Lateralous Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 (edited) I know it's not realistic, but if Boston were looking to move Big Joe after his no show in the playoffs this year, would you be willing to part with Gomez, Rafalski and our 1st rounder to aquire him? Would this even be enough? I think Rafalski is a good candidate to be moved with the emergence of Martin. Also, I would think that with the upcoming labor dispute, there will be plenty of 3rd pairing defenseman available though free agency to fill the void on D. Giroux is also a possibility here. While Gomez is a good center, we would be upgrading our 1st line center without question. We are very deep with smallish centers right now but Thornton, Parise Madden and Hrdina with Foster and Vrana waiting in the wings would look pretty damn good IMO. Edited May 3, 2004 by PhillyDevil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 First off, its highly doubtful that Boston would trade their franchise player. I wouldn't do it for Gomer & Rafi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satans Hockey Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 Stupid to even talk about it there isn't a 0.01% chance of joe getting traded anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundstrom Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 he "didn't show up" because his arm/wrist was damaged to the point where he could hardly shoot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Devsrule Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 Thornton is overrated IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueNJ97 Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 he "didn't show up" because his arm/wrist was damaged to the point where he could hardly shoot. Maybe, but that didn't make him take several stupid penalties. That's Joe's lack of maturity/hockey sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfsharkalligatorhalfman Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 yeah uhhhh not going to happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hells Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 yeah uhhhh not going to happen Hey, it could....on NHL 2004 they show a magazine on the front of which it says "Joe Thornton traded for Dany Heatley".... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 Scott Gomez + Brian Rafalski + first-round pick = more bang for the buck than Joe Thornton Joe's a great player, but three-for-one trades are generally not a good idea in the NHL. You need a lot of good players to win. He makes too much money for the Devs, considering two or three players on the Devs are already getting star money - Brodeur, Stevens, Elias. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 Rafalski is in my mind expendable. Giroux can take his place easily if he were traded. Gomez is difficult to replace, but if you've got the opportunity to get a franchise player like Thornton you make that deal. Granted this is all a pipedream since Boston would never trade Thornton, but these would be very good lines for the coming season: Elias Thornton Gionta Friesen Parise Kozlov Pandolfo Madden Langenbrunner Brylin Hrdina Stevenson White Niedermayer Hale Martin (Defenseman to be named later) Giroux Brodeur Clemmensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 It's not the worst trade idea I've ever heard though I'd pass both because you're giving up two good players and another potential good player for one great player who doesn't always play like it (nevermind the playoffs this year, Joe sleepwalked through half the year and he really hasn't produced in the playoffs yet, period) and because I'd almost always rather have the two-three good players over one great player regardless, plus I doubt Boston'd be looking to move Joe just yet anyway. Another early exit and 75-80 point year and that might be a possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lateralous Posted May 3, 2004 Author Share Posted May 3, 2004 (edited) I realize that it is unrealistic so nobody needs to point that out again. Obviously Boston would be crazy to get rid of him. Hasan, I disagree about quantity over quality trades. In the Devils position, with there track record of drafting and replacing departed players, I would always trade 2 or 3 of our good players for a great one. That Sykora trade for Friesen and Tverdovsky still bothers me. I know Gomez and Rafalski are both really good players, but you would essentially be replacing them with Thornton and Martin, with Giroux taking Martin's 3rd line minutes, which overall is an upgrade IMO. Edited May 3, 2004 by PhillyDevil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 It's not the worst trade idea I've ever heard though I'd pass both because you're giving up two good players and another potential good player for one great player who doesn't always play like it. And that should throw up a red flag. He's not worth it. Come on Newarkdevil, let's take it easy with the Giroux-can-easily-replace-Rafalski argument. Rafalski brings more to the party. You know it. Anyway, Rafalski is expendable, in my mind, because of Paul Martin, not Giroux. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 Well I guess it depends on your perspective. Giroux in my mind can easily play the role of the third offensive defenseman on this team. Martin in my opinion can easily play the role of the second pairing offensive defenseman and Niedermayer has the top pairing spot locked up. To me that means Rafalski, whether you believe him to be better or worse than Giroux or Martin, is expendable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 and we wonder why Brian has said he's not taking his qualifying offer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Devsrule Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 Just keep in mind Rafalski's leg was probably not 100% when he game back.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 What I'm saying isn't a reflection on how Rafalski played, its a reflection on how Giroux and Martin played. I've seen Rafalski at his best worst and medium. I know what he can give me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRafalski Posted May 4, 2004 Share Posted May 4, 2004 What I'm saying isn't a reflection on how Rafalski played, its a reflection on how Giroux and Martin played. I've seen Rafalski at his best worst and medium. I know what he can give me. 2004 Playoffs, minimum four games and mind you that Philly is solid through four lines, when they want to be. Giroux +1 Albelin +1 Rafalski 0 White -1 Martin -4 Neidermayer -5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted May 4, 2004 Share Posted May 4, 2004 Saying that Philly is solid through four lines doesn't mean anything. The line that was firing on all cylinders was the Primeau line and Nieds and Martin were out there against them for most of the series. Plus/minus doesn't really tell the story. I'm not saying Rafalski is a bad player. Far from it. He's a very good player and very valuable, but at this point I am of the opinion that he is worth more to us in trade than he is on the ice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted May 4, 2004 Share Posted May 4, 2004 Anyway, NewarkDevil, we agree that Rafalski is expendable. I wouldn't be surprised if he isn't in a Devil uniform next season..well, considering he's a restricted free agent under the old CBA rules and no one knows what the new rules will look like, who knows what will happen with Rafalski and all the other players in the league without contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRafalski Posted May 4, 2004 Share Posted May 4, 2004 Saying that Philly is solid through four lines doesn't mean anything. The line that was firing on all cylinders was the Primeau line and Nieds and Martin were out there against them for most of the series. Plus/minus doesn't really tell the story. I'm not saying Rafalski is a bad player. Far from it. He's a very good player and very valuable, but at this point I am of the opinion that he is worth more to us in trade than he is on the ice. Bottom line here is I don't see the defense of this team being broken up for any offensive prospects or talent. With all the uncertainity of the CBA looming, it is actually the players of any value who would be the hard ones to move. I'm not trying to be nit-picky on errors, but Neidermayer was on the ice for most of the time when the Roenick/Zhamnov/Amonte line was out, which was the line that accounted for 8 of Philly's 14 goals. That was the hottest line and plus/minus tells the story in this case. Rafalski was getting bowled over by Primeau for most of the series, but somehow managed to stay on the upside of things. Any other line Philly rolled just dominated us. One assist in five games from the guy who used to quarterback the PP is disappointing though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted May 4, 2004 Share Posted May 4, 2004 I don't want to make it look like I don't like Rafalski. I think he's a good player. This is a money issue more than anything else. Rafalski will command more money in arbitartion than the Devs are willing to pay him, I think.....considering that Paul Martin probably doesn't even make a million dollars and has shown that he's a top 4 defenseman isn't a good sign for Rafalski staying here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJayDevil Posted May 4, 2004 Share Posted May 4, 2004 Until he does something productive in the playoffs, I will consider him. But for Gomez, Raf, and a 1st, get the hell out here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Man Posted May 4, 2004 Share Posted May 4, 2004 Thornton hasn't done squat in the playoffs in any season. Yes he was injured but as Sue said he didn't need to take stupid penalties. No he doesn't belong on the Devils he wouldn't be a good fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted May 4, 2004 Share Posted May 4, 2004 I'd say that the first rounder is the thing that'd give me pause. If that could be worked to a second rounder I'd definitely be ok with it. But again, this is just idle speculation because Boston would never make that deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.