The Pronger trades
- Thread starter OCSportsfan
- Start date
-
HF Sportsbook has been reset for the new season - Click here to play.
KaseMeOutside
Based
- Oct 18, 2011
- 44,246
- 10,134
i am not a big murph fan but he nailed the pronger trade, and more importantly his scouts nailed the draft picks, or so it seems. and i miss pronger still
mightyquack
eggplant and jade or bust
- Apr 28, 2010
- 26,653
- 5,761
Philly trade worked out well for both teams. Pronger would of got them a cup if they didn't have an AHL scrub in goal. And we got somewhat of immediate help in Lupul (then had back issues) and then Sbisa, and made some good choices in Palmieri and Etem.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,347
- 39,119
Theridion
Registered User
The suprising thing, looking back, is just how much value is being dealt. How so few 9f those pieces going both ways disappeared. The ducks picks are nhlers now, lupul is a great player, beachemin... forget about it. Beach is just so good on the ducks. Gardiner worked out. Sbisa has been solid.
Dealing pronger, or any star... teams never get value back. Getting sbisa, beach, etem and palmeri is definitelly a great return for an irreplaceable player.
Damn good deals for the ducks but no sides should be complaining too hard with what they got. They all got what they expected to get or more.
Dealing pronger, or any star... teams never get value back. Getting sbisa, beach, etem and palmeri is definitelly a great return for an irreplaceable player.
Damn good deals for the ducks but no sides should be complaining too hard with what they got. They all got what they expected to get or more.
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,189
- 13,206
One thing I will complain about when we dealt Pronger is that it completely closed our cup window. We've been mediocre ever since and while we made out well asset wise, we also used up the final 4 years of Getzlaf and Perry's deals by icing a mediocre hockey team.
Now that Etem & Palmieri etc are emerging for us Getzlaf and Perry are in their final years and Selanne is another step closer to retirement.
I'm a fan of the return we received from Pronger but still not a fan of trading away such a quality blueliner.
Also you can't really claim we got Beauch in the Pronger deal. If you want to do that then the trade is essentially Pronger & Gardiner for Beauch (who could have been re-signed), Sbisa, Palmieri & Etem.
Now that Etem & Palmieri etc are emerging for us Getzlaf and Perry are in their final years and Selanne is another step closer to retirement.
I'm a fan of the return we received from Pronger but still not a fan of trading away such a quality blueliner.
Also you can't really claim we got Beauch in the Pronger deal. If you want to do that then the trade is essentially Pronger & Gardiner for Beauch (who could have been re-signed), Sbisa, Palmieri & Etem.
TheJoeMan
In Bob We Trust
Considering the deal that Pronger ended up signing it was highly unlikely he was going to remain a Duck beyond his contract. Potentially losing Pronger for nothing or even a lesser deal was just not an option. Even in hindsight I still think this is a great deal. Sure our defense hasn't been the same since he was traded but that was going to happen anyway when he walked. I hope Murph has the balls to pull off another deal like this when it's obvious Perry isn't coming back.
Water Knight
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2012
- 1,467
- 0
We also traded down in the draft and got a second which ended up being Matthew Clark.
snarktacular
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 20,525
- 182
I agree. I don't think we could have extended Pronger's contract. I just can't see us giving away a 35+ contract like that. So yes Murray was closing the window a little early, but it was going to close one year later even if he had kept Pronger around.
So instead of weighing the return against an assumed ___ years more of Pronger, you weight it against 1 more year of Pronger (plus whatever you think they might get from a rental trade if that happens).
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 23,672
- 17,990
Which if he did become a bottom pairing defenseman, isn't terrible for a second round pick. Not great value, but he wasn't a first rounder
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,347
- 39,119
Keep Schultz in process of keeping Gardiner? If that was even logical he would be in a Maple Leaf uniform and not a Oiler one. I still think this Gardiner traded means Schultz is lost is rediculous.
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,189
- 13,206
If you think Pronger definitely would have left you have a point but I still think something could have been done to keep him. Obviously we weren't going to offer him the contract Philly did but I hoped at the time (and it was probably wishful thinking on my part) that something could have been worked out. I just got the impression Murray dealt Pronger because he was banking on Niedermayer playing another few years instead of hanging them up when he did.
Agreed on Perry btw - if it's obvious he's not signing he needs to be traded.
bumperkisser
Registered User
- Mar 31, 2009
- 13,921
- 1,144
i dont think keeping gardiner would've allowed us to keep schultz, he wanted to play in a big hockey market and he got it.
its just bad asset management with beach.. ******* lol, why did murray ever think he was not WORTH the contract
not ot mention gardiner would be nice ot have right now with fowler out
its just bad asset management with beach.. ******* lol, why did murray ever think he was not WORTH the contract
not ot mention gardiner would be nice ot have right now with fowler out
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
i dont think keeping gardiner would've allowed us to keep schultz, he wanted to play in a big hockey market and he got it.
its just bad asset management with beach.. ******* lol, why did murray ever think he was not WORTH the contract
not ot mention gardiner would be nice ot have right now with fowler out
Gardiner was expendable due to Schultz. Unfortunately, Schultz has found a way out of Anaheim.
At the time, you have to make a decision and I am sure he probably regrets it, but I remember at the time thinking that might have been an overpayment to keep him.
We had Neds, Boynton, Whitney, Wiz, Eminger, brookbank that year. We picked up Vis for Whitney during the year. Yes I am sure Beauch would have been better than most.
Unfortunately, I thought it was an overpayment to send Lupul and Gardiner (even though he was a prospect) to get him back.
Dr Johnny Fever
Eggplant and Teal
I think people forget Beauch was just coming back from a serious knee surgery. There were questions on just how good he would be after the surgery. He only came back for a few playoff games before a decision had to be made. He played well in them but still, it would have been a risk signing him to a long term deal.
Of course in hindsight we should have just signed him.
Dr Johnny Fever
Eggplant and Teal
Lupul was a salary dump we insisted upon in order to give Burke Gardiner. Nobody expected him to have a career year.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Lupul was also in RC's dog house, wasn't being used correctly, and may have had issue's still with his back. At the time, it seemed like a fair trade. A non-scoring, scoring forward and a prospect defenseman for an established defenseman with no issue with his previous knee injury.
I don't know why, but I think the Ducks' went after Schultz to come out early from Wisconsin. He didn't and that kind of threw a wrench into the Ducks' plans. I truly believe Schultz didn't want to be a Duck that far back. Could not having Schultz have played into re-acquiring Beauch? Who knows? But I'm happy to have Beauch back. It was a win-win for both teams, more so for the Leafs.
Dr Johnny Fever
Eggplant and Teal
Supposedly Burke wanted Schultz and we told told him no, you can have Gardiner. Ouch!
Last edited:
DuckshaveaRPG
Registered User
at the time Schultz was the number 1 D prospect in our system and as we all know he was not exactly screaming about how much he wanted out of Anaheim
Quack Shot
Registered User
Many fans considered Gardiner better at that time. It wasnt until Schultz started to create drama people put him ahead of Gardiner.
