Toggle sidebar

The Filip Forsberg for Martin Erat trade has still not been beat

1743621313461.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bear of Bad News and Filthy Dangles
Matt Larkin has tripled down that Matt Savoie (sub PPG in the AHL for his draft plus 3 season) for Ryan McLeod (heading towards 50 points as a defensive center in his age 25 season) is just like this trade. The one where a star prospect who scored 26 goals and 63 NHL points in his draft plus three was moved for a 32 year old winger with nothing left.
 
TheBeard said:
Suzuki for Patches is looking close consider Vegas basically had to pay to give Max away like a year later
Click to expand...
Hey if Vegas never trades Suzuki away maybe they never pull the trigger on another lopsided trade but in their favor to get Eichel and maybe they never win a cup.

Montreal benefitted a whole lot from the trade but Vegas hardly suffered, they traded scraps to get another better 1C.
 
Kings could have had Ray Bourque
but instead gave that pick up for Ron Grahame

To say nothing of Larry Murphy for Brian Engblom (yes that one) and Ken Houston

Nice long history of slinging franchise defensemen for scraps, we all were puckering our buttcheeks at the 2008 draft
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pablo El Perro
MoneyManny said:
Hey if Vegas never trades Suzuki away maybe they never pull the trigger on another lopsided trade but in their favor to get Eichel and maybe they never win a cup.

Montreal benefitted a whole lot from the trade but Vegas hardly suffered, they traded scraps to get another better 1C.
Click to expand...
If we're gonna start butterflying effecting every trade...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shark Finn and Summer Rose
LarKing said:
Erat didn't play on that cup winning roster so the whole "they won a cup" argument is pretty irrelevant when judging a trade.

Obviously winning that cup eases the frustration Caps fans felt toward that trade though.

It probably is one of the worst trades I can think of off the top of my head
Click to expand...
What makes it so bad is that it was terrible at the time, not even in hindsight
 
McDonagh for Gomez
Pacioretty for Tatar+Suzuki+2nd
Kulak for 2nd (Lane Hutson)
Monahan for 1st (CGY)
Lehkonen for Barron + 2nd

Are the most lopsided trades in recent Habs history
 
The Gilmour, Macoun, Nattress, Wamsley, Manderville for Leeman, Berube, Goodynyuk, Petit and Reese trade didn't turn out so good for one team.
 
TheBeard said:
Suzuki for Patches is looking close consider Vegas basically had to pay to give Max away like a year later.
Click to expand...
Sure it looks bad for Vegas but Patches still was solid for 4 years after that and close to a PPG. Had 194 pts (97 goals) in 224 games with the Knights.
Far from worst of all-time yet. It could be there in about 5 years or so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose
SensontheRush said:
The reasoning doesn't matter, only the end result. The end result demonstrates what turned out to be EXTREMELY poor reasoning, and INCREDIBLY poor asset evaluation.

The end result? 62 GPs by Erat, 27 points, 3 goals.

For Nashville? 773 GPs by Forsberg, 673 points, 316 goals.

Not to mention Forsberg was almost a PPG in the year WSH won the cup.

At the end of the day, a premier player was traded for a washed-up has-been.
Click to expand...

Forsberg was almost a PPG (26+38/67, 0.96) in the year the Caps won the Cup, yes. He was also making $6M/yr. NHL is a salary capped league. Kuznetsov got an $7.8M/yr extension before the Cup season and went 27+56/79, 1.05 during the RS and had an incredible playoffs. Can the Caps even afford him if they still have Forsberg? It’s not as simple as just adding his eventual production to the Caps.

If Forsberg had led Nashville to a Cup instead of the Caps finally winning one, your fervor in this debate would make a lot more sense. Or if the Caps had carried a glaring hole of offensive production into the years after the trade. But he hasn’t and they didn’t. So it’s a trade that didn’t work out as the Caps would have hoped at the time, but also didn’t really slow them down much at all b/c they made efficient use of the cap space available without Forsberg’s contract in future years.
 
gtrower said:
Forsberg was almost a PPG (26+38/67, 0.96) in the year the Caps won the Cup, yes. He was also making $6M/yr. NHL is a salary capped league. Kuznetsov got an $7.8M/yr extension before the Cup season and went 27+56/79, 1.05 during the RS and had an incredible playoffs. Can the Caps even afford him if they still have Forsberg? It’s not as simple as just adding his eventual production to the Caps.

If Forsberg had led Nashville to a Cup instead of the Caps finally winning one, your fervor in this debate would make a lot more sense. Or if the Caps had carried a glaring hole of offensive production into the years after the trade. But he hasn’t and they didn’t. So it’s a trade that didn’t work out as the Caps would have hoped at the time, but also didn’t really slow them down much at all b/c they made efficient use of the cap space available without Forsberg’s contract in future years.
Click to expand...
Pretty much would never have gotten Oshie who was also a key part for the cup team. Might have won with Forsberg aswell, but might have never gotten it done. Caps was Great the two years before winning the cup aswell and they and Pittsburgh where the two best teams those 3 years. Caps beat them 1/3 and Pens the other two and the winner of those close matchups won the cup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: qcal1427
gtrower said:
Forsberg was almost a PPG (26+38/67, 0.96) in the year the Caps won the Cup, yes. He was also making $6M/yr. NHL is a salary capped league. Kuznetsov got an $7.8M/yr extension before the Cup season and went 27+56/79, 1.05 during the RS and had an incredible playoffs. Can the Caps even afford him if they still have Forsberg? It’s not as simple as just adding his eventual production to the Caps.

If Forsberg had led Nashville to a Cup instead of the Caps finally winning one, your fervor in this debate would make a lot more sense. Or if the Caps had carried a glaring hole of offensive production into the years after the trade. But he hasn’t and they didn’t. So it’s a trade that didn’t work out as the Caps would have hoped at the time, but also didn’t really slow them down much at all b/c they made efficient use of the cap space available without Forsberg’s contract in future years.
Click to expand...
Seems kind of ridiculous to analyze that far. Getting too far into the "what-ifs" now.

They had $7.6m tied up in Burakovsky, Hagelin, Connolly and Jaskin. I think they could have easily fit Forsberg in, and probably convinced him to take a bit of a discount, or at least sign him on a two-year contract instead of a six, as to not impact depth.

Furthermore, they could have even explored trading him after he broke out, and gotten a significant haul.

Forsberg "leading" Nashville to the cup has nothing to do with this, as no singular player leads a team to a cup. Not even McDavid can, though, Forsberg had proven to be a quality producer in the playoffs the two years prior to WSH winning the cup. Maybe they win it even earlier with him in the lineup?

I get it that the Caps are happy at the end of the day because they won the cup. That is very fair. However, they still traded away a franchise player that's probably going to hit 1200 games played and 1000 career points, for less than 30 pts. This we know concretely as fact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beardawg
Gregor Samsa said:
Unpopular opinion but this trade isn’t as “bad” as its reputation. Don’t get me wrong, it was one sided in the end but it’s not like Forsberg is racking up the Harts, Art Ross’s, and Conn Smythe’s and is a franchise changing player
Click to expand...
It was certainly franchise changing for Nashville. He's about as close to a superstar as one could be and the best forward to ever play for Nashville. He's a regular 50/50 guy if he didn't play in the offensive blackhole of 501 Broadway
 
  • Like
Reactions: Soundgarden
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom