Author Topic: Roman Polak to Leafs  (Read 11109 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline slapshot

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #165 on: June 30, 2014, 11:54:51 AM »
Oh please, people have been high on Gunnarsson for years. He's been the team's best all-around defenceman for the last two, anyway.

That says a lot about the state of this team, doesn't it? Truth is Gunnerson like some have said is nothing more than a 4-5 guys on contender when healthy. Last year, he played more like a 5-6 guy due to hip issues. Nice guy, but both Gardiner and Rielly are passing/past him on the depth chart. Phaneuf when not logging crazy minutes bring more to the table. That leaves Polak, Franson and Gleason for the 4,5,6 spots. Moving one of the kids up in minutes makes total sense, so Gunner was dropping back anyway.

TMLfans.ca

Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #165 on: June 30, 2014, 11:54:51 AM »

Offline Highlander

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 5745
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #166 on: June 30, 2014, 03:34:37 PM »
Gleason and now Franson will be gone. I have a feeling Franson and Reimer in some sort of deal with a draft pick to Winterpeg. Prehaps Kane the other way????
"We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children"
                                           Navaho Proverb

Offline Andy

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1576
  • TMLfans Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #167 on: June 30, 2014, 03:39:55 PM »
Gleason and now Franson will be gone. I have a feeling Franson and Reimer in some sort of deal with a draft pick to Winterpeg. Prehaps Kane the other way????

The other way to where? Certainly not to Toronto for Franson and Reimer.

Offline Andy

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1576
  • TMLfans Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #168 on: June 30, 2014, 03:44:55 PM »
Oh please, people have been high on Gunnarsson for years. He's been the team's best all-around defenceman for the last two, anyway.

That says a lot about the state of this team, doesn't it? Truth is Gunnerson like some have said is nothing more than a 4-5 guys on contender when healthy. Last year, he played more like a 5-6 guy due to hip issues. Nice guy, but both Gardiner and Rielly are passing/past him on the depth chart. Phaneuf when not logging crazy minutes bring more to the table. That leaves Polak, Franson and Gleason for the 4,5,6 spots. Moving one of the kids up in minutes makes total sense, so Gunner was dropping back anyway.

Why would Franson, Polak or Gleason supplant Gunnarsson? Just because you said he played like a 5-6 d-man last year? He had the best plus-minus on the defence, and he played top pairing minutes against the other team's top players.

Anyway my response that you are quoting was in regards to Nik's insinuation that most people in this thread only value Gunnarsson now that he's been traded.

Offline Nik the Trik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 25051
  • Some Guy On a Message Board
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #169 on: June 30, 2014, 03:51:06 PM »
Anyway my response that you are quoting was in regards to Nik's insinuation that most people in this thread only value Gunnarsson now that he's been traded.

Which is not what I was insinuating, now that we're clearing things up.
Give a man the reputation of an early riser and he can sleep 'til noon
-Mark Twain

Offline mr grieves

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1727
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #170 on: June 30, 2014, 03:53:09 PM »
They're probably roughly equal players but Polak hits people good and so Shanahan and co. decided to throw in a couple of almost entirely meaningless assets to get the guy that both teams seemingly prefer. If ever there was a wait and see on a trade, this would be it.

Depends how much Gunnarsson benefitted from playing with Phaneuf, how much Polak's partner dragged him down. Gunnarsson did pretty well limiting what Crosby, Moulson, Krejci, Turris (and others he played against frequently) could do. Polak seems to have had trouble against Jamie McGinn, Vernon Fiddler, and Bryan Bickell.

Offline Nik the Trik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 25051
  • Some Guy On a Message Board
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #171 on: June 30, 2014, 03:54:42 PM »
Depends how much Gunnarsson benefitted from playing with Phaneuf, how much Polak's partner dragged him down. Gunnarsson did pretty well limiting what Crosby, Moulson, Krejci, Turris (and others he played against frequently) could do. Polak seems to have had trouble against Jamie McGinn, Vernon Fiddler, and Bryan Bickell.

I think you might be down the rabbit hole.
Give a man the reputation of an early riser and he can sleep 'til noon
-Mark Twain

Offline Potvin29

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 14579
  • Gender: Male
  • Auston 20:16
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #172 on: June 30, 2014, 03:59:46 PM »
Oh please, people have been high on Gunnarsson for years. He's been the team's best all-around defenceman for the last two, anyway.

That says a lot about the state of this team, doesn't it? Truth is Gunnerson like some have said is nothing more than a 4-5 guys on contender when healthy. Last year, he played more like a 5-6 guy due to hip issues. Nice guy, but both Gardiner and Rielly are passing/past him on the depth chart. Phaneuf when not logging crazy minutes bring more to the table. That leaves Polak, Franson and Gleason for the 4,5,6 spots. Moving one of the kids up in minutes makes total sense, so Gunner was dropping back anyway.

Why would Franson, Polak or Gleason supplant Gunnarsson? Just because you said he played like a 5-6 d-man last year? He had the best plus-minus on the defence, and he played top pairing minutes against the other team's top players.

Anyway my response that you are quoting was in regards to Nik's insinuation that most people in this thread only value Gunnarsson now that he's been traded.

I think generally Gunnarsson was viewed as a dependable, quietly effect d-man who was valuable but who was playing 1st pairing minutes that he shouldn't have been playing.  I could see him being more effective in a different role.

Offline Andy

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1576
  • TMLfans Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #173 on: June 30, 2014, 04:01:36 PM »
Anyway my response that you are quoting was in regards to Nik's insinuation that most people in this thread only value Gunnarsson now that he's been traded.

Which is not what I was insinuating, now that we're clearing things up.

"
There's really nothing that increases a Maple Leafs' value more than getting traded away from the club.
"

So you mean you weren't insinuating but blatantly stating?

Offline Nik the Trik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 25051
  • Some Guy On a Message Board
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #174 on: June 30, 2014, 04:06:38 PM »
Anyway my response that you are quoting was in regards to Nik's insinuation that most people in this thread only value Gunnarsson now that he's been traded.

Which is not what I was insinuating, now that we're clearing things up.

"
There's really nothing that increases a Maple Leafs' value more than getting traded away from the club.
"

So you mean you weren't insinuating but blatantly stating?

No, I mean there's a difference between fans generally overvaluing players after they've been traded with not valuing them at all while they're here.
Give a man the reputation of an early riser and he can sleep 'til noon
-Mark Twain

Offline Significantly Insignificant

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 2949
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #175 on: June 30, 2014, 08:00:22 PM »
Then we have been sold a bunch of lies.  Dave Nonis has lied to us.  Can you smell that Dave Nonis?  Those are your pants.  They are on fire.

Well, no. The trade still makes perfect sense if Nonis thinks that Polak is a better defenseman than Gunnarsson is. It just doesn't seem to fit into the idea that they're trying to rebuild the juggernaut that was the 2013 Maple Leafs.

If only they hadn't run in to the X-Men..........Wait a second.  I didn't use the word juggernaut......
"Progress lies not in enhancing what is, but in advancing toward what will be. - Khalil Gibran

Offline Chev-boyar-sky

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1845
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #176 on: June 30, 2014, 08:26:28 PM »
Gleason and now Franson will be gone. I have a feeling Franson and Reimer in some sort of deal with a draft pick to Winterpeg. Prehaps Kane the other way????

How about to the Isles for a decent piece?

Offline mr grieves

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1727
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #177 on: June 30, 2014, 08:57:39 PM »
Depends how much Gunnarsson benefitted from playing with Phaneuf, how much Polak's partner dragged him down. Gunnarsson did pretty well limiting what Crosby, Moulson, Krejci, Turris (and others he played against frequently) could do. Polak seems to have had trouble against Jamie McGinn, Vernon Fiddler, and Bryan Bickell.

I think you might be down the rabbit hole.

Just ExtraSkater's list of most-seen opponents and stats for how productive those players are vs. Gunnarsson and Polak.

Offline 93forever

  • Marlie
  • **
  • Posts: 135
  • Chuck Norris puts the laughter in manslaughter
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #178 on: July 01, 2014, 07:59:38 PM »
Pierre MaGuire liked the Leafs picking up Polak.  Maguire says he is a hard hitter who blocks shots which means he sucks if the quote came from Maguire.

Offline RedLeaf

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 5564
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #179 on: July 02, 2014, 09:50:05 AM »
"The Maple Leafs are like a ship with a hole in the bottom, leaking water, and my job is to get the ship pointed in the right direction." --Steve Jobs for Brendan Shanahan.

TMLfans.ca

Re: Roman Polak to Leafs
« Reply #179 on: July 02, 2014, 09:50:05 AM »