[Signing] Maple Leafs re-sign Kadri. 1 year/4.1M - Page 2 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Enoch Root · 07-05-2015, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IgiTang

Not trying to call you out CC, but this kind of statement drives me nuts.

The guy is in the NHL for a reason and is being paid $4m for a reason also. He's a solid hockey player that many teams would love to have and I assure you many players would say he is tough to play against.

Someone who is not in the NHL has no right saying he is not tough to play against.

As for this deal, it is a perfect contract for a deadline deal to a contender and I would almost assure you that's why it is for 1 year. Get a first for him at the deadline regardless of his success this season. If he blows up, get more for him, if he busts, get minimum first rounder and Shanny can blame it on Kadri not being in the right system, proper support, whatever. Someone will want him and at the deadline and no huge contract lingering makes him the perfect deadline acquisition.

By the same token, someone who is not in the NHL has no right to say he IS tough to play against.

Such a empty, ridiculous argument.

BigTuna · 07-05-2015, 06:05 PM

Kadri is only 24. Is the best best defensive forward, and in a bad year can get 50+ points with little PP time.

He'll get his first chance as a #1 centre with Babcock.

BigTuna · 07-05-2015, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pylon

You know what, you're right.

I think the Flames should give up a package of Brodie, Bennett, Gaudreau and Monahan for him. He is an incredible player, especially as indicated by the 1 yr deal he just landed. Definitely in the long term future plans of the Leafs. In fact dare I say, I think he may perhaps be the greatest player in the league, and perhaps the history of the NHL, just based on the fact he plays for the Leafs.

Thanks for the hyperbole.

All I was saying is, Kadri is hardly "Useles with the puck" (I think that's just what people say about every Leaf player now). And he's certainly not soft at all.

Sorry if you take offense to that. Geeze.

IgiTang · 07-05-2015, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

By the same token, someone who is not in the NHL has no right to say he IS tough to play against.

Such a empty, ridiculous argument.

It is much more plausible that I am correct due to the fact he's actually in the NHL... Derrr...

Thanks for coming out tho.

And I did not say he was or was not tough to play against. I said that it is likely he is due to the fact that he plays in the best league in the world. I figured that would be inferred by even a casual hockey fan.

Enoch Root · 07-05-2015, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IgiTang

It is much more plausible that I am correct due to the fact he's actually in the NHL... Derrr...

Thanks for coming out tho.

lol

you might want to read those posts again

KootenayFlamesFan · 07-05-2015, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IgiTang

Someone who is not in the NHL has no right saying he is not tough to play against.

If people who aren't in the NHL can't give their opinions on players then what's the point of this site?

IgiTang · 07-05-2015, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

lol

you might want to read those posts again

MOD EDIT: That's enough. No one cares

IgiTang · 07-05-2015, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

If people who aren't in the NHL can't give their opinions on players then what's the point of this site?

Wow guys...

First, I wasn't looking for an argument. And I was trying to let CC know that I was not intending my comment as an attack.

But this site is for conversations yes. But when we talk in such difinitives that border on slander such as saying a player is "soft" or "not hard to play against" when truly the person has zero idea if that is true and all signs point to the opposite, there is nothing wrong with someone pointing that out.

I will tell you this, the pack mentality of some posters on this site... Is something else..

IgiTang · 07-05-2015, 06:52 PM

Nm

IgiTang · 07-05-2015, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

lol

you might want to read those posts again

Quote:

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

If people who aren't in the NHL can't give their opinions on players then what's the point of this site?

Quote:

Originally Posted by IgiTang

MOD EDIT: That's enough. No one cares

And you tell me no one cares, that's enough... Get real.

KootenayFlamesFan · 07-05-2015, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IgiTang

But this site is for conversations yes. But when we talk in such difinitives that border on slander such as saying a player is "soft" or "not hard to play against" when truly the person has zero idea if that is true and all signs point to the opposite, there is nothing wrong with someone pointing that out.

I don't think that's slander. It's just an opinion.

Quote:

I will tell you this, the pack mentality of some posters on this site... Is something else..

You quoted me, so all I can say is that I saw your post and quoted it before seeing any other responses. Just thought it was a bit of a strange comment.

Murph · 07-05-2015, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigTuna

Kadri is only 24. Is the best best defensive forward, and in a bad year can get 50+ points with little PP time.

He'll get his first chance as a #1 centre with Babcock.

Ummm... He had 39 points this year. So I guess this was a REALLY bad year?

BigTuna · 07-05-2015, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murph

Ummm... He had 39 points this year. So I guess this was a REALLY bad year?

in 73 gamews. The guy had 44 in 48 games during the lockout year and 50 last season.

Enoch Root · 07-05-2015, 08:22 PM

SO...

2012/13: 0.92 PPG
2013/14: 0.62 PPG
2014/15: 0.53 PPG

Nice trend - no wonder they only gave him a 1 year deal!

Superfraggle · 07-05-2015, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigTuna

in 73 gamews. The guy had 44 in 48 games during the lockout year and 50 last season.

So he would have gotten at least 11 points if he had played the other 9 games? Saying he gets 50 points in a bad year is a little ridiculous for a guy who has never gotten more than 50 in any year.

BigTuna · 07-06-2015, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

SO...

2012/13: 0.92 PPG
2013/14: 0.62 PPG
2014/15: 0.53 PPG

Nice trend - no wonder they only gave him a 1 year deal!

The 2013 season was 48 games.

Fire · 07-06-2015, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigTuna

The 2013 season was 48 games.

So? His post is referring to points PER game. Or are you saying that season was a fluke and we shouldn't expect him to reach that level again? If that's the case, then yes I agree with you.

BigTuna · 07-06-2015, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fire

So? His post is referring to points PER game. Or are you saying that season was a fluke and we shouldn't expect him to reach that level again? If that's the case, then yes I agree with you.

The longer a season goes, the chances the PPG dips.

Da_Chief · 07-06-2015, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigTuna

The longer a season goes, the chances the PPG dips.

Sure if you're a really an inconsistent player. From game 10 to 82 it shouldn't really differ by more then 0.1

Cleveland Steam Whistle · 07-06-2015, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothessence

Let's not aim for players from terrible organizations like Toronto.

Last time we did something similar (Jokinen from Florida) it was pretty much a bust and his bloated #1C numbers from playing in the old SW division made him seem better than he was.

He would wilt playing in the west and also on a team where there really isn't a place for him.

Alternatively we can aim for well developed players from good organizations. (Read: Hudler from Detroit).

Let's stop pretending previous deals from years ago with organisations have any bearing on any future deals, good or bad we might make with these organisations moving forward.