tom webster Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 With the emergence of Gino during Crosby's absence, folks in Pittsburgh have been debating the possibility they may not be able to sign both Malkin and Crosby. Frankly, I think they will be able to and will do it especially with the new arena and expected revenues from two team expansion. However, in our little dream world, Would you give up Roy, Vanek and both first round picks this year for either or? For Pittsburgh, they get two young stars for the cap hit of one plus don't have to pay the first $10 million of Vanek's contract, not to meantion the picks. For Buffalo, they get a bona fide star to continue to build around.
shrader Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 With the emergence of Gino during Crosby's absence, folks in Pittsburgh have been debating the possibility they may not be able to sign both Malkin and Crosby. Frankly, I think they will be able to and will do it especially with the new arena and expected revenues from two team expansion.However, in our little dream world, Would you give up Roy, Vanek and both first round picks this year for either or? For Pittsburgh, they get two young stars for the cap hit of one plus don't have to pay the first $10 million of Vanek's contract, not to meantion the picks. For Buffalo, they get a bona fide star to continue to build around. There's only one guy in this entire league I wouldn't trade for either. I'm sure you know who that is, some russian guy. As for the deal you mentioned above, I don't know. We might have to package Peters in with that deal.
tom webster Posted March 19, 2008 Author Report Posted March 19, 2008 There's only one guy in this entire league I wouldn't trade for either. I'm sure you know who that is, some russian guy. As for the deal you mentioned above, I don't know. We might have to package Peters in with that deal. some Russian guy? You mean Ovechkin's old linemate Max?
R_Dudley Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 Okay going on record as saying never going to happen but I'll play. First not for either but I would definitely go for Gino as I think he still has more upside potential then Sid IMO(I see many PGH games here and both players and am basing off that) First he is still learning the NA game and is already more physical and can get allot stronger and maore mature. Next I am not sure we would need to give up both first rounders but I would look to package the second and first from this year and a second next year with Vanek and roy. Last I would then recommend we also go after Malone who has settled in as his regular winger this year and has been playing very well with him if we are giving up Roy and Vanek..
Knightrider Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 With the emergence of Gino during Crosby's absence, folks in Pittsburgh have been debating the possibility they may not be able to sign both Malkin and Crosby. Frankly, I think they will be able to and will do it especially with the new arena and expected revenues from two team expansion.However, in our little dream world, Would you give up Roy, Vanek and both first round picks this year for either or? For Pittsburgh, they get two young stars for the cap hit of one plus don't have to pay the first $10 million of Vanek's contract, not to meantion the picks. For Buffalo, they get a bona fide star to continue to build around. I would give up Roy and Vanek, but given Vanek's salary, I don't think they'd take it. The cap number would still be too high. They'd probably throw in Fluery to get Roy and Miller, though.
tom webster Posted March 19, 2008 Author Report Posted March 19, 2008 I would give up Roy and Vanek, but given Vanek's salary, I don't think they'd take it. The cap number would still be too high. They'd probably throw in Fluery to get Roy and Miller, though. Vanek and Roys cap number combined is only 11.1 which is about what they will have to pay Gino to stay. They may be willing ot pay it for two players rather than one.
shrader Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 MY LEFT NUT. You'll probably have to throw in the other one too.
R_Dudley Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 You'll probably have to throw in the other one too. he has two left nuts ? :blink:
carpandean Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 You'll probably have to throw in the other one too. Like most things on the body that you have two of (kidneys, eyes, arms, ...), the second one is worth much more than the first. (Note: in case it's not clear, I mean the second on given up vs. the first one given up)
Two or less Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 08' 1st round (Buf) 08' 1st round (SJ) 09' 1st round (Buf) Thomas Vanek Jhonas Enroth Jason Pominville
deluca67 Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 To answer your question, nothing. They are very talented players. Along with OV, they maybe the best three players in the game. They do however have one thing in common. None have a Stanley Cup Ring.
tom webster Posted March 19, 2008 Author Report Posted March 19, 2008 To answer your question, nothing. They are very talented players. Along with OV, they maybe the best three players in the game. They do however have one thing in common. None have a Stanley Cup Ring. They have another thing in common, they all have been in the league less than years.
Chief Enabler Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 08' 1st round (Buf)08' 1st round (SJ) 09' 1st round (Buf) Thomas Vanek Jhonas Enroth Jason Pominville and Eric Lindros.... Another interesting powderpuff, If the winner of the Tavares lottery would trade for Malkin when that situation matures. Would you do it?
shrader Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 Like most things on the body that you have two of (kidneys, eyes, arms, ...), the second one is worth much more than the first.(Note: in case it's not clear, I mean the second on given up vs. the first one given up) Now that you mention it, he might have to throw in both kidneys too. They have another thing in common, they all have been in the league less than years. See, this is why I wonder why you even bother with him sometimes. Just under 3 years is more than enough to make that judgement about a player. :rolleyes:
inkman Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 Th premise of this thread makes me want to strangle someone...
shrader Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 Th premise of this thread makes me want to strangle someone... I can suggest a few people for you.
inkman Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 I can suggest a few people for you. Do any of them rhyme with Feluca? :lol:
shrader Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 Do any of them rhyme with Feluca? :lol: And slam slam, if he's still around.
spndnchz Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 Do any of them rhyme with Feluca? :lol: he's down by the river yelling at Jesus to stop lollygagging across the water. :lol:
tom webster Posted March 19, 2008 Author Report Posted March 19, 2008 Th premise of this thread makes me want to strangle someone... Sorry, Bucci wrote a referred to a similiar scenario in his ESPN column and I thought it would for make intersting dialogue.
shrader Posted March 19, 2008 Report Posted March 19, 2008 Sorry, Bucci wrote a referred to a similiar scenario in his ESPN column and I thought it would for make intersting dialogue. See, there's your problem, taking anything Buccigross writes seriously.
tom webster Posted March 19, 2008 Author Report Posted March 19, 2008 See, there's your problem, taking anything Buccigross writes seriously. I don't often take him seriously altough I do find him entertaining. In this piece he was actually responding to a letter from a fan regarding a piece that apparently ran in a Pittsburgh paper regarding trading Sid. He actually laughed it off but did throw out a couple of random scenarios.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.