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

Would you make this trade for Ovechkin?

Would you make this trade for Ovechkin?  

21 members have voted

  1. 1. If we could trade Gauthier, Bean, and this year's 2nd for Alex Ovechkin, would you do it?

    • Yes
      8
    • No
      13
    • Not sure
      0


Recommended Posts

A hockey writer speculated that if Ovechkin were being traded (he isn't), that a deal to consider would be Gauthier, Bean and our 2nd round draft pick.  If such a deal were available (it won't be), would you do it?  

 

Keep in mind that Ovie is 31 years old and has 4 years left on his contract at $10m per with a $9.5m cap hit.  

 

On the other hand, in a down year (for him), he still had 33 goals and 69 points.

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seriously, we don't even lose a roster player and get a hard hitting goal scoring machine?  Uh, yes please.  as far as the cap hit goes, we are the lowest in the league so we can afford it, even after signing our yutes.  We all know it would never happen though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be worried about the term of his contract. He , had for him, a down year last year. It's hard to tell if it was because of all the wear and tear from the years in the league, or the way he was used by Trotz. If he had 2 years left, or if the Caps retained some of his money, I'd say yes, but as everything stands, I'd pass. He only had 5 points more than E Staal, and E plays a lot better D, and can play in all situations. Nobody seems to want Eric back, but he would do more than Ovie. Eric had 65 points, and was +17. Ovie had 69 pts, and was +6.

 

Edited by caniac6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Washington is really floating Ovie, they are looking for someone to make a massive offer similar to what BD58 said. I wouldn't do that, and really don't want Ovie's contract. As his game slowly subsides, I see him as a prime candidate to bolt for the KHL. And although he has gotten Washington to the playoffs far more often, he is 2 seasons behind E. Staal in getting to the conference final or SCF (or winning the Cup). For the last several years, Staal's lack of leadership was blamed for our lack of success. Well, Ovie has the "C" in Washington and they are annual playoff underachievers. No thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My offer for Ovenchicken...

 

rights to Chad LaRose

1 pint of Eastern NC BBQ

1 pair of gently used Alex Semin skates

1 uncirculated Fat Kaberle bobblehead

1 lifetime pass to pee in the woods by the PNC Arena East lot

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, super_dave_1 said:

My offer for Ovenchicken...

 

rights to Chad LaRose

1 pint of Eastern NC BBQ

1 pair of gently used Alex Semin skates

1 uncirculated Fat Kaberle bobblehead

1 lifetime pass to pee in the woods by the PNC Arena East lot

Fixed...I'd take Rosey back over Ovi any day of the week...and Ovi is NEVER worth Carolina BBQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2017 at 10:40 AM, caniac6 said:

If he had 2 years left, or if the Caps retained some of his money, I'd say yes, but as everything stands, I'd pass.

This is the problem with trade proposals: the details (read: conditions) are never spelled out. It's easy (money) for some "respected" hockey writer to daydream and write about it. But they never address salary retained (or not), let alone the likelihood (in this case) of DC moving their captain to a divisional opponent and letting him beat them.

 

The writer who proposed this trade took the lazy way out: He read McClellan's (perfectly understandable) comment that (1) moving Ovi is not in the current plan, but (2) he'd have to think about it if the right offer comes along. Then the writer put forward a proposal that is anything BUT "right" from the Caps' POV, unless the Canes do something their GM has consistently said he won't: overpay (i.e., take most if not all of Ovi's salary) for an over-30 guy whose wheels could fall off at any moment.

 

Gawd, I'll be glad when moves start happening and this board is producing something worth reading/talking about.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, top-shelf-1 said:

This is the problem with trade proposals: the details (read: conditions) are never spelled out. It's easy (money) for some "respected" hockey writer to daydream and write about it. But they never address salary retained (or not), let alone the likelihood (in this case) of DC moving their captain to a divisional opponent and letting him beat them.

 

The writer who proposed this trade took the lazy way out: He read McClellan's (perfectly understandable) comment that (1) moving Ovi is not in the current plan, but (2) he'd have to think about it if the right offer comes along. Then the writer put forward a proposal that is anything BUT "right" from the Caps' POV, unless the Canes do something their GM has consistently said he won't: overpay (i.e., take most if not all of Ovi's salary) for an over-30 guy whose wheels could fall off at any moment.

 

Gawd, I'll be glad when moves start happening and this board is producing something worth reading/talking about.

 

Since this seems like a direct criticism of a post I started, let me address it.

 

Here's the post (from another thread) that initiated a discussion that led to this poll:

 

On 6/1/2017 at 7:43 PM, LakeLivin said:

Ok, this is in the "fun speculation" category (if that's your idea of fun).  TheHockeyNews had an article about a possible trade for Ovechkin.  Supposedly the Caps GM said trading Ovie isn't in his plans but that he would listen to a 'legitimate hockey deal' if it came up.  THN speculated that there were very few teams that would even be in a position to trade for Ovie due to cap issues and the assets required in return.  The interesting part of the article to me was what the author wrote about a possible deal with Carolina:

"Would he go to Carolina, where the Hurricanes could offer prospects Juien Gauthier, Jake Bean and a second-rounder?"

 

While I'm not taking this seriously, I was surprised at what he apparently thought was a fair exchange on Carolina's end; I would have thought it would be much higher than what he speculated.

 

http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/how-many-teams-could-actually-trade-for-ovechkin-right-now

 

Maybe I should have repeated more strongly here that this is a speculative, almost philosophical discussion prompted as much as anything else by what the author felt would be  equitable for both sides.  I'll also point out that the author approached it as such in his article.  Here's an excerpt (I added the bolding): 

"When Washington Capitals GM Brian MacLellan was quizzed on the topic of ‘Ovie’ on Tuesday, he mused about the issue, but pretty much poured cold water on the notion. MacLellan left the door open a crack, theorizing about a “legitimate hockey deal,” but it didn’t sound like a priority."

 

He also addressed the division thing:

"The latter also must consider the division rival aspect."

 

I understand and respect strong opinions on either side of this hypothetical trade and I appreciate the perspectives that have been shared (my personal position has moved from "in a heartbeat" to "probably, but maybe I should think about this a bit more").  I also understand that some members don't like playing "the speculation game", especially when it's about something that's unlikely to actually happen.  But I'll point out that we've got a diverse membership base in this forum with different tastes and interests, and some of us do enjoy that type of speculation.  And I'll respectfully make the suggestion that if a certain type of post (topic or format) doesn't fit "your" tastes (used generically, not just you Top), that it might be healthier to just ignore it rather than engage and get frustrated.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, LakeLivin said:

And I'll respectfully make the suggestion that if a certain type of post (topic or format) doesn't fit "your" tastes (used generically, not just you Top), that it might be healthier to just ignore it rather than engage and get frustrated.

And I'll point out that we who think this is all a phenomenal waste of time are completely within our rights when we express that. Nobody held you at gunpoint and told you to put up this poll; it was a choice you made.

 

I find it interesting that those who come here with the clear intention of disrupting things and provoking discord (read: trolls) can go their merry way, while a mod "likes" it when a member attempts to dress down another member for earnestly voting on and offering his opinion on a topic that the would-be down dresser specifically invited voting/opining on in the first place.

 

Your post-facto suggestion that I not participate makes clear it's not me who is frustrated. "Be careful what you ask for, Lake" would seem a more apt conclusion. 

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly can't take this trade scenario seriously since it seems like a fan proposal on hfboards.  My above scenario with the gently used Semin skates (and face it, they were all gently used while here) has just as much of a chance of happening as Washington moving Ovi for some magic beans.  They start out asking for Slavin, Aho, +, and RF hangs up.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2017 at 8:44 AM, top-shelf-1 said:

And I'll point out that we who think this is all a phenomenal waste of time are completely within our rights when we express that. Nobody held you at gunpoint and told you to put up this poll; it was a choice you made.

 

I find it interesting that those who come here with the clear intention of disrupting things and provoking discord (read: trolls) can go their merry way, while a mod "likes" it when a member attempts to dress down another member for earnestly voting on and offering his opinion on a topic that the would-be down dresser specifically invited voting/opining on in the first place.

 

Your post-facto suggestion that I not participate makes clear it's not me who is frustrated. "Be careful what you ask for, Lake" would seem a more apt conclusion. 

 

Sorry you see my response as a dressing down; it wasn't intended that way.  And by no means was I suggesting that you not participate. The whole reason I started this poll was because we disagreed about the hypothetical trade in another thread and I wanted to hear more about others opinions and rationales (yours included).  And from where I sit it has actually been informative, so I'm glad I started it.

 

My issue was your 3 paragraph response implying that the thread "isn't worth reading or talking about", especially when part of your rationale for that perspective ignores the caveats and limitations that were stated both by me and the author of the article.  There's a difference between taking a stand on either side of the question and criticizing the question in and of itself.  My suggestion that you might want to ignore the thread kind of relates to this question: if you think a thread isn't worth reading or or talking about, perhaps taking the time to criticize the thread (as compared to taking a position on either side of the question) isn't worth your time and effort, either?

 

I know OBXer doesn't need me to defend him, but I've got to believe that he "liked" my post because he correctly interpreted my intent, as I try to clarify above.  Even though he's a mod, I don't see why that should limit his participation on this board any more than any other member.

 

Lastly, of course you have the right to respond to my post criticizing your post that criticizes my thread.  As I have the right to respond to that, and you have the right to respond to that, and well, you can see where this is headed. :P  

 

I think I've made my position as clear as I can on this tangent we've gone off on, so feel free to have the last word on it if you so desire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/7/2017 at 9:20 AM, top-shelf-1 said:

This is the problem with trade proposals: the details (read: conditions) are never spelled out. It's easy (money) for some "respected" hockey writer to daydream and write about it. But they never address salary retained (or not), let alone the likelihood (in this case) of DC moving their captain to a divisional opponent and letting him beat them.

 

The writer who proposed this trade took the lazy way out: He read McClellan's (perfectly understandable) comment that (1) moving Ovi is not in the current plan, but (2) he'd have to think about it if the right offer comes along. Then the writer put forward a proposal that is anything BUT "right" from the Caps' POV, unless the Canes do something their GM has consistently said he won't: overpay (i.e., take most if not all of Ovi's salary) for an over-30 guy whose wheels could fall off at any moment.

 

Gawd, I'll be glad when moves start happening and this board is producing something worth reading/talking about.

 

Top, your post was fine until that last line. It shows a disrespect that boarders on a personal attack. It is over the line. Dissent is allowed, but we need to respect each other.

 

Share this post


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

Top, your post was fine until that last line. It shows a disrespect that boarders on a personal attack. It is over the line. Dissent is allowed, but we need to respect each other.

So which is it--bordering on a personal attack, or "over" the border?

 

If the first two paragraphs of my opinion above are fine, how is the last - which is also my opinion and attacks no one personally - not? We've all been here before: the off-season doldrums. I said nothing more than what everybody else - including the mods - has said in the past month: I'll be glad when "this board" (not a person) has actual moves to talk about. How does that even approach (let alone constitute) "personal attack"?

 

If merely expressing the same eagerness for actual news that everybody else expressed is a personal attack, just ban me and get it over with, please. Because - I gotta say - based on your response above and the PM I received from another mod after posting it, it feels I'm being baited into posting something that might clear the way for that.

 

Rem, I know moderation is a thankless job. I've acknowledged that and sincerely thanked the mods here, both personally and on the public boards, any number of times. I encourage having this discussion where everyone can read it, because (1) I think it's overdue, and (2) the more public such a discussion is, the more clear everybody will be on what's okay and what's not. That, in turn, not only makes the mods' jobs easier, it helps assure everybody knows where the lines really are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top,

 

I'll admit that sometimes things are close to the line, and sometimes the attack is in the eye of the beholder. I think expressing frustration with the doldrums is fine, but the line I pointed out seemed to be a swipe at this poll, and thus, it's poster, a fellow member.  It seemed to clearly imply that this poll was insipid and not worth anyone's time. "I'll be glad when...this board is producing something worth reading/talking about". 

 

I still think that sentiment about the lack of big time news in the doldrums being a bummer is fine, but in context, that line read as an attack on this poll and it's author, a fellow member who posted it. If it was not intended that way, it still read that way.

Lake certainly took it that way given his response.

 

The earlier discussion in your post was different because it was not directed as an attack on this thread or it's author. 

 

It was not a terrible offense or anything, and we certainly want people to be able to disagree with each other, but we all could stand to examine if our posts are worded in a way we wouldn't mind getting aimed at ourselves. 

 

The intent of this is not to call you out specifically but to point out how all of us can post things that end up being more of a personal attack than maybe even intended, (I know I have) and in the interest of mutual respect, we moderators intend try to point them out, hopefully before they escalate.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I said I was done with this tangent, but just to set the record straight:

 

I didn't take top's post as a personal attack on me.  I did take it as being directed at and denigrating this thread, which is why I felt a need to respond (as well as explain some factors I felt top overlooked).  As they say in real estate, location, location, location.  You can post the statement "some babies are ugly" on a Facebook page without generating too much ill will.  But post it underneath a picture of somebody's newborn, and, well . . .  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow ... Of all the topics to get everyone upset about! I visit these boards a lot more than I post because I get more info about the Canes on a good day than I get from the N&O in a month. Or for that matter talk radio or local tv. And a lot of what is posted is opinion, but that's okay because the back and forth discussion gives me something to think about with the Canes while we wait through another offseason with no playoffs. And for the most part, I enjoy reading everyone's take on the Canes, the NHL, the SC finals or whatever. The only way I see Washington trading Ovechkin is if they know something about his likely future productivity that others don't, or someone makes them an over the top offer, and I don't think those things are going to happen. But ... until Ronnie makes a trade, we get to the draft, the Penguins lose 2 more games, etc., we might as well talk about AO as anything else. For myself, I don't want him on my team, but reasonable minds can differ.

 

I saw a couple of players signed today, so I think the warmup to the expansion draft and entry draft, and the moves that will come leading up to them, is coming SOON! I hope and pray that in a week or less, we will have some real Canes news to discuss. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll say it was really not that big a deal and maybe not the best one to make and example of. Mainly no major harm no major foul. But it did end up turning into a shot at the moderators, and seemed to be a chance to call things a little tighter when it comes to things like this. But let's leave it there.
 

 

This trade is probably not happening.

 

But I actually think is it an interesting use of a poll. It seemed like this trade was nowhere near enough on our side, yet over half of those polled would not do the deal from our end.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2017 at 5:03 PM, remkin said:

But I actually think is it an interesting use of a poll.

And that's fine, because it is your opinion, as surely as my opinion was mine. 

 

My post merely pointed out the poll's non-specific nature, and drew an opinion based on it, i.e., it ignores the same factors of the "article" (very loosely, I use that term...) that proposed the trade. I am glad Lake didn't take it personally, because he shouldn't have.

 

FOR ME, unless factors like salary retained and trading within the division are factored in (and mentioning them, as the article did, doesn't equal factoring them in, AFAIC) no poll on any proposed trade has much value, because those are the issues on which trades turn. In the case of this proposed trade, I maintain that finding anything like common-enough ground on those issues to actualize it is about as likely as getting the entire Blackhawks roster for Jake Chelios. That said (and as I said on the thread where Lake and I originally discussed this) even if the Caps retained half of Ovi's salary and were willing to trade within the division, I seriously doubt Ronnie mortgages away the org's future for what's quickly becoming DC's past. 

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...