HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Free Agent Frenzy
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Free Agent Frenzy 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.

Trade proposal Montreal - Vancouver

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-13-2004, 01:01 PM
  #26
x-bob
Registered User
 
x-bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,000
vCash: 500
a bad trade for both teams

x-bob is online now  
Old
08-13-2004, 01:07 PM
  #27
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertovo
No thank you.

As stated before, it does not fill any of the Canucks holes.
I still don't get this thinking at all...

would you deal Bert for Zednik, Markov, and 5 1st round picks?? it still doesn't address our needs at all....

the original deal here is overpayment for Bert in terms of value... when looking at Bert's value you have to consider the question marks around him right now and his $7mill/yr salary.

if the canucks moved Bert for that, they would have more space on their budget to add UFAs, add other salary in trades, as well as more trade assets to get it done...

there isn't a player on the team I wouldn't deal for an overpayment that helps the team long term.... while the assets we would get back here doesn't exactly address our needs, it reduces our overall payroll in a huge way, while giving us more tradable assets... that in turn addresses the needs we have.

with a trade like this, we could in the end sign a UFA like Murray, so you're replacing Bert on the forward lines with Murray and Zednik ... and allow us to trade Sopel or Malik along with whatever else (we have more future assets with another 1st round pick, so you can use Koltsov, or Kesler, or King, our own 1st or this 1st, etc) to upgrade at another position, like in goal.

in the end, such a deal does address our holes... because in order to even address any of our holes right now we need to create more salary space in our budget, while also finding more tradable assets in our system.

NFITO is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 01:32 PM
  #28
whoshouse
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 982
vCash: 500
I wouldn't do the trade from both sides. From a Canucks point of view, once you get rid of Bert i think Naslund will want to get traded. Naslund and bertuzzi have a great friendship and if you trade one of them the other one is going to be extremely upset. Besides once you trade Todd, the locker room and chemistry wouldn't be the same.

From Montreals point of view they are giving up too much of their roster for a player that may not bounce back from a terrible season last year. Don't get me wrong, i think Bertuzzi will be back as good as ever but theres just too many questions. If Montreal trades that many players from their roster for one top 3 forward they will be seriously weak on their bottom 3rd and fouth lines. Once an injury comes to any of their players they may be in big trouble.

whoshouse is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 01:43 PM
  #29
LaVal
Registered User
 
LaVal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
I don't know if I buy that rumour at all...

there were lots of offers for Bert that Burke wouldn't touch several years back (before Bert broke out).... and many of the rumours had teams giving up much more than what we gave up for Linden.

The Canucks didn't give up much for Linden in the end (a 1st round pick and a 3rd I believe, but we get a 2nd rounder back with Linden, and the Caps eating more of his salary as well, while the Habs were already eating some of his salary - combined the two teams ate $2.5mill of his $4.5mill/yr deal).
well it is common knowledge that Burke had tried to aquire Linden while he was in Montreal (something Burke has said himself), but i've never heard of a Bertuzzi for Linden straight up. in fact from what i recall he was only offering picks, a similar deal to the one that Washington eventually bit on.

LaVal is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 01:45 PM
  #30
QuickDynamite
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Abu Dhabi
Country: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 4,815
vCash: 500
Zednik is better in the playoffs than Bertuzzi is.

QuickDynamite is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 01:50 PM
  #31
CH4
Registered User
 
CH4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicoutimi
Posts: 1,799
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chapel113x
Zednik is better in the playoffs than Bertuzzi is.
Wow!!
have you seen him in 2003 playoffs he was awesome, killing everybody, he was hitting so much.... even if he did not score as in regular season it does not means he played badly, and Zednik was not as good as in 2002 during this year playoffs....

CH4 is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 01:56 PM
  #32
whoshouse
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chapel113x
Zednik is better in the playoffs than Bertuzzi is.
Does Zednik hit players so hard that they miss the entire series? Bertuzzi may not have great stats in the playoffs, mind you the whole team doesn't have very good stats, but he brings so many intangibles to the game. Leadership, intiamedation, scoring touch, toughness, chemistry and the fact that he commands so much ice giving players like Naslund and Morrison more room. I don't think its fair to just compare their stats.

whoshouse is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 02:15 PM
  #33
Nazzy-19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,302
vCash: 500
Zednik hasn't impressed me much yet. He's never scored over 50 points (Bertuzzi had 60 last season during a bad year while playing 12 games fewer than Zednik)

Nazzy-19 is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 02:18 PM
  #34
x-bob
Registered User
 
x-bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nazzy-19
Zednik hasn't impressed me much yet. He's never scored over 50 points (Bertuzzi had 60 last season during a bad year while playing 12 games fewer than Zednik)
Without a doubt Beruzzi's better then Zednik but he isn't better then Zednik, Markov, Bulis and a first round prospect.

x-bob is online now  
Old
08-13-2004, 02:19 PM
  #35
NewHabsEra*
 
NewHabsEra*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -CadillaC-
Does Zednik hit players so hard that they miss the entire series? Bertuzzi may not have great stats in the playoffs, mind you the whole team doesn't have very good stats, but he brings so many intangibles to the game. Leadership, intiamedation, scoring touch, toughness, chemistry and the fact that he commands so much ice giving players like Naslund and Morrison more room. I don't think its fair to just compare their stats.
I couldnt say better

NewHabsEra* is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 02:22 PM
  #36
Nazzy-19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by x-bob
Without a doubt Beruzzi's better then Zednik but he isn't better then Zednik, Markov, Bulis and a first round prospect.
Agreed. The fact is that the Canucks don't need another 3rd liner or offensive defensemen. And Zednik would be a downgrade. I wouldn't mind him as our 2nd line RW to play with the twins.

Out of curiosity what would you guys want for just Zednik. (not counting Bertuzzi)

Nazzy-19 is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 02:22 PM
  #37
x-bob
Registered User
 
x-bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nazzy-19
Zednik hasn't impressed me much yet. He's never scored over 50 points (Bertuzzi had 60 last season during a bad year while playing 12 games fewer than Zednik)
Oh yea......also.......Bertuzzi is 7million$ and Zednik is 2.3million$

x-bob is online now  
Old
08-13-2004, 02:24 PM
  #38
x-bob
Registered User
 
x-bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nazzy-19
Agreed. The fact is that the Canucks don't need another 3rd liner or offensive defensemen. And Zednik would be a downgrade. I wouldn't mind him as our 2nd line RW to play with the twins.

Out of curiosity what would you guys want for just Zednik. (not counting Bertuzzi)

I can't see anything you guys have that would help us.

x-bob is online now  
Old
08-13-2004, 02:29 PM
  #39
Rotting Corpse*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,703
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rotting Corpse* Send a message via MSN to Rotting Corpse*
Even though it's overpayment for the Habs, as a Canucks fan I still wouldn't do this trade. Zednik would be a downgrade from Bertuzzi, and we don't need another offensive defenseman. We don't need another Bulis either. The only part of the trade that interests me is the 1st round pick.

Rotting Corpse* is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 02:34 PM
  #40
whoshouse
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by x-bob
Without a doubt Beruzzi's better then Zednik but he isn't better then Zednik, Markov, Bulis and a first round prospect.
Maybe he is not, but hes close. Think about just his game on the ice, forget everything about the legal matters. Before last years season, everyone thought Bertuzzi was a star in the making, heck some people even thought he was a star. He started off very slow and was playing without interest but i think the whole moore thing might wake him up and show him that hes lucky to have the skill to make him a star in the nhl. IF he "wakes up" next season, i think the whole league should watch out because, even though he made a stupid mistake, hes still one of the best power forwards in the league and can dominate almost any defender in this league...BUT as of right now...yes he is not better then all those players you have mentioned...Just saying, with his skill he can be easily better then those players.

whoshouse is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 02:40 PM
  #41
Rotting Corpse*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,703
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rotting Corpse* Send a message via MSN to Rotting Corpse*
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
I still don't get this thinking at all...

would you deal Bert for Zednik, Markov, and 5 1st round picks?? it still doesn't address our needs at all....
No, I would not.

A trade like that one (or this one) is FANTASTIC if the Canucks are rebuilding and looking to dump payroll.

You HAVE to look at where the Canucks are right now. Trading Bertuzzi for 5 1st round picks would be a HORRIBLE trade for them because it would basically ruin their chances of winning the cup this year. If .. IF the Canucks were a rebuilding team that was looking to dump Bert's big salary, then YES that would be a GREAT trade, but as it is now it doesn't make any sense.

RIGHT NOW the Canucks are looking to win the cup. To do that, they need to fill two needs:

-Second line winger
-Physical defenseman

With the trade proposal in this thread they would be getting a second line winger, but they'd be losing a first line winger, so that would be ********. They'd be getting another offensive defenseman (Which they don't need,) and another checking third liner (which they don't need.) The trade makes NO sense from the Canucks' point of view.

Again, if the 'Nucks were looking to re-tool, if they were cleaning house per se, then I'd do this trade in a heartbeat, but with the situation they're in right now, it just doesn't make sense.

Just imagine if they kept doing that. Trade Bertuzzi for picks, trade Naslund for picks. Draft great players. Trade those players for picks. Draft great players, trade those players for picks. Etc, etc. You would never win a cup.

And I know what else you're saying, that it gives the Canucks assets to make other moves, but why? Why blow the team up when they're so close but just need to fill a couple gaps?


Last edited by Rotting Corpse*: 08-13-2004 at 02:43 PM.
Rotting Corpse* is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 03:07 PM
  #42
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Ryan
No, I would not.

A trade like that one (or this one) is FANTASTIC if the Canucks are rebuilding and looking to dump payroll.

You HAVE to look at where the Canucks are right now. Trading Bertuzzi for 5 1st round picks would be a HORRIBLE trade for them because it would basically ruin their chances of winning the cup this year. If .. IF the Canucks were a rebuilding team that was looking to dump Bert's big salary, then YES that would be a GREAT trade, but as it is now it doesn't make any sense.

RIGHT NOW the Canucks are looking to win the cup. To do that, they need to fill two needs:

-Second line winger
-Physical defenseman

With the trade proposal in this thread we would be getting a second line winger, but we'd be losing a first line winger, so that would be ********. We'd be getting another offensive defenseman (Which we don't need,) and another checking third liner (which we don't need.) The trade makes NO sense from the Canucks' point of view.

Again, if the 'Nucks were looking to re-tool, if they were cleaning house per se, then I'd do this trade in a heartbeat, but with the situation they're in right now, it just doesn't make sense.

Just imagine if they kept doing that. Trade Bertuzzi for picks, trade Naslund for picks. Draft great players. Trade those players for picks. Draft great players, trade those players for picks. Etc, etc. You would never win a cup.
and IMO that's being totally shortsigthed.

you're not trading Bertuzzi for picks.

okay... I'll try and break it down for you:

1) the canucks current payroll sits at around $45mill (approx. after the Sedins/Auld are signed)...

2) we still have a hole on our 2nd line right wing (or if Cooke is moved there, our 3rd line left wing).

3) we have another hole on our 3rd line center, unless you use Kesler fulltime next year.

4) our best assets right now - outside of what we have on our roster - is our 1st pick in 2005, and other draft picks... prospects like Koltsov and Kesler - the majority of the rest of prospects we have in our system aren't worth much.

so now you have a team that has hit it's payroll ceiling, without much in the way of moveable assets and holes still in the lineup.

what's your solution to plugging those holes?

the most realistic way to do it is promotion from within. Kesler will take a spot in the lineup this year... Cooke will get that 2nd line spot... King and Bouck should both be in the lineup.

That's really our only option at this point... we don't have the $$ to sign UFAs, or the assets to land players we need.

and this is the best we can do, realistically, for a team that is challenging for the Cup.


Now if you make this deal, this is what happens....

Bertuzzi is out of our lineup... so now we have a hole in our 1st line right wing added to the holes we had before.

we plug that hole in the 2nd line right wing with Zednik.

we plug that hole at center with Bulis. Cooke can stay on the 3rd unit.

we still have a hole that Bertuzzi's departure created... but now we have solid trade prospects... either move the just acquired Markov along with another pick or prospect... or move Malik or Sopel, keep Markov (improving our overall depth on defense)... adding that extra 1st rounder gives us another top prospect to deal as well.

and - our payroll goes down!!!

Bertuzzi for Zednik shaves $4.7mill approx off our roster.

Markov makes $1.8mill... Sopel makes $2.1mill... trade Sopel and replace his roster spot with Markov and we shave another $300K.

Bulis makes $1.35 mill... Kesler makes $850K... send Kesler to the minors for the year and use that spot for Bulis and it increases our payroll by $500K.

adding those three contracts, while removing the outgoing players, and the players who's roster spots they're replacing and our payroll goes down by roughly $4.5mill.

that's money you could use now on the UFA market that we didn't have before... or money you can use to acquire a player through trade.

We could add O'Neill to that lineup and still have a lower payroll... and with guys like Sopel or Malik, plus a 1st round pick, or prospect like Koltsov (who is easier to trade now with a better depth on defense, plus having another top prospect - the Habs 1st rounder), you have assets to make a trade.

So in the end, which is a better lineup for a Cup contending team:

Naslund-Morrison-Bertuzzi
Sedin-Sedin-Cooke
Ruutu-Kesler-Linden
May-Chubarov-King
Bouck; another signing? or Fedorov

Ohlund-Sopel
Malik-Jovo
Allen-Salo
Aitken

or

Naslund-Morrison-O'Neill (or Murray or another right winger through trade - like Sykora)
Sedin-Sedin-Zednik
Cooke-Bulis-Linden
May-Chubarov-Ruutu
King; Bouck

Ohlund-Markov
Malik-Jovo
Allen-Salo

???

both lineups will come at roughly the same price.

personally I take the 2nd lineup. While the 1st option has a better 1st line, the 2nd has more depth upfront, and a top defense overall... an injury happens in the top 6 in the first lineup, and we have Linden moving into the top 6... in the 2nd option we have Cooke.

much safer depth IMO.

and this also gives you the chance to upgrade in other areas, like dealing Malik + another prospect like King, for a tougher dman, as we'd still have the extra payroll room created by dealing Bert, as well as the assets in the system to deal King.

And all this again is at roughly the same price, while now also having either more depth on our farm to make other trades if we need to, or just develop a better farm system (if we sign the 1st line replacement in free agency) or we use those extra assets to replace Bertuzzi to give us a deeper lineup than one with him in it.

that's why I make this trade... not because it doesn't help us now, but precisely because it helps us now.

if we're talking 5 1st round picks on top of that (ridiculous suggestion to show a point), then that gives us a lot more assets to get things done.

bottom line, our team has holes, and we have neither the physical assets, nor the financial assets to fill those holes effectively... for a team that is looking for a Cup, I would be much happier addressing those holes through NHL proven quality depth, rather than the Kesler, Kings, Boucks etc and hoping them to step up.

again you guys all seem to miss the whole point of doing this: you aren't making trades here in a vaccumn... you make trades to give you options to make other moves... just because you create a hole by making a trade shouldn't discourage you from making that trade if you gain more assets to plug those holes more effectively.... we're not talking the one and only trade the team makes... we're talking about creating more options - options which we otherwise don't have.

NFITO is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 03:09 PM
  #43
johnnyboo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Za Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewHabsArea
To Montreal: Bertuzzi

To Vancouver: Markov, Zednik, Bulis, 2005 first pick

You make trades to improve your team - not to desecrate it.

Yaa have to ask yourself would this trade improve Montreal or not??

I vote not it just leaves us with more holes to fill

johnnyboo is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 03:12 PM
  #44
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,918
vCash: 500
and just to add... my only concern in all this wouldn't be the assets coming back, or what we're losing... but how it affects overall chemistry.

This IMO is a legitmate concern with moving Bertuzzi.

but I'd still do it... because so far our great chemistry has seen our team get as far as the 2nd round, and show they are fragile enough to completely fall apart as a team when our captain gets hit and the rest of the team doesn't like it.

our chemistry was strong 3 years ago, when we went on an incredible run in the 2nd half and lost to a stacked Detroit team in the playoffs...

our chemistry right now isn't as good as people think... if it was, then our lineup - with guys like Naslund, Bertuzzi, Morrison, Ohlund, Jovo, Cooke, Linden, etc... should be doing better than they are... they should have the experience and maturity not to fall apart.

this team, with all the press and fans excited about it, and everything else about how much firepower we have and deep we are, has proven jack right now!!! I don't see any reason to worry about destroying chemistry here.

NFITO is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 03:26 PM
  #45
whoshouse
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
and just to add... my only concern in all this wouldn't be the assets coming back, or what we're losing... but how it affects overall chemistry.

This IMO is a legitmate concern with moving Bertuzzi.

but I'd still do it... because so far our great chemistry has seen our team get as far as the 2nd round, and show they are fragile enough to completely fall apart as a team when our captain gets hit and the rest of the team doesn't like it.

our chemistry was strong 3 years ago, when we went on an incredible run in the 2nd half and lost to a stacked Detroit team in the playoffs...

our chemistry right now isn't as good as people think... if it was, then our lineup - with guys like Naslund, Bertuzzi, Morrison, Ohlund, Jovo, Cooke, Linden, etc... should be doing better than they are... they should have the experience and maturity not to fall apart.

this team, with all the press and fans excited about it, and everything else about how much firepower we have and deep we are, has proven jack right now!!! I don't see any reason to worry about destroying chemistry here.

But its not just chemistry, i understand where your coming from and i love the idea of getting more trade assets but your not thinking about the possibility of other players getting mad or upset to see Bertuzzi go...if this was not a problem then of course i would make that trade but you got to understand that once you trade Bertuzzi your team just MAY fall apart because Todd is a big part of this club.

whoshouse is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 03:27 PM
  #46
Rotting Corpse*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,703
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rotting Corpse* Send a message via MSN to Rotting Corpse*
God, I hate the way you start a new pararaph for every sentence. Stop that!! :p

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
and IMO that's being totally shortsigthed. You're not trading Bertuzzi for picks. Okay... I'll try and break it down for you:

1) the canucks current payroll sits at around $45mill (approx. after the Sedins/Auld are signed)...

2) we still have a hole on our 2nd line right wing (or if Cooke is moved there, our 3rd line left wing).

3) we have another hole on our 3rd line center, unless you use Kesler fulltime next year.

4) our best assets right now - outside of what we have on our roster - is our 1st pick in 2005, and other draft picks... prospects like Koltsov and Kesler - the majority of the rest of prospects we have in our system aren't worth much.

so now you have a team that has hit it's payroll ceiling, without much in the way of moveable assets and holes still in the lineup. What's your solution to plugging those holes? The most realistic way to do it is promotion from within. Kesler will take a spot in the lineup this year... Cooke will get that 2nd line spot... King and Bouck should both be in the lineup.

That's really our only option at this point... we don't have the $$ to sign UFAs, or the assets to land players we need. And this is the best we can do, realistically, for a team that is challenging for the Cup. Now if you make this deal, this is what happens....

Bertuzzi is out of our lineup... so now we have a hole in our 1st line right wing added to the holes we had before. We plug that hole in the 2nd line right wing with Zednik. We plug that hole at center with Bulis. Cooke can stay on the 3rd unit. We still have a hole that Bertuzzi's departure created... but now we have solid trade prospects... either move the just acquired Markov along with another pick or prospect... or move Malik or Sopel, keep Markov (improving our overall depth on defense)... adding that extra 1st rounder gives us another top prospect to deal as well. And - our payroll goes down!!!

Bertuzzi for Zednik shaves $4.7mill approx off our roster.

Markov makes $1.8mill... Sopel makes $2.1mill... trade Sopel and replace his roster spot with Markov and we shave another $300K.

Bulis makes $1.35 mill... Kesler makes $850K... send Kesler to the minors for the year and use that spot for Bulis and it increases our payroll by $500K.

Adding those three contracts, while removing the outgoing players, and the players who's roster spots they're replacing and our payroll goes down by roughly $4.5mill. That's money you could use now on the UFA market that we didn't have before... or money you can use to acquire a player through trade.

We could add O'Neill to that lineup and still have a lower payroll... and with guys like Sopel or Malik, plus a 1st round pick, or prospect like Koltsov (who is easier to trade now with a better depth on defense, plus having another top prospect - the Habs 1st rounder), you have assets to make a trade.

So in the end, which is a better lineup for a Cup contending team:

Naslund-Morrison-Bertuzzi
Sedin-Sedin-Cooke
Ruutu-Kesler-Linden
May-Chubarov-King
Bouck; another signing? or Fedorov

Ohlund-Sopel
Malik-Jovo
Allen-Salo
Aitken

or

Naslund-Morrison-O'Neill (or Murray or another right winger through trade - like Sykora)
Sedin-Sedin-Zednik
Cooke-Bulis-Linden
May-Chubarov-Ruutu
King; Bouck

Ohlund-Markov
Malik-Jovo
Allen-Salo

???

Both lineups will come at roughly the same price. Personally I take the 2nd lineup. While the 1st option has a better 1st line, the 2nd has more depth upfront, and a top defense overall... an injury happens in the top 6 in the first lineup, and we have Linden moving into the top 6... in the 2nd option we have Cooke. Much safer depth IMO. And this also gives you the chance to upgrade in other areas, like dealing Malik + another prospect like King, for a tougher dman, as we'd still have the extra payroll room created by dealing Bert, as well as the assets in the system to deal King.

And all this again is at roughly the same price, while now also having either more depth on our farm to make other trades if we need to, or just develop a better farm system (if we sign the 1st line replacement in free agency) or we use those extra assets to replace Bertuzzi to give us a deeper lineup than one with him in it.

that's why I make this trade... not because it doesn't help us now, but precisely because it helps us now. If we're talking 5 1st round picks on top of that (ridiculous suggestion to show a point), then that gives us a lot more assets to get things done.

Bottom line, our team has holes, and we have neither the physical assets, nor the financial assets to fill those holes effectively... for a team that is looking for a Cup, I would be much happier addressing those holes through NHL proven quality depth, rather than the Kesler, Kings, Boucks etc and hoping them to step up.

Again you guys all seem to miss the whole point of doing this: you aren't making trades here in a vaccumn... you make trades to give you options to make other moves... just because you create a hole by making a trade shouldn't discourage you from making that trade if you gain more assets to plug those holes more effectively.... we're not talking the one and only trade the team makes... we're talking about creating more options - options which we otherwise don't have.
You're assuming you can make all those deals. What if you fail? What if you can't get O'Neill or those other players and you're stuck with Zednik and Cooke as your top two RWs? That would be ass, man.

Honestly, I get what you're saying, and it works great in video games, but it's just farrr too risky for me to like it. You're basically blowing up the team, and rolling the dice hoping you can make all these moves to try and make up for the MASSIVE hole left by Bertuzzi.

Honestly, I would rather just re-sign Rucinsky as our second line RW. He has about the same amount of production as Zednik anyways. I mean, I'm not Rucinsky fan or anything, but to make all these moves, hoping and praying that they all work...I just don't like it.

Nonis has no reason to move Bertuzzi unless some team ridiculously overpays.

Rotting Corpse* is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 03:37 PM
  #47
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -CadillaC-
But its not just chemistry, i understand where your coming from and i love the idea of getting more trade assets but your not thinking about the possibility of other players getting mad or upset to see Bertuzzi go...if this was not a problem then of course i would make that trade but you got to understand that once you trade Bertuzzi your team just MAY fall apart because Todd is a big part of this club.
honestly at this stage, I couldn't care less about chemistry and how the team reacts... that's something a team as a whole has to *earn*... and this team hasn't.

our team fell apart last season, plain and simple. for any player to say that they're pissed because management changes the direction of this team, that player shouldn't be a part of this team, and that includes Naslund.

the team has one goal - the Cup... they haven't made it past the 2nd round with this group, and did fall apart last season weeks prior to the post season... this isn't a team that has proven that in postseason play they can come together and win it all... they've proven that they can fall apart in crucial times and lose to teams that are less experienced than they are.

if players get mad because management feels that it'd be best to move Bertuzzi because there is a ridiculously good trade where another team is overpaying, then we don't have the players on this team to win a Cup... as players if they want to have a say in who stays and who goes, they have to earn that by showing that they're stronger team together and can win it all, together.

They haven't shown it... and patience doesn't last forever... 5 years under the same group that hasn't made it far, and you have to question how far this core can take you.

NFITO is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 03:45 PM
  #48
whoshouse
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
honestly at this stage, I couldn't care less about chemistry and how the team reacts... that's something a team as a whole has to *earn*... and this team hasn't.

our team fell apart last season, plain and simple. for any player to say that they're pissed because management changes the direction of this team, that player shouldn't be a part of this team, and that includes Naslund.

the team has one goal - the Cup... they haven't made it past the 2nd round with this group, and did fall apart last season weeks prior to the post season... this isn't a team that has proven that in postseason play they can come together and win it all... they've proven that they can fall apart in crucial times and lose to teams that are less experienced than they are.

if players get mad because management feels that it'd be best to move Bertuzzi because there is a ridiculously good trade where another team is overpaying, then we don't have the players on this team to win a Cup... as players if they want to have a say in who stays and who goes, they have to earn that by showing that they're stronger team together and can win it all, together.

They haven't shown it... and patience doesn't last forever... 5 years under the same group that hasn't made it far, and you have to question how far this core can take you.
You make very good points and you are right this team does not deserve to be as "a whole" because of the last few years. Maybe its just me thinking that Bertuzzi will have a stellar year next season..but i still think trading him for those players is a mistake and will haunt them. i think trading for trade assests are a little too optimistic...you might not be able to get the players you suggested.

whoshouse is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 03:48 PM
  #49
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Ryan
You're assuming you can make all those deals. What if you fail? What if you can't get O'Neill or those other players and you're stuck with Zednik and Cooke as your top two RWs? That would be ass, man.

Honestly, I get what you're saying, and it works great in video games, but it's just farrr too risky for me to like it. You're basically blowing up the team, and rolling the dice hoping you can make all these moves to try and make up for the MASSIVE hole left by Bertuzzi.

Honestly, I would rather just re-sign Rucinsky as our second line RW. He has about the same amount of production as Zednik anyways. I mean, I'm not Rucinsky fan or anything, but to make all these moves, hoping and praying that they all work...I just don't like it.

Nonis has no reason to move Bertuzzi unless some team ridiculously overpays.
I'm not assuming anything more than you are.

you're assuming that Bertuzzi comes back next season and is either a stronger player, or doesn't get any worse than he was before he got suspended... you're assuming that he will earn his $7mill against our payroll next season.

you're also assuming that the team we currently have can get to the Cup... that guys like King, Kesler, Bouck, etc, who will have to be in the lineup thanks to us not having the $$ to upgrade, will be able to step up and play key roles in getting us to the Cup.... you're assuming that Rucinsky will even be available for us, while not taking a contract from another team like the Rangers, and can be fit into the current payroll which is already going to be at or over the $45mill mark.

are my assumptions really any worse?? every season top 6 players get dealt... guys like O'Neill and Sykora have both been mentioned in numerous trade rumours.... if you have assets then it's a good gamble to take IMO that you can acquire one.... I'm gambling that you could entice one of the top UFAs to come here, if we have the extra $$ to play with *or* find a top 6 winger around the league that is available for trade.

and I'm not blowing up the team at all... look at the lineups above... is moving Bertuzzi and Sopel for Zednik, Markov, Bulis and a UFA signing, blowing up the team?? the core loses 1 player, adds at least 2 (Zed and Markov) if not 3 with the UFA signing.

and I thought I had already said in my previous post about signing UFAs right now like Rucinsky... just signing Rucinsky takes our overall payroll higher than it can be IMO... I don't think we can add Rucinsky at even $1.5mill (probably closer to $2mill) without shedding that much salary off our current payroll... the choice isn't filling our holes with UFAs like Rucinsky IMO.. it's either trading, or promoting from within...

I do agree with one point - that Nonis has no reason at all to move Bertuzzi unless a team overpays... but this IMO is exactly what this offer is... Markov, Zednik, Bulis and a 1st for Bertuzzi would *never* happen, because it's huge overpayment for Bertuzzi.... but if Gainey actually called up Nonis with this offer, I'd bet that Nonis wouldn't walk away... just too many strong assets coming back.

for the record, I don't think that Bertuzzi gets moved at all... unlike some Canuck fans (Peter?) I don't think that the club is even looking to move Bertuzzi... and I don't think that any team will give him much value right now, making the only option him remaining a canuck.

NFITO is offline  
Old
08-13-2004, 03:51 PM
  #50
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -CadillaC-
You make very good points and you are right this team does not deserve to be as "a whole" because of the last few years. Maybe its just me thinking that Bertuzzi will have a stellar year next season..but i still think trading him for those players is a mistake and will haunt them. i think trading for trade assests are a little too optimistic...you might not be able to get the players you suggested.
again, as I addressed KR's points...

am I being any more optimistic than you assuming that Bertuzzi has a stellar year next year, and the assets we have right now will take us to a Cup?

we're both taking a gamble... I don't take that gamble unless a team overpays for Bertuzzi... IMO this offer (although totally unrealistic) is overpayment.

NFITO 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 03:36 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.