Top Ten Trades That Make Perfect Sense.

[Oaklandblue]

#1 of the Potential Top Ten Trades "THAT MAKE PERFECT SENSE" isssssssss........



The one goaltender we got with the most promising upswing, who is pretty much NHL ready now, is Jake Allen. Him and a first for a RENTAL? Out of your goddamn mind.

If the Sabres want a up-and-comer, I'd trade them Bings and they can develop him. Sure as hell not Jake.

[gaijin]

So we would end up with Miller, Halak, AND Elliott. Giving up Allen essentially takes away our future goaltending, as Miller, Halak and Elliott aren't exactly young. Although for as many years as we've been saying this goalie or that goalie is our goaltender of the future, I really don't care anymore who our "goaltender of the future" is. But that's beside the point. This would force us to move either Elliott or Halak, and when you HAVE to move someone, the return isn't as good because the other team knows you're in a bind. So in addition to giving up Allen and a First, you're getting peanuts in return for either Halak or Ells.

Pass.

[Oaklandblue]

So we would end up with Miller, Halak, AND Elliott. Giving up Allen essentially takes away our future goaltending, as Miller, Halak and Elliott aren't exactly young. Although for as many years as we've been saying this goalie or that goalie is our goaltender of the future, I really don't care anymore who our "goaltender of the future" is. But that's beside the point. This would force us to move either Elliott or Halak, and when you HAVE to move someone, the return isn't as good because the other team knows you're in a bind. So in addition to giving up Allen and a First, you're getting peanuts in return for either Halak or Ells.

Pass.

Well, we're not getting peanuts in this situation as much as taking salary on for nothing. We end up with THREE netminders out the door and no one ready to put between the pipes. Talk about a lopsided bargaining table, Batman. Insane.

[glen a richter]

No.... franking.... way.

We've already been down the path of screwing up this teams goaltending future (out of a self made necessity) by unloading Bishop for peanuts. Let's not screw up again by trading Allen. Seriously. Prime goaltending prospects don't grow on trees. Unless they think Binnington can be the #1 of the future. I think he can, but I'd rather not wait for him to be ready when Allen is ready right now.

[cardsfan04]

Yeah, absolutely not. Halak + something for Miller. Allen isn't on the table.

A few days ago I read my first BR article in a long time. It was 3 possibilities of Halak + X for Miller. While the trade ideas weren't god awful, I remembered why I don't read BR. It makes my head hurt. Did you know that the Blues struggle to score goals this year? BR says we do.

[sseagle]

No (Franking) way.

Do it arrrrrrrmy

[ViPeRx007]

Yea, that's more like "#1 trade that makes no sense". That's a desperation trade. Right now I don't think we're in a position of being desperate for a goalie. We technically have the upper hand in a trade for Miller, as much as the Sabres would probably disagree. It's not like we NEED to take Miller from them, but I would say they NEED to get something for him since he's surely walking at the end of the season.

I said this in Chatzy, AKA "The Artist Formerly Known As Flashchat" (How's the repair going on this BTW? We've been a fairly mediocre team since Flashchat died. It's not a coincidence anymore.), last night though: if Allen is as good as everyone claims, why don't we bring him up now and let him play? If he's the future why don't we find out what we have for sure? Everywhere I read says he's ready, so what's the hold up? He's inexperienced? Well, no shit. You kind of have to play to get experience. Worst case scenario, he plays and totally bombs. Well, then you go back to Halak/Elliott and go from there. Obviously it's a risk. If he falters, his value drops. On the flip side, he could do outstanding and none of this would even matter. We could trade Halak or Elliott to address other needs instead.

Trading Allen right now, without knowing what he is, seems like a really stupid move, especially for next season. I just don't want to mess this up and end up with 0 goalies and have to dig from the scrap heap. It gives me flashbacks of the Turek/Johnson/Osgood/Mason/Legace years.

HOWEVER, again, I know we're all tired of worrying about "next season" and want to win NOW so maybe I'm just high. Maybe you go balls out and just do this.

[glen a richter]

I think what might happen is Halak or Elliott will be moved in a package that brings back a forward or two rather than Miller. Then, naturally, Allen will be recalled to back up whoever doesn't get traded. There's a solid chance both Halak and Elliott are both gone in the offseason anyway and there's a new, cheaper backup brought in to spell Allen. So it really doesn't matter, in the long haul, which guy they trade now. Trading Allen, however, would be idiotic. Armstrong isn't an idiot. Ergo, this trade makes no sense whatsoever.

[not_a_wings_fan]

So looking at this I am wondering if the plan isn't halak and change for miller, sign miller when the cap goes up, trade Ells at the draft (deadline!?), and head to next season with miller and Allen. This makes the most sense to me if the miller trade happens.

[glen a richter]

So looking at this I am wondering if the plan isn't halak and change for miller, sign miller when the cap goes up, trade Ells at the draft (deadline!?), and head to next season with miller and Allen. This makes the most sense to me if the miller trade happens.

That thought occurred to me. Why do we need to keep one of Halak or Elliott to start/backup Allen when we can have Miller and Allen and dump Halak and Elliott both? None of these rumors were based on it being fact that one of the two current goalies HAD to stay on the roster.

[ViPeRx007]

So looking at this I am wondering if the plan isn't halak and change for miller, sign miller when the cap goes up, trade Ells at the draft (deadline!?), and head to next season with miller and Allen. This makes the most sense to me if the miller trade happens.

If something indeed does happen, I hope this is how it goes down.

[ComradeT]

I think I could theoretically be ok with this trade if we can also trade Halak and Berglung and/or Stewart and get a center in return (like Backstrom). Washington look like they need a goalie...

[crazyhorse]

Stewart for Callahan! I'll believe it when I see it.

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2014 ... er=ya5nbcs

[not_a_wings_fan]

Callahan is on crack. There's no way a team gives him that many years for that much money. He's a good player, but not an elite scoring forward. He's also often injured and old.

I am fine with renting him for the rest of the season because it's an upgrade at center and frees up Backes et al. to play in a scoring role more. (I would say Backes and Callahan are similar forwards).

It also clears Stewart off the books and makes room for someone with more upside on the wing.

All that aside, I really believe the rumors and permission for his agent to talk to other teams is a negotiating tactic designed to let more GMs tell Callahan's agent just how far off he is on his expectations in an effort to get him to resign in New York. Not saying a trade won't happen, but I believe them when they say their priority is to get him to stay.

[ComradeT]

If we were to get a forward, I'd rather get Vanek for Stewart and/or Berglund. Maybe picks. But the dude wants A LOT of money.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=7034 ... l:topheads

[sseagle]

+60 goal differential right now, we clearly need MORE SCORING! (#1 in the league btw)

[not_a_wings_fan]

+20 of that +60 is four games against Florida and Edmonton, btw.

We struggle to score three goals most nights against Anaheim, LA, SJ, and Chicago - which seem to have no problem dumping three or four on us - and that's who we have to go through to win a cup. In fact, in 11 games against those teams we are -11 goal differential. If you throw out the blowout win over the kings as an outlier we are -16 against those teams.

I will always take more scoring. We always need more goals against elite teams.

[glen a richter]

Callahan is on crack. There's no way a team gives him that many years for that much money. He's a good player, but not an elite scoring forward. He's also often injured and old.

I am fine with renting him for the rest of the season because it's an upgrade at center and frees up Backes et al. to play in a scoring role more. (I would say Backes and Callahan are similar forwards).

It also clears Stewart off the books and makes room for someone with more upside on the wing.

All that aside, I really believe the rumors and permission for his agent to talk to other teams is a negotiating tactic designed to let more GMs tell Callahan's agent just how far off he is on his expectations in an effort to get him to resign in New York. Not saying a trade won't happen, but I believe them when they say their priority is to get him to stay.

Callahan is 28. Not exactly "old".

[not_a_wings_fan]

Callahan is on crack. There's no way a team gives him that many years for that much money. He's a good player, but not an elite scoring forward. He's also often injured and old.

I am fine with renting him for the rest of the season because it's an upgrade at center and frees up Backes et al. to play in a scoring role more. (I would say Backes and Callahan are similar forwards).

It also clears Stewart off the books and makes room for someone with more upside on the wing.

All that aside, I really believe the rumors and permission for his agent to talk to other teams is a negotiating tactic designed to let more GMs tell Callahan's agent just how far off he is on his expectations in an effort to get him to resign in New York. Not saying a trade won't happen, but I believe them when they say their priority is to get him to stay.

Callahan is 28. Not exactly "old".

While not "old" per se, it's ancient when you are asking for a seven year contract at 6 million per and you aren't scoring 50 goals a year.

[sseagle]

+20 of that +60 is four games against Florida and Edmonton, btw.

We struggle to score three goals most nights against Anaheim, LA, SJ, and Chicago - which seem to have no problem dumping three or four on us - and that's who we have to go through to win a cup. In fact, in 11 games against those teams we are -11 goal differential. If you throw out the blowout win over the kings as an outlier we are -16 against those teams.

I will always take more scoring. We always need more goals against elite teams.

Is there a secret forum where ya'll discuss what you are gonna spazz over on the season?

Most games we lose we end up with a negative goal fifferental... and we are 3-0 on the the DickHawks