William_Clarkson Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 player for player the deal makes sense and is a good trade off. Never said the deal makes sense for either team however a consistent 20+ goal scorer whose had one rough year with injuries in all reality, for a barely developed but steady defenseman is a fair trade. The only way i would make this trade is if we could get a serviceable dman in return via FA signing or a deal with another team. Just stating that as a piece saying Tanev is overpaying for Eriksson is a tad ridiculous and homerism at best. The fact Eriksson had 2 concussions last year really hurts his value. Remember, Booth had two concussions in the 2008/09 season and was never the same after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 The fact Eriksson had 2 concussions last year really hurts his value. Remember, Booth had two concussions in the 2008/09 season and was never the same after that. Booth wasn't the same due to leg injuries not concussions. Most of CDC wrote off Willie Mitchell due to concussions and he bounced back and won 2 cups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grandmaster Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Booth wasn't the same due to leg injuries not concussions. Most of CDC wrote off Willie Mitchell due to concussions and he bounced back and won 2 cups. Was he a force in those runs though? I think he was more of a passenger, his best days were in Minni and Van Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Was he a force in those runs though? I think he was more of a passenger, his best days were in Minni and Van I think the point is that players can successfully recover from concussion. Trading for him would be extremely risky from any team's point of view though. I think he will play at least next year in Boston and we should be able to see whether he bounces back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 player for player the deal makes sense and is a good trade off. Never said the deal makes sense for either team however a consistent 20+ goal scorer whose had one rough year with injuries in all reality, for a barely developed but steady defenseman is a fair trade. The only way i would make this trade is if we could get a serviceable dman in return via FA signing or a deal with another team. Just stating that as a piece saying Tanev is overpaying for Eriksson is a tad ridiculous and homerism at best. I would not trade Tanev for Eriksson straight up. We want to get younger and people jump on Daniel's one concussion. Eriksson's had 2, no thanks. 24 year old Top 4 d-man > 2time concussed 30 year old forward everyday of the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Building Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 I would not trade Tanev for Eriksson straight up. We want to get younger and people jump on Daniel's one concussion. Eriksson's had 2, no thanks. 24 year old Top 4 d-man > 2time concussed 30 year old forward everyday of the week. Tanev is a fave of mine, but it is still too early to define him as a top 4 dman. If he improves this year he will be a little bit closer to that though. Trading for Eriksson could turn out like Booth all over again though, who Benning just got rid of, so I see little chance of this trade happening. I'd rather keep Tanev too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Tanev is a fave of mine, but it is still too early to define him as a top 4 dman. If he improves this year he will be a little bit closer to that though. Trading for Eriksson could turn out like Booth all over again though, who Benning just got rid of, so I see little chance of this trade happening. I'd rather keep Tanev too. Tanev's numbers are similar too our other top 4 d-men if not better in some categories. If he hadn't missed so many games he'd have had 20+ points. Our highest point defencemen only had like 25 points. He had averaged 20 minutes TOI. I'd say he's top 4. May not be flashy or a goal producing machine but he's a shut down guy that is responsible in his own end. I just don't think people resorct hos defensive game enough. He doesn't crunch people but you don't need to, to play solid defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.