|
Post by Rob on Oct 13, 2015 18:18:56 GMT -5
The Chicago Blackhawks and Calgary Flames have made the following trade:
To Calgary
(D) T. Daley (Fw) R. Hartman
To Chicago
(D) D. Engelland (Fw) M. Ferland
Reason for trade:
I'm in need of a physical presence on my blue line that's more of a prototypical reliable stay at home defenceman. Engelland fits the mold and is friendly on my cap space. Ferland and Hartman are almost the same mold with Hartman having an edge for offensive upside. Ferland having the edge for a more physical/defensive upside. I have the scorers I need but lack a player with a physical and defensive upside so Ferland will fit in like a glove. Trevor Daley is just one more of the same defenceman I already have in Rundblad, Seabrook and Keith so I chose to make him expendable to gain a valuable physical defensive asset.
Note: As per rules, the Calgary Flames will need to confirm this trade and the board will review this transaction, they have 24hrs to raise any concerns.
|
|
|
Post by Beans (BOS) on Oct 13, 2015 19:11:58 GMT -5
If accepted by Calgary, I have no concerns.
|
|
|
Post by JasonG on Oct 13, 2015 21:19:10 GMT -5
The Chicago Blackhawks and Calgary Flames have made the following trade: To Calgary
(D) T. Daley (Fw) R. Hartman
To Chicago
(D) D. Engelland (Fw) M. Ferland
Reason for trade: I'm in need of a physical presence on my blue line that's more of a prototypical reliable stay at home defenceman. Engelland fits the mold and is friendly on my cap space. Ferland and Hartman are almost the same mold with Hartman having an edge for offensive upside. Ferland having the edge for a more physical/defensive upside. I have the scorers I need but lack a player with a physical and defensive upside so Ferland will fit in like a glove. Trevor Daley is just one more of the same defenceman I already have in Rundblad, Seabrook and Keith so I chose to make him expendable to gain a valuable physical defensive asset.
Note: As per rules, the Calgary Flames will need to confirm this trade and the board will review this transaction, they have 24hrs to raise any concerns.
Calgary has agreed to this deal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2015 11:12:37 GMT -5
Chicago is getting fleeced but it's not a veto type situation at all.
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Oct 14, 2015 12:06:26 GMT -5
Can you elaborate Chey ?
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Oct 14, 2015 12:37:15 GMT -5
Having a Trevor Daley being used as a 5th defenceman makes less sense than having a good quality tough reliable defenceman in Engelland (who I sorly lack and needed) is really my entire mentality with this trade. I feel he would bring more of what I need and is friendly on the cap hit (650k spare cap room to start season without reserves) and would bring a lot more than a potentially unhappy and unproductive Trevor Daley during the season as he would not be getting the ice-time as opposed to Engelland being slotted for that bottom role who will not belly ache over icetime.
Is Daley a better defenceman ? Sure he is, but it's about adding an ingredient into my potential Stanley Cup lineup that I'm missing for the grueling 82 games ahead of me. As for Hartman and Ferland they are around the same prototype, Ferland being favored for a more defensive, physical player , Hartman just as tough but more of a offensive flair. Fleeced ? I suppose that's how it would look to an Oilers GM =) har, har, har
|
|
|
Post by Dax (WPG) on Oct 14, 2015 13:20:31 GMT -5
Not going to lie I'd be a little bit more scared of Chicago with those two in their lineup. Chicago doesn't have much snarl and with Panarin bringing in more cheap skill. I'd say Chicago is the odds on favourite for a cup run at this point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2015 13:34:14 GMT -5
I just don't value "toughness" in a defenceman who can't skate or pass and whose contract is awfully spooky looking.
Different strokes I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Beans (BOS) on Oct 15, 2015 12:11:23 GMT -5
This transaction has officially been approved.
|
|