Richards trade rumor

[habfan74]

I just read that Montreal has made a trade


"Breaking news out of Newfoundland.
It was just on CBC Radio One 640 AM here in Bonavista Newfoundland that apperently home town star Michael Ryder along with fellow Montreal Canadiens' prospect Ron Hainsey and a 2006 3rd round draft pick has been traded to the Tampa Bay Lightning in exchange for Tampa Bay Centerman Brad Richards. They noted that the trade will be formally announced on Monday August 29th when Bob Gainey will speak with the media. "


Sound like B.S to me, thats too much for Richards.

Just wondering if anybody else heard anything?

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

I read that, posted it in the main forum, and then deleted it.

No cross-verification.

If Gainey can get Richards for Ryder, Hainsey, and our 3rd in 2006, I would kiss him on the lips the next time I see him (in a manly kind of way, of course).

[franko]

Eklund hasn't mentioned it, so how can it be true? ;D

[PTH]

mrbozo said:

If Gainey can get Richards for Ryder, Hainsey, and our 3rd in 2006

What a steal that would be. I really like Ryder and all, but Richards was a key player for the Lightning in their Cup run, is the same age, and was on the ice in just about all game situations. Hainsey is close to being a throw-away (if he doesn't make it in camp he's waiver wire bait), and a 3d really isn't much to get a massive upgrade.

It's only in terms of Cap space that I'd be worried.

[Forum Ghost]

habfan74 said:

Sound like B.S to me, thats too much for Richards.

No way is that too much for Richards. IMO, Tampa Bay would be the ones getting ripped off.

Ryder, Hainsey and a 3rd rd. pick for the 2004 Conn Smythe winner??

That has advantage Habs written all over it.

[Forum Ghost]

What is surprising is that this is the second rumour that Ryder is a part of.

One thing's for sure... if the Habs were to let him go, they would be able to fill his spot rather quickly with Perezhogin waiting in the wings.

Nice to have depth for a change.

[Forum Ghost]

And why would Bob Gainey wait three days after making a deal to announce it??

This is what makes me think that this rumour is pure BS.

[blny]

The reason to dispell this rumour is because of the supposed source. CBC staff are locked out. There's no one in the station to talk about hockey.

[nivram]

Very tempting to believe, but just call me Judas.

Marvin

[Ryan]

I honestly can't believe how much play these rumours get, and all because some kid posted a BS story for attention.

1. CBC is locked out, so who's reporting this on their radio station? If they're using BBC news for their television newscasts, you can't tell me they've got people still working on radio.

2. The original rumour monger claimed he heard it on AM 640 in Bonavista. AM 640 is not the frequency for CBC Radio One in Bonavista. www.cbc.ca/frequency/frequency_nfld.html

3. I heard Feaster myself on the Fan590 this weak talking about Richards and how he will be keeping him no matter what. I realize you can't believe everything a GM says, but if you've ever heard this guy talk you know he's not into mind games.

4. As others have stated, a possible flash in the pan rookie, a completely unproven defenseman prospect and a 3rd rounder aren't going to nab you one of the best young players in the game.

Eklund is reporting it now, and just showing how cow-poopy some of his rumours are. It's obvious that over time he's gained some inside sources (whether he had any to begin with is very debatable), but a lot of times he's just reading the same Spector's type sites as us and reporting them.

[cigarviper]

It probably isn't true. I know as much as you all do, but it's fun to dream isn't it? You have to admit that it wasn't that long ago that rumours like this ended quickly with everyone coming to the conclusion, "...why the hell would anyone want to play in Montreal?"

[StevePenny]

I didn't believe this at all but now so many boards and what not are reporting it hockey-leaks.blogspot.com/ has this deal at 70 % possibly.
These guys are usually right.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

The worm is tunneling through the 'net.

Be that as it may, and that to see Richards (whom I've always coveted more than the other guy) in Habs jersey would be really neat, let's look at some numbers:

2005-06 salaries

Rchards - $3.4M

Ryder - $1.2M (assumed, or the negotiations would be handed off to TB)
Hainsey - $0.57M
TOTAL - $1.77M

So, Tampa would save close to $2M in salary—they are apparently at $37M without Andreychuk's salary accounted.

Money aside, this deal would be a steal for the Habs.

Ah, perchance to dream!

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

mrbozo said:

The worm is tunneling through the 'net.

Be that as it may, and that to see Richards (whom I've always coveted more than the other guy) in Habs jersey would be really neat, let's look at some numbers:

2005-06 salaries

Rchards - $3.4M

Ryder - $1.2M (assumed, or the negotiations would be handed off to TB)
Hainsey - $0.57M
TOTAL - $1.77M

So, Tampa would save close to $2M in salary—they are apparently at $37M without Andreychuk's salary accounted.

Money aside, this deal would be a steal for the Habs.

Ah, perchance to dream!

This is exactly the kind of steal Gainey can make when he has room under tha cap and the other teams don't. Richards outscored our cousin Vinny and this year he will outscore St. Louis.
Having said that, I think the rumor is too good to be true.

[Doc Holliday]

ryan said:

3. I heard Feaster myself on the Fan590 this weak talking about Richards and how he will be keeping him no matter what. I realize you can't believe everything a GM says, but if you've ever heard this guy talk you know he's not into mind games.
.

I am certain that Feaster wants to keep all of his star players but cap realities are catching up to him. He’s already dangerously close to the limit with still 2-3 players to sign, he knows that next summer he will have a real problem with Richards… When Feaster will move, it will be to realease salary and so this rumored deal would be the kind that would happen.

pth said:

It's only in terms of Cap space that I'd be worried.

Richards in means Koivu out. That would be the only way we could afford Richards both in terms of salary and ice time. Bob would have to trade Koivu for about nothing. Suddenly this deals becomes: Koivu + Ryder + Hainsey + 3rd for Richards and about nothing. A little steeper in terms of asset cost…

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Geeze! It's odd not hearing something like this without Al Strachan in the background somewhere.

Sheesh ... where do these start?!?

Cheers.

[PTH]

docholliday said:

Richards in means Koivu out. That would be the only way we could afford Richards both in terms of salary and ice time. Bob would have to trade Koivu for about nothing. Suddenly this deals becomes: Koivu + Ryder + Hainsey + 3rd for Richards and about nothing. A little steeper in terms of asset cost…

Ice time wise, couldn't one of Richards, Ribs, Bonk or Saku go on the wing? I know Bonk's played the wing... Richards playing style makes me think he could be an excellent LW.

Richards-Ribeiro-Perezhogin?

Anyhow, I'd look at moving Ribs more than Saku. Richards is an upgrade on Ribs and we could get significant help elsewhere by dealing Ribs.

Higgins-Richards-Perezhogin? That's an awfully young 2nd line, and without Ribs I wonder if it's worth keeping Dagenais.

[Doc Holliday]

pth said:

Ice time wise, couldn't one of Richards, Ribs, Bonk or Saku go on the wing? I know Bonk's played the wing... Richards playing style makes me think he could be an excellent LW.

Richards-Ribeiro-Perezhogin?

I like that and you are right, Richards can and did play wing before (even did it with Lecavalier)..

pth said:

I'd look at moving Ribs more than Saku.

If you keep both Richards and Koivu you find yourself in Tampa’s situation, be it cap clogged this year and just postponing the choice between Koivu or Richards to next summer.

pth said:

we could get significant help elsewhere by dealing Ribs.

We could. But dealing Ribs gives you minimal cap space so you’re not likely going to seek significant help getting significant salary… All in all you would be dealing a highly productive, young and cheap asset just to clear roster space while Saku may just as well leave via free agency anyway…

[PTH]

docholliday said:

If you keep both Richards and Koivu you find yourself in Tampa’s situation, be it cap clogged this year and just postponing the choice between Koivu or Richards to next summer.

We could. But dealing Ribs gives you minimal cap space so you’re not likely going to seek significant help getting significant salary… All in all you would be dealing a highly productive, young and cheap asset just to clear roster space while Saku may just as well leave via free agency anyway…

My brain knows you're right, but my heart isn't sure at all.

To me Saku is the heart and soul of this team, and I'd seriously try to sign him long-term before just getting a replacement asset and really just pushing him away...

Actually, I'd rather trade Theo than Saku. To me trading Saku would like the Carbonneau trade - even if it had been a smart move hockey-wise, for team unity and the quality of the organisation and how it treats its players, it's bad. To me Ribs and Theo are just assets, to be used and traded if needed.

[heidivanstone]

This trade makes sense from both teams perspectives. Tampa Bay would receive two cheaper players and a draft pick. Ryder has lots of upside, and could develop into an excellent player.

Montreal has the room to potentially keep a player like Richards. No risk no gain. This would be an excellent move to get Montreal moving into the right directions.

I know people are worried about losing Saku, but Saku is on his way down, and has historically had injury problems because he plays hard on the ice.

[Forum Ghost]

pth said:

To me Saku is the heart and soul of this team, and I'd seriously try to sign him long-term before just getting a replacement asset and really just pushing him away...

Actually, I'd rather trade Theo than Saku. To me trading Saku would like the Carbonneau trade - even if it had been a smart move hockey-wise, for team unity and the quality of the organisation and how it treats its players, it's bad.

Agree 100%.

Some members of the media might not agree, but Saku is the heart and soul of the Habs. His play in the 2004 playoffs is a testament to that.

I would much rather trade Ribs for Richards. Tampa gets a young, productive center to replace Richards, and saves about $2M of cap room at the same time. With Ryder, they still have to negotiate a deal. Ribs is already signed.

Also, I think the Habs are a much better team with a Koivu-Richards one-two punch down the middle instead of a Richards-Ribeiro combo.

[Forum Ghost]

docholliday said:

If you keep both Richards and Koivu you find yourself in Tampa’s situation, be it cap clogged this year and just postponing the choice between Koivu or Richards to next summer.

I don't see why we wouldn't be able to keep both. A 1A and 1B center to fill out our top two lines. Salary-wise neither would be commanding $6M or $7M. Both could probably be had for $8M total.

And even if having them as centers becomes a problem then you simply move Richards to the wing.

We could. But dealing Ribs gives you minimal cap space so you’re not likely going to seek significant help getting significant salary… All in all you would be dealing a highly productive, young and cheap asset just to clear roster space while Saku may just as well leave via free agency anyway…

True, but players like Ribs are going to be in a lot more demand because they are cheap and productive. Gainey could easily trade Ribs for a quality defenceman or (if he doesn't want to take on a lot of payroll) he could trade Ribs for a quality prospect or two.

Having Ribs as a trading card gives Gainey a lot more options than Koivu does.

And besides, the whole point is what's best for the team. IMO the Habs are a stronger team with Koivu and Richards than they are with Richards and Ribs.

[Forum Ghost]

docholliday said:

Richards in means Koivu out. That would be the only way we could afford Richards both in terms of salary and ice time. Bob would have to trade Koivu for about nothing. Suddenly this deals becomes: Koivu + Ryder + Hainsey + 3rd for Richards and about nothing. A little steeper in terms of asset cost…

If Richards asks for Martin St. Louis type money ($5M) then I think that the Habs can find a way to keep both him and Koivu happy.

As for ice-time... if Colorado could make Sakic/Forsberg work and Detroit could make Yzerman/Fedorov work, then I'm sure the Habs could make Koivu/Richards work as well.


Keeping both of them on the same team could mean....

Zednik-Koivu-Kovalev

Richards-Ribeiro-Perezhogin



Or if Gainey trades Ribs instead of Ryder.....

Zednik-Koivu-Kovalev

Perezhogin-Richards-Ryder



Or even.....

Zednik-Koivu-Kovalev

Higgins-Richards-Ryder



A player like Richards would add a ton of depth to the Habs lineup. The lineup combinations could be endless. Needless to say, I really hope that there is some truth to this rumour.

[PTH]

forumghost2 said:

A player like Richards would add a ton of depth to the Habs lineup.

A major bonus to having Richards around would be that with a very capable top-2 center waiting in the wings (litterally!), we'd have 2 fairly effective offensive lines as long as only one of Saku and Ribs got hurt. Right now we have to look forward to an injury and then seeing a semi-adequate offensive line cobbled together, or to see a Bonk-centered line be given a much larger role. Really, neither scenario is all that hot.

[nivram]

Is this the same rumor mill that had Kariya coming to Mtl?

Marvin

[Deleted]

Ryder can emerge to be the same kind of player. Just give him another year.

[PTH didnt bother logging in]

mattdhf said:

Ryder can emerge to be the same kind of player. Just give him another year.

Perhaps, but Hainsey and a 3d are a low cost to be sure that we get a player like that out of Ryder. Also, a solid center like Richards is worth more, IMO, than a good scoring winger like Ryder. However good Ryder is, he's not the focal point of a line; Richards can be that.

[seventeen]

mattdhf said:

Ryder can emerge to be the same kind of player. Just give him another year.

I'm not so sure, and I like Ryder. I think he can be just a little better than last year....say 70 points. I really do think he's close to as good as he'll be. But then what do I know?

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

franko said:

Eklund hasn't mentioned it, so how can it be true? ;D

If Eklund mentioned a trade it would have been Ryder, Hainsey and a second rounder for Crosby.

Yeah, sure, I believe it! Simple swap of Maratimers.

[Skilly]

habsfaninla said:

franko said:

Eklund hasn't mentioned it, so how can it be true? ;D

If Eklund mentioned a trade it would have been Ryder, Hainsey and a second rounder for Crosby.

Yeah, sure, I believe it! Simple swap of Maratimers.

Grumbles. Ryder is not a maritimer. Newfoundland is not a maritime province. Newfoundland is apart of the Atlantic provinces with New Brunswick, PEI, and Nova Scotia ..... but we are not apart of the Maritime provinces. Little geography lesson

Ryder has stated he is unaware of any trade talk involving him, and even laughed at the supposed Florida rumour. The rumour supposedly started on Saturday (the day Ryder was interviewed by the local newspaper in a "20 Questions with ...... " article). Pretty sure this is total BS .... but if this was true what a coup for Gainey!!!