Confirmed with Link: Alex Tanguay and Cory Sarich to COL for David Jones and Shane O'Brien

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

O'Brien was problematic in Vancouver too.

 

[TheHudlinator]

Yup. Mike Cammalleri's value is poor not because he's a bad player but because he's a player worth maybe $3.5 million and his cap hit is $7 million for this year.

No he is not and no it isn't.

 

[Anglesmith]

Wasn't Sarich well liked in the locker room? Aren't we getting a player that was in the whole Vegas trip planning mess?

Either way, we got fleeced.

I was putting it the other way around. Tanguay was non-committed and wouldn't be good for the young guys in our room, and Sarich was/is useless.

"Either way, we got fleeced" doesn't seem to make sense in this scenario. It's not a lopsided trade by any means. Tanguay and Jones will likely be a wash, and O'Brien is an upgrade over Sarich. Neither team got fleeced, and neither really got that much better. Jones should be a better fit for us, though, given our logjam on the left side.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Saying Tangauy was "non-committed" isn't nearly the same as being called cancer.

Sarich was far from useless. He was a bottom pairing defenseman and he did his job to a tee.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

We got a locker room cancer and someone who's useless. Hate this trade.

Funny we got rid of those pieces too.

 

[TheHudlinator]

Saying Tangauy was "non-committed" isn't nearly the same as being called cancer.

Sarich was far from useless. He was a bottom pairing defenseman and he did his job to a tee.

Well before the trade I would have called Sarich useless. He was terrible, he was slow, would hit at the wrong times causing odd man rushes, couldn't read the play, didn't have any offensive game. Simply put Sarich was very bad.

 

[herashak]

yeah this trade isnt a franchise changer. no need to be to upset about it

 

[Lunatik]

O'Brien

When O'Brien was in Tampa, Feaster was the GM.
When O'Brien was in Nashville, Gelinas was Director of Player Development.

So you are telling me that SOB is a cancer and neither of these guys new this? I find that very unlikely.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

When O'Brien was in Tampa, Feaster was the GM.
When O'Brien was in Nashville, Gelinas was Director of Player Development.

So you are telling me that SOB is a cancer and neither of these guys new this? I find that very unlikely.

Feaster already gave up a 1st for him once. Lets not pretend his judgement is secure on this one.

 

[TheHudlinator]

Feaster already gave up a 1st for him once. Lets not pretend his judgement is secure on this one.

To be fair he looked like a star in the making in the AHL and had a great rookie season in ANA.

 

[Lunatik]

I posed this as a question on the trade forum for Avs fans but I will share here too.

I noticed that Jones missed time at the start of the season with a knee injury (2 games). He then missed more time with a knee injury (8 games), could have this been a lingering problem?

Also we hear alot about him being a healthy scratch, but those last 4 games also so the Avalanche in full tank mode, and statistically the 5 games prior to him being scratched appear to be 5 of his better games statistically speaking.

So I really have alot of questions. Hopefully someone will answer.

 

[Lunatik]

Feaster already gave up a 1st for him once. Lets not pretend his judgement is secure on this one.

You really have no idea how highly he was touted O'Brien was back then do you?

 

[TheHudlinator]

I posed this as a question on the trade forum for Avs fans but I will share here too.

I noticed that Jones missed time at the start of the season with a knee injury (2 games). He then missed more time with a knee injury (8 games), could have this been a lingering problem?

Also we hear alot about him being a healthy scratch, but those last 4 games also so the Avalanche in full tank mode, and statistically the 5 games prior to him being scratched appear to be 5 of his better games statistically speaking.

So I really have alot of questions. Hopefully someone will answer.

It's possible but this could mean he is now injury prone.

 

[Lunatik]

It's possible but this could mean he is now injury prone.

I'm not so sure it means that, if it is the case wouldn't it mean he was playing through the injury? And if it was the same injury all the way through wouldn't that technically make him less injury prone since it was 1 fewer injury?

 

[TheHudlinator]

I'm not so sure it means that, if it is the case wouldn't it mean he was playing through the injury? And if it was the same injury all the way through wouldn't that technically make him less injury prone since it was 1 fewer injury?

If you count Backlund as injury prone then Jones is injury prone either way.

 

[Lunatik]

If you count Backlund as injury prone then Jones is injury prone either way.

Jones has missed 30 games in the last 3 years for various reasons. The largest stints missed were 8 games (twice, one groin, one knee)

Backlund has missed 54 games due to injury in the past 2 years.

I see just a slight difference, how about you?

 

[TheHudlinator]

Jones has missed 30 games in the last 3 years for various reasons. The largest stints missed were 8 games (twice, one groin, one knee)

Backlund has missed 54 games due to injury in the past 2 years.

I see just a slight difference, how about you?

Since the 2010-2011 season Jones has 7 different injuries

Backlund has 3 see the difference?

 

[Lunatik]

Since the 2010-2011 season Jones has 7 different injuries

Backlund has 3 see the difference?

Yeah I see the difference. Jones misses an average of 4 games per "injury". Backlund misses an average of 18 games per injury.

Backlund has been much more injury prone than Jones the past few years.

The fact you are even trying to dispute that is just a pathetic attempt for you to try and justify your severely out of whack opinions on the trade.

 

[TheHudlinator]

Yeah I see the difference. Jones misses an average of 4 games per "injury". Backlund misses an average of 18 games per injury.

Backlund has been much more injury prone than Jones the past few years.

The fact you are even trying to dispute that is just a pathetic attempt for you to try and justify your severely out of whack opinions on the trade.

So if I break a leg and miss a season I am more injury prone then a guy that gets hurt every month?

 

[Lunatik]

So if I break a leg and miss a season I am more injury prone then a guy that gets hurt every month?

I didn't know a knee injury and a hurt shoulder were the same as a broken leg. but thanks for the laugh.

 

[StreakingRed]

O'Brien

Based on what, exactly?

I'm asking because so far everything I've read from former team mates of his ( aka people who actually were in the room) has been positive.

 

[TheHudlinator]

I didn't know a knee injury and a hurt shoulder were the same as a broken leg. but thanks for the laugh.

The definition of injury prone is

often sustaining injuries

so yes 7 injuries in 3 years makes him injury prone if 3 in 3 years makes Backlund prone.

 

[Lunatik]

The definition of injury prone is



so yes 7 injuries in 3 years makes him injury prone if 3 in 3 years makes Backlund prone.

that is assuming you consider missing 1 or 2 games "injuries" I suppose. Personally I do not.


And Backlund is injury prone because he has missed nearly 50% of the games in the past 2 seasons. That is why I consider him injury prone.

 

[TheHudlinator]

that is assuming you consider missing 1 or 2 games "injuries" I suppose. Personally I do not.


And Backlund is injury prone because he has missed nearly 50% of the games in the past 2 seasons. That is why I consider him injury prone.

Yes he was injured. Again if one is injury prone so is the other,

 

[Lunatik]

Yes he was injured. Again if one is injury prone so is the other,

Agree to disagree. This is a stupid argument, especially since my original thought/questions had nothing to do with him being injury prone. I had a serious question and unfortunately I took your lead and let it go off the rails.

I usually really like you as a poster Hud, but on this particular topic it's like you are so blind with hate over it that you can't see that it's not that bad. I am not sure why either because it's not usually your M.O to get this upset about a transaction.