R3aL Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 We gonna have to pay to play, I Benning wants first it's gonna cost. There job is to evaluate the risk/reward and decide which will give our team the most value and when. If Benning pulls te Kesler trade then does the proposal for the 6th pick which was posted on hf boards and shared on ours: 1st for Tanev, Shinkaruk, 6th That's realistic, yea it costs a lot, but you gott pay to play. 1st overalls don't usually move to often, Benning will be making a serious stamp on our club so soon. One thing is for sure I'm so happy gillis isn't driving the bus this summer: Kesler wouldn't get moved, we would either moved down when a great player is available or blotched our pick ( gillis pessimism) I feel confident Benning and linden and Willie are gonna do great things for our club in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 We gonna have to pay to play, I Benning wants first it's gonna cost. There job is to evaluate the risk/reward and decide which will give our team the most value and when. If Benning pulls te Kesler trade then does the proposal for the 6th pick which was posted on hf boards and shared on ours: 1st for Tanev, Shinkaruk, 6th That's realistic, yea it costs a lot, but you gott pay to play. 1st overalls don't usually move to often, Benning will be making a serious stamp on our club so soon. One thing is for sure I'm so happy gillis isn't driving the bus this summer: Kesler wouldn't get moved, we would either moved down when a great player is available or blotched our pick ( gillis pessimism) I feel confident Benning and linden and Willie are gonna do great things for our club in the long run. ugghhh it's to much, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 no its not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 I thought we established you're not allowed to comment on anything Edler for the same reason Hitler was not allowed to promise amnesty to certain...religious groups in the 40`s Literally. Didn't think we'd see Godwin's law invoked in a thread about a Friedman rumour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 If Benning pulls te Kesler trade then does the proposal for the 6th pick which was posted on hf boards and shared on ours: 1st for Tanev, Shinkaruk, 6th That's realistic, yea it costs a lot, but you gott pay to play. Funny, that's the same marketing slogan lotteries use. I don't like the projections of either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure to Mogilny Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Big no to tradeing shinck as part of a package for reinhart i say him and bo and kass are the three who we must hold on to. Tanev and guance and 6 is more than enough cause the panthers need those type of players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 ^ Jensen > shinkaruk yet you do not mention him in the top 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Didn't think we'd see Godwin's law invoked in a thread about a Friedman rumour. Not going to lie Heff my man, it took A LOT of coordination Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 no its not. oh yes it is. When you consider how woeful our depth of prospects are. Without knowing the return of a Kesler trade it's to much. Could package that up for something decent without losing the 6th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 @warhippy. So a B prospect, top 4 d and a 1th overall is too much for a RNH? lol you overvalue shinkaruk. also our prospect pool would be upgraded as we would have a true elite prospect which is something we do not have atm. shinkaruk is not a huge loss. sidenote: I am saying reinhart is RNH caliber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 @warhippy. So a B prospect, top 4 d and a 1th overall is too much for a RNH? lol you overvalue shinkaruk. also our prospect pool would be upgraded as we would have a true elite prospect which is something we do not have atm. shinkaruk is not a huge loss. sidenote: I am saying reinhart is RNH caliber. Shinkaruk is not a "B" prospect IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 @J.r. ..... what do you think he is a C+? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure to Mogilny Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 ^ Jensen > shinkaruk yet you do not mention him in the top 3 Jensen would be 4. Jensen is better right now cause of age and developement but shinck is a higher ceiling and is ready by 2015-16 whitch is fine cause theres still a possibillity we dont make the playoffs next year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 @Bure to mogilny. sorry bro but they both have the same ceiling Jensen is however more likely to reach it. god people think shinkaruk is going to be a susperstar for some reason I don't get. he has shown nothing to prove what you people think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 @warhippy. So a B prospect, top 4 d and a 1th overall is too much for a RNH? lol you overvalue shinkaruk. also our prospect pool would be upgraded as we would have a true elite prospect which is something we do not have atm. shinkaruk is not a huge loss. sidenote: I am saying reinhart is RNH caliber. First off Reinhart is not considered an elite prospect. I think RNH is too fragile to be a impact player. That being said assuming we drafted Landeskog I could part with Shinkaruk but seeing as there is no Landeskog in this draft I would keep Shinkaruk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 ^ how is he not elite? he put up a better ppg then mackinnon while being a two way forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papayas Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 ^ how is he not elite? he put up a better ppg then mackinnon while being a two way forward. you seriously want to reply to peaches5? watch out for your heart rate man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 @warhippy. So a B prospect, top 4 d and a 1th overall is too much for a RNH? lol you overvalue shinkaruk. also our prospect pool would be upgraded as we would have a true elite prospect which is something we do not have atm. shinkaruk is not a huge loss. sidenote: I am saying reinhart is RNH caliber. No that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that if Draisatl and Nylander have the same potential to be a #1 center it is not smart assert management to give up our only LW prospect worthy of the name for yet another center. Of which we have two or the that project into the possible top 6. I firmly believe we have other assets that get that deal done without depleting our meager prospect pool. I also believe that next year we won't be competitive as some do, and as such have a solid chance of getting a high draft pick which can slot in to our depth very well. You ironically claim I over value our prospects while you're ready to sell the farm for one while at the same time over value the prospects of every other team in rumored talks with the canucks. If there's a chance Nylander or Draisatl can be a 1st line center. It makes no sense giving up so much to move up for another player who may or may not have the same ceiling. Common sense not over valuing. But hey, don't let that stop you from griping about me while doing the exact same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 ^ how is he not elite? he put up a better ppg then mackinnon while being a two way forward. Most people keep overlooking that Reinhart is almost a year older than some of these other prospects he was born in 1995. He is only 2 months older than Mackinnon so if you want to look at stats remove 2013-2014 from his resume and the compare him to Mackinnon. Mackinnon: 2012-2013 HALIFAX MOOSEHEADS-QMJHL 44 32 43 75 40 45 10 2 7 2012-2013 HALIFAX MOOSEHEADS-QMJHL 17 11 22 33 17 12 5 0 4 81 13.6 2012-2013 HALIFAX MOOSEHEADS-M-CUP 4 7 6 13 8 0 1 1 1 Reinhart: 2012-13 Kootenay Ice WHL 72 35 50 85 22 5 0 1 1 -8 4 The top being regular season and under it the playoff performances. Mackinnon first off only played 44 regular season games and put up 75 points. Reinhart played 72 games and put up 85 points. In the playoffs Mackinnon put up 33 points in 17 games and then 13 points in 4 games in the Memorial Cup. In 2011 Mackinnon put up 27 points in 17 games while Reinhart put up 2 points in 4 games in 2011 and 1 point 5 games in 2012-13 while being -8. If Reinhart was in last year draft he would be no where near the first overall position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 ^ 2 months is nothing..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.