Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Canuck Surfer

The Trade We Should Have Made, Iginla?

   118 members have voted

  1. 1. What is your evaluation of the Hodgson trade?

    • It was a great trade because we got what we needed?
      9
    • I can live with it, because he wanted out?
      43
    • MG got fleeced, because he thought Kassian was more ready
      28
    • Tough decision, but I'll take it because Kassian will help us down the line?
      38

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

38 posts in this topic

Hey look, there is no meaning to this because nobody knows what was really available, but its fun? Hopefully the mods allow this as exactly that!

Hey Calgary traded for Cammalerri; a "valiant" attempt to get into the play off's. So they probably were not sellers. But consensus in the hockey world is they should have been?

I believe a great trade for both teams at the deadline would have been;

To Vancouver: Iginla & Scott Hanan.

To Calgary: Hodgson & Kieth Ballard

Vancouver would have had to clear cap space, nearly a million dollars if reports were correct that we had roughly $1 mill after possible manouvers; but we could have dropped Ebbett or ??? The bottom line is that this could be made to work. Ballard was on the IR, but Calgary makes a move dedicated to the future.

With Iginla, we would have had the perfect blend of speed, nasty, goal scoring and big game experience to play with the Twins. With Hanan, we get that 225 lb defenceman that we craved, and in reality badly needed? If you argue Kassian is an asset we keep, we also would have had $7 million expiring after next year with Iginla to shop for whatever we needed! And we would have replaced Ballards contract that all CDC'ers whinge about. I believe this would have made us Uber dangerous Cup threats immediately and through next year!

Calgary gets a return on a 1 year contract with Hanan and an exciting young center prospect which they desperately need. And they would look at Ballard. They are slow on D, and Ballard had his best years (the one's that seduced us into trading for him) playing with Jay Bo. This starts the rebuilding process and gives them a legitimate chance to improve even next year without Iggy?

That was my dream trade, which available or not, strikes me as a trade both should feel they have to make? What's your trade, or is the Hodgson trade the best one we could have made?

Cheers!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iggys a bit too old for my liking but I guess I wouldn't mind it. Sedins + Iginla sounds pretty scary to me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I would NEVER trade Hodgson to Calgary because they are a division rival and Iginla's getting old. If that trade was made, then Iginla would've given us probrably 2 good years and retired while Hodgson could've given them 18 years of good hockey, being a Canuck-Killer.

Plus Keith Ballard > Hannan.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calgary would never trade us Iginla.

It's like Colorado trading us Sacic or Edmonton trading us Gretzky

Iginla is not going to be traded to a division rival. He's a legend in that town and seeing him in Canuck colours would be seen as treason by the fan base, no matter what the return was.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think Calgary would have sent Iggy to Vancouver for Cody? If you do, give your head a shake. :picard:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calgary would never trade us Iginla.

It's like Colorado trading us Sacic or Edmonton trading us Gretzky

Iginla is not going to be traded to a division rival. He's a legend in that town and seeing him in Canuck colours would be seen as treason by the fan base, no matter what the return was.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think Calgary would have sent Iggy to Vancouver for Cody? If you do, give your head a shake. :picard:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They sent an aging Joe Nieuwendyk (I know I butchered the spelling) to Dallas for Iggy once upon a time.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iginla at 7 million until after next season... NO THANKS!

I get the impression that he will retire a flame, which is too bad because I'm pretty sure it's gonna cost him a chance at the cup.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Trade We Should Have Made, Iginla?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calgary would never trade us Iginla.

It's like Colorado trading us Sacic or Edmonton trading us Gretzky

Iginla is not going to be traded to a division rival. He's a legend in that town and seeing him in Canuck colours would be seen as treason by the fan base, no matter what the return was.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take the Ballard > Hanan, I even agree... But, we could replace Ballard in the lineup (we only really need him when Hamhuis or Edler is injured); but we desperately needed a big D to move the Dustin Penners & Milan Lucic's of the world out of the way... So it still would have helped us.

I also understand the division rival debate. I respect your opinion on that!

I personally have no problem helping Calgary, if it gets an Elite player that wins us a cup. It's not a complete rental as we get next year as well; and then cap flexibility moving forward. Heck, by that time we have only 1 more year on the Twins contract and might be up for rebuilding.We could win 2 cups ( :) ) and the Twins could retire to Sweden. Then we have $19 mill to rebuild, lol.

Lets face it; MG tried to get clever and get us a young player to solve our immediate needs and it did not work. Now we have wasted a year. I take great pleasure that for all the people telling us to get behind the Kassian trade, only 2 have so far voted that it was a great trade.

Last; someone else mentioned that Iginla might like to stay out his career & retire a Flame. Hard not to respect that. It may be the strongest reason a trade like this did not happen, and they tried to get Cammalerri to play with him? Iginla (like the Sedin's and more so, Linden for us) has been the type of guy for his team, and his community, that he deserves this. All the more reason for me to want specifically him!

No, I would NEVER trade Hodgson to Calgary because they are a division rival and Iginla's getting old. If that trade was made, then Iginla would've given us probrably 2 good years and retired while Hodgson could've given them 18 years of good hockey, being a Canuck-Killer.

Plus Keith Ballard > Hannan.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take the Ballard > Hanan, I even agree... But, we could replace Ballard in the lineup (we only really need him when Hamhuis or Edler is injured); but we desperately needed a big D to move the Dustin Penners & Milan Lucic's of the world out of the way... So it still would have helped us.

I also understand the division rival debate. I respect your opinion on that!

I personally have no problem helping Calgary, if it gets an Elite player that wins us a cup. It's not a complete rental as we get next year as well; and then cap flexibility moving forward. Heck, by that time we have only 1 more year on the Twins contract and might be up for rebuilding.We could win 2 cups ( :) ) and the Twins could retire to Sweden. Then we have $19 mill to rebuild, lol.

Lets face it; MG tried to get clever and get us a young player to solve our immediate needs and it did not work. Now we have wasted a year. I take great pleasure that for all the people telling us to get behind the Kassian trade, only 2 have so far voted that it was a great trade.

Last; someone else mentioned that Iginla might like to stay out his career & retire a Flame. Hard not to respect that. It may be the strongest reason a trade like this did not happen, and they tried to get Cammalerri to play with him? Iginla (like the Sedin's and more so, Linden for us) has been the type of guy for his team, and his community, that he deserves this. All the more reason for me to want specifically him!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need more pointless question marks, both in your poll choices and your posts.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yay, another Hodgson trade thread.

I love the trade we made. Can't wait to see Kassian next year. Much better than the silly idea of acquiring an expensive 35 year old.

And I like the fact Hodgson is gone - and that it annoys Tony Gallagher to no end.

Great trade all around.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why I think we should've got a guy with grit and scoring ability such as Chris Neil or Steve Ott, instead of the Pahlsson trade and for us to keep Hodgson. I don't mind the Kassian trade, but I must say, I didn't like the Pahlsson trade.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if you got that right, chum. Pahlsson was acquired for 4th round picks. Kassian was involved in the Hodgson trade.

regards,

G.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.