Wisp
Registered User
- Nov 14, 2010
- 7,569
- 2,039
That condition on the trade related more to Ehrhoff's value than White's though.
Not sure I follow. Patrick White always represented 2nd round pick in that trade.
That condition on the trade related more to Ehrhoff's value than White's though.
There's only three reasons to not like this trade:
1-You feel Forsling is going to be great and Clendening is a sure bust. I don't feel this position can be logically defended. Nothing about their development so far says this is the likely outcome. Could happen, sure. But to be down on this trade because of the likelihood of it is a tad silly.
2-You're sentimental for Forsling. It was fun watching him put up PP points at the WJC and you've grown emotionally attached. The heart wants what it wants, can't argue with that.
3-You're anti-Benning. Chicago is so smart and Benning aw shucks he sure tries his darnedest. But he could have had Garrison and Santorelli and really the same whole team as last year and he drafted guys that are big. D'uh potato head can't make good deals.
There's some intense paranoia at play here and this really nails it. The methodology of this trade is sound, but for many here they can't possibly entertain the possibility that the Canucks could make a trade and not get burned. They will gnash at the details to try and make it fit in their head.
People keep saying "Years to NHL readiness" with Forsling like it's a guarantee. It is awfully optimistic considering there is a chance he won't succeed in the AHL, let alone the NHL. Look how many Canucks picks come in and can't even crack that.i dont feel "forsling is a better prospect than clendening" requires paranoia
i dont actually need to value nhl readiness at anything other than 0. if i was concerned for the long-term, i dont feel getting years out of a player immediately makes that player more valuable
Not sure I follow. Patrick White always represented 2nd round pick in that trade.
The second round compensation for Patrick White was to offset the value for gaining Ehrhoff, not because Patrick White was actually worth a second round pick.
The San Jose Sharks received the 25th pick of this round (55th overall) as compensation for not signing 2007 first-round draft pick Patrick White.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_NHL_Entry_Draft[34]
No, as an awful hockey player and an unsigned 1st round pick, the only value he had left to him was that he was due to became a second round pick in the 2012 draft. Neither team involved in the trade saw him as anything more than that and neither intended on signing him.
aren't you both arguing the same point?
no of course its not a guarantee. i already made my opinions on the trade, im just defending the position that one can think forsling is a more valuable asset based on what they think he will become in the future
So you don't factor 'risk of not turning out' in player value? That's really what the difference in 'NHL readiness' between Clendening and Forsling represents - a difference in bottom end play.
There's a mystery box mentality at play here that I really don't identify with. So few NHL prospects succeed you're almost always met with disappointment.
You guys have actually watched Clendenning play a couple of NHL games now and you're still not sold that this was a good idea?
I'm baffled. It's early yet but everyone should be pretty stoked based on what they've seen to date.
?
if they're both bell curves, i see them both centering somewhere between a 4 and a 5 with clendening a little to the left and a lot sharper while forsling is flatter and wider. thats all. i think in a million realities forsling is on average a slightly better player. not by much that it matters a ton which is why my reaction to this trade is muted and i understand from a gms point of view why he wants a Now Person so i havent criticized him - but i think a negative view point of the trade is justifiable.
how nhl ready a prospect is in this view is not really relevant. all time does is focus and move the curve left or right
I mean, personally, I have really disliked a lot of what Benning has done, to a point where I think I'm inherently suspicious of anything he does. But this? This was just taking advantage of a glut of players in another organization where they had to get rid of someone. It's a win. It's basically Linden Vey all over again except better.
You guys have actually watched Clendenning play a couple of NHL games now and you're still not sold that this was a good idea?
I'm baffled. It's early yet but everyone should be pretty stoked based on what they've seen to date.
If Clendening were from Sweden people would probably like him better. It seems like people love Swedish players around here, and are loathe whenever we move one. I don't know why. It really has nothing to do with the quality of player. Just an observation I've made of human tendencies to seemingly prefer players from a certain region of the world. People also put way too much stock in a short 8 game tournament. Again, a player plays poorly and everybody craps on him and claims he's a bust. A player puts up big numbers and people fall in love with him and overrate him.
I personally love the trade. I see it as moving a recent 5th round pick who just made a name for himself at the WJC, for a guy who's a couple years older and further in his development, who is more likely to make an impact at the NHL level. It's an excellent trade for the Canucks.
why do humans do human things.... beep boop
Well said.
Not sure why y2k cant figure out why this city has a bit of a thing for Swedes. Certainly it's nothing historical. Maybe it's Ikea?