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 use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

Tim Gleason to Chicago

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-18-2011, 01:46 PM
  #1
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,993
vCash: 500
Tim Gleason to Chicago

He would easily round up the Chicago defense and make it one of the strongest in the NHL. I know some Carolina fans may say Hjalmarsson, but what would it take to get him in a Hawks sweater?

Keith-Seabrook
Hjalmarsson-Leddy
Montador-Gleason
Lepisto-O'Donnell

I like that.

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 01:59 PM
  #2
Evgeni Giroux
Registered User
 
Evgeni Giroux's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cullksinikers View Post
He would easily round up the Chicago defense and make it one of the strongest in the NHL. I know some Carolina fans may say Hjalmarsson, but what would it take to get him in a Hawks sweater?

Keith-Seabrook
Hjalmarsson-Leddy
Montador-Gleason
Lepisto-O'Donnell

I like that.
probally to much to give, I would think carolina would want a roster player in the top 6 coming back

Evgeni Giroux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:06 PM
  #3
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1972sabres View Post
probally to much to give, I would think carolina would want a roster player in the top 6 coming back
Stalberg has played in the top 6, maybe we can trade you Olesz? I'm sure he'll get a few top 6 looks.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:12 PM
  #4
dougd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: fortmcmurray ab can
Posts: 371
vCash: 500
Always have liked Gleason's style.

Even though there would be a chance he may walk after this year, I would offer up Dylan Olsen and one of either Stalberg/Olesz.

Carolina fans, what say??

dougd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:18 PM
  #5
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
How's the thesis?
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 34,208
vCash: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougd View Post
Always have liked Gleason's style.

Even though there would be a chance he may walk after this year, I would offer up Dylan Olsen and one of either Stalberg/Olesz.

Carolina fans, what say??
Nope. If we trade Gleason we're going to need an established top 4 defensive dman back. Essentially, it's a trade that just doesn't make sense for the Canes to make right now.

DaveG is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:19 PM
  #6
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 119,985
vCash: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cullksinikers View Post
He would easily round up the Chicago defense and make it one of the strongest in the NHL. I know some Carolina fans may say Hjalmarsson, but what would it take to get him in a Hawks sweater?

Keith-Seabrook
Hjalmarsson-Leddy
Montador-Gleason
Lepisto-O'Donnell

I like that.
Gleason would be on 2nd pairing with Leddy in AHL if we acquired him

Gleason means alot to Canes and the price would be too high I would imagine

He will be UFA next summer so he could be good target via trade during season if Canes falter

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:23 PM
  #7
urho
Registered User
 
urho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Oulu
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,782
vCash: 728
It wouldn't be wise to trade him right now. He's still a very important player for Canes (there's no other option for top 4-defensive role) and as last season wasn't too great for him, his value has also dropped. Keeping him is the best option unless someone makes a stupid offer.

urho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:24 PM
  #8
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 37,523
vCash: 500
Part of the problem here is that Gleason just had a horrible season, one which he will almost certainly not replicate next year, so it doesn't really behoove Carolina to deal him while his value is at its lowest. Also, it would really thin out the muscle on Carolina's blue line, to the point that we'd almost have to ask for the same kind of player back (as DaveG said above).

But presuming something crazy happened to open up a trade possibility, I'd have my eye on Bickell.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:25 PM
  #9
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougd View Post
Always have liked Gleason's style.

Even though there would be a chance he may walk after this year, I would offer up Dylan Olsen and one of either Stalberg/Olesz.

Carolina fans, what say??
Trade doesn't make much sense from Carolina's standpoint. Problem is that Carolina is lacking top 6 talent.

First, Stalberg/Olesz is just more of the same and doesn't help at all (and Olesz salary is a negative to the budget conscious Canes). Between LaRose, Ponikarovsky, Stewart, and Bowman, the Canes already have too 3rd many line players.

Second, the Canes actually have a pretty decent pipeline of young defenders....McBain, Murphy, Dumoulin, Faulk, are pretty good bets to be regular NHL players (McBain already is.) Then there are a couple of guys in the pipeline (Sanguinetti, Alt, Biega, Keegan Lowe, Austin Levi) that have a chance to be. I'll admit I don't know enough about Olsen though to know how he compares to the guys the Canes already have.

I think if the Canes were to part with Gleason, they'd probably do it in a package that would bring back a true top 6 fwd or established defenseman.

Boom Boom Anton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:34 PM
  #10
massivegoonery
Registered User
 
massivegoonery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 11,599
vCash: 500
Gleason for Hjalmarsson, straight up.

massivegoonery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:39 PM
  #11
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 119,985
vCash: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by massivegoonery View Post
Gleason for Hjalmarsson, straight up.
Makes no sense for Hawks + Gleason is UFA after next season

I could see the reasoning for Canes given Hammer will be RFA when his contract expires and is younger

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:40 PM
  #12
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 119,985
vCash: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Anton View Post
Trade doesn't make much sense from Carolina's standpoint. Problem is that Carolina is lacking top 6 talent.

First, Stalberg/Olesz is just more of the same and doesn't help at all (and Olesz salary is a negative to the budget conscious Canes). Between LaRose, Ponikarovsky, Stewart, and Bowman, the Canes already have too 3rd many line players.

Second, the Canes actually have a pretty decent pipeline of young defenders....McBain, Murphy, Dumoulin, Faulk, are pretty good bets to be regular NHL players (McBain already is.) Then there are a couple of guys in the pipeline (Sanguinetti, Alt, Biega, Keegan Lowe, Austin Levi) that have a chance to be. I'll admit I don't know enough about Olsen though to know how he compares to the guys the Canes already have.

I think if the Canes were to part with Gleason, they'd probably do it in a package that would bring back a true top 6 fwd or established defenseman.
What about a packaged built around LW Kyle Beach?

Do Canes have any good PF prospects in there system? Beach has 1 year of AHL under his belt and could contribute to Canes soonish

Beach + for Gleason ,, It isn't the top 6 talent you are looking but could be good value for Canes

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:52 PM
  #13
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 22,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
What about a packaged built around LW Kyle Beach?

Do Canes have any good PF prospects in there system? Beach has 1 year of AHL under his belt and could contribute to Canes soonish

Beach + for Gleason ,, It isn't the top 6 talent you are looking but could be good value for Canes
Don't think it's the value that the Canes would find a problem with that proposal - but rather needs. Dealing Gleason leaves them with a hole on the blueline that can't be filled adequately with the players they currently have. They'd want a D in return.

Barney Gumble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:53 PM
  #14
Finlandia WOAT
Registered User
 
Finlandia WOAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Raleigh NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,686
vCash: 500
There was a great trade proposal revolving around Gleason and Hjalmersson that nearly everyone agreed would work for both parties a few months ago.. what happened to that?

Finlandia WOAT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 02:53 PM
  #15
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 37,523
vCash: 500
I like the idea of bringing in a PF, which is something Carolina kind of lacks right now, but isn't Beach something of a "distraction" (speaking euphemistically)?

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 03:10 PM
  #16
Big Daddy Cane
#UndoNewStorm
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Western PA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by massivegoonery View Post
Gleason for Hjalmarsson, straight up.
Done. ~3.5 years younger, signed for two years more than Gleason and makes a $3.5 million salary each year (Gleason will probably require a raise on top of the $3.5 mil he makes this coming season.) Gleason probably fills the physical, gritty Top 4 defender role better, but considering what I mentioned above, I make this trade and add to Gleason if necessary.

Beach+ is a pretty good return. It's just not a deal that JR should make right now. If the Canes are out of it by the deadline, then I would seriously consider pulling the trigger, if I'm JR.

Big Daddy Cane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 03:20 PM
  #17
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 26,034
vCash: 500
there is no deal that would happen right now. Maybe 1st for Gleason at the deadline

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2011, 06:32 PM
  #18
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,993
vCash: 500
I don't think it would push Leddy into the AHL if we could get him without sacrificing Hjalmarsson.

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2011, 12:36 AM
  #19
Carolinas Identity
This is ARRGH State!
 
Carolinas Identity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: United States
Posts: 14,460
vCash: 50
Kinda coming out of left field, but what about this?

To CHI:
Timmy Gleason
Zach Boychuk
2012 CAR 2nd
2012 SJS 2nd

To CAR:
Nik Hjlamarsson
2012 CHI 1st

Carolinas Identity is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2011, 01:18 AM
  #20
Brock Anton
wat
 
Brock Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Westerly, RI
Country: United States
Posts: 15,021
vCash: 500
^ Why not just Gleason for Hammer? CHI's 1st is not worth Boychuk and two 2nds.

Brock Anton is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2011, 01:38 AM
  #21
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 26,034
vCash: 500
we want to add Gleason to our team without giving a Top4 Defender away. Can have Lalonde + 2nd

I think at the Deadline Gleason could be had

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2011, 02:41 AM
  #22
Brock Anton
wat
 
Brock Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Westerly, RI
Country: United States
Posts: 15,021
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
we want to add Gleason to our team without giving a Top4 Defender away. Can have Lalonde + 2nd

I think at the Deadline Gleason could be had
But theres zero point in trading Gleason without a top 4 coming back the other way, even at the deadline.

Brock Anton is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2011, 06:37 AM
  #23
HawkinMI
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Part of the problem here is that Gleason just had a horrible season, one which he will almost certainly not replicate next year, so it doesn't really behoove Carolina to deal him while his value is at its lowest. Also, it would really thin out the muscle on Carolina's blue line, to the point that we'd almost have to ask for the same kind of player back (as DaveG said above).

But presuming something crazy happened to open up a trade possibility, I'd have my eye on Bickell.
So.. straight up Bickell for Gleason? Where do I sign?


Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneInCalgary View Post
Kinda coming out of left field, but what about this?

To CHI:
Timmy Gleason
Zach Boychuk
2012 CAR 2nd
2012 SJS 2nd

To CAR:
Nik Hjlamarsson
2012 CHI 1st
Ab-so-lutely. You might want to rethink that one a little, you ripped off Carolina I'd say.

HawkinMI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2011, 06:42 AM
  #24
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 26,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple Axel View Post
But theres zero point in trading Gleason without a top 4 coming back the other way, even at the deadline.
what if you aren't in PO Race or can get a lesser Player for a 5th?

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2011, 07:37 AM
  #25
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple Axel View Post
^ Why not just Gleason for Hammer? CHI's 1st is not worth Boychuk and two 2nds.
Why would Chi. do that though? Gleason is a UFA after this season where-as Hjalmarsson is signed for 2 more years. They would basically be trading a top 4 for a top 4 signed for longer so that make no sense to them. The trade isn't really broken down into Gleason for Hammer....and Chicago's 1st for Boychuck and two 2nds.

To me that trade is more: 1 year of Gleason for 1 year of Hammer. 2 years of Hammer and Chi 1st for Boychuk and two 2nds. I still think the Canes give up too much, but it makes more sense when you break it down that way.

Boom Boom Anton 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 03:53 PM.

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.