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.

A few Brian Campbell ideas

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-02-2011, 11:33 PM
  #76
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
To Minnesota:

Brian Campbell
John Scott
Calgary 2nd round pick

To Chicago:

Cam Barker
Justin Faulk

Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 11:37 PM
  #77
TSA0402
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,232
vCash: 500
I would try and trade Hjalmarsson first because people won't ask for your first round pick as well in exchange. With Campbell, Keith and Seabrooks new bloated contract, its hard to have another defenseman making much more than 1.5 million and having a competitive forward core.

TSA0402 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 11:47 PM
  #78
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
I wouldn't say Seabs contract is a bloated one. With a 5.8 cap hit, that's pretty reasonable for the sound job he does. I consider Seabs to be more along the lines of a younger Kaberle, who hits and actually shows up everynight!

Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 11:54 PM
  #79
TSA0402
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,232
vCash: 500
You're probably right. Bloated for Seabrook is not the right word. I'll say he's slightly overpaid. However, for the amount Blackhawks allocated to defense already, that 5.8 million cap hit is a killer.

TSA0402 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 03:54 AM
  #80
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,458
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isles_Guy View Post
it may be a terrible deal for Chicago but its worse for the rangers.
36M for a steadily declining defenseman,
Chicago would be nuts not to take that

Campbell has the worst contact by far in hockey and Lacavalier is 2nd, neither is going anywhere this offseason Without adding something very enticing
how was Bolland doing this POs


you are nuts again.


I repeat and this will be the last time for guys like you


CAMPBELL IS NOT DECLINING - HE GOT BETTER OVERALL AND HIS D IS BETTER THAN EVER

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 08:44 AM
  #81
TOGuy14
Registered User
 
TOGuy14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,585
vCash: 500
All the Blackhawks fans need to relax and not go so worked up like everyone is trying to fleece you and steal Campbell away from you.

Last I checked it is Hawk fans who are trying to send him packing, and other teams fans are giving the "no thanks" back.

If you love him so much just keep him, I know Toronto is very satisfied not taking him (unless you are taking Komi back).

[edit] Anyway, given that you have about 9 million in cap space for this upcoming season and still need to resign Frolik, Kopecky, Brouwer, and Crawford (which should eat up at about 3/4 of your space) you also need a couple more bodies to fill roster spots as well which means you have essentially just enough to get by this year. Considering Sharp's sweetheart deal is over after next season you will be back in cap hell at that point unless you make a move. So not as dire as last summer, but another mini-purge does need to take place at some point.

TOGuy14 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 08:48 AM
  #82
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,967
vCash: 500
Lol at this thread.

Love the Kane/Toews counter-proposals involving marginal players like Yip. The difference being that Yip is bad and Campbell would be a #2 Dman on ALOT of teams.

If Chicago wants to move Campbell, they will, simple. He doesn't have an "immovable contract" as some proclaim, you just need the right situation.

Montreal gave up a top 15 pick for Scott freaking Gomez.. I think we could get something valuable for Campbell if Bowman decides to move him, which, I don't even think he will because our record without Campbell is roughly .500. The Hawks don't have any pressing needs in moving Campbell, and have no one who could immediately fill his role.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:21 AM
  #83
sabres_phan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Yeah right. Kane isn't going anywhere. If we ever did trade Kane, it would be only to Buffalo and for about double his actual value, which is way higher than you seem to understand. Everybody knows what Kane would mean to Buffalo. If it were to happen this offseason, discussions would start at Myers and Roy, with the Sabres adding another piece and you guys just getting Kane.
Personally, I don't think Buffalo should want anything to do with Kane. That's not to say he's not a great player - he certainly is! He just seems to get in enough trouble as it is with boozing and beating up cabbies and stuff. I'd be worried that he'd end up spending too much time with his crew from South Buffalo (a seemingly rough bunch) and these types of problems would get even worse. I love seeing the local boy do well, but he probably needs to grow up a bit before I'd consider Buffalo a good fit for him.

sabres_phan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:22 AM
  #84
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Ripper View Post
To Minnesota:

Brian Campbell
John Scott
Calgary 2nd round pick

To Chicago:

Cam Barker
Justin Faulk
I stand by my original offer.

Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:24 AM
  #85
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Ripper View Post
I stand by my original offer.
It's not a bad offer. I'd consider it if I knew I could flip Barker to Tallon and get the 2nd back or maybe even a 3rd.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:36 AM
  #86
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
It's not a bad offer. I'd consider it if I knew I could flip Barker to Tallon and get the 2nd back or maybe even a 3rd.
Looking at Florida's D, that'd be a pretty good offer for Tallon to refuse. I saw your proposal in the other thread. Would a Brouwer+Barker for Weiss be overpayment?

They'd be taking on some more salary not to mention a Brouwer raise, but they'll need it to get to the cap floor since they only have 17 million committed to 10 players for next season so far.

Edit: Didn't see Reinprect in the minors, guess that's 19 million to 11 players.

Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:44 AM
  #87
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Ripper View Post
Looking at Florida's D, that'd be a pretty good offer for Tallon to refuse. I saw your proposal in the other thread. Would a Brouwer+Barker for Weiss be overpayment?

They'd be taking on some more salary not to mention a Brouwer raise, but they'll need it to get to the cap floor since they only have 17 million committed to 10 players for next season so far.

Edit: Didn't see Reinprect in the minors, guess that's 19 million to 11 players.
Florida would want more than Brouwer and Barker. They're going to want multiple picks and/or Beach.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:53 AM
  #88
TSA0402
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Ripper View Post
To Minnesota:

Brian Campbell
John Scott
Calgary 2nd round pick

To Chicago:

Cam Barker
Justin Faulk
Yea its a pretty good offer. Most people would jump at this trade in a heartbeat it would seem, but I wouldnt. The most important thing Chicago needs to decide if they are re-tooling or win now mode. If you are win-now, I don't see how Campbell gets traded for that.

TSA0402 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 12:13 PM
  #89
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA0402 View Post
Yea its a pretty good offer. Most people would jump at this trade in a heartbeat it would seem, but I wouldnt. The most important thing Chicago needs to decide if they are re-tooling or win now mode. If you are win-now, I don't see how Campbell gets traded for that.
It would just be a restructuring of our cap, not a rebuilding year. I don't think you'll see the Hawks have another rebuilding year again given the extremely deep prospect pool they're putting together. We'd likely flip Barker, sign Jovo or Hejda, trade for a good second line center and sign a top 4th liner like Rupp. Then Sharp would be signed to a new multi-year deal shortly after.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 12:36 PM
  #90
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
My thoughts exactly. Posted what the line up would look like if it went like that, but still, the trades have to be made to get a number 2 center, or over pay a little in the FA market to get one. To be honest, i'd rather trade for one than overpay and ship off Campbell for that relief.

Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 12:42 PM
  #91
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,825
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
I'm quite sure an offer of Kris Russell + Kyle Wilson's UFA rights + Commodore would be enough for Campbell for the "get rid of him yesterday" crowd. What I'm curious about is whether or not it's sufficient for those who actually recognize that there's a good NHL player buried underneath that contract.

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 01:19 PM
  #92
Talentless Practise*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
I'm quite sure an offer of Kris Russell + Kyle Wilson's UFA rights + Commodore would be enough for Campbell for the "get rid of him yesterday" crowd. What I'm curious about is whether or not it's sufficient for those who actually recognize that there's a good NHL player buried underneath that contract.
Of course we recognize he's a great NHL player. That's not the point though, the point is he's overpaid which is hindering what our team can do financially, to compete in the FA market as well as keep our own talent.

Talentless Practise* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 01:30 PM
  #93
electricjib
Registered User
 
electricjib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 6,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon View Post
To Chicago: Brad Boyes
To Buffalo: Brian Campbell

To Chicago: Milan Michalek
To Ottawa: Brian Campbell

To Chicago: Paul Stastny
To Colorado: Brian Campbell, 2011 1st

To Chicago: Michal Rozsival, Lee Stempniak, Paul Bissonette
To Phoenix: Brian Campbell, 2011 3rd


All trades can be tweaked with picks or proespects as needed.
For Colorado to take on that salary your going to have to pay us.

I'm by no means an expert and rarely make counter trades but think of it this way. Campbell is overpaid by a TON. Stastny can play to his value on most occasions. Stastny is a number 1 center on a decent number of teams. Brian Campbell brings pretty much what we have in Liles with more size and makes what 3 million more?

Think about when the Avs traded Smyth to LA. I'd guess the Hawks would have to take on a little Salary and or overpay the avs for taking on Campbell as a dump. Which it is. Either way the Avs overpaid LA to take on Smyth even though he IMO is a better player than Campbell. And you think you'd get Stastny for that package?

electricjib is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 01:33 PM
  #94
TSA0402
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,232
vCash: 500
I think some Chicago fans think he is a good NHL player, that is declining like crazy, can't play defense. At least judging from what I've read on these boards. This is why they want him gone and are willing to add a 1st. This is where I disagree, if you can trade him, sign Jovo, extend Sharp and get a 2C, 3C that you want without overpaying and giving up too many assets, then it could work. You're looking at a lot of hypotheticals.

TSA0402 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 03:14 PM
  #95
Isles_Guy*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: long Island
Posts: 6,237
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Isles_Guy*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
how was Bolland doing this POs


you are nuts again.


I repeat and this will be the last time for guys like you


CAMPBELL IS NOT DECLINING - HE GOT BETTER OVERALL AND HIS D IS BETTER THAN EVER
THEN KEEP HIM AND STOP TRYING TO PAWN HIS ASS OFF ON OTHER TEAMS, ITS NOT LIKE OTHER TEAMS ARE THE ONES LOOKING TO ACQUIRE HIM

And what are you talking about Bolland for ? he had 37 points and was a plus 11 at 3.350M or better than $90,000 a point, Neilsen,on the other hand, had 44 points, was a plus 13, at 550K, or $12,500 a point.....

Neilsen is the better player hands down, especially when you consider how Bollands Stats were padded by Power play time, and Neilsen had 7 of his goals on the penalty kill,

thats funny, Neilson had almost as many points Shorthanded, as Bolland had with the Man advantage

Isles_Guy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 03:45 PM
  #96
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isles_Guy View Post
THEN KEEP HIM AND STOP TRYING TO PAWN HIS ASS OFF ON OTHER TEAMS, ITS NOT LIKE OTHER TEAMS ARE THE ONES LOOKING TO ACQUIRE HIM

And what are you talking about Bolland for ? he had 37 points and was a plus 11 at 3.350M or better than $90,000 a point, Neilsen,on the other hand, had 44 points, was a plus 13, at 550K, or $12,500 a point.....

Neilsen is the better player hands down, especially when you consider how Bollands Stats were padded by Power play time, and Neilsen had 7 of his goals on the penalty kill,

thats funny, Neilson had almost as many points Shorthanded, as Bolland had with the Man advantage
I like Nielson, but Bolland missed a lot of games this year and also played hurt and did nothing the first month or so. I'm not sure how you could say Neilson is the better player hands down when he has no playoff experience. Bolland is one of the best in the business in the playoffs. I haven't heard or seen anything from Neilson that suggests he is even half the agitator Bolland is. When it comes to checking centers, there's Staal, Bolland and everyone else, although I'll admit Nielson is probably in the top 5.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 03:51 PM
  #97
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grabovski View Post
How about:
Komisarek + Lebda
for
Campbell

??
You forgot the sarcasm face.

Liferleafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 03:56 PM
  #98
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 9,147
vCash: 500
Isles guy - i can guarantee you that fans of playoff teams would all love having Dave Bolland on their team. Its not about points as much as stepping up at tge right time. That being said, Bolland did have 28 points in his last 28 games.

As for Campbell. His contract is a big problem for the Hawks because of how keith, seabs and hammer have developed since soupy was signed. Simply put, his contract would only be a terrible burden for a handful of teams in the NHL, including the Hawks. Somehow people like your act as if his contract would be a huge burden to every team.

Sarava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 04:05 PM
  #99
Isles_Guy*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: long Island
Posts: 6,237
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Isles_Guy*
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
I like Nielson, but Bolland missed a lot of games this year and also played hurt and did nothing the first month or so. I'm not sure how you could say Neilson is the better player hands down when he has no playoff experience. Bolland is one of the best in the business in the playoffs. I haven't heard or seen anything from Neilson that suggests he is even half the agitator Bolland is. When it comes to checking centers, there's Staal, Bolland and everyone else, although I'll admit Nielson is probably in the top 5.
I can say hands down because Bolland makes almost 7 times as much and didnt do as well, despite playing on the power play more often and playing on a better team, youre holding it against Neilsen that he hasnt had the opportunity to play in the playoffs

Is say it again,

thats funny, Neilson had almost as many points Shorthanded, as Bolland had with the Man advantage

think about that for a second, as great as you think Bolland is, he had Zero Shorthanded goals. Neilsen had 7, nobody thinks either of Bolland or Neilsen is an offensive threat, but Quennevile lets Bolland get powerplay time to jumpstart his offense, The Isles never do that for Frans

Isles_Guy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 04:07 PM
  #100
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarava View Post
Somehow people like your act as if his contract would be a huge burden to every team.
Exactly. There are a bunch of teams not even spending to the cap that would move up multiple spots in the standings by adding Campbell to their roster. I would trade Campbell for nothing or even add a 1st to get the cap hit completely off the books. Otherwise, there's no point in moving Campbell and taking bad salary back because the Hawks will be worse for it. I think with 7.4M, the Hawks could replace Campbell's production and pick up a decent center or a couple of high end grinders, and that's really the only opportunity cost there is. Therefore, I don't expect Stan to move him unless a team desparate to make a splash is willing to take the player and the contract with no strings attached. And on a side note, Hawks fans are generally more realistic than most fans with their players and value, sometimes actually underrating value.

digdug41982 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 05:53 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.