|
Post by Yeti on Dec 14, 2003 12:31:42 GMT -5
That's according to the Toronto Star (O'Neill) and the Toronto Sun (Laraque- yeah, that's from Stratchan...)
I think it's been mentioned before for O'Neill. I wonder what they would want for him... I think he's earning close to 4 millions per year.
It's the first time I see a 'rumor' saying Laraque is on the block... but given the crap he served us last year about playing in Montreal, I think we're better off with Langdon...
|
|
|
Post by blny on Dec 14, 2003 15:11:04 GMT -5
O'Neill is as cheap as he'll ever be while in his prime. Jeff has really struggled this season. He's got a Hull like shot, skates pretty well and would be a good presence on the right side if he got healthy. The thing is we have some good players on the right. Zed is rounding into forum, and Ryder is showing some real consistancy for a rookie. If Jeff could play the left side well I'd consider making an offer (it couldn't hurt). However, I don't think it's something we need to actively pursue at this point.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 14, 2003 16:58:22 GMT -5
Well, I wouldn't hesitate to go for O'Neill myself, he'd look terrific on either of our top 2 lines, and both Zed and Ryder can be used on either wing, so we have some options. And it's not as if Perezhogin were almost ready, or Audette or Dagenais serious assets that we need to nurture....
Of course, it always depends on the price - but I'd think O'Neill would be worth a call to Carolina.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 14, 2003 19:48:45 GMT -5
Count me in on the "I'm intereseted in O'Neill" wagon. Better than average goal scorer who isn't afraid to pay the price. We'd have an instant upgrade on or right side. The $4mm salary is a bit steep, but I guess that's why he's available. Pretty well in line considering what we're paying Koivu and Theo, assuming we're using that benchmark rather than the rapidly falling recent salary appetites. Let's give up some 2nd tier prospects who are cheap (Milroy, Balej types)
|
|
|
Post by Strummerman on Dec 14, 2003 21:42:26 GMT -5
how bout offering audette and rivet for O'neill ![:o](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/shocked.png)
|
|
|
Post by JFM on Dec 15, 2003 0:41:45 GMT -5
how bout offering audette and rivet for O'neill ![:o](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/shocked.png) And that sound you heard right before the dial tone was Jim Rutherford laughing before hanging up the phone. Not only would the 'canes get two declining players, they add about 4 million in salary AND get older. To get O'Neill a quality prospect or 2 and or a solid current roster player would be the price IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Dec 15, 2003 9:01:52 GMT -5
And that sound you heard right before the dial tone was Jim Rutherford laughing before hanging up the phone. Not only would the 'canes get two declining players, they add about 4 million in salary AND get older. To get O'Neill a quality prospect or 2 and or a solid current roster player would be the price IMO. Heard they would like some young defencemen. Good luck. ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png)
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 15, 2003 9:05:13 GMT -5
O'Neil is so precisely what we need it's scary. There isn't much player I wouldn't trade for him.
Laracque seems to be a bit of a headcase and is rants against Montreal should tell us that he doessn't have a thick enough skin to perform here.
|
|
|
Post by StevePenny on Dec 15, 2003 9:28:05 GMT -5
O'Neil is having a horible season so i wonder if maybe he is declining.Also he is afraid of flying that's why he didn't play for Team Canada so i can't forgive him for that.If is skills are still there i'd say give up a prospect and a roster player for him but i don't want to se another Audette or Czerkawski thing happen.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Dec 15, 2003 10:02:54 GMT -5
O'Neill is a PERFECT fit in Montreal. He's only 27, makes about $4mm, and has been a regular 30-goal guy for the past few years. PLUS he's physical and plays with a ton of intensity. A legit power forward.
He's easily worth Markov, Hossa/Ryder/Ward, plus a pick. Still interested?
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 15, 2003 11:05:09 GMT -5
O'Neill is a PERFECT fit in Montreal. He's only 27, makes about $4mm, and has been a regular 30-goal guy for the past few years. PLUS he's physical and plays with a ton of intensity. A legit power forward. He's easily worth Markov, Hossa/Ryder/Ward, plus a pick. Still interested? O'Neil would instantly be the best forward on our roster but I think Hossa wouldn't generate much excitment. I would believe though that they'd be really interested in Garon. O'Neil for Garon + Markov and Kilger ?
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Dec 15, 2003 11:32:25 GMT -5
O'Neil would instantly be the best forward on our roster but I think Hossa wouldn't generate much excitment. I would believe though that they'd be really interested in Garon. O'Neil for Garon + Markov and Kilger ? I'd do that. What I also like about O'Neill is that he's a right-handed shot, which works well with a left-shooting center like Koivu.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Dec 15, 2003 11:33:07 GMT -5
O'Neil would instantly be the best forward on our roster but I think Hossa wouldn't generate much excitment. I would believe though that they'd be really interested in Garon. O'Neil for Garon + Markov and Kilger ? Two things about your offer. One, who do we use as a backup? Fichaud? Nah. Two, I'm not too interested in trading Garon inter-conference. He could easily come back to haunt us.
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Dec 15, 2003 11:39:49 GMT -5
I'm not too interested in trading Garon inter-conference. He could easily come back to haunt us. ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png) Don't take it the wrong way but by this statement you are implying that Garon has the potential to become an impact player in the NHL, one of the good to very good no 1 in the league. That's fine with me and that's why I hope Gainey is leaving the door open about trading Theodore... for the "right deal" of course...
|
|
|
Post by Goldthorpe on Dec 15, 2003 12:28:56 GMT -5
I would give Markov and a second-tier prospect (Balej? Hossa?) for O'Neill. Nothing more, really. O'Neill may have three 30-goals seasons under his belt, but he hasn't done much this season and I don't see the point in overpaying. We don't expect other teams to overpay for our underachiever. Why would we do it for their players?
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Dec 15, 2003 12:39:02 GMT -5
You can't just wait for the perfect deal (i.e the one where we give up very little and receive lots in return) or say "I would do that trade, but not with a team in the same conference" If it's good for the CH you do it.
And one of the biggest mistakes a team can make is overestimating the value of their own players and underestimating everybody else's. Jeff O'Neill is a proven player in this league, a legit All-Star. To say he is worth Markov (who hasn't really proven ANYTHING yet) plus a marginal prospect like Balej is laughable.
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Dec 15, 2003 13:29:14 GMT -5
I'd deal for O'Neill as well but I wouldn't go as far as you proposed Doc.Too much IMO,it will cost us something thats for sure but a three for one deal not too sure about that.I wouldn't trade Markov and or Garon at this point,though to improve up front you probably are on the right track. HFTO
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 15, 2003 15:27:41 GMT -5
...well seeing that Maurice just lost his job, I think that will put O'Neil's rumor to rest for a while...
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Dec 15, 2003 15:34:48 GMT -5
... for a little while indeed... But Laviolette was a disaster in New York, it took him a few months only to have all the veterans against him. I don't think the Canes are a better team now.
|
|
|
Post by Goldthorpe on Dec 15, 2003 16:05:01 GMT -5
To say he is worth Markov (who hasn't really proven ANYTHING yet) plus a marginal prospect like Balej is laughable. It has absolutely nothing to do with worth. It has to do with opportunity. O'Neill is having a desastrous season. In a team where he is one of the only goal scorer, he can't do the job and can't help his team like he did in the last years. Does that mean that he cannot be considered a legit 30 goals scorer anymore? Of course not. But the fact that he's not productive RIGHT NOW is still a very, very important element of any deal involving him. I mean, the same thing happened with Theo last year. What was Theo "value" last year? Most trade proposals involving him last season were considering his trade value as, let say, a starting goalie, but nothing more really. His "value" wasn't Vezina like, even if he managed to get it the year before. Same thing for O'Neill. I think he would be a great forward to have, but I don't see the point in paying him like the player he was last year when we can pay him for the player he is today. Hossa and Markov. Both are very young (much younger than O'Neill), both are talented, both are paid much much less than O'Neill. Other teams may offer more, but if I was in BG shoes, I wouldn't offer more.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 15, 2003 16:13:52 GMT -5
Laviolette had one very good season and a bad one in Long Island. Seeing how the Ilses are still struggling with internal problems, I don't think he was the main problem there. Isles are stuck like we are, be it that they have a blown up room that won't be easily patched up..
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Dec 15, 2003 18:38:16 GMT -5
![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png) Don't take it the wrong way but by this statement you are implying that Garon has the potential to become an impact player in the NHL, one of the good to very good no 1 in the league. That's fine with me and that's why I hope Gainey is leaving the door open about trading Theodore... for the "right deal" of course... Gee, I think I confused you with Blaise, sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Rimmer on Dec 16, 2003 4:29:04 GMT -5
IMHO, any deal to get O'Neill would have to include Richard Zednik going the other way. I'm sure they would love to get younger on D but they desperately need to score more goals (they are last in goals for) and I don't see anyone on their roster capable of replacing O'Neill's (lack of) scoring, at least for now.
btw, they are a respectable 14th in goals against per game so their D, while relatively old, is not bad at all.
R.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Dec 16, 2003 8:07:09 GMT -5
IMHO, any deal to get O'Neill would have to include Richard Zednik going the other way. I'm sure they would love to get younger on D but they desperately need to score more goals (they are last in goals for) and I don't see anyone on their roster capable of replacing O'Neill's (lack of) scoring, at least for now. btw, they are a respectable 14th in goals against per game so their D, while relatively old, is not bad at all R. I was thinking along the same lines. If the Canes chose to deal him, they'd want a scorer in return. The price would likely be Zed, a b+ to a prospect, and a pick.
|
|
|
Post by AH on Dec 18, 2003 18:03:37 GMT -5
O'Neill is a stiff !!! Can't believe some of you want to trade Markov for him. Not to mention the guy is a serious head case.
2 goals this season (including one into an empty net). have we not learned our lesson with Chow and Audette when it comes to high paid, under-performing head cases ?
O'Neill is a prime candidate to be one of those high profile non-tender Free Agents at the end of the current season. He is going to be one of many Paul Kariyas for this coming off-season, along with Jason Allison and Jarome Iginla.
I am so sure he will be non-tendered that I am going to post a link to this thread when it happens.
|
|