spndnchz Posted May 14, 2010 Report Posted May 14, 2010 Would you agree with this article? I wouldn't pick Souray for 1. And if u trade malkin it's gonna be for more than one winger. So, no, I don't agree with the article. A GM should b able 2 do more than that.
FearTheReaper Posted May 14, 2010 Report Posted May 14, 2010 Roy (signed longer) or Connolly plus Stafford for Malkin. Pretty even swap salary wise. Both teams get what they need. :D I'd say it'll take a little more than TC and Staff for Malkin. Maybe TC, Staff, Prospect/(Gerbe?), 3rd?
SwampD Posted May 14, 2010 Report Posted May 14, 2010 I was just thinking how good these playoffs have been. They have been pretty intense and it seems like they have been going for a long time, and it's only the end of round two. I really do think the Stanley Cup is one of the hardest trophies in sports to achieve. If you make it all the way to the end of this two month battle and win it, you probably deserve it (I just threw up in my mouth a little giving any kind of credit to Carolina or Brett Hull, but it's true).
deluca67 Posted May 14, 2010 Report Posted May 14, 2010 I'd say it'll take a little more than TC and Staff for Malkin. Maybe TC, Staff, Prospect/(Gerbe?), 3rd? You're not getting a Malkin in a trade with any offer that does not include Vanek or Myers. Malkin is a elite talent and packaging up the Sabres crap isn't going to get it done.
spndnchz Posted May 14, 2010 Report Posted May 14, 2010 You're not getting a Malkin in a trade with any offer that does not include Vanek or Myers. Malkin is a elite talent and packaging up the Sabres crap isn't going to get it done. One for one is not what the Pens are looking for IMO. They need more wingers, they've got tons of centers. Replacing one Malkin with two decent wingers IMO would make sense. You spend the same amount of money but have two players in positions that need to be filled. Sure, throw in a pick or good prospect.
Stoner Posted May 14, 2010 Report Posted May 14, 2010 One for one is not what the Pens are looking for IMO. They need more wingers, they've got tons of centers. Replacing one Malkin with two decent wingers IMO would make sense. You spend the same amount of money but have two players in positions that need to be filled. Sure, throw in a pick or good prospect. I'd love to hear that convo between Darce and Lindsey. "Vanek and Staff and a pick for Malkin, Lindy." "No freakin way Darce. What am I going to do with a Russian who can score?"
deluca67 Posted May 14, 2010 Report Posted May 14, 2010 One for one is not what the Pens are looking for IMO. They need more wingers, they've got tons of centers. Replacing one Malkin with two decent wingers IMO would make sense. You spend the same amount of money but have two players in positions that need to be filled. Sure, throw in a pick or good prospect. Problem is that Vanek is the only decent winger on the roster. If the Sabres acquire Malkin for Vanek (plus whatever) then the Sabres have a center with no one on the wing to score. They would be filling one hole and creating another.
Stoner Posted May 14, 2010 Report Posted May 14, 2010 Problem is that Vanek is the only decent winger on the roster. If the Sabres acquire Malkin for Vanek (plus whatever) then the Sabres have a center with no one on the wing to score. They would be filling one hole and creating another. Let's leave inkman's sex life out of this. Isn't it easier to find a scoring winger than an elite center? I think Darcy would agree with that. Is "build your team up the middle" still a fashionable saying? MILLER MYERS MALKIN
notwoz Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 Reading that story I got the sense that it's just some hockey writer speculating. Playing what-if. However, if the Pens were to think about dumping Malkin, I'd have some reservations about making a play for him. First, he makes $8.7 million according to that article. Wouldn't that be a big hit to the Sabres' cap situatin? Second: Isn't that a lot to pay for a center who coughed up a hairball in the playoffs. After all, the Sabres already have one of those in Connolly. And nearly everyone on this board wants to get rid of him.
Eleven Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 I'm never happy to see the Flyers win. But I'm less sad tonight than I normally would be. Here's to the Habs in four.
Stoner Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 TMMOTI penalty does in the Bruins. Gotta love those hockey gods. Weird sense of humor.
notwoz Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 Anyone else find it ironic that the thing that killed the Sabres against the Bruins is what killed the Bruins against the Flyers -- too many men on the ice?
notwoz Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 TMMOTI penalty does in the Bruins. Gotta love those hockey gods. Weird sense of humor. You beat me to it. I was busy telling my son that his mohawk is so 70s.
SwampD Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 Just thought I would revisit this post because I'm a pain. Here's the salient point You would? Can you come up with a single example in the NHL since free agency started? Hossa to Detroit is about the only example I can think of, and he went for one year and then bailed for the money ... so Babcock's genius could not keep him there. Still, I guess Babcock would be an example in this case ... but even then, would people be flocking to play for him or to play with Datsyuk/Lidstrom/Zetterberg/etc.? Who else is an "elite coach?" One who won a Cup? Like Tortorella? Think the Rangers are enjoying what a happy guy he is? Laviolette? Three years removed from a Cup, been fired and now working wonders (not) with Philly. Hitchcock is sinking fast in Columbus. I am NOT saying Ruff is better than these guys just because he has kept his job, but come on ... if there is any consideration beyond money, it's the other star players on the team, not the coach. I could be coaching the Penguins and free agents would consider playing for me if I could fit them under the cap and put them on Crosby's wing. BTP
deluca67 Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 TMMOTI penalty does in the Bruins. Gotta love those hockey gods. Weird sense of humor. Losing a game seven 4-3 after leading 3-0 in the first period. The lost the game and a series after being up 3-0. Ryan Miller's number? 30! Kind of eerie.
SwampD Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 I feel dirty. Having to root for Philly just,..well,..oof. What a great game though.
Stoner Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 Losing a game seven 4-3 after leading 3-0 in the first period. The lost the game and a series after being up 3-0. Ryan Miller's number? 30! Kind of eerie. Don't rake those grass clippings! They're good for the lawn.
SwampD Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 Don't rake those grass clippings! They're good for the lawn. Is that some kind of code?.. Hey look at the clock, it's 4:20.
Stoner Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 It couldn't happen to a better city/fanbase. Yeah but it also happened to Philly. :thumbdown:
PromoTheRobot Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 Now Boston fans can go back to ignoring the Bruins. Hey the Sox are winning and the Celtics beat LeBron! PTR
deluca67 Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 This NHL final four has to be Regier's worst nightmare. All teams that have used trades and free agency, along with developing their own talent, playing in the Conference Finals.
deluca67 Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 Now Boston fans can go back to ignoring the Bruins. Hey the Sox are winning and the Celtics beat LeBron! PTR What's it like here when the Bills are in the playoffs? I know it's been a long time ago but let's not forget.
PromoTheRobot Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 What's it like here when the Bills are in the playoffs? I know it's been a long time ago but let's not forget. Yes the Bills are top dog but it's all Sabres by January. Unlike Boston where anything beats the Bruins yearround. PTR
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.