Why would they want Geo? They have Quick and Peterson already.What do you want for Geo's rfa rights?
go back + checkWhy would they want Geo? They have Quick and Peterson already.
I did check. It said young goalies. Prospects.go back + check
wuz courtesy responding to suggestion they may be looking for goalie(s)
was surprised, I am aware they have Q + P and not expecting them to be looking to add anybody if neither is dealt
You're really good at picking out the guys I don't want and trying to make it seem like there is a lot of appeal there. I'm having trouble following this post unfortunately.
I'm assuming you mean the Vilardi and Kupari would be no.
Then we trade you a right now LHD for a prospect RHD to address weaknesses in both teams so I don't know what you mean by trading for the giggles without anything changing when this is the exact definition of a "hockey trade".
Then you say Fagemo is a no go but he's scoring at less than a point per game in the AHL (40 points in 54 games) as a 22 year old. That isn't ideal and his NHL equivalency looks like this:
View attachment 526460
So a guy that is trending as a middle 6 winger is a no go for a guy that is proven to be an NHLer that is 1 year older? For Jets fans reading this, he is 1 month older than David Gustafsson and scores at pretty much the same rate except Gus is a C and Fagemo is a W. We're thinking we might play Gus at 4C next year... maybe.
Spence would be the last of your RHD I would be interested in because he's undersized and we already have a bunch of medium sized guys in JMo, Pionk, DeMelo, Schmidt and Heinola so although he's a good puck mover, he isn't really what I'd want and since there's no pressure to move Stanley the Jets can be patient and wait for the right offer, not just settle for the first thing that comes along.
Then you talk about Robertson, which isn't a Jets prospect so I think you're a bit confused there.
Anyhow, I think the teams could make a larger trade too, but what I've proposed, in my opinion, is really fair and I wouldn't be happy if they moved Stanley for anything less. That would be just making a trade for giggles.
If Ottawa drafts Slafkovsky, I could see them wanting to get another Slovak to help ease him in.
That being said, Kleven for Chromiak makes sense to me.
Both seems to be pretty underwhelming targets for the Devils, but on the other hand, I don't know anything about them. How would you describe them as a player?Strand or Walker for Bahl
We are looking for wingers as well so center it is.
I would offer Akil Thomas
strand is a young righted defenseman with size that has top 4 upside he play a good defensive game.Both seems to be pretty underwhelming targets for the Devils, but on the other hand, I don't know anything about them. How would you describe them as a player?
StarchyBoth seems to be pretty underwhelming targets for the Devils, but on the other hand, I don't know anything about them. How would you describe them as a player?
I love Chromiak’s game, but this is an offer I might not going to be able to refuse
I'm not sure how much value I'd put in Akil Thomas. Six points in 31 AHL games doesn't exactly inspire, especially on a good AHL team like the Reign. I guess it's possible he's just buried by depth though, admittedly I haven't watched him much outside of the odd Condors game.
In that case, thank you, I stand corrected.I did check. It said young goalies. Prospects.
How is this a solid deal?Good post, too bad it was wasted on a guy who continually and habitually over values every single player LA has.....
Helge for Stanley is a solid deal for both clubs, no need to expand on it.
Helge Grans is good, but not too physical RDHow is this a solid deal?
It leaves both clubs exactly where they have been before
This would be trading for the sake of trading only
Helge Grans is good, but not too physical RD
Stanley is very physical LD
What are you missing here?