|
|
Post by DeportivoHabs on Jan 19, 2004 19:35:29 GMT -5
Of interest - I know we're all saying we have extra d-men laying around......
____________________________________________
Injury-riddled Flyers looking to deal
Associated Press
1/19/2004
VOORHEES, N.J. (AP) - With three of their defencemen sidelined with serious injuries, the Philadelphia Flyers acknowledge they are looking to make a trade.
Flyers general manager Bob Clarke said on Monday that he has been in contact with several teams to secure some blue-line help.
The team's top defenceman, Eric Desjardins, suffered a broken arm in Saturday night's game at Toronto and is expected to be out a minimum of eight weeks.
On Monday, the Flyers learned they will be without Marcus Ragnarsson due to a left shoulder injury he suffered in the Toronto game. He will miss about two weeks.
Previously, Dennis Seidenberg was lost for 12 weeks after his left leg was broken in a collision at practice.
``I would say we're going to get somebody,'' Clarke said. ``We've talked to a lot of teams. There are a few guys around. Mostly what you're looking at now is a stop-gap guy. No one has come out (and offered) a top-four guy yet. I don't know if that will happen or not.''
The Flyers know it will be difficult to replace Desjardins, a former all-star.
``You don't replace a guy like Desjardins,'' Keith Primeau said. ``He's our minutes leader on the back end. He will be sorely missed.
``Everyone's going to have to pick up the slack. The forwards are going to have to be strong as lines so our defencemen aren't stuck on extended shifts.''
Clarke said he had contacted the agent of defenceman Dmitry Yushkevich, who played for the Flyers in two previous stints. But Yushkevich is playing hockey in Russia and it would be difficult for him to get out of his contract.
Also, the Flyers are expected to be without goaltender Jeff Hackett for Tuesday night's game against Montreal. Hackett, who missed Monday's practice, is suffering from an inner ear/sinus infection.
The Flyers called up two minor-leaguers - defencemen Jim Vandermeer and John Slaney - from the AHL Philadelphia Phantoms to serve as replacements for the Montreal game.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jan 19, 2004 20:05:45 GMT -5
Bobby: please don't look in this direction -- we've learned from experience that whoever we send to you will come back to bite us on the butt!  |
|
|
|
Post by legaspesien on Jan 19, 2004 20:10:04 GMT -5
Bobby: please don't look in this direction -- we've learned from experience that whoever we send to you will come back to bite us on the butt! A couple of years ago whe got Dykhuis for future whe can give him back for future as long as whe clear some $ |
|
|
|
Post by Habit on Jan 19, 2004 20:13:34 GMT -5
``I would say we're going to get somebody,'' Clarke said. ``We've talked to a lot of teams. There are a few guys around. Mostly what you're looking at now is a stop-gap guy. No one has come out (and offered) a top-four guy yet. I don't know if that will happen or not.'' Traverse a "Stop-Gap"? His brain does stop sometimes, and we suspect that there might be gaps in it! But seriously, Traverse would be the perfect guy. Above AHL caliber, not quite an everyday NHL guy, and somewhat cheap. Would be a good 7th or 8th NHL D, and a good replacement for a few weeks when a top guy is out. But he is doing a good job on the farm showing the young guys how to play. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2004 20:53:29 GMT -5
Give him back players that have been on the team before. Traverse and Dykhuis. Please, Bobby, please!
|
|
|
|
Post by BCHab on Jan 19, 2004 21:04:00 GMT -5
Bobby: please don't look in this direction -- we've learned from experience that whoever we send to you will come back to bite us on the butt! Agreed, Clarke certainly came out ahead before. However, I think Savard came out ahead with Chouinard. Maxim Lapierre so far seems to be better than a Minnesota fifth rounder in a weak draft. Maybe Dykhuis for futures or a low pick would be of interest to Philly? Cheers, |
|
|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Jan 19, 2004 21:10:18 GMT -5
Andrei Markov for Simon Gagne?
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 19, 2004 21:26:17 GMT -5
Andrei Markov for Simon Gagne? He's a left shooting LW. How does that help us? Gagne is a very good player, but I don't think that is the area we need improvement at this point. I also don't think trading Markov at this point is smart. He's just starting to play better. I don't think you even ponder trading Andrei until Hainsey is ready. |
|
|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Jan 19, 2004 21:38:35 GMT -5
He's a left shooting LW. How does that help us? Gagne is a very good player, but I don't think that is the area we need improvement at this point. I also don't think trading Markov at this point is smart. He's just starting to play better. I don't think you even ponder trading Andrei until Hainsey is ready. I just think that Gagne is tremendously talented, and certainly better than any of the left shooting LWers we currently have on our roster. Sure his numbers have slipped the last 2 seasons, but i think that has more to do with Hitchcock than anything else. I mean this is a kid who scored 80 goals by his 22nd birthday (roughly). He's got speed to burn and is responsible at both ends of the ice. Plus he's from Quebec, and would be a certain fan favorite. At any rate, i haven't really given this one enough thought to say for sure one way or the other if i'd make the move, but i do really like Gagne and think he could be dynamite in Montreal... |
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on Jan 19, 2004 23:32:15 GMT -5
He's a left shooting LW. How does that help us? Gagne is a very good player, but I don't think that is the area we need improvement at this point. Simon Gagne is a player that the Habs can use right now. He would be able to take Bulis' spot as the first line LWer. IMO that would be a huge improvement to the top line. But seeing Gagne in a Habs uniform is not something that I think will happen anytime soon. He seems to be a part of that team's future core and I don't think Clarke would be all that willing to part with him. Agreed. |
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Jan 20, 2004 0:45:00 GMT -5
There are many places the Flyers can look for a defenseman.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 20, 2004 7:34:30 GMT -5
Columbus might be a real possibility. MacLean is threatening moves, and he has some veteran blueliners that might be the first to go. Richardson and Lachance would fill the role well. Luke has experience in Philly, would be cheaper (I believe), and is more likely to fit into a 6th or 7th position after guys return. While both are struggling this season, and Lachance couldn't get his act together in Montreal, they're both noted for being strong stay at home blueliners.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rimmer on Jan 20, 2004 8:11:20 GMT -5
Columbus might be a real possibility. MacLean is threatening moves, and he has some veteran blueliners that might be the first to go. Richardson and Lachance would fill the role well. Luke has experience in Philly, would be cheaper (I believe), and is more likely to fit into a 6th or 7th position after guys return. While both are struggling this season, and Lachance couldn't get his act together in Montreal, they're both noted for being strong stay at home blueliners. yeah, those are the real possibilities although I've read that Clarke would like a top 4 dman instead of settling for the fillers. but who can tell with him, right? R. |
|
|
|
Post by DeportivoHabs on Jan 20, 2004 9:21:35 GMT -5
I think the idea of trading Dykhuis is a good one. He would appear to fit the profile Clarke is looking for.
I know there is talk of gagne....however I've always liked the idea of handzus. Young (26), big (6'5 - 215), quick...and often frequents the pk unit. I don't know the details of his current contract, an I believe it would involve getting rid of either perreault or juneau of which I'm not sure is possible in the short term. Just an idea.
In the meantime....dyhuis for a 5th rounder.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jan 20, 2004 9:33:13 GMT -5
Even though it is against the way he usually does things (selling the farm), Clarke is probably looking for something for nothing. I can't see that Handzus would be available (though I've been wrong before). Gagne would be good. Whoever BG eventually picks up had better be big, though, if we want to make any noise from Apr-June.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jan 20, 2004 9:57:54 GMT -5
We need all hands on deck ourselves. Ever since Gillett turned over the conditioning staff, physiotherapists, and doctors (and replaced the Bell Centre glass and boards), we have grown rather complacent as regards our relatively excellent team health. Short memory. And no excuse to exchange either depth or the future for peanuts.
Unless Clarke falls victim to his sweaty, hairy palms, I say fuhgeddaboutit and let's focus on building a better team through chemistry, as we're doing.
|
|
|
|
Post by DeportivoHabs on Jan 20, 2004 10:29:30 GMT -5
I don't think anyone is saying to exchange our future for peanuts....unless traverse and dykhuis is part of our future. We are deep in D....and the flyers and deep in C. I think that's all I was thinking.
I do agree the chemistry is most important and there is no real need to deal at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by AH on Jan 20, 2004 10:34:41 GMT -5
Send them Breezy or Rivet if thy are willing to overpay. Otherwise, stay the course.
|
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Jan 20, 2004 10:51:17 GMT -5
The Habs aren't that deep in defensemen--that is, quality defensemen. I wouldn't want to see them finish the season with Beauchemin or Dykhuis playing regularly after a trade of Rivet or Brisebois.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jan 20, 2004 10:59:18 GMT -5
Send them Breezy or Rivet if thy are willing to overpay. Otherwise, stay the course. What a difference a decent run makes. Not so long ago we would hav been the buyers . . . now we don't want to sell unless we get more than fair market value.The way it should be. No panic, stay the course. Game plan for these three games (and for all that follow): play the whole ice surface (corners and front of the net especially), protect Theo, stand up for one another, rememeber games last a full sixy minutes . . . in other words, keep it up! And don't take any more nights off. |
|
|
|
Post by socky on Jan 20, 2004 12:23:31 GMT -5
The truth be known.....I think Clarke should sit tight for a while......the two guys they called up are no slouches-they just need games....Im pretty sure both could probably be in the nhl if they weren't affiliated with Philly imo  |
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Jan 20, 2004 12:32:16 GMT -5
Acquiring Dannty Markov will help solve the Flyers' problem without turning to the Habs.
|
|
|
|
Post by AH on Jan 20, 2004 12:40:28 GMT -5
Acquiring Dannty Markov will help solve the Flyers' problem without turning to the Habs. or the other 28 teams. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 20, 2004 13:08:00 GMT -5
I'm not sure who won the deal. Justin Williams has long been considered a top prospect. The Flyers are so deep at forward that he hasn't been able to get the ice time needed to develop at the NHL level. He'll get that chance in Carolina, and could blossom.
In Markov, the Flyers get a physical stay at home blueliner with decent size and a good all around game. It took Tanabe and the other blueliner for the Canes to get Markov from Phoenix last year and they flip him for Williams. Tanabe is doing well in Phoenix and I can't remeber the name of the Russian kid they also got.
All in all I guess the deal addresses both teams needs. The Flyers get a strong blueliner. The Canes get a young, cheap, winger with lots of potential. If I had to pick a winner, I'd say that Clarke might have the edge at this point. However, two or three years down the road it might be a very different story.
|
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Jan 20, 2004 15:25:51 GMT -5
You're doggedly persistent, aren't you. I didn't consult other teams' sites but I have a feeling fans elsewhere (Toronto, for example) were spouting the same speculations about their teams. I could have posted my remark on a Toronto site to rub it in because the Leafs had Markov at one time and now regret having traded him. But that would have been trolling. I encountered this on the Habs site, where our fellow posters were yakking just today about trading Brisebois or Rivet to Philly. So this is in reply to them, not part of a running dialog with you. |
|
|
|
Post by AH on Jan 20, 2004 16:27:21 GMT -5
So this is in reply to them, not part of a running dialog with you. I am hurt ...  |
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Jan 20, 2004 18:08:32 GMT -5
I apologize for chafing your dainty skin.  |
|
