Toggle sidebar

Trade Deadline Chat II

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Someone's been playing too many video games. The above fantasy scenarios are laughable, and downright awful. Why the hell would Colorado do any of those trades?
 
Basilisk said:
There were a few possibilities.....


McNabb
Clague
Lintuniemi
LoVerde
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (50% retained.....or at least 35%)
Beauchemin (50% retained)






....or.....






Muzzin
Clague
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)






...or...






Kempe (sorry, I don't see the heart in this kid)
Clague
McNabb
1st & 2nd

for

Duchene (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)





The point is, DL could have put something like this together. He did not. Looking ahead to the expansion draft, it's not as if McNabb could have been protected, anyway.... so why not at least have tried to swap McNabb for Beauchemin? I don't get it.....
Click to expand...
:handclap:
 
deaderhead28 said:
Depends who is available and yes, those players are available for the right deal.Kopi is over paid this year for what he is paid.Everyone can be traded for the right deal.We've Merch to come up and take a spot draft picks and prospects to sweeten deals.This team isn't going to get better until you get Green and Gabs cap off this team.Richards cap doesn't help to squeeze.Dean is wasting the older players years by trying to dumpster dive and myself of actually addressing needs.
Click to expand...

Okay. Would you sell Gaborik for our next two 1st rounders, Kempe and LaDue?
 
Basilisk said:
There were a few possibilities.....


McNabb
Clague
Lintuniemi
LoVerde
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (50% retained.....or at least 35%)
Beauchemin (50% retained)




....or.....






Muzzin
Clague
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)






...or...






Kempe (sorry, I don't see the heart in this kid)
Clague
McNabb
1st & 2nd

for

Duchene (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)





The point is, DL could have put something like this together. He did not. Looking ahead to the expansion draft, it's not as if McNabb could have been protected, anyway.... so why not at least have tried to swap McNabb for Beauchemin? I don't get it.....
Click to expand...

Or Colorado rejected such offers and wanted more like a Toffoli or a Pearson.
 
Basilisk said:
There were a few possibilities.....


McNabb
Clague
Lintuniemi
LoVerde
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (50% retained.....or at least 35%)
Beauchemin (50% retained)




....or.....






Muzzin
Clague
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)






...or...






Kempe (sorry, I don't see the heart in this kid)
Clague
McNabb
1st & 2nd

for

Duchene (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)





The point is, DL could have put something like this together. He did not. Looking ahead to the expansion draft, it's not as if McNabb could have been protected, anyway.... so why not at least have tried to swap McNabb for Beauchemin? I don't get it.....
Click to expand...

What's your fascination with Beauchemin? He's a shell of his former self.

Kempe with no heart? He's had a cup of coffee in the NHL. How did you come to this conclusion?
 
Basilisk said:
There were a few possibilities.....

McNabb
Clague
Lintuniemi
LoVerde
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (50% retained.....or at least 35%)
Beauchemin (50% retained)

....or.....

Muzzin
Clague
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)

...or...

Kempe (sorry, I don't see the heart in this kid)
Clague
McNabb
1st & 2nd

for

Duchene (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)

The point is, DL could have put something like this together. He did not. Looking ahead to the expansion draft, it's not as if McNabb could have been protected, anyway.... so why not at least have tried to swap McNabb for Beauchemin? I don't get it.....
Click to expand...

I think Beauchemin has to be protected.

You're listing these trades like they mean something. Did Lombardi have these on his desk as options? You can't make up trades and say the GM of the team should do this and that, and then complain that the GM is bad for not doing it. You want Colorado to retain all this cap space for years on end? That's not going to happen. For what? Kempe, who you don't see as having heart, but the Avs are still going to not only give you Duchene, but retain too? And take McNabb?

LoVerde? Where did that name come from? He's a soon to be 28 year old soon to be UFA who has never played a game in the NHL.
 
Dean said he wants LaDue and Kempe in the lineups for their speed. Hope this forces Sutter to sit McNabb since Gravel is better
 
Basilisk said:
There were a few possibilities.....


McNabb
Clague
Lintuniemi
LoVerde
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (50% retained.....or at least 35%)
Beauchemin (50% retained)




....or.....






Muzzin
Clague
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)






...or...






Kempe (sorry, I don't see the heart in this kid)
Clague
McNabb
1st & 2nd

for

Duchene (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)





The point is, DL could have put something like this together. He did not. Looking ahead to the expansion draft, it's not as if McNabb could have been protected, anyway.... so why not at least have tried to swap McNabb for Beauchemin? I don't get it.....
Click to expand...

Why would Colorado do ANY of those?

I get why some of you guys are mad that DL didn't do anything if you really believe trades like above are easy to make.

Would you take the following offer:

Barberio
Bigras
Geertzen
Redmond
1st
2nd

for

Toffoli (50%)
McNabb (50%)

Ugh I can't even make a comparable ****** trade because the teams are in such different situations. I know some people will say yes because 'picks, rebuild,' but the point is look at the crap you're throwing at the wall and thinking other teams will jump on it with 100% certainty.
 
Raccoon Jesus said:
Why would Colorado do ANY of those?

I get why some of you guys are mad that DL didn't do anything if you really believe trades like above are easy to make.

Would you take the following offer:

Barberio
Bigras
Geertzen
Redmond
1st
2nd

for

Toffoli (50%)
McNabb (50%)

Ugh I can't even make a comparable ****** trade because the teams are in such different situations. I know some people will say yes because 'picks, rebuild,' but the point is look at the crap you're throwing at the wall and thinking other teams will jump on it with 100% certainty.
Click to expand...

yeah this is why trying to do that is impossible
 
Scottkmlps said:
Because he hasn't, like, scored, like, 10 goals so far, so obviously no heart.
Click to expand...

I think some people are harsh on him. He's a 20yr old European player, he's not used to all the hitting and grinding in the corners. Remember when people thought Forbort would be useless because he didn't use his body?

He needs time and experience, it's not like he short and underweight.
 
Cruel11 said:
Dean said he wants LaDue and Kempe in the lineups for their speed. Hope this forces Sutter to sit McNabb since Gravel is better
Click to expand...

Mcnabb was responsible for two blatant mistakes leading to two goals for the Wild and he still played him over Gravel. I don't understand that. (Gravel was run over on the game tying goal in the 3rd but Mcnabb was brutal all night and so was Muzzin.)
 
Went skiing for the day. Just seeing what happened. I love that we didn't trade any of the kids away.we got rid of king which I have been wanting to do for two years and upgraded by getting it getting Iggy

We're not going to win the cup but we didn't organize the future

We are set for the expansion draft and have plenty of trade pieces to work with including Bishop.
 
Last edited:
TradeMadeMeSignUp said:
Mcnabb was responsible for two blatant mistakes leading to two goals for the Wild and he still played him over Gravel. I don't understand that. (Gravel was run over on the game tying goal in the 3rd but Mcnabb was brutal all night and so was Muzzin.)
Click to expand...

Gravel's biggest problem is handling physicality.

As you said, he got knocked out of a play again which led to a goal against.

McNabb has been brutal but is the only guy back there at the moment that is a threat to lay someone out.

I have no problem with wanting Gravel over McNabb, but him getting run over again is exactly why he was back out of the lineup instead of McNabb along with the fact that you don't have many NHL minutes out there if Gravel and LaDue are playing.

I like Gravel. Sutter probably envisioned a much more physical game last night than what we saw, plus back-to-backs.

If the decision on who sits was based purely on how a player performed the last game, Sutter would be able to ice maybe two lines and one pairing hahaha.
 
Basilisk said:
There were a few possibilities.....


McNabb
Clague
Lintuniemi
LoVerde
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (50% retained.....or at least 35%)
Beauchemin (50% retained)




....or.....






Muzzin
Clague
1st & 2nd

for

Landeskog (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)






...or...






Kempe (sorry, I don't see the heart in this kid)
Clague
McNabb
1st & 2nd

for

Duchene (at least 25% retained)
Beauchemin (50% retained)





The point is, DL could have put something like this together. He did not. Looking ahead to the expansion draft, it's not as if McNabb could have been protected, anyway.... so why not at least have tried to swap McNabb for Beauchemin? I don't get it.....
Click to expand...

All of these are terrible scenarios, trading what's left of out already paper thin prospect system for a guy whose career high in goals is 25? Landeskog struggles to produce on a consistent basis as it is in Colorado, what makes people think he would become the magical 30-40 goal scorer we need in Sutter's system? He would be lucky to hit 40 points playing here. And why the hell would the Kings want Beauchemin? The last thing this team needs is another aging, declining, slow player.

And a hearty LOL at the Kempe comment, I'm glad you know how the kid's career is going to play out after 7 games.
 
Guys...stop quoting that insane potential trade scenario post. Everyone knows it is fantasy land and it takes up a ton of real estate on the page with the 10 spaces between each "offer".
 
Lombardi even mentioned in his call that they "lost sight" a bit on the need to constantly build. That he learned a valuable lesson in the trials and wasn't going to load up and overpay, when you're not necessarily protected on team success. (which is interesting remark, as lots of folks here think he was gonna try to make a big deal to save his job)

"I know how to build, but staying on top is a different animal."
 
SCARFACE909 said:
"I know how to build, but staying on top is a different animal."
Click to expand...

this is something that a lot of fans, Kings fans in particular, have a hard time understanding. winning is a challenge in itself but staying a winner is something only a select few GMs have done. I can think of only one GM in the salary cap era thats managed to ice a contending team 3+ seasons in a row and I think we all know who it is
 
Pretty Silent trade deadline.

Lombardi did what he could, now it's up to Kopitar pretty much.

Got something out of Dwight King, who had no intent in resigning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom