• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Core 4 No More: The Motherfucking Off-Season Thread

WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou said:
So why change 4 quarters for a buck then? Why, if the Canucks want to get rid of Pettersson, would they trade him for a player who's just as much of an underachiever in the playoffs and has all that other baggage that Pettersson doesn't have?

Oh right, I forgot. Because it's the easiest and most convenient way for the Leafs to solve their problems. That's nice, but it's not solving any of the Canucks' problems. In fact, it is only adding to their problems. Y

ou think the Canucks front office doesn't know about Marner's dad or that private security firm? Fact is, the Leafs may wind up resigning him not because they want to keep him but because the aura of bullshittery with which he surrounds himself makes it impossible for them to get a fair return for him. No team wants a player who's resting facial expression is of a person who just had a hot turd put under their nose. Petulance may be brushed off in the other sports but hockey culture does not tolerate prima donna's or guys who give off those vibes.
Click to expand...

Solid (albeit unspectacular) essay

B+
 
Petterson is a good example of why Marner will be very difficult to move. Even if the player value was identical (ignoring that Petterson is a C and scores more goals), Marner is going to want a couple million more per year. Why would anyone do that?

Best chance to move Marner is to find a team desperate for a “star” with lots of cap space who won’t mind the overpay.
 
zeke said:
it's funny you guys don't realize the "shock" you feel at the canucks trading Pettersson is exactly the same shock you should feel about the leafs moving Marner.
Click to expand...

Negotiating EP’s contract involved quite a bit of work and stress … my “shock” involves the GM wanting to repeat the same assignment (with an even more complicated client) so soon after
 
You can call it unlikely, that's fine. But I'm not sure how there isn't logic behind trading two studs, one for one, that have sucked in the playoffs. The media has been on Pettersson since he signed that contract. He hasn't been very good and beyond one season, he has been a clear step down from Mitch throughout his career.

Vancouver is arguably getting the better offensive player here. Contracts will be similar and a change of scenery could benefit both guys
 
CH1 said:
Negotiating EP’s contract involved quite a bit of work and stress … my “shock” involves the GM wanting to repeat the same assignment (with an even more complicated client) so soon after
Click to expand...

if they don't want to trade him that's fine.

the point being here though is that he's getting a whole lotta negative attention right now.
 
zeke said:
if they don't want to trade him that's fine.

the point being here though is that he's getting a whole lotta negative attention right now.
Click to expand...

Yes… but negative attention can last a long time before it spurs one to action (pls consult Leafs negative attention to “we’re finally contemplating big changes” timeline)
 
CH1 said:
Yes… but negative attention can last a long time before it spurs one to action (pls consult Leafs negative attention to “we’re finally contemplating big changes” timeline)
Click to expand...
But many times teams will hold off trading their stars with negative attention because there are only losing trades out there. Not often do we see two similar caliber stars receiving loads of negative attention at the same time.

Tre picks up the phone and makes the offer and I bet the Canucks think about it at the very least.
 
Preston said:
But many times teams will hold off trading their stars with negative attention because there are only losing trades out there. Not often do we see two similar caliber stars receiving loads of negative attention at the same time.

Tre picks up the phone and makes the offer and I bet the Canucks think about it at the very least.
Click to expand...

Maybe I’m imposing my lazy/efficiency bias here, but as Van GM…. I’m thinking “I just signed my contract headache, not sure I want to take on Marner+ dad and paying a 1.5M/yr premium/yr for the pleasure”
 
CH1 said:
Maybe I’m imposing my lazy/efficiency bias here, but as Van GM…. I’m thinking “I just signed my contract headache, not sure I want to take on Marner+ dad and paying a 1.5M/yr premium/yr for the pleasure”
Click to expand...
Very possible. I'm just saying there's some logic behind this one for both teams. If they have any feeling that the media is at all right about their guys needing a change of scenery, maybe they take the opportunity and pull the trigger on a deal that will likely never be available again. Or at least they'll think about it!
 
But maybe if you're allowed to speak to Marner first and see that he'll sign the same deal, you pull the trigger.

The issue is, I don't see Marner going out of his way to help this process. He likes assists, but not these kinds. He'll deliberately ask for the moon just to kill a trade. Or he'll just refuse to waive the NMC and make it all irrelevant. Until he agrees to leave, I won't believe that he's willing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top