HoweHullOrr
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2013
- 11,585
- 2,198
I was speaking about all of Leaf fans who speculated on the value of Tanev. Yes, we all have different biases an example of that is being a fan. A fan by definition, is a bias towards one thing, in our case the hockey team we support. However, on this board we speculate, not only Leaf fans, but fans of all teams. It would be a lot quieter place here if only those who actually represent the teams or who actually know definitely what the fair value of a player, any player is.
Secondly, even among Leaf fans, there is a wide variety of views of what fair value is. When we include fans of the Canucks and other NHL teams that gap widens farther. The bias doesn't change though.
This is part of what makes hockey's future fun to be on. While it is true some posters have let their emotions get the better of them. Overall it is a great place to chat and argue and speculate on a players value. Your Sanctimonious post doesn't change that for me.
I think Tanev is a good player.
If you are saying that fans tend to have biases and that we are here to discuss ideas and trade proposals, then obviously I agree. The point that I was making is that all of us have opinions, but we can't really say "the Leafs will do this or that" because that is well outside of anything we can control. Yet, some people do anyways (cough).
Other points that fall into the realm of the obvious is that defenders tend to be in low supply and high demand, and even more so for a RHD. Discussions, opinions and trade proposals that don't recognize that just don't align to the reality of the marketplace and we can expect that those that make them will get called out.
Not sure what more I can offer on this specific subject, so its probably time to move on. I will say a few things about what might be the current strategy of Leafs management that I do find more interesting.
If Leaf management in fact doesn't want to move decent assets (players, prospects) for a defender which I suppose is possible, then I would think that leaves 2 potential strategies that they will undertake: a) They will sign an older UFA vet like they did with Hainsey. b) They will continue to develop their young defenders and will wait for those prospects to graduate. If such is the case, then these vets are temporary placeholders and will ultimately be replaced by our prospects.
BTW, if the above is in fact their strategy, that would be fine by me. I tend to think drafting (& developing) is the main, primary and most important tool in the tool-kit.
Last edited: