- png, jpeg
- Recommended minimum size 800px by 800px
- Maximum size: 1MB
May 30, 2017
Posts per Day
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CD282</b></div><div>No, but we saw him play at 23 (77, 37-36-73 +27) and 24 (80, 40-34-74 +7).
Vrana is on pace for 82, 26-19-45* this season while Burakovsky is on pace for 76, 9-11-20. Not even remotely comparable, sorry, and a late 1st doesn't compensate. The addition of Niskanen helps, but St. Louis hardly needs another RHD. And then you have Fabbri coming back - a tremendous talent if he can get healthy. And cheap, too. This could be a big win for Washington, at worst its an even deal.
*Additional context: Vrana's most common linemates are Kuznetsov, Oshie and Backstrom. He isn't driving the bus here. Tarasenko's center for both years listed was Jori Lehtera.
I think <a href="/users/biglite351" target="_blank">@biglite351</a> was being charitable with his comments. Your response looks pretty poorly on you.</div></div>
I just think another to add is that Tarasenko is the best player in the trade. Sure he's having a down year, but he's so consistent and even in this down year he will have better numbers than Vrana. That counts for something. He's an elite player and an elite shooter. While I don't think it will happen, Vrana could have a problem with his development and Burk might fall out of the league. That first could end up being a nonreactor player. But to get certainty in the player you have of Tarasenko is the real impetus behind this trade. Certainty and consistency are huge pieces. Niskanen is consistent too, but you have to give up good players to get good players. Couldn't get tarasenko for a whole bunch of hopefuls. There would have to be a good piece going back. I know me and Eli disagree on a lot of these issues, but I just felt that the consistency aspect had to be mentioned <a href="/users/Eli" target="_blank">@Eli</a>