Forsberg a Ranger or Flyer???
s_...@pavo.concordia.ca
Quebec papers today report that negotiations between the Nordiques and
Peter Forsberg broke down last night, and that Forsberg and his agent are
starting to negotiate with other clubs.
Supposedly, Mike Keenan and the Rangers have offered Forsberg a deal for
$20 million US for a six year contract with the organization.
Another article (from the Journal the Quebec) indicated earlier -after the
expansion draft- that Philly is also interested in acquiring his services,
but goes on to state that this would be based more on the dubious
motive of "Getting back at the Quebec organization" for passing a fast one
over their head in the deal that sent Baby Lindros to the Flyers.
(Honestly!!!).
Does anyone else out there have the same feeling of Deja Vue I'm feeling
right now?
Glenn...@engr.usask.ca
Message-ID: <6JUL1993...@pavo.concordia.ca>
>Another article (from the Journal the Quebec) indicated earlier -after the
>expansion draft- that Philly is also interested in acquiring his services,
>but goes on to state that this would be based more on the dubious
>motive of "Getting back at the Quebec organization" for passing a fast one
>over their head in the deal that sent Baby Lindros to the Flyers.
It makes sense for the Flyers to try and acquire Forsberg for two
reasons, the first of which is obviously Forsberg's skills. The second
reason would be to weaken the Nordiques so as to minimize their chances
of challenging for the Stanley Cup. If the Nordiques win the Cup before
Lindros and the Flyers do, pressure will mount on Lindros to duplicate the feat
in Philadelphia. The Flyer front office wants to avoid this possibility
for hockey and public relations reasons, that is, "prove" that the
Flyers won the trade.
Glenn
TIM, SUTHEAT
Glenn...@engr.usask.ca writes...
Good point, but think about it for a bit:
If the Flyers were to bid for Forsberg's services as the article suggests,
would that in itself not be an admittance that they "GOOFED" in the Lindros
trade and are now trying to make amends...
To be fair to the Philly organization though, most of what they lost
was not their own fault but rather, due to the incompetence of Bertuzzi;
as an indication, a joke going around in Quebec city during the expansion
draft stated that a secret agreement existed between Bertuzzi and the Quebec
organization whereby, in exchange for ruling in their favour to the extent
he did, Quebec agreed to draft Bertuzzi's nephew with their first round draft
choice.
At any rate, Forsberg will likely be a Ranger next season; after the draft,
a local TV personality asked Keenan if the choice the Rangers made means that
Forsberg will be a Ranger next year, Keenan smiled and said, "you never know".
Besides, what Keenan wants...Keenan gets, and after watching Forsberg
play in the world championship, it is safe to say that Keenan wants Forsberg.
joseph.m.dakes
> In article <930708011...@booth.USask.Ca>,
> >reasons, the first of which is obviously Forsberg's skills. The second
> >reason would be to weaken the Nordiques so as to minimize their chances
> >of challenging for the Stanley Cup. If the Nordiques win the Cup before
> >Lindros and the Flyers do, pressure will mount on Lindros to duplicate the feat
> >in Philadelphia. The Flyer front office wants to avoid this possibility
> >for hockey and public relations reasons, that is, "prove" that the
> >Flyers won the trade.
>
> Good point, but think about it for a bit:
> If the Flyers were to bid for Forsberg's services as the article suggests,
> would that in itself not be an admittance that they "GOOFED" in the Lindros
> trade and are now trying to make amends...
Twenty-eight days, eleven hours, thirty-three minutes and sixteen seconds.
That has to be a new record for time elapsed between talk of "the Lindros
Trade":-)!
For the n-th time, the Lindros trade was good for both teams. Quebec got
some good players and a few draft picks which helped them improve as
evidenced by their '92-93 record, and Philadelphia got a franchise player
to build around. The difference is that Philadelphia is rebuilding from
the ground floor up. While Quebec is ready to challenge right now.
So if Quebec wins a Cup before the Flyers do, that should only be expected.
Why would the Flyers be considered losers in the deal? Especially if they
win the Cup two or three years later? On the other hand, if the Flyers
win a Cup before Quebec does...
As for Forsberg, he would make a great addition to the Flyers. That
would make them that much more potent offensively and give the team even
more youth to build with.
But I have to admit it would also give me great personal satisfaction
as a Flyers fan for stealing a player Quebec depended on. Especially
after Quebec's low class dealings with Lindros, and the way people
on this newsgroup insist that the Flyers gave up too much in the deal.
> To be fair to the Philly organization though, most of what they lost
> was not their own fault but rather, due to the incompetence of Bertuzzi;
You lost me here. The Flyers made the deal with Quebec. Bertuzzi only
ruled that it was a legitimate trade before Quebec dealt with the Rangers.
My only problem is that Quebec should have been penalized one of the draft
picks for their behavior.
> At any rate, Forsberg will likely be a Ranger next season; after the draft,
> a local TV personality asked Keenan if the choice the Rangers made means that
> Forsberg will be a Ranger next year, Keenan smiled and said, "you never know".
Either way, Quebec loses a key player from the Lindros deal. And we won't
have to hear, "the Flyers gave up to much to get him", anymore:-)!.
\ \
Joe Dakes \/\
AT&T Microelectronics \/\
555 Union Boulevard \ \
Allentown, PA 18103 LET'S GO FLYERS!
alux1!jmd \ \
j...@aluxpo.att.com \ \__________
\____/_//__/
Daniel E Comeau
>Good point, but think about it for a bit:
> If the Flyers were to bid for Forsberg's services as the article suggests,
>would that in itself not be an admittance that they "GOOFED" in the Lindros
>trade and are now trying to make amends...
> To be fair to the Philly organization though, most of what they lost
>was not their own fault but rather, due to the incompetence of Bertuzzi;
>as an indication, a joke going around in Quebec city during the expansion
>draft stated that a secret agreement existed between Bertuzzi and the Quebec
>organization whereby, in exchange for ruling in their favour to the extent
>he did, Quebec agreed to draft Bertuzzi's nephew with their first round draft
>choice.
What do you mean "ruling in their favor to the extent he did"? His job was do
decide whether Quebec had made the deal with Philly or NY. He did not decide
on what the trade consisted of. That had already been decided between the
teams. The only decision he made was regarding the "future considerations"
part of the deal. Quebec was originally supposed to have Philly's 1992 and 1993
1st round picks. However, since Quebec thought they had completed the trade
with the Rangers, they did not get Philly's 1992 pick. Philly drafted Ryan
Sittler with that pick. When Bertuzzi decided that the deal had been made
with Philly, Philly offered Ryan Sittler instead of the '92 draft pick
which Quebec was supposed to get. Quebec didn't want him, and asked for the
1994 pick and future considerations. Philly just wanted to give up the pick.
Bertuzzi was then charged with deciding on this. He awarded Quebec the 1994
pick and forward Chris Simon to replace the 1992 pick. This is fair, since
Quebec was forced to wait for the draft pick.
> At any rate, Forsberg will likely be a Ranger next season; after the draft,
>a local TV personality asked Keenan if the choice the Rangers made means that
>Forsberg will be a Ranger next year, Keenan smiled and said, "you never know".
> Besides, what Keenan wants...Keenan gets, and after watching Forsberg
>play in the world championship, it is safe to say that Keenan wants Forsberg.
Not likely (although anything can happen). Although NY will try desperately
to get Forsberg, Quebec cannot afford to lose him and get nothing in return.
Marcel Aubut has already stated that Forsberg will be playing with the Nords
next season (and we all know how persistent Marcel Aubut can be). Granted,
Quebec will have to trade away Sakic in order to pay Forsberg the crazy amount
NY will offer him, but they will match any offer he gets.
>Suta
>s_...@pavo.concordia.ca
joseph.m.dakes
> What do you mean "ruling in their favor to the extent he did"? His job was do
> decide whether Quebec had made the deal with Philly or NY. He did not decide
> on what the trade consisted of. That had already been decided between the
> teams. The only decision he made was regarding the "future considerations"
> part of the deal. Quebec was originally supposed to have Philly's 1992 and 1993
> 1st round picks. However, since Quebec thought they had completed the trade
> with the Rangers, they did not get Philly's 1992 pick. Philly drafted Ryan
> Sittler with that pick. When Bertuzzi decided that the deal had been made
> with Philly, Philly offered Ryan Sittler instead of the '92 draft pick
> which Quebec was supposed to get. Quebec didn't want him, and asked for the
> 1994 pick and future considerations. Philly just wanted to give up the pick.
> Bertuzzi was then charged with deciding on this. He awarded Quebec the 1994
> pick and forward Chris Simon to replace the 1992 pick. This is fair, since
NO, IT WASN'T FAIR! The deal for Lindros involved the Flyers giving up
their '92 pick. And it was a done deal! Quebec did not think they had
completed a deal with the Rangers-they hoped to pull a fast one and back
out of the original trade with the Flyers. Because of that, the Flyers
were forced to make a pick in '92 and they chose Sittler. Once Bertuzzi
decided in favor of the Flyers, Quebec should have been given the rights
to Sittler. They should not have been given the '94 pick and a player
because that was not part of the original trade. If the NHL had any
balls, they would have stepped in and did something about it. But they
were too concerned about all the negative publicity that Quebec was
responsible for and didn't want to make it any worse. Better yet, Quebec
should have just lost the pick altogether because of their crap. I've
never heard of being rewarded with something extra for doing something
wrong and then lying about it. Only in the NHL.
______________________
(____________ _____ \
Joe Dakes ___________/ / __ \ \
AT&T Microelectronics (__________ / / \ \ \
555 Union Boulevard _________/ /__ \__/ / /
Allentown, PA 18103 (________ / \ \____/ /
alux1!jmd _______/ / \_______/
j...@aluxpo.att.com (_________/
LET'S GO FLYERS!
Daniel E Comeau
>In article <1993Jul8.1...@newton.ccs.tuns.ca>, come...@newton.ccs.tuns.ca (Daniel E Comeau) writes:
>> What do you mean "ruling in their favor to the extent he did"? His job was do
>> decide whether Quebec had made the deal with Philly or NY. He did not decide
>> on what the trade consisted of. That had already been decided between the
>> teams. The only decision he made was regarding the "future considerations"
>> part of the deal. Quebec was originally supposed to have Philly's 1992 and 1993
>> 1st round picks. However, since Quebec thought they had completed the trade
>> with the Rangers, they did not get Philly's 1992 pick. Philly drafted Ryan
>> Sittler with that pick. When Bertuzzi decided that the deal had been made
>> with Philly, Philly offered Ryan Sittler instead of the '92 draft pick
>> which Quebec was supposed to get. Quebec didn't want him, and asked for the
>> 1994 pick and future considerations. Philly just wanted to give up the pick.
>> Bertuzzi was then charged with deciding on this. He awarded Quebec the 1994
>> pick and forward Chris Simon to replace the 1992 pick. This is fair, since
>NO, IT WASN'T FAIR! The deal for Lindros involved the Flyers giving up
>their '92 pick. And it was a done deal! Quebec did not think they had
>completed a deal with the Rangers-they hoped to pull a fast one and back
The Nords did not think they had a done deal. To this day, Aubut still
says that he traded with the Rangers and not the Flyers. As a result, he
did nothing wrong by not taking the '92 pick from the Flyers (since this
pick did not, in any way, belong to them). Although oral agreements have
been used for trades in the past, whether or not they are binding had never
been contested, which is why this whole thing started. I still think that
nothing should be binding until it is on paper, registered with the NHL.
In the past, just about every year at the trading deadline, trades were
cancelled by the NHL because they were not registered in time (both sides
agreed on the trade, but could not get through to the NHL office in time).
How can the NHL cancel these trades (agreed on orally and sometime on paper)
and yet say that an oral agreement, whether it was made or not, is legally
binding. This is a double standard that Bertuzzi either ignored or was
unaware of.
>out of the original trade with the Flyers. Because of that, the Flyers
>were forced to make a pick in '92 and they chose Sittler. Once Bertuzzi
>decided in favor of the Flyers, Quebec should have been given the rights
>to Sittler. They should not have been given the '94 pick and a player
>because that was not part of the original trade. If the NHL had any
>balls, they would have stepped in and did something about it. But they
>were too concerned about all the negative publicity that Quebec was
>responsible for and didn't want to make it any worse. Better yet, Quebec
>should have just lost the pick altogether because of their crap. I've
>never heard of being rewarded with something extra for doing something
>wrong and then lying about it. Only in the NHL.
If you're gonna penalize the Nords for what happened, you better well penalize
a lot of other teams also. The Nords filed complaints with the NHL about teams
(most notably the Toronto Maple Leafs) tampering with Lindros while they were
trying to sign him. A team found guilty of doing this can lose (I can't
remember exactly) 3 or so first-round draft picks. However, the NHL didn't
care about a little team from Quebec City, especially if it would mean affecting
the Maple Leafs. As a result, nothing happened. As Mr. Aubut said, since
the NHL was unwilling to help them, he was just trying to get as much for
his team as he could get. Anyway, from what I heard about the Rangers' offer,
I'm happy that Philly won.
_________________________________________________________________________
| |
| ####### Daniel Comeau -> come...@newton.ccs.tuns.ca |
| ## ## |
| ## ## ## |
| # ## # # r.s.h. contact for the Quebec Nordiques |
| # # ## ## and the Cornwall Aces |
| # # # ####### |
| # # # # Hab Hater |
| ############# ############### Baby Eric Lindros Hater |
|_______________________________________________________________________|
Mike Poplawski
As a Flyer fan, I can only hope they try to acquire Forsberg,
as this would give them two of the best young players in the
world to build upon (and build they must...they are not very
deep).
Would Forsberg be interested in coming to the Flyers? I'm
sure he knows the organization quite well, as he was a part
of it for one year, but the Flyers have already traded him
once...
How would the Rangers fit Forsberg in? They seem to want the
best of both worlds...working with Kovalev, Hirsch next year
but bringing guys like Tikkanen, Lowe and Lidster in, too...
Funny organization! What are their plans? At least they've
hired a coach to replace Mark Messier.:-)
--
Mike Poplawski Victoria, British Columbia Canada
Phone/Fax: (604) 381-1289
Sherri Nichols
> The Nords did not think they had a done deal. To this day, Aubut still
>says that he traded with the Rangers and not the Flyers.
Then Aubut is a slime.
> As a result, he
>did nothing wrong by not taking the '92 pick from the Flyers (since this
>pick did not, in any way, belong to them). Although oral agreements have
>been used for trades in the past, whether or not they are binding had never
>been contested, which is why this whole thing started.
They had never been contested because there had never been a need to
contest them. Nobody else had tried to welsh on a deal.
Sherri Nichols
snic...@adobe.com
Danny J. Sohier
writes:
>Quebec papers today report that negotiations between the Nordiques and
>Peter Forsberg broke down last night, and that Forsberg and his agent are
>starting to negotiate with other clubs.
>
Of course, talks broke down. How else will Forsberg make more
money? This is going to be Selanne Thing. Aubut and Page already
said it. Forsberg will be playing for the Nords come October. In no
way are they going to let him get away. This thing should
be settle in two weeks tops!
'Nord said,
BBBB Danny J. Sohier
BBBB Analyste de l'informatique - Bibliothque
BBBB Universit Laval
BBBB Quebec, Canada