Postseason is here. Lets speculate.

[Hunter Gathers]

I'll call my pro scouts and get back to you.

You don't have any idea of what you'd want to see in a realistic trade? Like, you literally can't answer the question?

Personally, I think you're just being obstinate since you don't like TB

 

[Machinehead]

You don't have any idea of what you'd want to see in a realistic trade? Like, you literally can't answer the question?

Personally, I think you're just being obstinate since you don't like TB

I told you what I'd want to see in a realistic trade. I don't have a list of which teams are interested in DeAngelo or what they would be willing to make available. Would you like me to blindly speculate?

 

[Hunter Gathers]

I told you what I'd want to see in a realistic trade. I don't have a list of which teams are interested in DeAngelo or what they would be willing to make available. Would you like me to blindly speculate?

No, I'd like you to just peruse some of the trade partners and just take a look.

I am not really sure myself what we could bring in a fair trade for TDA and I think it's actually a really good discussion.

 

[True Blue]

The salary cap is a thing that exists. We can't commit all this money to one position.

Why not? Keep a position of strength as a position of strength.

Over the last two years, he's just behind Laurent Brossoit. Pretty good company.

His save percentage makes him a starting caliber goalie. We can all pick and choose names.

What am I, the f***ing GM?

No, you're a guy on the internet who blurts out a phrase but has actually not put any thought into how or with whom it can be done.

Never said Strome is the reason. Nice strawman.

You are the one pointing to what is indicative in the relationship. The connotation is there.

Points are actually the worst way to determine who's replaceable long-term but go on.

When talking about an offensive player, points do not really count? How fascinating. Must be because anyone can do it.

 

[True Blue]

If they retain Fast, my guess is Kakko' s play forces Fast down to the bottom six — where he probably should be.

And that is as it should be.

Though with Fast, there is also the issue of if they want to diversify the types of players, he may be one of the odd men out.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

I get a kick out of everyone attaching Strome to Panarin for his points but dont attach panarin to DeAngelo for his points. The two players are essentially the same only one is a bad defensive forward and the other is a bad defensive defenseman.

 

[Machinehead]

Why not? Keep a position of strength as a position of strength.

His save percentage makes him a starting caliber goalie. We can all pick and choose names.

No, you're a guy on the internet who blurts out a phrase but has actually not put any thought into how or with whom it can be done.

You are the one pointing to what is indicative in the relationship. The connotation is there.

When talking about an offensive player, points do not really count? How fascinating. Must be because anyone can do it.

Yeah, the connotation is there. Between the two of them, Panarin is more of an influence on Strome than Strome is on Panarin. This is an ice cold take.

"Because anyone can do it"

What, score 59 points? Yes, lots of guys can do that. You make it sound like Strome broke team records.

If we were contending I'd be concerned with "where are those points coming from?" We're not contending and I'm concerned with not giving Strome a fat contract.

 

[Machinehead]

For all the praise Strome gets and all the shit Fast gets, that line was unusable without Fast.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

For all the praise Strome gets and all the shit Fast gets, that line was unusable without Fast.

The whole top 6 outside of Buch was unwatchable, fast being there or not wasnt gonna change that.

 

[True Blue]

"Because anyone can do it"

What, score 59 points? Yes, lots of guys can do that. You make it sound like Strome broke team records.

You know the guys that score 59 points? They are called top line players. There are only so many of them in the entire league. So if by "lots", you mean lots of top liners, then sure.

 

[Machinehead]

You know the guys that score 59 points? They are called top line players. There are only so many of them in the entire league. So if by "lots", you mean lots of top liners, then sure.

So Derick Brassard was a 1C?

 

[True Blue]

I am not really sure myself what we could bring in a fair trade for TDA and I think it's actually a really good discussion.

It makes for a great discussion.

AK and I got into it a while ago, and the reality is that when you start to peruse the possible trading partners (remember that at some point soon, DeAngelo's contract is going up drastically) and then matching the partners for possible assets, the world shrinks dramatically.

Were it up to me, the only way that I would trade him would be for a similarly aged, similarly trajectories LD. That brings to mind a Theodore or a Werenski.

When you start to play the game with forwards, it gets even more complicated. You are not looking at LW at all, as those are locked up. RW, I guess can be a consideration but if you believe that there is a spot in the top 6 for Kakko soon, then Buch has to go as well (not necessarily in the same deal). Here, I would be looking at a Kyle Connor. But again, this gets more complicated as you now need to move several players as it will not make much sense to sign Buchnevich long term if you are bringing in a RW.

A young center? Maybe. But for now, is that something that is a must if you can have Strome playing there and continuing to feed Panarin for a few more years?

Like I said, when you start to look at possible matches, the world shrinks rapidly. And once you start to add player from this team or that team or from the Rangers, the deals tend to get more unrealistic.

 

[Machinehead]

It makes for a great discussion.

AK and I got into it a while ago, and the reality is that when you start to peruse the possible trading partners (remember that at some point soon, DeAngelo's contract is going up drastically) and then matching the partners for possible assets, the world shrinks dramatically.

Were it up to me, the only way that I would trade him would be for a similarly aged, similarly trajectories LD. That brings to mind a Theodore or a Werenski.

When you start to play the game with forwards, it gets even more complicated. You are not looking at LW at all, as those are locked up. RW, I guess can be a consideration but if you believe that there is a spot in the top 6 for Kakko soon, then Buch has to go as well (not necessarily in the same deal). Here, I would be looking at a Kyle Connor. But again, this gets more complicated as you now need to move several players as it will not make much sense to sign Buchnevich long term if you are bringing in a RW.

A young center? Maybe. But for now, is that something that is a must if you can have Strome playing there and continuing to feed Panarin for a few more years?

Like I said, when you start to look at possible matches, the world shrinks rapidly. And once you start to add player from this team or that team or from the Rangers, the deals tend to get more unrealistic.

True Blue: "The world shrinks and trades become unrealistic."

Also True Blue: "I would target bonafide #1 defensemen for DeAngelo."

 

[True Blue]

So Derick Brassard was a 1C?

Considering the fact that he hit 50+ points exactly twice in his career, I do not think he is a good example. Strome has already matched that. But sure, there was a 2-3 year span when with the Rangers ,he was certainly just that. Same way Krieder is, like it or not.

 

[True Blue]

True Blue: "The world shrinks and trades become unrealistic."

Also True Blue: "I would target bonafide #1 defensemen for DeAngelo."

Nice. Except I also said that "the ONLY way". Subtracting that, allows you to make your own Picasso. And unlike you, at least I put some thought into it. As opposed to simply blurting something out without any conception of how or if or frankly even why it should done.

TRADE HIM!......except whoops, I have absolutely no idea of what to do.

Enjoy tilting at windmills.

 

[Machinehead]

Considering the fact that he hit 50+ points exactly twice in his career, I do not think he is a good example. Strome has already matched that. But sure, there was a 2-3 year span when with the Rangers ,he was certainly just that. Same way Krieder is, like it or not.

"Brassard is a bad example because he only did it twice"

"Strome has already done it twice"

 

[True Blue]

"Brassard is a bad example because he only did it twice"

"Strome has already done it twice"

Oh, how cute. Do I really need to explain to you that Brassard did it it twice in his career? When one said that someone has already done it twice and are still only 26, one would presume that the point is understood. Clearly not.

 

[Machinehead]

Nice. Except I also said that "the ONLY way". Subtracting that, allows you to make your own Picasso. And unlike you, at least I put some thought into it. As opposed to simply blurting something out without any conception of how or if or frankly even why it should done.

TRADE HIM!......except whoops, I have absolutely no idea of what to do.

Enjoy tilting at windmills.

You didn't put any thought into to it, you suggested two outstanding young players that DeAngelo would never return

Chytil for Sam Reinhart, I put some thought into it!

 

[Machinehead]

Oh, how cute. Do I really need to explain to you that Brassard did it it twice in his career? When one said that someone has already done it twice and are still only 26, one would presume that the point is understood. Clearly not.

How old do you think Derick Brassard is?

 

[True Blue]

How old do you think Derick Brassard is?

Umm....32 years old......so yeah, there's that. So by the time he reached 32 years old, he has had two 50 point seasons. Strome has done that by 26. Does this really need to be explained to you or is this just an acute case of being willfully obtuse? Maybe a bit of both?

You didn't put any thought into to it, you suggested two outstanding young players that DeAngelo would never return

You have absolutely no idea. All depends on wants and needs of partners. Betting most teams wish for a 60 point, 24 year old RD. Then you need to go into what is the situation of this team.

Your putting thought into it just seems like you are having a hissy fit. Which is what some people do when they have absolutely no idea of how to answer a question.

 

[Machinehead]

Umm....32 years old......so yeah, there's that. So by the time he reached 32 years old, he has had two 50 point seasons. Strome has done that by 26. Does this really need to be explained to you or is this just an acute case of being willfully obtuse? Maybe a bit of both?

Brassard is 32 now but he had 60 points 5 years ago. Does this really need to be explained to you or is this just an acute case of being willfully obtuse? Maybe a bit of both?

This framing of Strome as an up and comer with upside at 26 while Brassard was done at 27 is deliberate backpedaling to defend the absurd notion that Strome is a first line player.

You have absolutely no idea. Adepends on wants and needs of partners. Betting most teams wish for a 60 point, 24 year old RD. Then you need to go into what is the situation of this team.

Your putting thought into it just seems like you are having a hissy fit. Which is what some people do when they have absolutely no idea of how to answer a question.

None of us have any idea and anybody can just make up trades and say "it would totally work bro!" That's why it's a pointless exercise, as evidence by the pipe dream returns you suggested.

 

[True Blue]

Brassard is 32 now but he had 60 points 5 years ago. Does this really need to be explained to you or is this just an acute case of being willfully obtuse? Maybe a bit of both?

If you want to make the comparison, shouldn't you wait until Strome is 32 before you start to beat your chest? Yeah, going with you are being willfully obtuse.

This framing of Strome as an up and comer with upside at 26 while Brassard was done at 27 is deliberate backpedaling to defend the absurd notion that Strome is a first line player.

He certainly is a top liner when with Panarin. Since the notion that "anyone can do it" is asinine, that makes him a fit for the short term, even as a stop gap

None of us have any idea and anybody can just make up trades and say "it would totally work bro!" That's why it's a pointless exercise, as evidence by the pipe dream returns you suggested.

Hence the term discussion, instead of simply blurting something out and then being utterly incapable of speaking intelligently on it.