|
|
Post by Yeti on Feb 28, 2004 19:53:32 GMT -5
Actually, it's coming for Danielle Sauvageau (Radio-Canada). That's the latest rumor from the Bell Centre after Rutherford was seen in Gainey's office this afternoon.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheHabsfan on Feb 28, 2004 23:28:36 GMT -5
I, for one, don't believe these rumours swirling around the Bell Center.
1. It was all started by Renaud Lavoie....again
2. It's not hard to understand that with a little more than a week left before the trade deadline, that Gainey will probably meet with every GM that comes into the building...it just makes sense...the fact that the met doesn't mean that BG is very interested in any player from Carolina...Speculation if you ask me!
3. With the way O'Neil played in the playoffs a couple of years ago, I would have to think about it seriously! The type of players you want for the playoffs are the ones with character...the ones that show up when it counts...Koivu is an example!
THF
|
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Feb 29, 2004 7:48:28 GMT -5
That's from the Raleigh News Observer of this morning:
"Carolina general manager Jim Rutherford said he had made Hill and his agent aware of a few teams' interest, but whether to waive his no-trade clause remained "totally up to him."
The Canadiens, Rutherford said, were not one of those teams, but that was before he spoke to Montreal GM Bob Gainey later Saturday".
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Feb 29, 2004 8:57:23 GMT -5
I voted no.
Zednik & O'Neill are a wash. They are the same age and around the same size. Zednik is probably making less than O'Neill and despite his recent struggles, he is having a better season.
Hill might be a useful addition for the short term but I would like to know his contract status. He is 34 now and not the type of player that will be around for a while.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Feb 29, 2004 9:22:32 GMT -5
I voted Yes.
O'Neil is having an off season but prior to this have been a great offensive contributor. Better number than Zed and consistant roughness. O'Neil is a better player than Zed and to get Hill as a bonus would make this deal an absolute steal for us.
|
|
|
|
Post by AH on Feb 29, 2004 9:45:33 GMT -5
I voted No.
O'Neill is a stiff. If given the chance to acquire a similar player to O'Neill, I would do it, but just not him. I don't like him.
|
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Feb 29, 2004 14:31:46 GMT -5
Jim Rutherford would think this absurd. He'd want 2 players for O'Neill (although O'Neill wouldn't want to go to the Habs).
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 29, 2004 18:28:17 GMT -5
Well, O'Neil and Hill would help the club there's no doubting that. However, it might take more than Zednik me thinks.
Moving Zednik (+?) would be detrimental to club chemistry right now. But, O'Neil and Hill are proven veterans who, again, would help pretty much any club.
A motivated O'Neil and the return of Hill? It would be nice, but it's too much to ask for IMHO. Nice to think about for sure.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by ethan on Feb 29, 2004 19:16:26 GMT -5
In a heart beat as long as Hill's contract isn't too heavy.
O'neil is the same age as Zednik, and scored 102 goals over the last three seasons to Zed's 72. They are both defensively unreliable and slumping this year but considering that we don't give up any prospects, and get Hill as a bonus defensman, this deal looks nice if it's on the table.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Feb 29, 2004 20:14:44 GMT -5
I voted No.
Zednik and Koivu need each other. If we add O'Neill and subtract Zednik we are still in the same boat. No third player to play on the line.
Koivu, O'Neill, and ?
A trade for a power forward or a forward who will play on the first line only makes sense if we can accomplish it without losing Zednik. Then we have:
Koivu, Zednik, trade guy
Ribeiro, Ryder, Dagenais
We would be better if we could get another plugger for the second line but Dagenais isn't doing anything to hurt us on that line .... plus it has been clicking. With a trade where we don't lose Zednik we can drop Bulis to the third line with Perreault and Sundstrom. Who knows if we get Eastwood then we have more options then we can shake a stick at for the last two lines.
|
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on Feb 29, 2004 21:54:03 GMT -5
(although O'Neill wouldn't want to go to the Habs). He doesn't have a no-trade clause, so it's not like he has a say in where he goes. Besides, why would he not want to come to Montreal? Has he said anything about it? |
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Feb 29, 2004 22:15:58 GMT -5
O'Neill doesn't want to go anywhere. He married a North Carolina woman and they have a home there. If you were in his circumstances, would you want to uproot and go to Canada?
|
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on Feb 29, 2004 23:35:57 GMT -5
O'Neill doesn't want to go anywhere. He married a North Carolina woman and they have a home there. If you were in his circumstances, would you want to uproot and go to Canada? That's all fine and dandy, but it doesn't really matter what Jeff O'Neill wants, or where Jeff O'Neill wants to stay. He doesn't have a NTC, so he'll have to go wherever Rutherford trades him. |
|
snap
Rookie
Posts: 93
|
Post by snap on Mar 1, 2004 0:09:02 GMT -5
Voted yes...I've loved O'Neil for years. I like his style. He can play gritty and he can put the puck in the net. A vet d-man like Hill is always great. If we were tradin zed for o'neil straight up I still would have said yes, so uhh..yea...YES
|
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Mar 1, 2004 0:32:23 GMT -5
O'Neill doesn't want to go anywhere. He married a North Carolina woman and they have a home there. If you were in his circumstances, would you want to uproot and go to Canada? That's such a boring place, I would beg Rutherford to trade me... I'm only half-kidding, this is 2004, people rarely spend their entire life in the same city anymore. You can actually learn things by moving to a new place. |
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Mar 1, 2004 1:07:24 GMT -5
I believe I heard that Rutherford has spoken to O'Neill about his feelings on a trade, and O'Neill wasn't enthusiastic. Also, aren't taxes higher in Canada?
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 1, 2004 8:26:07 GMT -5
I believe I heard that Rutherford has spoken to O'Neill about his feelings on a trade, and O'Neill wasn't enthusiastic. Also, aren't taxes higher in Canada? I know Sean Hill's wife is from North Carolina. I didn't know Jeff O'Neill's was. Are you sure on this? I heard Rutherford say he was going to extend the courtesy of "trade acceptance" with Hill and Wesley, but I have not heard he was also going to do the same with O'Neill. I have heard on here that Hill has a NTC so that makes me wonder why would he say Hill could veto a trade publicly? |
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Mar 1, 2004 10:11:23 GMT -5
I voted Yes. O'Neil is having an off season but prior to this have been a great offensive contributor. Better number than Zed and consistant roughness. O'Neil is a better player than Zed and to get Hill as a bonus would make this deal an absolute steal for us. My sentiments exactly. I don't think any impartial observer could argue that Richard Zednik is a better player than Jeff O'Neill. And no way is he better than O'Neill plus Sean Hill. |
|
|
|
Post by rhabdo on Mar 1, 2004 11:01:35 GMT -5
It would be too favourable to the Habs. The Habs would have to be giving more than just Zednik, such as prospects.
|
|
