We'd want Cheechoo because he can turn it around. Look what happened to Marleau.
GM Hockey
Go to page : 1, 2
Cap'n Clutch wrote:We'd want Cheechoo because he can turn it around. Look what happened to Marleau.
davetherave wrote:
And why would the Senators want an underachieving Cheechoo, who is signed for two more years at 3.5MM per?
504Heater wrote:Of course, this will never happen, because if the Sharks sustain an injury in their top 6, Cheechoo can step in immediately and help. That's depth for ya.
PKC wrote:Cronie wrote:Heard that there is a possibility the Sharks come out swinging to snag both Neil and Kuba later today; however, with no 1st in their arsenal, Murray may look elsewhere.
As they say, let the bidding wars begin.
I'd take Cheechoo, a prospect, and their highest available pick.
Phoenix30 wrote:PKC wrote:Cronie wrote:Heard that there is a possibility the Sharks come out swinging to snag both Neil and Kuba later today; however, with no 1st in their arsenal, Murray may look elsewhere.
As they say, let the bidding wars begin.
I'd take Cheechoo, a prospect, and their highest available pick.
I'd do Cheechoo, Logan, 2009 2nd, 2010 1st for Kuba and Neil. The price to pay for both players when both individually could get you picks and quality player or prospect.
marakh wrote:Phoenix30 wrote:PKC wrote:Cronie wrote:Heard that there is a possibility the Sharks come out swinging to snag both Neil and Kuba later today; however, with no 1st in their arsenal, Murray may look elsewhere.
As they say, let the bidding wars begin.
I'd take Cheechoo, a prospect, and their highest available pick.
I'd do Cheechoo, Logan, 2009 2nd, 2010 1st for Kuba and Neil. The price to pay for both players when both individually could get you picks and quality player or prospect.
You`re way off. DOn`t forget they are 2 UFAs.
Urkie wrote:Big Bruce brought up the name Logan Couture in his blog.
http://www.blog.canoe.ca/offtheposts
asq2 wrote:He mentions we should be interested in getting Couture, which is pretty obvious but doesn't mean he's available.
It's sort of like saying that if we were to trade Ruutu back to Pittsburgh, we should be interested in Malkin.
Urkie wrote:asq2 wrote:He mentions we should be interested in getting Couture, which is pretty obvious but doesn't mean he's available.
It's sort of like saying that if we were to trade Ruutu back to Pittsburgh, we should be interested in Malkin.
If we're giving up Kuba and Neil then they better give up Couture because they don't have their 1st rounder.
Go to page : 1, 2
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum