Commandant Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Today its hard to get a trade done because no one has cap sapce and any player you trade for you sits on your books without playing for the next 17 days of the Olympic Break. The market may open up after the break. I doubt it gets any worse. If the market was bad, there was really no need to force the trade on Monday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 It's a reflection of the market, especially in terms of what it takes to get a trade done. Also, Diaz playing 20 minutes in Vancouver is because everyone is injured there. You know who used to play 20 minutes in Colorado? Ryan O'Byrne. And we got a lot better than Dale Weise for him when Diaz is better than O'Byrne. Why? Market was easier then. Well, technicaly, we received a prospect (Bournival) that may or may not have panned out. It was an educated gamble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Today its hard to get a trade done because no one has cap sapce and any player you trade for you sits on your books without playing for the next 17 days of the Olympic Break. The market may open up after the break. I doubt it gets any worse. If the market was bad, there was really no need to force the trade on Monday. Just because you are not fond of trade, dosent mean any "force the trade" happened, unless you know it was "forced" by/upon Bergevin? Some may say 'smart trade', but again no one can really say yet, only time will tell (will cap space created factor into a March 4-5th trade, will a Moan or Prust or White now be packaged up in a bigger trade, who knows). I haven't see that anywhere and Canucks were just in desperate need with losing and injuries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 But he's a far better defenceman than given credit for, and maybe if we played him a little more instead of Murray, we could have got a lot better value out of the guy. That's like saying let's give Mathieu Darche first line and PP minutes to get the most out of him. Sure he will put up better numbers but it doesn't make the team better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Just coincidence or not, won both games since trade and hasn't hurt teams' results. I assume a trade of player who has been around several years, must have some impact in dressing room? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trizzak Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Just coincidence or not, won both games since trade and hasn't hurt teams' results. I assume a trade of player who has been around several years, must have some impact in dressing room? To be fair, winning against a shitty Calgary team and a heavily struggling Vancouver team isn't the sign of having a healthy team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 We beat the 3rd worst team in the league and a crappy, beat up, injured Vancouver team. Don't start planning the parade route yet. Just coincidence or not, won both games since trade and hasn't hurt teams' results. I assume a trade of player who has been around several years, must have some impact in dressing room? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Another reason why this trade could have waited until after the Olympic break: if one of the three remaining D-men we're sending gets injured, we'd be in much better position with Diaz still on the roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Also to be fair that same Calgary team was on a five game winning streak besting some of the top teams in the west. Just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I haven't see that anywhere and Canucks were just in desperate need with losing and injuries. You make an interesting point there - the Canucks probably were somewhat desperate given the injuries and only still the cost was Weise? When dealing from a position of strength (Montreal's healthy - for now at least - D corps) to a team missing several regular blueliners, wouldn't it be reasonable to anticipate that the Habs should have held out for more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 You make an interesting point there - the Canucks probably were somewhat desperate given the injuries and only still the cost was Weise? When dealing from a position of strength (Montreal's healthy - for now at least - D corps) to a team missing several regular blueliners, wouldn't it be reasonable to anticipate that the Habs should have held out for more? Who is to say that they didn't? I don't understand how people can say that we should have got more. No one knows what goes on up there, it's all speculation. Do we really think that MB is that incompetent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Who is to say that they didn't? I don't understand how people can say that we should have got more. No one knows what goes on up there, it's all speculation. Do we really think that MB is that incompetent? You're right, no one can say for sure. But it's hard to believe that the going rate for an NHL blueliner to a team desperately lacking that very element right now is a 4th line guy reduced to a 6-8 minute per game role. Historically d-men go for more than that, especially to those dealing from a position of weakness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 You're right, no one can say for sure. But it's hard to believe that the going rate for an NHL blueliner to a team desperately lacking that very element right now is a 4th line guy reduced to a 6-8 minute per game role. Historically d-men go for more than that, especially to those dealing from a position of weakness. We can look at the past to see what a player typically brings, but it may not be relative to the current market. It seems that our scouts were really high on Weise as a good fit for our team so maybe it took a little unbalanced trade to make it happen. You can't win every trade but you can make deals based on team needs, and that has value as well. We dealt from a position of somewhat strength, so we were able to afford it to obtain a glaring hole that we had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovett's Magnatones Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 You're right, no one can say for sure. But it's hard to believe that the going rate for an NHL blueliner to a team desperately lacking that very element right now is a 4th line guy reduced to a 6-8 minute per game role. Historically d-men go for more than that, especially to those dealing from a position of weakness. Lately, it seems like a few teams are getting poor returns for defensemen. Tallinder got NJ Riley Boychuck. Fraser got Toronto two middling prospects. Gleason got Liles. Problem for a problem. TJ Brennan got FLA Bobby Butler. Gonchar got Ottawa a 6th If we lump Diaz for Weise in there, and take out Gleason and Liles, it looks good that we got a roster player back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 DGB wrote one of the more sensible articles on the Leafs and advanced stats. That said far too many internet reporters think they'll get good paying jobs one day by just being statnerds. They never realized that the old school baseball writers still write. They were never replaced. I have seen two articles recently written by a guy who was a very frequent poster on this site. You guys have posted his links here. Sometimes stat nerds get writing jobs I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Lately, it seems like a few teams are getting poor returns for defensemen. Tallinder got NJ Riley Boychuck. Fraser got Toronto two middling prospects. Gleason got Liles. Problem for a problem. TJ Brennan got FLA Bobby Butler. Gonchar got Ottawa a 6th If we lump Diaz for Weise in there, and take out Gleason and Liles, it looks good that we got a roster player back. Tallinder was a cap dump. Fraser was a cap dump. Brennan is a minor leaguer who has cleared waivers several times in recent years. So too is Butler. Gonchar was a negotiating rights trade. None of those really apply to this trade, this wasn't a cap dump, a rights trade, or minor league players involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 That's like saying let's give Mathieu Darche first line and PP minutes to get the most out of him. Sure he will put up better numbers but it doesn't make the team better. Diaz is about the same as Murray in PKing, and better 5 on 5 and on the PP.... so how does it make the team worse to play him and sit Murray. Not the same situation as playing Darche on the first line. I'm not saying play Diaz over Subban. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 You make an interesting point there - the Canucks probably were somewhat desperate given the injuries and only still the cost was Weise? When dealing from a position of strength (Montreal's healthy - for now at least - D corps) to a team missing several regular blueliners, wouldn't it be reasonable to anticipate that the Habs should have held out for more? Yes, it seems that way dosent it. But, maybe Bergevin et al really liked Weise and had asked about him for Diaz before and Gillis said no? Till he spoke out against his favorite coach? So you think it should be been Weise and a 5th-6th pick maybe? Or simply for a Nick Jensen or the like from Canucks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Diaz is about the same as Murray in PKing, and better 5 on 5 and on the PP.... so how does it make the team worse to play him and sit Murray. Not the same situation as playing Darche on the first line. I'm not saying play Diaz over Subban. Playing Murray over Diaz, IMO, totally changes the attitude of the team, the energy, the grit, the arrogance, etc. It's a kinda huge factor against Boston, TO and other physical/arrogant teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Yeah, like I said before, you can demonstrate Diaz's superiority over Murray in all sorts of areas...but Murray brings a huge element of physicality that this team really needs. Diaz brings attributes we already have in abundance. Anyway, I'm opting out of this thread! This is ultimately a minor trade that doesn't deserve this level of ongoing argument IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Yes, it seems that way dosent it. But, maybe Bergevin et al really liked Weise and had asked about him for Diaz before and Gillis said no? Till he spoke out against his favorite coach? So you think it should be been Weise and a 5th-6th pick maybe? Or simply for a Nick Jensen or the like from Canucks? I think they should have set their sights higher than Weise (perhaps they did, perhaps not) in terms of getting more of an impact player/prospect back; Jensen would have been too much though. Failing that, a late round pick as a 'penalty' for making a desperate trade doesn't seem like too much of an ask. Anyway, I'm opting out of this thread! This is ultimately a minor trade that doesn't deserve this level of ongoing argument IMHO. After tonight there's no games for 2.5 weeks. This is going to get analyzed in every direction possible...it's either that or the Czarnik acquisition and there literally is nothing to discuss there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I think they should have set their sights higher than Weise (perhaps they did, perhaps not) in terms of getting more of an impact player/prospect back; Jensen would have been too much though. Failing that, a late round pick as a 'penalty' for making a desperate trade doesn't seem like too much of an ask. After tonight there's no games for 2.5 weeks. This is going to get analyzed in every direction possible...it's either that or the Czarnik acquisition and there literally is nothing to discuss there. Sure, just is so much speculation as to exactly how Bergevin-Gillis worked it out and what the 28 other GMs may have already offered for Diaz or Weise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 To be fair, winning against a shitty Calgary team and a heavily struggling Vancouver team isn't the sign of having a healthy team Although I agree. Good teams beat those teams on a regular basis. Great teams destroy them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.