worm
Well-known member
i actually laughed out loud
Games 60-82: The Rest of the Season GDT
- Thread starter hairnova
- Start date
i actually laughed out loud
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou
I will get banned again soon, worry not.
Indeed we did. Langway wanted to play in the US. We weren't going to be able to keep him indefinitely. Everyone crapped their pants when that trade went down (David Poile was the GM of the Capitals at the time) but the Habs won the Cup 4 years later with Walter and Green while the Caps never got beyond the second round with any of the players they acquired. Langway won the Norris but he didn't lead Poile and the Crapitals to the promised land. Neither did Doug Jarvis, Brian Engblom or Craig Laughlin.
GrandWazoo
Well-known member
Besides the 2015-16 season when Price was injured, our record at home and on the road were pretty close. We just sucked in the West but otherwise we were a pretty good road team. Nothing even remotely similar to what is happening this year.
GrandWazoo
Well-known member
That's all fine and dandy, and I agree with real example in which the acquired player actually contributed something significant toward the Cup but there isn't a world besides WeHave's in which we won the Chelios trade and the Oilers won the Gretzky trade. It's not like the Nieuwendyk-Iginla trade, who was a great trade for both teams.
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou
I will get banned again soon, worry not.
Here's a breakdown on the Gretzky trade done by CBC:
Key numbers
Who got more in the deal? Here are the differences in total production for each team's acquisitions after the trade was made:
The Oilers got 748 more man-games.
The Oilers got 231 more goals.
The Kings got 315 more assists.
The Kings got 84 more points.
The Oilers went on to win the Stanley Cup (their only one without Gretzky) in 1990. The Kings made the final once during Gretzky's tenure, losing to Montreal in 1993.
Bottom Line:
It seems like both teams made out fairly well, especially since Gretzky was approaching free agency and may have left the Oilers with nothing in return at all.
Key numbers
Who got more in the deal? Here are the differences in total production for each team's acquisitions after the trade was made:
The Oilers got 748 more man-games.
The Oilers got 231 more goals.
The Kings got 315 more assists.
The Kings got 84 more points.
The Oilers went on to win the Stanley Cup (their only one without Gretzky) in 1990. The Kings made the final once during Gretzky's tenure, losing to Montreal in 1993.
Bottom Line:
It seems like both teams made out fairly well, especially since Gretzky was approaching free agency and may have left the Oilers with nothing in return at all.
while true, Nashville got the better player and went further last year
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou
I will get banned again soon, worry not.
Exactly. Which is why you can't bitch about losing Chelios for Savard reasoning that Chelios was a better player at the time of the trade because that fact means nothing. The only question you ask is "Which team did better? Which team achieved its ultimate goal?" If one team wins a Cup and the other one, despite the great play of the traded player in question, does not, then it's clear: the team that won the Cup won the trade.
I think some people get so caught up in advanced stats, who's worth what, which prospects are better than which others, that they forget what the ultimate purpose of every deal is: to win the Cup. If a trade goes down and the end result is that neither team ends up winning a championship then the trade is a wash no matter how well or badly the players involved in the trade happen to play. The vast majority of all trades fall into this category. The only trades in which there are winners and/or losers are those which result in one or both teams winning a Cup because that's what trades are in aid of to begin with. You trade if and when you feel that you can improve your team with the ultimate goal being a championship. You don't make trades just because you're bored and have nothing better to do that day.
CH1
The Artist Formerly Known as chiggins.
I'll take my chances with choosing to receive the best player every single time.
Nobody can prove that the Habs wouldn't have won the Cup with Chelios. And maybe they win another because they eventually trade him for something of equal value.
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou
I will get banned again soon, worry not.
If the Preds had lost in four straight in the second round they'd have still "gone further" than the Habs did. And since they didn't win the Cup one could argue that they may as well have lost in round 2 because "going further" is meaningless if you don't win the championship.
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou
I will get banned again soon, worry not.
And if your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle. You can't assume what might have happened if... You can only judge what actually did happen. The Habs, after trading Chelios for Savard, won the Cup. The Blackhawks, after trading Savard for Chelios, did not win the Cup. That is the only measuring stick we've got.
CH1
The Artist Formerly Known as chiggins.
google causation vs correlation. you might learn something.
or stay ignorant. and get a podcast. don't waste your taxi wisdom on us folks. go out there and monetize it.
lecoqsportif
Well-known member
Thornton to San Jose was another interesting trade.
That was a great trade for both teams . It was made for hockey reasons and benefitted both .
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou
I will get banned again soon, worry not.
Iggy sold tickets but never won them anything.
Cmon your way off base now. Dallas was in win now mode . There was no cup without Joe and he gave them another good 5-6 years as well .
Calgary wasn't going anywhere and traded a solid vet for a very prospect that gave them a HOF career.
A great trade for 2 teams that were going on different directions. It's like the Verlander deal last year in MLB , helped out both teams that were going in opposite directions .