But Calgary...is good...

No thanks.

Hence what I believe to be the overpay for Tanev

I'd be ok without it and using the cash to resgning Rutta too.

Also allow me to quote John Tortorella from 04"Good is the enemy of Great."

Always loved that quote.

Side note: Frig off Torts. Guy is trying to be the Steven A. Smith or Colin Cowherd of hockey with his outrageously stupid takes right now. "Zegras alley oop pass was bad for hockey". Get outtttta here with that gahhhhbage. People who have never watched hockey suddenly started watching hockey clips because of how crazy it was, and that's bad for the game? Sports are supposed to be fun to watch.

Sorry. Rant over.

All good I kind of agree with you, however will always have a fondness for Torts 1) his working with animals 2 his working with vet groups 3 First bolts cup

Yeah, I actually love Torts, and think he's a really good coach for veterans. I'll just never understand the usage of guys like PLD and Laine. It's ok to treat special players differently, IMO.

Vinny hated him early according to Jay Feaster Vinny would go into his office all the time until he told Vinny " I don't know what my legacy in Tampa Bay is going to be, however I do know it won't be of the GM that traded Vincent Lecavalier or the one who fired John Tortorella

Its not an overpay by any means.

We can agree to disagree

I mean, Im a fan of both teams and Tanev is at least on the same level as McDonagh, cheaper, and has 2 more years after this. Calgary is also not selling by any means so their interest in moving one of the best shutdown dmen in the NHL for futures is next to zero

That return is better than what the rangers got for McDonagh and Jt Miller Namestnikov Hajek Howden 1&2 this offer for Tanev is better

In hindsight sure, at the time of that trade Namestnikov was a 25 year old top 6 winger pacing 60 points. Howden was a recent 1st round draft pick with good pretty high potential and just under a ppg in the AHL
Hajak was a recent 2nd round pick with good potential. On the other hand Miller was a 25 year old also pacing around 60 points but had a bit higher potential than Namestnikov.

So we can break this down
The difference between Miller and Namestnikov at the time of the trade was probably around a 2nd.

So that works out to two 1sts and one 2nd for 1.5 years of McDonagh with zero retention.

In your above offer you put two 1sts and a 5th for 2.5 years of Tanev with retention.

Correct me if I am wrong but that sounds like a worse return than the McDonagh trade

Yeah the Namestnikov analysis is manipulative if there was a guy carried by his linemates it was vladdy with the bolts Kucherov and Stamkos

Sure but he was still 25 and succeeding. MIller played with prime Zuccarello.

Both players had near identical production at the time of the trade and were the same age, both were 1st round picks in 2011. Vlad's QoT is why I said the difference between them at the time of the trade was a 2nd

Yeah please don't compare zuccarello to Stamkos or Kucherov TB's management knew a lot of Namestnikov production was playing 3rd fiddle to Kucherov and Stamkos

I really dont understand what you are trying to argue here but it's not the point I made. Im fully aware that Namesnikov was a beneficiary of his linemates. That doesnt dispute my points by any means

TB knew he wasn't the player his points said he was and sold high on him he wasn't even value with Miller

Who said he was even value with Miller?