Rumors from the NHL Blogosphere – October 17, 2011.

In today’s roundup of trade rumors from the NHL blogosphere: five potential trades for the Maple Leafs…Should the Rangers trade Brandon Dubinsky?…Cory Schneider to the Coyotes?…Canucks close to landing Kyle Turris?…Senators and Oilers talking “major swap”.

THE HOCKEY WRITERS: Peter Harling recently offered up five potential trade targets for the Toronto Maple Leafs, including New Jersey’s Zach Parise and Colorado’s Paul Stastny.

SPECTOR’S NOTE: Harling isn’t saying the Leafs are chasing those players, merely offering them up as possibilities. I don’t believe Parise or Statsny will be available for the Leafs to pursue this season or next summer. He also suggested Jordan Staal, Jason Spezza and Kyle Turris as other possibilities, but I don’t see them pulling on Leafs jerseys anytime soon.

BLEACHER REPORT: Tom Urtz Jr. suggests the NY Rangers should trade forward Brandon Dubinsky, perhaps by offering him to the Phoenix Coyotes for Ray Whitney or to the Nashville Predators for Ryan Suter.

SPECTOR’S NOTE: Yes, the Rangers are off to a slow start, but it is only three games into the season, and GM Glen Sather isn’t going to panic, especially by trading away Dubinsky. 

GATHER.COM: Larry Seely cites Bleacher Report in claiming the Vancouver Canucks could trade goalie Cory Schneider to the Phoenix Coyotes.

SPECTOR’S NOTE: Can’t see it happening. The Canucks intend to use Schneider more often earlier in the season until starter Roberto Luongo rounds back into mid-season form, while the Coyotes are 2-1-1 in their first four games, and their current tandem of Mike Smith and Jason Labarbera don’t appear to be having any difficulties.

HOCKEYBUZZ.COM: “Eklund” claimed the Edmonton Oilers and Ottawa Senators were “talking major swap”, following up by claiming the talks had nothing to do with Jason Spezza, but “.rather a D-man the Oilers want and a young stud forward the Senators want in return..and “one of the Oilers recent first overall picks may be in play if the Oilers get a certain “young star D-man…” “Eklund” also claimed two sources said the Canucks were close to acquiring Kyle Turris from the Phoenix Coyotes, or perhaps “a top six forward” within the next 48 hours.

SPECTOR’S NOTE: Not sure why the Oilers would part with “one of their recent first overall picks” (which would be either Ryan Nugent-Hopkins or Taylor Hall) for a “certain young star D-man” from the Senators. The Sens have some promising young defensemen, but none are “stars” at this point in time, and certainly none which would address the Oilers need for an experienced, skilled puck-moving defenseman. As for the Canucks and Turris, there’s been nothing in the Vancouver media about GM Mike Gillis pursuing a trade, while recent reports claim the Coyotes have no intention of trading Turris.

25 Comments

  1. RAY WHITNEY???

  2. Eklund sure can stir the pot and often so much of it has little or no basis to it. Right now I think all the teams are talking to each other about one thing or the other just to feel out the trade market for deals maybe further down the line

  3. I really have to wonder why anybody bothers to quote the Bleacher Report, it is all pure speculation without any trace of a lead or source. Many of the “articles” are there simply as regular bait to pull in hits. A few that I have seen were even a little deceptive in terms of the story content having very little relation to the headline. Though I’m not a fan of Eklund, he does at least on occasion give some insight into the thoughts of hockey people.

  4. I am not saying that these particular rumors by Eklund carry any weight, only that sometimes he has something worth reading. I don’t see Phoenix getting a goalie upgrade from within their own conference, nor do I think they want to mess with their forwards right now. Maloney also came out recently with a pretty clear indication that he’s playing hard-ball with Turris. He really has to – or risk opening the door to other “public” trade demands.

  5. I agree with Doktordave… at least Eklund’s site has a couple of decent writers that provide some good hockey insights… his rumors are baseless, but the other writers offer some real writing. The Bleacher Report is 100% garbage most of the time. The trade proposals and such are generally so ridiculous that it is difficult to even have an intelligent conversation about potential counter offers.

  6. don’t think dubinsky for sutter straight up would be enough to get the latter. aside from all the other assinine stuff that rangers report said … though tortorella should spend time going around the room with a paddle over his shoulder. kinda time to wake up and play hockey. the rangers have been sloppy at best so far.

  7. Slats is not going to trade Dubinsky. But, they really need a veteran d-man to help the current AHL worthy blueline that they have. It’s absolutely ridiculous.

    As for the Oilers, i think recent first rounder means someone like Gagner, or Pajaarvi. I think the Oilers keep throwing in these teenagers into the NHL, rushing them and there isn’t enough development.

  8. He didn’t say recent first rounder. He said “recent first overall picks.” That means Hall or Nugent-Hopkins, period. Personally I think the Boilers should be looking at dealing one of their young forwards for a blueliner. But I wouldn’t trade Hall or Nuge for anyone short of Shea Weber and even then I’d have to think about it.

  9. Why would Ottawa trade one of their young D for another forward? They have the worst D in the NHL by far; it is not even close. And they have a bunch of promising young forwards in the system. If anything, it should be the opposite scenario.

  10. I almost never put stock in “Eklund”, but it would make perfect sense for the Oilers to go after Karlsson (already a veteran of 150 NHL games with 77 points, over 0.5 points per game) or Rundblad, and it makes perfect sense for the Sens to go after a young forward from the Oilers. So the fit is there, unlike most Eklund rumors.

    But the questions to me are:
    (1) While the Sens have the promising Rundblad and intriguing Wiercioch, do they believe in them enough to make Karlsson movable? Do they believe in Wiercioch enough to move Rundblad?
    (2) Do the Sens value Paajarvi enough to move Karlsson for him? Do the Oilers value Karlsson enough to move one of their top 3 studs (Hall, RNH, Eberle) for him.

    To me, the answer to both questions under (2) is no. It’d make perfect sense to me if the Oilers went to the Sens with an offer of Paajarvi for Karlsson, the Sens counter with one of the 3 studs, and the Oilers balking. A Paajarvi-Rundblad swap would make sense if both managements believe in the player they are acquired, as both have star talent but also carry significant risk at this early career stage.

  11. The trade between Edm & Ott as written by EK will not happen. Murray is re-building the team from the net out. Why would he trade Karlsson, Cowen & Rundblad? These young D will be the future in Ottawa. The vets on the team now… will be gone within 2 or 3 yrs. Let’s hope these young D can succeed.. because right now the vets are setting poor examples with their play. And to DS — 3 of the D in Ottawa is young. Karlsson is in his 3rd year, Cowen has played under 10 NHL games. Rundblad has played 3 NHL games. So it will take time before the latter 2 develop. That’s not to say they will be bad their whole career.
    The Sens need elite offensive prospects.. which they should get in the next two drafts. The have pretty good offensive talent from the last draft .. but they have not had the luxury of the 1st overall picks the last 2 yrs like Edm has to get that elite talent.
    The only trade the Sens will make (if they do) is to trade D to make room for Cowen & Rundblad. They will not be trading Cowen or Rundblad.
    EK is just trying to get more hits on his site. Gee he hasn’t done a Spezza trade rumour in a while. Expect to see that shortly.

  12. Keep in mind, Bleacher Report’s articles are meant to be opinion and speculation about what kind of trade might be good for a team. It doesn’t really report actual trade rumors and if it does, the rumors are supposed to be cited. So, any BR article on potential trades are simply ideas about trades that might benefit a team or, given a team’s situation, could simply be within the realm of possibility. Also, keep in mind that Tom Urtz, Jr. is a very bad writer. That’s the unfortunate part about Bleacher Report—some writers are really good and others are terrible and just troll the cite that they are writing for. They need better screening and selection of writers.

  13. Is there anything more useless than trade rumours THREE games into the season? Even GMs with itchy trigger-fingers are going to wait at least 10 games before doing anything. This isn’t fantasy hockey.

  14. Tom Urtz Jr is worse than Eklund. Ray Whitney for Dubinsky. Funniest thing I’ve heard all day!!

  15. The one rumour here that actually makes a lot of sense would be Phoenix targeting Cory Schneider. As for the rest….. Dubinsky for a 39 year old veteran – that pretty much sums it up.

  16. I find that Eklund’s rumors are on par with randomly pointing at two NHL team logos in the Hockey News, flipping to their respective team pages and then randomly pointing at a couple of names and saying that “Team A trades all star goalie X to Team B for their utility fourth line centre Y and seventh defenceman Z.”

  17. The proff that Eklund has no sources than the opening in his own postierior: He NEVER actual names the players in place. That Crap about a “certain D-Man” for “a Recent first pick” …seriously? If he actually had a source they would flat out say palyer X is being offered for player Y. None of this you fill in the blanks garbage. AAAARRRGGGGGGG I HATE EKLUND!!!!!!!!!!

  18. Heck….My Rumors are better than Ek’s
    Phoenix sends Turris to Columbus in reaction to Columbus doing some sort of major change with the realization that Jeff Carter will be out longer than anticipated, and Turris sending word to Columbus thru former teammate Upshall that he’d take less to sign a deal there.

  19. I use to come on this site because there was NOT unjustified trade rumors like Eklunds. Please don’t even bother putting his dumb make believe ideas on here, he does that enough…

  20. It’s quite simple: if you don’t want to read the rumors from the blogosphere posts, just don’t read them, and stick to those MSM rumors I post here. That’s why they’re under separate posts, so folks who don’t want to read those from rumor bloggers don’t have to.

  21. Dubinsky for Whitney? Whatever this guy is smoking is clearly some powerful stuff. Why would the rangers trade away a youth player, this early in the season, for an aging player.

    I don’t see there being any shred of logic, reason, or credibility to this rumor.

  22. I never said it was a rumor. It clearly says SPECULATION. I was asked a question on twitter by some fans and I wrote my opinion. If the whole story was read, I never suggested a one for one trade involving Dubinsky and Whitney. I don’t appreciate the negative publicity by not clarifying my intentions.

    I clearly stated my reasoning and said it was highly unlikely, I used the term fantasy scenario. FYI, Whitney has posted at least 50 points in the last 4 seasons. He has not shown an ounce of age lately. He would do a lot more than Fedetenko.

    In the future please don’t post stories of mine with misleading headlines.

    What it actually says

    “The Rangers could deal a combination of or any player including Dan Girardi, Brandon Dubinsky, Christian Thomas and a first-round pick to acquire a combination or players including Keith Yandle Ray Whitney, and Mikkel Bødker.

    You may call me crazy but with the rising play of Ryan McDonagh, Michael Sauer, and Dylan McIlrath in the wings a year or two away, where will Girardi fit in? Assuming Staal comes back healthy, if the Rangers make a move for a top defender, eventually they will be finically obligated to push someone out.
    That man would be Dan Girardi in all likelihood. He will be 31 when his current contract expires.
    This summer the Rangers will have some cap to work with This is a fantasy situation and a trade that with some fine-tuning could actually work out..”

    I bolded and italicized text to note it was opinion. Don’t like my opinion sorry.

  23. Tom: First of all, the title of your piece was “Should the NY Rangers trade Brandon Dubinsky”. So, where is the misleading headline here? Second, you did suggest a trade involving Dubinsky and Whitney:

    “Phoenix would most likely part with an aging veteran in exchange for Brandon Dubinsky, ” prefacing that by suggesting the Rangers should look at acquiring Ray Whitney.

    Third, it’s pretty obvious you’re merely offering your opinion, but there was nothing misleading about the headline used, or the fact you were merely suggesting the Rangers trade Dubinsky, rather than citing it as a fact, which was duly noted.

    Furthermore, nowhere did I disparage you, or your opinion, or “call you crazy” You posted your opinion, I posted mine, and did so without disparaging you, so you have no reason to be upset.. You weren’t misquoted, your words weren’t taken out of context, and you were treated fairly.

  24. No that was not the title. What you posted is the headline from the main page. The title if you click through to the article is NHLTrade Speculation: Should The Rangers Trade Brandon Dubinsky.

    This is done so all intentions are clear about it being an idea and not a rumor like other commenters have such suggested.

    That one quote you just took is a small part of the overall proposal. There is no way I would make that one for one trade involving Dubinsky and Whitney. The way you wrote it though it made it sound like I was suggesting a simple one for one traded which makes me look unintentionally foolish.

    I was not directing my comments solely at you. It was also at readers. I was just angry because you used the headline and not the title and it becomes a bit misleading. Also I realize you never called me crazy.

    That section is in quotes from the text detailing the proposed deals in its entirety. I was just caught off guard that is all. I meant nothing ill towards you.

  25. Tom, not to belabor the point, but the way I wrote my link to your post was done in the same context as both the headline and the way you wrote the post. You asked the question if Brandon Dubinsky should be traded, offered up your opinion as to why, and suggested two trade scenarios. Those main points were duly noted above, and in no way disparages you, nor was it misleading in any way.