• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Gunnarson traded to the Blues for Polak, draft pick

LeafOfFaith said:
Now I'm getting upset.
Click to expand...

About this trade, you should be.

Now, with that said Gunner clearly had some ongoing hip issues and we've seen how quickly a problem hip can sap a player's mobility and effectiveness. But at Gunnar's cost I would have much rather seen us slot him onto the 3rd pairing to play Robin to Gardiner's development and brought in a legit upgrade to play with Phaneuf. Gunnar playing fewer minutes against lesser competition would have made his life a lot easier and probably eased the burden on his hip. We keep throwing him from surgery, onto the 1st pairing. When was the last time he got to spend an off season getting in shape for the following year? (Remember Joffrey's comments on the importance of that?)
 
hockeylover said:
We still need a major upgrade to our top 4 - Phaneuf, Rielly, Gardiner and -------. Not sure how they'll get it.
Click to expand...

Rumor out of Montreal is that the Leafs made a pitch for Gorges but Toronto wasn't on his list of teams he'd allow a trade to. Actually, no Canadian team was on his list.
 
Yeah, that was in the Offseason thread.

I'm gonna be really distressed if we sign like... Orpik or something.
 
James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 13m
Nonis on Polak: Can play in four-five hole. We feel other people can play that role with Dion.


James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 9m
Nonis says they're comfortable with what they have on defence now. Want Gardiner and Rielly to play big roles.

This is good... if you think that Polak is a replacement for Gunnar, it isn't. Maybe Gards or Rielly get that time. This seems to be a replacement for Ranger/Franson/Gleason. A right shot to play a little more nasty.
 
Meh trade.

I never really liked Gunnarson that much. On the soft side for me. Maybe the fact that he was thrown into the top pairing made me sour on him.

I don't know much about Roman Polak, but if he's the tough as nails bottom defender as advertised then im ok with that.

Our team needs toughness and people to block shots.

Was kinda hoping they would leave a spot open for Granberg, but its looking less and less likely.
 
Hoss said:
James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 13m
Nonis on Polak: Can play in four-five hole. We feel other people can play that role with Dion.


James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 9m
Nonis says they're comfortable with what they have on defence now. Want Gardiner and Rielly to play big roles.

This is good... if you think that Polak is a replacement for Gunnar, it isn't. Maybe Gards or Rielly get that time. This seems to be a replacement for Ranger/Franson/Gleason. A right shot to play a little more nasty.
Click to expand...

I'm okay with this explanation. I would prefer if we didn't retain salary or give up the pick but whatever. Gardiner or Rielly move up with Phaneuf, I'm ok with that.
 
my guess would be

Rielly - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Polak
Franson - Gleason
Granberg

with 1 or both of the guys in bold gone before the season starts
 
I do like the Rielly and Gardiner getting big roles part. Those two are building blocks and we need to start treating them as such.
 
I think the fact that we haven't traded Franson yet means we might be keeping him. If we can get him on a cheap contract, then its not too bad.

If you are able to partner Franson with a Gleason-type defender he's not a bad option. He's young enough that he might still improve defensively.
 
Leafin' said:
I think the fact that we haven't traded Franson yet means we might be keeping him. If we can get him on a cheap contract, then its not too bad.

If you are able to partner Franson with a Gleason-type defender he's not a bad option. He's young enough that he might still improve defensively.
Click to expand...

If you bring back Franson and Gleason... and Phaneuf, and Rielly, and Gardiner are there.

Aren't you basically giving Carlyle nearly the exact same group as last year? I'm not sure why we'd expect anything to be any different.
 
Volcanologist said:
Not too bad?? Franson is a disaster and needs to go. He's part of the problem not the solution.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. If i asked you about Franson this time last year, your answer would be different. This is a guy that was viewed as a cornerstone for our defense after the Boston series and a guy that was looking at big money. It would suck to lose him for nothing and watch him develop into the top-4 defender we all thought he was going to be.

I think a lot of Fransons issues are due to the coaching staff not playing him correctly. Maybe with a slight adjustment in coaching we might see the valuable Franson again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top