TRADE DAY: Sandin / Engvall / Schenn

[cw]

I'm still not crazy about the Sandin trade but I've mellowed a bit.

Over the summer, he beefed up. He needed to. He was stronger and significantly more physical. I thought he was the most improved over the summer. His PP Points/60 was respectable but his shot was lacking some.

He was difficult to re-sign. Ice time was key. By adding Schenn & McCabe and maybe Gustavsson (I'm not sure where or how he fits), Sandin was going to be watching a lot of Leafs playoff games from the press box and would be very unhappy about that. He'd also be tough to re-sign after next season due to it.

So they cut their losses and got what they could.

I think Sandin still has some upside to improve and will be around for sometime to come.

I do not see how they can stand pat with 9 NHL dmen and Benn having cleared waivers for a 10th and Mete on LTIR. They're not done. Dubas would normally have had a press scrum. I wonder if his silence is because something else is going to happen and he did not want to field questions until it was done.

[OldTimeHockey]

I'm not sure I'm on board with the roster changing THIS much.  Keefe is going to have his hands full figuring it all out.

Why. He moved out 2 guys that have ahard time with the heavy game.

Sandin is a big loss.  As I said earlier, we'll be rueing this like we did Stralman.  Engvall's return is an irritant to me, but I don't have a problem moving him, even though I like parts of his game.

And my point is that rejiggering the chemistry will be a big challenge for the coaches.

Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".

I'm not over the moon on the Sandin deal, but I also don't think losing him moves the needle a lot. He was the number 5 or 6 dman on this team for much of the season....even with a rash of injuries. His use was trending downwards and was going to be even less with McCabe added to the roster. I mean, if we're going to look solely at offensive upside(which is the majority of what Sandin brings at this point), Connor Timmins has 7 less points in 30 less games.

Sure I'd like a little more return for Sandin as I do think he has potential to be pretty good. Unfortunately, he hasn't shown much of that yet so his value isn't going to be as high as we'd like it to be.

[OldTimeHockey]

My thoughts on the trades:

Sandin: See above. I'm not over the moon on it, but I'm not too upset about it either
Engvall: Meh. A 3rd rounder is about right for an ok PK guy that doesn't contribute a whole bunch.
Schenn: Not sure why, but ok

[Bender]

I think also Sandin playing hardball thinking he was William Nylander soured the relationship a bit. If he wanted assurances he should be undeniable, not Dermott 2.0 where he's great in sheltered minutes but not really showing more than that, esp when being passed by lower maintenance Lily on the depth chart.

[Nik]

Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".

It's certainly not on the level of, say, Rask I agree. I do think there was quite a bit of regret over it but not because Stralman became some sort of legend or anything but more because he was indicative of a general dissatisfaction with the club and their ability to identify talented players during a real low point for the club. Like, the Stralman trade came the year after the Jeff Finger signing.

And I do think there's maybe some parallel with how this deal is being perceived. Like I said in my review of the trade, I don't think the value here is way off but there is a sort of, like, wondering why you'd do this with one of the team's very few young assets with potential when it doesn't seem necessary.

[L K]

Admittedly I think I was more annoyed at the Stralman trade because he was traded for Wayne Primeau.  It was both an unnecessary trade and one that didn't recognize his potential.  I will concede that even with a late 1st round pick, that's easy enough to either flip into another asset OR Dubas can do his usual trade down for 2-3 other picks and potentially recoup some assets for a guy who at least for this season wasn't likely to play in the top 6 anymore.

[Zee]

Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".

It's certainly not on the level of, say, Rask I agree. I do think there was quite a bit of regret over it but not because Stralman became some sort of legend or anything but more because he was indicative of a general dissatisfaction with the club and their ability to identify talented players during a real low point for the club. Like, the Stralman trade came the year after the Jeff Finger signing.

And I do think there's maybe some parallel with how this deal is being perceived. Like I said in my review of the trade, I don't think the value here is way off but there is a sort of, like, wondering why you'd do this with one of the team's very few young assets with potential when it doesn't seem necessary.

I also equated Sandin's loss to Stralman.  Not to say Stralman was a legend by any means, but he had a solid career in the league, played in over 100 playoff games and went to two Stanley Cup Finals.  If Sandin's career turns out as good as that, well, it's better than any Leafs defenseman of the last 56 years.  At least the Leafs received a 1st back in the deal, which can be used to acquire someone else, so it's better than the Stralman trade for sure.

[OldTimeHockey]

Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".

It's certainly not on the level of, say, Rask I agree. I do think there was quite a bit of regret over it but not because Stralman became some sort of legend or anything but more because he was indicative of a general dissatisfaction with the club and their ability to identify talented players during a real low point for the club. Like, the Stralman trade came the year after the Jeff Finger signing.

And I do think there's maybe some parallel with how this deal is being perceived. Like I said in my review of the trade, I don't think the value here is way off but there is a sort of, like, wondering why you'd do this with one of the team's very few young assets with potential when it doesn't seem necessary.

I agree with all of that. Like I said, I scratched my head when I heard about the trade. I'm also not ready to hang Dubas for it either.

[OldTimeHockey]

Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".

It's certainly not on the level of, say, Rask I agree. I do think there was quite a bit of regret over it but not because Stralman became some sort of legend or anything but more because he was indicative of a general dissatisfaction with the club and their ability to identify talented players during a real low point for the club. Like, the Stralman trade came the year after the Jeff Finger signing.

And I do think there's maybe some parallel with how this deal is being perceived. Like I said in my review of the trade, I don't think the value here is way off but there is a sort of, like, wondering why you'd do this with one of the team's very few young assets with potential when it doesn't seem necessary.

I also equated Sandin's loss to Stralman.  Not to say Stralman was a legend by any means, but he had a solid career in the league, played in over 100 playoff games and went to two Stanley Cup Finals.  If Sandin's career turns out as good as that, well, it's better than any Leafs defenseman of the last 56 years.  At least the Leafs received a 1st back in the deal, which can be used to acquire someone else, so it's better than the Stralman trade for sure.

Perhaps there is parallel in the two trades. I'm also confused about the 'why' of the trade. Not really concerned about the loss though. Not right now at least. And perhaps people are correct. I hope they are for the sake of Sandin succeeding.

[herman]

SANDIN:
Dubas has done Sandin a favour and got him more playing time (the point of contention in his contract hold up). That's all it is. The Capital's LD side is wide open and he'll get to play with someone like Carlson or Jensen or van Riemsdyk under almost no pressure to win (just feed Ovi's record chase). While Carlson is out injured and Gustafsson is gone, they have no more PP options. A bit of a trickier pass for a lefty to feed Ovechkin's office, but Sandin can figure it out.

For the Leafs, they've clearly indicated they can't wait for 100+ more games for Sandin to reach the level they need today. Rielly's re-signing and the myriad of motivations behind it include it taking too much time for Sandin to fill that spot (and maybe too much cap space while waiting).


ENGVALL:
Similar course in a front office favoured project (Marlies champ) that just ran out of reasonable time within their cap framework. You can get his on-ice results (in a different way + more) by paying less; Engvall had lots of chances to demonstrate he could take that opportunity but he just didn't. Maybe the best 4th line in the world can teach him how to forecheck more physically. Engvall has the body of Optimus Prime but unfortunately also has with the processor speed of a Pentium 2 paired with the instincts of a perimeter playmaker.


Overall:
I really liked both players, but the shine starts to wear off when they climb near 3M, which is what next contracts would've been hovering around. Like the Kapanen/Johnsson/Dermott trades, it feels like a small step back when viewing these moves in isolation, and pretty ruthless from Dubas, but he has created room to change the identity and complexion of the bottom half of the roster. More will to support the skill. We've seen Matthews get fired up from Simmonds or Matt Martin shenanigans; I don't recall anyone on the bench being particularly excited for Engvall's minutes.

[Dappleganger]

I'm not sure I'm on board with the roster changing THIS much.  Keefe is going to have his hands full figuring it all out.

Why. He moved out 2 guys that have ahard time with the heavy game.

Sandin is a big loss.  As I said earlier, we'll be rueing this like we did Stralman.  Engvall's return is an irritant to me, but I don't have a problem moving him, even though I like parts of his game.

And my point is that rejiggering the chemistry will be a big challenge for the coaches.

Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".

I'm not over the moon on the Sandin deal, but I also don't think losing him moves the needle a lot. He was the number 5 or 6 dman on this team for much of the season....even with a rash of injuries. His use was trending downwards and was going to be even less with McCabe added to the roster. I mean, if we're going to look solely at offensive upside(which is the majority of what Sandin brings at this point), Connor Timmins has 7 less points in 30 less games.

Sure I'd like a little more return for Sandin as I do think he has potential to be pretty good. Unfortunately, he hasn't shown much of that yet so his value isn't going to be as high as we'd like it to be.

I think the Stralman thing is, if you at all the Leafs trades over the last 20 years, he's one of the few players traded away, who was a legit NHL player, and went on to have a decent career. Most didn't.

[Bender]

Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".

It's certainly not on the level of, say, Rask I agree. I do think there was quite a bit of regret over it but not because Stralman became some sort of legend or anything but more because he was indicative of a general dissatisfaction with the club and their ability to identify talented players during a real low point for the club. Like, the Stralman trade came the year after the Jeff Finger signing.

And I do think there's maybe some parallel with how this deal is being perceived. Like I said in my review of the trade, I don't think the value here is way off but there is a sort of, like, wondering why you'd do this with one of the team's very few young assets with potential when it doesn't seem necessary.

I also equated Sandin's loss to Stralman.  Not to say Stralman was a legend by any means, but he had a solid career in the league, played in over 100 playoff games and went to two Stanley Cup Finals.  If Sandin's career turns out as good as that, well, it's better than any Leafs defenseman of the last 56 years.  At least the Leafs received a 1st back in the deal, which can be used to acquire someone else, so it's better than the Stralman trade for sure.

Perhaps there is parallel in the two trades. I'm also confused about the 'why' of the trade. Not really concerned about the loss though. Not right now at least. And perhaps people are correct. I hope they are for the sake of Sandin succeeding.

I mean if it literally comes down to "Do we see Sandin as a liability this year and possibly next year during the playoffs?" and if the answer's yes then it's a pretty easy decision to make. They don't really have time treat him like Dermott, esp with the way the negotiations went and how unhappy he'd be if he became the team's 7th D and was an irregular on the 3rd pair playing exclusively sheltered minutes.

[Bender]

I'm not sure I'm on board with the roster changing THIS much.  Keefe is going to have his hands full figuring it all out.

Why. He moved out 2 guys that have ahard time with the heavy game.

Sandin is a big loss.  As I said earlier, we'll be rueing this like we did Stralman.  Engvall's return is an irritant to me, but I don't have a problem moving him, even though I like parts of his game.

And my point is that rejiggering the chemistry will be a big challenge for the coaches.

Maybe it's just me, but was there a lot of "rueing" done over Stralman? Like did anyone look back over the years and think "man if we could turn back time". I'll give you that Stralman had a pretty ok career. But personally, I don't remember ever thinking "we'd be so much better if we had Anton Stralman".

I'm not over the moon on the Sandin deal, but I also don't think losing him moves the needle a lot. He was the number 5 or 6 dman on this team for much of the season....even with a rash of injuries. His use was trending downwards and was going to be even less with McCabe added to the roster. I mean, if we're going to look solely at offensive upside(which is the majority of what Sandin brings at this point), Connor Timmins has 7 less points in 30 less games.

Sure I'd like a little more return for Sandin as I do think he has potential to be pretty good. Unfortunately, he hasn't shown much of that yet so his value isn't going to be as high as we'd like it to be.

I think the Stralman thing is, if you at all the Leafs trades over the last 20 years, he's one of the few players traded away, who was a legit NHL player, and went on to have a decent career. Most didn't.

As much as I was annoyed to see Stralman succeed in a non-Leafs uniform, do we really think he'd be a difference maker once JFJ traded Rask away? He also bounced around the league so its not like he's some untouchable defenseman like Hedman. We were consigned to being a terrible team from then on and Stralman wouldn't have changed that.

[bustaheims]

As much as I was annoyed to see Stralman succeed in a non-Leafs uniform, do we really think he'd be a difference maker once JFJ traded Rask away? He also bounced around the league so its not like he's some untouchable defenseman like Hedman. We were consigned to being a terrible team from then on and Stralman wouldn't have changed that.

Yeah. The issue with the Stralman deal was much more about it being yet another example of management in that era not understanding what they had in the player and also not being able to recognize what a successful NHL roster would look like - even in the regular season. That's not at all the sense I get from trading Sandin.

[cabber24]

My thoughts on the D:

I think the makeup of the D is now superior to what it was. I do not believe the team could win the playoffs with Sandin/Holl/Lil playing meaningful minutes. We have brought in two tough defensive defensemen that will be a lot harder to play against, exactly what we needed.

Old:

Gio - Holl
Rielly - Brodie
Lil - Sandin

New (my pairs):

Brodie - McCabe
Rielly - Schenn
Gio - Lil

Scratch/Gone: Gust/Holl/Sandin

Sandin: wish him well, not what we needed right now.

Holl: defensive style depth guy

Gustafsson: offensive style depth guy or trade bait