DonTaylor4President Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 So my first idea was Ballard, Raymond and a 2013 1st for Yakupov but then I didn't want to be too mainstream CDC so I switched it up. This is a trade I would look into if we miss out on Doan, and if we don't get back a top six forward in the luongo deal. Haven't put too much thought into this one but here it goes... To Vancouver Hemsky To Edmonton Ballard I know everyone throws ballard into trades like no other but I feel that both teams are trading away overpaid players that they no longer need. With all of the oilers up and coming forwards paying an injury prone Hemsky 5M per year hardly makes sense. Yakupov, Hall, Eberle, Smyth and maybe even Jones will compete to be top six wingers around Nuge and Gagner... So they would be replacing one of their many wingers for a top four D man. The Canucks get the more talented player out of the trade but his injury history speaks for itself. Although Canucks are looking to get bigger, adding a pass first player to play with Keslers and Booths scoring abilities might ignite the line and would be too hard to resist. Should these teams look into this after the Doan and Yandle sweepstakes are over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck_trevor16 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Hemsky is soft and injuried prone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grape Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 So my first idea was Ballard, Raymond and a 2013 1st for Yakupov but then I didn't want to be too mainstream CDC so I switched it up. This is a trade I would look into if we miss out on Doan, and if we don't get back a top six forward in the luongo deal. Haven't put too much thought into this one but here it goes... To Vancouver Hemsky To Edmonton Ballard I know everyone throws ballard into trades like no other but I feel that both teams are trading away overpaid players that they no longer need. With all of the oilers up and coming forwards paying an injury prone Hemsky 5M per year hardly makes sense. Yakupov, Hall, Eberle, Smyth and maybe even Jones will compete to be top six wingers around Nuge and Gagner... So they would be replacing one of their many wingers for a top four D man. The Canucks get the more talented player out of the trade but his injury history speaks for itself. Although Canucks are looking to get bigger, adding a pass first player to play with Keslers and Booths scoring abilities might ignite the line and would be too hard to resist. Should these teams look into this after the Doan and Yandle sweepstakes are over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 ha ha ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWestCoastConnection Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I would rather have a highly overpaid D man who will actually play some games in the season then a forward who is as soft as a soup sandwich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Hemsky's too predictable in terms of how he plays (high risk dangles and soft, skill-based and passing game without shooting enough). He could really benefit the 2nd line but he costs a lot salary-wise and could cost the team even more if he gets injured (he costs $5M). I'd rather see if there is a player who could shoot AND pass than someone who is almost always exclusively pass. Ballard could probably still bring a hardier, more playoff-oriented player with grit, or better yet sign Shane Doan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kack Zassian Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Edmonton would never do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schnieds Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Gotta love CDC. In the same week, we see one proposal with Hemsky for Yandle and now we see Hemsky for Ballard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksFanMike Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Ballard is a solid no. 5 dman and he can step into the top 4 if one of Garrison, Bieksa, Hamhuis, or Edler gets hurt. If we are going to trade him we should get back probably a third line center which fills one of our needs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugemanskost Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 1. Why would the Oilers do this? Hemsky > Ballard, by far. 2. The Canucks don't need another soft, perimeter forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greene02 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 1. Why would the Oilers do this? Hemsky > Ballard, by far. 2. The Canucks don't need another soft, perimeter forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Thanks, I really needed a luagh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex the Great Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Hemsky is soft and injuried prone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Thanks, I really needed a luagh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 He would be nice to get but he's too injury prone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugemanskost Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Hemsky is fragile and not a soft perimeter player. That's why he's hurt so much. He actually needs to start playing a little softer. As for the trade. Hemsky may be overpaid at 5M but it's a short term deal. His contract expires the same year as RNH's. The Oilers would also be selling extremely low. Hemsky has been a just under point per game player every year since the lockout except for last year. One year and all is forgotten? Not for me. He gets another chance. If he plays the way he's capable of, a 65-75 point RWer isn't a bad player to have on the 2nd line. You don't give up Hemsky for a bottom pairing Dman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gino Odjick Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 If this was 2005, maybe. But who wants a weak forward whose better years are behind him? Forget it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Ballard has more worth to us than Hemsky does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConnorFutureGM Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Ballard has more worth to us than Hemsky does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warrchief Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Ballard has negative value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.