It's honestly reminiscent of the guy that defended Callahan at all costs, only to later find out Callahan was a personal client of his and then it all made sense.
There's no legitimate finisher on the second line. It's all two way forwards that lack a playmaker unless Hagel takes that role and feeds elite sniper Anthony Cirelli. Cirelli and Stamkos are lousy. You admitted Paul and Stamkos are garbo together. So, if it's not precisely Stamkos that is the problem and you load up one scoring line because at least he's good enough to warrant putting there, where does the offense come from on the bottom nine? Lol. Not to mention now you're recommending someone from Syracuse to play in the top 6 or someone in the 1.5-2 million range that *you* repeatedly denied would be an improvement by any stretch over Cirelli. You said "no thanks" and "I doubt that would work" when I gave you 3-4M range guys. Lol. But now suddenly someone like Lafferty/Sheary is going to log +16mins a night and mesh? Those guys are 20-30pt guys and unproven commodities like "someone from Syracuse" that's suddenly going to jump into the NHL under the radar and play a top 6 role? Goncalves and Groshev were your picks, those two? Lol.
You are literally contradicting yourself by the day on how to improve the team without possibly stating that moving Cirelli is a logical option and quite reasonable seeing as a forward making half of what he makes can fill his shoes. Hell, the winger you want to pair him with outscores him by 20-30 points only makes 250k more - which he deserves.
Aaaaaannddddd circling back to my point from a week ago, Anthony Cirelli has been and still remains a luxury on this team. Others can claim the same about Sergachev and while I would rather see us move Cirelli before Sergachev at this point, I would also agree with that assessment. Both are luxuries that if allocating their AAV to areas of need, such as middle six wingers, would be much more wisely spent. People seem to forget without Cirelli, we have three centers capable of hitting over 20 goals, two hitting +40 goals, and two out of those three (Stamkos & Paul) are much better on the draw than Cirelli (56% and 54% to Cirelli's 49%). What the hell does a $6.25M player at this point have in his arsenal that team defense couldn't mask when production is matched and exceeded by players half his cap hit?
*Also, even if Paul has a "down" year and nets 15g 15a 30pts, at least he's paid his worth and living up to it. If he wasn't streaky for a third of the year, he would've hit 30 at 3M. That's f***ing wild that anybody can still defend non-Selke Cirelli at this point when we are talking cutthroat to move players and make the team better. Like, I love the guy. He is the epitome of a hockey player, but I would absolutely be on Stamkos' ass (like I have plenty of times) when he's playing subpar or any player isn't worth his cap hit. This isn't new, either. This is yearly Cirelli. We have Hagel now who is far superior offensively. We are better off putting Stamkos at center with Hagel on his wing and grabbing a legitimate winger to play top 6. That is precisely the case I have been making for a week.
at least teams would want and pay assets for cirell 
