Confirmed with Link: [VAN/PIT] Pedan and 2018 4th round pick for Derrick Pouliot

[Shareefruck]

I don't think he meant you. Also I sent you a message.

Isn't that what we've been talking about, though? That he finds my posts irritating because I do the same thing too? I agreed with him that one of the points was unacceptable but that I didn't think that I did it, and he responded with that, so I can only assume he meant that it was an example of something I supposedly sometimes do. Ending it with "Carry on if you must, it's a free forum" makes that pretty unambiguous, too.

And got it, and replied.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Except we threw a 4th in.

With rumours like this it's pretty clear we should be moving prospects in situations like Pedan for picks, not acquiring players like Pedan for picks.

Was Rutherford was going to let Pouliot go for nothing.?.As a (regressed) 8OA he does have some value..You don't think Colorado would have jumped on Pouliot if he did go on waivers..?

I like the deal....If Pouliot is put in a position to 'succeed'.. who knows,..we can either keep him or flip him..I don't see any loss of value in the deal.

 

[Peter10]

Based on stats? History? Gut feeling?

I obviously havent run the numbers but a former top 10 pick defenseman who hasnt cracked the line up 5 years after his draft is not looking all too good. Even more so if he seems to be regressing instead of progressing. As i mentioned before his p/g in the AHL went down each year. His number of NHL games went down each year (34, 22, 11)? Does that give you any hope that all of a sudden this trend is turned around? Do you have any recent example of something like this happening?

Also to get back to your previous point:

"What are the odds a 4th round pick sticks in the NHL for over 3 seasons and maintains 0.3PPG? What are the odds of Pouliot doing the same?"

Pouliot hasnt done that either, he couldnt stick in the big league and scored 0.2 points (no points in 11 games last season). If you just go by stuff like this, I would argue Ben Hutton would be fitting way better as a PPQB. Drafted the same year but only in the 5th round, unlike Pouliot he has progressed not regressed, he played twice as many games in the NHL already and score 3 times as many points. What qualifies Pouliot more than Hutton?

 

[Paulinvancouver]

You guys must really love that Pickard trade for Vegas then.

They dealt a #3 goalie away for a prospect and a 6 th round pick!,

Brett Hull was drafted in the 6th round! They basically traded Calvin Pickard for a prospect and Brett Hull! Awesome.

 

[CanaFan]

You guys must really love that Pickard trade for Vegas then.

They dealt a #3 goalie away for a prospect and a 6 th round pick!,

Brett Hull was drafted in the 6th round! They basically traded Calvin Pickard for a prospect and Brett Hull! Awesome.

Do you actually think people are saying this?

 

[drax0s]

I obviously havent run the numbers but a former top 10 pick defenseman who hasnt cracked the line up 5 years after his draft is not looking all too good. Even more so if he seems to be regressing instead of progressing. As i mentioned before his p/g in the AHL went down each year. His number of NHL games went down each year (34, 22, 11)? Does that give you any hope that all of a sudden this trend is turned around? Do you have any recent example of something like this happening?

He had excellent Corsi and a respectable PPG in his first season and his play definitely dropped. Did it drop through lost confidence? Frustration? Did he not have the professional drive to make it as a NHL player? Who knows. He definitely has the talent though, and there's definitely a chance he figures it out and rejuvenates his career like Baertschi, Granlund and recently Justin Schultz did for the Pens.

Pouliot hasnt done that either, he couldnt stick in the big league and scored 0.2 points (no points in 11 games last season). If you just go by stuff like this, I would argue Ben Hutton would be fitting way better as a PPQB. Drafted the same year but only in the 5th round, unlike Pouliot he has progressed not regressed, he played twice as many games in the NHL already and score 3 times as many points. What qualifies Pouliot more than Hutton?

Nothing? Both have the chance to become the #1 PPQB. If Hutton shows he can take over the PPQB role and run with it, give it to him? Why is it an either or?

Are Hutton or Subban locks for solving our lack of PPQB? Hell no.

 

[krutovsdonut]

But when have I said anything like this? Especially that last line.

i thought you had moved on to discussing the types of insulting posts you thought were ok and not ok. that was intended as a generic example of a type of insulting post i don't like.

 

[Shareefruck]

i thought you had moved on to discussing the types of insulting posts you thought were ok and not ok. that was intended as a generic example of a type of insulting post i don't like.

Oh. But I already agreed with you that that was not okay, in that case.

Can we agree that the only one I'm guilty of is the one that I defended and find acceptable?

 

[Hit the post]

I like the deal....If Pouliot is put in a position to 'succeed'.. who knows,..we can either keep him or flip him..I don't see any loss of value in the deal.

Flip him for what exactly?

St. Anger > Pouliot if it came to that point.

 

[CanaFan]

Flip him for what exactly?

St. Anger > Pouliot if it came to that point.

Ya, it’s weird to feel that needed pointing out that if he succeeds we can always keep or flip him. Well, obviously. You can keep or flip anyone who succeeds. The issue isn’t what to do with him if he works out, it’s whether or not he actually works out.

 

[Hit the post]

Ya, it’s weird to feel that needed pointing out. “If he works out we can always flip him”. Well, obviously. You can flip anyone who “works out”. The issue isn’t what to do with him if he works out, it’s whether or not he actually works out.

Yeah I don't get it....if he works works - of course you don't deal him. But if he doesn't (and there's a good chance of that if Green staples his butt to the bench/pressbox if he can't defend good enough) his value logically will drop noticeably.

 

[CanaFan]

Yeah I don't get it....if he works works - of course you don't deal him. But if he doesn't (and there's a good chance of that if Green staples his butt to the bench/pressbox if he can't defend good enough) his value logically will drop noticeably.

It’s the same logic with Gudbranson. If he plays great we can sign him and if he doesn’t we can deal him at the deadline. Well duh, that’s not in question. The issue is whether we can afford to resign him if he plays great or if we can get anything in a trade if he plays like crap. It’s the quality of the options we would be facing, not whether those options exist.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Oh. But I already agreed with you that that was not okay, in that case.

Then can we agree that the only one I'm guilty of is the one that I defended and find acceptable?

no. we can agree that i dialed back interacting with you a while ago because i felt the way i felt. the search function is not working so an autopsy on exactly how that happened is not on the table, and it involved you dealing with other posters as well.

not sure what difference it would make though. you seem to be fine with the way things are here. based on that we're bound to disagree so don't let my view bother you.

 

[Paulinvancouver]

Do you actually think people are saying this?

Yes. It's the exact same argument you people are trying to make with Pouliot.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Ya, it’s weird to feel that needed pointing out that if he succeeds we can always keep or flip him. Well, obviously. You can keep or flip anyone who succeeds. The issue isn’t what to do with him if he works out, it’s whether or not he actually works out.

It totally is...all we can do is speculate..You're taking the complete negative viewpoint on him (I wouldn't expect any less from you) that he won't work out to anything...I think ,given the opportunity to succeed,in the right environment..some players will surprise you..His value should exceed a 4th rounder if he can even become an NHL player in any shape or form.

 

[Shareefruck]

no. we can agree that i dialed back interacting with you a while ago because i felt the way i felt. the search function is not working so an autopsy on exactly how that happened is not on the table, and it involved you dealing with other posters as well.

not sure what difference it would make though. you seem to be fine with the way things are here. based on that we're bound to disagree so don't let my view bother you.

Well, I'd like to be accountable when I do something that I myself wouldn't find acceptable, and I don't want to give the impression that I'm weaseling around intentionally avoiding the truth and being a hypocrite. But to be honest, even ignoring the evidence, I'm not even sure what the allegation is. The bulk of the most aggregious stuff that I'm aware of doing that I can imagine stepping on toes is: express annoyed frustration/confusion that people would subscribe to certain ideas (like defending Sbisa or finding zero goals to be a credible argument against Gaunce), finding specific ideas silly or idiotic, or that time I pointed out what I saw logically wrong with being a self-proclaimed optimist.

All of those are direct and sincere assertions about the ideas themselves that I was aware might indirectly step on toes but was worth expressing anyways, rather than back-handed passive aggressive snipes or agenda/narrative-spinning.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Well, I'd like to be accountable when I do something that I myself wouldn't find acceptable, and I don't want to give the impression that I'm weaseling around intentionally avoiding the truth and being a hypocrite. But to be honest, even ignoring the evidence, I'm not even sure what the allegation is. The bulk of the most aggregious stuff that I'm aware of doing that I can imagine stepping on toes is: express annoyed frustration/confusion that people would subscribe to certain ideas (like defending Sbisa or finding zero goals to be a credible argument against Gaunce), finding specific ideas silly or idiotic, or that time I pointed out what I saw logically wrong with being a self-proclaimed optimist.

i don't think you are weaseling. i am the one not backing up my original comment by dredging out your old posts and trying to reconstruct history.

 

[drax0s]

Well, I'd like to be accountable when I do something that I myself wouldn't find acceptable, and I don't want to give the impression that I'm weaseling around intentionally avoiding the truth and being a hypocrite.

I don't want to fake forum mod here, but maybe this convo best belongs in private messages or something?

 

[CanaFan]

Yes. It's the exact same argument you people are trying to make with Pouliot.

It’s the *exact* same argument?

People are saying we definitely gave up drafting Johnny Gaudreau for Pouliot?

This is actually how you have interpreted the past 20 pages?

Like, uh .... wow.

 

[Shareefruck]

I don't want to fake forum mod here, but maybe this convo best belongs in private messages or something?

That's fine, I think we're finished anyways.

 

[CanaFan]

It totally is...all we can do is speculate..You're taking the complete negative viewpoint on him (I wouldn't expect any less from you) that he won't work out to anything...I think ,given the opportunity to succeed,in the right environment..some players will surprise you..His value should exceed a 4th rounder if he can even become an NHL player in any shape or form.

What is the point of posting this though? “If he can become an NHLer”. Ya, no shit Sherlock. The debate is over whether he will, not “will he have any value IF he does.”

Oh and the obligatory “I wouldn’t expect anything less from you” back at ya. Wouldn’t want to miss tossing in some passive aggressive snarkiness of my own.

 

[Nomobo]

What is the point of posting this though? “If he can become an NHLer”. Ya, no **** Sherlock. The debate is over whether he will, not “will he have any value IF he does.”

Oh and the obligatory “I wouldn’t expect anything less from you” back at ya. Wouldn’t want to miss tossing in some passive aggressive snarkiness of my own.

If he turns out so well that his value blows the value of a 4th rounder out of the water, that would be more than enough to warrant taking this so called gamble. Why shouldn't he post that? This debate is not only about "will he or will he not?" but is this a calculated risk?
I don't mind this gamble.

 

[rune74]

I honestly don't mind this gamble either. It's relatively safe.

Now, a higher round draft pick that's another story.

 

[CanaFan]

If he turns out so well that his value blows the value of a 4th rounder out of the water, that would be more than enough to warrant taking this so called gamble. Why shouldn't he post that? This debate is not only about "will he or will he not?" but is this a calculated risk?
I don't mind this gamble.

Because if Pedan or the 4th turn out well it blows the value of Pouliot out of the water too. The hypothetical best-case-scenario will always “blow the value out of the water”. It’s not a useful argument for or against the deal. Just like saying if Petrus Palmu turns into an NHLer it will be a steal of a pick. Like, uh, thanks for the great contribution.

 

[VanJack]

Ha..ha...Bob McKenzie on with Sekaras and Price, saying that the Pens scouts have been telling Rutherford for some time, "if you have a chance to get your hands on Andrey Pedan, go for it.".... adding they've been bullish since his days in the OHL.....of course you have to take that with a gain of salt, since Pedan has been on waivers twice with no takers, including the Pens......but beauty I guess, "is in the eye of the beholder".