HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Lundmark?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-05-2004, 12:50 PM
  #1
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,917
vCash: 500
Lundmark?

Any chance of him getting moved, and if so, what would the Rangers expect back in the deal? Having watched him grow up playing for the T-Birds I would love to see him come to Vancouver and play in Crawford's system .... so what would it take to swing a deal?

maruk14 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 12:52 PM
  #2
Bure9*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14
Any chance of him getting moved, and if so, what would the Rangers expect back in the deal? Having watched him grow up playing for the T-Birds I would love to see him come to Vancouver and play in Crawford's system .... so what would it take to swing a deal?
Either a pick, prospect, or player of a similar age. Rangers need a center or LW.

Bure9* is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 12:54 PM
  #3
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,917
vCash: 500
Jason King or Brandon Reid with a mid level pick to even things out?

maruk14 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 06:19 PM
  #4
Firefly
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Mohawk Valley
Country: Poland
Posts: 3,464
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Firefly Send a message via Skype™ to Firefly
no offense...

but good lord i just hope he is moved, im so sick of hearing about him. and we all know if he stays in NY, and doesnt break out, there will be even more *****ing and moaning about him.

Firefly is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 06:51 PM
  #5
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,716
vCash: 500
If Lundmark gets moved, it will most likely be in a package to move up in the draft.

jas is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 06:54 PM
  #6
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas
If Lundmark gets moved, it will most likely be in a package to move up in the draft.
There are other possibilities as well - Don't discount the possibility of Eric Brewer - depending upon how his contract plays out and the CBA. Lundmark and a defensive prospect for Brewer..... This is my own speculation, but EDM has been interested in bringing an Alberta kid home and Brewer could be gone. Would be a good move for both teams.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:04 PM
  #7
nyr5186
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New Orleans
Country: Madagascar
Posts: 2,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
There are other possibilities as well - Don't discount the possibility of Eric Brewer - depending upon how his contract plays out and the CBA. Lundmark and a defensive prospect for Brewer..... This is my own speculation, but EDM has been interested in bringing an Alberta kid home and Brewer could be gone. Would be a good move for both teams.
Normally I'd say keep Lundmark and give him a final shot to prove himself in New York, but if we could get Brewer for Lundy and maybe a 2nd rounder, I wouldn't be opposed to that at all. Brewer is still fairly young and somebody you can build your defense around. His arrival would probably also allow us to deal Poti for whatever we can get in the draft. Plus I could see Lundmark fitting in very well with the Oilers. He'll get a legit chance over there, and the quick Edmonton ice and less physical Western conference will do wonders for his confidence.

nyr5186 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:10 PM
  #8
pittengineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
There are other possibilities as well - Don't discount the possibility of Eric Brewer - depending upon how his contract plays out and the CBA. Lundmark and a defensive prospect for Brewer..... This is my own speculation, but EDM has been interested in bringing an Alberta kid home and Brewer could be gone. Would be a good move for both teams.
It would take alot more to move Brewer. He is already a #1-#2 dman at 25. Lundmark's value has really dropped and looks to be added to those labeled busts from the 99' draft in the 1st round. Still too young to label a bust, but his value is so low that he has more value to the rangers youth movement than he would to be traded.

pittengineer is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:17 PM
  #9
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittengineer
It would take alot more to move Brewer. He is already a #1-#2 dman at 25. Lundmark's value has really dropped and looks to be added to those labeled busts from the 99' draft in the 1st round. Still too young to label a bust, but his value is so low that he has more value to the rangers youth movement than he would to be traded.
Edmonton may be forced to move Brewer - his a group II expecting a raise from his $2.5 million salary which Lowe really doesn't wish to give. That said, I don't think you could get him for Lundmark and a 2nd... But I don't think that it wouldn't take that much more. Edmonton likes Lundmark, has for some time..... Anyway, it's just my speculation. But I wouldn't be surprised to see Brewer become available.....

Park #2 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:22 PM
  #10
nyr5186
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New Orleans
Country: Madagascar
Posts: 2,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Edmonton may be forced to move Brewer - his a group II expecting a raise from his $2.5 million salary which Lowe really doesn't wish to give. That said, I don't think you could get him for Lundmark and a 2nd... But I don't think that it wouldn't take that much more. Edmonton likes Lundmark, has for some time..... Anyway, it's just my speculation. But I wouldn't be surprised to see Brewer become available.....
Do you think we could get him for Lundmark and the #24 pick? Would you make that deal? I'm kinda torn. It would suck to give up two young assets, but at the same time, Brewer could be a cornerstone defenseman for many years to come and we've still got five 2nd rounders.

nyr5186 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:23 PM
  #11
donpaulo
Capt Barry Beck
 
donpaulo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: nihon
Country: Japan
Posts: 1,620
vCash: 500
yes edmonton are motivated sellers of brewer, no doubt about that. Not sure a 2nd rounder and lundmark would do it, I suspect edmonton would prefer an 'established' player with upside.
Or scale the deal up and include rita (who prucha continues to harp on)
Brewer and Rita for
Lundmark, ... and the 24th pick (TLM)
granted the TLM first rounder is a nice piece but to get brewer is worth it. Rita just appears to meet a need for NY and lundmark deserves some friggin ice time.

Or keep lundmark and give him a legit shot in ny.

donpaulo is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:30 PM
  #12
nyr5186
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New Orleans
Country: Madagascar
Posts: 2,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by donpaulo
yes edmonton are motivated sellers of brewer, no doubt about that. Not sure a 2nd rounder and lundmark would do it, I suspect edmonton would prefer an 'established' player with upside.
Or scale the deal up and include rita (who prucha continues to harp on)
Brewer and Rita for
Lundmark, ... and the 24th pick (TLM)
granted the TLM first rounder is a nice piece but to get brewer is worth it. Rita just appears to meet a need for NY and lundmark deserves some friggin ice time.

Or keep lundmark and give him a legit shot in ny.
How about this?

To NYR: Brewer and Rita

To Oilers: Lundmark, Rachunek and the 24th pick

nyr5186 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:32 PM
  #13
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr4life5186
How about this?

To NYR: Brewer and Rita

To Oilers: Lundmark, Rachunek and the 24th pick
Rangers are giving up FAR too much.

Lundmark and Rachunek for Brewer/Rita is close as it is.......

Park #2 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:33 PM
  #14
pittengineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by donpaulo
yes edmonton are motivated sellers of brewer, no doubt about that. Not sure a 2nd rounder and lundmark would do it, I suspect edmonton would prefer an 'established' player with upside.
Or scale the deal up and include rita (who prucha continues to harp on)
Brewer and Rita for
Lundmark, ... and the 24th pick (TLM)
granted the TLM first rounder is a nice piece but to get brewer is worth it. Rita just appears to meet a need for NY and lundmark deserves some friggin ice time.

Or keep lundmark and give him a legit shot in ny.
I think lundmark is in the same situation as kraft was with us last year. A make or break type year. Move value as a player than their trade value. Kraft was given time and looks to be a solid center in the pens future. Hopefully NY gives him a chance, however I'm not sure if they will.

pittengineer is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:37 PM
  #15
pittengineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Rangers are giving up FAR too much.

Lundmark and Rachunek for Brewer/Rita is close as it is.......
Lundmark and Rita both appear to be busts and about equal each other trade wise. Brewer is better than Rachunek, IMO.

This is coming from a neutral fan.

pittengineer is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:41 PM
  #16
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Rangers are giving up FAR too much.

Lundmark and Rachunek for Brewer/Rita is close as it is.......
Isn't Brewer much better than Rachunek?

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:41 PM
  #17
nyr5186
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New Orleans
Country: Madagascar
Posts: 2,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Rangers are giving up FAR too much.

Lundmark and Rachunek for Brewer/Rita is close as it is.......
You're probably right. But I really wasn't that impressed with Rachunek down the stretch with us. I'd prefer to keep him (and Lundmark), I'm just not as high on him as others are. To me, he looks like another Poti-type defenseman. A guy with a boatload of talent but a liability in his own zone.

nyr5186 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:44 PM
  #18
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prucha73
Isn't Brewer much better than Rachunek?
He's more established, sure. But Edmonton is dealing from weakness since they are forced to deal, Rachunek still has a lot of respect as a developing young defenseman, and most people that I know would rather have Lundmark than Rita if given the choice.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:45 PM
  #19
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr4life5186
You're probably right. But I really wasn't that impressed with Rachunek down the stretch with us. I'd prefer to keep him (and Lundmark), I'm just not as high on him as others are. To me, he looks like another Poti-type defenseman. A guy with a boatload of talent but a liability in his own zone.
Rachunek can be a lot more physical then Poti and I'm sure will show signs of that this season (if it happens....). I think he will develop into a nice 3-4 Defenseman. He had a tough season, and lost some confidence in Ottawa.... and then coming to NY was just a total change in scenery and basically went from playing with a Cup Contender to playing with a polished AHL team. I think he will develop into a nice 3-4 Defenseman. Just my opinion.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:47 PM
  #20
pittengineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
He's more established, sure. But Edmonton is dealing from weakness since they are forced to deal, Rachunek still has a lot of respect as a developing young defenseman, and most people that I know would rather have Lundmark than Rita if given the choice.
I dont believe Edmonton will be dealing from a weakness financially. They will def. wait to see what happens in the CBA, which will include some type of revenue sharing/soft cap/hard cap/salary structure, before trading brewer.

pittengineer is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:49 PM
  #21
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
I think Brewer will ask for somewhere around 3 mil, and I think in the end Oilers will decide to keep him and maybe trade Smith instead.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:50 PM
  #22
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittengineer
I dont believe Edmonton will be dealing from a weakness financially. They will def. wait to see what happens in the CBA, which will include some type of revenue sharing/soft cap/hard cap/salary structure, before trading brewer.
Well, even taking the CBA out of consideration, Edmonton would think twice about bringing Brewer back with a raise - that is the way Lowe operates.

A prolonged lockout has the capability to financially cripple the Edmonton Franchise. Cripple them. Depending upon it's length, the Oilers quite possibly could go bankrupt.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:53 PM
  #23
pittengineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Well, even taking the CBA out of consideration, Edmonton would think twice about bringing Brewer back with a raise - that is the way Lowe operates.

A prolonged lockout has the capability to financially cripple the Edmonton Franchise. Cripple them. Depending upon it's length, the Oilers quite possibly could go bankrupt.
Very true also. If they went bankrupt, wonder what would happen to them. My guess would move to the brand-new Sprint Center in Kansas City. New owners could prob afford them, as all new owners buying nhl franchise must currently treat the team as a hobby and not a business.

pittengineer is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 07:59 PM
  #24
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittengineer
Very true also. If they went bankrupt, wonder what would happen to them. My guess would move to the brand-new Sprint Center in Kansas City. New owners could prob afford them, as all new owners buying nhl franchise must currently treat the team as a hobby and not a business.
Well, I can just say that I hope they do not. I may be a little bit from the old school, but I have a lot of admiration for the Canadian Franchises. Watching the fan support in Calgary really shows the passion that they have for this great game.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
06-05-2004, 08:02 PM
  #25
pittengineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Well, I can just say that I hope they do not. I may be a little bit from the old school, but I have a lot of admiration for the Canadian Franchises. Watching the fan support in Calgary really shows the passion that they have for this great game.
I am in the same boat. I would never hope my team(the pens) would move if they were to go bankrupt(again ). Not to mention keeping the team in canada and especially in edmonton holds a nostalgic value. However in reality, money talks and the group that is building the sprint center look to have deep pockets.

pittengineer 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 09:23 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.