WonderTwinPowers Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 24 minutes ago, smithers joe said: so cdc, would gladly give up horvat and a first for a 2 month rental player? And a likely Stanley Cup final appearance? Also Horvats playing big minutes in the NHL, Bowey is doing well in the AHL bit of a difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomato Pajamas Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 22 minutes ago, smithers joe said: so cdc, would gladly give up horvat and a first for a 2 month rental player? Imagine if we had a healthy top 2 defenseman to play along side (and later on replace) Hamhuis during the cup final. Not saying that we had the pieces in 2011 for a trade like that but, in hindsight, I would have done almost anything if it meant we could increase our chances at winning the cup that year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithers joe Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 18 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: But we're the home of Raymond, Ballard and a 1st! cdc builds up what they think is fair trade value, and then when benning can't get that, fans say he is a poor gm...benning will ask for one think, the other gm will offer something else and somewhere in the middle, they will agree on a deal...cdc gm's will whine... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiley2051 Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 4 minutes ago, LarsEller said: You guys are crazy. Teams don't usually trade their top prospects for rentals. Teams trade their second tier prospects and picks for rentals. If the Canucks trade Hamhuis, which they very well may not, then they will get a late first and project prospect in return. Definitely think the Caps make a gamble like that, they have not looked this good in awhile. Salary retention would be most likely, Laich maybe an ugly contract but he is loved in that room, they may risk giving up their good prospects but they should refrain from messing with the chemistry in that locker room. History shows you need incredible defensive depth going in for a long run, imagine if VAN had acquired a Hamhuis-type defenceman back in 2011? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noble 6 Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 If we want Bowey, we are going to have to add more to Hamhuis. To WSH: Hamhuis (50% retained) 3rd round pick Pedan To VAN: Bowey I would still do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeefcakeBo Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 1 minute ago, Smiley2051 said: Definitely think the Caps make a gamble like that, they have not looked this good in awhile. Salary retention would be most likely, Laich maybe an ugly contract but he is loved in that room, they may risk giving up their good prospects but they should refrain from messing with the chemistry in that locker room. History shows you need incredible defensive depth going in for a long run, imagine if VAN had acquired a Hamhuis-type defenceman back in 2011? I'm sure the caps will trade for extra defence but they aren't trading Bowey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokes Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 47 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: Goalies prospects and back ups aren't in demand. Most teams have a guy or two of their own on their farm club. Just because the team and fans like a player doesn't mean the other teams are sold. Great defencemen and centres usually are what most teams need. It's not a matter of timing, it's what's being dealt. Yes, but Lack was dealt too early. At the time, lack was considered the best available goalie via trade. His stats were better than Talbot's. Talbot fetched a better return and Lack was worth more than was received. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomato Pajamas Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 34 minutes ago, smithers joe said: so cdc, would gladly give up horvat and a first for a 2 month rental player? Gotta give a little future to live a little in the present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiley2051 Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 Just now, LarsEller said: I'm sure the caps will trade for extra defence but they aren't trading Bowey. And good on them if they can shore up the blueline without doing so, but if they don't win they'll be imagining what could have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeefcakeBo Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 2 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said: If we want Bowey, we are going to have to add more to Hamhuis. To WSH: Hamhuis (50% retained) 3rd round pick Pedan To VAN: Bowey I would still do that. See this still doesn't make sense. Teams don't give up their best prospects for a 3rd and a long shot project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 Bowey is almost certainly not happening for a rental. Their 1st and Siegenthaler is much more likely the kind of package you would be looking at as well as retaining some salary on Hamhuis. Maybe we can snag one of their young roster players as an alternative instead of the prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeefcakeBo Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 Just now, Smiley2051 said: And good on them if they can shore up the blueline without doing so, but if they don't win they'll be imagining what could have been. Your delusional if you think they are going to trade their best prospects over draft picks and second tier prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 2 hours ago, LeanBeef said: Have no idea what it would take to do it but wouldn't mind seeing Tom Wilson come our way. That would make me forget about Kassian playing in Edmonton pretty fast! 2 hours ago, Warhippy said: Yandle, Hamhuis, Byfuglien, Shattenkirk. Just my opinion, and I know the press is out there suggesting otherwise (certainly with Shatty)... I just cannot see NYR's and STL dumping Yandle and Shattenkirk before the play off's start? These guys are too important to their play off prospects. Maybe in the off season in Shatenkirks case! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brobidus Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 Hamhuis + Shinkaruk for Bowey and Carrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiley2051 Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 4 minutes ago, LarsEller said: Your delusional if you think they are going to trade their best prospects over draft picks and second tier prospects. *You're Time will tell I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeefcakeBo Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 1 minute ago, Smiley2051 said: *You're Time will tell I guess. Auto correct doesn't understand. It's not a case of time will tell though. The Caps won't trade Bowey for any rental player. Just not going to happen. Period. They will trade their first and something else. Seconds, thirds. Players that aren't projecting to become top pair D men ect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 11 minutes ago, smokes said: Yes, but Lack was dealt too early. At the time, lack was considered the best available goalie via trade. His stats were better than Talbot's. Talbot fetched a better return and Lack was worth more than was received. Talbot 2014-15 21 wins in 36 games. Lack, 41 games, 18 wins. Or are you one of those that don't count wins as goalie stats? Lack also had a pretty bad outing in the playoffs. Scouts and GM's look at everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
48MPHSlapShot Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 51 minutes ago, billabong said: Obviously if you can get a first rounder from them that would be unreal, but hammer hasn't been having a good year and the only teams that will want hammer will be drafting pretty low anyways so you take the best offer either way from whomever it is True. Either we get something now or lose him for nothing at free agency. At the end of the day we're gonna have to take whatever we can get. Hopefully we can get a bit of a bidding war going tho. Wait for Benning to say something like "We fully intend to hold on to Dan (and Radim), but we're willing to listen to offers." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 33 minutes ago, LarsEller said: You guys are crazy. Teams don't usually trade their top prospects for rentals. Teams trade their second tier prospects and picks for rentals. If the Canucks trade Hamhuis, which they very well may not, then they will get a late first and project prospect in return. No but apparently they trade top prospects for average players on contracts. Depres for Lovejoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 Thats it everybody get interested! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.