Tough Call : Tomas Plekanec

[Kraniumm]

So much goalpost moving.

 

[Takeru]

So much goalpost moving.

Don't worry, you'll get used to it at some point.

 

[Nynja*]

How is it goalpost moving, if you were replying to me? Here are my two original posts that started this:

So its Feb 28, Plek hasnt signed an extension, but were in the top 5 of the league, and regardless of this you still want to trade him for a prospect that MAY be useful in 2-4 years?

Which team would trade a good NHL ready 21-24 year old winger for a very good 32 year year old two way C thats on an expiring contract?? Remember, this is under the impression were in the top 5 of the league nearing the trade deadline. Who would be stupid enough to make such a ridiculously stupid trade?

His examples are David Perron, who was on a lottery bound team and wasnt on an expiring contract, and Curtis Glencross (whos career high is 26 goals shooting at 23.6%, thats 1 goal in 4 shots), who was on a vastly overachieving team, and is such a great player he's still a free agent. Neither player was traded for "a good 21-24 year old NHL ready player" either, they were traded for draft picks. Oh wait, Edmonton got Klinkhammer, who got 9 points in 69 games last season over three teams. None of these trades made their teams better "now". They made their teams better in 5-6 years when those picks develop (if they become NHL players). In 5 years, Price is 33, PK is 31, Patch is 32, Eller is 31...

So once again, whos moving the goalposts?

 

[Takeru]

Can't speak for him but the goalpost phenomenon is symptomatic of the many posters simultaneously debating similar points.

Here it started with someone saying you can't trade Plekanec in a way that benefits the team, then a scenario was presented, only to be asked for examples of teams that would do it (which is fair), then when given possible teams, it was asked which teams recently adopted such strategy, some were named again, now we're at which top 5 teams have done it.

No one specific poster asked all these questions or supplied all the answers (to the best of my knowledge), but the whole flow of the debate feels like a goalpost moving.

 

[Nynja*]

Here it started with someone saying you can't trade Plekanec in a way that benefits the team.

The only way to trade Plek in a way that benefits the team is if something goes wrong and were a bubble team (or worse)...or if somehow MB has convinced MT that Eller can take Plek's role, and theres another PO team looking for a shutdown C for their PO run (which is probably not a good idea for us regardless, as much as I like Eller).

No "rebuilding" team would take Plek's services for 2 months.

 

[Kraniumm]

Can't speak for him but the goalpost phenomenon is symptomatic of the many posters simultaneously debating similar points.

Here it started with someone saying you can't trade Plekanec in a way that benefits the team, then a scenario was presented, only to be asked for examples of teams that would do it (which is fair), then when given possible teams, it was asked which teams recently adopted such strategy, some were named again, now we're at which top 5 teams have done it.

No one specific poster asked all these questions or supplied all the answers (to the best of my knowledge), but the whole flow of the debate feels like a goalpost moving.

Pretty much. And new conditions keep getting added after every reply. Hilarious. Typical internet, I know.

 

[Nynja*]

Pretty much. And new conditions keep getting added after every reply. Hilarious. Typical internet, I know.

What new conditions did I add?
Yeah, none, thats what I thought.

Which team would trade a good NHL ready 21-24 year old winger for a very good 32 year year old two way C thats on an expiring contract?? Remember, this is under the impression were in the top 5 of the league nearing the trade deadline. Who would be stupid enough to make such a ridiculously stupid trade?

Good luck.

 

[Znthnk]

I think it's time to trade Plekanec. Established veterans like Iginla, St-Louis and Callahan were traded to create space for the youth to pick up the slack. This is no slight on Pleky, yet Bergevin has previously mentioned he's willing to take a step back to take two forward. He needs to be traded early as he's better at helping a team make the playoffs than performing in the playoffs. Teams like Edmonton or Winnipeg might be interesting trading partners.

 

[ECWHSWI]

I've never suggested it was common, just doable. While you proclaimed, it wasn't possible at all. And you were proven completely wrong. You weren't willing to do any homework yourself to back up your (rooted in fantasy) contrarian claim, at all.



Intellectual honesty would suggest that the onus is on everybody to come to the conversation in a receptive and responsible way. Not in a mocking, trolling way that looses everybody's time.

Oh! yeah, you're absolutely right, it is doable, it's actually so doable it happened twice in the last few months suggesting it's relatively easy to do so. It's not rocket science.

although if you really wanted to talk about intellectual honesty, you'd have no problem admitting the "it's doable" stuff you're spewing is complete ********, just like your guarantees.

 

[SOLR]

Can't speak for him but the goalpost phenomenon is symptomatic of the many posters simultaneously debating similar points.

Here it started with someone saying you can't trade Plekanec in a way that benefits the team, then a scenario was presented, only to be asked for examples of teams that would do it (which is fair), then when given possible teams, it was asked which teams recently adopted such strategy, some were named again, now we're at which top 5 teams have done it.

No one specific poster asked all these questions or supplied all the answers (to the best of my knowledge), but the whole flow of the debate feels like a goalpost moving.

Hmm hmm. That's because it's not a real debate. It's a bunch guys that have a very emotional bond towards the idea that keeping Plekanec is the only solution. It's self-evidently emotional because if you don't say what you should you are "against them" and a "quack dreamer" who should play "NHL16". Hey, we are all just fan. Our mileage vary, therefore our opinions may also vary. I happen to think we could have much better discussions, interesting and enriching for all.

 

[Takeru]

The only way to trade Plek in a way that benefits the team is if something goes wrong and were a bubble team (or worse)...or if somehow MB has convinced MT that Eller can take Plek's role, and theres another PO team looking for a shutdown C for their PO run (which is probably not a good idea for us regardless, as much as I like Eller).

No "rebuilding" team would take Plek's services for 2 months.

Yet there was an alternative that was presented where it could actually be beneficial trading him. Whether you personally agree it could or should happen is up to you, but dealing in absolute is rarely the answer. Hockey, as life, is not either black or white, there's room for other possibilities than what you envision.

What new conditions did I add?
Yeah, none, thats what I thought.

Not sure if you've read my whole post or only the parts you disagreed with, but I'll state it again cause I'm such a nice guy:

It's not about you specifically, it's about the whole discussion. Poster A asks for condition X and is given an answer, then poster B is not satisfied and asks for condition Y, then poster C comes in and asks for condition Z and so forth. It's a group thing that, as a whole, gives a feeling of goalpost moving.

 

[Nynja*]

Yet there was an alternative that was presented where it could actually be beneficial trading him. Whether you personally agree it could or should happen is up to you, but dealing in absolute is rarely the answer. Hockey, as life, is not either black or white, there's room for other possibilities than what you envision.



Not sure if you've read my whole post or only the parts you disagreed with, but I'll state it again cause I'm such a nice guy:

It's not about you specifically, it's about the whole discussion. Poster A asks for condition X and is given an answer, then poster B is not satisfied and asks for condition Y, then poster C comes in and asks for condition Z and so forth. It's a group thing that, as a whole, gives a feeling of goalpost moving.

There was no alternative that didnt concede the season. You think trading pleks at the deadline for picks if were amongst the top of the league is a good idea, and that will make our playoff run better?

 

[Takeru]

There was no alternative that didnt concede the season. You think trading pleks at the deadline for picks if were amongst the top of the league is a good idea, and that will make our playoff run better?

Do you really like making people repeat themselves that much or did you miss part of the argument?

Either way, never said the deals have to happen at deadline, can happen before that. And for the Xth time, the idea isn't just to get picks and sit on them, but use those picks with other assets of ours to get a younger player from some team that would be interested by these picks and assets, but not directly by Plekanec and assets.

Hopefully this is the last time this needs to be clarified, I swear it seems sometimes people are doing this on purpose.

 

[Nynja*]

And once again, which team is going to move a top young stud for picks? Dont say boston, because a trade like that happens once per decade?

 

[Takeru]

And once again, which team is going to move a top young stud for picks? Dont say boston, because a trade like that happens once per decade?

Alright, you clearly enjoy going in circles more than I do, and quite frankly, I've had enough repeating myself here. Go read the last few pages if you're truly curious about the answer to your question.

I don't know if you're enjoying this, but at this point this has become repetitive and quite boring. I won't pretend to know your intentions, but it doesn't feel like your goal is having a constructive discussion (maybe it is though).

I just believe the debate around here would be more interesting if more people (not aimed at you specifically) would come with an open mind and search for creative solutions, rather than this almost competitive atmosphere of "winning the argument at all cost". May I remind you that we're dealing with hypothetical trades on which none of us has any impact, so there is no inherent completely right or wrong claim, there's a lot of grey area.

A good night to you sir.

 

[Nynja*]

In 3.5 paragraphs, you spoke a lot of nonsense under the impression i wouldnt read it, but nowhere in there did you answer the question "which team would move a top young stud for picks"?

 

[CaptainBenn]

Sign him, hes a 2nd line center on a strong team
So long term he needs to be the habs 2nd line center, will galchenyuk end up a center or a winger on the top line remains to be seen, habs need a #1 superstar center tho
Trading plekanec makes no sense

 

[Carey The Habs]

If he's willing to take a short term contract then sign him, and trade DD. Not a DD hater but there's just too many centers.

 

[Takeru]

I still can't tell if you're doing it on purpose or are just an unfortunate person with poor reading comprehension so I'll give you one last chance in case it's the latter.

In 3.5 paragraphs, you spoke a lot of nonsense under the impression i wouldnt read it, but nowhere in there did you answer the question "which team would move a top young stud for picks"?

See:

Alright, you clearly enjoy going in circles more than I do, and quite frankly, I've had enough repeating myself here. Go read the last few pages if you're truly curious about the answer to your question.

I don't know if you're enjoying this, but at this point this has become repetitive and quite boring. I won't pretend to know your intentions, but it doesn't feel like your goal is having a constructive discussion (maybe it is though).

I just believe the debate around here would be more interesting if more people (not aimed at you specifically) would come with an open mind and search for creative solutions, rather than this almost competitive atmosphere of "winning the argument at all cost". May I remind you that we're dealing with hypothetical trades on which none of us has any impact, so there is no inherent completely right or wrong claim, there's a lot of grey area.

A good night to you sir.

The answer is there already. As I've said, it's been repeated enough already, do your part if you're honestly curious about it.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

The answer is there already. As I've said, it's been repeated enough already, do your part if you're honestly curious about it.

I don't see where you've listed any likely targets, either. In fact, most of your posts seem completely devoid of specific names regardless of topic/context as I flip back through.

 

[Takeru]

I don't see where you've listed any likely targets, either. In fact, most of your posts seem completely devoid of specific names regardless of topic/context as I flip back through.

Well since you're asking so nicely and apparently made an effort I'll give you a hand:

This is a question for Bergevin, but I can see a few scenarios from teams that are still rebuilding like Carolina (E. Lindholm), logic is getting a number of assets for 1 to speed up the wave.

Or from team that are about to sell and rebuild, this will happen in January-Feb. In this case the player would be a bit older and more proven. Logan Couture is an example if the Sharks implode again.

There is also the "all-out" trade for a guy like Sam Reinhart. Buffalo has ROR, Eichel and Girgensen and Reinhart is already talking about playing wing. The logic for them would be to able to draft a few high-caliber wingers and complete their rebuild. Maybe giving themselves a shot at Puljujärvi via 3 1st rounders(1 coming from us, one from our Pleks trade partner *or equal value). Reinhart would play 3rd-line for us this year with Eller moving in the top 6 for 1 year.

Depending on the team's stance, some of them might bite at the offer of two 1sts and a prospect (more or less):

Phi - Couturier
Car - Lindholm
Buf - Reinhart
Edm - Draisaitl
NYI - Nelson
SJ - Couture

I'm sceptical as well, but depending on their plans and what we offer, one of these teams might be willing to part with one of their young stud.

And hey thanks for the exercise, now I can confirm some posters are being dishonest, I didn't remember but it turns out the quote from me was a direct reply to the same question someone's been asking relentlessly.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Well since you're asking so nicely and apparently made an effort I'll give you a hand:

And hey thanks for the exercise, now I can confirm some posters are being dishonest, I didn't remember but it turns out the quote from me was a direct reply to the same question someone's been asking relentlessly.

Thanks for the list. Must have missed it. Have to point out that a lot of that list seems to have been taken care of this off season. Couturier just signed for 6 years/$26 million, so he's likely more in their plans than a couple of picks and a prospect. Lindholm just signed for a very cap friendly bridge contract, so I don't think they'd be willing to give him up. Reinhart and Draisaitl... maybe. A couple of firsts and a prospect seems steep at this point for either guy, though. Wouldn't expect them to be available until their entry levels are closer to expiring anyway. Teams just seldom abandon top prospects in favour of other prospects until they have a much better look at them. Nelson just re-signed with the Islanders, but you never know. Again, a couple of 1sts and a prospect would be a king's ransom for him. And I don't know if Couture is worth the price, either.

 

[Takeru]

Thanks for the list. Must have missed it. Have to point out that a lot of that list seems to have been taken care of this off season. Couturier just signed for 6 years/$26 million, so he's likely more in their plans than a couple of picks and a prospect. Lindholm just signed for a very cap friendly bridge contract, so I don't think they'd be willing to give him up. Reinhart and Draisaitl... maybe. A couple of firsts and a prospect seems steep at this point for either guy, though. Wouldn't expect them to be available until their entry levels are closer to expiring anyway. Teams just seldom abandon top prospects in favour of other prospects until they have a much better look at them. Nelson just re-signed with the Islanders, but you never know. Again, a couple of 1sts and a prospect would be a king's ransom for him. And I don't know if Couture is worth the price, either.

Well I did say more or less, of course the price would be adapted depending on the player we're going for, as they don't have equal value. I don't claim to know their intentions, but I could see at least one of them being interested in going for a volume approach when it comes to draft and prospects. It would all depend on the sale pitch. There might be teams I've missed as well.

 

[Nynja*]

You listed candidates that you would like to see in the CH. You didnt answer the question of which team would trade a young stud for picks. How often does a NHL ready 21-24 year old get moved? And once again, dont say boston because everyone laughed at it, and a good chunk of bruins fans wanted to burn their jerseys over it (exaggerating)

 

[Takeru]

You listed candidates that you would like to see in the CH. You didnt answer the question of which team would trade a young stud for picks. How often does a NHL ready 21-24 year old get moved? And once again, dont say boston because everyone laughed at it, and a good chunk of bruins fans wanted to burn their jerseys over it (exaggerating)

Are you really that ****ing dense, or just making an effort of missing the point!?!

No one can give you a list of teams that would absolutely certainly be willing to trade a young stud for picks. Unless you pretend to know the team's intentions, that's impossible.

What we can offer is a list of teams (and specific players from them) that might entertain such possibility. Is it really that hard to see the difference?

If you still don't get it after this, then I don't know how else I can make it understandeable for you.