jame

The last 8 months, the fan based... largely in lock step with Botts... railed against Murray's spending of futures for young, prime aged, NHL talent. And praised the direction Botts was taking (acquiring picks, build through draft). This move is essentially 1st, Armia, Lemiuex for Kane. Just kind of shows that Botts has acquired some teflon without actually accomplishing anything. I like this move. I recognize the flaws Montour has. He's not a true top pairing guy. He's a guy who needs to be "partnered up". But I like the deal... I don't overvalue late 1sts and mid tier prospects. I'd rather convert coin flips to prime aged certainty every time. Montour is a much better fit for our system than say Jake McCabe. And that gives him much more value to us. But in a systemless vaccuum, they are relatively equal. How would everyone like the trade if it was viewed in those terms? Brandon Montour is to puck moving defensemen what Jake McCabe is to stay at home defensemen.... Futures for young talent. This is essentially 1st, Lemieux, Armia for Kane.... same trade.

Solid trade. Fair amount of risk/reward. It will be interesting to see where/how they try to fit Montour in. Burke nailed it in describing him as unpredictable... and having that be a great trait when it's viewed through the prism of your opponent, but a terrible trait when understood in terms of your teammates, especially your D partner. Dahlin-Montour probably won't work because of that. More likely it's McCabe-Montour or Scandella-Montour in the near term. Which probably puts Risto on the trade block this summer. I'm surprised how many people love this trade... given how much hate there is for Murray's tenure. This is a Tim Murray trade, minus the additional tertiary asset.

Cirelli is untouchable Paquette and Erne would be interesting restricted free agent targets since Tampa will have such a tight cap next year

He could’ve just protected Ullmark, and kept Carrier.

Good question, dying breed William Carrier leads the league in hits by a wide margin, and is one of the most physical players in the league... but Botts gave him away. Hits: Carrier #1, Foligno #12, Kane #26, Deslauriers #27.... all players Botts got rid of. We’re soft because of him.

ROR is significantly better/more valuable than Hamilton so... ROR, McCabe, Guhle? ROR, Scandella, Nylander? ROR, Ristolainen?

3rd line center

There’s pretty much no one else like Tom Wilson and the Capitals would never trade him. I agree, Tom Wilson is a major difference maker

His in game tactics seriously strain the credulity of that statement. vlad Sobotka was on the ice down by a goal with 4 minutes left. Like the only way that’s acceptable is if 3 forwards are in the lockerroom with injuries.

That’s the nightmare scenario right... one where you’ve changed every part, turned over every player, and after 11 years it turns out it was him all along.

Botts should’ve beaten Calgary’s offer.

Presumptuous ?

Because I know it all.

I don’t know what you think I’ve put on you?

I mean... I get it, there’s a really tight knit group of old timers who converse over tea and crumpets or something (it’s a joke laugh a little). this is how everyone I’ve ever known talks about sports. At the bar, around the dinner table, in the arena... everywhere. It’s passionate and combative. No one takes offense, it’s the norm. I’m going to continue to be someone who actively participates passionately, brings different viewpoints, and gets into it when there are disagreements... I’m never going to sit down for tea and crumpets. That’s not me. So I’ll either be accepted or booted. It’s all good.

Maybe, just maybe, all the folks who vote for MVP understand it’s the most valuable player TO their team (not relative to the rest of the team’s roster composition). Maybe these voters have read the plain language of the award, interpreted as it is written, and voted for Crosby’s over Tavares’s for years... and maybe you’re just wrong. nah... never mind... you’ve found the hidden meaning, that everyone else has been missing.

That’s not good

I’m certain you don’t know the definition of relative

The definition does not say “relative” to their team... that’s a definition you invented.

Damn KO got tagged

Yea remember all the Hart trophies Tavares won over Crosby, Malkin, Kane, Ovie, Perry.... your false insertion of the term “relative” did not go unnoticed. Clever, but wrong.

Yea I could go A-Z on arguments that counter your “eichel is an mvp candidate because it feels right” argument

Here’s your argument exposed: Echel 1.15 points per game Duchene 1.13 points per game imagine how bad Ottawa would be without Duchene, therfore Duchen is an MVP candidate

Lol logic 101 isn’t just making stuff up. Seriously, you’re argument is that Matt Duchene is an MVP candidate...

It’s really not. One is a presumption (Sabres would be really bad without Eichel), the other is a fact (the Bruins are really good with Bergeron). By the way, Bergeron missed some time this year... he’s playing at a 40 goal /106 point pace at 41 games this year.