Buds Board Keepers League

TT is a skillful mofo, that said Coyle's probably better suited for this league.

We'll talk in a year or two about TT's status and ceiling compared to Coyle. Personally I believe TT's skill level is right up there with the Forsbergs and Grigorenkos of this draft, and I'm taking the long path to developing my team anyways, I think TT has the potential to be a Skinner/Granlund of the 2012 draft. Really like Coyle, he might have a good rookie season, he isn't a huge hitter but I'm sure he'll get pk time one days and be a solid 50-60 point guy hitting periphs. TT on the other hand is a total wild card, I've heard of scouts saying he could go as high as 5th or 6th, Im not sure of that, but I'm sure he'll be a top 6 player in the nhl one day, and the sky is his potential. What he did in the second half of this season is remarkable.

From what i'm aware of, the people who have the most positive things to say about TT are the people who have seen him play the most, and the people with the most negative things to say about him, just see him listed as a 5'10 160 pound winger (PS he's 5'11 and well over 170 from what I know)

canuckspk wroteCOLONWe'll talk in a year or two about TT's status and ceiling compared to Coyle. Personally I believe TT's skill level is right up there with the Forsbergs and Grigorenkos of this draft,

You are 100% correct, that point can't be argued at all IMO

I'd be shocked if Coyle broke 50 as a rookie.

Nick wroteCOLONI'd be shocked if Coyle broke 50 as a rookie.

No chance IMO; however, i think he's good for 35 points and a bunch of hits

Depends....the Wild are kinda in a state of flux now so Coyle may seem some decent PP time or good minutes. Especially if PM Bouchard misses significant time again and Lats moves on.

Nick wroteCOLONI'd be shocked if Coyle broke 50 as a rookie.

I meant in the long run, once he develops, not as a rookie

Coyle isn't even that physical. He just uses his size to his advantage ala Joe Thornton.

Shep wroteCOLONCoyle isn't even that physical. He just uses his size to his advantage ala Joe Thornton.

Bingo! people calling him a backes type clearly do not watch him. his phisicality is in how he leans on people, he does hit but it's not on an above average rate.

At the end of the day even if you totally disagree with value here, which is your opinion and not fact, you end up with a guy overpaying for an asset he really wanted and who here hasn't done that.

shooker wroteCOLON

Shep wroteCOLONCoyle isn't even that physical. He just uses his size to his advantage ala Joe Thornton.

Bingo! people calling him a backes type clearly do not watch him. his phisicality is in how he leans on people, he does hit but it's not on an above average rate.

At the end of the day even if you totally disagree with value here, which is your opinion and not fact, you end up with a guy overpaying for an asset he really wanted and who here hasn't done that.

Exactly.

Wanna talk about overpaying for an asset you like go see what I originally paid for Kirill Kabanov.

shooker wroteCOLON

Shep wroteCOLONCoyle isn't even that physical. He just uses his size to his advantage ala Joe Thornton.

Bingo! people calling him a backes type clearly do not watch him. his phisicality is in how he leans on people, he does hit but it's not on an above average rate.

At the end of the day even if you totally disagree with value here, which is your opinion and not fact, you end up with a guy overpaying for an asset he really wanted and who here hasn't done that.

Everyone has made a trade in which they acquired the player they admire and idealise as their kind of hockey player. I have done it with Brayden Schenn and Olivier Ekman-Larsson. No one should be laughing at Peter for this trade -- I don't see a downside to it, and as far as I'm concerned, he looks like a champ for targeting and getting the guy he wants.