Ianturnedbull
Registered User
- Jun 11, 2022
- 6,061
- 5,474
Value of: Nick Robertson to a non-contending team willing to move a top 4D
- Thread starter Ianturnedbull
- Start date
Djp
Registered User
He doesn’t move the needle on giving up a top 4 RD
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 23,886
- 15,556
I guess he could get an aging D man, who once was a top four guy? Maybe a guy who, like Gio, is playing out his career on a cheap contract?
He doesn't even come close to getting a legit Top 4D...
how many of you saying he doesn't fetch a top 4 D have actually seen him play ?I have, he doesn’t bring back a top 4. Not really close. If he was good enough to he’d be in the lineup.
He's a winger who hasn't been able to establish himself at the NHL level 3 years after being drafted.
In what f***ing world does that type of player fetch a legit Top 4D... The far more valuable position.
He doesn't get a top 4 D. Top 4 D are very valuable right now, look how much Arizona is asking for Chychrun. He would have to be included in a package. He's still a prospect, it's not a given that he becomes a good NHL player.
- Jul 28, 2011
- 16,122
- 10,832
He could get a UFA top 4, maybe. He's not bringing back a top 4, younger/signed Dman right now. I think there's a lot of teams that would take a shot on him, but not the contending ones willing to part with a top 4, and not the rebuilding ones who have there young top 4 locked. So it would take a bit of an add on to get that established top 4, with term.
The Red Line
Registered User
- Oct 11, 2010
- 8,600
- 5,083
Ah the old "you disagree with me, therefore you haven't seen him play" argument.
Plenty of people have seen him play in the few games where he wasn't scratched. A middling bottom 6 player who can't crack the lineup on a team with depth issues doesn't get you a top 4 D.
Ianturnedbull
Registered User
- Jun 11, 2022
- 6,061
- 5,474
I never proposed Robertson alone.
The problem is people see "top 4" and they automatically think top 2 or number 1. I'm not asking for that.
The problem is people see "top 4" and they automatically think top 2 or number 1. I'm not asking for that.
Holymakinaw
Registered User
Well you should maybe start off with "How about Robertson plus a 1st" or something similar, and you might not get those responses.
It's pretty obvious you haven't seen him play if you think he won't fetch a top 4 D.
You probably think Shane Wright can't fetch a top 4 D because he was scratched too am I right ? Or does that logic only apply to Robertson ?
In a world where if you watched him you'd know the reason he's been in the AHL and not NHL is back to back major injuries, not a lack of skill/effort/talent
And even this year he absolutely should be in the lineup, Keefe is just making a dumbass decision by keeping him out. Same way he makes the same dumbass decision to play Justin Holl over and over again
Shane Wright confirmed bust, if he was good enough he wouldn't have been scratched !
Before this gets ugly : let‘s just get put the old Bracco thread. The results will be the same 
Philadelphia Ducks
Win it for Ed
Ristolainen. Thank you for the trade.
Lets also bring out the old Marner and Nylander threads, the results will be the sameBefore this gets ugly : let‘s just get put the old Bracco thread. The results will be the same
Rich Nixon
No Prior Knowledge of "Flyers"
The Red Line
Registered User
- Oct 11, 2010
- 8,600
- 5,083
What a horrendous counter argument. Wright was drafted a few months ago and has nothing to do with Robertson, who was drafted three years ago. Straw man arguments will get you nowhere. I didn't say he's a bad player, I said he doesn't get you a top 4 defenseman, which he won't.It's pretty obvious you haven't seen him play if you think he won't fetch a top 4 D.
You probably think Shane Wright can't fetch a top 4 D because he was scratched too am I right ? Or does that logic only apply to Robertson ?
In a world where if you watched him you'd know the reason he's been in the AHL and not NHL is back to back major injuries, not a lack of skill/effort/talent
And even this year he absolutely should be in the lineup, Keefe is just making a dumbass decision by keeping him out. Same way he makes the same dumbass decision to play Justin Holl over and over again
Shane Wright confirmed bust, if he was good enough he wouldn't have been scratched !
And I have seen him play, so have others, stop using that it just makes you sound desperate.
BringTheReign
Registered User
I'm generally pro-Leafs, and I watch them play a lot as a Matthews fan in particular (and my local teams are RSN blackouts). Robertson hasn't shown enough in the NHL to land a top four defenseman. With his skating and size, he needs to really pop with his offense, and he just hasn't done that consistently.
I think a piece of equal value would need to be added if you're looking for someone to replace what a healthy Muzzin could bring. I mean, look at the trade that brought Muzzin in. On a one-on-one level, I'm valuing Durzi and the 1st rounder in the early 20s each separately over Robertson. He's above Grundstrom in value, but Grundstrom has also played pretty damn well in the playoffs and shown he can be the perfect 3rd or 4th line winger with physicality and some scoring. It's likely going to be Robertson + 1st round pick top a legitimate #2-4 defenseman.
If the main piece is a first round pick then I think Robertson as an add on should land a second pairing guy.
- Jul 28, 2011
- 16,122
- 10,832
You asked "can he fetch a top 4 alone? I'm not sure. Kyle can add on..." Nobody is thinking top 2 or 1 or the thread would have been closed already. They answered the question about fetching a top 4. Obviously an add-on changes that but nobody knows what the add-on is. If you want term, the add-on is probably greater than what you value Robertson right now. If you want just a top 4, that's different.
The Red Line
Registered User
- Oct 11, 2010
- 8,600
- 5,083
Chiarot got a 1st + last TDL and is a №4-5-6 in most NHL team.
Now... Why would a team trade a top4 D for less value than what the Habs got for Chiarot? Cause a 1st has a lot more value than a small forward who can't crack a roster in his 3rd pro season
Now... Why would a team trade a top4 D for less value than what the Habs got for Chiarot? Cause a 1st has a lot more value than a small forward who can't crack a roster in his 3rd pro season
