Yet, according to your logic, the Stars win the trade? I know I exaggerated, but the more you exaggerate, the better you can prove your point. Unless the aquired player in question becomes a huge part of your team and eventually be one of the key reasons as of why you won the Cup, a trade is not always won when winning it all. I do agree that Langenbrunner and Nieuwendyk contributed enough to consider this a won trade.
We sometimes lose focus about the purpose of a trade. They aren't so a team can chalk one up under the "Trades Won" column in the standings the next morning. There are no points allotted for won trades, and though we all use it incessently, the whole notion of "winning and losing" trades is somewhat faulty. The Cup's the thing, and its a team game. Long-term, every trade may not make the team better. However, if a team wins a Cup with a collection of players, theres really no sense in debating whether a team won or lost the trades that the team made in order to put that collection together. They won the Cup with them, end of story. There is nothing else to be concerned with in team sports.

kenabnrmal is offline  
Closed Thread

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 01:05 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.