Toggle sidebar

Rumor: Trade Rumours Thread Part V: Gaborik "available"; LeBrun: NYR interested in D. Boyle

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gaborik to SJ for Couture

Buy out Richards, sign a winger

Nash-Couture-FA winger
Hagelin-Stepan-Callahan

Younger, faster, better.

:sarcasm:
 
Trxjw said:
Did I say better? No. However, Fisher, Ellis and a 1st is FAR more realistic than getting Hornqvist and the same pieces. Though I suppose it's easier to put words in my mouth than it is to end your vacation in fantasy land.
Click to expand...

Correction
The proposal I was talking about was Hornqvist + BLUM + first, there was no mention of Ellis. Now who is putting words in people's mouth?

You may not have said better, but you have certainly implied it. Otherwise why would you say that Fisher would improve our 3C "immensely"?
If you were just shooting the breeze, you forgot the :sarcasm:
 
-31- said:
Stepan at 2nd line center?
Click to expand...

Yessir. Logan is a more talented version of Steps. Which says a lot. Not that whether one or the other plays on the 1st or 2nd line makes a difference on a Torts team anyway though

Trxjw said:
Must have spelled Jokinen wrong.
Click to expand...

So many people blew this out of proportion and took it way out of context. To this day I see people posting the following:

"there's fans here who wanted to trade Stepan for Jussi Jokinen!!2?!! OMGG!"


No. I wanted to trade scraps for J Jokinen when Stepan was playing AHL caliber hockey from February 2012 to last month. I still want Jussi. Very underrated 2 way player at this stage. An obvious upgrade over Boyle. But then again my cat is probably an obvious upgrade over Boyle.

If there was someone else I don't know about that ever proposed Stepan for J Jokinen straight up, they need to be found and beaten
 
Last edited:
WojtekGoalski said:
Yessir. Logan is a more talented version of Steps. Which says a lot. Not that whether one or the other plays on the 1st or 2nd line makes a difference on a Torts team anyway though



So many people blew this out of proportion and took it way out of context. To this day I see people posting the following:

"there's fans here who wanted to trade Stepan for Jussi Jokinen!!2?!! OMGG!"


No. I wanted to trade scraps for J Jokinen when Stepan was playing AHL caliber hockey from February 2012 to last month. I still want Jussi. Very underrated 2 way player at this stage. An obvious upgrade over Boyle. But then again my cat is probably an obvious upgrade over Boyle.

If there was someone else I don't know about that ever proposed Stepan for J Jokinen straight up, they need to be found and beaten
Click to expand...
So you didn't say that Jokinen was an upgrade to Stepan and that Stepan isn't a 2nd line center?
 
Kwayry said:
Correction
The proposal I was talking about was Hornqvist + BLUM + first, there was no mention of Ellis. Now who is putting words in people's mouth?
Click to expand...

My mistake. Despite that, it's still just as far fetched and unrealistic.

You may not have said better, but you have certainly implied it. Otherwise why would you say that Fisher would improve our 3C "immensely"?
If you were just shooting the breeze, you forgot the :sarcasm:
Click to expand...

Why? Because Fisher would immensely improve our 3C position. That's not even remotely debatable. You stated that I "think trading for Fisher is a better solution" when I never said anything remotely close to that. I've said it's a more realistic solution and that the return addressed 3 current team needs. Pretty simple concept.
 
-31- said:
So you didn't say that Jokinen was an upgrade to Stepan and that Stepan isn't a 2nd line center?
Click to expand...

Oh no.. I did. At that time Jokinen, IMO, was a better option at 2C than Stepan. That's how terrible he was playing. Must I reach into my bag-o-gifs?

Now Steps is playing great and I luhhh dat.
 
WojtekGoalski said:
Oh no.. I did. At that time Jokinen, IMO, was a better option at 2C than Stepan. That's how terrible he was playing. Must I reach into my bag-o-gifs?

Now Steps is playing great and I luhhh dat.
Click to expand...

Yes, in fairness to you, Stepan had a tough few weeks there. Out with the old and in with the new at that point. But now that hes playing better, thank goodness.
 
And in fairness to Stepan, it was 7 games, and it was ridiculous to be drawing the kind of conclusions he was drawing.
 
its funny eklund posted a new blog.. Rangers are trying to acquire Kane.. to me its a complete joke.. you know it would start with gabs, but honestly noowayyy ny can afford to trade young pieces.. kanes value is high..

but just for *****.....what would it take for gaborik+ for kane..

in another blog i was reading.. it would be Gabs+Kreider and a pick for kane?

Edit: I havent given up on Kreider, kid is solid player.. but you got to give to get..
 
What is this fascination with Vanek? Especially when compared to Gaborik, they are basically the same player. When they score they look great when they don't they're invisible.

Vanek is 2 years younger and is having a better year this year. That's about all he has over Gabby.

Career wise Gabby produces a little more, .89 points per 82 games as compared to Vanek's .83. Both have multiple 40 goal seasons, Vanek with 2, Gabby with 3.

Where is this obviously better player than Gaborik? Am I missing something? All these posts about what Vanek can do better to Gaborik (stickhandling, gritty, etc) but it doesn't lead to any more production.

I know Gabby been terrible this year and I don't really care if they trade him but trading Gaborik + more for Vanek doesn't seem like a step forward to me.
 
Can't say I've watched a ton of Vanek since leaving the WNY area two years ago, but I'm not sure he'd fit that well. People are constantly complaining about Gaborik "not fitting" with the team - is Vanek really that different? I remember him being soft and having a very similar style to Gaborik. Has he changed his game recently?
 
dethomas07 said:
its funny eklund posted a new blog.. Rangers are trying to acquire Kane.. to me its a complete joke.. you know it would start with gabs, but honestly noowayyy ny can afford to trade young pieces.. kanes value is high..

but just for *****.....what would it take for gaborik+ for kane..

in another blog i was reading.. it would be Gabs+Kreider and a pick for kane?

Edit: I havent given up on Kreider, kid is solid player.. but you got to give to get..
Click to expand...

Not sure Winnipeg would even want Gaborik and his higher cap hit next season for Kane.

They'd probably want something like Girardi, Miller, and a 1st.
 
turcotte8 said:
What is this fascination with Vanek? Especially when compared to Gaborik, they are basically the same player. When they score they look great when they don't they're invisible.

Vanek is 2 years younger and is having a better year this year. That's about all he has over Gabby.

Career wise Gabby produces a little more, .89 points per 82 games as compared to Vanek's .83. Both have multiple 40 goal seasons, Vanek with 2, Gabby with 3.

Where is this obviously better player than Gaborik? Am I missing something? All these posts about what Vanek can do better to Gaborik (stickhandling, gritty, etc) but it doesn't lead to any more production.

I know Gabby been terrible this year and I don't really care if they trade him but trading Gaborik + more for Vanek doesn't seem like a step forward to me.
Click to expand...

RH shot, plays LW. That alone brings an element that Gaborik is unable or unwilling to bring.
 
haveandare said:
Can't say I've watched a ton of Vanek since leaving the WNY area two years ago, but I'm not sure he'd fit that well. People are constantly complaining about Gaborik "not fitting" with the team - is Vanek really that different? I remember him being soft and having a very similar style to Gaborik. Has he changed his game recently?
Click to expand...

He's definitely not soft.

He's a garbage goal scorer, a PP wizard. He can shoot the puck, too, very accurate shooter. He's bigger and better on the puck than Gaborik, and also younger, a LW, and RH.

We would have to add SOMETHING to Gaborik to get Vanek, but I would not mind a trade like that at all, I LOVE Vanek,.
 
Zenith said:
He's definitely not soft.

He's a garbage goal scorer, a PP wizard. He can shoot the puck, too, very accurate shooter. He's bigger and better on the puck than Gaborik, and also younger, a LW, and RH.

We would have to add SOMETHING to Gaborik to get Vanek, but I would not mind a trade like that at all, I LOVE Vanek,.
Click to expand...

I see the benefits for the Rangers. He'd be quite a nice fit.

I fail to see any reason why Buffalo would take Gaborik back as the centerpiece.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom