Heroic Shrimp
New member
Bender said:
I suspect it's the old hockey illusion where the tall, lanky guys sometimes tend to look slower than they truly are, for whatever reason. But I agree, speed for JVR isn't an issue.
James van Riemsdyk
- Thread starter Redleaf
- Start date
I suspect it's the old hockey illusion where the tall, lanky guys sometimes tend to look slower than they truly are, for whatever reason. But I agree, speed for JVR isn't an issue.
I applaud the Leafs' coaches for tapping into JVR's strengths and realizing that he needs to park himself in front of the net in order to be successful. He looks like he will turn out well for the Leafs. This trade was one of Burke's better moves. Burke was better than Ferguson at least. He did do some things right.
Seymore Pucks
New member
Burke wasn't everyones cup of tea, but he made some pretty good trades. Some of the most unwanted players by fans in Toronto are still playing in the NHL. Go figure.
Burke's downfall was the Kessel trade and especially his free agent signings. His other trades were very, very good. The Phaneuf trade, the Lupul/Gardiner trade, and the JVR trade all look like highway robberies. He got Colborne, a 1st, and a 2nd for Kaberle and a 1st and a 3rd for Versteeg. That's some great value.sickbeast said:
leafplasma
New member
Justin said:
Yes and the Kessel trade is only bad when you take hindsight into consideration. Even still I don't call it terrible as is.
Kin
New member
I think the idea that the Phaneuf trade was a good one, let alone "highway robbery", is one that relies both A) really terrible hindsight and B) the false notion that the alternative to the Phaneuf trade was keeping the guys traded for Phaneuf forever.
When you just look at it in the sense of the assets surrendered for what the Leafs got back, I think I'd put it in the middling to bad category that can really only be seen in a positive light if you consider that Burke was already going down the wrong road and all it did was go a little further.
As for Versteeg, I think it's a case where the Leafs made a bad trade out of necessity.
When you just look at it in the sense of the assets surrendered for what the Leafs got back, I think I'd put it in the middling to bad category that can really only be seen in a positive light if you consider that Burke was already going down the wrong road and all it did was go a little further.
As for Versteeg, I think it's a case where the Leafs made a bad trade out of necessity.
leafplasma
New member
Nik Pollock said:
That changed nothing in my line of thinking, nice try though
.
Bullfrog
Active member
Nik Pollock said:
I don't agree that either terrible hindsight or your proposed false notion are required to see that trade as a good one. The leafs received a top pairing defenseman, a decent defense prospect, and a decent role-player. In return they shipped out two forwards having career years, a useless plug in Mayers, and a good defenseman in White.
Though you've pumped Stajan up as a 50-60 pt player, I think most people who watched him on a regular basis could see that those numbers were likely not sustainable. Though you might argue that's the hindsight portion, I'll disagree. I never saw him as anything more than a utility player with decent offensive and defensive instincts.
It doesn't really seem like a lopsided trade in either teams favour.
Kin
New member
Bullfrog said:
Well, I think you've done two things there that sort of speak to what I'm talking about. First categorizing Stajan and Hagman in the middle of "career years" is somewhat misleading. Hagman was on pace for a 30 goal, 49 point season when he got traded which, I suppose, would have technically been career highs in both regards. However it's a pretty minimal bump from his previous two seasons where he had a 27 goal, 41 point season and then a 22 goal, 42 point season in 65 games. Stajan was basically just doing the same thing he'd done the year before.
Secondly, though, when Ian White got traded he was not only playing on the team's top pairing but when Bob Mackenzie evaluated the trade he said that of all of the players in the deal White was playing the best. I think in that context it's a little unfair to categorize Phaneuf as a "top pairing" defenseman and White as "good" regardless of anything else.
Bullfrog said:
Well, with all due respect, I haven't pumped him up to be anything. A 50-60 point player is just what he was. That said, I agree it was a somewhat inflated total due to his circumstances. I'd say that Leafs fans tend to apply that particular jeweler's loupe fairly inconsistently but that's neither here nor there.
Bullfrog said:
I agree with that but my point here has never been that the trade was great for the Flames or that the trade should be judged by which of the two teams did better. It was always about what the move meant for the Leafs and what their alternatives where with regards to the players and cap dollars involved.
Heroic Shrimp
New member
Does anybody know what Flames fans currently think about the Phaneuf trade?
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Heroic Shrimp said:
Searching HFBoards they don't seem too pleased with it.
bustaheims
Active member
Potvin29 said:
Well, all they have left from it is Matt Stajan and the ridiculous extension he signed with them.
Kin
New member
RedLeaf said:
I thought you were legitimately asking. He keeps up his current pace he'll finish at 29 goals, which would indeed be surpassing that career high by quite a bit. I don't think he'll do that but I wouldn't be surprised if he's at or even a little above 21 goals when the season ends which would be a pretty impressive accomplishment.