both teams

Really? You think Ottawa says no to that?

the last thing the leafs need to spend their 1st on is a streaky, old, pending ufa one way forward

Leafs don't need Tarasenko

A: He's been consistently good this year.

B: 32 is not that old.

C: You can re-sign him if you want.

D: He's on track for 64 points this year.

E: He has a +10 rating this year on a god-awful team, I don't think calling him one-way would be a fair assessment.

They don't need him but I'm sure they'd like him.

Half retained for a 3rd then yes

A: not really, and im talking about the past few years
B:32 is a solid 5 years past prime for the average scorer, it is quite old for a player like him, especially with his injury history
C:that doesnt matter because his contract value being an unknown is a negative to his value and desirability
D: Neat, he still doesnt fill a need that would justify a 1st from the Leafs
E:+/- is about as meaningless as what his favourite show tune is and tells you just as much about his hockey abilities.

Right, because you can always get a 64 point winger for a 3rd...

and now you understand value relative to need

If the leafs move a 1st at the deadline it’ll be to get a defender with term or one they can re sign, can’t see them making a big deal for a winger.

Heh. Be a dear and detail that worrisome "injury history" for us, would ya?

You guys just stick to your simple, easy, disingenuous narratives like glue. If only the rest of the hoo-mans displayed half as much faithfulness. Hell, I'd take 10%.

yeah, it's almost like the guy has averaged about 20 missed games a season for the past few years. But hey, just focus on like 1 of the 10 points brought up like it wasnt a cumulative thing. Im sure you have some blues player with bad numbers and a bad contract being besmirched in another thread for you to white knight

Dude. We've been over this and over this, and it hasn't been just me pointing it out. If you want to bring up bullet points for people to peruse, don;t throw a fit when someone responds to a bullet point. That's literally the entire point of the site.

Now... The guy has been one of the most durable forwards in the league apart from ONE injury that the surgeons failed to correct twice. Since returning from that ONE injury, he has had exactly zero problems with it. Still. If that qualifies as a worrisome injury history to you, more power to ya. Maybe save the super cool, not pissy at all white knight speeches and actually ingest the counterpoint for five seconds. This same story you guys tell has been going on for years, and you guys freak out ad hominem at any pushback, no matter how factual or reasonable it is. Good luck with all that, bro.

Sens say yes to both

yes, we have been over this and when a player over 30 has a major injury that causes them to miss significant time and then continues to never have a full season after that that injury and history of missed games becomes a point of interest in any trade or signing regarding that player. In Tarasenko's case it is a factor if you like it or not. You can argue the degree of impact it has, but still has an impact.
And if you wanna start calling people out on getting pissy, maybe dont jump into a conversation smelling like a litterbox and throwing the first chirps, dont dish em if you cant take em and all that.

As far as factual and reasonable pushback, the next time you offer some would be the first time.

Continues to never have a full season since!

Reality: He literally played 75 games + all 12 playoff games the following season. AND I was literally laughing and making jokes in my initial comment.

THIS is your capacity for declaring fact in a nutshell. You are your own mic drop against yourself, bud. As usual.

Both the Leafs and the Islanders say no.


1. Leafs need a two-way RD instead of a Top 6 RW stuck behind Nylander and Marner.

2. Kubalik is worth a 5th.

wow, you mean he played 75 games of an 82 game season? That sure sounds like a full season to me....well except the games he didnt play, that might factor into the 'whole' season part.
Jeez dude, you think that a guy playing 10, 24, 75 and 69 games for a few seasons in a row would be a pretty obvious case of "hasnt played a full season", but i guess you got me, or something.
But hey, this is your time to shine, you go get em tiger

Wow. That was just sad. It's Sunday, dude. Try if you can to not have a stroke. Kaythaanks.

now that's some quality deflection right there. Way to try and draw attention away from the fact that you didnt understand what a full season was.
Dont worry hoss, you havent distracted anyone away from the fact that there's about a dozen reasons why the leafs wont give up a 1st for tarasenko, even with your odd hyper-fixation on a single minor detail

Oh give over already. Very few players play EVERY game in a season. By your "logic" Matthews have never played anything resembling a full season. When do we describe him every time has having a bad injury history?

Just stop. We get it. You want to spout falsehoods and have nobody ever call you on it. I'll just leave you to that, bud. No need to have a coronary episode.

yeah dude, it's almost like you're making an absolute mountain out of this molehill of a point. You're acting like I said that the leafs wouldnt trade for him strictly because of his injury history instead of here are half a dozen reasons why he isnt worth this to the leafs and his injury history is a small part of it.
And yea dude, if we were talking about reasons why matthews might not be as valuable as some think then his injury history would play a part too! It's almost like it's relevant to look at the entire package when evaluating a guy in a trade. Oh, and people talk about matthews injury history all of the time.

I did not say or imply anything about whether the Leafs would trade a 1st for Vova.

Sure, you were just arguing that injury history and games missed mean absolutely nothing when evaluating a players value