Author Topic: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal  (Read 1461 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nik the Trik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 21723
  • Some Guy On a Message Board
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #15 on: May 02, 2017, 03:22:51 PM »
However, Griffith's AHL numbers at those ages are generally better, aside from Kapanen.

YearAgeGPGAPtsPPG
2013-1421692030500.725
2014-1522391219310.795
2015-1623572453771.351

We've been over this before. That's just not true.

Leipsic in his first two AHL years was at .843 ppg and .831. He also had better junior numbers.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2017, 03:27:03 PM by Nik the Trik »
Give a man the reputation of an early riser and he can sleep 'til noon
-Mark Twain

Online herman

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 7847
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #16 on: May 02, 2017, 03:45:20 PM »
Quote
Leafs PR‏ @LeafsPR  2 minutes ago
The @MapleLeafs have signed forward Ben Smith to a one-year contract worth $650,000. #TMLtalk

Latest update is that this is a two-way deal, with 150k in the AHL.

Online CarltonTheBear

  • Global Moderator
  • Sittler Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 18693
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #17 on: May 02, 2017, 03:50:27 PM »
Latest update is that this is a two-way deal, with 150k in the AHL.

Laich'd!

Fun fact Ben Smith has actually been a very good AHL player when down there. He has a career 0.72 PPG rate, and since his rookie season he's scored 94 points in 111 games over parts of 3 seasons.

Online herman

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 7847
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #18 on: May 02, 2017, 03:53:50 PM »
Leipsic in his first two AHL years was at .843 ppg and .831. He also had better junior numbers.

You're right. I didn't line up the ages right.

I got 0.730 and 0.831 for Leipsic's first two years. (combined Milwaukee and Toronto data).

Is there a conversion rate between WHL and OHL numbers?
« Last Edit: May 02, 2017, 03:56:33 PM by herman »

Offline Nik the Trik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 21723
  • Some Guy On a Message Board
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #19 on: May 02, 2017, 05:01:10 PM »
Is there a conversion rate between WHL and OHL numbers?

I don't know that there's anything definite with historical and team based context baked in. There's NHLe but at a glance that really wouldn't change things. You'd still be left with Leipsic being younger, potentially with some rougher edges to his game and having produced at, at the very least, the same level of Griffith.

Protecting Griffith over Leipsic would have no real justification. Reichel I think is pretty clearly the #2 choice because he's big, he's almost a full 2 years younger than Griffith and the production difference between Reichel and Griffith wasn't all that noteworthy until this year.
Give a man the reputation of an early riser and he can sleep 'til noon
-Mark Twain

Offline Deebo

  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 4373
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #20 on: May 02, 2017, 05:49:59 PM »
Depends what you mean by 'consequence'... Leipsic is at about a PPG in the AHL and Leivo is coming off 10 pts in 13 games in the NHL.

I don't think any of the players I listed will amount to any more than average 3rd liners.

At a bare minimum, those two should be good assets for the team and losing either to expansion is a waste.

If they plan to protect Martin, it better be because they traded one or both of Leipsic and Leivo for value.

I can't see them getting real value for expansion eligible marginal players.

Also, If they leave Martin unprotected, then would only be able to protect one of Leivo or Leipsic leaving the other for Vegas to take. Would Vegas take Martin ahead of the other?

Online herman

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 7847
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #21 on: May 02, 2017, 05:54:13 PM »
I wouldn't protect Griffith. As mentioned up thread, the stigma of triple waivings should be shield enough. He's not critical to keep as we have redundancy, but I sure would like to keep him. His numbers aren't really PP bolstered, but he'll produce in just about any top-half deployment.

I also wouldn't protect Martin, because his contract and age and lack of production are also shield enough. I can't see Vegas, laden with 3rd/4th liners that have been in the league long enough needing a dressing room dad, or a fighter.

Barring trades, I think we should protect:
JvR, Kadri, Bozak, Komarov, Brown, Leipsic, Rychel;
allowing us to fulfill the forward requirements with Martin, Fehr, and Smith
and leaving unprotected Leivo, Griffith, Lupul (and UFAs)

Offline Nik the Trik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 21723
  • Some Guy On a Message Board
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #22 on: May 02, 2017, 06:15:58 PM »
I wouldn't protect Griffith. As mentioned up thread, the stigma of triple waivings should be shield enough. He's not critical to keep as we have redundancy, but I sure would like to keep him. His numbers aren't really PP bolstered, but he'll produce in just about any top-half deployment.

I also wouldn't protect Martin, because his contract and age and lack of production are also shield enough. I can't see Vegas, laden with 3rd/4th liners that have been in the league long enough needing a dressing room dad, or a fighter.

Barring trades, I think we should protect:
JvR, Kadri, Bozak, Komarov, Brown, Leipsic, Rychel;
allowing us to fulfill the forward requirements with Martin, Fehr, and Smith
and leaving unprotected Leivo, Griffith, Lupul (and UFAs)

I'm more or less the same but I'd protect Martin and expose Rychel. When it comes down to it the time to be blase about Martin being on the team was before you signed him, not one year into a four year deal where he's established himself as a popular guy on a successful(relatively) team.

Rychel, I don't think, is a good enough player that he's the guy you potentially want to show your ruthless side over.
Give a man the reputation of an early riser and he can sleep 'til noon
-Mark Twain

Online CarltonTheBear

  • Global Moderator
  • Sittler Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 18693
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #23 on: May 02, 2017, 07:30:10 PM »
I'm more or less the same but I'd protect Martin and expose Rychel. When it comes down to it the time to be blase about Martin being on the team was before you signed him, not one year into a four year deal where he's established himself as a popular guy on a successful(relatively) team.

If the team did decide to part ways with Martin they could probably get something decent for him in a trade too. I won't lose any sleep whatsoever over losing Rychel or Griffith or Leivo in the expansion draft. Leispic a little bit, but like I said I really think he'll be protected. On the defence side I'm guessing Carrick gets the 3rd protection spot over Marincin. Despite his struggles this season, I still think Marty can be a solid 3rd pairing defenceman so I'm hoping Vegas gets enough D from other teams that they overlook him.

Online herman

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 7847
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #24 on: May 03, 2017, 08:43:45 AM »
If Martin is protected/not picked up in expansion/not traded as expected, the one area that I would be willing to overspend a bit these next two seasons is on a centre that makes Martin actually effective (e.g. Brian Boyle) and shut me up.

It'd make for a pricey 4th line overall (haha, Islanders) and is the very definition of throwing money after bad money, but we're theoretically saving (literally) millions on the 1st line, and hopefully the same on the 3rd line until Martin's contract is expiring.

Offline digdug

  • Prospect
  • *
  • Posts: 63
  • TMLfans Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #25 on: May 03, 2017, 09:09:19 AM »
I agree with Carlton and Busta
This signing of Smith guarantees that Martin will be protected.

I'm guessing the last forward protected is Leipsic, and the
last dman protected is Marinicin.  (He played more minutes
in the playoffs than Carrick did).

So Vegas can pick one of the following

Fehr, Rychel, Griffith, Leivo, Carrick or Sparks


Offline Kaberle15

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1582
  • Gender: Male
  • They Did it!
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #26 on: May 03, 2017, 11:59:29 AM »
I agree with Carlton and Busta
This signing of Smith guarantees that Martin will be protected.

I'm guessing the last forward protected is Leipsic, and the
last dman protected is Marinicin.  (He played more minutes
in the playoffs than Carrick did).

So Vegas can pick one of the following

Fehr, Rychel, Griffith, Leivo, Carrick or Sparks

No way they will protect Marincin over Carrick. Carrick was a top 3 regular, Marincin was not. It is that simple.
A.K.A Gardiner51, Changed back to Kaberle15 now that he is retired.

Online CarltonTheBear

  • Global Moderator
  • Sittler Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 18693
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #27 on: May 03, 2017, 01:01:55 PM »
No way they will protect Marincin over Carrick. Carrick was a top 3 regular, Marincin was not. It is that simple.

I agree that Carrick is more likely to be protected, but that's because of his age/ceiling. But I do see the argument that Babcock would value Marincin more. Yes, Carrick was in the line-up a lot more but that's largely just because of handedness. When Marincin did play he averaged just as much even-strength ice-time as Carrick did plus he was actually 2nd on the team in PK ice-time per game. Babcock even went as far as to say Marincin might be the teams best penalty killer. I mean it's a little baffling as to why he sat so much when you hear him talk like that but Babcock's gonna Babcock sometimes.

Carrick meanwhile won't ever get a regular job at killing penalties probably. He's 4th on the defence depth chart for powerplay time, and the team only gives 2 defencemen powerplay time so he's not going to be playing there ever on a regular basis. If we lose Hunwick or Hunwick's role on the team is decreased next season someone is going to have to take his PK minutes and that could definitely make Marincin a more appealing option to protect.

Offline LuncheonMeat

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1745
  • Tank!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #28 on: May 03, 2017, 01:13:06 PM »
I agree with Carlton and Busta
This signing of Smith guarantees that Martin will be protected.

I'm guessing the last forward protected is Leipsic, and the
last dman protected is Marinicin.  (He played more minutes
in the playoffs than Carrick did).

So Vegas can pick one of the following

Fehr, Rychel, Griffith, Leivo, Carrick or Sparks

No way they will protect Marincin over Carrick. Carrick was a top 3 regular, Marincin was not. It is that simple.

I'm not sure it is that simple. Marincin kills penalties (Carrick doesn't kill penalties or play on the PP), and is 6'4" compared to Carrick's 5'10". I realize that isn't everything, but those are traits - size, special teams - that Babcock seems to favor.
“How many people from Ontario play in the National Hockey League? Once we make it safe, they’re coming home. Mark my words, they’ll be coming.”
~ Mike Bacock, in an open letter to Steven Stamkos John Tavares

Offline Coco-puffs

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 884
  • TMLfans Rocks!
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #29 on: May 03, 2017, 01:30:22 PM »
No way they will protect Marincin over Carrick. Carrick was a top 3 regular, Marincin was not. It is that simple.

I agree that Carrick is more likely to be protected, but that's because of his age/ceiling. But I do see the argument that Babcock would value Marincin more. Yes, Carrick was in the line-up a lot more but that's largely just because of handedness. When Marincin did play he averaged just as much even-strength ice-time as Carrick did plus he was actually 2nd on the team in PK ice-time per game. Babcock even went as far as to say Marincin might be the teams best penalty killer. I mean it's a little baffling as to why he sat so much when you hear him talk like that but Babcock's gonna Babcock sometimes.

Carrick meanwhile won't ever get a regular job at killing penalties probably. He's 4th on the defence depth chart for powerplay time, and the team only gives 2 defencemen powerplay time so he's not going to be playing there ever on a regular basis. If we lose Hunwick or Hunwick's role on the team is decreased next season someone is going to have to take his PK minutes and that could definitely make Marincin a more appealing option to protect.

BGBS - That's a mnemonic we need to use around here. 
BGBS #1.  Playing defensemen on their strong side as much as humanly possible meant that Marincin had to outplay Hunwick to get a spot in the lineup.  Carrick had to outplay just one out of a group that included Corrado, Marchenko, and Polak.  Carrick had an easier path to a spot, and developed some chemistry with Jake that helped him.

So I wouldn't look so much into who played in more games as to whom Babcock prefers.  I wouldn't be surprised to see Marincin protected over Carrick.

However, in terms of handed-ness depth for next year on NHL contracts we are currently at:

Gardiner - Rielly - Marincin - Dermott - Nielsen - Valiev
Zaitsev - Carrick - Marchenko - Holl

Based on that list, I'd much rather lose Marincin to Vegas than Carrick.  Especially with the list of UFA RHD being Shattenkirk, Franson, and a bunch of players I'd rather not talk about.  Management might see the same thing- a huge hole if they lose Carrick over Marincin.


TMLfans.ca

Re: Ben Smith re-signed to a 1-year deal
« Reply #29 on: May 03, 2017, 01:30:22 PM »