HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Kadri or Gardiner for ROR? Dreger?

View Poll Results: Would you trade Kadri or Gardiner For ROR?
Kadri 21 5.60%
Gardiner 121 32.27%
Forget ROR 233 62.13%
Voters: 375. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-16-2013, 12:05 PM
  #626
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErnieLeafs View Post
We're talking about size.
Not the game.... not the game....

TieClark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:08 PM
  #627
ErnieLeafs
LOVE & LIVE the Game
 
ErnieLeafs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Windsor, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
Not the game.... not the game....
?

ErnieLeafs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:12 PM
  #628
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 62,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Interactif View Post
I can see Bozak but he has little value as a UFA, which means we have to probably part with Gardiner and Gardiner is probably enough to get it done alone.

If it's Gardiner and Bozak, I would want ROR and something else, perhaps Siemens?
Maybe the Leafs could just sign Bozak and keep Gardiner.

Leafs are going to get some draft picks this year, so they should draft and develop.

I'm not in a hurry to get to the mediocre stage.

__________________
http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/14...cording-forbes

The New York Rangers are the most valuable NHL franchise at $1.2 billion, taking the top spot on the Forbes list for the first time since 2004.

The magazine said Tuesday that Montreal is second at $1.18 billion, followed by Toronto at $1.15 billion.
ULF_55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:14 PM
  #629
The Winter Soldier
Registered User
 
The Winter Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 41,336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
Maybe the Leafs could just sign Bozak and keep Gardiner.

Leafs are going to get some draft picks this year, so they should draft and develop.

I'm not in a hurry to get to the mediocre stage.
I agree about not overpaying for ROR, Nonis will kick the tires but I bet Leafs are not the only team Sherman is talking to.

Draft/develop/promote

I have no problem with this model, remember I am the one that created the rebuild thread and the Boston model is what we should be striving to become.

The Winter Soldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:20 PM
  #630
johnny_rudeboy
Registered User
 
johnny_rudeboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Karlstad
Country: Sweden
Posts: 16,695
vCash: 50
I think the words you guys are looking for instead of size is intensity and determination. I personally much much rather have a smaller guy with a lot of intensity and determination then a big gentle giant like Colborne or Steckel.


ROR seem to be one of those who is energetic and have really good vision and hockey sense. You dont have that many takeaways with so few penalty minutes or giveaways if you dont.

I would like for us to make a trade with Colorado but then again I would not trade away Gardiner or Kadri to get him. Colorado have a shallow prospect pool but they have some talented defenders so what they need is forward prospects.

If Nonis & co truly believe ROR have #1 potential then of course even Kessel is in play and we should offer something like.

Kessel + Colborne + Kenny Ryan

for

O´Reilly + 1st -14 (If Kessel resigns)

But if they believe he "only" have 2nd line upside then Grabovski should be the roster player we offer (can of course retain some salary) and no first going our way from Avs. Prospects can remain the same.

This is of course if Nonis, like most GMs value defenders > centers > wingers.

johnny_rudeboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:30 PM
  #631
ErnieLeafs
LOVE & LIVE the Game
 
ErnieLeafs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Windsor, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny_rudeboy View Post
I think the words you guys are looking for instead of size is intensity and determination. I personally much much rather have a smaller guy with a lot of intensity and determination then a big gentle giant like Colborne or Steckel.


ROR seem to be one of those who is energetic and have really good vision and hockey sense. You dont have that many takeaways with so few penalty minutes or giveaways if you dont.

I would like for us to make a trade with Colorado but then again I would not trade away Gardiner or Kadri to get him. Colorado have a shallow prospect pool but they have some talented defenders so what they need is forward prospects.

If Nonis & co truly believe ROR have #1 potential then of course even Kessel is in play and we should offer something like.

Kessel + Colborne + Kenny Ryan

for

O´Reilly + 1st -14 (If Kessel resigns)

But if they believe he "only" have 2nd line upside then Grabovski should be the roster player we offer (can of course retain some salary) and no first going our way from Avs. Prospects can remain the same.

This is of course if Nonis, like most GMs value defenders > centers > wingers.
No. We're actually talking about physical size here.

ErnieLeafs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:31 PM
  #632
johnny_rudeboy
Registered User
 
johnny_rudeboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Karlstad
Country: Sweden
Posts: 16,695
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErnieLeafs View Post
No. We're actually talking about physical size here.
Is there really much to talk about then? The numbers are out there. Give and take an inch and 10-20 lbs.

johnny_rudeboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:33 PM
  #633
12345*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny_rudeboy View Post
Is there really much to talk about then? The numbers are out there. Give and take an inch and 10-20 lbs.
20 pounds of weight equates to a huge difference in strength and sturdiness on skates.

12345* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:37 PM
  #634
johnny_rudeboy
Registered User
 
johnny_rudeboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Karlstad
Country: Sweden
Posts: 16,695
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12345 View Post
20 pounds of weight equates to a huge difference in strength and sturdiness on skates.
I know, was just implying that the official numbers are not 100% accurate.

johnny_rudeboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:39 PM
  #635
The Winter Soldier
Registered User
 
The Winter Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 41,336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny_rudeboy View Post
Is there really much to talk about then? The numbers are out there. Give and take an inch and 10-20 lbs.
I just posted about Josua Leivo he was 6'2 180 when drafted, he has the height but he needs to fill in, weight/mass has a lot to do with size. As does as you mentioned a willingness to use your frame.

Mike Richards is a bigger player than Dave Steckel and he is 6 inches shorter and 35 lbs lighter, some just want to argue for the sake of trying to look smarter than what they truly are, that poster you are conversing with is rarely right anyway. Just a whole lot of hot air that lingers around this room.

The Winter Soldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:42 PM
  #636
slozo
Registered User
 
slozo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Newmarket, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,439
vCash: 500
A lot of children (or demented adults?) on this topic trying to prove how smart they are, it would seem. Thankfully, some have attempted to illuminate others on practical word definitions here - it appears our education system has failed us!

Size - a quantative, PHYSICAL measurement.
Yes, some big guys play tough and "big"; and some big guys play a softer, less physical game. But in the end, they will always have size, they will always be big. Large in stature. Players with size. Etc.

Gritty, physical player - an observable STYLE of play
Size has no bearing here, and neither does skill - it only has to do with how physical and punishing and gritty a player can be. From the highest skilled Gilmours and Clarkes of the past, to the toughest in a guy like Domi (to a previous poster - he was only about 5'9", always listed as many inches taller) . . . many smaller, slighter, shorter players can "play big" without being big. That's not to say that Mats Sundin, a big player at 6'3" and over 220lbs I believe, was any cupcake; he played big and he was big.

Goodness, feel like I'm in school again here!

Ryan O'Reilly plays very big. He's also got mad skills - takeaways is a stat not for the faint of talent. Yeah, he's probably around 5'11" only if given a true measurement . . . but he is a skilled player with grit.

And he's got a lot of promise. Enough promise and leadership qualities that . . . I'd be willing to be happy with a slight overpayment to get him (which is what it will likely take).

The kid's got game, and he hasn't come close to peaking yet, is my guess.

Let's get him.

slozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:45 PM
  #637
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 62,285
vCash: 500
Speculation: Kadri or Gardiner for ROR? Dreger?

Okay now that we have defined the definition of this thread we'll all stay on topic and leave the petty bickering behind.

ULF_55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:45 PM
  #638
The Winter Soldier
Registered User
 
The Winter Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 41,336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slozo View Post
A lot of children (or demented adults?) on this topic trying to prove how smart they are, it would seem. Thankfully, some have attempted to illuminate others on practical word definitions here - it appears our education system has failed us!

Size - a quantative, PHYSICAL measurement.
Yes, some big guys play tough and "big"; and some big guys play a softer, less physical game. But in the end, they will always have size, they will always be big. Large in stature. Players with size. Etc.

Gritty, physical player - an observable STYLE of play
Size has no bearing here, and neither does skill - it only has to do with how physical and punishing and gritty a player can be. From the highest skilled Gilmours and Clarkes of the past, to the toughest in a guy like Domi (to a previous poster - he was only about 5'9", always listed as many inches taller) . . . many smaller, slighter, shorter players can "play big" without being big. That's not to say that Mats Sundin, a big player at 6'3" and over 220lbs I believe, was any cupcake; he played big and he was big.

Goodness, feel like I'm in school again here!

Ryan O'Reilly plays very big. He's also got mad skills - takeaways is a stat not for the faint of talent. Yeah, he's probably around 5'11" only if given a true measurement . . . but he is a skilled player with grit.

And he's got a lot of promise. Enough promise and leadership qualities that . . . I'd be willing to be happy with a slight overpayment to get him (which is what it will likely take).

The kid's got game, and he hasn't come close to peaking yet, is my guess.

Let's get him.
An excellent post, if it took all that to get to this, it was worth it.

The Winter Soldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:49 PM
  #639
ErnieLeafs
LOVE & LIVE the Game
 
ErnieLeafs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Windsor, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slozo View Post
A lot of children (or demented adults?) on this topic trying to prove how smart they are, it would seem. Thankfully, some have attempted to illuminate others on practical word definitions here - it appears our education system has failed us!

Size - a quantative, PHYSICAL measurement.
Yes, some big guys play tough and "big"; and some big guys play a softer, less physical game. But in the end, they will always have size, they will always be big. Large in stature. Players with size. Etc.


Gritty, physical player - an observable STYLE of play
Size has no bearing here, and neither does skill - it only has to do with how physical and punishing and gritty a player can be. From the highest skilled Gilmours and Clarkes of the past, to the toughest in a guy like Domi (to a previous poster - he was only about 5'9", always listed as many inches taller) . . . many smaller, slighter, shorter players can "play big" without being big. That's not to say that Mats Sundin, a big player at 6'3" and over 220lbs I believe, was any cupcake; he played big and he was big.

Goodness, feel like I'm in school again here!

Ryan O'Reilly plays very big. He's also got mad skills - takeaways is a stat not for the faint of talent. Yeah, he's probably around 5'11" only if given a true measurement . . . but he is a skilled player with grit.

And he's got a lot of promise. Enough promise and leadership qualities that . . . I'd be willing to be happy with a slight overpayment to get him (which is what it will likely take).

The kid's got game, and he hasn't come close to peaking yet, is my guess.

Let's get him.
Thanks for ending the fuss.

ErnieLeafs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:55 PM
  #640
zeke
#freewilly
 
zeke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 32,720
vCash: 500
Does Colarado even miss the great O'Rielly?

seems they're about the same team this year as they were last year, and that's with Johnny Malkin filling O'Rielly's slot (and producing just as much as O'Rielly did, but with more physical play to boot).

zeke is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 12:57 PM
  #641
ErnieLeafs
LOVE & LIVE the Game
 
ErnieLeafs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Windsor, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeke View Post
Does Colarado even miss the great O'Rielly?

seems they're about the same team this year as they were last year, and that's with Johnny Malkin filling O'Rielly's slot (and producing just as much as O'Rielly did, but with more physical play to boot).
Trade Gardiner for Johnny Malkin!

In all honesty, though, Mitchell has been really solid so far. I really like the way he's played.

ErnieLeafs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 01:08 PM
  #642
dimi78
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamond Joe Quimby View Post
One thing I think people are forgetting is that he's the youngest of the three, and has had by far the most success at the NHL level.
I wouldn't trade both for O'Reilly. But to claim that somehow he does not, individually, have the most value of the three is asinine. Now is he worth 5M a year at this point of his career, hell no.
Age means nothing in this case do to all 3 are young and have long careers a head of them.

IMO it's about attributes and skill level that we should be looking at with young guys not what RoR did production wise last season... Kadri in his draft year was rated 2nd only to Taveres in skill and the only reason why he went 7th and not higher was do to his size that he's currently developing. RoR is nowhere near the skill level that Kadri has and the offensive attributes he has period.

The love affair with RoR is about his age thinking just because he's 22 that there will be rise in production on what he did last season because of that, that's the mistake in thinking that cost this organization Rask, Do we really want to risk repeating that mistake by including either of Kadri or Gardiner to get RoR?

RoR is a good player but he's no future #1 center to start giving up young players that have a higher end skill set to get him just because he's broken out before them. How do we not know this is the best RoR will ever be? What happens if and really when Kadri breaks out? Gardiner last year was named to the 1st team all rookie team and we would not include him to get Nash yet we're willing to trade him for a question mark that has played no better than Bozak? Crazy I say and if Nonis trades either Gardiner, Kadri or Reilly for RoR he should be fired.

dimi78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 01:22 PM
  #643
Nifty Mittens43
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 45
vCash: 500
The only deal that I would do would be Bozak, Percy, and maybe a pick besides our first. Makes no sense to move Kadri the way hes playing right now and Gardiners a special talent thats hard to find. If Colarado doesn't wanna do this, then move on and go find a TRUE #1 centre

Nifty Mittens43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 01:25 PM
  #644
Count Von Grabo*
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Halifax
Posts: 977
vCash: 500
Neither. ROR is hella overrated. scores 17 goals and is hyped as a star.

Count Von Grabo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 01:28 PM
  #645
The Magic Man
With God given hands
 
The Magic Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,077
vCash: 500
Team needs:

1C, 2D, 3C, possible 1G.

Player in question:

2C.

Number of 2C's currently on the team:

3. 1 with possible 1C potential.

Conundrum:

Trade potential 2D or potential 1C for our 4th 2C, because he would be the better defensive center.


Sure. Makes sense to me.

The Magic Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 01:34 PM
  #646
dcervi*
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 288
vCash: 500
I dont think we should go after this guy and trade for him with our top assets. If anything we should trade our assets for better proven players on colorado or trade our assets for better players on other teams. I mean, what has he even accomplished in this league? This scenerio reminds me of the kyle Turris episode. An unproven player that appears to be over-confident, full of himself and greedy who is looking for a lot of money (Apparently ROR is looking for 5 million?)... eff that man

dcervi* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 01:39 PM
  #647
therealkoho
Gary says it's A-OK
 
therealkoho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: the Prior
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,405
vCash: 500
Gardiner for ROR is a non starter

The Leaf PP is somewhere south of non-existent right now, Gardiner once healthy changes that considerably, ROR does not

Kadri for ROR is an overpayment in my books

Kadri according to the experts who work the game is all blue sky, the kid has all the major tools needed to become a very high level NHL player. ROR is what he is which is a very good 2 way guy who is probably going to have a better career as a 3rd line center then as anything higher. I know he can handle a 2 line, but thats no different really then saying Bozak can handle a 1 line. You can either have a player who excels at "his" level or a guy who is merely able to handle the job.

Kadri and Gardiner together for this player is ludicrous

therealkoho is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 01:50 PM
  #648
birddog*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny_rudeboy View Post
I think the words you guys are looking for instead of size is intensity and determination. I personally much much rather have a smaller guy with a lot of intensity and determination then a big gentle giant like Colborne or Steckel.


ROR seem to be one of those who is energetic and have really good vision and hockey sense. You dont have that many takeaways with so few penalty minutes or giveaways if you dont.

I would like for us to make a trade with Colorado but then again I would not trade away Gardiner or Kadri to get him. Colorado have a shallow prospect pool but they have some talented defenders so what they need is forward prospects.

If Nonis & co truly believe ROR have #1 potential then of course even Kessel is in play and we should offer something like.

Kessel + Colborne + Kenny Ryan

for

O´Reilly + 1st -14 (If Kessel resigns)

But if they believe he "only" have 2nd line upside then Grabovski should be the roster player we offer (can of course retain some salary) and no first going our way from Avs. Prospects can remain the same.

This is of course if Nonis, like most GMs value defenders > centers > wingers.
#1 potential comes with a pedigree. ROR never scored 20 goals even in junior. ROR never had a PPG in junior. ROR played on one of the worst team in the OHL -- Erie. Sidney Crosby, Lindros, Tavares etc. never played on a team that bad because they made there team much better. ROR was a minus player last year. ROR's line-mate, Landeskog, was a plus 20. ROR is supposed to be a premier penalty killer, but he was 9th on the team with just over a minute per game short handed. Jay McClement was first with almost 3 times as much, at over 3 minutes. ROR was drafted in the second round because there were concerns about his skating and size. He has improved his skating, but he will never be an elite skater. ROR does not pocess a great shot. ROR had 62 hits last year. Landeskog had 219. ROR will never be an elite center. In fact I am going to go out on a limb and say he may never top 55 points. He certainly might but 65 points would be his absolute top end. He simply isn't this dominant center that many are making him out to be. He is a gritty, two way center, with some passing ability -- but he will never be in the HOF.

Is he worth something? Yes. Is he a good player? Yes. Is he worth 5 million? No. Is he worth Gardiner? No.

Let's not get too carried away. Remember Nikolai Kulemin scored 30 a couple years ago and he was so young - 40 was a possibility. Now, 20 would be nice. Just because a player is 22 doesn't mean you add 10 points a year until he's 28 and then start subtracting.

Fact, Patrice Bergeron, the player ROR is so often compared to (even though he doesn't skate as well, nor is he as good on draws) scored 73 points as a 20 year old -- 7 years later it remains his best offensive season. As a 21 year old he put up 3 points less. He's had seasons of 39, 52, 57, and 64.

So the whole point of this thread is -- PERSPECTIVE -- what's a gritty, two-way center with 55 points worth? Cause he will never be a PPG player. Did I also mention Bergeron scored 62 points in 38 games in junior? ROR has never been a PPG player in junior or the NHL.

birddog* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 01:53 PM
  #649
birddog*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
Speculation: Kadri or Gardiner for ROR? Dreger?

Okay now that we have defined the definition of this thread we'll all stay on topic and leave the petty bickering behind.
I would not, could not trade Kadri or Gardiner for Dreger.

birddog* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2013, 01:57 PM
  #650
Porn*
Registered User
 
Porn*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In your nightmares
Country: Israel
Posts: 35,903
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Porn*
If we made a move I'd prefer to include gardener over Kari as we need offensive forwards and have an abundance of dmen

Porn* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:28 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.