leafs_rock_go_mccabe Posted October 29, 2008 Report Share Posted October 29, 2008 Fantasy Trade! To Montreal: Jeff Carter ($5.000) - RFA in 2011-2012. Ryan Parent ($0.855) - RFA in 2010-2011. 3rd round draft choice (2009). To Philadelphia: Tomas Plekanec ($1.600) - RFA in 2009-2010. Ryan O'Byrne ($0.941) - RFA in 2011-2012. Steve Begin ($1.057) - UFA in 2009-2010. Matt D'Agostini ($0.500) - RFA in 2009-2010. 2nd round draft choice (2010). Now, keep in mind everyone... FANTASY trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlaster_mtl Posted October 29, 2008 Report Share Posted October 29, 2008 I certainly wouldn't trade Halak to ANY team in the East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flunky Posted October 29, 2008 Report Share Posted October 29, 2008 I'm casting a NO vote too. Halak is one of the best young goalies in the game today. If Price was to get injured, we'd have to rely on Denis, or whoever may come back in a trade. I think Halak will be with the team at least until the trade deadline next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animerules1x3 Posted October 29, 2008 Report Share Posted October 29, 2008 I don't think it is a step back at all...you get a tremendous young center on Carter...put him on a free wheeling team, like the habs...would be tanguay times five It is possible that he would be Tanguay times five... we do not know that. He could just not fit for all we know. Besides, we already have three offensive centres who are reliable, we don't need to weaken someplace else to get another one. You give up Lang and Halak... done deal...and spare parts Obryne or Georges -- Obryne has moments but I would sooner lose him than Gosh George...Gosh George is just the ultimate steady man back their. We cannot afford to give a D-man for no D-man in return, our weakness is exactly there ! Besides, Lang was just acquired and did his job so far, thus he won't be traded back, and Halak is our insurance policy should Price falter or be injured. When in a trade and you have the chance get hands down the best player in the tradeyou win. And Carter is the best player. Not if you blast a hole somewhere on your team to get him, and give so many players that you have to fill up the squad with rookies on a year you desperately need experience. If Philly fell for that ... i would smile my way to the bank. I'd be swearing over and over for the rest of the season as it would be a tremendous mistake. What gives to score one more goal (maybe) every three games, if your '' suspect '' defense give one more every two games ? We can always add a deeman for number four...were not in any big rush were winning with what we have...and I am sure Breeseby can step in until Gainey finds the right deal. Exactly : our defense is our weak point right now. This is what we need to adress now, not later, and certainly not to reduce our trading assets for a luxury. Also don't forget Weber was one of the last to be sent down...he could probably come in if there is an injury and fill in for 10 or 12 minutes a game. Exactly, he's a rookie. This isn't a development year. It is a cup run year. This wouldn't be a trade motivated by need, but rather by luxury. Trading for a marquee player is funny and all, but when it isn't necessary, it's like buying an SUV with the construction break's gaz price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jl-1 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 When in a trade and you have the chance get hands down the best player in the trade you win. And Carter is the best player. If Philly fell for that ... i would smile my way to the bank. QFT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamesgal1 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 This wouldn't be a trade motivated by need, but rather by luxury. Trading for a marquee player is funny and all, but when it isn't necessary, it's like buying an SUV with the construction break's gaz price. It has nothing to do about luxury and evrything to do about quality. Lets say you had a 1995 corrolla all rusted out that was in the garage weekly. You also had a brand new set of 4 tires for a bronco. But you don't own a bronco so really you have no use for them. Now some one notices these tires he has been searching for for about a year. So he offers you a brand new corrolla top of the line all souped for your 1995 corrola and the 4 brand new tires that you don't need but he does. He is more interested in the tires but because he is going to give you the car he needs one in return,so you get this brand new souped up car for an old 95 and a brand new set of tires you had no use for, now you get a car that has better acceleration, better mileage, better handling, longer life, overaul this thing is just going to blow away the competition in the same class. Yep, I would not make that deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animerules1x3 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 It has nothing to do about luxury and evrything to do about quality. Lets say you had a 1995 corrolla all rusted out that was in the garage weekly. You also had a brand new set of 4 tires for a bronco. But you don't own a bronco so really you have no use for them. Now some one notices these tires he has been searching for for about a year. So he offers you a brand new corrolla top of the line all souped for your 1995 corrola and the 4 brand new tires that you don't need but he does. He is more interested in the tires but because he is going to give you the car he needs one in return,so you get this brand new souped up car for an old 95 and a brand new set of tires you had no use for, now you get a car that has better acceleration, better mileage, better handling, longer life, overaul this thing is just going to blow away the competition in the same class. Yep, I would not make that deal. Nobody in their right mind would give a brand-new car for a scrapped car and a set of tires, first. Secondly, our '' tires '', we need them. Halak is our backup, and as long as Price hasn't acquired more experience at this level, I wouldn't rely entirely on his potential. And we don't need a brand new corolla as our third car. Our old one, which is free (Lang) is doing the job alright. No need to give anything to improve on what's working. It is not a matter of simply acquiring top players, it is a matter of keeping useful tools at all positions, and weakening in defense where it is already suspect, plus weakening in nets, just to acquire a 3rd offensive centre just slightly better, but much less experienced than the one we currently have, and went out to acquire earlier this season, is nonsensical. It's like taking steroids to improve muscle mass... you weaken your heart to do it, you'll soon face the consequences. Besides, this team has plenty of centres coming in the system, and they only really need one, as Koivu and Plekanec will be there for years to come. One of Maxwell, Fortier, Trotter or White is sure to make a good 3rd liner, even if Chipchura never does. Carter is luxury, not need. Greed, not reason. And for the record, with Brière currently injured, Carter is the Flyers' second centre. With their defense being what it is, they need all the offense they can get their mitts on, which mean that they wouldn't even consider trading him, thus doubling the nonsensical value of this trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
go_leafs_go11 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 I will also go on record in saying that I don't buy this story (oh wait, I've already done so)... Still, just for the heck of it, I wouldn't do anything with Philly that doesn't involve Jeff Carter. To Philadelphia: Robert Lang $4M Josh Gorges $1.1M or Ryan O'Byrne $0.942M Jaroslav Halak $0.775M Mathieu Dandenault $1.75M or Steve Begin $1.3M High draft pick or prospect like Valentenko, Chipchura,... To Montreal: Jeff Carter $5M Antero Niitymaki $1.225M No real chance Philly accepts this. They would definitely want Komisarek since he plays pure Philly hockey. Carter, Sbisa for Komisarek and Halak? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony1234 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 You are wrong if you think we don't need Carter. He is exactly what we need. A BIG, strong point scoring center who is young and can lead the team for the next 5-10 years. Yes we have some nice depth at center, but nothing like this kid. You wonder why we lose to teams like Anaheim, Florida etc. etc., and we play our fourth line against other teams top lines ? It is because our current centers are too small. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animerules1x3 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 You are wrong if you think we don't need Carter. He is exactly what we need. A BIG, strong point scoring center who is young and can lead the team for the next 5-10 years. Yes we have some nice depth at center, but nothing like this kid. You wonder why we lose to teams like Anaheim, Florida etc. etc., and we play our fourth line against other teams top lines ? It is because our current centers are too small. Go look at Detroit's lineup at centre. This small centre myth is what it is, a myth. Nuff said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA_Champion Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 We would certainly benefit from Carter, but we're not getting Carter in any beneficial and reality-based scenario, so it's a moot point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
74Kos-yn-31Price Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 Who here is seriously thinking about helping the team that knocked us out last year with good goaltending? by sending them a goalie of all things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbarker78 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 Who here is seriously thinking about helping the team that knocked us out last year with good goaltending? by sending them a goalie of all things? Not me,trust me they are going to be the team to beat in the east by seasons end.Giving them a good goalie makes them instant contenders.Not a risk I would take unless they way over paid something to the tune of Carter and Sbisa.So no it will never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony1234 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 Go look at Detroit's lineup at centre. This small centre myth is what it is, a myth. Nuff said. Yup, that same myth that got us booted out of the playoffs against Philly eh ? Nuff said !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roy_133 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 Yup, that same myth that got us booted out of the playoffs against Philly eh ? Nuff said !!! They got the saves, we didn't. They got the bounces, we didn't. I don't think Philly obliterated our small centers and that was the difference in the series. Small centers won Detroit a cup last season, I agree you'd rather have some size up the middle, but it's overrtaed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony1234 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 They got the saves, we didn't. They got the bounces, we didn't. I don't think Philly obliterated our small centers and that was the difference in the series. Small centers won Detroit a cup last season, I agree you'd rather have some size up the middle, but it's overrtaed. If we had one big center you wouldn't think it was overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roy_133 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 If we had one big center you wouldn't think it was overrated. You're right, I haven't seen any other team play and am totally unaware of what a big center can do. First of all, we have a "big center," Robert Lang is big. Second of all, again, I didn't say it's not helpful it's just overrated. You can win a cup without a big center, ask the Red Wings. If it was as absolutely critical as you seem to want to imply, then the Wings wouldn't have won the cup, end of discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gracie12 Posted October 30, 2008 Report Share Posted October 30, 2008 If we had one big center you wouldn't think it was overrated. We actually have several big centres (lang: 6' 2" 218lbs, Lapierre 6'2" 200lbs, Chipchura 6'2" 206lbs) and while pleks and koivu are short, neither are exactly oleg-petrov smurfs - both are hardy (pleks is 5'10" and 196lbs while koivu is 5'10" 187lbs) Carter is 6'3" yes, but at 200lbs he's only a coulple of big macs heavier than pleks - not exactly Sundin size or something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jl-1 Posted October 31, 2008 Report Share Posted October 31, 2008 Go look at Detroit's lineup at centre. This small centre myth is what it is, a myth. Nuff said. Go look at his stats and come back to say that he's not worthy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animerules1x3 Posted October 31, 2008 Report Share Posted October 31, 2008 Yup, that same myth that got us booted out of the playoffs against Philly eh ? Nuff said !!! In the recent playoffs, it wasn't a matter of the centres, it was a goaltending issue. Pricey was ordinary at best (and lower at worst), and Biron stood on his head. Nothing to do with the centres being too small. Plus, obviously, a certain Umberger guy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animerules1x3 Posted October 31, 2008 Report Share Posted October 31, 2008 Go look at his stats and come back to say that he's not worthy... He's talented, obviously, but in our situation, he's a luxury. We do not need him. With the team we have, I'd only justify a trade by need, because any trade could backfire, thus making unnecessary trades a worthless risk. The difference between you all and me, is that I'm fine with Lang as our third centre and do not see the point of giving plenty to get Carter, who's big and talented and all, but not ours, thus, costly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jl-1 Posted October 31, 2008 Report Share Posted October 31, 2008 In the recent playoffs, it wasn't a matter of the centres, it was a goaltending issue. Pricey was ordinary at best (and lower at worst), and Biron stood on his head. Nothing to do with the centres being too small. ... and mostly, our lack of true snipers on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animerules1x3 Posted October 31, 2008 Report Share Posted October 31, 2008 You're right, I haven't seen any other team play and am totally unaware of what a big center can do. First of all, we have a "big center," Robert Lang is big. Second of all, again, I didn't say it's not helpful it's just overrated. You can win a cup without a big center, ask the Red Wings. If it was as absolutely critical as you seem to want to imply, then the Wings wouldn't have won the cup, end of discussion. Right on the money, roy. The Wings had something we should try to emulate : a terrific defense. And right now, we still do not have a reliable (every night except the odd-night out) 4th D. Brisebois was okay tonight, but I'm not betting on him to be every time he takes the ice. ... and mostly, our lack of true snipers on the team. I'll never agree to that. Teams who finish 1st in scoring have enough scorers to do the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jl-1 Posted October 31, 2008 Report Share Posted October 31, 2008 I'll never agree to that. Teams who finish 1st in scoring have enough scorers to do the job. And I'm not expecting or even asking you to agree. It doesn't change the fact. During regular season, you face good teams and bad teams. The intensity level isn't the same as everybody here could attest. A sniper will find the back of the net on a scoring opportunity in those situations instead of finding the goalie's logo, the goal post or miss the net all together. Agree or not, it's irrelevant in my opinion, in all due respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animerules1x3 Posted October 31, 2008 Report Share Posted October 31, 2008 And I'm not expecting or even asking you to agree. It doesn't change the fact. During regular season, you face good teams and bad teams. The intensity level isn't the same as everybody here could attest. A sniper will find the back of the net on a scoring opportunity in those situations instead of finding the goalie's logo, the goal post or miss the net all together. Agree or not, it's irrelevant in my opinion, in all due respect. How come Brodeur happen to blank teams with snipers on their roster, then ? You saw Biron's save as mistakes or misses from our forwards, and I saw them as saves. There is our disagreement. We should leave to that. This conversation is going nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.