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

GDT - Auston vs. his hometown team | 7:30PM EST SNET

zeke said:
Matthews is too unemotional.

Marner is too inconsistent and cocky.

Nylander is soft and arrogant.
Click to expand...
Price is very unemotional (except the occasional outburst). Great players tend to use their heads more.
 
leafman101 said:
Just get used to it. Its a good sign, it means they are doing things right. Over the next decade even Matthews will be traded a bunch of times because he is a soft American that isn't a leader.

It happened to hall of famers like Gilmour, Murphy, Sundin and Quinn, no one here now is immune.

Except for Hyman, Soshnikov and Brown. Everyone will love those guys.
Click to expand...

90% of the fanbase is shit.
 
They'll find another way to get their help on D rather than trade away a 20 year old on pace for nearly 60 points.
 
leafman101 said:
Just get used to it. Its a good sign, it means they are doing things right. Over the next decade even Matthews will be traded a bunch of times because he is a soft American that isn't a leader.

It happened to hall of famers like Gilmour, Murphy, Sundin and Quinn, no one here now is immune.

Except for Hyman, Soshnikov and Brown. Everyone will love those guys.
Click to expand...
Yep. I kind of lost track of how many times over the years the "radio-call-in" type fans called for Sundin to be traded for "Da big E" or someone with "heart", or how many times it was suggested that the "C" should be stripped off Sundin's chest and given to Tie Domi or Gary Roberts.

And most of those same idiots have probably spent the last eight years crying un-ironically about how we don't have a #1 center.

Then there's Tomas Kaberle, who would score 10 goals and 45-50 points every year like clockwork while also being great defensively, and most average fans were desperate for us to trade him away because he was "soft", and they believed he didn't shoot the puck enough.

That George Carlin line that someone around here has as their signature is pretty apt when it comes to Leaf fans, or any fanbase in general: "think of how dumb the 'average person' is, and then realize that 50% of people are even dumber than that."
 
hockeylover said:
They'll find another way to get their help on D rather than trade away a 20 year old on pace for nearly 60 points.
Click to expand...

The best part about our defensive situation is that improvement is easy. Replace hunlak with legitimately good #4 type defenders (think pre hip damage Carl gunnarsson) and our blue line takes a huge leap forward. Replace Carrick with a good #3 and again a solid improvement.
 
hey everybody has their price. if they can get a bonafide top flight dman you deal nylander to get it done. but those trades just don't happen very often.

as for their D... i think they really need to replace carrick. that isn't a solid improvement, that's the big improvement that htey need to make.

you can live with a hunlak pairing imo... i mean, SJ went to the finals basically with that last year. but they need a second pair that babcock can put against real skaters, and marincin and carrick don't get you there.

(of course if you replace carrick in the top 4 you can put him on the 3rd pair instead of polak. not sure htat's much of a difference maker though)
 
Why so sour on Carrick? All his advanced stats are very good. Most who play with him see their corsi improve, particularly Gardiner.
 
Yeah I dont get his odd dislike of Carrick. I see him as a guy who can be improved on in the 2nd pairing definitely but he's a decent NHL #5-6 at this point imo.

"Living with" hunlak and focusing on replacing Carrick is bananas.
 
carrick is being seriously sheltered.

he's borderline nhl'er right now. 6/7 guy.

he will probably get better, but i don't think he has the skillset to be much better than a bottom pair guy.

anyways, my point is that they need to improve the top 4.

having a weak link on your bottom pair is only a big deal if you have a hole in your top 4... which the leafs have and which is why hunlak are getting tougher matchups than most bottom pairs would get.
 
MindzEye said:
Yeah I dont get his odd dislike of Carrick. I see him as a guy who can be improved on in the 2nd pairing definitely but he's a decent NHL #5-6 at this point imo.

"Living with" hunlak and focusing on replacing Carrick is bananas.
Click to expand...

there's no 'dislike' and nothing odd about wanting to replace a marginal player who is in a role he shouldn't be in with a better player.

the usage says it all.
 
imo you guys are focusing way too much on a 3rd pair.

plenty of very good teams have had shitty 3rd pairs.

the leafs d clearly needs to get better. the focus should be on improving the top 4. carrick is a very apparent hole. they don' tneed a small upgrade there... the leafs need another top pair caliber dman, or very good 2nd pair guy
 
mbow30 said:
hey everybody has their price. if they can get a bonafide top flight dman you deal nylander to get it done. but those trades just don't happen very often.

as for their D... i think they really need to replace carrick. that isn't a solid improvement, that's the big improvement that htey need to make.

you can live with a hunlak pairing imo... i mean, SJ went to the finals basically with that last year. but they need a second pair that babcock can put against real skaters, and marincin and carrick don't get you there.

(of course if you replace carrick in the top 4 you can put him on the 3rd pair instead of polak. not sure htat's much of a difference maker though)
Click to expand...
Considering this team's current stage of development, and the fact that Nylander's already playing like a 60+ point first line talent, in order to even consider it, not only would it have to be a "top-flight D-man", but it would have to be a guy that's approximately the same age as Nylander with the same pedigree & same amount of team control.

How many of those guys even exist in the NHL at the moment?

And then if you deal away Nylander, now you also have to fill the hole you've created down the middle, since Bozak sure isn't a long-term solution there, and we've got pretty much nothing of obvious NHL-caliber down the middle in the organization after Matthews & Kadri.

It just strikes me as so unlikely that it's barely worth considering. Not to mention the fact that there's no hurry. We've got time to wait to see what Morgan Rielly can turn into, or Andrew Nielsen & Travis Dermott. And there should be some solid "top-4" guys on the market towards year's end thanks to the expansion draft. Could be our opportunity to do what the Isles did when they picked up Boychuk & Leddy for a pretty cheap price.
 
LeafGm said:
Considering this team's current stage of development, and the fact that Nylander's already playing like a 60+ point first line talent, in order to even consider it, not only would it have to be a "top-flight D-man", but it would have to be a guy that's approximately the same age as Nylander with the same pedigree & same amount of team control.

How many of those guys even exist in the NHL at the moment?

And then if you deal away Nylander, now you also have to fill the hole you've created down the middle, since Bozak sure isn't a long-term solution there, and we've got pretty much nothing of obvious NHL-caliber down the middle in the organization after Matthews & Kadri.

It just strikes me as so unlikely that it's barely worth considering. Not to mention the fact that there's no hurry. We've got time to wait to see what Morgan Rielly can turn into, or Andrew Nielsen & Travis Dermott. And there should be some solid "top-4" guys on the market towards year's end thanks to the expansion draft. Could be our opportunity to do what the Isles did when they picked up Boychuk & Leddy for a pretty cheap price.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. The kind of guy we'd trade Nylander for isn't the kind of guy teams move at all.
 
but it would have to be a guy that's approximately the same age as Nylander with the same pedigree & same amount of team control.
Click to expand...

meh

i wouldn't deal him for a guy hiting his mid 30s like keith but if you can get an in his prime top paiirng dman for nylander you'd have to do it.

we could be awaiting 8 or 9 years before the likes of dermott or nielsen really hit their stride.

obviously, i'd prefer not to trade nlyande,r but if he's the price to pay for a top nothc dman you do it.
 
1. Nylander is better than Galchenyuk
2. Our defense corps is actually pretty good. Rielly, Gardiner, Zaitsev is actually a very good and talented top 3. The bottom 3 slots aren't great but no worse than most teams.

We play a very high tempo high event system, and literally half of our forwards are rookies - the dmen are probably getting undeserved blame for our goals against totals.
 
Perhaps having two 19 year olds and one 20 year old all on pace for ~60 or more points makes people forget how big of a deal that is at that age.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top