[Trade] Tkachuk (8 yrs x $9.5 mil) + `25 4th to FLA for Huberdeau, Weegar, Schwindt & `25 1st

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Saqe

Try harder? Or get a life lol.

Does getting a life mean waking up in the morning and feeding a bullkyit story to homers on a Flame site? lol I will try that tomorrow since it's almost 11am.

Tips. Maybe don't make crap up in a thread that has what you posted before? hahahahahaha

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yeah and I said more or less what I recall, which was essentially that people were overrating Huberdeau but that Weegar was a really good pickup, and that they absolutely should not sign Huberdeau to a long term deal until they'd had a chance to see him play for a while in a Flames uniform to see how it would go, because unlike Tkachuk he wasn't a real offensive driver in his own right and that any long term deal would age poorly.

So yeah, not misremembering anything. I also hated the Huberdeau contract but was very in favour of the Weegar one for the same reasons. If I was wrong about something it was how fast Huberdeau would fall off a cliff, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who saw that coming.

From Florida's perspective, it always seemed like a great deal from my perspective. I wasn't sure if it would work out for the Flames, but I was sure it would be great for the Panthers.

- They were trading a 29 year old exiting his prime for a 24 year old entering his prime. Adding Weegar+ was a fair amount for that upgrade.

- The forward they were getting back was a more complete player that already had similar point production to the one they were trading. It was like trading one of those full sized poodles for a German Shephard. Both are big dogs that might win you best in show, but one will also guard your home.

- The two roster players that Panthers were giving up were on expiring deals and their cap situation pretty much assured that at least one of them would have to be sacrificed after the following season, so they were giving up one or possibly two short term assets for a better long term asset.

[Saqe]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

When debating opinions there isn't really a definition of reality.

If someone is ignoring actual facts that's different. But that's not what we are talking about in most cases on this site.

And you don't think when someone has outlined their views, that someone calling them a "homer" is not insulting?

If there are people who always defend what the Flames do, that is homerism. It's not reality. Also it is a very uninteresting position to take. You seem to say that if a person can in any way justify their opinion (every idea can be justified because ideas are malleable) it should be considered and valued. I totally disagree, some ideas are simply bad.

[BigThief]

Sage woke up this morning and decided today is the day he's going to crawl on that soap box and be right about everything

[Calgary Highlander]

It was a good trade at the time. The mistake was the emotional response in committing the Gaudreau deal to Huberdeau without evaluating fit.

If you flip Huberdeau or sign him to a discounted contract based on his 2022-2023 performance, then it's a good trade considering your other option was to walk Tkachuk to free agency.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by BigThief

Sage woke up this morning and decided today is the day he's going to crawl on that soap box and be right about everything

Hard to imagine what has had to go wrong to be a guy who takes his hockey opinions on the internet that seriously.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Saqe

"For the record" I also remember you (I think?) defending me because I hadn't logged on for a while and people were ####ting on me for what I said about Huberdeau. Saying something like it's not fair because I'm not here to defend myself. Good deeds are remembered!


Yes, there are some complete homers on this site that feel the need to defend everything the Flames do, no need to mention names.

I'm pretty optimistic so I probably fall into that group.

I don't like the term "homers'. ... it's a label that attempts to make any point that person makes as tainted.

I think a person can be more negative and still be a fan, and more positive and not be a homer.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Saqe

I mean if calling people homers, when they are homers, is somehow insulting then that's on them. It's the truth. I don't go on here everyday yelling and being a nazi about it.

What makes you the expert on who a homer is?

Personally I don't see you as the homer expert with a degree in homerism.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Unfortunately, this further proves it's a lot easier to score in the East than the West, in my opinion. Huberdeau has had to adjust, albeit very slowly but he has. He's a completely different forward than what he was in Florida, at the cost of significant production loss.

I think it shows more how player production in general can be situational. Huberdeau was probably the 3rd or 4th best forward in Florida. That gave them the luxury of playing him on the 2nd line where he didn't have the hardest match-ups and could play without the reins on.

Then going to Calgary and expecting him to be the number one forward on the 1st line, it's just not the dude that he is. Even in Florida, when they played him on the top line with Barkov, his production would go down. He's just an easier player to defend against compared to other star players, so the tough match-up just never worked out great for him.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Saqe

If there are people who always defend what the Flames do, that is homerism. It's not reality. Also it is a very uninteresting position to take. You seem to say that if a person can in any way justify their opinion (every idea can be justified because ideas are malleable) it should be considered and valued. I totally disagree, some ideas are simply bad.

What if a person has a 70/30 split towards optimism? Are they homers? Are they uninteresting?

You're digging deeper and deeper on this topic in my mind.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

From Florida's perspective, it always seemed like a great deal from my perspective. I wasn't sure if it would work out for the Flames, but I was sure it would be great for the Panthers.

- They were trading a 29 year old exiting his prime for a 24 year old entering his prime. Adding Weegar+ was a fair amount for that upgrade.

- The forward they were getting back was a more complete player that already had similar point production to the one they were trading. It was like trading one of those full sized poodles for a German Shephard. Both are big dogs that might win you best in show, but one will also guard your home.

- The two roster players that Panthers were giving up were on expiring deals and their cap situation pretty much assured that at least one of them would have to be sacrificed after the following season, so they were giving up one or possibly two short term assets for a better long term asset.

The fact Weegar abd Huberdeau were UFAs was certainly a factor in Fla's favour. But it's a bit of a stretch to say a guy still in his 20s who just scored 115 points and set an assist record for his position would be seen as "exiting his prime".

And Tkachuk a "more complete player"? I don't know about that. More physical? Yeah. Better passer? No. Better skater? No, both sub par. Better defensively? Neither were good at that.

[Burning Beard]

The internet is weird, man.

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by Bingo

What if a person has a 70/30 split towards optimism? Are they homers? Are they uninteresting?

You're digging deeper and deeper on this topic in my mind.

dino7c or or however. That guy is a bonefide Homer. Textcritic too.

[dino7c]

Its still a good trade at the time, the best value available for a player that wasnt going to sign. The 10.5M contract and Huberdeau's drop in play is what killed it.

Weegar has been good and still has high value, Potter might be a player. Not sure why this needed bumped we have been over it 1 million times, without guessing I could have made 4 (max) guesses who bumped it and would have been correct.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by BigThief

dino7c or or however. That guy is a bonefide Homer. Textcritic too.

You are a bonefide hater...its so interesting to complain about everything and let a ####ing kids game ruin your mental health lol
nothing matters, we're all gonna die. You guys can't enjoy a game.

I sat back with a brewski saturday night and watch the Flames dominate a game...some people were worried about a draft pick all night.

[Saqe]

Originally Posted by Bingo

What makes you the expert on who a homer is?

Personally I don't see you as the homer expert with a degree in homerism.

Weird comment.

Originally Posted by Bingo

What if a person has a 70/30 split towards optimism? Are they homers? Are they uninteresting?

You're digging deeper and deeper on this topic in my mind.

I said if people are 100% pro Flames and literally defend everything, it's uninteresting. And homerism. You are the one doing the digging here.

[GioforPM]

Having a bias towards the home team on a fan site seems pretty normal. As long as facts aren't misrepresented, it seems preferable to being automatically biased against whatever the team does.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Its still a good trade at the time, the best value available for a player that wasnt going to sign. The 10.5M contract and Huberdeau's drop in play is what killed it.

Weegar has been good and still has high value, Potter might be a player. Not sure why this needed bumped we have been over it 1 million times, without guessing I could have made 4 (max) guesses who bumped it and would have been correct.

Yep, trade was good. If they had flipped Huberdeau and kept Monahan we'd be praising it today still.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Saqe

Weird comment.




I said if people are 100% pro Flames and literally defend everything, it's uninteresting. And homerism. You are the one doing the digging here.

What about people who say one thing at the time and then try to say I told you so years later with a point the contradicts what they initially said

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by DJones

Yep, trade was good. If they had flipped Huberdeau and kept Monahan we'd be praising it today still.

We will see what Kadri returns...the Monahan trade tree this has branches