farinush Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 So Dubas got a bag of doodoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moeknows Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 2 minutes ago, Dom said: WOW!! That seems like a pretty stiff price to pay! Wanted him but glad we didn't pay at that level for him. Good job JR and PA 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 I'm the opposite. Carolina gave up almost nothing that is deemed pure quality for Guentzel imo Picks and bunting and that's it 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highandinside Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 5 minutes ago, Moeknows said: WOW!! That seems like a pretty stiff price to pay! Wanted him but glad we didn't pay at that level for him. Good job JR and PA I could be wrong but it seems they kept all there top prospects. Quantity over quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeanSeanBean Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 15 minutes ago, Dom said: That's it? Ouch doesn't seem like much. Dubas gonna Dubas I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Fist Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flat land fish Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 9 minutes ago, highandinside said: I could be wrong but it seems they kept all there top prospects. Quantity over quality. Similar to our acquisition of lindholm. Honestly those 2 deals feel like old fashioned MLB trades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farinush Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 9 minutes ago, highandinside said: I could be wrong but it seems they kept all there top prospects. Quantity over quality. Yup. The condition on that 1st is steep Canes didn’t lose any of their top 5 prospects and got a 25% retention. I thought if not Nadeau, Drury must be part of the deal… 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hughes Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 Haha dumbass sucks again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 15 minutes ago, Warhippy said: I'm the opposite. Carolina gave up almost nothing that is deemed pure quality for Guentzel imo Picks and bunting and that's it No kidding. Surprised we didn't beat that 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bardown Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Moeknows said: WOW!! That seems like a pretty stiff price to pay! Wanted him but glad we didn't pay at that level for him. Good job JR and PA Lots of players but I’m curious if it’s quantity over quality I know nothing of these players Morrow isn’t in there so that’s a big surprise Edited March 8 by Bardown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 (edited) The 1st rounder and 5th rounder conditions being Cup finals appearance seems steep. But they got 3 solid prospects, so it's still a pretty gnarly deal for Pittsburgh who had very little in the cupboard. But if Carolina fizzles the deal looks less good. None of Carolina's great prospects though. That's a good deal for Carolina. An okay deal for Pittsburgh. Edited March 8 by JeremyCuddles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Fist Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 5 minutes ago, flat land fish said: Similar to our acquisition of lindholm. Honestly those 2 deals feel like old fashioned MLB trades. Lindholm we gave our 5th best prospect and a 1st. Guentzel got a second and no top 5 prospects. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainCanuck12 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 Guentzel to Carolina for: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester13 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 This seems like a terrible deal for Pitts, no? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBearded1 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 those players are 2nd, 2nd, and a 4th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 I'm in the minority but I think that was a fair deal for a rental. Not worth it to throw away a top prospect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filthy animal Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 22 minutes ago, highandinside said: I could be wrong but it seems they kept all there top prospects. Quantity over quality. Sometmes quantity matters. The number of assets the Pens recieved, they are bound to have a few hits. Way too much though for Guentzel, especially since hes not healthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tower102 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 Neither Van or car were willing to give up a top prospect, Car just has more prospects in the B region. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 12 minutes ago, highandinside said: I could be wrong but it seems they kept all there top prospects. Quantity over quality. Before the season started just looking quick it was their 6th, 7th and 9th ranked prospects but all are having good years and likely ranking higher maybe. It’s hard to say because their prospect pool is very nice! Ponomarev is a 21 year old center who has 29 points in 39 games in the AHL and at 20 had 46 points in 64 games at the AHL. Cruz Lucius is a 19 year RW that’s been a point a game player at college for 2 seasons in a row now (also led his team in points both years). Koivunen is a 20 year old center with 55 points in 57 games (leading his team in points). If you compare them into our prospect pool this is probably 3,4 and 5 with a 1rst round pick. I think it’s a pretty steep price to pay that is unless it comes with an extension. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB28 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 I like Lindholm but then why did we pay so much for Lindholm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 5 minutes ago, TheBearded1 said: those players are 2nd, 2nd, and a 4th Brzustewicz was a 3rd but the way he was playing was valued higher. I think the same could be said about those 3 prospect's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 The return is low but maybe this isn't a trade and sign. He wants to go to free agency Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 4 minutes ago, Master Mind said: I'm in the minority but I think that was a fair deal for a rental. Not worth it to throw away a top prospect. It is, but given what was being thrown around as the ask for Vancouver, and correspondingly that we were out because the price was too high.... It seems, as the kids would say, "mid". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoHeart Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 28 minutes ago, Warhippy said: I'm the opposite. Carolina gave up almost nothing that is deemed pure quality for Guentzel imo Picks and bunting and that's it I agree, this could’ve been easily matched. 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.