[Trade] Andersson (50% retained) to Vegas for 27 1st, cond 28 2nd, Whitecloud, Wiebe

[442scotty]

First game but Whitecloud looked like he belongs. I get good vibes about him. He’s certainly younger than Weegar and Hanley. More headaches for Conroy over the D.
On another note it’s funny how the bickering bunch on here seamlessly move on to the next thing to argue about. It’s like watching a sitcom but for real.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by jayswin

The point was the calling out "negative" posters for "whining" leading up to the trade. His post was not unlike any number of posters that he was calling out, and that's fine. There's a race to be positive because it's human nature to not want to hear negative feelings, unless you yourself want to express negative feelings because you're frustrated then that is separated out from the rest because it's you. Human nature.

To clarify, I do not have a problem with constructive criticism. Most of the issues I have with certain posters is their intentional manipulation of the facts, misrepresentation of what others have said, and flat out making stuff up.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

All I know is that Brz played about a minute and a half more than he did the previous game.

And he looked good!

Hard to judge the impact of a trade after one game.

I may hate Huska's system, but I don't think he is out there plotting against young players.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by jayswin

The point was the calling out "negative" posters for "whining" leading up to the trade. His post was not unlike any number of posters that he was calling out, and that's fine. There's a race to be positive because it's human nature to not want to hear negative feelings, unless you yourself want to express negative feelings because you're frustrated then that is separated out from the rest because it's you. Human nature.

Missed out on a the rumored better returns that came with an extension, just like i said.

However the rental return was much better than I had anticipated, especially since it came from Vegas.

My vote in the poll reflects that and I am pretty happy.

And I certainly didn't whine and complain lol

Nice try though

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The sad thing is, the actual trade was a great deal better than what Roof-Daddy was complaining about in advance – ‘a late first and some mid prospect’.

It's a bit sad when people have to borrow things from the future to complain about… and when the future arrives, they can't afford to pay back what they owe.

Anybody who thinks Roof-Daddy ‘called it’ by leaving out the 2nd (which can convert to a 1st) and a tough right-shot #4 defenceman on a good contract… well, let's just say I would not trust them to count the eggs in my egg carton.

I certainly didn't call it, except that he wasn't going to sign an extension sion before the trade that is.

This return was impressive given the situation.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

New guy with the most TOI.

"Not taking any ice from the rookies"

Well played CC, well played.

Originally Posted by DoubleK

When did Bahl start playing the right side?

You CC fans are becoming delusional

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Pinder and I are over here being wrong.

The math isn't mathing.

If you're going to trash talk an entire fanbase, you might want to try and understand what you're talking about first.

1) As far as "taking any ice time from the rookies" goes, Brzustewicz's ice time was UP. His avg TOI is 13:45 and he played 15:58 last night. Parekh is on a conditioning stint in the AHL. When he comes back, someone else will come out of the lineup.

2) With respect to Flames fans being 'delusional' Bahl does in fact play the left side, but WTF does that have to do with ice time distribution? There are 6 Dmen, and Whitecloud slotted in on the right side, taking Andersson's spot. Sometimes there can be 2 lefties, or 2 righties on the ice (it happens). Also, there is usually only 1 Dman on during the PP, who can be either a leftie or a rightie, so distribution of ice time is not 100% left-right linear (but you're sitting around with Pinder doing the math, so I would assume you'd know that).

3) First of all, just because someone else (Pinder) made the same mistake as you, that doesn't make you right. Second, if you're going to start talking math, get a clue about how it works. There are 120 minutes of ice time available for defensemen in a game (plus 2XOT). Andersson averages 24:14 per game, and that 24:14 has been removed. Whitecloud was inserted in his place, playing 22:33, which is a shortfall of a little under 1 minute. That means there was almost a minute of EXTRA time for other defenders.

Your posts were antagonistic and intentional trolling. And beyond that, they were arrogant and condescending. And yet, they were also flat out wrong. So you deserve whatever pushback you get.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Pinder is wrong about a lot of things, but I thought he could at least do simple arithmetic on two-digit numbers.

When I do watch Barn Burner I spend most of the time shaking my head at his takes.

[Enoch Root]

It's interesting to watch the distribution of the bell curve in the poll. The bottom side (disapproval) out-weighed the top side (approval), by a fair margin at first. But the gap steadily closed, and now it has tiled the other way (more approvals than disapprovals).

And I would venture to guess that if we re-did the poll now, after people have had time to digest, and see Whitecloud in action, I would guess that it would tilt a fair bit more to the positive than it does.

On the flip side, I know there is a lot of hate towards VGS, and a strong 'anybody but them' sentiment, but upon reflection, I can't imagine that very many people could conclude that VGS won this trade: they paid a 1st, a C prospect, and a 2nd that could become a 1st, to upgrade from Whitecloud to Andersson. Andersson is clearly a better player than Whitecloud, and offense is more valuable (and rare) than defense, but is Andersson a 1st + 2nd better than Whitecloud? That's a tough argument to make, IMO.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Inferno

When I do watch Barn Burner I spend most of the time shaking my head at his takes.

It's been said a hundred times on CP already, but the guys on Barnburner understand that only strong, or extreme, takes generate viewership. No one is going to watch 3 guys agree and be level-headed, for one or two hours, everyday. You want viewership, you have to take extreme positions. That is the nature, and strategy, of talk shows.

Anyone who quotes them as an appeal to authority, needs to consider them through that filter first. But he ones who usually claim that appeal, rarely seem to.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

It's been said a hundred times on CP already, but the guys on Barnburner understand that only strong, or extreme, takes generate viewership. No one is going to watch 3 guys agree and be level-headed, for one or two hours, everyday. You want viewership, you have to take extreme positions. That is the nature, and strategy, of talk shows.

Anyone who quotes them as an appeal to authority, needs to consider them through that filter first. But he ones who usually claim that appeal, rarely seem to.

It’s pretty obvious when they’re being intentionally hyperbolic.

Also, disagreement with views doesn’t equal irrationality. It's often good to take a moment and reflect on our own biases (Naïve realism). There’s a tendency here for people to assume that because they personally don’t agree, they’re therefore the “rational” ones in the room.

A lot of their takes are just reflecting a segment of fan sentiment rather than inventing extreme positions out of thin air.

And it’s not like they were roasting the trade. They were largely fine with it and, at times, were actively promoting it.

[taxbuster]

The poll results are pretty much a classic, if mildly flattened, Bell Curve: 50% average, with 20% wings, and 5%(ish) fringe. Not surprising at all.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

It's been said a hundred times on CP already, but the guys on Barnburner understand that only strong, or extreme, takes generate viewership. No one is going to watch 3 guys agree and be level-headed, for one or two hours, everyday. You want viewership, you have to take extreme positions. That is the nature, and strategy, of talk shows.

Anyone who quotes them as an appeal to authority, needs to consider them through that filter first. But he ones who usually claim that appeal, rarely seem to.

This is pretty much why I find BB unwatchable.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by traptor

Also, disagreement with views doesn’t equal irrationality. It's often good to take a moment and reflect on our own biases (Naïve realism). There’s a tendency here for people to assume that because they personally don’t agree, they’re therefore the “rational” ones in the room.

I don't have a problem with him having a different view than me on a subject. He can just come off as too doom and gloom. And it's rubbed off on the other two this season which is why I barely watch. I only tuned in yesterday because of the trade.

[TheScorpion]

Now, AfterBurner on the other hand is extremely measured and thoughtful, and the hosts are better-looking.

[MolsonInBothHands]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

It's interesting to watch the distribution of the bell curve in the poll. The bottom side (disapproval) out-weighed the top side (approval), by a fair margin at first. But the gap steadily closed, and now it has tiled the other way (more approvals than disapprovals).

And I would venture to guess that if we re-did the poll now, after people have had time to digest, and see Whitecloud in action, I would guess that it would tilt a fair bit more to the positive than it does.

On the flip side, I know there is a lot of hate towards VGS, and a strong 'anybody but them' sentiment, but upon reflection, I can't imagine that very many people could conclude that VGS won this trade: they paid a 1st, a C prospect, and a 2nd that could become a 1st, to upgrade from Whitecloud to Andersson. Andersson is clearly a better player than Whitecloud, and offense is more valuable (and rare) than defense, but is Andersson a 1st + 2nd better than Whitecloud? That's a tough argument to make, IMO.

Add to that, Whitecloud is in a very team friendly contract beyond Rasmus' expiry. It was never so much about Rasmus' age, it was about he hunting for his big long term payday which doesn't line up with the window the Flames are trying to frame. NHL defensemen usually don't show what they are going to really be until 27 years old, so people b!tching about 29 years are missing the mark, IMHO.

I would like to see until the trade deadline how Whitecloud fits in. Yesterday was a pleasant surprise, but it shouldn't be that surprising. Everyone thought Bahl was a unnecessary throw in too.

Weegar is the one I am most unimpressed with. He looks beleaguered and defeated most times. If he is playing through an injury we don't know about, now would be the time to pull him and address it. Trade Treliving a bargain basement D, Pachal, Hanley, or Bean if possible. Trade Lomberg if possible. Keep evaluating.

[Johnny Makarov]

hmm i wouldn't mind keeping Whitecloud. He was pretty great in the 1st Vegas cup trip to the finals.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by MolsonInBothHands

Add to that, Whitecloud is in a very team friendly contract beyond Rasmus' expiry. It was never so much about Rasmus' age, it was about he hunting for his big long term payday which doesn't line up with the window the Flames are trying to frame. NHL defensemen usually don't show what they are going to really be until 27 years old, so people b!tching about 29 years are missing the mark, IMHO.

I would like to see until the trade deadline how Whitecloud fits in. Yesterday was a pleasant surprise, but it shouldn't be that surprising. Everyone thought Bahl was a unnecessary throw in too.

Weegar is the one I am most unimpressed with. He looks beleaguered and defeated most times. If he is playing through an injury we don't know about, now would be the time to pull him and address it. Trade Treliving a bargain basement D, Pachal, Hanley, or Bean if possible. Trade Lomberg if possible. Keep evaluating.

TBF, last season Weegar was great and Andersson wasn't. Players have off years, GMs know this, and it probably shouldn't affect the long term plans either way.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Now, AfterBurner on the other hand is extremely measured and thoughtful, and the hosts are better-looking.

I can't recall if I have mentioned it on here before, but you and Cami have great on-air chemistry and work very well together.

[Johnny Makarov]

Weegar is so bad this year you could prob only get a 2nd rounder for him.

[MolsonInBothHands]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

TBF, last season Weegar was great and Andersson wasn't. Players have off years, GMs know this, and it probably shouldn't affect the long term plans either way.

To clarify, I am not advocating to trade Weegar, yet, with the caveat that if a great offer arrives for him, you certainly take it. I am saying if there is an injury, there is no reason to keep him in the line up right now. Fix it.