Well I certainly haven’t mentioned the highlighted part, I rarely engage in hockey trade talk.

I can see all the mentions of trading this guy , we can’t bring back the same team, need to move one of, this, that or the other.

Say it enough with no mention of return, it certainly sounds like move this, that, or the other, for whatever.
- Makita

You trying to stir the pot old man


I really like the character of Jake . I like my team more and I think he can get us a very decent return.

Not only would having a good Dman come in on a trade but it then sets up a future trade for OJ

I want Jake for Ristolainen

IF we trade Jake, it should only be for a NHL ready dman. What kind of idiot would trade him for a second? A second is more likely to bust than be as useful as Jake is, and unlikely to ever be an upgrade.
- Retinalz

Really, you think he is worth a first?

If jake is traded for a terrible Dman like Rostialin(sp), then it’s a step back.

Why?
- bloatedmosquito

He’s going to be an Adams finalist this year?

Really, you think he is worth a first?

If jake is traded for a terrible Dman like Rostialin(sp), then it’s a step back.
- Makita

Ristolainen puts up forty points every year on a bad team. There was no Edler to play along side of him on Buffalo. He was their best.

You trying to stir the pot old man


I really like the character of Jake . I like my team more and I think he can get us a very decent return.

Not only would having a good Dman come in on a trade but it then sets up a future trade for OJ

I want Jake for Ristolainen
- VANTEL

Maybe Jake for Larsson?

You trying to stir the pot old man


I really like the character of Jake . I like my team more and I think he can get us a very decent return.

Not only would having a good Dman come in on a trade but it then sets up a future trade for OJ

I want Jake for Ristolainen
- VANTEL

Oops 😬 should have read your post before saying don’t move jake for that bad defense guy

Maybe Jake for Larsson?
- 1970vintage

Risto gets double the points he does.

Risto gets double the points he does.
- VANTEL

i always thought risto was a solid top pairing D man, but talking to BUF fans, they dislike him as much as we disliked Sbisa.

Risto gets double the points he does.
- VANTEL

But Larsson cost Hall, and if Risto is better then Jake is probably not enough. Add in a 1st and maybe there’s a trade there...

Risto gets double the points he does.
- VANTEL

Well his -43 will fit right in with the team, I’m sure Green and Baumgartner will love him and play him 25 mins a game

Oops 😬 should have read your post before saying don’t move jake for that bad defense guy
- Makita

Every game I seen Risto play I never questioned his D.

He played on the second worst team and was the top guy with no goal tending . I would take him and his 40 pts any day over Jakes 20 pts.

If we lose tonight and end up with the same record as the Ducks - who finishes lower?

If we lose tonight and end up with the same record as the Ducks - who finishes lower?
- Brooks_Light

Canucks - ROW!

Also, the Ducks suck and the Canucks are on the rise, but both finish with 80 points

Well his -43 will fit right in with the team, I’m sure Green and Baumgartner will love him and play him 25 mins a game
- Makita

Edler had - 39 . They can see if they can combine for a -75

i always thought risto was a solid top pairing D man, but talking to BUF fans, they dislike him as much as we disliked Sbisa.
- Codes1087

Who was his D partner and goalie over the last couple of years. Much like Gudbrandson is playing better with his new partner instead of Hutton and Pouliot.

I seen so many times on here Gudbrandson looks better with Edler . I wonder why that is?

Canucks can’t move up, Flyers own the tie breaker. Either 9th (currently) or 8th if they lose in regulation. Draft 1-2-3 or 8-9-10

Edler had - 39 . They can see if they can combine for a -75
- VANTEL

sign Eddie to a 3 year deal and they could put up a -225!

Canucks can’t move up, Flyers own the tie breaker. Either 9th (currently) or 8th if they lose in regulation. Draft 1-2-3 or 8-9-10
- 1970vintage

I am okay with that.

Who was his D partner and goalie over the last couple of years. Much like Gudbrandson is playing better with his new partner instead of Hutton and Pouliot.

I seen so many times on here Gudbrandson looks better with Edler . I wonder why that is?
- VANTEL

I’m not opposed to trading Jake for Rasmus, I just don’t think there’s equal value there, based on what “good D” cost these days.

I am okay with that.
- VANTEL

It is what it is. Would rather be picking higher, but I would also rather pick higher after winning the cup

I’m sure we will get a good player, who will contribute a few years down the road. I’m just glad it’s not 10th, we would never hear the end of it.

I’m not opposed to trading Jake for Rasmus, I just don’t think there’s equal value there, based on what “good D” cost these days.
- 1970vintage

We could throw in Pouliot

We could throw in Pouliot
- VANTEL

And Goldobin?

Had it ever been that busy ? I don’t remember a time ...
- Redmile247

I guess you guys had some prominent guys who posted loads so it always seemed there was some flamer around.

It is what it is. Would rather be picking higher, but I would also rather pick higher after winning the cup

I’m sure we will get a good player, who will contribute a few years down the road. I’m just glad it’s not 10th, we would never hear the end of it.
- 1970vintage

We are either going to pick 1 2 or 3 or not ,depends on the Luck. We have finished third before and still picked 5 th.

After that I think you have an equal shot at a guy like Cozens or Boldy at 4 th or 10 th and I am pretty sure I would rather Boldy over Cozens even though Cozens is projected to go 4 th. It all depends on the selections before us but there will still be good players when we draft.

I’m not opposed to trading Jake for Rasmus, I just don’t think there’s equal value there, based on what “good D” cost these days.
- 1970vintage

So good is based on 41pts, not an overall skill set of the player, ok then,