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

No Excuses No Limits! The mother fucking goddamn season thread

Volcanologist said:
this is coping nonsense. his philosophy is to acquire players who make a difference, and tried to trade for Zadorov. therefore, he feels Zadorov moves the needle.
Click to expand...
They wanted him at 50%. So a 1.875m dollar value. Which is bottom pair money. Doesn't sound like he felt that he moved much of a needle.
 
yes, the same ilk that suddenly only cares about "regulation wins" when they never have before.
 
I don't like Tree Bitch nor do I trust what he believes is a difference maker (see his original targets of Dumba and Klingberg). But the fact that he had zero interest taking Zadorov at 3.75 is a pretty ironclad case of what he thinks he is, no? I don't get this argument?
 
Volcanologist said:
did I say ANY player mentioned by the media?

if we're going down that road then why discuss anything at all
Click to expand...
you did not provide any other basis other than Tre's perceived interest...

nor did you counter the (IMO) fairly obvious rebuttal provided by zeke and presto...

so if that is not your argument, you're welcome to clarify.
 
Preston said:
I don't like Tree Bitch nor do I trust what he believes is a difference maker (see his original targets of Dumba and Klingberg). But the fact that he had zero interest taking Zadorov at 3.75 is a pretty ironclad case of what he thinks he is, no? I don't get this argument?
Click to expand...
yeah I am a tree skeptic but agree with this.

it's not like the cost to acquire Zadorov was particularly high.
 
Wayward DP said:
you did not provide any other basis other than Tre's perceived interest...
Click to expand...

and what would that "basis" constitute? seems we have new rules for the board on rumours now, should be discussed if that's the case.

Wayward DP said:
nor did you counter the (IMO) fairly obvious rebuttal provided by zeke and presto...

so if that is not your argument, you're welcome to clarify.
Click to expand...

are you serious? you think a team has to take the full cap hit on a player or he's not a difference maker?
 
Volcanologist said:
and what would that "basis" constitute? seems we have new rules for the board on rumours now, should be discussed if that's the case.



are you serious? you think a team has to take the full cap hit on a player or he's not a difference maker?
Click to expand...
lol you still won't say what you rely upon in support of your position. the opposing view has been made clear. hard to have a debate when you simply present a conclusion as an ironclad fact and then fail to explain how and why you reached said conclusion.

and again, as has been explained (and ignored) repeatedly now - if Tre viewed Zadorov as a true difference maker, it is reasonable to assume that he would: a) be willing to take on his full cap hit as we can easily fit it into our team; and b) would be willing to part with a couple of late round draft picks to acquire said difference maker. since he did neither, we conclude he did not, in fact, view Zadorov as a difference maker.

you have concluded that he does, in fact, view Zadorov as a difference maker, because ???
 
Tree Bitch viewed Zadorov as a potential bottom pair d that he wanted to pay at bottom pair money because he felt that he was not good enough to be the only addition to this teams' blue line (which he would have been if they took his whole cap hit). But that ship has sailed so he has appeared to pivot towards acquiring a single high quality defensman that is more of a top 4 guy.

TLDR: He wanted Zadorov. But at bottom pair money. Because he did not view him as good enough to make a difference to this d corps since he wanted an actual top 4 guy packaged with him. If Tree felt Zadorov was a difference maker he would have paid a 3rd and 4th rounder for him at his full AAV. And it would wrap up their d corps.
 
Zadorov at full cap hit would’ve been a waste of time.

Get a guy that can be a #2/3. Someone we can rely on in all situations. Or better
 
That's why I think they wanted to do the Tanev and Zadorov deal. Tanev being the shut down and Zadorov providing some size with offense on the second or third pair
 
Sorry late to the refresh. I agree Zadorov would be a great bottom pair d for a playoff run. His size and offense would help in the second pair...but he should not be the bulk of the cap hit available. But if tre could somehow trade a Kampf or a Reaves along with the Klingberg money now you can get someone similar in the 2 mill range from somewhere else and spend what give or six on a top d or a D and a bottom six forward with speed and a bit of bite
 
Volcanologist said:
I've explained my position repeatedly, and it hasn't been countered with anything that makes any sense.

it's time to stop.
Click to expand...

this was your first post on the topic:
Volcanologist said:
he obviously viewed Zadorov as a difference maker. he tried to trade for him, but was outbid by vancouver.
Click to expand...

this was your second:

Volcanologist said:
this is coping nonsense. his philosophy is to acquire players who make a difference, and tried to trade for Zadorov. therefore, he feels Zadorov moves the needle.
Click to expand...

this was your third:

Volcanologist said:
completely irrelevant. Nobody wants anyone at their full cap hit if it can be negotiated.
Click to expand...

and numero cuatro:

Volcanologist said:
that's not going get any more logical through repetition.
Click to expand...

y cinco:

Volcanologist said:
players are only difference makers if the team takes the full cap hit?

what a bunch of fucking nonsense that is
Click to expand...

so the best I can glean from the above is that you have concluded that Tre's philosophy is to acquire exclusively "difference makers", and therefore any player Tre is interested in acquiring must be a "difference maker" in his eyes (based on post two).

for the reasons already explained, I disagree. if there is additional information that supports the conclusion you reached regarding Tre's philosophy, I would be keen to see it.
 
His quote was essentially “ya we looked at the market, but if we are going to make a trade it has to make sense in cost and impact”

so if they didn’t make a trade the reasonable implication is the cost and impact didn’t make sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top