|
|
Post by CrocRob on Feb 28, 2008 9:42:31 GMT -5
Bob would never trade Komi ... what he conveniently leaves out, is who Montreal wanted in return. He listed a bunch of prospects, but no one Montreal would have even considered giving up Komi for. Exactly my thoughts. I don't think there's even a package of prospects and players that the Islanders could put together to get Komisarek at the moment. My gut, if this is all true, is that it was McCabe ... and the Leafs wanted a first round pick or a good prospect. That's a good point. McCabe, by all reports, was willing to waive his NTC to go to a few select teams. Given his connections to the area I would presume those teams were NYR, NYI, NJ (or some combination thereof). |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 15, 2008 7:03:10 GMT -5
Let's resurrect this thread now that the season is over.  His latest rumor. The Leafs after Lecavalier? - I have no idea what the Leafs could offer that would interest Tampa. I would think the cap pressure is off Feaster somewhat with Richards gone. He also says the Habs are the leaders for Hossa. This doesn't jibe with everything else I read that says the Penguins are pushing hard to re-sign him. www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=15685 |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jun 15, 2008 7:28:02 GMT -5
His latest rumor. The Leafs after Lecavalier? - I have no idea what the Leafs could offer that would interest Tampa. I would think the cap pressure is off Feaster somewhat with Richards gone. Whatever. It's from Bill Watters, who suggested that now that the Leafs have a bona-fide coach (and Maruice wasn't?) -- one who Vinny could play for (and would be glad to play for?) -- Lecavalier will come to Toronto once he hits free agency (I mean, who wouldn't want to paly for the Leafs -- especially since Brian Burke is still going to coach there after next season?). So point one: the Leafs don't have to offer TBay anything -- they just wait for next year when Vinny jumps at the chance to play for the Leafs. And point two: once the ownership situation get resolved in TBay Vinny may be asked to sign for life. And point three: it's Eklund, for goodness sake! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 15, 2008 15:23:16 GMT -5
His latest rumor. The Leafs after Lecavalier? - I have no idea what the Leafs could offer that would interest Tampa. I would think the cap pressure is off Feaster somewhat with Richards gone. Whatever. It's from Bill Watters, who suggested that now that the Leafs have a bona-fide coach (and Maruice wasn't?) -- one who Vinny could play for (and would be glad to play for?) -- Lecavalier will come to Toronto once he hits free agency (I mean, who wouldn't want to paly for the Leafs -- especially since Brian Burke is still going to coach there after next season?). So point one: the Leafs don't have to offer TBay anything -- they just wait for next year when Vinny jumps at the chance to play for the Leafs. And point two: once the ownership situation get resolved in TBay Vinny may be asked to sign for life. And point three: it's Eklund, for goodness sake! ;D I find Watters more arrogant all the time & I can't figure out why. His track record is right down there with Eklund. He 's usually wrong on his predictions - regular season or playoffs & he is wrong on his pronouncements about Burke coming this year. And I find him kind of two faced. He slagged the Wings & there players all playoffs but toadies up to his Red Wing guests. He doesn't ask the obvious question - Why would V.L. leave a losing situation in Tampa to go to another losing situation in Toronto? He's tasted a Stanley Cup, why would he consider another losing organization. Just because Wilson is there? Give me a break. Tortorella has something Wilson will probably never have, especially in TO - a Cup ring. If Lecavalier hits UFA next year at 29 he will likely be the prize catch & the whole league will be after him. The Leafs won't even be in the running. PS: I flipped off the radio several days ago when he actually said the 93 Leafs would have beaten the Habs in the final because Burns was a better coach then Demers. Well if Burns was so good how the he!! did he lose to Melrose?  |
|
