Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:Guilt Trip said:Why. He moved out 2 guys that have ahard time with the heavy game.Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:I'm not sure I'm on board with the roster changing THIS much. Keefe is going to have his hands full figuring it all out.
Sandin is a big loss. As I said earlier, we'll be rueing this like we did Stralman. Engvall's return is an irritant to me, but I don't have a problem moving him, even though I like parts of his game.
And my point is that rejiggering the chemistry will be a big challenge for the coaches.
OldTimeHockey said:Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".
Nik said:OldTimeHockey said:Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".
It's certainly not on the level of, say, Rask I agree. I do think there was quite a bit of regret over it but not because Stralman became some sort of legend or anything but more because he was indicative of a general dissatisfaction with the club and their ability to identify talented players during a real low point for the club. Like, the Stralman trade came the year after the Jeff Finger signing.
And I do think there's maybe some parallel with how this deal is being perceived. Like I said in my review of the trade, I don't think the value here is way off but there is a sort of, like, wondering why you'd do this with one of the team's very few young assets with potential when it doesn't seem necessary.
Nik said:OldTimeHockey said:Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".
It's certainly not on the level of, say, Rask I agree. I do think there was quite a bit of regret over it but not because Stralman became some sort of legend or anything but more because he was indicative of a general dissatisfaction with the club and their ability to identify talented players during a real low point for the club. Like, the Stralman trade came the year after the Jeff Finger signing.
And I do think there's maybe some parallel with how this deal is being perceived. Like I said in my review of the trade, I don't think the value here is way off but there is a sort of, like, wondering why you'd do this with one of the team's very few young assets with potential when it doesn't seem necessary.
Zee said:Nik said:OldTimeHockey said:Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".
It's certainly not on the level of, say, Rask I agree. I do think there was quite a bit of regret over it but not because Stralman became some sort of legend or anything but more because he was indicative of a general dissatisfaction with the club and their ability to identify talented players during a real low point for the club. Like, the Stralman trade came the year after the Jeff Finger signing.
And I do think there's maybe some parallel with how this deal is being perceived. Like I said in my review of the trade, I don't think the value here is way off but there is a sort of, like, wondering why you'd do this with one of the team's very few young assets with potential when it doesn't seem necessary.
I also equated Sandin's loss to Stralman. Not to say Stralman was a legend by any means, but he had a solid career in the league, played in over 100 playoff games and went to two Stanley Cup Finals. If Sandin's career turns out as good as that, well, it's better than any Leafs defenseman of the last 56 years. At least the Leafs received a 1st back in the deal, which can be used to acquire someone else, so it's better than the Stralman trade for sure.
OldTimeHockey said:Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:Guilt Trip said:Why. He moved out 2 guys that have ahard time with the heavy game.Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:I'm not sure I'm on board with the roster changing THIS much. Keefe is going to have his hands full figuring it all out.
Sandin is a big loss. As I said earlier, we'll be rueing this like we did Stralman. Engvall's return is an irritant to me, but I don't have a problem moving him, even though I like parts of his game.
And my point is that rejiggering the chemistry will be a big challenge for the coaches.
Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".
I'm not over the moon on the Sandin deal, but I also don't think losing him moves the needle a lot. He was the number 5 or 6 dman on this team for much of the season....even with a rash of injuries. His use was trending downwards and was going to be even less with McCabe added to the roster. I mean, if we're going to look solely at offensive upside(which is the majority of what Sandin brings at this point), Connor Timmins has 7 less points in 30 less games.
Sure I'd like a little more return for Sandin as I do think he has potential to be pretty good. Unfortunately, he hasn't shown much of that yet so his value isn't going to be as high as we'd like it to be.
OldTimeHockey said:Zee said:Nik said:OldTimeHockey said:Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".
It's certainly not on the level of, say, Rask I agree. I do think there was quite a bit of regret over it but not because Stralman became some sort of legend or anything but more because he was indicative of a general dissatisfaction with the club and their ability to identify talented players during a real low point for the club. Like, the Stralman trade came the year after the Jeff Finger signing.
And I do think there's maybe some parallel with how this deal is being perceived. Like I said in my review of the trade, I don't think the value here is way off but there is a sort of, like, wondering why you'd do this with one of the team's very few young assets with potential when it doesn't seem necessary.
I also equated Sandin's loss to Stralman. Not to say Stralman was a legend by any means, but he had a solid career in the league, played in over 100 playoff games and went to two Stanley Cup Finals. If Sandin's career turns out as good as that, well, it's better than any Leafs defenseman of the last 56 years. At least the Leafs received a 1st back in the deal, which can be used to acquire someone else, so it's better than the Stralman trade for sure.
Perhaps there is parallel in the two trades. I'm also confused about the 'why' of the trade. Not really concerned about the loss though. Not right now at least. And perhaps people are correct. I hope they are for the sake of Sandin succeeding.
Dappleganger said:OldTimeHockey said:Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:Guilt Trip said:Why. He moved out 2 guys that have ahard time with the heavy game.Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:I'm not sure I'm on board with the roster changing THIS much. Keefe is going to have his hands full figuring it all out.
Sandin is a big loss. As I said earlier, we'll be rueing this like we did Stralman. Engvall's return is an irritant to me, but I don't have a problem moving him, even though I like parts of his game.
And my point is that rejiggering the chemistry will be a big challenge for the coaches.
Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".
I'm not over the moon on the Sandin deal, but I also don't think losing him moves the needle a lot. He was the number 5 or 6 dman on this team for much of the season....even with a rash of injuries. His use was trending downwards and was going to be even less with McCabe added to the roster. I mean, if we're going to look solely at offensive upside(which is the majority of what Sandin brings at this point), Connor Timmins has 7 less points in 30 less games.
Sure I'd like a little more return for Sandin as I do think he has potential to be pretty good. Unfortunately, he hasn't shown much of that yet so his value isn't going to be as high as we'd like it to be.
I think the Stralman thing is, if you at all the Leafs trades over the last 20 years, he's one of the few players traded away, who was a legit NHL player, and went on to have a decent career. Most didn't.
Bender said:As much as I was annoyed to see Stralman succeed in a non-Leafs uniform, do we really think he'd be a difference maker once JFJ traded Rask away? He also bounced around the league so its not like he's some untouchable defenseman like Hedman. We were consigned to being a terrible team from then on and Stralman wouldn't have changed that.