Confirmed with Link: [CHI/VAN] Gustav Forsling traded for Adam Clendening

[Pip]

If Clendening were from Sweden people would probably like him better. It seems like people love Swedish players around here, and are loathe whenever we move one. I don't know why. It really has nothing to do with the quality of player. Just an observation I've made of human tendencies to seemingly prefer players from a certain region of the world. People also put way too much stock in a short 8 game tournament. Again, a player plays poorly and everybody craps on him and claims he's a bust. A player puts up big numbers and people fall in love with him and overrate him.

I personally love the trade. I see it as moving a recent 5th round pick who just made a name for himself at the WJC, for a guy who's a couple years older and further in his development, who is more likely to make an impact at the NHL level. It's an excellent trade for the Canucks.

This is certainly one way to justify a trade where you know nothing about either player.

 

[Lindgren]

That seems like a fair assessment. Pronman switched the bell curves and considered Clendening to be on average a slightly better player when assessing the trade. One can probably say that they are reasonably close on average though.

I don't understand posters who put the average outcome of each player massively apart though. Don't think there's a reasonable way to really love or really hate this trade at this point.

I'm with Pronman on this one, but even more with the bolded.

 

[me2]

If Clendening were from Sweden people would probably like him better. It seems like people love Swedish players around here, and are loathe whenever we move one. I don't know why. It really has nothing to do with the quality of player.

It has absolutely nothing to do with topping the WC in Dman points, it is only because he's Swedish.

I personally love the trade. I see it as moving a recent 5th round pick who just made a name for himself at the WJC, for a guy who's a couple years older and further in his development, who is more likely to make an impact at the NHL level. It's an excellent trade for the Canucks.

thank god Benning didn't trade Cederholm when Chicago asked for him. I think we are all too attached to that 5th rounder because he's Swedish.

 

[Uhmkay]

My like or dislike of this trade has absolutely nothing to do with where the player is from, what round he was picked in, or what organization picked him.

I love this trade because I think that Clendening has a higher upside long term, and is closer to being a regular NHL defenseman NOW than Forsling.

I don't agree with everything Benning has done, and have been vocal about it. However this is simply Benning picking out organizations that are very deep in talent at a position where we are not, seeing players that are not going to make the big club because they have players like Brown, Carter, Stoll, Richards (In the case of Vey), Rundblad, Seabrook, Oduya and other prospects ahead of Vey/Clendening whose parent club Chicago/LA were in a position of losing that player for nothing.

Chicago gets a replacement prospect for the one they are losing, but the benefit being that they have that new prospect under entry level for several more years. The downside for Chicago is that they lose a player who could likely have made many clubs around the NHL, but simply couldn't make Chicago because of depth.

Benning recognized that those players were better than what we had and made the move and improved our team. It's a very good way to improve your hockey club.

 

[Uhmkay]

If nothing else, this trade, and the Vey one in the summer, should give us a good example of SOME types of deals Benning may look to do in the future. Specifically teams that have lots of prospects who are possibly up for waiver eligibility soon, and also at positions where we have a need.

The Pedan trade is a third example as well.

 

[Zombotron]

If nothing else, this trade, and the Vey one in the summer, should give us a good example of SOME types of deals Benning may look to do in the future. Specifically teams that have lots of prospects who are possibly up for waiver eligibility soon, and also at positions where we have a need.

The Pedan trade is a third example as well.

That's the notion which is going around, and why some of us are hoping to see Brett Connolly be traded this way.

 

[WTG]

Cledenning is a long term project. But what does that mean for our defense when we are all healthy?

We currently have 5 RHD and 4 LHD. Edler, Hammer stays no idea what the contract status of Stanton is, and Sbisa (who knows what the hell is gonna happen to this guy)

On RHD we have Tanev (needs to be resigned), Bieksa (most likely wont waive), Clendenning (this guy is part of Benning's plan moving forward), Corrado (Needs to play in the AHL as soon as Bieksa is healthy don't want his waiver eligibility to activate), Weber (no idea what the contract situation is).

Does Benning wait till Bieksa's contract is up in I think 2 years or does he trade Tanev in favor of Bieksa, Corrado. I hope he keeps Corrado cooking in the AHL. Weber needs to be gone at the trade deadline and we need to decide if Sbisa or Stanton is gone by the deadline/end of the season.

Let's hope Benning does the right move and keep Tanev

 

[BobbyJazzLegs]

Trade bait

 

[vancityluongo]

If Clendening were from Sweden people would probably like him better.

Why?

It seems like people love Swedish players around here, and are loathe whenever we move one.

True. I still have nightmares about the day we moved Daniel Rahimi.

People also put way too much stock in a short 8 game tournament.

But in other scenarios arbitrarily picking 7 game playoff series' to discredit the Sedins is okay?

Again, a player plays poorly and everybody craps on him.

A player puts up big numbers and people fall in love with him.

That's generally how people feel about hockey players, yes.

I personally love the trade. I see it as moving a recent 5th round pick who just made a name for himself at the WJC, for a guy who's a couple years older and further in his development, who is more likely to make an impact at the NHL level. It's an excellent trade for the Canucks.

Agreed. So what's that Swedish crap all about?

 

[Jay Cee]

Stanton and Weber might be on the move if they have to by the looks of preference of the coaching staff. Stanton is admittedly not thriving the the first half of this season but does he deserve to go so quickly? Sbisa is not that great and likely has no value and Weber is a replacement player.

 

[a Fool]

IDK what happened to Stanton this year. Injuries? He seems to have a gash on his face or a new missing tooth every time I see him. He was really solid last year, and now is on par with Sbisa. Weber is probably the only guy there with trade value.

 

[WTG]

IDK what happened to Stanton this year. Injuries? He seems to have a gash on his face or a new missing tooth every time I see him. He was really solid last year, and now is on par with Sbisa. Weber is probably the only guy there with trade value.

sophomore slump maybe? Let's hope. He was so good last season.

 

[me2]

That's the notion which is going around, and why some of us are hoping to see Brett Connolly be traded this way.

Connolly has played 39 games this year. might be a too experienced given benning likes them untested.

 

[Lemmiwinks]

But in other scenarios arbitrarily picking 7 game playoff series' to discredit the Sedins is okay?

Geez, enough with the ad hominem. He made a good point, that there are too many "wjc scouts" on here. Attacking a previous and irrelevant statement of his is a cheap way of arguing.

 

[Pip]

Geez, enough with the ad hominem. He made a good point, that there are too many "wjc scouts" on here. Attacking a previous and irrelevant statement of his is a cheap way of arguing.

He did not, in any way, make a good point. What Forsling is doing in the SEL is impressive and you simply can't bury your head in the sand and ignore it. Dismissing anyone high on Forlsing as a WJ scout is lazy at best.

 

[Verviticus]

Geez, enough with the ad hominem. He made a good point, that there are too many "wjc scouts" on here. Attacking a previous and irrelevant statement of his is a cheap way of arguing.

thats not a good point. its a really bad or completely meaningless point. saying "some people blah blah" is bad and lazy. its not useful.

if he said "poster x is a wjc scout (and what it implies)" that's useful, maybe. just lamenting the quality of the discourse by saying a bluhhhhhhhhhhh wjc scouts is not good

 

[racerjoe]

Pfft I once tried to find the Ikea in Van (I'm not from Van) and it was impossible to find that thing. It's like hidden or something. Took me like 2 hours before giving up

There is a couple in Van, I sugest the one just of the number 1 as it is super easy to find. Also always check out the as is section, there are some hidden gems in there.

 

[Lemmiwinks]

thats not a good point. its a really bad or completely meaningless point. saying "some people blah blah" is bad and lazy. its not useful.

if he said "poster x is a wjc scout (and what it implies)" that's useful, maybe. just lamenting the quality of the discourse by saying a bluhhhhhhhhhhh wjc scouts is not good

Forsling has great numbers that go beyond the wjc, and in that respect I don't agree with his whole argument. My main beef was that disproving his point by bringing up previous statements of his regarding the performance of the Sedins in the playoffs was an example of arguing ad hominem. I decided to call it out because it's something I've seen occur innumerably here, mostly directed at Y2K (I'm not supporting his opinions necessarily, just calling out the way in which people argue against them).

Also, while it's not fair to generalize a fanbase as being wjc scouts per se, does it not seem as though the Forsling hype exploded after the tournament? My personal view of the trade is that Benning sold extremely high on Forsling and got a player whose already done in the AHL what we hope Forsling will one day do.

 

[me2]

Clendening = 5th rounder
Clendening 》 Vey
5th rounder 》 Vey

 

[DoubleTrouble]

I have been happy with Clendening , He has played well and is a plus 2..

I don't think he has been on the ice for a goal against.

He looks like he wants to show more but is holding back to make sure he doesn't get caught up ice

 

[deckercky]

He looks like he wants to show more but is holding back to make sure he doesn't get caught up ice

Which honestly may be the way he has to play at even strength to be an NHL player (then make his niche on the powerplay where he can be a bit more aggressive and creative).

 

[DoubleTrouble]

Which honestly may be the way he has to play at even strength to be an NHL player (then make his niche on the powerplay where he can be a bit more aggressive and creative).

I would really like to see him on the top PP line with Edler.

Just so we can see what we have

 

[Regal]

Forsling has great numbers that go beyond the wjc, and in that respect I don't agree with his whole argument. My main beef was that disproving his point by bringing up previous statements of his regarding the performance of the Sedins in the playoffs was an example of arguing ad hominem. I decided to call it out because it's something I've seen occur innumerably here, mostly directed at Y2K (I'm not supporting his opinions necessarily, just calling out the way in which people argue against them).

Pointing out someone's hypocrisy has a different intent than simply making an ad hominem argument. He's not trying to disprove his point by attacking him for unrelated reasons, he's trying to have him reassess his own arguments since he appears to waver in his beliefs depending on the parties involved.

 

[CanaFan]

Pointing out someone's hypocrisy has a different intent than simply making an ad hominem argument. He's not trying to disprove his point by attacking him for unrelated reasons, he's trying to have him reassess his own arguments since he appears to waver in his beliefs depending on the parties involved.

But just as most posters would (and have) disagreed with Y2K's assessments of the Sedins based on these relatively rare situations (SCF's), he is actually correct in this case whereby he argues against making the same suspect assessments (WJC's). While he may be flip flopping on his views, so are any posters who disagreed with his Sedin view but are basing their opinions of Forsling largely on 7 WJC games.

Plenty of inconsistent positions to go around and not just Y2K.

 

[Regal]

But just as most posters would (and have) disagreed with Y2K's assessments of the Sedins based on these relatively rare situations (SCF's), he is actually correct in this case whereby he argues against making the same suspect assessments (WJC's). While he may be flip flopping on his views, so are any posters who disagreed with his Sedin view but are basing their opinions of Forsling largely on 7 WJC games.

Plenty of inconsistent positions to go around and not just Y2K.

All very true, and Y2K receives an unfair amount of flack in threads that are unrelated to the opinions people disagree with. I was just pointing out that I don't think the intention was to argue against his position, it was just to comment on the inconsistency you mention. And, more to the point, it was a chance to take a pot shot at his opinion of the Sedins.