Jump to content

"Increasingly Substantiated BS" rumor thread- 2014 Edition

WildCard

By WildCard
in The Aud Club

 Share

  

68 members have voted

  1. 1. Sabre's Trade Partners

  2. 2. Team With The Largest Acquisition

    • Anaheim Ducks
      0
    • Chicago Blackhawks
      3
    • St. Louis Blues
      16
    • San Jose Sharks
      1
    • LA Kings
      12
    • Pittsburgh Penguins
      6
    • Boston Bruins
      0
    • Montreal Canadiens
      1
    • Washington Capitals
      5
    • Tampa Bay Lightening
      2
    • Toronto Maple Leafs
      3
    • Ottawa Senators
      1
    • Other
      4

Recommended Posts

WildCard Hall of Famer

WildCard

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

So can we get rid of the childish title and get back to some good discussion? On top of that, can we stop ever quoting Eklund on rumors?

Not sure where it came from, I'd assume the mods did it.

 

It was supposed to discuss rumors, not ###### as the title alludes to. So whoever changed it, can you please change it back? Some of us were actually enjoying this

 

I think the thread title is as appropriate a thread has ever been. There may be 1% content that has some real legs, but everything else is fantasy land crap and we should treat it as such.

 

 

:blush:

Could have just been put as "speculation" or "rumored thread," doesn't have to make a complete mockery of it. I get they're rumors, but some of them are coming from decent sources, and the rest is just that, speculation amongst ourselves. And if we're gonna shame that, then why are we even here?

Edited by WildCard
LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
Posted

Not sure where it came from, I'd assume the mods did it.

 

It was supposed to discuss rumors, not ###### as the title alludes to. So whoever changed it, can you please change it back? Some of us were actually enjoying this

If you go back to your first post in the thread and use the "edit", then "Use Full Editor" option you can edit the thread title.

WildCard Hall of Famer

WildCard

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If you go back to your first post in the thread and use the "edit", then "Use Full Editor" option you can edit the thread title.

I had changed it to something along the lines of "Trade Deadline Rumors/Speculation- 2014 Edition" per someone's request, and I thought that was reasonable, but I suppose not. It is just a title, and if people agree with it it's fine, I just don't want it turning into crap because I know some of us really do want a consolidated thread to discuss possible trades rather than hop around three different threads looking for what I wanted. The thread is temporary until the deadline, after which I'm sure someone will make a "Trades that Actually happened" thread, which are always a good time.

 

Thanks for the help on how to change it though, much appreciated :thumbsup:

Samson's Flow First Liner

Samson's Flow

Posted
Posted

Miller for Allen would make some sense if miller committed to signing with the Blues.

I think what Liger was saying is the St. Louis has pegged Jake Allen as their goalie of the future, and that a trade for Miller would consist of one of Halak/Elliot coming back along with a prospect pick. That gives STL a top goalie while they wait for Allen to develop into a studmuffin.

 

With the speculation about O'Reilly, do you guys think of an Ehrhoff/Grigorenko offer makes any sense?

Ehrhoff certainly meets the Avs needs.

That sounds like a great deal to me, and may even be reasonable for what Colorado would be expecting. With 2nd round picks to even it out either way.
Claude_Verret First Liner

Claude_Verret

Posted
Posted

Could have just been put as "speculation" or "rumored thread," doesn't have to make a complete mockery of it. I get they're rumors, but some of them are coming from decent sources, and the rest is just that, speculation amongst ourselves. And if we're gonna shame that, then why are we even here?

 

Agreed. In the past these types of speculation/rumors ended up popping up in multiple threads, so I agree with the stance that they should be kept to one thread, which I assume is why you began the thread in the first place. But even when confined to one thread it still causes gnashing of teeth for some posters it seems.

Samson's Flow First Liner

Samson's Flow

Posted
Posted

Can't see Col moving Oreilly in season.

I don't see it either...but if they do, I'm once again willing to make a significant offer.

Wasn't there a condition of his original contract standoff that he could not be moved within a year? Any idea if that is still the case? I may be getting my timeframes mixed up or misremembering though... :unsure:

Stoner Hall of Famer

Stoner

Posted
Posted

If you go back to your first post in the thread and use the "edit", then "Use Full Editor" option you can edit the thread title.

 

Ahhhhhh. Thanks.

dudacek Hall of Famer

dudacek

Posted
Posted

I guess the situation with O'Reilly is that the Avs need to pay him at least $6.5 million next year to keep his rights, thanks to the Calgary offer sheet. That's a lot of coin for a second-line player, unless you see him as a Bergeron.

 

They can, however, sign him to a longer-term offer to reduce the cap hit. The potential issues are bad blood over the offer sheet and Colorado's desire not to pay him any more than the team-friendly Duchene contract.

 

There is no need to make a call on this until July, but Feb. 28 is the first day he can be traded.

Media in Vancouver are in a frenzy over a Lebrun report Canucks are very interested.

TrueBlueGED Hall of Famer

TrueBlueGED

Posted
Posted

Wasn't there a condition of his original contract standoff that he could not be moved within a year? Any idea if that is still the case? I may be getting my timeframes mixed up or misremembering though... :unsure:

 

It's just the way RFA offer sheets work. Once they're signed/matched, the player can't be traded for a calendar year. O'Reilly can be moved sometime next month IIRC.

LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
Posted

I think what Liger was saying is the St. Louis has pegged Jake Allen as their goalie of the future, and that a trade for Miller would consist of one of Halak/Elliot coming back along with a prospect pick. That gives STL a top goalie while they wait for Allen to develop into a studmuffin.

 

That sounds like a great deal to me, and may even be reasonable for what Colorado would be expecting. With 2nd round picks to even it out either way.

Yea pretty much.

2ForTripping Fourth Liner

2ForTripping

Posted
Posted

Wasn't there a condition of his original contract standoff that he could not be moved within a year? Any idea if that is still the case? I may be getting my timeframes mixed up or misremembering though... :unsure:

when the offer sheet was matched on 2 28 so not until 2 28 of this calendar year can he be moved
Weave Hall of Famer

Weave

Posted
Posted

O'reilly can't be traded until 2/28 because he can't be traded until 1 yr after his RFA offer sheet was matched by Col, on 2/28 of last year.

 

 

Just thought I'd put my $0.02 in. Maybe clear things up. Seems like noone was weighing in on this. :D

Eleven Hall of Famer

Eleven

Posted
Posted

Seeing that this day isn't a Leap Year, O'Reilly can't be traded until one day before the first day of March.

 

This day is not a leap year?

 

Not sure where you were headed with that, but 2013 wasn't, either.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...