Canada4Gold
Registered User
- Dec 22, 2010
- 42,997
- 9,190
I was just going to say something along those lines lmao. You forgot about a Swiss team though!
That team has had him for almost a week of practice. That’s plenty for them. No more!
I was just going to say something along those lines lmao. You forgot about a Swiss team though!
PHI has 5RD and 2LD on their roster.
Hmmmm
He's probaly the biggest reason why we get there considering he plays and faces more shots than any other goalie. We have a young team in front still having to learn the game at the nhl level. I'd take a top 10 goalie over a top 10 winger any day. Now add in a top prospect like kapanen Id say we didn't lose that trade.I would say Toronto lost that deal. Andersen needs to pick it up in the playoffs and although kapanen has had a good start to the season he still has a lot to prove. Plus I never said teams trading the best player always loses the deal. But most do b
Id take a top 10 goalie over a top 10 winger. Plus we got a top prospect who is starting to show what he can do even if it's early. We didn't lose the trade. Sorry but we didn't.Kessel > Andersen and Kapanen. Kessel is a top 10 winger. high end goalies arent worth as much as high end forwards. Kapanen doesnt close that gap
Again. We didn’t get Andersen in the kessel deal. We got him after.He's probaly the biggest reason why we get there considering he plays and faces more shots than any other goalie. We have a young team in front still having to learn the game at the nhl level. I'd take a top 10 goalie over a top 10 winger any day. Now add in a top prospect like kapanen Id say we didn't lose that trade.
He's probaly the biggest reason why we get there considering he plays and faces more shots than any other goalie. We have a young team in front still having to learn the game at the nhl level. I'd take a top 10 goalie over a top 10 winger any day. Now add in a top prospect like kapanen Id say we didn't lose that trade.
Again. We didn’t get Andersen in the kessel deal. We got him after.
Sure it does.So turning that 1st into an asset like Anderson shouldn't count got it.
You’re missing the point. Pittsburgh won the kessel trade. Which was my whole point to begin with. It was a bad trade(one that had to be made though). But Anything that happens after has nothing to do with the Pittsburgh trade.So turning that 1st into an asset like Anderson shouldn't count got it.
You didn’t get the top 10 goalie from Pittsburgh.So your saying getting a top 10 goalie and a potential top 6 forward who is now showing his potential we lost the trade.
Nope but we got their 1st. You can't look at a trade like this and determine who won it at the beginning. You have to see how the assets turn out from the trade you can't determine right when it happens bc we were in rebuild mode and they weren't.You didn’t get the top 10 goalie from Pittsburgh.
BUt you didn’t get Andersen from Pittsburgh.Nope but we got their 1st.
BUt you didn’t get Andersen from Pittsburgh.
LHD:
Provy
Ghost
Sanheim
Hagg
AMac
Morin(hurt)
RHD:
Gudas
Folin
Of course you can. It was a bad trade. I’m talking the actual trade. Not anything that happened after. Just because you want to look at it 3 years later after a couple of pieces were shuffled elsewhere doesn’t mean it wasn’t a bad trade.You can't look at a trade like this and determine who won it at the beginning. You have to see how the assets turn out from the trade you can't determine right when it happens bc we were in rebuild mode and they weren't.
According to capfriendly, Gudas, Folin, Ghost, AMac and Sanheim make up the right handlers, while Provy and Hagg make up the LD
Ghost can play both position, AMac can’t play any positions & Sanheim is definitely an LD.According to capfriendly, Gudas, Folin, Ghost, AMac and Sanheim make up the right handlers, while Provy and Hagg make up the LD
Again. We didn’t get Andersen in the kessel deal. We got him after.
Not in the Pittsburgh dealBoston didn't get Seguin and Hamilton in the Kessel deal either.
Of course you can. It was a bad trade. I’m talking the actual trade. Not anything that happened after. Just because you want to look at it 3 years later after a couple of pieces were shuffled elsewhere doesn’t mean it wasn’t a bad trade.
Well that’s how you look at a trade. But not all do.Yeah that's how you look at a trade when one team was rebuilding and the other wasn't.
So the Leafs give up a cost controlled fantastic winger for a 3rd and a UFA inferior winger...?Zuc + 3rd for Nylander
So the Leafs give up a cost controlled fantastic winger for a 3rd and a UFA inferior winger...?
Why?
« Cost controlled » shouldn’t be used when referring to Nylander.So the Leafs give up a cost controlled fantastic winger for a 3rd and a UFA inferior winger...?
Why?