Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
OBXer

Trade rumors and talk

Recommended Posts

If Francis is looking at a bigger than (close to) 1-1- deal with the Avs, I hope he's putting together a multi team package that lands us another good goaltender. This team is too promising to not have an insurance policy/ relief in place for Ward the rest of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think at the moment we will be very careful before pulling the trigger on a trade. This team is learning how to win and learning how to play together. We are also still rebuilding so anyone you get has to fit into the plan a year or two down the road. Anyone you give up has to have a replacement that can step in. That narrows the possibilities.

 

I would think one option will be to give up our first round draft choice and build from there with a add-on. Since both Duchene/ Landeskog  could fit into our rebuild I think you would need to consider a 1 pick in a deal for them.

 

Landeskog  contract runs through 2021. In effect you would be obtaining a partner for Staal for the remainder of his contract. He also has a modified no-trade so he would need to agree and you would add another no trade to the roster with term.

 

Duchene has only 2 years left on his contract without a NTC. If Lindy isn't going to make a shift to center that is our bigger need right now.

 

Avs and Coyotes are the only teams we know for sure are sellers right now. If things go bad for us we will be sellers and if they break good we could be buyers. I don't think we make a deal until more teams are selling and that would be closer to the March deadline.  But we sure are kicking tires so anything is possible.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LakeLivin said:

 

I'd do this, but I don't see how the Avs possibly could. It would set their rebuild way too far out in the future.  I think that because of how poorly the Avs are doing we tend to forget how good Duchene and Landeskog are.  If they trade one close to straight up for Hanifin, seems like they'd have to get back young but NHL-now pieces for the other, and PDG isn't going to cut it on that front.   

 

I'm not sure they wouldn't or shouldn't. Their team is a mess with the two of them and they won't change that any time soon. They NEED to start over. Their defense is a mess. Their coach quit on them a month before the start of the season and forced a replacement hire that may not be ready. They are at the bottom at this point. No point in holding on to pieces that are expensive and will not be there when they turn things around. A trade like I proposed could push the rebuild for both teams forward by giving us the forwards that we need to get over the hump while giving them a bunch of young futures to accelerate the rebuild. Also, Sakic has to be feeling some pressure at this point due to the ineffectual play of his team during his tenure. He may be looking at one last chance. Playing it conservative is not going to help as that rarely leads to a dramatic turnaround. Finally, his trade of ROR to Buffalo was a heavy now for futures trade, so there is precedence that he might be willing to do that again. 

 

I won't say that this will happen, because it is big and those rarely happen. Couple that with our recent play, and I could see a conservative Ron Francis just playing his current hand vs. going all in. However, we do have our own problems that would make this something he might consider: a rebuild that accelerated too quickly to give us the number of bad years necessary to accumulate great top end picks, and a tricky situation with a potential ownership change and the threat of that change on a relocation of a club struggling to bring in fans. Those two factors could push a normally conservative Francis into making a move that otherwise he might not make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

 

I'd do this, but I don't see how the Avs possibly could. It would set their rebuild way too far out in the future.  I think that because of how poorly the Avs are doing we tend to forget how good Duchene and Landeskog are.  If they trade one close to straight up for Hanifin, seems like they'd have to get back young but NHL-now pieces for the other, and PDG isn't going to cut it on that front.   

I discussed that trade with him on another board.  If they were going to do that trade, it would definitely be at the end of the season, because like you said, they wouldn't be able to ice anything resembling a competitive team.  I could see them trading one now and one later.  But if I were to go that route, it would be:

 

Duchene & Landeskog

for

Hanifin/Bean/Roy/1st round/2nd (depending on how far we make it) or McKeown

 

Having Roy and Kuokkanen while having Duchene/Rask/Staal would be pointless.  And even with MD + GL, we'd still be short on the right.  Also, Fleury is more NHL ready, and he's bigger and more physical than Bean.  But having those two players from Colorado would be great not only for talent, but they're both on great contracts that would fit a budget team like us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, PenaltyKiller17 said:

Duchene & Landeskog

for

Hanifin/Bean/Roy/1st round/2nd (depending on how far we make it) or McKeown

 

I saw you post this elsewhere, and it has some advantages, but I prefer my proposal for two reasons. First, I think Bean has a much higher chance of being an impact offensive defenseman than Fleury has. Plus, in watching the two of them, Bean seems to see the ice and react effectively much better than Fleury, so if I was to keep one or the other for potential, I'd prefer Bean. The second reason I like my proposal better is that we risk losing PDG for nothing with the upcoming expansion draft, especially if we bring in two new forwards that we need to protect. For that reason, I'd rather hold onto our second round pick and send them PDG in it's place. Plus, we need to shed two contracts to bring in both players I believe as I think we have 50 at this point. Hanifin would be the other, obviously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MinJaBen said:

 

I saw you post this elsewhere, and it has some advantages, but I prefer my proposal for two reasons. First, I think Bean has a much higher chance of being an impact offensive defenseman than Fleury has. Plus, in watching the two of them, Bean seems to see the ice and react effectively much better than Fleury, so if I was to keep one or the other for potential, I'd prefer Bean. The second reason I like my proposal better is that we risk losing PDG for nothing with the upcoming expansion draft, especially if we bring in two new forwards that we need to protect. For that reason, I'd rather hold onto our second round pick and send them PDG in it's place. Plus, we need to shed two contracts to bring in both players I believe as I think we have 50 at this point. Hanifin would be the other, obviously.

 

I feel you, but I'm worried Bean would become what people think about Faulk.  I think Fleury will be really tough to play against, covers more ice, and would be more of a two-way player.  I'm okay with sending away PDG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, MinJaBen said:

 

I'm not sure they wouldn't or shouldn't. Their team is a mess with the two of them and they won't change that any time soon. They NEED to start over. Their defense is a mess. Their coach quit on them a month before the start of the season and forced a replacement hire that may not be ready. They are at the bottom at this point. No point in holding on to pieces that are expensive and will not be there when they turn things around. A trade like I proposed could push the rebuild for both teams forward by giving us the forwards that we need to get over the hump while giving them a bunch of young futures to accelerate the rebuild. Also, Sakic has to be feeling some pressure at this point due to the ineffectual play of his team during his tenure. He may be looking at one last chance. Playing it conservative is not going to help as that rarely leads to a dramatic turnaround. Finally, his trade of ROR to Buffalo was a heavy now for futures trade, so there is precedence that he might be willing to do that again. 

. . .

 

They need to start over, but as PK points out, no need for them to panic.  If they're going to go for mostly "futures", why not wait until the TD approaches when remaining annual cap hits will be lower and more teams looking to bolster either their playoff or cup chances would be in play?  Or after the season ends?  It's not like either Duchene or Landeskog are locker room cancers.  What does Colorado gain by moving one or both now instead of later if they can't get the deal they want at this point?  I suspect that there are a number of teams that couldn't afford their cap hit now who would be glad to work out cap space after the season is over in order to target a player like Duchene or Landeskog.

 

When I say "NHL ready" I'm talking about Avs targeting very young but more proven players like Hanifin or maybe Brandon Carlo.  Not only would their contributions come sooner, the further out a prospect, the more risk associated with him living up to potential.  I just can't see the Avs taking on the amount of risk associated with these latest proposals for both Landeskog and Duchene.  Maybe for one of them, but not both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey all's fair in trade discussions and talent projection and it's a good discussion. I was leaning heavy to pulling the Faulk for either guy trade not long ago.

 

Right now I really like our team and the need for a move seems less, even in the last few games.

 

I also completely get the idea that today's great looking offensive line, can cool way off, I may be overly exuberant based on too few games and that there may be a reason that a guy like Ryan was not in the NHL sooner. I also do agree with the notion of upgrading, even good players if we can get a very good player. But, the problem that very good player is not coming for free.

 

While I agree that home town fans tend to overvalue their own assets in a trade, I also believe that fans also tend to undervalue the potential of very young prospects that aren't killing it in the NHL the way say Jeff Skinner or Connor McDavid or Aron Ekblad did. Some Hall of Fame players were not killing it in the NHL at 19. But it is very hard to wait on guys, especially knowing that some never arrive "cough, Boychuk, cough, Murphy". Still the modus has been to give the kids a chance to develop. Most of them are in the small ponds, out of sight except for the occasional pop up in World Juniors or stats, but Hanifin is developing in the big ocean, right in front of our eyes. In a weird way that is harder. Think of Skinner's less glorious growing pain years. His head was firmly on the trading block several times.

 

I will concede that if Francis doesn't see the great in Hanifin, then there may not be a huge drop off from him to Fleury as our guy in the future. Personally, I think there is though. Hanifin has to be a future #1, top 15 Dman to not strongly consider the deal, IMHO. I think he will be, but I may be alone.

 

I may be mesmerized by the many slick plays Hanifin makes and his size and skating, but I do think that even if Hanifin is off the Ekblad pace, and a few others may be age adjusted a touch ahead of Noah, does not mean he's not the real deal. He's 19. He has the tools the size the skating, the desire.

 

Also, while Landeskog has established himself over time as a very nice player, last year wasn't great and this year is really not good. In terms of what he is worth there is some risk (he's on a 37 point pace projected over 82 games). Duchene is on a much better pace the last two years, and more consistent.

 

As to getting both Duchene and Landeskog. Well kudos for thinking big. If they seriously want to move on from them both, they would be getting a lot of future potential in Hanifin, Fleury, and Gauthier and two first rounders (with theirs). I'd have to munch on that one. We'd need both Bean and McKeown to really develop well to make up for losing our two top D picks. I really like Gauthier to be big time in the NHL too. Easily could be as good as either guy. Personally, I think that is too far of a swing from Francis' "draft and develop" giving up that much future, but the return is impressive too. It's also a lot of salary, especially when Duchene has to be re-signed in 2.5 years.

 

The last point I'd make is on Landeskog. There is a chance that he could be a bit of a value play. He is, as I've mentioned, following up a slightly sub par year, with a very sub par year. In him Colorado has a bit of a bigger problem, sort of like we had with Eric. Landeskog is the Captain. But he is becoming the face of losing and a captain that is underperforming as a player. Maybe, just maybe we could get Landeskog without giving up Hanifin or Faulk.

 

Then maybe, relieved of the Captain burden, and in a much better culture, coach, and management, Landeskog regains his form. Somehow feels like a Francis play to try to get him, but without giving up a prime return.

 

Landeskog for: Fleury, Our first rounder, next year's second rounder and a good prospect: (Kouk, Roy, maybe Gauthier (I really don't want to give him up)), PDG, Murphy. Just pile up the pieces. Probably not, but I do know that Francis is a creative deal maker. Maybe he finds a way.

 

The other thing would be if we got Landeskog PLUS for Faulk.

 

 

Here's one thing I will say. In Ron I trust. I am against trading Hanifin due to the future. I am against trading Faulk due to this year. BUT if Ron sees it differently, I'm with him.

 

 

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

They need to start over, but as PK points out, no need for them to panic.  If they're going to go for mostly "futures", why not wait until the TD approaches when remaining annual cap hits will be lower and more teams looking to bolster either their playoff or cup chances would be in play?  Or after the season ends? 

 

The reason to do it now and not later for them is two fold. First and probably least necessary is that the team could "go on a run" that would not get them in the playoffs but screw up their draft lottery position. If they are committed to the rebuild and will deal those two players anyway, sooner is better. The other issue is more pressing potentially: if you have a buyer now that is giving you a good price, you might lose them if you wait to sell and they move on. And there is no guarantee that other teams can give you what you want or have the room to take on the contracts without sending a poor one back. We give them two A level defensive prospects, a first round pick, and an A level forward prospect and a good forward player. That's a hell of a good package. With no bad contract coming back. I doubt they get that from anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MinJaBen said:

: a rebuild that accelerated too quickly to give us the number of bad years necessary to accumulate great top end picks,

 

Sorry MinJaBen, but you had me ROFL on that one! :rofl:

 

No disrespect, I know you are serious, but this is a good problem to have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not a fan of losing all that youth.  

 

Im more of a fan of going small moves now and getting more value from the assets before the expansion draft.  

 

A backup goaltender.  Maybe a 3rd line forward for injury protection.  The team doesn't have the depth to make a serious run.  Wouldn't have depth with a big trade with a roster defenseman.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't watch the Avs much so if someone has, and Landeskog has been passing the eyeball test then I defer, but if not, I would not be comfortable trading a major asset: read Faulk or Hanfin, for Landeskog. Mainly because while we may not make a deep playoff run, this team is making a seriously hard run to get into the playoffs.

 

That means not sacrificing this year, and Landeskog has just not proven it the last two years. Last year 53 points. This year headed for 35 points. Landeskog feels like a great play for the future, banking on the change of scenery, but his current production pace would not make the cut for our top 6 now. If we gave up Faulk for him there would be a blue line price to pay too. Hanifin for Landeskog at least trades future potential for future potential, and loses less off of this year's run.

 

But Faulk for Duchene trades defensive goals and points for offensive goals and points. Something we want to do in the long run, but this year? Maybe. But it depends on how Francis values Faulks role in this year's team especially. Because he simply cannot sacrifice this year.

 

This year Hanifin for Duchene would be a boom. We can at least get by replacing Hanifin with Dahlbeck, and get a turbo charge up front and on the PP. This is the deal for this year for sure. But the future? Duchene is much older than Hanifin and only signed for 2.5 years. Still, if Hanifin is not all that, then next year Fleury slots in there, and Bean even further down the line so the future is fine.

 

So, as I type, the idea of Hanifin for Duchene makes sense, IF Frances et all don't see Hanifin as future greatness. It gives us the pop for now, (possibly even a playoff run) and covers the future D with our yutes. IF Francis is lukewarm on Hanifin this deal makes sense. If he sees future great in Hanifin, then no way.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

Im not a fan of losing all that youth.  

 

Im more of a fan of going small moves now and getting more value from the assets before the expansion draft.  

 

A backup goaltender.  Maybe a 3rd line forward for injury protection.  The team doesn't have the depth to make a serious run.  Wouldn't have depth with a big trade with a roster defenseman.  

 

I'd be in favor of a smaller deal as well. In the offseason there was some talk about a deal with Detroit and I'd be all for revisiting that scenario. The Red Wings are a mess right now and may be looking to enter rebuilding mode. Gustav Nyquist would be a perfect addition and would be a lot cheaper than Duchene or Landeskog. I'd be comfortable sending Fleury and a pick. Throw Nyquist on the top line with Skinner and Rask. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim Matheson of the Edmonton Journal: Agree with Elliotte Friedman that the Carolina Hurricanes and Colorado Avalanche would be good trading partners. The Hurricanes have defensive prospects in Jake Bean, Noah Hanifin and Hayden Fleury and the Avs could dangle Gabriel Landeskog or Matt Duchene. Matheson would ask for either Nicolas Roy or Julien Gauthier in any trade for Landeskog or Duchene.

 

 

 

This makes me wonder if a prospect package for Landeskog deal could be there. Fleury, Roy, and our first rounder for Landeskog? Throw in Murphy. Ha, not that that adds much but still.

 

If would give them a grade A D prospect, a very good big center prospect, and another first rounder for the next draft. We keep Hanfin, Faulk and Gauthier.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to summarize so I don't give anyone a wrong impression about my take on Hainfin: I haven't seen anything that would make me think that he can't become an elite d-man.  But there a lot of things that would help me make that jump that I haven't seen, as well.

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, wxray1 said:

 

Sorry MinJaBen, but you had me ROFL on that one! :rofl:

 

No disrespect, I know you are serious, but this is a good problem to have.

 

No disrespect taken...it sounds crazy. But consider this, what would Toronto's rebuild look like if Marner and Nylander started playing full time last year and were moderately successful? Would they have made the playoffs? Probably not, but it might have made their chances at Matthews much smaller leading to not getting him. Then would they be pushing for the playoffs this year? I don't think so. I think we sort of did that during our rebuild by not shedding good players sooner and then having players develop on the NHL team quickly enough that we were more competitive sooner than expected. This lead to draft positions in the last several drafts that were not as high as they may have been otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny to hear Marner's name as we ponder trading Hanifin.

 

We would have only needed to end up losing a couple more games the previous year to pick Marner. As it was, we did not have the option, though the vast majority here, if not everyone said they would have taken Hanifin anyways (me included). But Marner was a guy I really liked. He was in fact part of a debate that pitted one player attribute against another. Marner, at is currently, at 19 years old, on a 70 point pace in the NHL.

 

Still, in the end we did not have the option, so it's just one of those theoretical things to ponder.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, remkin said:

Funny to hear Marner's name as we ponder trading Hanifin.

 

We would have only needed to end up losing a couple more games the previous year to pick Marner. As it was, we did not have the option, though the vast majority here, if not everyone said they would have taken Hanifin anyways (me included). But Marner was a guy I really liked. He was in fact part of a debate that pitted one player attribute against another. Marner, at is currently, at 19 years old, on a 70 point pace in the NHL.

 

Still, in the end we did not have the option, so it's just one of those theoretical things to ponder.

 

Marner?  Meh, he's too small . . . :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, gocanes0506 said:

Im not a fan of losing all that youth.  

 

Im more of a fan of going small moves now and getting more value from the assets before the expansion draft.  

 

A backup goaltender.  Maybe a 3rd line forward for injury protection.  The team doesn't have the depth to make a serious run.  Wouldn't have depth with a big trade with a roster defenseman.  

 

I'm of a like mind. You don't want to give up a lot of future for now but either of the guys we are talking about are of the age that they fit the rebuild plan. I sure wouldn't want to give up too much though. I di think it would take our number 1 plus a good player

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long time lurker, first time (I think?) poster...

 

Like everyone else, I am very pleased with the way this team has played recently and while I understand the excitement and desire to theoretically add that "one-last-piece" to put this team over the top, I see the proposed trades involving Colorado and I can't help but think of it all as premature and counter productive to the goals that Francis has set forth for the franchise in regards to drafting and developing our own talent.  

 

Yes - at some point in the future this team will probably need to make some trades but in my opinion that time is not this season.  We are right on the cusp of having real, legitimate depth both up front and on the back end but that depth is still shallow, unproven, and tenuous at this point.  This rebuild is still realistically another two years before it is at the point where our prospects become the level of "overripe" that Francis is gunning for, so that we can both make trades from a serious position of strength AND have another guy that is ready to jump right in and fill any potential voids.  

 

As fans, we don't want to hear that this rebuild has 2 more years to go and it is hard for us to be patient - especially when we start seeing signs of this team moving in the right direction.  Many of us see our recent success and want to take shortcuts to jump ahead but we've been down that road before (hi JR!) and we know where it leads.  At best you get a short boost but it usually ends up costing us future playoffs because you've traded away your depth.  The goal for this franchise is to perennially be in the playoffs and be bursting at the seams with home-developed talent so that you either have guys jumping in and succeeding at the roles you acquired them for (because you actually let them develop - what a novel idea!) or you have other teams knocking down your door and offering the world because your depth is that good.  

 

In regards to dealing Hanifin, I think it is waaaaaaay too early to be giving up on this kid.  Yes, you have to give up quality to get quality in trades but the criticisms leveled at Hanifin to justify him being expendable are in my opinion short-sighted and based off unrealistic expectations due to the strong successes of Slavin and Pesce (and potentially Aaron Ekblad).  The kid is just 19 (almost 3 years behind Slavin and Pesce who were actually allowed to develop in college and the AHL first), was thrown into the NHL probably prematurely, hasn't even completed 2 full seasons yet, and has at times had a rotating door for a defensive partner.  Let's face it, he is having the dreaded sophomore slump that soooo many players end up going through but even his slump has not been the worst thing in the world.  He has had defensive breakdowns for sure and has not put up Erik Karlsson-like offensive numbers but I'm not worried about him not living up to his potential because you know why?  We have Steve Smith teaching him and molding him into that elite defenseman he was drafted to be.  The tweaks that Steve Smith has made with our defense are nothing short of miraculous if you've witnessed the defenses that we've put on the ice in the past.  Noah will get there, us fans just need to temper our expectations.

 

I think we are on our way to the promised land but we still have a ways to go and I personally don't feel that either Duchene or Landeskog is worth deviating from The Plan© at this point.  Were we still early on in our rebuild, perhaps those trades would sound better to me.  But I like the way this team looks and I would rather see the yutes in our system rise to the top and put us over the top for years to come.  

 

None of this is to imply that you guys shouldn't daydream about possibilities.  But don't lose sight of the bigger, longer-term picture in your desire to pick apart Colorado's carcass. :)  

 

Of course, knowing my luck though, tomorrow Francis will turn around and do the exact opposite of everything I just preached for...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, yggsdrasil said:

Yes - at some point in the future this team will probably need to make some trades but in my opinion that time is not this season.  We are right on the cusp of having real, legitimate depth both up front and on the back end but that depth is still shallow, unproven, and tenuous at this point.  This rebuild is still realistically another two years before it is at the point where our prospects become the level of "overripe" that Francis is gunning for, so that we can both make trades from a serious position of strength AND have another guy that is ready to jump right in and fill any potential voids.  

 

 

Important point but at some point RF has to make that bigger trade. At least I would think. If he can get a player(s) that fit the needs now and fit the rebuild plan why not pull the trigger? I only see the asking price as a reason not to make such a trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like it comes down to how aggressive and proactive you want to be.  I don't want to be reckless or sacrifice our future for short term gain.  But if we can limit those risks I would consider a bold move that could very well make us a legitimate deep playoff run threat, maybe as soon as next year.

 

But I will say this: in the short term, I hope RF is working as much or more on a goalie contingency plan as he is on a trade for a Duchene/ Landeskog.  I'm getting too optimistic about our chances this year to see it go down the drain if Ward gets hurt or worn down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, OBXer said:

 

 

Important point but at some point RF has to make that bigger trade. At least I would think. If he can get a player(s) that fit the needs now and fit the rebuild plan why not pull the trigger? I only see the asking price as a reason not to make such a trade.

 

I may be in the minority on this but from my point of view, the asking price as it stands is where any hypothetical trades with Colorado fall apart.  Our young, uber defense JUST arrived on the scene last season.  I'm not so eager to give any of that up yet until we know what we have in Fleury, McKeown, or Bean and whether they are ready to take the next step if we did want to move one of our roster defensemen - even for an elite forward like Duchene or Landeskog.  And given the struggles in Charlotte, I'd say Fleury and McKeown still need a little more time in the oven.  

 

I know this team has had offensive woes in the recent past and that we have to take the recent goal scoring with a heavy grain of salt but I think when you look at this season as a whole there has been a slow, gradual build up to the increase in offense.  To me, it seems like Coach Peters is of the mindset that a team doesn't have to rely on one or two elite forwards for offense.  He wants offense that is spread throughout the line-up because that makes it so much more difficult for teams to match-up against us.  As a budget-minded team, that strategy negates any immediate need for another elite forward when you can rely on scoring from any of your lines.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, yggsdrasil said:

I may be in the minority on this but from my point of view, the asking price as it stands is where any hypothetical trades with Colorado fall apart.

 

Maybe you are but then I am too. I agree with your assessment. My question is if the price were right do you pull the trigger on a trade even if it means altering your rebuild plan to include the player you get while giving up what I would expect to be a pretty good assets and draft pick.  I would not meet the price that has been rumored for the AVs players but at a better price I might consider it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, OBXer said:

 

Maybe you are but then I am too. I agree with your assessment. My question is if the price were right do you pull the trigger on a trade even if it means altering your rebuild plan to include the player you get while giving up what I would expect to be a pretty good assets and draft pick.  I would not meet the price that has been rumored for the AVs players but at a better price I might consider it.

 

For the two players in question, my answer is no.  But I may just be a fan that values my own players higher than others. :) 

 

Honestly though, I just get more enjoyment watching the yutes we develop grow into successful players that can take this team where it needs to go.  Those successes just feel more sweet and earned than buying a high-priced UFA or trading for someone else's cast-offs.  Of course that also has its own share of risks, ie. Boychuck and Murphy but I feel so much better about the development we provide our prospects now that those cases feel like outliers rather than the norm.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...