Rumor: Rumors and Proposals Thread: ... Silent Night

Status
Not open for further replies.

space321

Registered User
May 11, 2011
6,075
1,899
Lol we’re already complaining that our bottom 6 and defense corps are terrible, yet your scoring solution is to gut what little we already have? Not to mention throwing away our top blue chip prospect only to land a rental?
So much talk about Hall wanting to win the cup, why do you think he’d want to come back to Edmonton? We haven’t won jack **** yet.

What do you mean "gut what we have"? You realize if we had Hall on the 2nd line instead of Gagner, we wouldn't have this scoring problem anymore? Btw I said Bouchard OR Benson.

And I'm basing my proposals on what Coyotes gave up, Bouchard alone is worth more than those 3 coyotes prospects. Benson is better than both those forwards. If Coyotes wanted quality over quantity, we could've offered it to them without taking much of a hit.
 

McTedi

Registered User
Jul 16, 2008
13,206
6,790
Edmonton
What do you mean "gut what we have"? You realize if we had Hall on the 2nd line instead of Gagner, we wouldn't have this scoring problem anymore? Btw I said Bouchard OR Benson.

And I'm basing my proposals on what Coyotes gave up, Bouchard alone is worth more than those 3 coyotes prospects. Benson is better than both those forwards. If Coyotes wanted quality over quantity, we could've offered it to them without taking much of a hit.
Yup only to have him walk July 1st. We can sign Hall if he really wants to sign here and not give up prospects and 1st round draft picks. Not sure he is the best fit here anyways.
 

McDraekke

5-14-6-1
Jan 19, 2006
2,853
397
Edmonton
What do you mean "gut what we have"? You realize if we had Hall on the 2nd line instead of Gagner, we wouldn't have this scoring problem anymore? Btw I said Bouchard OR Benson.

And I'm basing my proposals on what Coyotes gave up, Bouchard alone is worth more than those 3 coyotes prospects. Benson is better than both those forwards. If Coyotes wanted quality over quantity, we could've offered it to them without taking much of a hit.

But we would still have a bottom 6 problem, a defense corps problem, and missing out on Bouchard. Lol Benson is nowhere NEAR the value that Bouchard is, not even the same galaxy, so I ignored that bit of lunacy. Like saying McDavid or Nuge lol.
 

belair

Win it for Ben!
Apr 9, 2010
39,622
23,328
Canada
Start looking at this team's situation objectively and there's very little let down. Still a pretty good chance this team gets itself into the postseason this year without robbing itself of future assets.

Alternatively I look forward to see how things roll out in Arizona where their success is rooted deeply in their ability to run a stifling defensive system. As a result the ability to produce consistent offense is apparently thwarted when it comes to a number of notable players. Kessel's game has fallen off the Earth. How does Hall fit?
 

Cloned

Begging for Bega
Aug 25, 2003
81,237
70,671
Start looking at this team's situation objectively and there's very little let down. Still a pretty good chance this team gets itself into the postseason this year without robbing itself of future assets.

Alternatively I look forward to see how things roll out in Arizona where their success is rooted deeply in their ability to run a stifling defensive system. As a result the ability to produce consistent offense is apparently thwarted when it comes to a number of notable players. Kessel's game has fallen off the Earth. How does Hall fit?

He won't. He'll be disappointing there and will sign in Edmonton in the offseason.
 

space321

Registered User
May 11, 2011
6,075
1,899
But we would still have a bottom 6 problem, a defense corps problem, and missing out on Bouchard. Lol Benson is nowhere NEAR the value that Bouchard is, not even the same galaxy, so I ignored that bit of lunacy. Like saying McDavid or Nuge lol.

I think you have a reading problem because I never said Benson had the same value as Bouchard.

I specifically said Bouchard > 2F + 1D, and Benson > EITHER of the 2F.

Oh and btw, I want to hear about how not doing any trades is the best way to solve our scoring depth problem (which isn't just bottom SIX, it's more like bottom NINE).
 

McDraekke

5-14-6-1
Jan 19, 2006
2,853
397
Edmonton
He won't. He'll be disappointing there and will sign in Edmonton in the offseason.

If Hall really wants to win, he likely won’t be knocking on our door that quickly. Even with the two best players in the league this team still has massive issues. He’s likely smart enough to know that he isn’t the missing link, and that chances are he wouldn’t be playing with Mcdrai on a regular basis anyways, so what’s the point? Play on a team that seems to have systemic problems, play on a line that has less talent than any other place he could probably end up? If I were Hall, Edmonton would not be my top choice.
 

Mc5RingsAndABeer

5-14-6-1
May 25, 2011
20,184
1,385
Good thing we addressed our secondary scoring woes
Looking forward to missing the playoffs again and McDavid asking out in 2-3 years

He won't. He'll be disappointing there and will sign in Edmonton in the offseason.
I would rather have Hall as a rental than as a signed player
 

McDraekke

5-14-6-1
Jan 19, 2006
2,853
397
Edmonton
I think you have a reading problem because I never said Benson had the same value as Bouchard.

I specifically said Bouchard > 2F + 1D, and Benson > EITHER of the 2F.

Oh and btw, I want to hear about how not doing any trades is the best way to solve our scoring depth problem (which isn't just bottom SIX, it's more like bottom NINE).

Actually what you said was “Bouchard or Benson and a first.” And without any kind of punctuation in that sentence, the reader has to infer what you’re meaning. So while I inferred your meaning incorrectly, I’d prefer you to not insult my reading - which is fine - and suggest adding some punctuation or clarifying words to your statements (ie, “Benson and a first, or Bouchard” would read loud and clear).

I realize that our bottom nine is an issue. But attempting to fix 9 f***ing positions with one player who hasn’t proven he can win any better than our current club makes very little sense, especially when your proposal makes many of the other 8 positions weaker PLUS our D weaker PLUS our defensive prospects weaker.

And nowhere did I say we shouldn’t make any trades, so don’t put words in my mouth. I don’t think trading for Hall would have been a good move, as per my arguments, but making smaller trades to shore up the middle six is something I have time for.
 

9GWG9

C=NV
Jul 13, 2007
1,615
648
We’re looking in all the same places as everyone else for the hot toy...

What’s available on the island of misfit toys? Or should I say what are we willing to part with...
 

McDraekke

5-14-6-1
Jan 19, 2006
2,853
397
Edmonton
devils retained 50% is what I find funny

Must be that was the only way to get the haul they did. If they didn’t retain, I don’t think the Coyotes had the space (could be wrong, thought I read that somewhere). And other teams probably didn’t want to pay that much for a rental.
 

McXLNC97

Registered User
Mar 20, 2007
5,335
2,208
B.C.
Thing with that pick is, it's only top 3 protected. This is a pretty strong draft class and the Coyotes take a big risk by at least not protecting that pick at top 10 like the Leafs did with Carolina in the Marleau deal.
 

Dohilers

Registered User
Dec 18, 2011
189
121
BC
Hall would have been a nice addition, but we all knew the asking price would be far higher than Holland would be willing to pay. It'll be interesting to see where he winds up this summer. I doubt he returns to Edmonton, but weirder things have happened.
 

48g90a138pts

Registered User
Jun 30, 2016
10,485
5,956
It'd be nice to grab Kovalchuk at league minimum and see if he can get something going on this team.

I think his contract gets terminated tomorrow.

What are others opinions around here on him?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad