Roman Polak to Toronto for Carl Gunnarsson and Pick 94
Moderator: LGB Mods
Re: Roman Polak to Toronto for Carl Gunnarsson and Pick 94
This trade still pisses me off.
Re: Roman Polak to Toronto for Carl Gunnarsson and Pick 94
It won't when Husso starts winning Vezina's on the regular.STLADOGG wrote:This trade still pisses me off.
2015-2016 Official LGB Sponsor of Jaden Schwartz (IR) & The Hockey Gods
2014-2015 Official LGB Sponsor of T.J. Oshie
2013-2014 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2012-2013 Official LGB Sponsor of Ryan Reaves
2011-2012 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko
2014-2015 Official LGB Sponsor of T.J. Oshie
2013-2014 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2012-2013 Official LGB Sponsor of Ryan Reaves
2011-2012 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko
Re: Roman Polak to Toronto for Carl Gunnarsson and Pick 94
Lol, yeah. That's as good of a guarantee as any I guess.ViPeRx007 wrote:It won't when Husso starts winning Vezina's on the regular.STLADOGG wrote:This trade still pisses me off.
- dmiles2186
- Hockey God
- Posts: 7288
- Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Selling Air Bombays--for kids who want to coach
Re: Roman Polak to Toronto for Carl Gunnarsson and Pick 94
No, it didn't strike me as a significant problem. But per JR and other sources, the Blues were looking for a compatible lefty shot to play w/ Shattenkirk, that's all I meant.ecbm wrote:Did Shattenkirk not playing with a left-handed shot strike you as a significant problem last season? Never really occurred to me. I think the thing Army actually wanted here was the draft pick-and I have no problem with that especially considering the Blues' D prospects. Still leaves me to speculate as to what the front office has planned to address needs...dmiles2186 wrote:It addresses the need to have a lefty shot to pair with Shattenkirk, which has been stated.ecbm wrote:I can't see how the moves so far address the team's shortcomings. THAT'S WHY WE'RE READING INTO THINGS, ARMY!!!
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Not Ott, because he is a booger-eating dumb dumb
Re: Roman Polak to Toronto for Carl Gunnarsson and Pick 94
Given our meager PP, pairing up right- and left-handed shooting D could be a significant improvement. Much better one-timer opportunities, which were sorely missing from the blue line when the good guys were on the power play.dmiles2186 wrote:No, it didn't strike me as a significant problem. But per JR and other sources, the Blues were looking for a compatible lefty shot to play w/ Shattenkirk, that's all I meant.ecbm wrote:Did Shattenkirk not playing with a left-handed shot strike you as a significant problem last season? Never really occurred to me. I think the thing Army actually wanted here was the draft pick-and I have no problem with that especially considering the Blues' D prospects. Still leaves me to speculate as to what the front office has planned to address needs...dmiles2186 wrote:It addresses the need to have a lefty shot to pair with Shattenkirk, which has been stated.ecbm wrote:I can't see how the moves so far address the team's shortcomings. THAT'S WHY WE'RE READING INTO THINGS, ARMY!!!
2018 - 2019 Official sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko
2017 - 2018 Official sponsor of Joel "Top Shelf" Edmundson
2016 - 2017 Official sponsor of Nail "THE YAK" Yakupov
2017 - 2018 Official sponsor of Joel "Top Shelf" Edmundson
2016 - 2017 Official sponsor of Nail "THE YAK" Yakupov
Re: Roman Polak to Toronto for Carl Gunnarsson and Pick 94
This.ComradeT wrote:Given our meager PP, pairing up right- and left-handed shooting D could be a significant improvement. Much better one-timer opportunities, which were sorely missing from the blue line when the good guys were on the power play.dmiles2186 wrote:No, it didn't strike me as a significant problem. But per JR and other sources, the Blues were looking for a compatible lefty shot to play w/ Shattenkirk, that's all I meant.ecbm wrote:Did Shattenkirk not playing with a left-handed shot strike you as a significant problem last season? Never really occurred to me. I think the thing Army actually wanted here was the draft pick-and I have no problem with that especially considering the Blues' D prospects. Still leaves me to speculate as to what the front office has planned to address needs...dmiles2186 wrote:It addresses the need to have a lefty shot to pair with Shattenkirk, which has been stated.ecbm wrote:I can't see how the moves so far address the team's shortcomings. THAT'S WHY WE'RE READING INTO THINGS, ARMY!!!
What we lost in toughness with this trade, we make up for with improved puck movement, which should ultimately mean more scoring chances. If this improves our powerplay then I'm all for it. I think it will.
2015-2016 Official LGB Sponsor of Jaden Schwartz (IR) & The Hockey Gods
2014-2015 Official LGB Sponsor of T.J. Oshie
2013-2014 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2012-2013 Official LGB Sponsor of Ryan Reaves
2011-2012 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko
2014-2015 Official LGB Sponsor of T.J. Oshie
2013-2014 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2012-2013 Official LGB Sponsor of Ryan Reaves
2011-2012 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko
Re: Roman Polak to Toronto for Carl Gunnarsson and Pick 94
Getting Gunnarsson and Husso for Polak was a very good trade (as long as Gunnarsson's hip heals successfully-which it should). Gunnarsson may not be the classical "crease clearer with a nasty streak), but he has for years played consistently well in his own zone vs. opponents' #1 and #2 lines, and played with poise against hard forechecking. Unlike Polak, he doesn't panic and lose the puck on a turnover, or just dump it off the wall, only for the opponents to skate it right back in. He also can skate the puck away from trouble, and out of the defensive zone, and make the good first pass, starting up the offence. Polak does little of that very well. Playing next to either Shattenkirk OR Pietrangelo, he gives The Blues 4 defencemen who are capable of skating the puck out of trouble, leading the rush, and starting the offence off quickly, before defenders can get into position. He eats up a LOT of minutes without over-exposing a defensive weakness (unlike Polak, with his susceptibility to a hard forecheck. I like this trade VERY much even up. Getting a potential quality NHL starting goalie (Husso) out of it, as well, makes it a great trade.
I DO, however, agree that The Blues need to add toughness. But, I don't see this trade hurting Cole's chances for minutes. He's GOT to nail down full time on the 3rd shift, and hope, in the future, to win some PK time.
I DO, however, agree that The Blues need to add toughness. But, I don't see this trade hurting Cole's chances for minutes. He's GOT to nail down full time on the 3rd shift, and hope, in the future, to win some PK time.
Re: Roman Polak to Toronto for Carl Gunnarsson and Pick 94
Understood about the lefthanded shot. Personally I don't feel like it'll make much difference but I hope I'm wrong. I just think this team needs to find some physicality on defense quick. Gunnarson strikes me as another in the Petro-Boumeester-Shattenkirk mold. Being a goalie myself, I appreciate those guys but I really appreciate defensemen who can clear the crease of a big body. I don't see that on the current roster.
Re: Roman Polak to Toronto for Carl Gunnarsson and Pick 94
^^^This^^^ecbm wrote:Understood about the lefthanded shot. Personally I don't feel like it'll make much difference but I hope I'm wrong. I just think this team needs to find some physicality on defense quick. Gunnarson strikes me as another in the Petro-Boumeester-Shattenkirk mold. Being a goalie myself, I appreciate those guys but I really appreciate defensemen who can clear the crease of a big body. I don't see that on the current roster.