Brobust
Registered User
- Sep 29, 2017
- 6,895
- 6,313
Glendening for Kapanen would be absolutely hilarious.
It would not be hilarious at all.
Glendening for Kapanen would be absolutely hilarious.
I don't think it would be bad for the Leafs.
With what they have up front already, and having to pay out a few of their high level forwards soon. Glendening is a good bottom-6 player that has contract and cost stability for another three seasons.
These are two very different styles of players and of course everyone here values the 'skill' player much more. I actually think it would be a pretty even trade, however. Maybe Detroit needs to throw in a mid-round pick.
Kapanen is never going to be that special of an offensive player. I think he has a good overall skill-set in a few different capacities and will have a decent career, but I don't think he'll ever tear it up offensively.
This would actually be a great 'hockey trade'.
Just feels like a Babcock type of move.
I read it to be a first OR a second and an NHL ready prospect. I do a first before I give up a guy that can step onto their roster next year AND a second.Green improves Tampa quite a bit, if it only costs a 1st and a mid level prospect, that’s a trade they should make.
Unless Kapanen is traded for Glendening, there is no other reason to mention it other than click bait.
It’s so obvious that any GM would love a high potential prospect for their depth players that it shouldn’t be mentioned.
I don’t doubt his credibility, but as this thread is a great example. If there’s any hint of Leafs, our insane fan base spreads like wildfire.
I don't think it would be bad for the Leafs.
With what they have up front already, and having to pay out a few of their high level forwards soon. Glendening is a good bottom-6 player that has contract and cost stability for another three seasons.
These are two very different styles of players and of course everyone here values the 'skill' player much more. I actually think it would be a pretty even trade, however. Maybe Detroit needs to throw in a mid-round pick.
Kapanen is never going to be that special of an offensive player. I think he has a good overall skill-set in a few different capacities and will have a decent career, but I don't think he'll ever tear it up offensively.
This would actually be a great 'hockey trade'.
That is ridiculous. So you would rather have zero information about potential trades and only reports of trades that actually occur? Would you be happy if he left it at asking price is high, or is that also clickbait? You realize he writes for a local Michigan news media that has the vast majority of its traffic come in for non hockey related news. He is not trying to generate Leafs traffic from a few hardcore Leafs fans.
I think Leafs media and fans overrate Kapanen's offensive potential, but I very well may turn out to be wrong.No, it wouldn't.
Kapanen has all the tools to be a productive top 6 player and he's also very reliable defensively and even penalty kills for us as essentially a rookie.
Glendening is a good faceoff guy and another pk guy and that has value but we don't need it so badly that trading Kapanen's potential makes any sense
Kapanen for Glendening would be, easily, the worst trade in the history of the Toronto Maple Leafs, and the Leafs are an organization that's like "50 years of doing everything wrong except when they accidentally got Mats Sundin."
I read it to be a first OR a second and an NHL ready prospect. I do a first before I give up a guy that can step onto their roster next year AND a second.
I think Leafs media and fans overrate Kapanen's offensive potential, but I very well may turn out to be wrong.
My main thought here is that if the Leafs really think their window is open and they can win a cup, Glendening would help them more in accomplishing that this season and next (and maybe even further?). Later on down the road, sure Kapanen may be the better player...but the question is: Are the Leafs looking to win now?
It's not an earth shattering trade either way, so perhaps I am just splitting hairs
Get real. Kapanen has not proven much. I could see why the Leafs might be more interested in giving up a meaningless youngster instead of picks.Kapanen for Glendening would be, easily, the worst trade in the history of the Toronto Maple Leafs, and the Leafs are an organization that's like "50 years of doing everything wrong except when they accidentally got Mats Sundin."
And Glendening is nowhere near Erat levels of bad after the tradeIt would look bad but not that bad. Kapanen will never even be close to being the player Forsberg is.
You weren't around when the Leafs acquired Kurvers or Raycroft, were you?Kapanen for Glendening would be, easily, the worst trade in the history of the Toronto Maple Leafs, and the Leafs are an organization that's like "50 years of doing everything wrong except when they accidentally got Mats Sundin."
Why would he mention Kapanen? Other teams are interested in Glendening, why would his “connections” say, “Red Wings want Kapanen for Glendening” instead of an NHL ready prospect with Top 6 potential?That is ridiculous. So you would rather have zero information about potential trades and only reports of trades that actually occur? Would you be happy if he left it at asking price is high, or is that also clickbait? You realize he writes for a local Michigan news media that has the vast majority of its traffic come in for non hockey related news. He is not trying to generate Leafs traffic from a few hardcore Leafs fans.
Clendening for Kap is fair. How many NHL games does Kap have ? 10?
DET would probably have to include their 1st round pick if they want to unload Glendenning with Kappy going the other way.
meaningless youngster? he's a better player and has much more value than your 4th linerGet real. Kapanen has not proven much. I could see why the Leafs might be more interested in giving up a meaningless youngster instead of picks.
i think hes exaggeratingHow in the world is Kap worth assets like a 1st (top 10 pick) and Clendening?!
Why would he mention Kapanen? Other teams are interested in Glendening, why would his “connections” say, “Red Wings want Kapanen for Glendening” instead of an NHL ready prospect with Top 6 potential?
I was a bit over the top, that said, that suggestion makes no sense other than it being for hits or that’s what’s on the table from the Leafs.
Plenty of teams can tell a local writer “Toronto called about Larkin, I asked for Matthews in return, they said no” why would you write about that?