I don't disagree with you. I'm saying that the hype often leads to wrong choices. Remember Theodore winning the Heart trophy? Most media people will tell you (including Bob McKenzie) saying that in hindsight, more people should have voted for Iginla. The Montreal media made the case for Theodore and he ended up winning. Not saying he did or didn't deserve it, just stating that media hype helps. Same for Toews. A lot of non-Hawks fans often say that Toews is their favorite player. I get it. He's a complete player and he's won several championships. As a Bruins fan, I do not believe Toews is far superior to Bergeron. A slight edge maybe but not far superior. Price, because of his demeanor and being a poster boy Canadian, gets hyped by the media a lot. He benefits from this. People who never see Price play will still say he's a great goaltender. I never said he wasn't good, I said he benefits from playing on a team that plays a defensive system. That's my opinion. End of rant.
- Bruiniak

Bergeron to me is one of the most underrated players in the league.

I can't think of a worse 1 for 1 trade than Hall for Larsen. Anybody else?
- PugsNotDrugs

Eret for Forsberg immediately come to mind

just because he's what the oilers needed it doesn't make it not a terrible trade....in terms of value.
- sensarmy_11

The trade wasn't just for Larrsen, thats what no one here is understanding. They got an excellent up and coming dman and they also got 6million in cap space to sign Lucic who is another need for their roster. So it's really Hall for Larrsen AND Lucic which is a better value.

The trade wasn't just for Larrsen, thats what no one here is understanding. They got an excellent up and coming dman and they also got 6million in cap space to sign Lucic who is another need for their roster. So it's really Hall for Larrsen AND Lucic which is a better value.
- Dcoms

Hall's cap hit was 6M, Larssen's is $4,166,666. How did the trade net Edmonton 6M in cap space? What am I missing?

The trade wasn't just for Larrsen, thats what no one here is understanding. They got an excellent up and coming dman and they also got 6million in cap space to sign Lucic who is another need for their roster. So it's really Hall for Larrsen AND Lucic which is a better value.
- Dcoms

They had the space to sign Lucic either way.

Hall's cap hit was 6M, Larssen's is $4,166,666. How did the trade net Edmonton 6M in cap space? What am I missing?
- MJL

Because Lucic and Hall have the exact same cap hit and play the exact same position so Edmonton gets their top pairing dman that they have been searching for and only add 4 million in cap space doing it and not creating any holes in their lineup. You think Chiarelli makes this trade without Lucic agreeing to sign with them ahead of time? No chance. And I give Chiarelli pretty much zero credit to being good at his job.

They had the space to sign Lucic either way.
- PepinoPamplemousse

Yeah they did but they didn't have the roster space. And they have pretty big contracts to negotiate coming up in the next few years. In bringing on Lucic they had to move out someone some time.

Yeah they did but they didn't have the roster space. And they have pretty big contracts to negotiate coming up in the next few years. In bringing on Lucic they had to move out someone some time.
- Dcoms

Even if that were true, they just gave Lucic what they were paying Hall, so...


They created no cap space, have $4 million less cap space than they had before, in fact, and traded away one of the very best forwards in the game for a good, but not great, defenseman.

Because Lucic and Hall have the exact same cap hit and play the exact same position so Edmonton gets their top pairing dman that they have been searching for and only add 4 million in cap space doing it and not creating any holes in their lineup. You think Chiarelli makes this trade without Lucic agreeing to sign with them ahead of time? No chance. And I give Chiarelli pretty much zero credit to being good at his job.
- Dcoms

That's backwards logic. The Hall trade did not get them 6M in cap space. It gained them 1.83M in cap space. They used cap space they already had to sign Lucic.

Yeah they did but they didn't have the roster space. And they have pretty big contracts to negotiate coming up in the next few years. In bringing on Lucic they had to move out someone some time.
- Dcoms

They got rid of one player in Hall, and took in two players in Larssen and Lucic.

You, for putting your crappy dad 'rock' in your blogs.

Tanner you are a work of art

I agree that Edmonton did not get enough for Hall but the fact remains that they are a better team. Lucic is a downgrade. They gave up a 60-80 point player for a 50-60 point player BUT Edmonton gained a top pair Dman. Tanner finally thinks they will miss the playoffs after being wrong 9 times. I will take the biased bet that they make it this season!

I loved this blog James, you nailed it. I think sometimes your humor gets the best of you but you sure nailed this one, could not agree more on everything. Especially Kessel not getting mvp, Subban trade was dumb and the Hall trade was dumber!

I agree that Edmonton did not get enough for Hall but the fact remains that they are a better team. Lucic is a downgrade. They gave up a 60-80 point player for a 50-60 point player BUT Edmonton gained a top pair Dman. Tanner finally thinks they will miss the playoffs after being wrong 9 times. I will take the biased bet that they make it this season!
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

Lucic has nothing to do with Hall for Larsson!

Even if that were true, they just gave Lucic what they were paying Hall, so...


They created no cap space, have $4 million less cap space than they had before, in fact, and traded away one of the very best forwards in the game for a good, but not great, defenseman.
- PepinoPamplemousse

Not to mention Hall is twice the player that Lucic is. Lucic's only hope is that McDavid carries him!

Your repeated appeals to the analytics experts is different?
- MJL

It's not 'appealing to the experts' when you look at data. Holy Crap! I wish you were joking, that's an embarrassing post.

We don't know that for sure, as no team has actually done it.
- PepinoPamplemousse

I am confident that a team that did would get a massive edge and be nearly unstoppable. There is so much stupidity, ignorance, group think, and just like internet-level thinking going on on most NHL teams that you could probably destroy the competition by making your numbers team the most important voice in management and cutting out the entire group of ex-players.

Basically I am saying that a team run out side the 'old boys club' would embarrass the rest of the league.

And if you don't believe me, google "Chiareli, Neely, Benning and Sweeney Destroy the Bruins Video."

I agree that Edmonton did not get enough for Hall but the fact remains that they are a better team. Lucic is a downgrade. They gave up a 60-80 point player for a 50-60 point player BUT Edmonton gained a top pair Dman. Tanner finally thinks they will miss the playoffs after being wrong 9 times. I will take the biased bet that they make it this season!
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

Where did I say they will miss the Playoffs? The have the best roster in hockey, so you'd have to be pretty dumb to think that.

Lucic has nothing to do with Hall for Larsson!
- joegreif17

Don't even try to explain this to people, you'll give them a headache. Thanks for the kind words though.

Hall for larsson was good for both teams ...

It's not 'appealing to the experts' when you look at data. Holy Crap! I wish you were joking, that's an embarrassing post.
- James_Tanner

Basically the same thing. You think the data is fool proof, and without flaws. Makes it pretty much the same thing. The data is equal to the experts in the scenario. Think outside the box James. You have a need to call someone's post "embarrassing" because your ego won't accept a different opinion. That is a direct indication of a character weakness and flaw.

The bigger issue is how when someone offers a dissenting opinion to yours, your fallback position if to deflect from the actual subject, and accuse someone of making an appeal to authority. Or any other fallacy you can think of to throw into the mix.

I am confident that a team that did would get a massive edge and be nearly unstoppable. There is so much stupidity, ignorance, group think, and just like internet-level thinking going on on most NHL teams that you could probably destroy the competition by making your numbers team the most important voice in management and cutting out the entire group of ex-players.

Basically I am saying that a team run out side the 'old boys club' would embarrass the rest of the league.

And if you don't believe me, google "Chiareli, Neely, Benning and Sweeney Destroy the Bruins Video."
- James_Tanner

Thanks for proving my point, James!

I loved this blog James, you nailed it. I think sometimes your humor gets the best of you but you sure nailed this one, could not agree more on everything. Especially Kessel not getting mvp, Subban trade was dumb and the Hall trade was dumber!
- joegreif17

Basically the same thing. You think the data is fool proof, and without flaws. Makes it pretty much the same thing. The data is equal to the experts in the scenario. Think outside the box James.

The bigger issue is how when someone offers a dissenting opinion to yours, your fallback position if to deflect from the actual subject, and accuse someone of making an appeal to authority. Or any other fallacy you can think of to throw into the mix.
- MJL

This is not even a coherent argument. You amuse me, but come on!

Just because I discredit bad arguments does not mean I try to silence those who'd disagree with me. You just think it's everyone because you've never made a good argument free from logical fallacies.

But hey, think what you want, it's not like anyone can convince you of anything.