Dekes For Days
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2018
- 21,411
- 16,108
Unless they're LTIRs, no. They get injured after, like Foligno, or like Tanev will plenty over the next 6 years.And sometimes they're injured when you trade for them.
Unless they're LTIRs, no. They get injured after, like Foligno, or like Tanev will plenty over the next 6 years.And sometimes they're injured when you trade for them.
I know it can be shocking sometimes how inept and dumb Dubas is/was. Hard to believe he has any fans really.Unless they're LTIRs, no. They get injured after, like Foligno, or like Tanev will plenty over the next 6 years.
He joined the team on April 22nd, fully healthy, and got injured May 3rd. I'm not sure what you think he has to do with Tanev, but if you dislike injury risk, Tanev from ages 34-40 is pretty much all injury risk.
I'm talking about one of the worst trades in Maple Leafs history when Dubas gave up a first round pick for a low talent grinder who had a back injury. Yes, I know Tanev is a risk. That's why he doesn't have a higher cap hit.He joined the team on April 22nd, fully healthy, and got injured May 3rd. I'm not sure what you think he has to do with Tanev, but if you dislike injury risk, Tanev from ages 34-40 is pretty much all injury risk.
You're talking about a trade for a healthy and highly coveted player years ago. I'm talking about Tanev, who didn't get a raise because he's 34 years old, and being signed until he's 40. At that age and term, he should have been cheaper.I'm talking about one of the worst trades in Maple Leafs history when Dubas gave up a first round pick for a low talent grinder who had a back injury. Yes, I know Tanev is a risk. That's why he doesn't have a higher cap hit.
The best 11 games that I've ever witnessed from a broken down grinder with a bad back. It was magical. Thank you Dubas.You're talking about a trade for a healthy and highly coveted player years ago. I'm talking about Tanev, who didn't get a raise because he's 34 years old, and being signed until he's 40. At that age and term, he should have been cheaper.
He totally got taken to the cleaners. That's where his inexperience really showed.The best 11 games that I've ever witnessed from a broken down grinder with a bad back. It was magical. Thank you Dubas.
You really don't see the difference between signing Tanev and trading for Karlsson?What boggles my mind is how many people are celebrating this.
Meanwhile my suggestion they trade for a younger three time Norris winner in Karlsson was ridiculed. He's too old and injury prone is exactly what I was told. But the same people who said that are tripping all over themseves regarding this one.
You know who you are.
What's with Treliving and damaged goods anyway. Am I the only one concerned the starting goaltender, 1RHD, OEL, Murray, and Hakanpaa are all made of Cottonelle. I don't even know if I got everybody, probably not.
All these guys are on top of the injury prone players like Matthews, Liljegren, and Robertson, who were already here.
The Leafs went from horrible management to even more horrible management. Treliving's dumber than dumb. A team made of glass expecting to play pound and ground hockey doesn't sound like the best idea to me.
But yeah, Tanev is soooo much younger, better, and healthier than Erik Karlsson it shouldn't be a problem.
The consensus of the board is not how the hockey club is run.. they are obviously looking to compete this year, and the next, and the next, and the next etc.. there is no rebuild year until it eventually falls off the rails.What I don't get with alot of people is the consensus on here(hfboards) is that this coming year is a throw away year with Tavares and Marner's contract so were not expected to compete for the cup this season
but so many people are saying it's a great signing because we should get two good years out of Tanev, before he regresses to maybe a bottom pairing guy for a year or 2 and then LTIR.
but if were not competing this year that means only 1 year Tanev will still be at his best and 2 years he'll be overpaid playing on our bottom pairing.
everybody believes our best chance to win is in Matthews current contract meaning the three season's after this next one yet were basically just signed a player not expected to be worth his contract in year 2 and 3 of that window, and yet the majority seem to like the deal
btw this is not my opinion at all just the consensus it seems to what I'm reading in here. just doesn't seem to make sense.
The consensus of the board is not how the hockey club is run.. they are obviously looking to compete this year, and the next, and the next, and the next etc.. there is no rebuild year until it eventually falls off the rails.
Come on man, it's a forum. Everyone has a different opinion, and opinions change once a little optimism flows in lolI'm aware of all of this. my point was towards how the board seems to be happy with a move that contradicts it's self
There's a difference between what the uber pessimistic HFboards and what Leaf management think.What I don't get with alot of people is the consensus on here(hfboards) is that this coming year is a throw away year with Tavares and Marner's contract so were not expected to compete for the cup this season
but so many people are saying it's a great signing because we should get two good years out of Tanev, before he regresses to maybe a bottom pairing guy for a year or 2 and then LTIR.
but if were not competing this year that means only 1 year Tanev will still be at his best and 2 years he'll be overpaid playing on our bottom pairing.
everybody believes our best chance to win is in Matthews current contract meaning the three season's after this next one yet were basically just signed a player not expected to be worth his contract in year 2 and 3 of that window, and yet the majority seem to like the deal
btw this is not my opinion at all just the consensus it seems to what I'm reading in here. just doesn't seem to make sense.
What boggles my mind is how many people are celebrating this.
Meanwhile my suggestion they trade for a younger three time Norris winner in Karlsson was ridiculed. He's too old and injury prone is exactly what I was told. But the same people who said that are tripping all over themseves regarding this one.
You know who you are.
What's with Treliving and damaged goods anyway. Am I the only one concerned the starting goaltender, 1RHD, OEL, Murray, and Hakanpaa are all made of Cottonelle. I don't even know if I got everybody, probably not.
All these guys are on top of the injury prone players like Matthews, Liljegren, and Robertson, who were already here.
The Leafs went from horrible management to even more horrible management. Treliving's dumber than dumb. A team made of glass expecting to play pound and ground hockey doesn't sound like the best idea to me.
But yeah, Tanev is soooo much younger, better, and healthier than Erik Karlsson it shouldn't be a problem.
Negative poster, finds way to spin things in a negative way... news at 11.What boggles my mind is how many people are celebrating this.
Meanwhile my suggestion they trade for a younger three time Norris winner in Karlsson was ridiculed. He's too old and injury prone is exactly what I was told. But the same people who said that are tripping all over themseves regarding this one.
You know who you are.
What's with Treliving and damaged goods anyway. Am I the only one concerned the starting goaltender, 1RHD, OEL, Murray, and Hakanpaa are all made of Cottonelle. I don't even know if I got everybody, probably not.
All these guys are on top of the injury prone players like Matthews, Liljegren, and Robertson, who were already here.
The Leafs went from horrible management to even more horrible management. Treliving's dumber than dumb. A team made of glass expecting to play pound and ground hockey doesn't sound like the best idea to me.
But yeah, Tanev is soooo much younger, better, and healthier than Erik Karlsson it shouldn't be a problem.
You really don't see the difference between signing Tanev and trading for Karlsson?
There's a difference between what the uber pessimistic HFboards and what Leaf management think.
We think this could be a throwaway year.
Leafs are thinking they needed to improve their team through options available to them.
Coaching change is a good one for sure and I'd argue the D looks better than last year. Goaltender still iffy.
Will it end up making a difference in the end? I personally don't think this is a cup winning team BUT at the end of the day a team needs to rise above the sum of it's parts to win. They are likely a playoff team but beyond that very unproven hence everyone's pessimism.
Your proposal would have seen the Leafs move two of their best prospects, a youngster (albeit who has underachieved) and two 1sts this team can ill afford to trade at this point.Of course I do.
Tanev is older, less gifted or skilled, signed longer, and costs almost as much as Karlsson retained would have.
But he cost less to trade for and he plays the "right way" so Go Tanev... I guess.
Your proposal would have seen the Leafs move two of their best prospects, a youngster (albeit who has underachieved) and two 1sts this team can ill afford to trade at this point.
I'm content with a geriatric Tanev who cost all but money and extra term to add some much needed toughness on the D. I love Karlsson, but a trade like that for him would set the team back years just as it has for Pittsburgh. Sadly, the Leafs aren't a Karlsson away to go all in with and blow their few valuable pieces to try and achieve.
I really hope you aren't suggesting, lol, that, lol, Tanev is the solution...