Jump to content

Tinordi traded to Arizona


dlbalr

Recommended Posts

For all we know Tinordi could turn into Ryan O'Byrne. A shitty defenceman who got killed in possession every night but stayed in the league due to size before ending up in Europe

Six years post draft, I'm betting on the O'B guy.

He's just not your type of player, plain and simple.

There's really not much of a comparison to be made outside of their size. O'Byrne played a few hundred games in the league, he's not the bellwether bust you make him out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can't just come out in say in the press release that "We only acquired Scott because ownership in Arizona is cheap." That's pretty much why they got him...but it wouldn't be nice to say that publicly. So instead they go with the experience line because when you can't say anything all that nice about an old player, you can at least say they're experienced.

:nuts:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here was the problem. Tinordi may have improved but not without ice time. He is completely inept at the NHL level. To send him to the NHL we lose him for nothing. We got an AHL defence man for him,. Better than nothing. He would never improve in the press box. He needed to be moved and had zero trade value. If you want a proven goal scorer from another team you better be prepared to say goodbye to Sherbek and McCarron. Other teams know what we have for assets and all trade offers will want quality. This is not EA Sports.Scott is a toss in to keep him out of the all star weekend, I almost said game, but there is no all star game now....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe JT improving with playing time at the NHL level is not warranted. He is clearly not the first rounder we projected him to be when we traded up to draft him. His father he is not!

I watched him a lot in Hamilton last year live as well as on tv and he wasn't even our #2 defender in the AHL, 3 at best! People say he lost a bit after getting ko'd but his vision of the game isn't there, it never was. He has a horrible outlet pass, continually treats the puck like a freakin hot potato and now has a glass jaw to go with all the "jam" in his game. i truly was routing for him and wanted him to at least be given a chance as a #6 to see if he'd blossom. But the fact is he couldn't even beat out his colleagues vying for that final spot.... We got a replacement for him at the AHL level. He is a minor leaguer that continues to hang around because of his pedigree( mark tinordi) and his lustful size.

I really was routing for him though and my expectation dropped each passing game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hainsey, Fischer and now Tinordi.

Those three are hardly on the same level. Hainsey has been an NHLer for 10 years and has played 800 games in the league. We didn't even sign Fischer out of college and he played 2 AHL games. Tinordi likely lies somewhere in between, perhaps an O'Byrne as somebody else mentioned.

But I get your point. Other than Komisarek, who only briefly panned out before Lucic broke him, the only 1st round Dman we've drafted who was worth a high pick was McDonagh, whom we gave away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe JT improving with playing time at the NHL level is not warranted. He is clearly not the first rounder we projected him to be when we traded up to draft him. His father he is not!

I watched him a lot in Hamilton last year live as well as on tv and he wasn't even our #2 defender in the AHL, 3 at best! People say he lost a bit after getting ko'd but his vision of the game isn't there, it never was. He has a horrible outlet pass, continually treats the puck like a freakin hot potato and now has a glass jaw to go with all the "jam" in his game. i truly was routing for him and wanted him to at least be given a chance as a #6 to see if he'd blossom. But the fact is he couldn't even beat out his colleagues vying for that final spot.... We got a replacement for him at the AHL level. He is a minor leaguer that continues to hang around because of his pedigree( mark tinordi) and his lustful size.

I really was routing for him though and my expectation dropped each passing game

My sentiments exactly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fact is, both Beaulieu and Pateryn passed up Tinordi on the depth chart. Can hardly blame the club for poorly handling him - he just simply never took the next step. Both Beaulieu and Pateryn kept improving and taking the next steps. Bergevin hung on to Tinordi because if he could take the next step, the high ceiling risk was worth it. It was a gamble, they believed in Tinordi - he didn't reward that faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

You do realize Tinordi played 3 games this year and 13 spot starts last year. How is that getting a fair shake.

Too bad Tinordi wasn't from Qc. Still be wearing a Habs Uni'. Probably half the reason this team is in on Drouin. Fackin joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize Tinordi played 3 games this year and 13 spot starts last year. How is that getting a fair shake.

Too bad Tinordi wasn't from Qc. Still be wearing a Habs Uni'. Probably half the reason this team is in on Drouin. Fackin joke.

I think a lot of Habs fans dislike big, physical players and were waiting for any opportunity not to like him.

Pateryn was only higher on the depth chart because of Therrien's preference. Those two mistakes he made in the last month versus Detroit and another where he went for a kill shot thirty yards away were bigger mistakes than Tinordi ever made.

It's clear that he was another guy on Therrien's shit list. They never found him a complimentary pairing. Barberio has Emelin (and sorry Barberio Booster, he's out of the lineup when Gilbert comes back if not Sunday for Bartlett) Nate has PK, and Gonchar. I can't remember any pairing with Tinordi besides Frankie B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize Tinordi played 3 games this year and 13 spot starts last year. How is that getting a fair shake.

Too bad Tinordi wasn't from Qc. Still be wearing a Habs Uni'. Probably half the reason this team is in on Drouin. Fackin joke.

He played a bunch of games in 2013, including the playoff series against Ottawa.

He got an NHL job out of the gate in 2013-14. He regressed and was sent back to the AHL.

He was passed on the depth chart by Beaulieu.

At the AHL level, he did not dominate and show he belonged in the NHL.

In 2014 he came to camp, and didn't have a particularly good one.

He played in the AHL and quite frankly was not good enough to push for a spot on the big club.... as said, he was passed by Pateryn.

In 2015 he came to camp and was freaking awful. He was passed by Barberio, but the team kept him cause they didn't want to put him on waivers. Barberio excelled and was an AHL All-Star, he forced the team's hand.

Sometimes you have to earn your ice time. Tinordi couldn't. 6 years after he was drafted he was passed on the depth chart 3 times. He didn't earn his ice time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

I think a lot of Habs fans dislike big, physical players and were waiting for any opportunity not to like him.

Pateryn was only higher on the depth chart because of Therrien's preference. Those two mistakes he made in the last month versus Detroit and another where he went for a kill shot thirty yards away were bigger mistakes than Tinordi ever made.

It's clear that he was another guy on Therrien's shit list. They never found him a complimentary pairing. Barberio has Emelin (and sorry Barberio Booster, he's out of the lineup when Gilbert comes back if not Sunday for Bartlett) Nate has PK, and Gonchar. I can't remember any pairing with Tinordi besides Frankie B.

It would be different if they got something in return for Tinordi. I don't know how many texts I've got over the last 24hrs from buddies askin wtf is going on in Montreal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The right criticism is that we maybe could have gotten back a low-to-middling pick had we dealt him in October.

I just don't buy the other criticisms.

The Tinordi defenders really need to point to some actual reason to think he was a significant prospect, based on his on-ice performances in the AHL and NHL, rather than just pointing to the fact that he was a high pick 6 years ago and that he's huge. Seems to me that this is a guy who singularly and chronically failed to grab hold of every chance he got. By most accounts he did not excel in the AHL (although he did succeed in getting utterly destroyed in a fight - so much for Mr. Intimidator). He did not impress in his stints in the NHL. Think about this year's training camp. Everyone knew he had to step up and make a statement. With everything on the line, he did nothing of the sort and instead got passed on the depth chart by Barberio. At some point, you look at the body of work and go, 'well...time to move along.'

As always, I reject this idea that any prospect is ENTITLED to a blank cheque under the auspices of 'giving them a chance.' Why Tinordi and not Pateryn? Just because he was a high pick a half-decade ago, he automatically deserves an NHL spot which other players would actually earn with their performance? Nonsense.

I come back to a comment of MB's that was reported on RDS: the position of defence has changed greatly in recent years. Mobility, vision, and puck-movement are no longer optional, they are indispensable for any effective NHL defender. Tinordi seems to be a guy who was drafted under a different set of assumptions - the older model of a heavy-hitting 'tough' defender - say, Craig Ludwig - who doesn't worry about the puck and just goes out and punishes people. Zoot doesn't see that as compatible with the team he's building or the game's direction as a whole.

I suspect he's right. Just look at all the loathing piled onto Emelin, a player who is over-paid and routinely derided for being ONLY about hitting, yet who never once had his job security threatened by the much cheaper and younger Tinordi. If Tinordi looks to be an inferior version of Emelin, just what the hell are we crying about?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The right criticism is that we maybe could have gotten back a low-to-middling pick had we dealt him in October.

I just don't buy the other criticisms.

The Tinordi defenders really need to point to some actual reason to think he was a significant prospect, based on his on-ice performances in the AHL and NHL, rather than just pointing to the fact that he was a high pick 6 years ago and that he's huge. Seems to me that this is a guy who singularly and chronically failed to grab hold of every chance he got. By most accounts he did not excel in the AHL (although he did succeed in getting utterly destroyed in a fight - so much for Mr. Intimidator). He did not impress in his stints in the NHL. Think about this year's training camp. Everyone knew he had to step up and make a statement. With everything on the line, he did nothing of the sort and instead got passed on the depth chart by Barberio. At some point, you look at the body of work and go, 'well...time to move along.'

As always, I reject this idea that any prospect is ENTITLED to a blank cheque under the auspices of 'giving them a chance.' Why Tinordi and not Pateryn? Just because he was a high pick a half-decade ago, he automatically deserves an NHL spot which other players would actually earn with their performance? Nonsense.

I come back to a comment of MB's that was reported on RDS: the position of defence has changed greatly in recent years. Mobility, vision, and puck-movement are no longer optional, they are indispensable for any effective NHL defender. Tinordi seems to be a guy who was drafted under a different set of assumptions - the older model of a heavy-hitting 'tough' defender - say, Craig Ludwig - who doesn't worry about the puck and just goes out and punishes people. Zoot doesn't see that as compatible with the team he's building or the game's direction as a whole.

I suspect he's right. Just look at all the loathing piled onto Emelin, a player who is over-paid and routinely derided for being ONLY about hitting, yet who never once had his job security threatened by the much cheaper and younger Tinordi. If Tinordi looks to be an inferior version of Emelin, just what the hell are we crying about?

Ya know I can't really disagree with what you say, but really John forking Scott? I thought if we got something a pick, SOMETHING, we got nothing. We got 2 guys we don't want. Neither one has any talent. The Barberio argument makes some sense, cause he can actually play hockey. He pushed Tinner out. I say good for him, that is what he is supposed to do. If we at least call up Scott for one game to destroy Chara, I will be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya know I can't really disagree with what you say, but really John forking Scott? I thought if we got something a pick, SOMETHING, we got nothing. We got 2 guys we don't want. Neither one has any talent. The Barberio argument makes some sense, cause he can actually play hockey. He pushed Tinner out. I say good for him, that is what he is supposed to do. If we at least call up Scott for one game to destroy Chara, I will be happy.

Scott is fish-waste who has no place in the game in my book. But basically, I don't care if he plays on our AHL affiliate.

Yes, we probably could have gotten maybe a 5th rounder for Tinordi in October. Like I say, THAT'S the right criticism of this deal. But that aside, if you just take it as an AHL trade, which is basically what it boils down to, it's no big deal either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott was a business move plain and simple.

We are saving cap space on the deal (Tinordi for Bartley/Elliott)... but arizona isn't a team that can take on more money.

So we save them real $$$ by taking john scott off their hands (1-way deal) and give them a failed prospect.

This is Molson/Bergevin using their financial might to save some cap space but actually paying out more dollars.

Scott will never play a game for us, we all know he's a shit hockey player and a joke, but who cares? He's only a Hab for Business reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, we probably could have gotten maybe a 5th rounder for Tinordi in October. Like I say, THAT'S the right criticism of this deal. But that aside, if you just take it as an AHL trade, which is basically what it boils down to, it's no big deal either way.

And what's more valuable, a late round pick, or someone like Bartley (or Elliott, or insert depth defenceman's name here)? We've seen Bergevin move picks for depth before so even if they did flip Tinordi for a later pick, there's a decent chance that a player like Bartley winds up in the fold at some point or another anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize Tinordi played 3 games this year and 13 spot starts last year. How is that getting a fair shake.

Too bad Tinordi wasn't from Qc. Still be wearing a Habs Uni'. Probably half the reason this team is in on Drouin. Fackin joke.

How did he do in those 3 games? He stunk! If we were a basement team we could play him third pairing and deal with the turnovers and negative production numbers. He showed no signs that he is at the NHL level or ever will be. Only comment I ever heard that he was came from a AHL team mate who would not say is fellow team mate was a bust. I am glad he isn't from PQ as we can deal him without hearing cries from the Francos. Of course though there will be Anglo comments like yours. He was not traded for poor language skills. He is not ready and has been passed by more players in our depth chart yet again this season. He could not be sent down to develop as we would lose him on waivers and he is not playable at the NHL level. What do you do with him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did he do in those 3 games? He stunk! If we were a basement team we could play him third pairing and deal with the turnovers and negative production numbers. He showed no signs that he is at the NHL level or ever will be. Only comment I ever heard that he was came from a AHL team mate who would not say is fellow team mate was a bust. I am glad he isn't from PQ as we can deal him without hearing cries from the Francos. Of course though there will be Anglo comments like yours. He was not traded for poor language skills. He is not ready and has been passed by more players in our depth chart yet again this season. He could not be sent down to develop as we would lose him on waivers and he is not playable at the NHL level. What do you do with him?

Pretty much everyone on here is an Anglophone - I don't see what that has to do with anything when it comes to this trade. Trying to turn this into a language issue is uncalled for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much everyone on here is an Anglophone - I don't see what that has to do with anything when it comes to this trade. Trying to turn this into a language issue is uncalled for.

I was responding to a comment that he was traded because he wasn't Franco, so please.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much everyone on here is an Anglophone - I don't see what that has to do with anything when it comes to this trade. Trying to turn this into a language issue is uncalled for.

I was responding to a comment that he was traded because he wasn't Franco, so please.......

Yes, for what it's worth I think johnny's remark was fair comment, taken in context.

But this is not a language issue one way or the other, so best to turn the page on this particular issue before it gets unpleasant...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think this trade is getting the amount of discussion that it is because it was a bad trade (Tinordi is clearly a bust, it's a fair hockey trade when cap considerations are factored in)....we are all fixated on it because it wasn't the trade we have been hoping/praying for that will help this team score more goals. It's sort of a salt in the recent wounds thing; "we FINALLY hear about a trade, and it's this pathetic garbage for garbage deal?!" sort of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott is fish-waste who has no place in the game in my book. But basically, I don't care if he plays on our AHL affiliate.

Yes, we probably could have gotten maybe a 5th rounder for Tinordi in October. Like I say, THAT'S the right criticism of this deal. But that aside, if you just take it as an AHL trade, which is basically what it boils down to, it's no big deal either way.

You are right, but do I have to like it? This will all make sense if they bring the big dummy up to fork some guys up. Like Chara for instance. :clap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The right criticism is that we maybe could have gotten back a low-to-middling pick had we dealt him in October.

I just don't buy the other criticisms.

The Tinordi defenders really need to point to some actual reason to think he was a significant prospect, based on his on-ice performances in the AHL and NHL, rather than just pointing to the fact that he was a high pick 6 years ago and that he's huge. Seems to me that this is a guy who singularly and chronically failed to grab hold of every chance he got. By most accounts he did not excel in the AHL (although he did succeed in getting utterly destroyed in a fight - so much for Mr. Intimidator). He did not impress in his stints in the NHL. Think about this year's training camp. Everyone knew he had to step up and make a statement. With everything on the line, he did nothing of the sort and instead got passed on the depth chart by Barberio. At some point, you look at the body of work and go, 'well...time to move along.'

As always, I reject this idea that any prospect is ENTITLED to a blank cheque under the auspices of 'giving them a chance.' Why Tinordi and not Pateryn? Just because he was a high pick a half-decade ago, he automatically deserves an NHL spot which other players would actually earn with their performance? Nonsense.

I come back to a comment of MB's that was reported on RDS: the position of defence has changed greatly in recent years. Mobility, vision, and puck-movement are no longer optional, they are indispensable for any effective NHL defender. Tinordi seems to be a guy who was drafted under a different set of assumptions - the older model of a heavy-hitting 'tough' defender - say, Craig Ludwig - who doesn't worry about the puck and just goes out and punishes people. Zoot doesn't see that as compatible with the team he's building or the game's direction as a whole.

I suspect he's right. Just look at all the loathing piled onto Emelin, a player who is over-paid and routinely derided for being ONLY about hitting, yet who never once had his job security threatened by the much cheaper and younger Tinordi. If Tinordi looks to be an inferior version of Emelin, just what the hell are we crying about?

There's no entitlement, but first round picks are resources that should be invested in. Sure, they have to make the team, but they ideally get more rope than 25 year old scrubs without ceilings like Pateryn or Barberio.

You don't know what you have with a defenseman until he's played 200 games. Tinordi hasn't even played 50. But hey! Four below average games of Barberio means this trade works.

There's no case to be made that playing Tinordi is any worse than the players Therrien insisted on playing in front of him:

Frankie Bouillon

Douglas Murray

Barberio

Greg Pateryn

Raphael Diaz

We'll see what happens. Likely his ceiling is a #5 with an edge, but that's better than squandering a prospect to play three players (will be five next year) that aren't even in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...