Toggle sidebar

Proposal: Trade ideas

TheNorth86

Registered User
Nov 15, 2016
48
3
Bolt 45 said:
It is a coicidence, because nobody is scoring, including guys who never see ice time with Stamkos. This same exact team did just fine the last time he went down, if I recall. Was that a coincidence? That being said, I don't like that we have the exact same team that we did. Virtually everyone else in the East made moves and we did nothing. Hence this thread.

Racking up points? We're paying him to be THE guy, not to keep pace with the other guys. Great on the PK? You mean he jumped in on a couple of of 2-on-1s with Palat, an actual natural on the PK? Okay. Setting up goals for teammates? Kuch? There's a shocker. Good backcheck? I didn't really notice him, which, to be fair, probably bolsters your case. Limited TOs? It's embarrassing that this needs to be pointed out at all. It should be a given (and I'll refrain from pointing out a particularly embarrassing turnover early in the year against a particular player, no matter how ironic it is given the trade proposal we're debating).

Stamkos is underachieving would be my point. Why should he need a new 8.5 million dollar a year contract to work on his game? As an example, Ovechkin isn't anywhere close to the player he was when came into the league. He worked on improving his entire game while continuing to put up more goals than anyone else. If Stamkos worked half as hard to get his chances as Ovechkin does he'd be be potting 70 a year, every year. Seriously.

I don't necessarily think that "the player we don't have" is better than Stamkos. I just think that players we don't have could make our team better as a unit.
Click to expand...

Could we all pay you to never post another opinion of your's ever again?
 

Flat Ronnie

Registered User
Feb 11, 2014
5,581
2,976
Bolt 45 said:
It is a coicidence, because nobody is scoring, including guys who never see ice time with Stamkos. This same exact team did just fine the last time he went down, if I recall. Was that a coincidence? That being said, I don't like that we have the exact same team that we did. Virtually everyone else in the East made moves and we did nothing. Hence this thread.

Racking up points? We're paying him to be THE guy, not to keep pace with the other guys. Great on the PK? You mean he jumped in on a couple of of 2-on-1s with Palat, an actual natural on the PK? Okay. Setting up goals for teammates? Kuch? There's a shocker. Good backcheck? I didn't really notice him, which, to be fair, probably bolsters your case. Limited TOs? It's embarrassing that this needs to be pointed out at all. It should be a given (and I'll refrain from pointing out a particularly embarrassing turnover early in the year against a particular player, no matter how ironic it is given the trade proposal we're debating).

Stamkos is underachieving would be my point. Why should he need a new 8.5 million dollar a year contract to work on his game? As an example, Ovechkin isn't anywhere close to the player he was when came into the league. He worked on improving his entire game while continuing to put up more goals than anyone else. If Stamkos worked half as hard to get his chances as Ovechkin does he'd be be potting 70 a year, every year. Seriously.

I don't necessarily think that "the player we don't have" is better than Stamkos. I just think that players we don't have could make our team better as a unit.
Click to expand...

Haha...wow.
 
The Macho King

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
48,776
29,312
I find it hilarious that the guy that was second in the league in goals and points when he went down and was driving our offense is getting such flak. At least when I had my pitchfork out for Stamkos he was actually playing poorly.
 

Flat Ronnie

Registered User
Feb 11, 2014
5,581
2,976
The Macho Man said:
I find it hilarious that the guy that was second in the league in goals and points when he went down and was driving our offense is getting such flak. At least when I had my pitchfork out for Stamkos he was actually playing poorly.
Click to expand...

Only a select few think this nonsense.
 
bov

bov

Registered User
Nov 13, 2010
7,196
3,320
I wouldn't be expecting a complete resurgence but I don't think the situation in Colorado is getting the most out of him as a player at this point. Could be useful for some secondary scoring, grit, and leadership heading into a playoff run. I think a trade to a contender would give him a bit of a spark.
 
AlphaCatalyst

AlphaCatalyst

Elite Fan
Jun 27, 2007
14,921
7,126
Calgary
If we did manage to get Iggy and make a deep playoff run, I know a lot of people that would lose their minds just because of their inability to let go of 04
 
Sky04

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
29,114
18,212
Still All In said:
A solid point backed by facts, well done.

Seriously, knock this **** off. We're all better than this.
Click to expand...

Well done, i'm not going to argue facts (which have been presented) to someone who's admitted to having a bias and observations are clearly off track.

That wasn't anywhere close to a personal attack or anything of the sort, calm your panties.
 
Last edited:
Sky04

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
29,114
18,212
Still All In said:
Boyle, Point, for starters.

Boyle - you get exactly what you pay for with him, can't complain about that.
Point - hasn't really slowed down, learning to adapt to whatever line he gets thrown on.
Click to expand...


Not hard to slow down considering he never really got going, at least he's cheap cap-wise.
 
LTIR Trickery

LTIR Trickery

Plz stop pucks
Jun 27, 2007
23,880
2,685
Scrip Club
He has points in 1/3 of his games currently and drives play as an undersized 20 year old - thats very, very good. Especially when you see him only shooting 3%. He isn't out of place on any lines and adapts quickly. A lot of people are harping on his play, but he has been very good relative to his assignment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom