Sorry but giving up Berggren to move up from 15 to 13 is crazy talk.
I think he is overrated on here and I’d completely agree with you
Sorry but giving up Berggren to move up from 15 to 13 is crazy talk.
Eeek that's a big no15 OA + Wallinder + Berggren for Marner lol
I don't value the assets Detroit would give up.Eeek that's a big no
15 OA + Wallinder + Mazur for Marner lol
Eeek that's a big no
Berggren
Fabbri
2nd
Toronto wouldn't ever do it15 OA + Wallinder + Mazur for Marner lol
Toronto wouldn't ever do it
Agreed...While he's a lil'weiner - he's a talented lil'weiner that would instantly be a top point producer on this team.I’d do either of these or even some combination of the two in a heartbeat
At this point, wouldn't there be a mob without a trade?
Gotta feel for Treliving...Poor bastard.Yeah, that's a lynch mob trade.
Then fleece the f*** out of them and don't worry about a mob that won't actually form.Naw, Leafs fans are accustomed to disappointment.
Then fleece the f*** out of them and don't worry about a mob that won't actually form.
There were very specific components in the talked about trade for DBC that I opposed, half of which was a rumored 8x$9M extension that obviously didn't happen. Kane was just a diversion from the rebuild. People will credit him as opposed to Ray for Ray's growth, but it's done and over with now. Had you force-fed Berggren Kane's deployment and disregarded all the lost battles and defensive miscues you'd have come awful close to similar numbers.I don't care about the mob, but I'm sure Tre would like to keep his job.
Every offseason there are people that think we're gonna get Eichel, Tkachuk, Marner, etc for peanuts and it never happens. Instead you get Cat and Kane, and you hated both acquisitions, lol.
There were very specific components in the talked about trade for DBC that I opposed, half of which was a rumored 8x$9M extension that obviously didn't happen. Kane was just a diversion from the rebuild. People will credit him as opposed to Ray for Ray's growth, but it's done and over with now. Had you force-fed Berggren Kane's deployment and disregarded all the lost battles and defensive miscues you'd have come awful close to similar numbers.
No you wouldn't. Patrick Kane, even at this stage in his career, is just a wildly better hockey player than Jonatan Berggren. Like, it's not close.
You would not have gotten Kane level production out of Berggren.
Force-feeding kids minutes for the f***in hell of it does not make them develop. Edvinsson would not have magically been a far superior player if he was in Detroit in November instead of GR.
I know you love the young kids they draft... but development in the league just does not occur the way you seem to think it does.
And I'm calling BS right back. You know that Lalonde would have had a short leash for him early on in the season. He would have been yanked down or out of the lineup with a bad mistake.I'm calling BS on that. You can't say for sure that Ed wouldn't be a better player if he got the perm callup in November. Every player is different. 60 NHL games vs. what, 50 AHL games...
What development needs to happen for Berggren to be able to produce offensively on a top line, PP1, lose a ton of puck battles and make a lot of defensive mistakes? He can do that now, just like Kane did...No you wouldn't. Patrick Kane, even at this stage in his career, is just a wildly better hockey player than Jonatan Berggren. Like, it's not close.
You would not have gotten Kane level production out of Berggren.
Force-feeding kids minutes for the f***in hell of it does not make them develop. Edvinsson would not have magically been a far superior player if he was in Detroit in November instead of GR.
I know you love the young kids they draft... but development in the league just does not occur the way you seem to think it does.
Thank you for defending my point.And I'm calling BS right back. You know that Lalonde would have had a short leash for him early on in the season. He would have been yanked down or out of the lineup with a bad mistake.
I mean, no, I can't say for sure he wouldn't be a better player. But I wasn't the one making the grandiose statement that young guys would just be as good as veterans if you force-fed them minutes.
What development needs to happen for Berggren to be able to produce offensively on a top line, PP1, lose a ton of puck battles and make a lot of defensive mistakes? He can do that now, just like Kane did...
Thank you for defending my point.
The main difference between kids and vets is leash. Not ability.
Who said f*** all about linear production?Yeah, and they won't be able to use that ability if they are getting yanked in and out of the lineup and looking over their shoulder at the coach. And no damn NHL coach is going to keep sending a 20 year old over the boards. I'm not defending your point at all. No coach or GM worth their f***ing salt is going to give a kid who isn't clearly NHL ready the type of latitude that you're saying should be given to Jonatan Berggren. Like, Lucas Raymond made it as a rookie and got lots of latitude because his talent was undeniable. He passed the "Mrs. Blashill" test of, yeah, that guy is noticeable and should be playing for you now.
And development for Berggren... develop some size to not be knocked off the puck. Backcheck a little bit. Quite a bit of development actually. Like good lord man, he produced at Andrew Copp and JT Compher levels (Berggren, I mean). If you gave Andrew Copp or JT Compher force-fed top line, PP1 minutes how would they do?
I mean, good lord, there has never been a single solitary stretch of his career where Jonatan Berggren's production was within megaphone distance of Kane's.
Mother f***er, this is the same shit that my least favorite poster in the history of this site used to bleat about regarding Athanasiou. Guys do not linerally increase in stats with more ice time. Rates don't not generally hold steady with more opportunity.