Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread DCLXXXIII:Stepping up next? A Top Ten pick???

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maximus said:
Sorry for delay...was playing in a golf tournament and we had a dinner afterwards.

I like Duchene and don't think that's nuts that he could be had. Would I rather him over a Bonino? Absolutaly. But I think Duchene is going to cost us a Skejei or Vesey type plus a high pick or so. I really don't want to give up assets heading into the year.

I'd rather use the surplus cash we have, fix the back end with a Shatty and Smitty and go out and get a Bonino type. This way we keep our assets and let's see how we do. I'm betting we'd be just fine and we would be very competitive. Hank is a huge key for us this year. I'm of the belief as I've said a few times, he's got a chip on his shoulder and he's going to want to prove his detractors wrong that he's on the way down. I expect a steller season from Hank and with an improved defense in front of him, I don't think it's a stretch at all to think Hank will be the Hank of old.
Click to expand...

I don't think that will be the selling price for Matt. He's not MacKinnon, that's someone you move a big piece for. Matt is worth 2 really good prospects and a pick.
 
have a feeling we see
Mac Shatty
Skjei Holden
Staal DeAngelo
would rather it be skjei smith but i don't think we sign both of them
 
Were they to consider it, for better/w3orse, if we intend to sign one of Smith or Shattenkirk, it'd be contingent on a McDonagh trade, which would need to happen before a week from now. It's unlikely for that reason, Shattenkirk ewill probably sign somewhere else then.
 
BobMarleyNYR said:
Were they to consider it, for better/w3orse, if we intend to sign one of Smith or Shattenkirk, it'd be contingent on a McDonagh trade, which would need to happen before a week from now. It's unlikely for that reason, Shattenkirk ewill probably sign somewhere else then.
Click to expand...

Why would it be contingent on a Mcdonagh trade?
 
19399679_10213555659185028_6019670944192987617_n.jpg
 
BobMarleyNYR said:
Were they to consider it, for better/w3orse, if we intend to sign one of Smith or Shattenkirk, it'd be contingent on a McDonagh trade, which would need to happen before a week from now. It's unlikely for that reason, Shattenkirk ewill probably sign somewhere else then.
Click to expand...

they wouldn't sign shatty or smith just to trade Mac?? the idea is to add to the defense i don't care what type of rebuild on the fly he wants you don't spend money to make your D better just to move the best guy.
 
BobMarleyNYR said:
Were they to consider it, for better/w3orse, if we intend to sign one of Smith or Shattenkirk, it'd be contingent on a McDonagh trade, which would need to happen before a week from now. It's unlikely for that reason, Shattenkirk ewill probably sign somewhere else then.
Click to expand...

I think the opposite. I think if we sign Shattenkirk, Mac is a lifer.
 
GregSirico said:
I still don't think people realize how good he is offensively.
Click to expand...

or defensively... He's probably a top 15 defenseman overall in the entire league, the market for him will be robust.. but if he wants to play here, we can probably make it happen.
 
GregSirico said:
Just asking because that seems to be the only thing Colorado is looking for.
Click to expand...

If I thought Duchene was gonna be a 70 P player again I'd move Skjei for him.. IMO C > D, especially a LHD those are easier to come by..

I simply don't think that's Duchene based on one time 4 years ago.
 
I'm pretty certain that getting DeAngelo signals that the FO is not going to be in on Shattenkirk. A PP QB doesn't have to be a top 4 guy (And with DeAngelo, I think sheltered 5v5 minutes and loads of PP time would be ideal) and he is a much cheaper alternative.

Brooks isn't the only one saying that the Rangers won't be after him, Friedman alluded to it yesterday as well.



After the Stepan trade, it doesn't make any sense anyway.
 
Geoff Gorden said:
I'm pretty certain that getting DeAngelo signals that the FO is not going to be in on Shattenkirk. A PP QB doesn't have to be a top 4 guy (And with DeAngelo, I think sheltered 5v5 minutes and loads of PP time would be ideal) and he is a much cheaper alternative.

Brooks isn't the only one saying that the Rangers won't be after him, Friedman alluded to it yesterday as well.



After the Stepan trade, it doesn't make any sense anyway.
Click to expand...


You cant' really compare it to letting Yandle walk, when the Rangers already had Mcdonagh and Staal (whatever) ahead of him on the left side, there's nobody on the right side that would be ahead of Shattenkirk, not the same situation, nowhere near it.
 
Geoff Gorden said:
I'm pretty certain that getting DeAngelo signals that the FO is not going to be in on Shattenkirk. A PP QB doesn't have to be a top 4 guy (And with DeAngelo, I think sheltered 5v5 minutes and loads of PP time would be ideal) and he is a much cheaper alternative.

Brooks isn't the only one saying that the Rangers won't be after him, Friedman alluded to it yesterday as well.



After the Stepan trade, it doesn't make any sense anyway.
Click to expand...


So then I guess we are going to war with the D core we have?
 
Lundsanity30 said:
If I thought Duchene was gonna be a 70 P player again I'd move Skjei for him.. IMO C > D, especially a LHD those are easier to come by..

I simply don't think that's Duchene based on one time 4 years ago.
Click to expand...

I'm on the fence which is why a Skjei asking price is too high. If he put up 70, I'd do it too, but the inconsistency makes me say a lower tier D man is more reasonable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom