canucklehead44 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 To Vancouver Josh Bailey Nick Leddy Jimmy Hayes To Chicago Roberto Luongo Mason Raymond Aaron Ness To NYI Corey Crawford Keith Ballard Michael Frolik Vancouver acquires: Bailey, Leddy, Hayes loses: Luongo, Ballard, Raymond Vancouver acquires a young two-way forward who has not lived up to expectations but is only 22 years old. Bailey's defensive acumen coupled with his play-making ability would make him a great fit alongside Ryan Kesler. He is also a natural centre, which is useful when there are injuries. Nick Leddy is the big piece going to Vancouver. He is a young, top-flight offensive defenseman who can fill the gaping hole of puck mover left by the departure of Christian Erhoff. Jimmy Hayes is a huge player who can hit and put the puck in the net. Fits the mould of big and skilled. Chicago acquires: Luongo, Raymond, Ness loses: Leddy, Hayes, Frolik, Crawford The big piece for Chicago is Leddy for Luongo. Luongo is good enough to put Chicago over the top and they don't have to give up one of their main core players. Leddy is a big loss but they have enough D to compensate. I think Vancouver needs to get a player that can make some sort of an impact for Luongo. Crawford becomes expendable. They swap out Frolik for Raymond who will likely contribute more than 5 goals (for the same price). Hayes and Ness is a bit of a wash, although they lose a bit here (gain an offensive dman to eventually replace Leddy). NYI acquires: Crawford, Ballard, Frolik loses: Bailey, Ness Crawford will make a good one-two punch with Nabokov and will help bridge the gap between Nabokov's retirement and their goalie prospects being ready to compete for NHL jobs. Ballard would likely be a 20+ minute defenseman for them and Frolik could regain 40 point form. He is still young and has already had success at the NHL level. Bailey has struggled with the Islanders so far. This trade fits Vancouver and Chicago's needs. I think this also makes the Islanders a better team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlurTriX Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Decent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksFanMike Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Not bad value wise.... Leddy would be a good fit here i think we should keep Ballard as a really solid /5 dman though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Chicago is giving up too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Not bad, though I think the Hawks could get more for Crawford than nothing (Isles slightly underpay --> basically have Lu for Leddy Ballard for Bailey Raymond for Hayes? then Crawford and Frolik for Ness). I like the Vancouver side of things though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 I think Chicago might not be getting quite enough value but it is a bit hard to gauge Luongo's value. Crawford was pretty bad last year given his salary and Frolik has negative trade value on the Hawks (5 goals for 2.33 million) so I think Crawford & Frolik for Ness is fair. Hayes for Raymond is a bit off. Maybe add a 3rd round pick from Vancouver going to Chicago and replace Aaron Ness with de Haan or Donovan. Either way I think all three teams are better on the ice next year if this trade were to go down. Chicago still has an awesome D core with 18 million tied up in their top 4 and their forward lineup doesn't really take a hit. They lose a couple of good young players but will be so much better in the short term since their goaltending improves immensely (a huge weakness last year). Vancouver loses two redundant players and an overpaid 5th defenseman for 3 young, complimentary players. Leddy played best with less minutes and would be a great fit with Tanev, Hamhuis or Garrison. The Islanders are loaded with prospects, which can actually be a bad thing (too many young guys fighting for limited spots, not enough veteran presence). This trade gives them three NHL players who can hopefully contribute. Ballard and Frolik were sought after players when they were in the East and Crawford could regain form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Kane Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 One of the better (if not the best) proposal I've seen here involving Luongo to Chicago. I don't know much about Ness, but I'd swap him for Matt Martin and you've got yourself a deal. But overall that's a well thought out proposal, good job! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Intriguing. Leddy is young and a very solid D man. I don't know much about Bailey other than he was a top ten pick. And we could have another Kassian type prospect in Hayes. So overall good proposal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 One of the better (if not the best) proposal I've seen here involving Luongo to Chicago. I don't know much about Ness, but I'd swap him for Matt Martin and you've got yourself a deal. But overall that's a well thought out proposal, good job! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Kane Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Thanks! It is rare to see fans of both teams like a deal. I wonder if there are any Islanders fans who can chime in? For the Islanders this trade is the biggest risk but could bring huge rewards. Bailey is not meeting expectations and they have a log jam of defensive prospects. Ballard and Frolik are classic examples of buying low (in terms of trade) and given the Islanders need to fill cap room they are both great deals. All three players (Ballard, Frolik, and Crawford) are still young and have had success in the eastern conference. I don't see how they can really lose this deal on the ice (just financially, but this pales in comparison to some other financial blunders). I wouldn't be surprised if Ballard and Frolik combined for 80 points between the two and Crawford plays 35-40 with solid numbers. Darth what is the DL on Frolik? Why does he suck so bad in Chicago? I thought he was a great acquisition at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkeeterHansen Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I don't know if it's very well plausible, but well thought out for a change! +1, OP! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 If Lou goes to the hated Hawks you want something in return as a top line player like Hossa, you have to play them 4 friggin times during the season and probably somewhere in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Kane Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 If Lou goes to the hated Hawks you want something in return as a top line player like Hossa, you have to play them 4 friggin times during the season and probably somewhere in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thad Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 One of the better (if not the best) proposal I've seen here involving Luongo to Chicago. I don't know much about Ness, but I'd swap him for Matt Martin and you've got yourself a deal. But overall that's a well thought out proposal, good job! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoolander Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Best proposal I've seen in a while. Good job! Value-wise it's fair, and all 3 guys we get fit the mold of big,young and skilled. Maybe if Manny isn't the best candidate for our 4th line, he could go into management and stay with the organization. Either that or test free-agency, which I would suck because Manny is a real character-guy. I'd love to see that line-up when we finally start playing hockey again... Sedin-Sedin-Burrows Booth-Kesler-Kassian Higgins-Bailey-Hansen Vopatti-Lapierre-Hayes Hamhuis-Bieksa Edler-Garrison Leddy-Tanev Schneids Lack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Why does New York need / want another ordinary goalie? So for them it's Ballard for Bailey... Okay, Frolik is chucked in. It's the weak part of a pretty interesting proposition. I guess they could trade Nabakov for prospects, which was probably the plan all along as Dipietro proves all doubters wrong??? I guess they have to hope their investment in him still has hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nd84 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Doesn't make sense for the Blackhawks to give up that much. Maybe if Nielsen goes Chicago's way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 If that's Vancouver's asking price then a deal with Chicago will not happen. Bowman loves his "core" players and won't give then up for Luongo. Like I said in other threads, any trade involving Luongo to Chicago should automatically exclude Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Bolland, Saad, Shaw, Keith and Seabrook. I'm only mentioning roster players, and I'm including Saad because the Hawks management loves him and he'll make the team for sure. If a deal can be made with other players then great, otherwise it's not happening. I'm not saying Luongo's not a good goalie or even worth a top 6 forward, I just know that Chicago isn't willing to pay that price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Kane Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 The last thing i would hate to see is Lou going to the Hawks to make them even stronger. There has to be a core player comming back or the Canucks get screwed in any deal with them. You dont make a hated rival like Chicago even stronger than they are already. Gillis kind of said this if you trade in your division or conference you need something very good comming back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.