TMLfans.ca

Maple Leafs News and Views => Leafs Media Rumours => General Rumours & Speculation => Topic started by: Tigger on September 08, 2016, 11:45:41 PM

Title: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on September 08, 2016, 11:45:41 PM
So, opening the thread I'm throwing out a salvo of whatever for next offseason. ( sure, ahat ) Big questions on D and I threw in Iginla for a larf. Guessing on Brown, Hyman, Zaitsev and Enroth contracts and a 2 mil increase in the cap.

FORWARDS

J. Van Riemsdyk ($ 4,250,000) --- A. Matthews ($ 925,000) --- M. Marner ($ 894,166)
N. Soshnikov ($ 736,666) --- W. Nylander ($ 894,166) --- J. Iginla ($ 3,000,000)
L. Komarov ($ 2,950,000) --- N. Kadri ($ 4,500,000) --- C. Brown ($ 1,200,000)
M. Martin ($ 2,500,000) --- F. Gauthier ($ 863,333) --- Z. Hyman ($ 900,000)

DEFENCE

M. Rielly ($ 5,000,000) --- ?. d ($ 0)
J. Gardiner ($ 4,050,000) --- N. Zaitsev ($ 3,000,000)
M. Marincin ($ 1,250,000) --- C. Carrick ($ 750,000)

GOAL

F. Andersen ($ 5,000,000) --- J. Enroth ($ 1,100,000)

Extras

K. Kapanen ($ 863,333) --- T. Dermott ($ 894,166) --- R. Valiev ($ 778,333)

---------------------------------------------------

2017 NHL Cap Limit: $ 75,000,000
23 Player Roster Cap Used: $ 51,599,163
Cap Hit from Buyout(s): + $ 1,333,333
2015 Bonus Overages: + $ 0 ( potential 3.7 )
Cap Retained in Trades : + $ 1,200,000
Long Term Injury Reserve: - $ 0
Cap Space Available : $ 20,867,504


Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on September 09, 2016, 08:45:59 AM
This thread confuses me.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on September 09, 2016, 10:07:31 AM
Yeah, the thread is about this year, that post is about what the team might look like at the end of the year and where the holes will be ( I could have just left out the free agent winger and not signed the leaf players )
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 10, 2016, 09:11:19 AM
One of my fav activities as a Leafs fan.  I'll put together a roster once Leafs training camp is underway.  Until then, we've got our hockey team, representing our Nation to support... and that marvellous U23 NA team. 

Hopefully the Jays can turn their September skid around, too.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 10, 2016, 09:48:17 AM
Something to maybe keep in mind during these is who the Leafs are most likely to lose in the expansion draft. If they can protect 7, 3 and 1 then a quick work up of their protected players might be:

Kadri
JVR
Komarov
Leipsic
Brown
Martin(A big leap but you figure you'd protect a guy a year after signing him to a 4 year deal)

Rielly
Gardiner
Carrick

Andersen

So I don't think there's a ton to worry about forward wise. Either we lose a pretty minor consideration like Leivo or we get relieved of a not great contract like Bozak or Lupul.

Defense is probably the bigger issue. It seems fairly unlikely that the team will be able to keep both Carrick and Marincin so this season will probably be a long evaluation as to which one is more valuable going forward.

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on September 11, 2016, 07:34:37 PM
I think there's a decent chance both Carrick and Marincin will finish their current contracts in Toronto as far as expansion goes. How many defencemen are we talking about being exposed?

Edit: Also, the only way it really matters is if they both knock it out of the park, if one is clearly the one to protect, ok, if they are both at that level, a trade should be possible.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on September 11, 2016, 07:39:48 PM
With Vegas being forced to meet a minimum of 60% of the cap through the expansion draft, I wonder if maybe Lupul or Bozak might actually be more appealing to them. Or, if they're really just looking for a cap acquisition, maybe even Horton - though, that is, admittedly, a long-shot.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: princedpw on September 11, 2016, 10:33:14 PM
With Vegas being forced to meet a minimum of 60% of the cap through the expansion draft, I wonder if maybe Lupul or Bozak might actually be more appealing to them. Or, if they're really just looking for a cap acquisition, maybe even Horton - though, that is, admittedly, a long-shot.

I kinda think Horton is an impossibly long shot.  There are enough overpaid but still viable players in the league that they'll be able to fill their payroll easily without stooping to Horton.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on September 12, 2016, 07:55:30 AM
With Vegas being forced to meet a minimum of 60% of the cap through the expansion draft, I wonder if maybe Lupul or Bozak might actually be more appealing to them. Or, if they're really just looking for a cap acquisition, maybe even Horton - though, that is, admittedly, a long-shot.

I think that Bozak would get claimed for sure if he was exposed, not sure the Leafs will do that though unless they're hands are tied with the requirements.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 12, 2016, 10:32:53 AM
I think there's a decent chance both Carrick and Marincin will finish their current contracts in Toronto as far as expansion goes. How many defencemen are we talking about being exposed?

Edit: Also, the only way it really matters is if they both knock it out of the park, if one is clearly the one to protect, ok, if they are both at that level, a trade should be possible.

You protect three defensemen. I'm assuming Zaitsev is exempt so two of the three spots will be Gardiner and Rielly. So one of those two will almost certainly be exposed.

And it only matters in the sense of projecting who will be on the team next year.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on September 12, 2016, 10:40:10 AM
Would they even look at our non Rielly/Gardiner defense if Bozak and Komarov were exposed?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 12, 2016, 10:53:43 AM
Would they even look at our non Rielly/Gardiner defense if Bozak and Komarov were exposed?

Depends on how valuable they think those guys are, I suppose. In terms of Carrick it's not super hard to see a team thinking a young, affordable RHD is more valuable than a couple of expensive 3rd liners in their 30's.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on September 12, 2016, 10:56:11 AM
I think there's a decent chance both Carrick and Marincin will finish their current contracts in Toronto as far as expansion goes. How many defencemen are we talking about being exposed?

Edit: Also, the only way it really matters is if they both knock it out of the park, if one is clearly the one to protect, ok, if they are both at that level, a trade should be possible.

You protect three defensemen. I'm assuming Zaitsev is exempt so two of the three spots will be Gardiner and Rielly. So one of those two will almost certainly be exposed.

And it only matters in the sense of projecting who will be on the team next year.

I meant how many will be exposed league wide, I get the reasoning behind the three you noted.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 12, 2016, 11:10:45 AM
I meant how many will be exposed league wide, I get the reasoning behind the three you noted.

Beats me in terms of league wide. Still, the Leafs will lose a player and we should be mindful of who it might be.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on September 12, 2016, 11:10:58 AM
Did a quick go through GeneralFanager's expansion draft tool, and assuming every team protects 3 defencemen (some might opt to go the 8-skaters route instead of course), this is the pool of potential defenceman available:

Despres/Fowler/Stoner
Schenn
McQuaid/Miller
Pokka/TVR
Zadorov/Wiercioch
R. Murray/J. Johnson
M. Green/J. Eriksson
Fayne
Pysyk/Petrovic
Spurgeon/Scandella
Hickey/de Haan/Pulock
Klein
Cole/Pouliot/Dumoulin
Braun/Dillon
Coburn/Garrison
Orlov/Orpik
Enstrom/Stuart

I did that pretty quickly, in some cases it's an either/or pick per team or a team has to expose 2 of them.

That might be a big enough pool of decent-to-good NHL defencemen that Marincin or Carrick (whoever plays worse this season) goes unclaimed.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on September 12, 2016, 11:29:38 AM
Did a quick go through GeneralFanager's expansion draft tool, and assuming every team protects 3 defencemen (some might opt to go the 8-skaters route instead of course), this is the pool of potential defenceman available:

Despres/Fowler/Stoner
Schenn
McQuaid/Miller
Pokka/TVR
Zadorov/Wiercioch
R. Murray/J. Johnson
M. Green/J. Eriksson
Fayne
Pysyk/Petrovic
Spurgeon/Scandella
Hickey/de Haan/Pulock
Klein
Cole/Pouliot/Dumoulin
Braun/Dillon
Coburn/Garrison
Orlov/Orpik
Enstrom/Stuart

I did that pretty quickly, in some cases it's an either/or pick per team or a team has to expose 2 of them.

That might be a big enough pool of decent-to-good NHL defencemen that Marincin or Carrick (whoever plays worse this season) goes unclaimed.

Thanks for that Carlton.  That's what I was thinking about...like is Marincin or Carrick really that enticing when compared to what will be exposed? 

Looking at that list, for example, I'm not so sure.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on September 12, 2016, 11:42:15 AM
Thanks for that Carlton.  That's what I was thinking about...like is Marincin or Carrick really that enticing when compared to what will be exposed? 

Looking at that list, for example, I'm not so sure.

I think that if Carrick were exposed (and had a relatively successful 16/17 season), he might stand out a little bit as a younger defenceman with an offensive upside higher than a lot of defencemen on that list. Being an ever-elusive right-handed shot probably would make him a little more enticing too.

After looking at that list though I'm not sure I'd be too worried about Marincin, unless Vegas has a stats guy they trust who really, really likes him.

edit: Then again, they have to pick SOMEBODY from the Leafs. So if the forward options aren't appealing (which they might not be) then they'd go with a defenceman by default.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on September 12, 2016, 11:54:22 AM
I think that as things stand right now, the Leafs will protect the following players: Kadri, JVR, Bozak, Komarov, Martin, Brown, Leipsic, Rielly, Gardiner, Carrick, Andersen

That would leave the following players exposed: Horton, Lupul, Holland, Rychel, Leivo, Marincin, Loov, Corrado. With the assumption that Lupul, Holland, and Marincin all meet the GP requirement.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on September 12, 2016, 12:05:14 PM

edit: Then again, they have to pick SOMEBODY from the Leafs. So if the forward options aren't appealing (which they might not be) then they'd go with a defenceman by default.

OK, that I didn't know.  So that changes things for me...hmmm.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: jdh1 on September 12, 2016, 12:58:35 PM
I think that as things stand right now, the Leafs will protect the following players: Kadri, JVR, Bozak, Komarov, Martin, Brown, Leipsic, Rielly, Gardiner, Carrick, Andersen

That would leave the following players exposed: Horton, Lupul, Holland, Rychel, Leivo, Marincin, Loov, Corrado. With the assumption that Lupul, Holland, and Marincin all meet the GP requirement.
Here's hoping that Rychel develops this year and he would be protected.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on September 12, 2016, 01:00:18 PM
I think that as things stand right now, the Leafs will protect the following players: Kadri, JVR, Bozak, Komarov, Martin, Brown, Leipsic, Rielly, Gardiner, Carrick, Andersen

That would leave the following players exposed: Horton, Lupul, Holland, Rychel, Leivo, Marincin, Loov, Corrado. With the assumption that Lupul, Holland, and Marincin all meet the GP requirement.

The only one I might miss if he continues to develop is Marincin.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on September 13, 2016, 03:07:01 PM
I think that as things stand right now, the Leafs will protect the following players: Kadri, JVR, Bozak, Komarov, Martin, Brown, Leipsic, Rielly, Gardiner, Carrick, Andersen

That would leave the following players exposed: Horton, Lupul, Holland, Rychel, Leivo, Marincin, Loov, Corrado. With the assumption that Lupul, Holland, and Marincin all meet the GP requirement.

I was actually wondering if the Leafs would expose Bozak June 2017 and run Kadri and Matthews 17/18.

If not then I would expect the list to be as you put it.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 13, 2016, 03:26:55 PM
That would leave the following players exposed: Horton, Lupul, Holland, Rychel, Leivo, Marincin, Loov, Corrado. With the assumption that Lupul, Holland, and Marincin all meet the GP requirement.

Which GP requirement? The only GP requirement I know of is that a couple of exposed players have to exceed a GP total but not all of them do.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: pnjunction on September 13, 2016, 03:45:53 PM
That would leave the following players exposed: Horton, Lupul, Holland, Rychel, Leivo, Marincin, Loov, Corrado. With the assumption that Lupul, Holland, and Marincin all meet the GP requirement.

Which GP requirement? The only GP requirement I know of is that a couple of exposed players have to exceed a GP total but not all of them do.

2 FW and 1 D have to meet the requirement (which is 40 GP in last season or 70 GP in last 2 seasons, so basically pray Lupul plays at least 24 games this season...)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 13, 2016, 03:47:18 PM
2 FW and 1 D have to meet the requirement

Ah, with the assumption that those three are the guys who meet it. Understood.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on September 13, 2016, 03:59:05 PM
2 FW and 1 D have to meet the requirement

Ah, with the assumption that those three are the guys who meet it. Understood.

Is that because it's assumed that the others on Carlton's list won't meet it?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 24, 2016, 11:29:59 AM
One crazy move I'd probably pull the trigger on is Nylander for Trouba.

Jets get a potential future 1/2C to develop with Laine.  We shore up our top 4 D.

Rielly-Trouba
Gardiner-Zaitsev

We have Matthews and Kadri as our 1 & 2C.  They have Scheifle and Nylander.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on September 25, 2016, 10:51:28 AM
I think I would pull the trigger on that deal as well
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on September 25, 2016, 12:15:30 PM
No chance, Marner, Nylander and Matthews are the holy trinity that are going to lead us back to the promised land.

Andreas Johnson, Travis Dermott and a good pick should get it done.

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 25, 2016, 05:18:05 PM
I don't think that Trouba has a high enough upside that you'd want to trade Nylander for him.

I doubt any sort of package where Dermott is the most valuable asset gets it done. This is where the Leafs not holding onto their late first round picks/reaching with their high seconds the last two years hurts them. They don't really have any of those A-/B+ sort of prospects outside of maybe Kapanen. If they had a Konecny or Gabriel Carlsson or someone like that it may be the basis of an offer
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: RedLeaf on September 25, 2016, 10:39:28 PM
I don't think that Trouba has a high enough upside that you'd want to trade Nylander for him.

I doubt any sort of package where Dermott is the most valuable asset gets it done. This is where the Leafs not holding onto their late first round picks/reaching with their high seconds the last two years hurts them. They don't really have any of those A-/B+ sort of prospects outside of maybe Kapanen. If they had a Konecny or Gabriel Carlsson or someone like that it may be the basis of an offer

Kapanen and Dermott might not be too bad an offer for Winnipeg to chew on for Trouba.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 25, 2016, 11:36:43 PM
Kapanen and Dermott might not be too bad an offer for Winnipeg to chew on for Trouba.

Leaving aside whether or not that's fair strictly on a balancing the scales sense I think it's sort of a uniquely bad fit for the Jets. Dermott is at least a couple years away and the Jets have used their top pick in each of the last three years(#9, #17 and #2) on guys who figure to primarily be scoring wingers.

Remember that Winnipeg was a playoff team a year ago. I think it would be an abrupt change of course for them to be willing to trade a good, young NHL defenseman for guys who realistically don't help them for a few years at best.

There's an article on NHLnumbers about the possibility of the Leafs trading for Trouba(which makes the case that you'd probably need Marner or Nylander in the deal) that has this tweet:


And if you click on that Lawless' profile he seems to be pretty sure the Jets are looking for defensive help right now on the left side. Last year I floated the idea of Travis Hamonic being someone who might interest the Jets and I do think that's the kind of player you need to include in a trade like this. Let's keep in mind though that what happened with Drouin last year is pretty solid evidence that asking for a trade doesn't necessarily lead to one if the team doesn't get offers they like.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: RedLeaf on September 26, 2016, 08:26:13 AM
What an asinine request from the Jets. Same age, position and calibre? What team would make that trade? Another team in a similar position with that particular type of defensemen requesting a trade as well? Good luck Jets!
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on September 26, 2016, 09:19:10 AM
Can someone elucidate me on the allure of Trouba?

Checks: young, RHD, Rielly-esque numbers
Nopes: looking mildly expensive, Rielly-esque numbers against lesser opponents

Is he worth the princely ransom the Jets have outlined?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on September 26, 2016, 09:25:21 AM
Can someone elucidate me on the allure of Trouba?

Checks: young, RHD, Rielly-esque numbers
Nopes: looking mildly expensive, Rielly-esque numbers against lesser opponents

Is he worth the princely ransom the Jets have outlined?

This article/tweet by Garret Hohl at JetsNation might be helpful: http://jetsnation.ca/2016/6/6/don-t-let-point-totals-fool-you-trouba-has-been-getting-better-and-better

Quote
Garret Hohl ‏@GarretHohl  16 hours ago
Stuart last 2yrs:
w/ Trouba: 51% Corsi, 45% Goals
w/o Trouba: 45% Corsi, 47% Goals
Trouba w/o: 55% Corsi, 63% Goals
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on September 26, 2016, 09:34:03 AM
I was wondering if it was Gardiner that they would target as a LD who is on a reasonable $4 MIL contract.  Add a Kapanen and it might close the deal.

That leaves a hole on the Leafs LD so I would try to get Lindholm, another RFA holdout.  JVR would be the center piece.  A young dman like Corrado would be added as well as a 2nd prospect.

That would leave Rielly, Trouba and Lindholm as the dmen the Leafs protect in the Las Vegas expansion draft
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on September 26, 2016, 09:37:00 AM
so gardiner for trouba?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on September 26, 2016, 09:38:52 AM
I was wondering if it was Gardiner that they would target as a LD who is on a reasonable $4 MIL contract.  Add a Kapanen and it might close the deal.

That leaves a hole on the Leafs LD so I would try to get Lindholm, another RFA holdout.  JVR would be the center piece.  A young dman like Corrado would be added as well as a 2nd prospect.

That would leave Rielly, Trouba and Lindholm as the dmen the Leafs protect in the Las Vegas expansion draft

haha beat me to it...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on September 26, 2016, 09:40:20 AM
I like the jvr for lindholm idea also but isn't anahem an internal cap team.

Is there a salary dump that toronto could take back in that deal?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on September 26, 2016, 09:47:05 AM
This article/tweet by Garret Hohl at JetsNation might be helpful: http://jetsnation.ca/2016/6/6/don-t-let-point-totals-fool-you-trouba-has-been-getting-better-and-better

Quote
Garret Hohl ‏@GarretHohl  16 hours ago
Stuart last 2yrs:
w/ Trouba: 51% Corsi, 45% Goals
w/o Trouba: 45% Corsi, 47% Goals
Trouba w/o: 55% Corsi, 63% Goals

Fantastic. Thanks, Carlton.

So he's already good despite his wonky deployment, and still very early in his development curve. > or < than Seth Jones?

I don't see a match with the Leafs in terms of trading partners, nor do I want the Leafs to traipse down the path of rushing things by forcing multiple moves to accommodate an opportunity that still qualifies as a gamble at this stage in our rebuild.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 26, 2016, 12:47:50 PM
What an asinine request from the Jets. Same age, position and calibre? What team would make that trade? Another team in a similar position with that particular type of defensemen requesting a trade as well? Good luck Jets!

I'd imagine that the hopes would be from the Jets that they'd be able to find a team with a glut of LHD similar to how Winnipeg is stacked on the RHD and who would make a trade for the sake of balance. Philadelphia is a team who might fit that bill. They're not all NHL ready yet but they've got a bunch of young defensemen in Gostisbehere, Sanheim, Morin and Provorov who are all LHD.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 26, 2016, 12:55:50 PM
so gardiner for trouba?

The issue there being that Gardiner's 4 years older and only has three years left on his deal.

Still, I think that's at least in the ballpark of what we'd realistically be talking about. I think you'd have to be comfortable making that trade without assuming Anaheim wouldn't be facing the exact same issue with Lindholm though.

Which, again, is where it all gets a little sticky for me. Assuming you can't do a JVR for Lindholm deal(and if the Leafs could, I think that would largely be done already) is the D definitely better with Rielly-Trouba as the top pairing and something like Marincin-Zaitsev as the second pairing then they are with Rielly-? and Gardiner-? as your top 2 pairings? I don't know if that's clear cut, especially if it takes 5-6 million to sign Trouba.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 26, 2016, 01:24:37 PM
They want a young LHD back for Trouba?  Fine.  If we're looking to shore up our top 4 with this deal, they ain't getting Gards.

We also need to clear cap to sign Trouba.

Ehlers and Laine, isn't exactly Ladd and Laine

JVR + Marincin for Trouba.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 26, 2016, 01:39:42 PM
They want a young LHD back for Trouba?  Fine.  If we're looking to shore up our top 4 with this deal, they ain't getting Gards.
We also need to clear cap to sign Trouba.

Ehlers and Laine, isn't exactly Ladd and Laine

JVR + Marincin for Trouba.

I don't think they want just any LHD for Trouba. Certanly not a fairly limited bottom pairing guy. They want someone comparable.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on September 26, 2016, 01:52:47 PM
I was wondering if it was Gardiner that they would target as a LD who is on a reasonable $4 MIL contract.  Add a Kapanen and it might close the deal.

That leaves a hole on the Leafs LD so I would try to get Lindholm, another RFA holdout.  JVR would be the center piece.  A young dman like Corrado would be added as well as a 2nd prospect.

That would leave Rielly, Trouba and Lindholm as the dmen the Leafs protect in the Las Vegas expansion draft

I don't think Anaheim is looking to move Lindholm, but that might get you Fowler, I wonder if there's any interest in some sort of Trouba for Fowler + deal.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 26, 2016, 01:53:41 PM

I don't think they want just any LHD for Trouba. Certanly not a fairly limited bottom pairing guy. They want someone comparable.

That might be their initial ask.  But if the Leafs are offering up JVR as the main piece, that may lower the LHD expectation that goes along with him, some.

Plus by the end of the season, Marincin was partnered on the top pairing with Rielly.  Babs obviously saw something there.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 26, 2016, 02:01:23 PM
That might be their initial ask.  But if the Leafs are offering up JVR as the main piece, that may lower the LHD expectation that goes along with him, some.

That's only if nobody else offers them something more in line with what they're after. That seems fairly unlikely given how valuable someone like Trouba figures to be.

Plus by the end of the season, Marincin was partnered on the top pairing with Rielly.  Babs obviously saw something there.

The "something" probably being Auston Matthews.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 26, 2016, 02:17:58 PM
That's only if nobody else offers them something more in line with what they're after. That seems fairly unlikely given how valuable someone like Trouba figures to be.

Always a possibility given that 28 other teams are still out there.  But is a lateral move that doesn't actually improve either team's overall situation worth it?

The "something" probably being Auston Matthews.

IDK its not exactly like Babs put Corrado on the top pairing.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 26, 2016, 02:26:57 PM
Always a possibility given that 28 other teams are still out there.  But is a lateral move that doesn't actually improve either team's overall situation worth it?

It certainly can be if the "lateral move" means that you have a LHD instead of a RHD and the LHD is more open to signing a long-term deal than Trouba seems to be(or is already under contract).

Winnipeg is a team with reasons to be optimistic. They have a bunch of good young players like Ehlers and Scheifele and some potentially really good rookies in Laine and Connor. Maintaining an equilibrium on defense(but with everyone playing their natural side) seems like a pretty good outcome. 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 26, 2016, 02:30:33 PM
Always a possibility given that 28 other teams are still out there.  But is a lateral move that doesn't actually improve either team's overall situation worth it?

It certainly can be if the "lateral move" means that you have a LHD instead of a RHD and the LHD is more open to signing a long-term deal than Trouba seems to be(or is already under contract).

Winnipeg is a team with reasons to be optimistic. They have a bunch of good young players like Ehlers and Scheifele and some potentially really good rookies in Laine and Connor. Maintaining an equilibrium on defense(but with everyone playing their natural side) seems like a pretty good outcome.

Lindholm for Trouba.  Straight up.  ;)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Crake on September 26, 2016, 04:10:12 PM
I was wondering if it was Gardiner that they would target as a LD who is on a reasonable $4 MIL contract.  Add a Kapanen and it might close the deal.

That leaves a hole on the Leafs LD so I would try to get Lindholm, another RFA holdout.  JVR would be the center piece.  A young dman like Corrado would be added as well as a 2nd prospect.

That would leave Rielly, Trouba and Lindholm as the dmen the Leafs protect in the Las Vegas expansion draft

I don't think Anaheim is looking to move Lindholm, but that might get you Fowler, I wonder if there's any interest in some sort of Trouba for Fowler + deal.
I know it's into fantasy hockey territory, but that was my thought as well, some sort of three way trade centred around Trouba, JvR and Fowler.

Fun things like that never happen in the NHL any more though :(
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on September 26, 2016, 04:11:44 PM
Always a possibility given that 28 other teams are still out there.  But is a lateral move that doesn't actually improve either team's overall situation worth it?

It certainly can be if the "lateral move" means that you have a LHD instead of a RHD and the LHD is more open to signing a long-term deal than Trouba seems to be(or is already under contract).

Winnipeg is a team with reasons to be optimistic. They have a bunch of good young players like Ehlers and Scheifele and some potentially really good rookies in Laine and Connor. Maintaining an equilibrium on defense(but with everyone playing their natural side) seems like a pretty good outcome.

Lindholm for Trouba.  Straight up.  ;)

Don't even joke about that!   I want them both with the Leafs!

 ;D
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 26, 2016, 04:17:44 PM

Don't even joke about that!   I want them both with the Leafs!

 ;D

Gotta leave room for when McDavid refuses to sign his first RFA in Edmonton. :P
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on September 29, 2016, 04:21:44 PM
Trouba, Ristolainen, Lindholm, and Kucherov still without contracts.

According to Bob McKenzie, the first three are at impasses with their teams sort of because of Rielly/Ekblad and their contracts.

Sure would be nice to have some cap space right now.

If we didn't got for Martin and Polak, we'd be floating in about 6ish M of cap space + cap hits of whoever we need to trade to make one of these fancy names show up on our roster.

Next season when we will have a glut of cap space, I don't really see any premiere RHDs approaching free agency of the right age/development curve (other than Zaitsev and Parayko).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 29, 2016, 04:50:57 PM

I like all of those guys but I don't think the Leafs are ready to be paying RFA compensation yet.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on September 29, 2016, 05:13:38 PM

I like all of those guys but I don't think the Leafs are ready to be paying RFA compensation yet.

Weren't we pretty ready to offer sheet Jones earlier in the offseason?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 29, 2016, 05:31:46 PM

I like all of those guys but I don't think the Leafs are ready to be paying RFA compensation yet.

Weren't we pretty ready to offer sheet Jones earlier in the offseason?

Fair point. Still, I'm more sold on Jones' potential to really be a #1 guy than I am any of those guys. That was also before I knew our defensive cupboard would still look as bare post-draft as it did pre-draft.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on September 29, 2016, 05:47:29 PM

I like all of those guys but I don't think the Leafs are ready to be paying RFA compensation yet.

Weren't we pretty ready to offer sheet Jones earlier in the offseason?

Fair point. Still, I'm more sold on Jones' potential to really be a #1 guy than I am any of those guys. That was also before I knew our defensive cupboard would still look as bare post-draft as it did pre-draft.

Of the bunch, I'm most sold on Lindholm, but he's basically Swedish Rielly. I just thought that knowing there were these big ticket RFAs out there for teams with budget/cap issues that the Leafs should've opted for flexibility rather than locker room presence.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 29, 2016, 05:53:14 PM
Of the bunch, I'm most sold on Lindholm, but he's basically Swedish Rielly. I just thought that knowing there were these big ticket RFAs out there for teams with budget/cap issues that the Leafs should've opted for flexibility rather than locker room presence.

Don't get me wrong. Cap wise I agree with you 100%. If I had my way the team wouldn't have Andersen, Martin or Polak on the books and would have done more to clear up one of the bigger salaries on the roster. I'd much rather have that flexibility then what those guys bring.

I just don't think you can look at the team's farm system right now and write off any sort of drafting of a high value D or G prospect next year.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on September 29, 2016, 06:52:58 PM
So the subtext I'm taking from this is our mystifying offseason is already biting us in the buttocks.

I'm going to lay this at the feet of Lou. Honestly so long as we are talking mystifying I still don't quite understand that particular hire.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on September 29, 2016, 07:06:08 PM
Of the bunch, I'm most sold on Lindholm, but he's basically Swedish Rielly. I just thought that knowing there were these big ticket RFAs out there for teams with budget/cap issues that the Leafs should've opted for flexibility rather than locker room presence.

Don't get me wrong. Cap wise I agree with you 100%. If I had my way the team wouldn't have Andersen, Martin or Polak on the books and would have done more to clear up one of the bigger salaries on the roster. I'd much rather have that flexibility then what those guys bring.

I just don't think you can look at the team's farm system right now and write off any sort of drafting of a high value D or G prospect next year.

Say the Leafs draft 1st overall again next year.  Do they take Nolan Patrick if he is still the consensus #1, or do they take Timothy Liljegren if he is still the top rated d-man?  This is where the whole "take the best player available" strategy starts to get iffy for me.  If there isn't that much of a drop between Patrick to Liljegren, then I say take Liljegren, or trade out of the #1 spot to #2 and Liljegren.  I just think that you aren't going to get that much to drop to #2 in a trade.   
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 29, 2016, 07:51:23 PM
Say the Leafs draft 1st overall again next year.  Do they take Nolan Patrick if he is still the consensus #1, or do they take Timothy Liljegren if he is still the top rated d-man?  This is where the whole "take the best player available" strategy starts to get iffy for me.  If there isn't that much of a drop between Patrick to Liljegren, then I say take Liljegren, or trade out of the #1 spot to #2 and Liljegren.  I just think that you aren't going to get that much to drop to #2 in a trade.

I think a ton of that depends on what happens this year and what we see with the young players. We might very well be around next June and thinking we might not be as rock solid in terms of high value young forwards as we think we are. Likewise, Rielly might grow to the point where we're less worried about finding a #1 defenseman. So "need" might be a non-issue.

I said it elsewhere though. You shouldn't draft for need in the sense of "Our NHL team doesn't have great defensemen, so we should draft a defenseman" but the idea of "We don't have a good defensive prospect base so we should draft a defenseman" makes sense to me.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on September 29, 2016, 07:53:06 PM
If we get #1, couldn't we move the weaker of our big three for an established defender (or high pick + d prospect) and still draft Patrick at 1?

Drafting Defense and Goaltending is a huge priority, barring a strong trade this year.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on September 29, 2016, 07:56:44 PM
Say the Leafs draft 1st overall again next year.  Do they take Nolan Patrick if he is still the consensus #1, or do they take Timothy Liljegren if he is still the top rated d-man?  This is where the whole "take the best player available" strategy starts to get iffy for me.  If there isn't that much of a drop between Patrick to Liljegren, then I say take Liljegren, or trade out of the #1 spot to #2 and Liljegren.  I just think that you aren't going to get that much to drop to #2 in a trade.

If the difference between the two isn't significant, then you take Liljegren - because, it means there really isn't a consensus #1, just a strong preference. If there's a clear gap, you probably can get a reasonable amount to trade down to 2. If not, you take Patrick, and, if you can't work out a deal you like for another young top pairing defenceman, you build your team like Pittsburgh.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 29, 2016, 07:58:10 PM
So the subtext I'm taking from this is our mystifying offseason is already biting us in the buttocks.

That strikes me as a bit of an overstatement. Everyone knew there'd be some RFA defensemen out there that teams would have trouble signing. If the folks running the team thought the RFA route was either a good or a likely route to adding one of those guys I don't think the signings they made would have happened. So I don't see this as a situation where those signings closed off any avenues the team planned on pursuing.

I'm going to lay this at the feet of Lou. Honestly so long as we are talking mystifying I still don't quite understand that particular hire.

More and more I just think it was optics. I think this group, faced with a board that probably has some loud opinions on it, wanted to cut off any questions about experience or expertise they might have dealt with.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 29, 2016, 07:59:28 PM
If we get #1, couldn't we move the weaker of our big three for an established defender (or high pick + d prospect) and still draft Patrick at 1?

What grade of established defender do you figure an A- prospect fetches? I doubt you land the sort of guy who solves anything.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on September 29, 2016, 08:54:52 PM
If we get #1, couldn't we move the weaker of our big three for an established defender (or high pick + d prospect) and still draft Patrick at 1?

What grade of established defender do you figure an A- prospect fetches? I doubt you land the sort of guy who solves anything.

Hard to say until we get there, depending on cap circumstances, but by and large, I agree with your assessment when you put it so succinctly.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on September 29, 2016, 09:57:22 PM
If we get #1, couldn't we move the weaker of our big three for an established defender (or high pick + d prospect) and still draft Patrick at 1?

What grade of established defender do you figure an A- prospect fetches? I doubt you land the sort of guy who solves anything.

Hard to say until we get there, depending on cap circumstances, but by and large, I agree with your assessment when you put it so succinctly.

Could be sweet part of a larger deal.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 30, 2016, 08:47:26 AM
Of the bunch, I'm most sold on Lindholm, but he's basically Swedish Rielly. I just thought that knowing there were these big ticket RFAs out there for teams with budget/cap issues that the Leafs should've opted for flexibility rather than locker room presence.

Don't get me wrong. Cap wise I agree with you 100%. If I had my way the team wouldn't have Andersen, Martin or Polak on the books and would have done more to clear up one of the bigger salaries on the roster. I'd much rather have that flexibility then what those guys bring.

I just don't think you can look at the team's farm system right now and write off any sort of drafting of a high value D or G prospect next year.

But you don't have your way.  And the season hasn't started yet.  And you have no idea what impact these players can bring to this TEAM.

You can't build an NHL team entirely on skill.

You're not close to Andersen I suspect and like me have barely seen him play.  I would have preferred bringing Reimer back, especially considering what he signed for but that's because I don't know Andersen that well.

Martin is a GOOD insulator and team player and signed for a decent value for what he brings.  Ditto Polak.

Ask the Czechs what they think of Polak.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on September 30, 2016, 10:21:37 AM
TheLeafsNation: What Game Score Says About The Leafs At The World Cup (http://theleafsnation.com/2016/9/23/what-game-score-says-about-the-leafs-at-the-world-cup)

Quote
Roman Polak: In what is perhaps the least surprising thing of this tournament, Polak was not good. Actually, that's underselling it, he was bad. Actually, that's underselling it, he was very bad. Actually, thats' underselling it, he was extremely bad. Actually, that's underselling it, he was terrible. Actually, that's underselling it, he was on another level of terrible that I was frankly unaware existed. Actually, that's underselling it, he was horrific in the same way that most horror movies are also horrific, just scary bad, but also still frightening to watch if you have a rooting interest for the characters involved. Actually, that's underselling it, he was an actual train-wreck. Actually, that's underselling it, he was an unmitigated disaster of epic proportions. Actually, that's underselling it, he was a perfect analogy for ice hockey's version of the Titanic. Actually, that's underselling it, he was worse than the Raycroft for Rask trade. Okay on second thought, that last one went a bit too far. The point is that Polak did not play well. He had the worst Game Score at the tournament thanks to the worst Corsi differential there at -36. The next worst player was a three-way tie at -24. The difference between Polak and the next worst Corsi performance is the same as that guy and the guy 34 players below him. That bad. Polak was also a -4 in 5-on-5 goal differential, also last, but this time, he had company as it was a five-way tie with four players on Team USA. But hey, at least he got an assist and blocked six shots. It is honestly impressive how bad Polak was, I didn't think it could be done, but it was done, and it was done by a member of the 2016-17 Toronto Maple Leafs.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on September 30, 2016, 10:41:56 AM
Say the Leafs draft 1st overall again next year.  Do they take Nolan Patrick if he is still the consensus #1, or do they take Timothy Liljegren if he is still the top rated d-man?  This is where the whole "take the best player available" strategy starts to get iffy for me.  If there isn't that much of a drop between Patrick to Liljegren, then I say take Liljegren, or trade out of the #1 spot to #2 and Liljegren.  I just think that you aren't going to get that much to drop to #2 in a trade.

If the difference between the two isn't significant, then you take Liljegren - because, it means there really isn't a consensus #1, just a strong preference. If there's a clear gap, you probably can get a reasonable amount to trade down to 2. If not, you take Patrick, and, if you can't work out a deal you like for another young top pairing defenceman, you build your team like Pittsburgh.

Pittsburgh did a good job in getting Letang in the third round.  The Leafs might have something along those lines with Nielsen or Dermott.  The first time they won the cup in 2009 their defence consisted of Letang, Gonchar, Goligoski, and Orpick in their top 4.  At that time, I am not sure that Letang was at the level that year that he is today.  This last cup that the Pens won, Letang was definitely the linchpin on that defence.   
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 30, 2016, 11:23:45 AM
TheLeafsNation: What Game Score Says About The Leafs At The World Cup (http://theleafsnation.com/2016/9/23/what-game-score-says-about-the-leafs-at-the-world-cup)

Quote
Roman Polak: In what is perhaps the least surprising thing of this tournament, Polak was not good. Actually, that's underselling it, he was bad. Actually, that's underselling it, he was very bad. Actually, thats' underselling it, he was extremely bad. Actually, that's underselling it, he was terrible. Actually, that's underselling it, he was on another level of terrible that I was frankly unaware existed. Actually, that's underselling it, he was horrific in the same way that most horror movies are also horrific, just scary bad, but also still frightening to watch if you have a rooting interest for the characters involved. Actually, that's underselling it, he was an actual train-wreck. Actually, that's underselling it, he was an unmitigated disaster of epic proportions. Actually, that's underselling it, he was a perfect analogy for ice hockey's version of the Titanic. Actually, that's underselling it, he was worse than the Raycroft for Rask trade. Okay on second thought, that last one went a bit too far. The point is that Polak did not play well. He had the worst Game Score at the tournament thanks to the worst Corsi differential there at -36. The next worst player was a three-way tie at -24. The difference between Polak and the next worst Corsi performance is the same as that guy and the guy 34 players below him. That bad. Polak was also a -4 in 5-on-5 goal differential, also last, but this time, he had company as it was a five-way tie with four players on Team USA. But hey, at least he got an assist and blocked six shots. It is honestly impressive how bad Polak was, I didn't think it could be done, but it was done, and it was done by a member of the 2016-17 Toronto Maple Leafs.

And then of course there's the view of his actual GM, not some stat watcher.

Leafs Defenceman Roman Polak is ‘Heart and Soul’ of Czech Team (https://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/2016/09/13/leafs-defenceman-roman-polak-is-heart-and-soul-of-czech-team.html)

Quote
“He’s our heart and soul,” Czech general manager Martin Rucinski said. “He plays hard, blocks shots. He’s a difficult player to play against. With our situation in Czech hockey, he was an easy choice for our team.”

Not just 'a' heart and soul player.  'The' heart and soul player.

Roles matter.  He wasn't brought for his offence.  :P
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 30, 2016, 11:56:22 AM
Don't get me wrong. Cap wise I agree with you 100%. If I had my way the team wouldn't have Andersen, Martin or Polak on the books and would have done more to clear up one of the bigger salaries on the roster. I'd much rather have that flexibility then what those guys bring.

I just don't think you can look at the team's farm system right now and write off any sort of drafting of a high value D or G prospect next year.

But you don't have your way.

This is true. A keen-eyed sleuth, however, might notice that the name of the thread is "Armchair GM" and not "Actual GM".

You can't build an NHL team entirely on skill.

Absent bringing in any of those guys the Leafs still would have had  role players and Gritty McGrittersons. Komarov, Laich, Greening, Marincin, etc
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 30, 2016, 12:14:39 PM
Any of those guys?  Andersen's a gritty player?

Polak's only on a one year.  I'm just saying, let's not INVENT problems before they actually establish themselves as problems.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 30, 2016, 12:18:11 PM
Any of those guys?  Andersen's a gritty player?

I don't know what this is supposed to mean.

Polak's only on a one year.  I'm just saying, let's not INVENT problems before they actually establish themselves as problems.

The whole point of this thread is to talk about what we might do as the GM of the team. That's not "inventing problems". It's a hypothetical exercise.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on September 30, 2016, 12:33:15 PM
Any of those guys?  Andersen's a gritty player?

I don't know what this is supposed to mean.

Polak's only on a one year.  I'm just saying, let's not INVENT problems before they actually establish themselves as problems.

The whole point of this thread is to talk about what we might do as the GM of the team. That's not "inventing problems". It's a hypothetical exercise.

Hypothetical or not, to me Armchair GM means you take the team that exists today and move forward with it 'hypothetically'.  Saying you'd take back moves already made, isn't Armchair GM'ing.  Its complaining.  Like the trade for Kessel when Burke gave up 2 unprotected 1sts and a 2nd when the team obviously needed rebuilding. 

Let's Armchair forward, not back.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 30, 2016, 12:45:46 PM
Hypothetical or not, to me Armchair GM means you take the team that exists today and move forward with it 'hypothetically'.  Saying you'd take back moves already made, isn't Armchair GM'ing.  Its complaining.  Like the trade for Kessel when Burke gave up 2 unprotected 1sts and a 2nd when the team obviously needed rebuilding. 

Let's Armchair forward, not back.

Nah, I'm good. You do you though.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on September 30, 2016, 02:15:58 PM
If we get #1, couldn't we move the weaker of our big three for an established defender (or high pick + d prospect) and still draft Patrick at 1?

What grade of established defender do you figure an A- prospect fetches? I doubt you land the sort of guy who solves anything.

Huh. I always sort of though talent-for-talent from the big three would be the way the Leafs grabbed an upgrade of defense. Maybe not fully emerged, "established" but someone on the cusp of prospect and NHLer.
That wouldn't be a sure shot at a top-pairing defenseman, but it might be a pretty valuable contribution to the defense all the same.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 30, 2016, 02:24:14 PM
If we get #1, couldn't we move the weaker of our big three for an established defender (or high pick + d prospect) and still draft Patrick at 1?

What grade of established defender do you figure an A- prospect fetches? I doubt you land the sort of guy who solves anything.

Huh. I always sort of though talent-for-talent from the big three would be the way the Leafs grabbed an upgrade of defense. Maybe not fully emerged, "established" but someone on the cusp of prospect and NHLer.
That wouldn't be a sure shot at a top-pairing defenseman, but it might be a pretty valuable contribution to the defense all the same.

Absolutely that's something they could do. My comment was more predicated on two things:

1) That a player being "established" in any meaningful sense raises their value. So an A- prospect is probably bringing back, on a straight trade, an established player a half-grade or so lower.

2) That right now defensemen are valuable to the point that I think the forward-defense drop-off value is as sharp as established/prospect.

So could you do a deal like Nylander for Provorov or Werenski? I don't know. My guess is maybe. But in terms of a straight up trade for a NHL defenseman I really don't know what he could bring back. My money says we'd hear back some disappointing names.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on September 30, 2016, 03:52:31 PM
2) That right now defensemen are valuable to the point that I think the forward-defense drop-off value is as sharp as established/prospect.

I wonder if that is because there seems to be a lack of top notch d-man in the draft or at least more risk in drafting a top notch d-man near the top of the draft.  Here is the number of d-men taken in the top 5 since 2010:

2010:  1 at 3 (Erik Gudbranson)
2011:  1 at 4 (Adam Larsson)
2012:  3 at 2, 4, 5 (Ryan Murray, Griffin Reinhart, Morgan Rielly)
2013:  1 at 4 (Seth Jones)
2014:  1 at 1 (Aaron Eckblad)
2015:  1 at 5 (Noah Hannifin)
2016:  1 at 5 (Olli Juolevi) 

So it's either harder to get a read on d-men when they are young so teams are somewhat hesitant to risk a high pick on them, or the development cycle for a d-man doesn't allow them to be as noticeable as 18 year olds as the forwards.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 30, 2016, 04:17:52 PM

It's an interesting idea. I don't know how much it holds up though. In the seven drafts you mention there are/were 9 defensemen taken in the top 5. In the 7 drafts previous to those(2003-2009) there were 10 defensemen taken in the top 5. It's tough to compare as we don't really have a full idea of the newer guys careers but it seems like you have roughly the same percentage of busts/stars/ok players.

Go back another 7 drafts(1996-2002) and again it's roughly the same number of top 5 defensemen(11) but this time it's an absolute trainwreck in terms of quality. It's Jay Bouwmeester as unquestionably the best and then guys like Chris Phillips and Joni Pitkanen. Go back another 7 drafts and there are 12 top 5 defensemen although the quality improves with Niedermayer and Pronger.

So the number of defensemen picked in the top 5 seems pretty consistent. The quality of them too except for the awful 1996-2002 stretch. So changes in the draft seem like a tough sell. I think the value of defensemen is more just about coaches valuing the transition game and realizing how valuable the guys who can skate and play with smarts are. It used to be that the big slow physical guys were just as valued and (maybe) just as valuable. Now that's no longer the case. So the pool of highly sought after defensemen shrank and the guys in it became more sought after.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on September 30, 2016, 04:56:56 PM
Some talk about Nolan Patrick and the draft here yesterday, last week Bob McKenzie released his pre-season rankings for the 2017 draft: http://www.tsn.ca/mckenzie-s-pre-season-ranking-the-nolan-patrick-draft-1.567410

What he wrote on Patrick was interesting:

Quote
While some of the scouts surveyed by TSN do not discount Patrick evolving into that role, the consensus view is Patrick is projected more as a second-line NHL centre and doesn't have the same “wow” factor as McDavid, Eichel and Matthews.

"He's going to be a good, maybe very good, NHL player," one scout said, "but he isn't a dynamic player. His skating isn't bad but he's not dynamic like those others [McDavid, Eichel and Matthews]."

...

Patrick's birthday is Sept. 19, so he was just four days off being eligible for last season's draft. Had he been available last June, where would he slot amongst the best players of a very strong draft class, like Matthews, Patrik Laine, Jesse Puljujarvi and Pierre-Luc Dubois, among others?

The consensus amongst scouts surveyed by TSN is that Patrick wouldn't have displaced any of the top four picks in last year's draft. Depending on the scout, they retroactively rank Patrick anywhere between No. 5 and 10, based on his 2015-16 season.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on September 30, 2016, 05:04:54 PM

It's an interesting idea. I don't know how much it holds up though. In the seven drafts you mention there are/were 9 defensemen taken in the top 5. In the 7 drafts previous to those(2003-2009) there were 10 defensemen taken in the top 5. It's tough to compare as we don't really have a full idea of the newer guys careers but it seems like you have roughly the same percentage of busts/stars/ok players.

Go back another 7 drafts(1996-2002) and again it's roughly the same number of top 5 defensemen(11) but this time it's an absolute trainwreck in terms of quality. It's Jay Bouwmeester as unquestionably the best and then guys like Chris Phillips and Joni Pitkanen. Go back another 7 drafts and there are 12 top 5 defensemen although the quality improves with Niedermayer and Pronger.

So the number of defensemen picked in the top 5 seems pretty consistent. The quality of them too except for the awful 1996-2002 stretch. So changes in the draft seem like a tough sell. I think the value of defensemen is more just about coaches valuing the transition game and realizing how valuable the guys who can skate and play with smarts are. It used to be that the big slow physical guys were just as valued and (maybe) just as valuable. Now that's no longer the case. So the pool of highly sought after defensemen shrank and the guys in it became more sought after.

Although the other way to look at it would be that the price of a top end d-man was always high, and then it could be tied to the draft.  I started looking at Norris winners in the 80's and 90's to see how many switched teams.  All of them did.  Randy Carlyle, Doug Wilson, Paul Coffey, Ray Bourque, Chris Chelios, Rod Langway, Brian Leetch, Al MacInnis, and Chris Pronger were all moved around.  So I looked at the situation around their trades:

Rand Carlyle:  Traded after his second year to the Pens.  Traded from Pens to the Jets in 8th year for a 1st round pick.
Doug Wilson:  Traded at the end of his career.
Paul Coffey:  He was moved a lot.  For a lot of different things at a lot of different times.
Ray Bourque:  Moved at the end of his career
Chris Chelios:  Moved to Chicago in his prime.  However he cost Dennis Savard.  He was traded to Detroit for 2 firsts and Anders Erickson.
Rod Langway:  Traded to Washington before his third year.  Also his Norris wins are a bit of an aberration (IMHO).
Brian Leetch:  Traded near the end.  As Leaf fans we know this.
Al MacInnis: Traded with a 4th to the Blues for Phil Housley and a 2nd. 
Chris Pronger:  Moved around a lot, for a lot of stuff.  Similar to Paul Coffey. 

When you get in to the 2000's you still have a couple of d-men that moved like Chara and Scott Niedermayer, but because Lidstrom won it so much, it's kinda throws this sort of analysis of using the Norris as a guideline in to the iffy category.

However the other part that has an impact is that trades are harder to complete now because of the cap, and also because of the cap you don't have financial problems forcing them to jettison good players at a bargain.  I think if this was still the 90's, Trouba would have a new address by now, and it would probably be the Rangers, or Detroit.   

So perhaps great d-man have always been at a premium, and maybe it's tied to the fact that it's harder to figure them out in the drafting stages.  I mean it does make sense in a way.  You have less of them than forwards.  It's likely the same effect that is seen with goalies. Goalies don't seem to get drafted very high either because they are harder to gauge when they are younger and that could be because the pool is smaller.  Also when you get a good goalie, they don't tend to switch teams in their primes. 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on September 30, 2016, 05:15:30 PM
Some talk about Nolan Patrick and the draft here yesterday, last week Bob McKenzie released his pre-season rankings for the 2017 draft: http://www.tsn.ca/mckenzie-s-pre-season-ranking-the-nolan-patrick-draft-1.567410

What he wrote on Patrick was interesting:

Quote
While some of the scouts surveyed by TSN do not discount Patrick evolving into that role, the consensus view is Patrick is projected more as a second-line NHL centre and doesn't have the same “wow” factor as McDavid, Eichel and Matthews.

"He's going to be a good, maybe very good, NHL player," one scout said, "but he isn't a dynamic player. His skating isn't bad but he's not dynamic like those others [McDavid, Eichel and Matthews]."

...

Patrick's birthday is Sept. 19, so he was just four days off being eligible for last season's draft. Had he been available last June, where would he slot amongst the best players of a very strong draft class, like Matthews, Patrik Laine, Jesse Puljujarvi and Pierre-Luc Dubois, among others?

The consensus amongst scouts surveyed by TSN is that Patrick wouldn't have displaced any of the top four picks in last year's draft. Depending on the scout, they retroactively rank Patrick anywhere between No. 5 and 10, based on his 2015-16 season.

After reading that, if the Leafs have the top pick, then it's the year to go for the best defenceman in the draft.  I would be hesitant of trading the pick and having the team you traded it too picking that d-man.   
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on September 30, 2016, 05:26:58 PM
 
Although the other way to look at it would be that the price of a top end d-man was always high, and then it could be tied to the draft.

*cut*

I have to be honest, I'm not entirely sure where you went on this one. It seems like you're lumping in guys like Bourque and Leetch who got dealt after 15+ years with one team with guys who were traded multiple times in an entirely different era and trying to draw a particular meaning from it. I think it's probably fair to say that elite players at any position have always been highly sought after but what I'm talking about is the price of defensemen relative to forwards. Lots of elite forwards in the 80's and 90's switched teams too so I'm not sure what the contrast is you're seeing.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on September 30, 2016, 09:18:41 PM
 
Although the other way to look at it would be that the price of a top end d-man was always high, and then it could be tied to the draft.

*cut*

I have to be honest, I'm not entirely sure where you went on this one. It seems like you're lumping in guys like Bourque and Leetch who got dealt after 15+ years with one team with guys who were traded multiple times in an entirely different era and trying to draw a particular meaning from it. I think it's probably fair to say that elite players at any position have always been highly sought after but what I'm talking about is the price of defensemen relative to forwards. Lots of elite forwards in the 80's and 90's switched teams too so I'm not sure what the contrast is you're seeing.

I have to be honest as well, as I was going through that exercise, I kinda knew it wasn't going anywhere.  I had put the time in though, so I figured what the hell, I'll post it anyways.

I was trying to come up with a way of assigning an asset cost to defencemen across different times.  After thinking about it a bit, I think that is incredibly hard to do because there are too many variables that go in to trades across the different eras.  For example, is a 1st rounder worth more in the NHL today than it was in the 80's due to more teams currently and the existence of a cap? 

I agree with your premise that defencemen are at a premium in the current NHL due to the shift in philosophies in playing styles and teams trying to build their team makeup around this shift.  However, I think there was a similar shift between the late 80's and the early 90's which saw teams move towards bigger, more physical defencemen to handle the likes of Lemieux, Lindros and Jagr.  So I was trying to see if maybe there was a premium put on d-men during that shift as well.  I thought maybe looking at Norris winners would sort of give an idea of what elite defencemen were being moved for, but as you pointed out, that sort of thing really tells us nothing.  In order to track this sort of thing you would need to look at the types of deals made and by which teams.  This still leads to the problem though that the deals in those days were somewhat influenced by the existence of larger markets being able to use salaries to their advantage.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on October 01, 2016, 11:12:49 AM
Interesting thought, if we had left Kessel alone and drafted Sequin and Hamilton, would we have been in a position to draft Matthews now?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on October 04, 2016, 05:46:53 AM
Interesting thought, if we had left Kessel alone and drafted Sequin and Hamilton, would we have been in a position to draft Matthews now?

Never mind Rask.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 04, 2016, 07:39:16 AM
Interesting thought, if we had left Kessel alone and drafted Sequin and Hamilton, would we have been in a position to draft Matthews now?

Probably not but that seems like the sort of thing where there's just been too much distance between then and now and so many other moves made that it'd be impossible to say for certain what the team would look like now. I mean, if the team has Kadri/Seguin in the fold do they draft two C's with their first round picks in the '13 and '14 draft? What if that means that instead of Gauthier/Nylander they have Theodore/Ehlers? Or something lousy from both years?

Also, I don't mean to misinterpret the implication here but as excited as we all are for Matthews...I'd still rather have Seguin/Hamilton. Seguin is arguably just behind Crosby as the second best offensive C in the world. I don't know how the rest of you see Matthews but Seguin seems like a fairly reasonable goal for what he could eventually be.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on October 04, 2016, 09:16:27 AM
Interesting thought, if we had left Kessel alone and drafted Sequin and Hamilton, would we have been in a position to draft Matthews now?

Probably not but that seems like the sort of thing where there's just been too much distance between then and now and so many other moves made that it'd be impossible to say for certain what the team would look like now. I mean, if the team has Kadri/Seguin in the fold do they draft two C's with their first round picks in the '13 and '14 draft? What if that means that instead of Gauthier/Nylander they have Theodore/Ehlers? Or something lousy from both years?

Also, I don't mean to misinterpret the implication here but as excited as we all are for Matthews...I'd still rather have Seguin/Hamilton. Seguin is arguably just behind Crosby as the second best offensive C in the world. I don't know how the rest of you see Matthews but Seguin seems like a fairly reasonable goal for what he could eventually be.

I'd say McDavid is just behind Crosby and he'll show that this season should he stay healthy.  He's better than Seguin.  .PPG+ player in his rookie season when healthy.  Its insane how good you have to be as a regular in the NHL to do that, let alone a rookie.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 04, 2016, 09:45:18 AM
I'd say McDavid is just behind Crosby and he'll show that this season should he stay healthy.  He's better than Seguin.  .PPG+ player in his rookie season when healthy.  Its insane how good you have to be as a regular in the NHL to do that, let alone a rookie.

McDavid might very well vault himself right into the #1 spot this year but I'll need to see him do it over the course of a full season before I put him in that territory. Either way, the difference between Seguin and Crosby the last couple of years(1.08ppg for Crosby to 1.05 for Seguin) is so small that the main point there remains.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on October 04, 2016, 09:54:11 AM
McDavid might very well vault himself right into the #1 spot this year but I'll need to see him do it over the course of a full season before I put him in that territory. Either way, the difference between Seguin and Crosby the last couple of years(1.08ppg for Crosby to 1.05 for Seguin) is so small that the main point there remains.

Yes it does.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on October 18, 2016, 08:48:43 AM
From the Rakell thread (http://www.tmlfans.ca/community/index.php?topic=4109.msg275776#msg275776):

FORWARDS

J. Van Riemsdyk ($ 4,250,000) --- T. Bozak ($ 4,200,000) --- M. Marner ($ 894,166)
L. Komarov ($ 2,950,000) --- N. Kadri ($ 4,500,000) --- M. Michalek ($ 4,000,000)
W. Nylander ($ 894,166) --- A. Matthews ($ 925,000) --- Z. Hyman ($ 900,000)
N. Soshnikov ($ 736,666) --- P. Holland ($ 1,300,000) --- C. Brown ($ 686,667)

DEFENCE

H. Lindholm ($ 7,300,000) --- J. Trouba ($ 5,000,000)
M. Rielly ($ 5,000,000) --- N. Zaitsev ($ 925,000)
M. Marincin ($ 1,250,000) --- C. Carrick ($ 750,000)

GOAL

F. Andersen ($ 5,000,000) --- J. Enroth ($ 750,000)

Extras

M. Martin ($ 2,500,000) --- R. Polak ($ 2,250,000) --- M. Hunwick ($ 1,200,000)

2016 NHL Cap Limit: $ 73,000,000
23 Player Roster Cap Used: $ 72,324,165
Cap Buried in the Minors: + $ 5,250,000
Cap Hit from Buyout(s): + $ 683,333
2015 Bonus Overages: + $ 512,000
Cap Retained in Trades : + $ 1,200,000
Long Term Injury Reserve: - $ 8,300,000
Cap Space Available : $ 1,330,502

This looks delectable. I think we're clear of any cap overage issues in the upcoming offseason as well with all that space clearing off from departed/ing UFAs. We might lose Corrado to waivers and maybe Carrick to expansion, but for Lindholm and Trouba, I'm very okay with that.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 18, 2016, 10:05:37 AM

If it's Gardiner+ for Trouba I think that + is going to have to be pretty significant and, assuming we're offer sheeting Lindholm and without draft picks, we're probably saying goodbye to anything high value not in the NHL.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on October 18, 2016, 01:23:53 PM

If it's Gardiner+ for Trouba I think that + is going to have to be pretty significant and, assuming we're offer sheeting Lindholm and without draft picks, we're probably saying goodbye to anything high value not in the NHL.

What do we have of 'high value' not in the NHL? Kapanen, Leipsic, Johnson, Timashov, Bracco, Soshnikov, all have high end potential, but you'd be lucky to get a 15-20g/45-50p, middle-6 NHL regular out of any of them. Gardiner, plus one of them, plus a pick (probably 1st), and we're still not at what WPG wants for Trouba -- and the offer sheet is out.

Maybe the Lindholm offer sheet makes more sense? As noted in the other thread, a Kessel-like move after we've already got Seguin, Hamilton, etc. is not a bad move... and an overloaded LD doesn't matter so much when we're told Rielly likes (prefers?) playing his off-side.

H. Lindholm --- M. Rielly
J. Gardiner --- N. Zaitsev
M. Marincin --- C. Carrick
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 18, 2016, 01:37:25 PM
What do we have of 'high value' not in the NHL? Kapanen, Leipsic, Johnson, Timashov, Bracco, Soshnikov, all have high end potential, but you'd be lucky to get a 15-20g/45-50p, middle-6 NHL regular out of any of them. Gardiner, plus one of them, plus a pick (probably 1st), and we're still not at what WPG wants for Trouba -- and the offer sheet is out.

I think that's all true, I don't think Trouba to the Leafs is at all likely, but I suppose the assumption of any discussion around the topic rests on Winnipeg sort of giving up and taking less than they're looking for.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on October 18, 2016, 02:04:57 PM
Rielly likes (prefers?) playing his off-side.

Do you have a reference for this? I've only seen that he plays there out of necessity and that Babcock prefers his defense on their strong sides. While he can handle it, his defensive numbers flag when he's on the right.

Phaneuf preferred playing on his offside and had trouble adjusting.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on October 18, 2016, 02:10:14 PM
Rielly likes (prefers?) playing his off-side.

Do you have a reference for this? I've only seen that he plays there out of necessity and that Babcock prefers his defense on their strong sides. While he can handle it, his defensive numbers flag when he's on the right.

Phaneuf preferred playing on his offside and had trouble adjusting.

Thought I saw it quoted on Twitter, somewhere. Source was of the reputable sort (Mirtle, maybe?).
I'm curious to know whether his defensive numbers flag when he's on the right or when he's on the right, in order to play with Hunwick.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on October 18, 2016, 02:17:14 PM
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2016/8/9/12331450/examining-how-morgan-riellys-partners-affected-him

PPP did a rundown of Rielly's numbers depending on his partner.
Quote
The three defensemen that Rielly played the most on his natural side with were Polak, Phaneuf, and Corrado. All three pairings were more offensively potent than any of Rielly's pairings where he played RD (with the exception of Gardiner, who is a total outlier on the Leafs defense in the best possible way). There's not enough data here to say this with certainty (I want to stress that - aside from Hunwick and Marincin, we're looking at pretty small TOI figures), but perhaps for Rielly, the handedness effect manifests itself mostly on the offensive side of the game. I’d like to explore this more in a future piece, because there’s a lot to unpack here. For now, it’s interesting to note how Rielly seemed to be disproportionately affected on offense by playing his off-side. If true, this would reduce the strength of the argument that Rielly’s poor defensive numbers are a result of him playing an unfamiliar side of the ice.

So it wasn't exactly his defensive numbers that flagged when he was playing the right side, it was his offense. Except with Gardiner (who is magic). More offensive chances usually means fewer defensive situations in my mind, but still, Rielly plays a high event game from either side.

Generally speaking, defensive numbers go down for players on their offside (link (https://hockey-graphs.com/2016/03/04/quantifying-the-importance-of-handedness/)). Babcock is playing Marincin on the right side now, so Rielly takes the left. Rielly also occasionally gets time with Zaitsev. We'll see after a few more games what's working or not.

Edit: http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/maple-leafs-stats-analysis/2016/2/9/10933164/should-we-be-concerned-about-morgan-riellys-defensive-play

PP did another analysis of the Hunwick-Rielly pairing and found that shots were coming in largely from Rielly's right side of the ice.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on October 18, 2016, 04:49:46 PM
Interesting stuff. I guess what I wonder is whether the deficiencies in Rielly's game on the right are so great that you wouldn't want to add a LD of Lindholm's calibre. If he did well with Gardiner (magic) on the left, then things might work out with Lindholm. Maybe Trouba would be ideal, but I'm proceeding under the assumption that he's very unlikely to be acquired -- you can't just offer sheet him and there are probably other teams that have the pieces WPG wants for him (haven't Carolina and Anaheim been drafting good defensemen?). 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 18, 2016, 05:03:40 PM
Interesting stuff. I guess what I wonder is whether the deficiencies in Rielly's game on the right are so great that you wouldn't want to add a LD of Lindholm's calibre. If he did well with Gardiner (magic) on the left, then things might work out with Lindholm. Maybe Trouba would be ideal, but I'm proceeding under the assumption that he's very unlikely to be acquired -- you can't just offer sheet him and there are probably other teams that have the pieces WPG wants for him (haven't Carolina and Anaheim been drafting good defensemen?).

In some of the stuff I saw re: what Winnipeg wanted it didn't sound like high quality defensive prospects would do it. They wanted, essentially, a left handed Trouba. I don't know that Carolina has that sort of thing and short of a Lindholm-Trouba swap Anaheim needs to slash cap space just to sign Lindholm.

Realistically a Trouba trade is almost certainly going to depend on Winnipeg coming off of what they want regardless of who it's with. Whether that's in the direction of getting fewer years of control(like for someone like Gardiner) or someone less established has yet to be seen but it seems incredibly unlikely anyone will offer what they're asking.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on October 18, 2016, 06:11:33 PM
Is Trouba better than Gardiner?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 18, 2016, 06:16:03 PM
Is Trouba better than Gardiner?

In the immediate sense probably not. He's got some things going that make him roughly as valuable though(age, righthandedness).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on October 18, 2016, 06:21:30 PM
Another question,  how long are we giving Rielly to establish himself as the man on this team before looking for an upgrade? 

I ask because I'm not sure that he's their Letang/Burns/Doughty/Keith.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on October 18, 2016, 06:23:24 PM
Is Trouba better than Gardiner?

In the immediate sense probably not. He's got some things going that make him roughly as valuable though(age, righthandedness).

That's what I thought.  Like my other post, I'm wondering if we should be setting our sights higher.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on October 18, 2016, 06:35:42 PM
Another question,  how long are we giving Rielly to establish himself as the man on this team before looking for an upgrade? 

I ask because I'm not sure that he's their Letang/Burns/Doughty/Keith.

Babcock -- who (IIRC) was reluctant to draft Marner because he values having high-end defensemen above forwards -- seems to be pretty high on Rielly and talks like he's developing into such a player. I don't think that necessarily makes it so.

I don't know how this team gets its hands on someone much better without bottoming out again -- unlikely to happen and, if it does, uncertain to yield a franchise defenseman -- or trading one of Marner, Matthews, or Nylander (and that assumes none have rough patches that diminish their value).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 18, 2016, 06:54:23 PM
Another question,  how long are we giving Rielly to establish himself as the man on this team before looking for an upgrade? 

I ask because I'm not sure that he's their Letang/Burns/Doughty/Keith.

That's sort of the million dollar question for the Leafs now. Not so much "how much time do they give Rielly" because I don't think Rielly is on any sort of clock but rather if we assume Rielly doesn't become that Norris-calibre defenseman how does the team build a championship-quality defense?

I think the "Offer-sheet Lindholm, trade for Trouba" idea recognizes that if Rielly isn't quite at that level that the chances of adding a player like that via trade are fairly slim and so it instead revolves around the idea that you can win without a top notch #1 if you have a couple of guys on the tier just below that. That's attractive because it seems fairly doable, even if there's not a lot of evidence it yields cups.

The other alternative is you build assets through the draft. Obviously Liljegren looks like an ideal solution if the Leafs stink again this year but even if they don't get him you can still use those assets in the service of trading for that sort of player(or at least players with that kind of potential) should they become available. It's worth mentioning that in the Cap years high value defensemen were probably the most likely players to move about. Pronger, Chara, Subban, Burns...it's not common but it happens enough that building up good and expendable assets can yield that result given patience.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on October 18, 2016, 08:10:21 PM
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thought-ducks-lindholm-oilers-leafs-100-flames-gaudreau/

Quote
1. Basically, the Hampus Lindholm situation comes down to this: Anaheim wants him under Rasmus Ristolainen’s $5.4M salary.

At the beginning of last week, word around the NHL indicated the two sides were $700,000 apart per season (Lindholm at $5.8M, the Ducks at $5.1M). I think that’s closed, but the critical sticking point remains that if it’s a six-year term (as it is with the Buffalo defender), that buys up two years of unrestricted free agency for Lindholm as opposed to one for Ristolainen. Anaheim has flirted with a five-year offer, but Lindholm’s camp doesn’t seem interested.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: pnjunction on October 18, 2016, 08:13:51 PM
I guess of all Cup-winning #1 D-men of the last 10 years Boston getting Chara in a trade comes to mind.

Assuming Rielly is as good as we can get the only potential comparable I see in the list (Niedermayer/Pronger, Lidstrom, Letang x2, Keith x3, Chara, Doughty x2) is maybe Letang?  Some of those guys are in a league of their own (Niedermayer, Lidstrom), he's not going to be a defensive rock like Keith or prime Chara and isn't as skilled as Doughty (who was a stud on Canada's gold-medal blue line at 20!).

Actually Letang's first 3 years don't look much different from Rielly, at least offensively (+/- is bad but the Leafs especially goaltending have stunk).  It kind of seems like unless we tank again or get a crazy lucky draft/trade (lottery win, Karlsson-like mid-1st pick, Chara trade) Rielly developing into a Letang-like player and then finding a solid defensive guy like 2010 Orpik or 2016 Dumoulin (?) is about all we can hope for?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 18, 2016, 09:01:16 PM
I guess of all Cup-winning #1 D-men of the last 10 years Boston getting Chara in a trade comes to mind.

Chara was a UFA when he went to Boston, not a trade. Pronger is probably best defenseman to be traded in that time span and was effectively a #1 for Anaheim.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: pnjunction on October 18, 2016, 11:16:11 PM
I guess of all Cup-winning #1 D-men of the last 10 years Boston getting Chara in a trade comes to mind.

Chara was a UFA when he went to Boston, not a trade. Pronger is probably best defenseman to be traded in that time span and was effectively a #1 for Anaheim.

Ah right I stand corrected, don't know how I forgot about Pronger moving around...  Still for both of those moves you have to go pretty far back, seems to be less big trades these days (Subban for Weber was trading one for another) and the UFA market is pretty lame now (they have to give up 8th year to leave a team, the open market salary demands are nuts, and Toronto is at massive tax disadvantage with the new bonus scams).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Jolly good show chaps on October 19, 2016, 08:39:27 AM
Quick question guys  - if we successfully signed Lindholm via an offer sheet at a level that involves us needing to give up a first round pick, then at what point do we hand over this pick?  If it's as soon as the signing is made, could we trade for another first rounder beforehand and hand that over in the Lindholm deal or would it always be the Leafs own pick unless they didn't own it?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Rob on October 19, 2016, 08:46:33 AM
Quick question guys  - if we successfully signed Lindholm via an offer sheet at a level that involves us needing to give up a first round pick, then at what point do we hand over this pick?  If it's as soon as the signing is made, could we trade for another first rounder beforehand and hand that over in the Lindholm deal or would it always be the Leafs own pick unless they didn't own it?


The draft picks a team gives up have to be their own.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on October 19, 2016, 09:02:16 AM
Quick question guys  - if we successfully signed Lindholm via an offer sheet at a level that involves us needing to give up a first round pick, then at what point do we hand over this pick?  If it's as soon as the signing is made, could we trade for another first rounder beforehand and hand that over in the Lindholm deal or would it always be the Leafs own pick unless they didn't own it?

Has to be their own pick, and has to be in the next draft (or multiple drafts, if multiple picks in the same round are involved).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on October 19, 2016, 04:56:18 PM
I guess of all Cup-winning #1 D-men of the last 10 years Boston getting Chara in a trade comes to mind.

Assuming Rielly is as good as we can get the only potential comparable I see in the list (Niedermayer [3rd]/Pronger [2nd], Lidstrom [53rd], Letang x2 [62nd], Keith x3 [54th], Chara [56th], Doughty x2 [2nd]) is maybe Letang?  Some of those guys are in a league of their own (Niedermayer, Lidstrom), he's not going to be a defensive rock like Keith or prime Chara and isn't as skilled as Doughty (who was a stud on Canada's gold-medal blue line at 20!).

Actually Letang's first 3 years don't look much different from Rielly, at least offensively (+/- is bad but the Leafs especially goaltending have stunk).  It kind of seems like unless we tank again or get a crazy lucky draft/trade (lottery win, Karlsson-like mid-1st pick, Chara trade) Rielly developing into a Letang-like player and then finding a solid defensive guy like 2010 Orpik or 2016 Dumoulin (?) is about all we can hope for?

While a UFA or trade for a proven commodity might offer the most obvious solution, it does seem the hardest, and high-volume drafting in later rounds, emphasizing defensemen there, might help things out. A bit weird they opted for the over-agers this draft, but, as a TLN article points out today, at their age, PK Subban (43rd) didn't look much different than Travis Dermott (34th) or Andrew Nielsen (65th).

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 19, 2016, 05:08:25 PM
While a UFA or trade for a proven commodity might offer the most obvious solution, it does seem the hardest, and high-volume drafting in later rounds, emphasizing defensemen there, might help things out. A bit weird they opted for the over-agers this draft, but, as a TLN article points out today, at their age, PK Subban (43rd) didn't look much different than Travis Dermott (34th) or Andrew Nielsen (65th).

We've talked about it before but of the defensemen who grew from being 2nd or 3rd round picks into those kinds of defensemen you're realistically looking at at least a Draft +4 or Draft +5 year until they actually are playing at that level.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on October 19, 2016, 05:22:08 PM
While a UFA or trade for a proven commodity might offer the most obvious solution, it does seem the hardest, and high-volume drafting in later rounds, emphasizing defensemen there, might help things out. A bit weird they opted for the over-agers this draft, but, as a TLN article points out today, at their age, PK Subban (43rd) didn't look much different than Travis Dermott (34th) or Andrew Nielsen (65th).

We've talked about it before but of the defensemen who grew from being 2nd or 3rd round picks into those kinds of defensemen you're realistically looking at at least a Draft +4 or Draft +5 year until they actually are playing at that level.

Right. And there aren't enough defensemen in the system that I'd bet we're 3 or 4 years from seeing one emerging from within (which would be within our hopes for when the team would contend). A trade for a Trouba would likely set them back a couple years. -- So, doesn't seem a problem with a quick fix.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on October 19, 2016, 05:38:12 PM
I don't see how trading for Trouba really sets the Leafs back all that much. Assuming the trade is Gardiner + a forward prospect + whatever.

We don't have any RHD in the pipeline. Zaitsev is good, but I'd like another rising option. Carrick is awesome, but I think he tops out at 3/4. On the left side, we're about to have Dermott, Nielsen, Loov, Valiev as options bubbling to the NHL roster who also have 3/4 potential.

If our window to win is 2-4 years from now, and the likelihood of a 2nd-4th rd Def pick takes 3-5 years to pan out, wouldn't you want to have an emergent RHD on hand to complement Rielly now?

Whether or not Trouba is the right player to target is a different question, but the way I see it, it'll be even more of a crapshoot to draft a #1/2 RHD that peaks in the next 2-4 years. Teams don't really let go of their top RHD and Trouba is a chance for one with a high ceiling.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 19, 2016, 05:51:05 PM
I don't see how trading for Trouba really sets the Leafs back all that much. Assuming the trade is Gardiner + a forward prospect + whatever.

I think we're now onto that being maybe too much of an assumption. Especially if, say, the upper limit on that forward prospect is Kapanen.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 19, 2016, 06:00:27 PM
I don't see how trading for Trouba really sets the Leafs back all that much. Assuming the trade is Gardiner + a forward prospect + whatever.

I don't know if it really moves them forward though, unless an accompanying offer sheet for Lindholm goes up too. Losing Gardiner would make us pretty weak on the left-side. It'd be Rielly-Hunwick-Marincin as things stand right now. I don't want to be down on Dermott and Nielsen but we can't go pencilling them into top-4 spots.

I'm of the opinion that spreading out your top-2 defencemen is the way to go anyway, so we'd be going from Rielly-Zaitsev/Gardiner-X to Rielly-Zaitsev/X-Trouba. So there's a hole there regardless.

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 19, 2016, 06:14:25 PM
I don't know if it really moves them forward though, unless an accompanying offer sheet for Lindholm goes up too. Losing Gardiner would make us pretty weak on the left-side. It'd be Rielly-Hunwick-Marincin as things stand right now. I don't want to be down on Dermott and Nielsen but we can't go pencilling them into top-4 spots.

Even then though it forces the question of how much do we want to sacrifice on the altar of Babcock's preference for LD/RD parity. If I remember Herman's posts on the subject there's some evidence that Rielly/Gardiner is an effective pairing despite them both being left-handed shots so assuming someone the quality of Lindholm does fall out of the sky and gives us Rielly, Gardiner and Lindholm on the Left side you really have to wonder how much it's worth to have a Rielly/Trouba top pairing vs. Rielly/Gardiner.

I mean assuming you're already losing a 1st, 2nd and 3rd for our hypothetical Lindholm do we want to pile on a few key prospects/picks on top of it for that gain? I know the team has a deep prospect base and it looks like their main pieces are set at forward but you'd like to keep a few bullets in the clip.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 19, 2016, 06:22:30 PM
Even then though it forces the question of how much do we want to sacrifice on the altar of Babcock's preference for LD/RD parity. If I remember Herman's posts on the subject there's some evidence that Rielly/Gardiner is an effective pairing despite them both being left-handed shots so assuming someone the quality of Lindholm does fall out of the sky and gives us Rielly, Gardiner and Lindholm on the Left side you really have to wonder how much it's worth to have a Rielly/Trouba top pairing vs. Rielly/Gardiner.

I mean assuming you're already losing a 1st, 2nd and 3rd for our hypothetical Lindholm do we want to pile on a few key prospects/picks on top of it for that gain? I know the team has a deep prospect base and it looks like their main pieces are set at forward but you'd like to keep a few bullets in the clip.

That's true. Personally speaking if a Trouba trade opportunity did come up I wouldn't add much to Gardiner. The Jets are the ones with their back up against the wall here and we've seen time and time again that teams in that position don't usually come out looking like they won the trade. Gardiner will also come with probably about a $2mil-ish cap difference for the next 3 years vs. what Trouba likely signs for. Those two things are enough to make up for any perceived difference in trade value between the two.

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on October 19, 2016, 06:52:42 PM
There's some quality food for thought, here, gentlemen.
If Dermott/Nielsen push for a top 4 role, and forces Gardiner with Rielly, that wouldn't be the worst.

Gardiner - Rielly
Dermott/Nielsen - Zaitsev
Nielsen/Dermott - Carrick
Marincin, Corrado, Valiev

Gardiner not breaking 40-pts would be beneficial for the next contract from a Leafs' standpoint.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on October 19, 2016, 07:06:08 PM
Even then though it forces the question of how much do we want to sacrifice on the altar of Babcock's preference for LD/RD parity. If I remember Herman's posts on the subject there's some evidence that Rielly/Gardiner is an effective pairing despite them both being left-handed shots so assuming someone the quality of Lindholm does fall out of the sky and gives us Rielly, Gardiner and Lindholm on the Left side you really have to wonder how much it's worth to have a Rielly/Trouba top pairing vs. Rielly/Gardiner.

I mean assuming you're already losing a 1st, 2nd and 3rd for our hypothetical Lindholm do we want to pile on a few key prospects/picks on top of it for that gain? I know the team has a deep prospect base and it looks like their main pieces are set at forward but you'd like to keep a few bullets in the clip.

That's true. Personally speaking if a Trouba trade opportunity did come up I wouldn't add much to Gardiner. The Jets are the ones with their back up against the wall here and we've seen time and time again that teams in that position don't usually come out looking like they won the trade. Gardiner will also come with probably about a $2mil-ish cap difference for the next 3 years vs. what Trouba likely signs for. Those two things are enough to make up for any perceived difference in trade value between the two.

Are you suggesting Trouba gets $6m?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 19, 2016, 07:51:01 PM
Are you suggesting Trouba gets $6m?

I thought that at one point, although it's tough to tell since it doesn't seem like there's been any negotiations for awhile. But I guess after the Rielly and Risto contracts he probably comes in somewhere in that range.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on October 19, 2016, 08:00:48 PM
Are you suggesting Trouba gets $6m?

I thought that at one point, although it's tough to tell since it doesn't seem like there's been any negotiations for awhile. But I guess after the Rielly and Risto contracts he probably comes in somewhere in that range.

Yeah, well, that was a stupid idiot thought for idiots.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 19, 2016, 08:03:05 PM
Are you suggesting Trouba gets $6m?

I thought that at one point, although it's tough to tell since it doesn't seem like there's been any negotiations for awhile. But I guess after the Rielly and Risto contracts he probably comes in somewhere in that range.

Yeah, well, that was a stupid idiot thought for idiots.

My high sensitivity level and uber political correctness is extremely offended by this.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Crake on October 19, 2016, 08:04:35 PM
Just how good is Trouba? The impression I've always held was that he currently isn't as good as Reilly and his ceiling isn't as high as Reilly either.

Is that accurate, and if so is he really worth paying more money and additional assets then just Gardiner?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on October 19, 2016, 09:15:47 PM
Just how good is Trouba? The impression I've always held was that he currently isn't as good as Reilly and his ceiling isn't as high as Reilly either.

Is that accurate, and if so is he really worth paying more money and additional assets then just Gardiner?

How good defensemen are isn't an exact science just yet but I've read some things that indicate he's a bit better than his numbers indicate with some real room for growth. Obviously his not being used on his preferred side complicates matters some but I think opinion is high that he can be a top pairing guy even if not a legit #1.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Crake on October 20, 2016, 10:40:55 AM
Just how good is Trouba? The impression I've always held was that he currently isn't as good as Reilly and his ceiling isn't as high as Reilly either.

Is that accurate, and if so is he really worth paying more money and additional assets then just Gardiner?

How good defensemen are isn't an exact science just yet but I've read some things that indicate he's a bit better than his numbers indicate with some real room for growth. Obviously his not being used on his preferred side complicates matters some but I think opinion is high that he can be a top pairing guy even if not a legit #1.
So a little more comparable to Reilly than I thought, thanks.

I'm not the guy who's most up to date on advanced stats so it's hard for me to tell. I've heard some question his decision making abilities, but the same has been said about Gardiner for years too.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on October 21, 2016, 09:55:46 AM
A good article about the youth movement in hockey. I think almost 10% of the league are rookies this year.

It also talks about the somewhat unique group dynamic in the Leafs locker room this season.

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/marner-matthews-rookies-1.3810436

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on October 28, 2016, 10:18:29 PM
Would a salary retained JVR for Fowler and Cogliano make sense?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Big Daddy on November 16, 2016, 12:57:09 PM
Love that the team is playing so well but why not shake
 things up just a bit to get things going for everyone

    
Komarov-Kadri-Brown
JVR-Matthews-Marner
Nylander-Bozak-Soshnikov
Martin-Smith-Hyman

Rielly-Zaitsev
Gardiner-Polak
Hunwick-Marincin

Andersen
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on November 16, 2016, 02:24:03 PM
Don't know if it just me, but Brown is playing well but not great…He would clear waivers. I would love to see Kapanen get a few games
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on November 16, 2016, 02:30:43 PM
Don't know if it just me, but Brown is playing well but not great…He would clear waivers. I would love to see Kapanen get a few games

Actually, isn't brown still waiver exempt? 

Remember, those aren't light minutes he's getting.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: LuncheonMeat on November 16, 2016, 03:05:04 PM
Don't know if it just me, but Brown is playing well but not great…He would clear waivers. I would love to see Kapanen get a few games

I bet the Leafs are pretty happy with the way he's playing for the Marlies, but I think he stays there. I see him as a guy who maybe comes up to stay after the trade deadline passes this year, assuming some movement of players. Depending on how things go, maybe Kapanen gets a look on Nylander's wing.  8)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Coco-puffs on November 16, 2016, 03:39:24 PM
Don't know if it just me, but Brown is playing well but not great…He would clear waivers. I would love to see Kapanen get a few games

1.  He's waiver exempt.
2.  If he wasn't waiver exempt, he'd be snapped up on waivers in an instant. 

I would like to see Kapanen get a few games as well, but Brown has EARNED his spot in the lineup based on the past two seasons in the AHL where he was one of the best young players in the league over that span, plus his performance so far in the NHL has been good despite a lack of production this season.  He's playing heavy minutes (quality wise- not quantity wise) along side Kadri and hasn't looked one bit out of place. 

Kapanen has less than a year of top level performance.  Before the World Juniors last year he didn't look very good in the AHL.  After returning he had a strong finish to his campaign and an even better start to this years campaign in the AHL.  He's on his way to earning a spot in an NHL lineup, but he certainly hasn't earned one over Brown.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on November 16, 2016, 04:03:25 PM
One thing to keep in mind with Kapanen is that he's still pretty young. I mean, we just drafted 2 players in June who are actually OLDER than he is, plus a 3rd who is only 7 days younger. This will be his 4th season playing professional hockey, but he's never been the go-to player on any of his teams. Getting a chance to do that in the AHL for a year would likely be beneficial for his career.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on November 17, 2016, 01:39:10 AM
Don't know if it just me, but Brown is playing well but not great…He would clear waivers. I would love to see Kapanen get a few games

I bet the Leafs are pretty happy with the way he's playing for the Marlies, but I think he stays there. I see him as a guy who maybe comes up to stay after the trade deadline passes this year, assuming some movement of players. Depending on how things go, maybe Kapanen gets a look on Nylander's wing.  8)

This.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on November 18, 2016, 07:28:43 PM
I have to retract my opinion of Downtown, he sure put on a show last night. He is a keeper. Sorry Kapi but you are staying with the Marlies for now
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on December 07, 2016, 01:00:32 PM
Looking for a thread that contains Armchair GM ideas for who to protect and who to expose for the Las Vegas expansion draft.  I thought I saw some ideas but wonder if they were in this thread.  Anyone know?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: L K on December 07, 2016, 05:30:39 PM
One thing to keep in mind with Kapanen is that he's still pretty young. I mean, we just drafted 2 players in June who are actually OLDER than he is, plus a 3rd who is only 7 days younger. This will be his 4th season playing professional hockey, but he's never been the go-to player on any of his teams. Getting a chance to do that in the AHL for a year would likely be beneficial for his career.

Yeah, I see him as a callup late in the year if the Leafs trade guys like Bozak/JVR/Komarov but nothing more than that this year.

What might complicate that is if the Leafs made a few trades where they would trade someone like JVR but take back a guy who has a contract for next year for purposes of exposing them on the expansion draft.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 07, 2016, 05:32:38 PM
Looking for a thread that contains Armchair GM ideas for who to protect and who to expose for the Las Vegas expansion draft.  I thought I saw some ideas but wonder if they were in this thread.  Anyone know?

I guess coming up with those ideas here are as good a place as any, given its gonna be a very real part of Armchair GM'ing. :)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on December 08, 2016, 12:21:08 PM
Well here is the strategy I think I would suggest to decide how to approach the Las Vegas expansion draft:

From all the players under contract remove the pending UFAs and Horton's LITR contract as they are exempt -

Forwards:
Brooks Laich
Milan Michalek
Colin Greening 
Ben Smith
Defense:
Roman Polak
Matt Hunwick
Stephane Robidas
Andrew Campbell   
Goalies:
Jhonas Enroth   
Exempt:
Nathan Horton

Look at the remaining players on this young team to see who are qualify to be the 2 eligible forwards, 1 eligible defense and 1 eligible goalie to see who we suggest to expose.  My suggestions to expose are bolded:

Eligible Forwards
Nazem Kadri
JVR if he plays 7 more games   
Tyler Bozak
Leo Komarov
Matt Martin

Peter Holland
Eligible Defense   
Morgan Rielly
Jake Garderner
Martin Marincin
Eligible Goalies
Frederik Andersen
Antoine Bibeau
Garret Sparks

Here is the list of players who need to be protected:

Forwards
Joffery Lupul
Nazem Kadri
JVR   
Tyler Bozak
Leo Komarov
Matt Martin
Peter Holland
Kerby Rychel
Connor Brown
Brendan Leipsic
Josh Leivo
Byron Froese
Defense   
Morgan Rielly
Jake Garderner
Martin Marincin   
Connor Carrick
Victor Loov
Frank Corrado
Goalies
Frederik Andersen
Antoine Bibeau
Garret Sparks

Since most of the Leafs talent is young forwards I would approach the expansion draft with the 8 skaters and 1 goalie strategy rather than the 7 forwards, 3 defense and 1 goalie strategy.

If JVR gets moved for a defense man then this strategy is even more prefered in my perspective. So hoping this kind of trade happens I would protect the following:

Kadri, Bozak, Brown, Rychel, Rielly, Gardiner, JVR Trade, Carrick, Andersen.

Add them to:
Matthews, Nylander, Marner, Hyman, Kapanen, Soshnikov, and Zaitsev

I would expect Las Vegas to take Matt Marincin meaning the additional players under contract to the Leafs July 2nd would be:
Komarov,
Martin,
Leivo

12 forwards, 5 defense men and 1 goalie.

....and if JVR doesn't get traded for a defense man then the 7 forwards, 3 defense and 1 goalie protected is back in play:

Kadri, Bozak, JVR, Rychel, Brown, Leipsic, Leivo, Rielly, Gardiner, Carrick, Andersen
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 08, 2016, 05:07:09 PM
I'd pass on Rychel there, Komarov would be likely more valuable in a trade, and currently I don't see the Leafs keeping Leivo over Martin. Otherwise, pretty much agree.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on December 09, 2016, 10:03:32 AM
I'd pass on Rychel there, Komarov would be likely more valuable in a trade, and currently I don't see the Leafs keeping Leivo over Martin. Otherwise, pretty much agree.

The kicker regarding Komarov and Martin is that they meet the criteria of eligibility.  The only other forwards are Kadri, JVR, Bozak and Holland.  Holland might be gone soon in a trade or waivers.  If the Leafs do trade Komarov, which I am impartial to, and Holland is gone then the Leafs need to expose 2 of: Kadri, JVR, Bozak and Martin.

That's what I was trying to show up above.  Where some teams are trying to figure out how to protect as many eligible players as possible, the Leafs are close to needing players who are eligible if any trades are made.

That is why I thought Holland was re-signed and why I thought he was going to be part of the team going forward.  The Leafs have hardly enough players who qualify for the expansion draft so that key players can be protected.

The Leafs must really be banking on Marincin as the player getting picked.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 09, 2016, 10:46:44 AM
The expansion draft probably doesn't get talked about very much because there's still so much time between then and now and so much can change. Look at how many bodies we picked up in the 2nd part of last season. I don't know how they'll do it, but I'm pretty confident the Leafs will make sure all of Bozak/Martin/Komarov are protected. They'll pick up players to make sure they can exposed forwards who meet the criteria.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on December 09, 2016, 12:04:21 PM
In Lou we Trust
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 09, 2016, 12:32:42 PM
The expansion draft probably doesn't get talked about very much because there's still so much time between then and now and so much can change. Look at how many bodies we picked up in the 2nd part of last season. I don't know how they'll do it, but I'm pretty confident the Leafs will make sure all of Bozak/Martin/Komarov are protected. They'll pick up players to make sure they can exposed forwards who meet the criteria.

Yup. Really, we won't really have any real clarity about the situation until after the trade deadline.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 13, 2016, 02:10:11 PM

This one is pretty soft, as far as rumours go, as Tkachyov has only indicated interest in coming to North America, but hasn't been in direct contact with the Leafs yet, so I'm not going to bother with a separate thread.

http://theleafsnation.com/2016/12/13/leafs-have-interest-in-khl-forward-vladimir-tkachyov
http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=77117

If he were to come over, it would be on a 1-year ELC (a la Zaitsev). He's a 23 year old leftie Centre with good faceoff numbers, average size, slick hands, and good along the boards, with a nose for the net-front.

As mentioned in the TLN article, the Leafs have very little centre depth beyond our NHL roster: Adam Brooks, Byron Froese, Fredrick Gauthier, Colin Smith, Trevor Moore, and much less likely candidates in Dominic Toninato, Tony Cameranesi, and Dakota Joshua.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 14, 2016, 01:34:38 PM
I'm gonna spitball a trade proposal of JVR, Kapanen, Polak for Jared Spurgeon.  Too pricey?

Why it makes sense:

The Wild could really use some offensive help to secure a playoff spot and JVR would be an offensive upgrade to both Parise and Zucker in their top six LW situation.

They also get the benefit of a blue chip RW prospect in Kapanen and a functional RHD shutdown replacement in Polak until season's end.

Leafs secure their top 4 with Rielly, Spurgeon, Gardiner, Zaitsev.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on December 14, 2016, 02:03:32 PM
I'm gonna spitball a trade proposal of JVR, Kapanen, Polak for Jared Spurgeon.  Too pricey?

Why it makes sense:

The Wild could really use some offensive help to secure a playoff spot and JVR would be an offensive upgrade to both Parise and Zucker in their top six LW situation.

They also get the benefit of a blue chip RW prospect in Kapanen and a functional RHD shutdown replacement in Polak until season's end.

Leafs secure their top 4 with Rielly, Spurgeon, Gardiner, Zaitsev.

I think it's an overpayment.

If they acquire a dman I suspect it'll be a #4-#6 type who is on an expiring deal, I don't think they'll risk losing a top 4 dman to expansion.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 14, 2016, 02:35:27 PM
I'm gonna spitball a trade proposal of JVR, Kapanen, Polak for Jared Spurgeon.  Too pricey?

Why it makes sense:

The Wild could really use some offensive help to secure a playoff spot and JVR would be an offensive upgrade to both Parise and Zucker in their top six LW situation.

They also get the benefit of a blue chip RW prospect in Kapanen and a functional RHD shutdown replacement in Polak until season's end.

Leafs secure their top 4 with Rielly, Spurgeon, Gardiner, Zaitsev.

I think it's an overpayment.

If they acquire a dman I suspect it'll be a #4-#6 type who is on an expiring deal, I don't think they'll risk losing a top 4 dman to expansion.

Aren't we allowed to protect 7F and 4D?

https://www.nhl.com/gamecenter/fla-vs-min/2016/12/13/2016020438#game=2016020438,game_state=final,game_tab=stats

Height is his only knock.  He's become Boudreau's TOP pairing all situations D in every sense of the word, on a defensive juggernaut team, paired with Suter and trusted both on PP and PK.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 14, 2016, 02:37:28 PM
Aren't we allowed to protect 7F and 4D?

No, it's 7/3/1 or 8 forwards + defensemen and a goalie.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 14, 2016, 02:54:28 PM
Yup, 3, but I believe Zaitsev is exempt.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 14, 2016, 03:06:24 PM
Yup, 3, but I believe Zaitsev is exempt.

Yeah, so adding another non-exempt defenseman would mean exposing Carrick.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 14, 2016, 03:16:09 PM
I stand corrected at 3 D.  Is Zaitsev exempt because he wasn't under an NHL contract?  He has the pro league experience requirement...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 14, 2016, 03:25:48 PM
Yup, 3, but I believe Zaitsev is exempt.

Yeah, so adding another non-exempt defenseman would mean exposing Carrick.

Would you mind exposing Carrick if we added Spurgeon?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 14, 2016, 03:37:06 PM
Would you mind exposing Carrick if we added Spurgeon?

I can't pretend to be an expert on Spurgeon. At a very quick glance I'd say these are my quick hits:

1. I'm not wowed by his numbers, conventional or otherwise

2. He's got a good contract but he's a little old for my tastes in terms of fitting in with this current core

3. Eitherway, exposing Carrick should be reflected as an element of the trade and if it could cost us JVR, Kapanen and Carrick I'd probably want a slightly bigger prize.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 14, 2016, 04:07:59 PM

I can't pretend to be an expert on Spurgeon. At a very quick glance I'd say these are my quick hits:

1. I'm not wowed by his numbers, conventional or otherwise

2. He's got a good contract but he's a little old for my tastes in terms of fitting in with this current core

3. Eitherway, exposing Carrick should be reflected as an element of the trade and if it could cost us JVR, Kapanen and Carrick I'd probably want a slightly bigger prize.

Thinking a little more heavily on it, I'd probably take Kapanen out and replace him with a 2nd.

The point is add an all situations true #2 D, which is what Spurgeon has developed into and solidify our top 4 for future contention.

We're good on offence moving forward.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 14, 2016, 04:17:11 PM
He's become Boudreau's TOP pairing all situations D in every sense of the word, on a defensive juggernaut team, paired with Suter and trusted both on PP and PK.

The point is add an all situations true #2 D, which is what Spurgeon has developed into and solidify our top 4 for future contention.

I guess I would wonder why Minnesota would be looking to trade him. I get that they've got a decision to make in regards to their defence and the expansion draft, but I don't see them making Spurgeon available because of that.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 14, 2016, 04:31:06 PM

I guess I would wonder why Minnesota would be looking to trade him. I get that they've got a decision to make in regards to their defence and the expansion draft, but I don't see them making Spurgeon available because of that.

I imagine if they keep Spurgeon, I can see them exposing a guy like Dumba. Maybe the play for Spurgeon is too bold, but Parise is declining and JVR is more productive than any LW they currently possess and with the way Dubnyk is playing, I imagine them to be a defensive juggernaut even without Spurgeon and could really benefit from JVR's added offence.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 14, 2016, 04:36:52 PM
I'm a little bit more interested in parlaying some of our forward prospect depth into picks or a defenseman from Las Vegas, actually, a la Grabner-trade.

Vegas'll be picking a sizable handful of at minimum #4Ds, potential #1Gs, but the dregs of the NHL in the forward ranks, and 0 prospects until the draft. I think they'd value some relatively known quantity a bit more than most.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 14, 2016, 04:52:15 PM
I'm not particularly enthused by Spurgeon, either. The Leafs need a guy who can be a real #1 type defenceman, and, while Spurgeon is good, he's more of a 2/3. Don't be fooled by the fact that he plays for a Minnesota team with very good GA numbers. They're not a good possession team - middle of the pack for score & venue adjusted CF%, SA/60, etc, (bottom 1/3 when not adjusted) though, like the Leafs, doing well in terms of chance against % - with exceptional (and, likely, unsustainable - that 5-on-5 Sv% is going to drop 15-20 points by the end of the season) goaltending. Being one of the most relied upon defenceman on a team with those numbers is honestly not super impressive - never mind the fact that being on a good defensive team, even as one of the most heavily used defencemen on such a team, is not a good indicator of personal defensive ability, as defence is very much group effort rather than an individual one. I wouldn't give up anything close to what you're suggesting to for Spurgeon. Heck, I don't think I'd trade JvR straight up for him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 14, 2016, 04:57:30 PM
I'm not particularly enthused by Spurgeon, either. The Leafs need a guy who can be a real #1 type defenceman, and, while Spurgeon is good, he's more of a 2/3. Don't be fooled by the fact that he plays for a Minnesota team with very good GA numbers. They're not a good possession team - middle of the pack for score & venue adjusted CF%, SA/60, etc, (bottom 1/3 when not adjusted) though, like the Leafs, doing well in terms of chance against % - with exceptional (and, likely, unsustainable - that 5-on-5 Sv% is going to drop 15-20 points by the end of the season) goaltending. Being one of the most relied upon defenceman on a team with those numbers is honestly not super impressive - never mind the fact that being on a good defensive team, even as one of the most heavily used defencemen on such a team, is not a good indicator of personal defensive ability, as defence is very much group effort rather than an individual one. I wouldn't give up anything close to what you're suggesting to for Spurgeon. Heck, I don't think I'd trade JvR straight up for him.

Why am I not surprised? You look to debunk every idea or opinion that isn't your own. I trust Boudreau's useage of him over your off the cuff, little knowledge of the player quick analysis.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 14, 2016, 05:00:08 PM
Why am I not surprised? You look to debunk every idea or opinion that isn't your own. I trust Boudreau's useage of him over your off the cuff, little knowledge of the player quick analysis.

Why am I not surprised that you dismiss any opinion that opposes your own as coming from someone who isn't knowledgeable about the player, is combined with rhetorical fallacy - in this case, an appeal to authority - and, in no way attempts to address or refute the counterpoints being put forward?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 14, 2016, 05:04:11 PM
Why am I not surprised? You look to debunk every idea or opinion that isn't your own. I trust Boudreau's useage of him over your off the cuff, little knowledge of the player quick analysis.

Why am I not surprised that you dismiss any opinion that opposes your own as coming from someone who isn't knowledgeable about the player, is combined with rhetorical fallacy - in this case, an appeal to authority - and, in no way attempts to address or refute the counterpoints being put forward?

Probably because of your instant dismissal and passive aggressive insult that just JVR straight up for him, you'd consider an overpayment.

You probably never even stopped to consider the term remaining on Spurgeon's contract in comparison to JVR.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on December 14, 2016, 05:28:12 PM
In Busta's defense, I had much the same reaction, I just chose to label it an overpayment because arguing a point with you is the forum equivalent of banging your head against the wall.

I'm sure you're a good guy though, nothing personal.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 14, 2016, 05:43:41 PM
In Busta's defense, I had much the same reaction, I just chose to label it an overpayment because arguing a point with you is the forum equivalent of banging your head against the wall.

I'm sure you're a good guy though, nothing personal.

Right now true #1, 2 NHL D men are valued higher than top six highly productive wingers.  The is a fact of the league.  You may personally see more value in JVR than Spurgeon and that's fine.

I would much prefer to solidify a true top 4 NHL D for the foreseeable future because that's what we'll need if we want to contend over JVR's goal scoring.

Spurgeon excels at making sure the puck doesn't go in the Wild goal, while he is out on the ice. He is relied on for both PP and PK. The Wild is a poor Corsi team, because they lack offensive depth. Not one of their players has registered 10 goals yet this season. We have 3 scoring 10 or more already.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 15, 2016, 01:15:19 AM
Yup, 3, but I believe Zaitsev is exempt.

Yeah, so adding another non-exempt defenseman would mean exposing Carrick.

It would, but then I suppose part of the equation would be looking to move him in that case.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 15, 2016, 01:21:50 AM

I guess I would wonder why Minnesota would be looking to trade him. I get that they've got a decision to make in regards to their defence and the expansion draft, but I don't see them making Spurgeon available because of that.

I imagine if they keep Spurgeon, I can see them exposing a guy like Dumba. Maybe the play for Spurgeon is too bold, but Parise is declining and JVR is more productive than any LW they currently possess and with the way Dubnyk is playing, I imagine them to be a defensive juggernaut even without Spurgeon and could really benefit from JVR's added offence.

Expose Dumba in the expansion draft? They'll trade him before that happens, in fact, I'd take him for JVR before I'd take Spurgeon.


I can't pretend to be an expert on Spurgeon. At a very quick glance I'd say these are my quick hits:

1. I'm not wowed by his numbers, conventional or otherwise

2. He's got a good contract but he's a little old for my tastes in terms of fitting in with this current core

3. Eitherway, exposing Carrick should be reflected as an element of the trade and if it could cost us JVR, Kapanen and Carrick I'd probably want a slightly bigger prize.

Thinking a little more heavily on it, I'd probably take Kapanen out and replace him with a 2nd.

The point is add an all situations true #2 D, which is what Spurgeon has developed into and solidify our top 4 for future contention.

We're good on offence moving forward.

The Leafs are not 'good' on offence moving forward, less so if they trade JVR ( which I'm ok with, generally, if they're moving him for a good young dman ).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 15, 2016, 01:30:06 AM
Right now true #1, 2 NHL D men are valued higher than top six highly productive wingers.  The is a fact of the league.  You may personally see more value in JVR than Spurgeon and that's fine.

I would much prefer to solidify a true top 4 NHL D for the foreseeable future because that's what we'll need if we want to contend over JVR's goal scoring.

Spurgeon excels at making sure the puck doesn't go in the Wild goal, while he is out on the ice. He is relied on for both PP and PK. The Wild is a poor Corsi team, because they lack offensive depth. Not one of their players has registered 10 goals yet this season. We have 3 scoring 10 or more already.

That seems like a bizarre definition of depth. Like you say, the Leafs have three players with 10+ goals, the Wild have none but the Leafs as a group aren't outscoring the Wild by a particularly significant amount. The Leafs are at 2.89 gpg and the Wild at 2.82. I don't think you can attribute CORSI differences to the tune of a .07 Goals per Game difference.

I think you're right that with the current market for defensemen JVR might only be worth someone like Spurgeon but to me that seems like a much better argument to not try and trade for D when the market seems a little out of whack. Seems like the perfect example of selling low and buying high. 

More to the point though, I think you're glossing over the question of Spurgeon vs. Carrick. Without getting into your claim that Spurgeon is a huge upgrade in spite of the numbers, the reality is that Carrick is 4 and a half years younger which puts him in line for some potentially serious development the way defensemen tend to get better as they hit their 24-25 year old seasons. Combine that with the age of the forwards we want to build around and Carrick might be the way I lean even before you start throwing some of the Leafs' best trade chips into the mix.

In fact it's hard not to see parallels between Carrick and Spurgeon. Both undersized a bit on the back end, both with good mobile games that haven't translated into NHL offense much. When Spurgeon was Carrick's age he was used pretty similarly, getting 15 minutes a night with no SH time and a little bit of PP time. It's hard not to look at Spurgeon as the sort of player Carrick can become. So why jump the gun?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 15, 2016, 01:32:42 AM
It would, but then I suppose part of the equation would be looking to move him in that case.

Maybe but the Leafs need to expose one defenseman who meets the GP criteria.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 15, 2016, 01:37:07 AM
It would, but then I suppose part of the equation would be looking to move him in that case.

Maybe but the Leafs need to expose one defenseman who meets the GP criteria.

Sure, barring Marincin being shattered, it'll be him over Carrick.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 15, 2016, 08:57:45 AM
The Leafs are not 'good' on offence moving forward, less so if they trade JVR ( which I'm ok with, generally, if they're moving him for a good young dman ).

As much as I completely understand the temptation to want to trade JVR, especially for a defenceman, let's not pretend that he wouldn't leave a pretty big hole in our forward group. Without him our LW is Komarov-Hyman-Leivo-Marin.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 15, 2016, 09:03:20 AM
As much as I completely understand the temptation to want to trade JVR, especially for a defenceman, let's not pretend that he wouldn't leave a pretty big hole in our forward group. Without him our LW is Komarov-Hyman-Leivo-Marin.

*coughLeipsiccough*
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 15, 2016, 09:07:31 AM
*coughLeipsiccough*

Admittedly he did slip my mind. Boy it sure would be nice if we had a roster spot for him so we could see if he's the real deal before making a decision on JVR. Too bad that left side is crowded with such great playe... oh wait.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 15, 2016, 10:34:02 AM

That seems like a bizarre definition of depth. Like you say, the Leafs have three players with 10+ goals, the Wild have none but the Leafs as a group aren't outscoring the Wild by a particularly significant amount. The Leafs are at 2.89 gpg and the Wild at 2.82. I don't think you can attribute CORSI differences to the tune of a .07 Goals per Game difference.

I think you're right that with the current market for defensemen JVR might only be worth someone like Spurgeon but to me that seems like a much better argument to not try and trade for D when the market seems a little out of whack. Seems like the perfect example of selling low and buying high. 

More to the point though, I think you're glossing over the question of Spurgeon vs. Carrick. Without getting into your claim that Spurgeon is a huge upgrade in spite of the numbers, the reality is that Carrick is 4 and a half years younger which puts him in line for some potentially serious development the way defensemen tend to get better as they hit their 24-25 year old seasons. Combine that with the age of the forwards we want to build around and Carrick might be the way I lean even before you start throwing some of the Leafs' best trade chips into the mix.

In fact it's hard not to see parallels between Carrick and Spurgeon. Both undersized a bit on the back end, both with good mobile games that haven't translated into NHL offense much. When Spurgeon was Carrick's age he was used pretty similarly, getting 15 minutes a night with no SH time and a little bit of PP time. It's hard not to look at Spurgeon as the sort of player Carrick can become. So why jump the gun?

You bring up good points re Spurgeon/Carrick.  I've looked at Carrick in the vein of a young Tyson Barrie myself, but can also definitely see the similarities to a young Spurgeon as well.

Yeah actually offering this trade up would have to be mulled over a long while.  If the deal was done and Carrick exposed, at least we still have Corrado if Vegas jumps on Carrick?

Given the type of minutes JVR is now playing, I'd imagine a Leivo or Leipsic recouping a good portion of those points.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 15, 2016, 10:48:27 AM

I assume they'd still have Corrado but Babcock doesn't seem that interested in giving him a shot so you'd have to question whether keeping him around makes sense unless he'd be getting a regular shift.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 15, 2016, 10:52:46 AM
Admittedly he did slip my mind. Boy it sure would be nice if we had a roster spot for him so we could see if he's the real deal before making a decision on JVR. Too bad that left side is crowded with such great playe... oh wait.

Subconciously I kind of think that the readiness/willingness to trade JVR comes from the fact that we're coming off a free agency year where pretty good LW's were readily available. Of the Leafs' major pieces, JVR strikes me as the one who you can peel off with some sort of confidence you can replace what he brings(at least in part) with cash when the team needs it.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Coco-puffs on December 15, 2016, 11:10:55 AM
Admittedly he did slip my mind. Boy it sure would be nice if we had a roster spot for him so we could see if he's the real deal before making a decision on JVR. Too bad that left side is crowded with such great playe... oh wait.

Subconciously I kind of think that the readiness/willingness to trade JVR comes from the fact that we're coming off a free agency year where pretty good LW's were readily available. Of the Leafs' major pieces, JVR strikes me as the one who you can peel off with some sort of confidence you can replace what he brings(at least in part) with cash when the team needs it.

That is an interesting take, although I'm not so sure many of us really want to spend money in free-agency on wingers.  At least not consciously. 

I think everyone sees JvR as the best asset we have that we are actually willing to trade.  We all want to see the defense improve (esp. the right side) and it doesn't seem like we have any prospects who could conceivably be in our Top 4 in the next couple of years.  We do however have some prospects on the wing who could do a reasonable job in his place- although I don't expect Leivo or Leipsic to produce at his rates- so he is expendable. 

As you said, if none of our prospects show they are capable enough, then yes, its more conceivable that some money in free agency will solve the problem.  At least, more conceivable than addressing our defense through the same manner.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 15, 2016, 11:13:31 AM

I assume they'd still have Corrado but Babcock doesn't seem that interested in giving him a shot so you'd have to question whether keeping him around makes sense unless he'd be getting a regular shift.

I'm inclined to think that Corrado is being kept around precisely for expansion insurance.  He did have a good camp.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: louisstamos on December 15, 2016, 11:14:42 AM

I assume they'd still have Corrado but Babcock doesn't seem that interested in giving him a shot so you'd have to question whether keeping him around makes sense unless he'd be getting a regular shift.

I'm inclined to think that Corrado is being kept around precisely for expansion insurance.  He did have a good camp.

I mean - you have to think that both Polak and Hunwick are gone at the deadline and Corrado gets in permanently at that point, right?  He's just biding his time before then?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 15, 2016, 11:18:14 AM
I'm inclined to think that Corrado is being kept around precisely for expansion insurance.  He did have a good camp.

I don't know if I see that. If you figure that, absent a trade, the Rielly, Gardiner, Zaitsev, Carrick group is fairly safe going forward then Corrado would only be along as a bottom pairing guy and if Babcock were inclined to use Corrado as a bottom pairing guy...well, I think you can see where I'm going with this.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 15, 2016, 11:18:42 AM

Subconciously I kind of think that the readiness/willingness to trade JVR comes from the fact that we're coming off a free agency year where pretty good LW's were readily available. Of the Leafs' major pieces, JVR strikes me as the one who you can peel off with some sort of confidence you can replace what he brings(at least in part) with cash when the team needs it.

That is an interesting take, although I'm not so sure many of us really want to spend money in free-agency on wingers.  At least not consciously. 

I think everyone sees JvR as the best asset we have that we are actually willing to trade.  We all want to see the defense improve (esp. the right side) and it doesn't seem like we have any prospects who could conceivably be in our Top 4 in the next couple of years.  We do however have some prospects on the wing who could do a reasonable job in his place- although I don't expect Leivo or Leipsic to produce at his rates- so he is expendable. 

As you said, if none of our prospects show they are capable enough, then yes, its more conceivable that some money in free agency will solve the problem.  At least, more conceivable than addressing our defense through the same manner.
[/quote]

Nice thinking, IMO.  Yeah the expansion is bound to shake loose a few half decent 3-4 pairing NHL D, a manner of which we both have and are developing.

A true 1-2 D, either young and developing, or in their prime will remain just as elusive as ever.  Much more so than a scoring left winger.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 15, 2016, 11:20:45 AM
I don't think he's really been talked about too much yet, but I'd like to get the Shattenkirk ball rolling. I'd seriously pursue him on July 1st if he makes it there (which as long as St. Louis doesn't trade him prior to that he probably will). With Burns getting $8mil x 8 years I'd do 7x7 for Shattenkirk.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 15, 2016, 11:25:53 AM
That is an interesting take, although I'm not so sure many of us really want to spend money in free-agency on wingers.  At least not consciously.

We might not want to now but I think there's going to be a time in the not too distant future where guys like Matthews-Marner-Nylander are locked up long term at reasonable rates where the team has money to spend. Being as significant improvements on the blueline or at C tend to just not be available on the UFA market(or are crazy expensive when they are) then signing wingers could very well be an area to look at.

Whether via signing or trade, pretty good wingers tend to be more available at decent prices and I think good teams have taken advantage of that to add those final puzzle pieces. Hossa with the Hawks, Gaborik in LA, Kessel in Pittsburgh and so on.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 15, 2016, 11:26:26 AM
I'm inclined to think that Corrado is being kept around precisely for expansion insurance.  He did have a good camp.

I don't know if I see that. If you figure that, absent a trade, the Rielly, Gardiner, Zaitsev, Carrick group is fairly safe going forward then Corrado would only be along as a bottom pairing guy and if Babcock were inclined to use Corrado as a bottom pairing guy...well, I think you can see where I'm going with this.

Either way, isn't it insurance for a bottom pairing D that we can freely expose, even with those you mentioned protected?

Especially if Polak is moved for a and no D came back.  He won't have had enough NHL games in this season to be desirable once exposed to Vegas. Which would mean no Leafs D going to Vegas and they Leafs avoid losing Corrado on waivers, so that next season, they basically still have all the D they want still in the system.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 15, 2016, 11:28:32 AM
I don't think he's really been talked about too much yet, but I'd like to get the Shattenkirk ball rolling. I'd seriously pursue him on July 1st if he makes it there (which as long as St. Louis doesn't trade him prior to that he probably will). With Burns getting $8mil x 8 years I'd do 7x7 for Shattenkirk.

Yeah Shattenkirk is the obvious discussion. I was just trying to be a little more "creative".  ;)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 15, 2016, 11:30:14 AM
I don't think he's really been talked about too much yet, but I'd like to get the Shattenkirk ball rolling. I'd seriously pursue him on July 1st if he makes it there (which as long as St. Louis doesn't trade him prior to that he probably will). With Burns getting $8mil x 8 years I'd do 7x7 for Shattenkirk.

Depending on how the trade deadline and draft play out, yeah, Shattenkirk should probably be the team's top UFA target this summer.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 15, 2016, 11:36:45 AM
Either way, isn't it insurance for a bottom pairing D that we can freely expose, even with those you mentioned protected?

Especially if Polak is moved for a and no D came back.  He won't have had enough NHL games in this season to be desirable once exposed to Vegas. Which would mean no Leafs D going to Vegas and they Leafs avoid losing Corrado on waivers, so that next season, they basically still have all the D they want still in the system.

You've lost me. The Leafs can only protect 3 defensemen and right now that figures to be Rielly, Gardiner and Carrick. Keeping Corrado around doesn't mean they don't have to expose Marincin. If Vegas wants Marincin(or Polak or Hunwick if they're re-signed) though, exposing Corrado won't affect that.

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on December 15, 2016, 11:42:20 AM
I don't think he's really been talked about too much yet, but I'd like to get the Shattenkirk ball rolling. I'd seriously pursue him on July 1st if he makes it there (which as long as St. Louis doesn't trade him prior to that he probably will). With Burns getting $8mil x 8 years I'd do 7x7 for Shattenkirk.

Depending on how the trade deadline and draft play out, yeah, Shattenkirk should probably be the team's top UFA target this summer.

Consistently 40+ points.  20-22mins a game.  A little low, but I guess with Pietrangelo/Bouwmeester/Parayko eating up a bunch too, it makes some sense.  I'll admit, I'm not sure how to read his fancier stats given the Blues' record over the past few years.

I like the idea though.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 15, 2016, 12:06:31 PM

You've lost me. The Leafs can only protect 3 defensemen and right now that figures to be Rielly, Gardiner and Carrick. Keeping Corrado around doesn't mean they don't have to expose Marincin. If Vegas wants Marincin(or Polak or Hunwick if they're re-signed) though, exposing Corrado won't affect that.

Okay, I'll circle back. All but 3D and an exempt Zaitsev will be exposed by the Leafs.  Hunwick and Polak don't qualify as expansion draft targets unless re-signed.

1) If the Leafs do land a top 2 D via trade, it will leave Carrick exposed as well as Marincin and Corrado, but I imagine Carrick would be the favoured expansion D target for Vegas, so Corrado is the insurance if Carrick is picked up in that scenario, because he would slot under Zaitsev, assuming Polak walks or is traded.

2) If the Leafs stand pat on D, Hunwick and Polak still become free agents, Carrick is protected and Marincin and Corrado are exposed. Vegas probably passes on Leafs D, Polak walks if he isn't traded at the deadline and Corrado is the insurance that fills in his bottom pairing RHD spot next season, now under Carrick.

How is Corrado not insurance?

During this season, keeping Corrado up on the roster is injury insurance.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 15, 2016, 12:18:06 PM
How is Corrado not insurance?

I guess what I'm not really seeing there is this idea that Corrado would fill a need Babcock sees him as being suitable for because, if that were the case, I can't help but feel he'd occasionally play him now and sort of be interested in his development. I guess to me there's a disconnect between "This guy can really play for us next year" and "Enjoy the pressbox for a year".

It seems to me like if you were really worried about the bottom pairing next year you wouldn't really need insurance so much as a willingness to make the sort of minor deals that brought Hunwick, Corraddo, Polak, Marincin and Carrick to the Leafs in the first place.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 15, 2016, 03:11:20 PM
How is Corrado not insurance?

I guess what I'm not really seeing there is this idea that Corrado would fill a need Babcock sees him as being suitable for because, if that were the case, I can't help but feel he'd occasionally play him now and sort of be interested in his development. I guess to me there's a disconnect between "This guy can really play for us next year" and "Enjoy the pressbox for a year".

It seems to me like if you were really worried about the bottom pairing next year you wouldn't really need insurance so much as a willingness to make the sort of minor deals that brought Hunwick, Corraddo, Polak, Marincin and Carrick to the Leafs in the first place.

But he's still in the room and practising on the team. I just feel if they weren't mutually on the same page he'd have requested a trade like Holland or been waived by now. I certainly don't see it as ruining his career based on how long it can take a D to develop at the NHL level, anyway.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 15, 2016, 03:15:47 PM
But he's still in the room and practising on the team. I just feel if they weren't mutually on the same page he'd have requested a trade like Holland or been waived by now. I certainly don't see it as ruining his career based on how long it can take a D to develop at the NHL level, anyway.

That length of time it takes for D to develop typically happens over a period of time when said defensemen are playing competitive hockey games. I don't think I'm going too far out on a limb to say that "playing hockey" is important to the development of hockey players.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 15, 2016, 03:50:58 PM
But he's still in the room and practising on the team. I just feel if they weren't mutually on the same page he'd have requested a trade like Holland or been waived by now. I certainly don't see it as ruining his career based on how long it can take a D to develop at the NHL level, anyway.

That length of time it takes for D to develop typically happens over a period of time when said defensemen are playing competitive hockey games. I don't think I'm going too far out on a limb to say that "playing hockey" is important to the development of hockey players.

Maybe he plays via hypnosis?  Keepin' that mental game strong!
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 15, 2016, 03:53:58 PM
Coincidentally David Alter just posted a Corrado article on the Athletic moments ago:

Quote
This season, Corrado has been more vocal about his current situation. He hasn’t demanded a trade, but he has made it pretty clear he is unhappy that his season was limited to one game while all of the Leafs other seven defencemen have played at least 16 times.

“Everyone on our back end gets a chance to play except me,” Corrado said.  “I’d love to play. I had a good camp. I put on ten pounds in the summer. I sacrificed a lot to earn a job here when there might not have been one for me. I’m sure Holly’s situation was similar in ways, but for me, it’s really frustrating right now.”

Corrado’s situation has made clear that there is a divide between management and the coaching staff.

“I talked to Lou and he’s been supportive with me,” Corrado said. “He told me he likes me, and he wants me here. It does make me feel better about the situation, but at the end of the day, the coach is the one who makes the lineup and if the coach doesn’t like you, then you’re not going to play. And that’s where I’m at right now.”

https://theathletic.com/30064/2016/12/15/corrado-happy-for-holland-but-laments-living-in-no-mans-land/

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 15, 2016, 04:07:25 PM
Coincidentally David Alter just posted a Corrado article on the Athletic moments ago:

Quote
This season, Corrado has been more vocal about his current situation. He hasn’t demanded a trade, but he has made it pretty clear he is unhappy that his season was limited to one game while all of the Leafs other seven defencemen have played at least 16 times.

“Everyone on our back end gets a chance to play except me,” Corrado said.  “I’d love to play. I had a good camp. I put on ten pounds in the summer. I sacrificed a lot to earn a job here when there might not have been one for me. I’m sure Holly’s situation was similar in ways, but for me, it’s really frustrating right now.”

Corrado’s situation has made clear that there is a divide between management and the coaching staff.

“I talked to Lou and he’s been supportive with me,” Corrado said. “He told me he likes me, and he wants me here. It does make me feel better about the situation, but at the end of the day, the coach is the one who makes the lineup and if the coach doesn’t like you, then you’re not going to play. And that’s where I’m at right now.”

https://theathletic.com/30064/2016/12/15/corrado-happy-for-holland-but-laments-living-in-no-mans-land/

I don't think we should ready the pitchforks outside Babs office just yet...

Sorry about your luck Corrado. Be ready when your time comes.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on December 15, 2016, 06:01:44 PM
Babcock really is stubborn to a fault. It makes no sense that he hasn't gotten more than 1 chance considering all the issues the Leafs have had (and continue to have) on defense.  It appears Babcock really doesn't like him for whatever reason.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on December 15, 2016, 06:23:03 PM
Babcock really is stubborn to a fault. It makes no sense that he hasn't gotten more than 1 chance considering all the issues the Leafs have had (and continue to have) on defense.  It appears Babcock really doesn't like him for whatever reason.

I think this is a general coaching situation and not something limited to Babcock.  Think back to the days when the Leafs gave up Jason Smith and Steve Sullivan during the Quinn era. 

For whatever reasons, coaches end up going with the guys that they "like". 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on December 15, 2016, 06:25:03 PM
Babcock really is stubborn to a fault. It makes no sense that he hasn't gotten more than 1 chance considering all the issues the Leafs have had (and continue to have) on defense.  It appears Babcock really doesn't like him for whatever reason.

I think this is a general coaching situation and not something limited to Babcock.  Think back to the days when the Leafs gave up Jason Smith and Steve Sullivan during the Quinn era. 

For whatever reasons, coaches end up going with the guys that they "like".
The Jason Smith thing really bugged me at the time. You could tell he was going to be a good defenseman and they totally gave up on him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on December 15, 2016, 06:28:37 PM
Babcock really is stubborn to a fault. It makes no sense that he hasn't gotten more than 1 chance considering all the issues the Leafs have had (and continue to have) on defense.  It appears Babcock really doesn't like him for whatever reason.

I think this is a general coaching situation and not something limited to Babcock.  Think back to the days when the Leafs gave up Jason Smith and Steve Sullivan during the Quinn era. 

For whatever reasons, coaches end up going with the guys that they "like".
The Jason Smith thing really bugged me at the time. You could tell he was going to be a good defenseman and they totally gave up on him.

I read one article back in the day that said that Quinn didn't like the way that he skated all hunched over.  I'm not sure if that is true or not, but it kind of seems like a silly reason to give up on a d-man if true.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 15, 2016, 06:31:55 PM
Babcock really is stubborn to a fault. It makes no sense that he hasn't gotten more than 1 chance considering all the issues the Leafs have had (and continue to have) on defense.  It appears Babcock really doesn't like him for whatever reason.

I think this is a general coaching situation and not something limited to Babcock.  Think back to the days when the Leafs gave up Jason Smith and Steve Sullivan during the Quinn era. 

For whatever reasons, coaches end up going with the guys that they "like".

Waiving Sullivan never sat well with me but then I don't know what kind of person he was at the time.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: McGarnagle on December 15, 2016, 07:02:51 PM
I'm not particularly bothered that Babcock doesn't play him, but it isn't fair to let him languish in the box eating popcorn at his age for as long as he has -and that's as much a managerial decision as a coaching one.

 He's not even the 7th D, so the right thing to do is waive him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on December 15, 2016, 07:11:25 PM
I'm not particularly bothered that Babcock doesn't play him, but it isn't fair to let him languish in the box eating popcorn at his age for as long as he has -and that's as much a managerial decision as a coaching one.

 He's not even the 7th D, so the right thing to do is waive him.
I'm wondering why his agent hasn't pressed the issue. He's basically been unused since last season.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on December 16, 2016, 11:04:45 AM
In Lou we Trust.  We are only on defensive injury away from seeing Frankie play. Patience in the young is non existent, just keep believing, work hard and you will get your chance.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 16, 2016, 12:18:30 PM

So assuming the Leafs maintain this point per game pace right up into February who would be on the respective armchair GMs list of guys to move at the deadline?

For me I think it'd be Hunlak obviously and then one of Komarov or JVR to get Leipsic into the lineup. Bozak would be in the discussion but until we have a better sense of who his replacement would be I don't think it's as pressing.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 16, 2016, 12:25:25 PM
For me I think it'd be Hunlak obviously and then one of Komarov or JVR to get Leipsic into the lineup. Bozak would be in the discussion but until we have a better sense of who his replacement would be I don't think it's as pressing.

Similar for me. Hunlack would be the two I'd be pushing the most, followed by JvR/Komarov/Bozak (not super concerned about his replacement, to be honest - Matthews & Kadri can handle the top 2 lines and picking up a 3rd line center in the UFA market shouldn't be overly difficult). I'd also be trying to move guys like Laich, Greening, Michalek, etc. to teams looking for injury insurance (or immediate injury replacements) or depth. Obviously, the return there wouldn't be much (if anything), but clearing the some more cap space to fit the impending rookie bonuses would be return enough.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 16, 2016, 01:31:53 PM
Those all make sense. In general, I'd hope we would be sellers.

I would try to trade Martin back to the island (yeah I know they aren't likely buyers). He's cheaper than they expected.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 16, 2016, 01:34:34 PM

Since we're all in agreement re: Hunlak I guess the interesting thing there is what they'll be worth. It's crazy to think about but Polak did get two 2nd rounders last year. Could dealing those guys yield, say, a 2nd and a 3rd?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 16, 2016, 01:45:31 PM
Since we're all in agreement re: Hunlak I guess the interesting thing there is what they'll be worth. It's crazy to think about but Polak did get two 2nd rounders last year. Could dealing those guys yield, say, a 2nd and a 3rd?

I imagine that's probably on the higher end of the possible range, but, I wouldn't say it's out of the question. The pending UFA defencemen who are likely to be available at the deadline isn't exactly filled with great options.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 21, 2016, 02:18:31 AM
FORWARDS

J. vr ($ 6,000,000) --- A. Matthews ($ 925,000) --- C. Brown ($ 1,200,000)
N. Sosh ($ 1,200,000) --- B. Ny ($ 6,000,000) --- M. Marner ($ 894,166)
B. Leipsick ($ 950,000) --- N. Kadri ($ 4,500,000) --- K. Kapanen ($ 863,333)
U. Leo ($ 3,000,000) --- F. Gauthier ($ 863,333) --- Z. Hyman ($ 900,000)

DEFENCE

M. Rielly ($ 5,000,000) --- K. Shat ($ 7,000,000)
S. stick ($ 5,500,000) --- N. Zaitsev ($ 4,500,000)
R. Valiev ($ 778,333) --- T. Lil ($ 925,000)

GOAL

F. Andersen ($ 5,000,000) --- 2. g ($ 1,000,000)

Extras

A. Johnson ($ 750,833) --- A. Nielsen ($ 670,000) --- T. Dermott ($ 894,166)


An internal 'Leafs plus Shat' thought paradigm a year and a half out, around 9-10 in cap space ( presuming Vegas is a hit, which wouldn't surprise me ). Matthews, Marner and Kadri drive their lines, if the Leafs luck out in the draft they have that coming down the pike, the top 4 D are balanced somewhat ( Shat'n'JamesT coming to Toronto is unlikely, still ) Leo is arguable...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Andy on December 21, 2016, 06:55:46 AM
Is S Stick Gardiner? Who's T Lil? (Sorry, I'm a bit obtuse). 

Ideally I'd try to move JVR + a few other pieces (Kapanen, Leipsic, Dermott etc.) for an upgrade at defense. Maybe a deal with ANH could work. I'd love to get Trouba from Win but I'm not sure we have anything that gets it done (that satisfies both teams).

Then you have that vacancy on the 1st line wing that has Tavares' name alllll over it!

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 21, 2016, 09:07:05 AM
I assume S Stick is Jake "Silver Stick" Gardiner, and T. Lil is Timothy Liljegren.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 09:15:03 AM
I assume S Stick is Jake "Silver Stick" Gardiner, and T. Lil is Timothy Liljegren.

If that's true and this is for the 2018-2019 season wouldn't Gardiner still be at 4.05?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 21, 2016, 09:24:58 AM
I assume S Stick is Jake "Silver Stick" Gardiner, and T. Lil is Timothy Liljegren.

If that's true and this is for the 2018-2019 season wouldn't Gardiner still be at 4.05?

If that is true, then yes #ThankDubas
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Jolly good show chaps on December 21, 2016, 02:00:26 PM
Was hoping we may be able to trade for a defensive prospect from the past draft or two. Provorov particularly (although I guess that's unrealistic now). Are there any others we may he able to get in a trade?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 21, 2016, 02:08:04 PM
My bad, I thought Jake only had a year and a half left, two and half it is. A lot of guesses on salary there. Also shows the kind of flex they have if they don't land Liljegren, for argument, if they get Patrick they could probably start looking at a meaningful trade for a top young dman. Acquiring Shattenkirk for no talent cost would really be helpful.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on December 21, 2016, 03:03:49 PM
I assume S Stick is Jake "Silver Stick" Gardiner, and T. Lil is Timothy Liljegren.

If that's true and this is for the 2018-2019 season wouldn't Gardiner still be at 4.05?

If that is true, then yes #ThankDubas

Previous administration.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 21, 2016, 03:07:06 PM
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-suitors-will-ante-van-riemsdyk/

Quote
10. A year ago, teams asked about James van Riemsdyk and were told he was not available. Now they’re being told, “If you’re serious, ante up.” What it comes down to is this: van Riemsdyk is an unrestricted free agent after next season, and can be extended July 1. At some point, the Maple Leafs will decide if they are going to meet his price.

Van Riemsdyk is a scorer, he’s going to cash in somewhere. Toronto’s cap situation is pretty good for a couple of years, until the likes of Auston Matthews, Mitch Marner and William Nylander need their next contracts.

So that will be the decision. If they decide to deploy their wealth elsewhere, it’s going to be on the blueline. Van Riemsdyk could get you that help. But his value drops if you’re trading him with free-agency looming. So that’s why I think it’s gone from “No,” to “What have you got for us?”

Per his reddit-AMA (https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/5jf2pj/james_mirtle_editor_and_hockey_writer_the/dbfn0fj/) yesterday, James Mirtle is working on a piece about the JvR trade avenue; return will be similar in build to the Kessel deal. JvR (+ pot sweeteners) <--> young prospect on the rise (hopefully defense) + pick(s)/part(s).

Other than the Anaheim route, I would also venture Nashville as a pretty good trading option. Their window with Rinne is closing (some would say closed, thanks to Juuse Saros) but the West is significantly weakened this year. They are currently the only team in the West with a positive goal differential on the outside looking in, so an injection of a scoring winger could very well move them up to where they'd like to be. Their left side is currently Forsberg/Wilson/Arvidsson. Any one of Arvidsson, Saros, Girard, or even Ellis would interest me.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 03:07:54 PM
Was hoping we may be able to trade for a defensive prospect from the past draft or two. Provorov particularly (although I guess that's unrealistic now). Are there any others we may he able to get in a trade?

I don't want to put too fine a point on it but what you might be able to get in a trade is solely determined by what you're willing to give up in a trade. The Hall-Larsson trade though suggests that it's not a great market for dealing for defensemen.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 03:09:58 PM
Other than the Anaheim route, I would also venture Nashville as a pretty good trading option. Their window with Rinne is closing (some would say closed, thanks to Juuse Saros) but the West is significantly weakened this year. They are currently the only team in the West with a positive goal differential on the outside looking in, so an injection of a scoring winger could very well move them up to where they'd like to be. Their left side is currently Forsberg/Wilson/Arvidsson. Any one of Arvidsson, Saros, Girard, or even Ellis would interest me.

Just cannibalize their last draft. JVR for Fabbro, Girard and Allard.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on December 21, 2016, 03:17:35 PM
I gotta say that maybe the leafs have just as much a need at centre than on defence.  After matthews, kadri and bozak they have NOBODY of note.

and if they're thinking of trading bozak it'll even be worse.

So I wouldn't be too upset if they traded jvr for a young good centre if it was a better player than the defensemand they could get.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 21, 2016, 03:22:49 PM
If that is true, then yes #ThankDubas
Previous administration.

Gardiner signed July 29, 2014.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/gardiners-new-deal-suggests-a-shift/
Quote
"The long-term wasn’t something we thought of originally," said Nonis. "But (we) talked about it the past week and they had interest and once we did it, came together pretty quickly."

Let's see... what happened that week...

July 22: Kyle Dubas named Assistant General Manager
https://www.nhl.com/mapleleafs/news/leafs-name-kyle-dubas-assistant-general-manager/c-726837

While he wasn't directly involved in the negotiations, I'm pretty sure Dubas had some input at the table when Nonis and Shanahan were discussing their decision on how to handle Gardiner (and Carlyle's issues with him).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Deebo on December 21, 2016, 03:24:25 PM
I gotta say that maybe the leafs have just as much a need at centre than on defence.  After matthews, kadri and bozak they have NOBODY of note.

I think they view Nylander as a centre, long term.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 03:27:15 PM
I gotta say that maybe the leafs have just as much a need at centre than on defence.  After matthews, kadri and bozak they have NOBODY of note.

How many do they need? If Matthews/Kadri are pretty set as 1 and 2 for the long term and Gauthier is in the mix for a #4 spot then having a good #3 doesn't really seem like a position of urgent need.

And that's before, as Deebo says, the long term question of where Nylander plays comes up.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 03:28:49 PM
While he wasn't directly involved in the negotiations, I'm pretty sure Dubas had some input at the table when Nonis and Shanahan were discussing their decision on how to handle Gardiner (and Carlyle's issues with him).

You're kind of reaching a bit here. One week on the job he's probably going to have minimal input on the structure of any significant extension especially given his age/experience.

It's ok to admit that once Nonis was allowed to do things the right way he did some fairly smart things.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on December 21, 2016, 03:29:27 PM
I gotta say that maybe the leafs have just as much a need at centre than on defence.  After matthews, kadri and bozak they have NOBODY of note.

I think they view Nylander as a centre, long term.

What makes you think that?  the only times that they have used them there at the nhl level has been when they have had no other options. 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 21, 2016, 03:30:26 PM
Just cannibalize their last draft. JVR for Fabbro, Girard and Allard.

You don't want Rem Pitlick too?

Fun fact: there are three Pitlicks in the NHL circle: Lance, who played for Ottawa and Florida in the 90s/00s, his nephew Tyler with Edmonton now, and his son Rem, drafted this summer.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 03:32:32 PM
You don't want Rem Pitlick too?

Forwards? We don't need no steenkin' forwards.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on December 21, 2016, 03:33:00 PM
I gotta say that maybe the leafs have just as much a need at centre than on defence.  After matthews, kadri and bozak they have NOBODY of note.

How many do they need? If Matthews/Kadri are pretty set as 1 and 2 for the long term and Gauthier is in the mix for a #4 spot then having a good #3 doesn't really seem like a position of urgent need.

And that's before, as Deebo says, the long term question of where Nylander plays comes up.

yeah but if theres injuries...basically their only 2 viable callups right now are gauthier and froese.  all of there other centres are juniors or overseas.

at least they have corrado and neilsen, dermott, valiev, loov...they have guys on D that can at least fill in and some guys with potential.

other than the top 4 guys they have no organizational depth at centre.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 03:38:14 PM
yeah but if theres injuries...basically their only 2 viable callups right now are gauthier and froese.  all of there other centres are juniors or overseas.

I don't get it. Are we talking about immediate need or organizational depth? Because they're fine for right now with Bozak around and Laich in the minors and Nylander able to slide over and so on and organizational need isn't the sort of thing you worry about spending real assets on. You can pick up that sort of depth for the minimum or on the waiver wire.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Deebo on December 21, 2016, 03:40:49 PM
I gotta say that maybe the leafs have just as much a need at centre than on defence.  After matthews, kadri and bozak they have NOBODY of note.

I think they view Nylander as a centre, long term.

What makes you think that?  the only times that they have used them there at the nhl level has been when they have had no other options. 

He's played C with the Marlies last year and during his post deadline call up.

I think they are easing him to his first NHL year on the wing while Bozak is still here. But Long term, I think the plan is Matthews, Nylander and Kadri down the middle. I could be wrong of course.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on December 21, 2016, 03:46:14 PM
yeah but if theres injuries...basically their only 2 viable callups right now are gauthier and froese.  all of there other centres are juniors or overseas.

I don't get it. Are we talking about immediate need or organizational depth? Because they're fine for right now with Bozak around and Laich in the minors and Nylander able to slide over and so on and organizational need isn't the sort of thing you worry about spending real assets on. You can pick up that sort of depth for the minimum or on the waiver wire.

I'm saying both I guess.  That I am at least, if not more worried about their strength at centre as on defence.  So if JVR is going out I would be ok with a good to great young centre OR a good to great young dman as a centrepiece coming back.

I don't think its dman or bust in any trade.  I have to remind myself that they will probably have a top 10 pick this year too so they'll get another good/great player there too.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 03:55:06 PM
I'm saying both I guess.  That I am at least, if not more worried about their strength at centre as on defence.  So if JVR is going out I would be ok with a good to great young centre OR a good to great young dman as a centrepiece coming back.

Right. And I'm just saying that long term, realistically, the team's fine at C. "What if there are injuries" is a question for immediate depth. Going forward having Matthews/Kadri/Gauthier is a good enough foundation that there are much simpler ways to add a #3 or organizational depth without using the team's biggest trade chip on it.

Right now it's probably the organization's biggest strength.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on December 21, 2016, 04:33:15 PM
I'm saying both I guess.  That I am at least, if not more worried about their strength at centre as on defence.  So if JVR is going out I would be ok with a good to great young centre OR a good to great young dman as a centrepiece coming back.

Right. And I'm just saying that long term, realistically, the team's fine at C. "What if there are injuries" is a question for immediate depth. Going forward having Matthews/Kadri/Gauthier is a good enough foundation that there are much simpler ways to add a #3 or organizational depth without using the team's biggest trade chip on it.

Right now it's probably the organization's biggest strength.

I'm not sure how you could argue that the organization's biggest strength is anywhere but on the wing and by a long shot.

also, if the leafs are going to be cup contenders than probably kadri should be a #3 so really you are looking for a #2C. 

so throw out my previous statement about injuries.  forget about organizational depth...

the biggest trade chip the leafs have should return what?  a top 4 defenceman or a #2 centre?

I don't know...maybe the hall larsson trade has me spooked.

I'd rather a really good #2C over a #4 dman anyday
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 04:49:04 PM
I'm not sure how you could argue that the organization's biggest strength is anywhere but on the wing and by a long shot.

Well, it goes back to what Deebo said about where Nylander ultimately projects.

Because if Nylander is a C then what do the Leafs really have in terms of good young wingers who are top 6 types? They have Marner but other than that it's a lot of question marks and B+ kind of prospects.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 21, 2016, 06:46:29 PM
IMO having more natural centers on your roster than having roster spots for them all, is a very good problem to have.

Babs doesn't seem to have any problem with it, coaching Team Canada.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 07:09:53 PM
IMO having more natural centers on your roster than having roster spots for them all, is a very good problem to have.

Babs doesn't seem to have any problem with it, coaching Team Canada.

What in the world does that have to do with anything anyone's said?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on December 21, 2016, 07:37:22 PM
Kadri is much better than a third liner.

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 21, 2016, 08:00:24 PM
Kadri is much better than a third liner.

My thoughts exactly. It's also not super unusual for a team to have their best two-way C on the 2nd line. I mean, to be really effective against the other team's best offensive players, you need to be good on both sides of the puck.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 21, 2016, 08:52:32 PM
Kadri is much better than a third liner.

My thoughts exactly. It's also not super unusual for a team to have their best two-way C on the 2nd line. I mean, to be really effective against the other team's best offensive players, you need to be good on both sides of the puck.

That said it's tough to get around the fact that the #2 C's on Cup winners have been guys like Jeff Carter, Malkin(who's obviously a unique case), Krejci, Sharp and so on. Kadri's a good player and he doesn't deserve the somewhat outdated label of a 3rd player but I don't know if he's quite at that level yet.

Which is why the Nylander thing seems so simple to me. He was drafted as a C, he played there in the AHL, he's clearly got the physical tools to play there, why in the world wouldn't the future be something like

Hyman-Matthews-Marner
X-Nylander-X
Leipsic-Kadri-Brown
Someone-Gauthier-Someone else

As opposed to:

Hyman-Matthews-Marner
Leipsic-Kadri-Nylander
????
Fourth Line

Seems to me that by going with the first one you have a real chance of having three effective lines, none of which really deserve to be called a third line the way we think of it.

The question to me really becomes how do you juggle the wingers in that first scenario. I put Hyman and Leipsic there in as place holders but between them, Sosh, Kapanen, guys like Bracco and whoever you might acquire as a free agent or via trade you have more question marks than you do down the middle.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 21, 2016, 10:12:28 PM
Seems to me that by going with the first one you have a real chance of having three effective lines, none of which really deserve to be called a third line the way we think of it.

The question to me really becomes how do you juggle the wingers in that first scenario. I put Hyman and Leipsic there in as place holders but between them, Sosh, Kapanen, guys like Bracco and whoever you might acquire as a free agent or via trade you have more question marks than you do down the middle.

I have no problem with that, either. I like the idea of the Leafs having an offence with depth. With the way the game has evolved, I think having a 2A line and a 2B line behind your top line is the model for real success. I also agree that, after a top pairing D, the team's most pressing need is more affordable "top 6" style wingers. There's a number of guys with potential in the system, but, as it tends to be with prospects, most won't pan out. If you can turn JvR into a younger, cheaper winger who's in a similar situation where he was when the Leafs picked him up (high ceiling, but not quite performing to the team's expectations/stuck behind guys who developed a little faster), I think you have to go for it.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 21, 2016, 10:59:36 PM
IMO having more natural centers on your roster than having roster spots for them all, is a very good problem to have.

Babs doesn't seem to have any problem with it, coaching Team Canada.

What in the world does that have to do with anything anyone's said?

The talk was around Nylander on the wing, no?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 21, 2016, 11:16:01 PM
I'm very much into playing Nylander down the middle.

Babcock has recently gone on record to say he doesn't want Marner winging for Matthews, because they are both line drivers and he'd like to do that depth offense thing that's so in vogue these days.

It gives our team an opportunity to run three distinct flavours of offense too.

Blue Collar/Top line matchup: Hyman - Matthews - Kapanen
These guys like to just get into the zone and take it to the net. Kapanen gives Matthews a speedy wing to give and go with through the NZ. While Hyman is the quintessential digger, both Kapanen and Matthews can do excellent work in front and behind the net.

E-W Razzle Dazzle/Secondary matchup: Soshnikov - Kadri - Marner
I want Marner with a left Center, and he's pretty crazy good on the backcheck, so it makes sense to me to run him with Kadri, another player that can play that lateral game to open up seams for tap-ins.

Wheel-Snipe-Celly/Defensively suspect: JvR/Leipsic - Nylander - Brown/Bracco
Nylander is disgustingly good on the transition. JvR has a history with playing that kind of game, as do Leipsic/Bracco if they makes the roster (or JvR is traded). Brown is a good wing option for Nylander as well as he has the defensive wherewithal and has played well alongside Nylander on the Marlies in the past.

Zero out: Lindberg - Gauthier/Froese - Froese/Brown
Defense first. Take the DZ draw and truck it into the OZ then work the walls until a change is made. If Brown isn't required up in the top-9, he'd make a nice scoring option down on the 4th. Lindberg and Gauthier are big. If Gauthier is a no-go, Froese fills in.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 22, 2016, 12:33:31 AM
The talk was around Nylander on the wing, no?

It was on where he eventually winds up.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on December 22, 2016, 10:21:39 AM
Babcock is just weird with how he deals with these roster decisions.  Like nylander only getting a shot at 4th line C and being up and down the lineup all year.  It makes me question whether or not he wants him at C long term because of how stubborn he is with other players not playing well but staying put (Hunlak, corrado not getting a shot, the marner bozak jvr line, Hyman with matthews, komarov with kadri.)

I don't mind nylander as the #2C but unless its happening after the deadline this year I don't have any reason to believe its babcocks plan.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 22, 2016, 10:29:09 AM
Babcock is just weird with how he deals with these roster decisions.  Like nylander only getting a shot at 4th line C and being up and down the lineup all year.  It makes me question whether or not he wants him at C long term because of how stubborn he is with other players not playing well but staying put (Hunlak, corrado not getting a shot, the marner bozak jvr line, Hyman with matthews, komarov with kadri.)

I don't mind nylander as the #2C but unless its happening after the deadline this year I don't have any reason to believe its babcocks plan.

I think at this point it's important to remember just how young these guys are.

You know how if a team has a really good player and they're 22 we all say "Wow, how lucky they are to have someone so good, so young"? We're still years away from that. Babcock not doing something right this second now really doesn't reflect too much on long term thinking. 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 22, 2016, 04:54:41 PM
https://thebloggerstribune.com/2016/12/22/the-trade-market-for-james-van-riemsdyk/

JvR trade ideas. Sanheim is interesting. Manson is interesting.

If we pick up an RHD in return, Corrado seems like a natural fit going to other way as a deal balancer. Or Polak, Bob McKenzie-willing.

Is Montreal also an option? Juulsen and Sergachev might incline them towards letting one of them go as Weber has their right side locked. They might be interested in consolidating some divisional scoring power into their own hands, especially during peak Price.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 22, 2016, 06:57:06 PM

Of those suggestions I feel like the Sanheim one is the one I'd be most interested by. I really feel the Leafs need to maybe look a little away from the "Sure he doesn't score points but look at those possession numbers and righthandedness!" types and start taking home run swings. Sanheim is kind of one already, a 1st rounder would let them take another(or draft Sergei Makarov's older brother, preferences may vary).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 23, 2016, 11:50:22 AM
https://theathletic.com/31051/2016/12/23/mirtle-yes-the-leafs-should-probably-trade-james-van-riemsdyk/

Not much by way of trade ideas, but Mirtle lays down the logic behind spinning off JvR at his peak value for assets to ensure cap room for our actual core.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on December 23, 2016, 12:11:35 PM
https://theathletic.com/31051/2016/12/23/mirtle-yes-the-leafs-should-probably-trade-james-van-riemsdyk/

Not much by way of trade ideas, but Mirtle lays down the logic behind spinning off JvR at his peak value for assets to ensure cap room for our actual core.

I think this all makes sense, but we've been talking about trading JVR and Bozak for 2 years.  It really isn't news that they'll probably move them...the longer they wait though, the less the return.

Since we're at the Christmas break here, I have to think that teams like NYI and Dallas have to start making some moves to get some scoring help.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 23, 2016, 12:38:04 PM

I don't know that it needs a professional like Mirtle to explain the pretty simple concept of the Leafs being a few years away, JVR being valuable and his contract posing an obstacle.

He's a good player but the Leafs are in a position to make a deal for him where the return really sort of blows your hair back and they can go into the draft with multiple 1sts, multiple 2nds and add to the prospect base. As good as he is, he's not worth giving that up when the team still has a ways to go.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 23, 2016, 01:37:53 PM
I like to think a good number of us are ahead of the curve, so that article was mostly just repeating a lot of what we've been saying here (which one of you is Mirtle?). I was hoping for some insider theory mongering.

In terms of first rounders coming back, I'd be quite alright with them taking 2018s instead of 2017s.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 28, 2016, 01:39:57 AM
https://theathletic.com/31051/2016/12/23/mirtle-yes-the-leafs-should-probably-trade-james-van-riemsdyk/

Not much by way of trade ideas, but Mirtle lays down the logic behind spinning off JvR at his peak value for assets to ensure cap room for our actual core.

Was working on another Leafs brass 'speed up the process' pov and wondered if some of the beneficial by product might be added value to minus one year ufa contracts at the following deadline, Komarov, JVR, Bozak

FORWARDS

L. Komarov ($ 2,950,000) --- A. Matthews ($ 925,000) --- W. Nylander ($ 894,166)
J. Van Riemsdyk ($ 4,250,000) --- N. Kadri ($ 4,500,000) --- C. Brown ($ 1,200,000)
N. Soshnikov ($ 736,666) --- T. Bozak ($ 4,200,000) --- M. Marner ($ 894,166)
K. Kapanen ($ 863,333) --- F. Gauthier ($ 863,333) --- Z. Hyman ($ 900,000)

DEFENCE

K. Alzner ($ 6,000,000) --- K. Shat ($ 7,000,000)
M. Rielly ($ 5,000,000) --- N. Zaitsev ($ 4,500,000)
J. Gardiner ($ 4,050,000) --- T. Lily ($ 925,000)

GOAL

F. Andersen ($ 5,000,000) --- K. Kaskisuo ($ 925,000)

Extras

M. Martin ($ 2,500,000) --- R. Valiev ($ 778,333) --- T. Dermott ($ 894,166)

That's a LTIR team, but, between Horton and Lupul it could be interesting. I'm not convinced selling JVR now is a slam dunk better choice than waiting til next year, unless the Leafs really are willing to keep bottoming out and maybe retains now to make it a more attractive option.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on December 28, 2016, 10:54:09 AM
Didn't realize that it was Connor Brown's contract year...

Courtesy of https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/mapleleafs

(http://i1260.photobucket.com/albums/ii562/fvanderveen/leaf%20cap%20hits%20Dec.2816.png)

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 28, 2016, 01:43:48 PM
I'm not convinced selling JVR now is a slam dunk better choice than waiting til next year, unless the Leafs really are willing to keep bottoming out and maybe retains now to make it a more attractive option.

Considering how team-friendly his contract is and how likely he is to be looking for a raise when it's over, I'm really to struggling to see how trading JVR at any point other than ASAP could possibly be the one where he's at his highest value.

So long as we generally agree that the Leafs have long odds to make the playoffs this year or the next then the term of JVR's deal plus sliding a spot or two in the draft(potentially in both years) seem to be a pretty clear win-win.

Likewise, there's the real possibility that next year's team is closer to the playoffs than this one's probably stands to be and so trading JVR becomes a question of whether the team is "giving up" or not.

So the equation on trading JVR seems pretty straight forward. It's trading him when his remaining term makes him most valuable + his absence could create the greatest draft benefit vs. turning him into a rental and potentially creating a PR problem by dealing him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bates on December 28, 2016, 01:55:52 PM
Unless preliminary discussions have JVR wanting to stay and willing to do so for a team friendly contract.  Not optimistic of that but if any Leaf would offer it I suspect it would be JVR.
I'm not convinced selling JVR now is a slam dunk better choice than waiting til next year, unless the Leafs really are willing to keep bottoming out and maybe retains now to make it a more attractive option.

Considering how team-friendly his contract is and how likely he is to be looking for a raise when it's over, I'm really to struggling to see how trading JVR at any point other than ASAP could possibly be the one where he's at his highest value.

So long as we generally agree that the Leafs have long odds to make the playoffs this year or the next then the term of JVR's deal plus sliding a spot or two in the draft(potentially in both years) seem to be a pretty clear win-win.

Likewise, there's the real possibility that next year's team is closer to the playoffs than this one's probably stands to be and so trading JVR becomes a question of whether the team is "giving up" or not.

So the equation on trading JVR seems pretty straight forward. It's trading him when his remaining term makes him most valuable + his absence could create the greatest draft benefit vs. turning him into a rental and potentially creating a PR problem by dealing him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 28, 2016, 02:00:09 PM
Unless preliminary discussions have JVR wanting to stay and willing to do so for a team friendly contract.  Not optimistic of that but if any Leaf would offer it I suspect it would be JVR.

Even then, you're talking about passing up on what JVR could fetch in a trade and the "team friendly" cap space(that they're really not even allowed to be discussing the specifics of).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bates on December 28, 2016, 02:04:13 PM
Correct but then you hope for performance from the acquisitions and start searching for a JVR. 
Unless preliminary discussions have JVR wanting to stay and willing to do so for a team friendly contract.  Not optimistic of that but if any Leaf would offer it I suspect it would be JVR.

Even then, you're talking about passing up on what JVR could fetch in a trade and the "team friendly" cap space(that they're really not even allowed to be discussing the specifics of).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on December 28, 2016, 02:05:23 PM
I think the longer you sit on JVR, the lousier the return.

He's healthy, he's producing, and he's relatively cheap for the next season and a half.

Turn him into defense prospects now.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on December 28, 2016, 02:06:49 PM
Correct but then you hope for performance from the acquisitions and start searching for a JVR. 
Unless preliminary discussions have JVR wanting to stay and willing to do so for a team friendly contract.  Not optimistic of that but if any Leaf would offer it I suspect it would be JVR.

Even then, you're talking about passing up on what JVR could fetch in a trade and the "team friendly" cap space(that they're really not even allowed to be discussing the specifics of).

I'll worry about adding a nice 25-30 goal winger in 3 years from now.

Until then, this team needs a stud defenseman or 2 in the system way more than a goal scorer.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 28, 2016, 02:13:22 PM
Correct but then you hope for performance from the acquisitions and start searching for a JVR.

Sure but let's remember that between Leipsic, Kapanen, Bracco, Korshkov, Grundstrom, Johnson, Timoshov, etc the team is so much stronger in terms of non-NHL talent on the wing that anywhere else that it's a serious concern going forward. If none of those guys already in the system can provide contributions that are roughly on par with JVR we might as well go home because our scouting staff/development system is in trouble.

Likewise, as I've mentioned, pretty good wingers are probably the easiest adds to make come UFA time. So the avenues for potentially replacing JVR are pretty numerous whereas the avenues for adding what he could fetch are basically just him and a bunch of guys we really don't want to trade.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Coco-puffs on December 28, 2016, 02:46:07 PM
I'm not convinced selling JVR now is a slam dunk better choice than waiting til next year, unless the Leafs really are willing to keep bottoming out and maybe retains now to make it a more attractive option.

Considering how team-friendly his contract is and how likely he is to be looking for a raise when it's over, I'm really to struggling to see how trading JVR at any point other than ASAP could possibly be the one where he's at his highest value.


In any normal year I'd say you are 100% right that his value would be highest before this years trade deadline than at any other point.  However, with the Expansion Draft approaching and teams already worried about losing NHL assets as it is, I think his trade value will be the highest AFTER the Expansion draft. 

I guess we will see how many teams approach this deadline with concern over losing assets in the draft vs going for it this year before the lose some assets.  For a team like the Wild, who are probably going to lose a good asset no matter what, maybe trading for JvR now makes sense.  Just don't expect them to trade one of their NHL defencemen.  At this point the Wild will lose a good player, so whats it to them to add another one and go for it. 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 28, 2016, 02:54:10 PM
In any normal year I'd say you are 100% right that his value would be highest before this years trade deadline than at any other point.  However, with the Expansion Draft approaching and teams already worried about losing NHL assets as it is, I think his trade value will be the highest AFTER the Expansion draft. 

There hasn't been a whole lot of talk about teams concerned about being able to protect all the forwards they want to. It's been almost entirely about defencemen and goalies. Since teams can basically protect their entire top two lines, JvR may be exactly the type of asset a team would identify as the prime target to acquire as a part of a deal for a good young blueliner they risk losing for nothing in the expansion draft. He's an upgrade for most team's top 6, and isn't likely to put a team in a situation where they now have to expose someone they really wanted to hold on to.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 28, 2016, 02:58:20 PM
In any normal year I'd say you are 100% right that his value would be highest before this years trade deadline than at any other point.  However, with the Expansion Draft approaching and teams already worried about losing NHL assets as it is, I think his trade value will be the highest AFTER the Expansion draft. 

I guess we will see how many teams approach this deadline with concern over losing assets in the draft vs going for it this year before the lose some assets.  For a team like the Wild, who are probably going to lose a good asset no matter what, maybe trading for JvR now makes sense.  Just don't expect them to trade one of their NHL defencemen.  At this point the Wild will lose a good player, so whats it to them to add another one and go for it.

That strikes me as a relatively minor consideration. I'd wager most teams are almost certainly going to go with the 7/3/1 protection breakdown and if adding JVR isn't easily worth the difference between keeping your 7th and 8th best draft eligible forward you're not likely to pay much for him regardless.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 28, 2016, 03:00:52 PM
I think the longer you sit on JVR, the lousier the return.

He's healthy, he's producing, and he's relatively cheap for the next season and a half.

Turn him into defense prospects now.

This.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bates on December 28, 2016, 03:12:51 PM
If a JVR is so easy to find and add why would another NHL team give us a hard to find D stud for him??  Hard to follow that logic.
Correct but then you hope for performance from the acquisitions and start searching for a JVR.

Sure but let's remember that between Leipsic, Kapanen, Bracco, Korshkov, Grundstrom, Johnson, Timoshov, etc the team is so much stronger in terms of non-NHL talent on the wing that anywhere else that it's a serious concern going forward. If none of those guys already in the system can provide contributions that are roughly on par with JVR we might as well go home because our scouting staff/development system is in trouble.

Likewise, as I've mentioned, pretty good wingers are probably the easiest adds to make come UFA time. So the avenues for potentially replacing JVR are pretty numerous whereas the avenues for adding what he could fetch are basically just him and a bunch of guys we really don't want to trade.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 28, 2016, 03:13:44 PM
Also, I think trading guys in the off-season always carries a bit of baggage with it in the sense that teams will always be faced with the option of "Do I want to trade one of my best defensive prospects and a 1st round pick for Player X or do I want to wait a week and sign Player Y as a UFA and get 75% of Player X but get to keep those high value assets".

You trade a player at the deadline and your "competition" is all of the players other teams are willing to trade. You trade them in the off-season and the competition is everyone other teams are willing to trade plus the marketplace.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bates on December 28, 2016, 03:17:17 PM
For the record I'm not against trading JVR, but I'm only in favor if the return is overwhelming.  I'm not in favor of just making the trade for a maybe prospect and picks.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 28, 2016, 03:23:18 PM
If a JVR is so easy to find and add why would another NHL team give us a hard to find D stud for him??  Hard to follow that logic.

Not especially. First off, I don't think anyone but the super duper optimistic thinks that JVR will get dealt for someone who's already a top flight NHL defenseman. So you're talking about prospects/developing defensemen. So the "logic" as it were is just about teams who are making an immediate push willing to trade some future for the present which is something we see all the time.

Likewise, if you go back to Herman's link to the column about possible returns you'll see that a lot of the emphasis is on teams with an abundance of D prospects but with a need upfront making that swap. So Philadelphia who already has Provorov and Gostisbehere in the lineup could part with Sanheim and still have an abundance of D talent in the lineup and in the system.

Additionally there's nothing "easy" about the talent the Leafs have been building up at wing. The guys I listed are the result of the team making multiple trades, using multiple 2nd round picks...that's not something a team can do overnight. The Leafs are in that position of advantage.

Finally, adding a JVR equivalent in free agency is easy in a sense in that good wingers are usually available but for a team with immediate cup hopes the problem isn't the difficulty, it's the cap. Adding guys like Lucic, Eriksson, Okposo or Backes this off-season was relatively painless for the teams that did it but it wasn't cheap. The Leafs are in a position where, in a few years out, they can spend that money to bolster their line-up. JVR at 4.25 million for this year and next represents a particular opportunity that isn't of much use to them but to the right team could be super valuable.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Coco-puffs on December 28, 2016, 03:26:09 PM
In any normal year I'd say you are 100% right that his value would be highest before this years trade deadline than at any other point.  However, with the Expansion Draft approaching and teams already worried about losing NHL assets as it is, I think his trade value will be the highest AFTER the Expansion draft. 

There hasn't been a whole lot of talk about teams concerned about being able to protect all the forwards they want to. It's been almost entirely about defencemen and goalies. Since teams can basically protect their entire top two lines, JvR may be exactly the type of asset a team would identify as the prime target to acquire as a part of a deal for a good young blueliner they risk losing for nothing in the expansion draft. He's an upgrade for most team's top 6, and isn't likely to put a team in a situation where they now have to expose someone they really wanted to hold on to.

I brought up the Wild specifically because they have 6 quality NHL defensemen.  It appears they are losing one of them without a doubt (I doubt they trade 3 of them just to avoid losing any of them in expansion), so they probably aren't going to bother trading one of them for JvR.  We are going to get picks and prospects if that were to happen.

As for other NHL teams.  Teams with no/little playoff aspirations will be the most likely to trade their 4th best defenceman to get something of value in return instead of losing that player in expansion.  They aren't trading that player for JvR though.  Teams with serious playoff aspirations most likely won't worry about losing their 4th best defenceman in expansion if it means getting weaker at one of their most important positions for the stretch run/playoffs.  Which teams do you think will try and turn their 4th best defenseman into JvR?

Furthermore, Vegas isn't going to select 15 or 20 defensemen either.  They HAVE TO select 14 forwards and 3 goalies, so the maximum is 13 defensemen (minimum is 9).  I wouldn't be surprised if they do select 12-13 defensemen though- they do carry more value in trades.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bates on December 28, 2016, 03:32:25 PM
But if JVR is willing to accept a contract with a moderate raise we could also try to trade some of those prospects into D prospects as we have a position filled for a few years with a proven scorer.
If a JVR is so easy to find and add why would another NHL team give us a hard to find D stud for him??  Hard to follow that logic.

Not especially. First off, I don't think anyone but the super duper optimistic thinks that JVR will get dealt for someone who's already a top flight NHL defenseman. So you're talking about prospects/developing defensemen. So the "logic" as it were is just about teams who are making an immediate push willing to trade some future for the present which is something we see all the time.

Likewise, if you go back to Herman's link to the column about possible returns you'll see that a lot of the emphasis is on teams with an abundance of D prospects but with a need upfront making that swap. So Philadelphia who already has Provorov and Gostisbehere in the lineup could part with Sanheim and still have an abundance of D talent in the lineup and in the system.

Additionally there's nothing "easy" about the talent the Leafs have been building up at wing. The guys I listed are the result of the team making multiple trades, using multiple 2nd round picks...that's not something a team can do overnight. The Leafs are in that position of advantage.

Finally, adding a JVR equivalent in free agency is easy in a sense in that good wingers are usually available but for a team with immediate cup hopes the problem isn't the difficulty, it's the cap. Adding guys like Lucic, Eriksson, Okposo or Backes this off-season was relatively painless for the teams that did it but it wasn't cheap. The Leafs are in a position where, in a few years out, they can spend that money to bolster their line-up. JVR at 4.25 million for this year and next represents a particular opportunity that isn't of much use to them but to the right team could be super valuable.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 28, 2016, 03:39:16 PM
I brought up the Wild specifically because they have 6 quality NHL defensemen.  It appears they are losing one of them without a doubt (I doubt they trade 3 of them just to avoid losing any of them in expansion), so they probably aren't going to bother trading one of them for JvR.

I don't understand this thinking at all. Right now the Wild appear to have a pretty set top 4 of Suter, Spurgeon, Dumba and Brodin(all over 20 minutes a game) and then have Scandella and Folin as a pretty clear bottom pairing getting 16 a night.

So, for the sake of argument, assuming they internally value their defensemen by ice time at:

1. Suter
2. Spurgeon
3. Brodin
4. Dumba
5. Folin
6. Scandella

You're saying there's no reason for them to actually reap the value of someone like Dumba in a trade and lose Folin or Scandella in the draft vs. letting Vegas take who they want? In that scenario they're losing their most valuable expansion draft eligible defenseman for nothing vs. losing their second most, someone who's clearly on their bottom pairing.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 28, 2016, 03:45:16 PM
But if JVR is willing to accept a contract with a moderate raise we could also try to trade some of those prospects into D prospects as we have a position filled for a few years with a proven scorer.

But there are some pretty obvious problems there. The first being that it's entirely predicated on a hypothetical(and, I suppose, what we might define as a "moderate" raise). We don't know what JVR might want to sign an extension for.

Moreover, the Leafs need high value D prospects in the system. One of the things we've seen is that it's tough to trade forwards for defensemen and that applies to prospects as well. So the idea behind trading JVR, someone established, for prospects is you get the higher upside. You can trade a B forward for an A defensive prospect. If you're dealing prospects you're probably working with the same imbalance so you're trading an A forward prospect for a B defensive prospect.

Of course, like I said, all of that is academic because it's predicated on a fairly unlikely situation. I mean, I could just as easily say we'd be absolutely crazy not to trade JVR because he might be willing to re-sign with the Leafs in a couple of years.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 28, 2016, 03:51:50 PM
I'm not convinced selling JVR now is a slam dunk better choice than waiting til next year, unless the Leafs really are willing to keep bottoming out and maybe retains now to make it a more attractive option.

Considering how team-friendly his contract is and how likely he is to be looking for a raise when it's over, I'm really to struggling to see how trading JVR at any point other than ASAP could possibly be the one where he's at his highest value.

So long as we generally agree that the Leafs have long odds to make the playoffs this year or the next then the term of JVR's deal plus sliding a spot or two in the draft(potentially in both years) seem to be a pretty clear win-win.

Likewise, there's the real possibility that next year's team is closer to the playoffs than this one's probably stands to be and so trading JVR becomes a question of whether the team is "giving up" or not.

So the equation on trading JVR seems pretty straight forward. It's trading him when his remaining term makes him most valuable + his absence could create the greatest draft benefit vs. turning him into a rental and potentially creating a PR problem by dealing him.

I thought I spoke to the 'unless they really maximize the situation' in the second half of that sentence, but, oh well.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Coco-puffs on December 28, 2016, 03:56:33 PM
I brought up the Wild specifically because they have 6 quality NHL defensemen.  It appears they are losing one of them without a doubt (I doubt they trade 3 of them just to avoid losing any of them in expansion), so they probably aren't going to bother trading one of them for JvR.

I don't understand this thinking at all. Right now the Wild appear to have a pretty set top 4 of Suter, Spurgeon, Dumba and Brodin(all over 20 minutes a game) and then have Scandella and Folin as a pretty clear bottom pairing getting 16 a night.

So, for the sake of argument, assuming they internally value their defensemen by ice time at:

1. Suter
2. Spurgeon
3. Brodin
4. Dumba
5. Folin
6. Scandella

You're saying there's no reason for them to actually reap the value of someone like Dumba in a trade and lose Folin or Scandella in the draft vs. letting Vegas take who they want? In that scenario they're losing their most valuable expansion draft eligible defenseman for nothing vs. losing their second most, someone who's clearly on their bottom pairing.

Well, first of all I think they would want to keep and protect Dumba more than anyone not named Suter or Spurgeon.  Right-handed offensive defenseman who's only 22.  So that leaves:  Brodin, Folin, and Scandella. 

They have an aging team with a windows thats closing, and a goalie who's been lights out for the last couple of years.  Now is not the time to trade one of those three for JvR.  Despite their difference in minutes played, I don't see a huge difference in talent between them either.  If you are going to lose one or the other anyways, why trade one of them and hurt your chances THIS year.  They are better off trading prospects/picks for JvR and letting the chips fall as they may come expansion draft time. 

Furthermore, they can also make a trade after the season ends, before the expansion draft as long as it doesn't circumvent the rules.  (I believe those rules are trades where they send a player to be protected on another teams roster, and then trade back for them after its done etc)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 28, 2016, 04:10:19 PM
They have an aging team with a windows thats closing, and a goalie who's been lights out for the last couple of years.  Now is not the time to trade one of those three for JvR.  Despite their difference in minutes played, I don't see a huge difference in talent between them either.  If you are going to lose one or the other anyways, why trade one of them and hurt your chances THIS year.  They are better off trading prospects/picks for JvR and letting the chips fall as they may come expansion draft time. 

Well, I guess the obvious answer there is that Minnesota sadly doesn't get to make trades solely on the basis of what's best for them. If they value JVR to the point of actually wanting him, they'd have to offer what the Leafs were willing to take.

So the math for Minnesota would be whether or not 5 of their 6 defensemen + JVR this year and 4 of their top 6 and JVR next year really would be worse than 6 of 6 and 5 of 6 next year. If they do think that would be worse for them short term then, sure, there's not really a fit there, especially as Minnesota doesn't really have any high value D prospects.

But Minnesota was your example. I'm just saying that if you're losing your #4, #5 or #6 defenseman anyway , it's in your best interest that the one you lose for nothing not be the most valuable of the three. That seems pretty straight forward to me.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Andy on December 29, 2016, 06:13:46 AM
I think the longer you sit on JVR, the lousier the return.

He's healthy, he's producing, and he's relatively cheap for the next season and a half.

Turn him into defense prospects now.

This.

These.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on December 30, 2016, 08:18:29 AM
www.twitter.com/LeafReport/status/814245468343562240

Here's the discussion on JvR I was hoping Mirtle's article would get into. Kicks in around the middle.

If you're concerned about where our replacement LW might come from if JvR goes, I would offer up the suggestion of Nylander as our sheltered scoring LW until such time that he takes over centering the sheltered scoring line. We've got young RWs in the pipeline (and Hyman is a righty too).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 30, 2016, 11:16:05 AM
Didn't realize that it was Connor Brown's contract year...

I put him in at 1.2 mil but I don't know how realistic that is. Hyman is coming up too.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on December 30, 2016, 12:00:56 PM
Didn't realize that it was Connor Brown's contract year...

I put him in at 1.2 mil but I don't know how realistic that is. Hyman is coming up too.

If he keeps playing with Matthews and puts up 30-40 points, he may get a bridge around $2m.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 30, 2016, 12:01:30 PM
www.twitter.com/LeafReport/status/814245468343562240

Here's the discussion on JvR I was hoping Mirtle's article would get into. Kicks in around the middle.

If you're concerned about where our replacement LW might come from if JvR goes, I would offer up the suggestion of Nylander as our sheltered scoring LW until such time that he takes over centering the sheltered scoring line. We've got young RWs in the pipeline (and Hyman is a righty too).

Decent listen, thanks for posting. If they could get Dumba, I'd be pretty happy.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 30, 2016, 12:02:52 PM
Didn't realize that it was Connor Brown's contract year...

I put him in at 1.2 mil but I don't know how realistic that is. Hyman is coming up too.

If he keeps playing with Matthews and puts up 30-40 points, he may get a bridge around $2m.

Yeah, maybe. I haven't dug into any comparisons.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 30, 2016, 06:18:06 PM
I'd love to see a big trade as much as the next fan but ATM I think the thing to do is stand pat on JVR.

Bozak is the one it's time to move on from and maximize his value.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: LuncheonMeat on December 30, 2016, 08:47:40 PM
I'd love to see a big trade as much as the next fan but ATM I think the thing to do is stand pat on JVR.

Bozak is the one it's time to move on from and maximize his value.

Except Bozak's value is probably a 2nd round pick. Which is nice, but it doesn't exactly address a need.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 30, 2016, 09:08:55 PM
Except Bozak's value is probably a 2nd round pick. Which is nice, but it doesn't exactly address a need.

Yeah. I mean, another 2nd round pick would be great. There are still usually a few pretty good players available, and it helps the Leafs to continue to build and fill the pipeline, but it doesn't do anything for the team in terms of the very near future.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 30, 2016, 11:32:42 PM

I actually disagree about Bozak's value. I think he's worth a little more than a 2nd. Not a 1st maybe but I think what you could get for him is a late 1st/high 2nd type prospect who's AHL ready and who a team might be willing to trade due to being pretty set at the NHL level.

I'm thinking along the lines of a Gabriel Carlsson or Jacob Larsson here. Columbus and Anaheim seem to have pretty set, solid defenses with young talent already. It would sort of be akin to the Santorelli/Leipsic deal only ideally getting someone the Leafs wouldn't want to bury inexplicably.

Bozak for Larsson, Stoner and a 4th? 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: TBLeafer on December 31, 2016, 01:48:19 AM
Believe it or not, I'm wondering what a trade with Tampa would look like.

Their center depth leaves something to be desired with those injuries.

I think Bozak could help them out and stop the bleeding in the standings.

Bozak for one of Stralman or Tampa's 1st?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on December 31, 2016, 02:12:06 AM

I don't think they'd trade one of the better #2 defensemen in the league for someone who's maybe their #3C when everyone is healthy(He's a marginal upgrade on Filppula at best). Especially when right now their problems are more defensive than they are offensive. 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on December 31, 2016, 09:13:23 AM

I don't think they'd trade one of the better #2 defensemen in the league for someone who's maybe their #3C when everyone is healthy (He's a marginal upgrade on Filppula at best). Especially when right now their problems are more defensive than they are offensive.

And Stralman plays not only as many minutes for Tampa as Rielly does for the Leafs, but it's also more than 4 minutes more than their #3 defenseman, and he is heavily used on both the PP and PK.  There's no conceivable way they trade him without a very solid defenseman coming back, let alone for the likes of Bozak.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on December 31, 2016, 10:31:08 AM
Except Bozak's value is probably a 2nd round pick. Which is nice, but it doesn't exactly address a need.

Yeah. I mean, another 2nd round pick would be great. There are still usually a few pretty good players available, and it helps the Leafs to continue to build and fill the pipeline, but it doesn't do anything for the team in terms of the very near future.

I think you guys are light on Bozak.  He's a pretty consistent 40-50 point producer on some pretty bad teams, and he's on an affordable contract.

It think he's worth a first round pick, or the equivalent prospect.

EDIT:  We got 2nds for Polak.  Lee Stempniak went for a second and a 4th.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: louisstamos on December 31, 2016, 01:09:12 PM
Bozak is one of those players that teams tend to pay a lot for at a deadline.  Very much like an Antoine Vermette, who went for a 1st round pick.  Bozak is not as good at faceoffs as Vermette is, but is much more offensively inclined.  I would say a late 1st is definitely fair value for him, or at the very least, a 2nd + something...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on December 31, 2016, 01:10:04 PM
I think you guys are light on Bozak.  He's a pretty consistent 40-50 point producer on some pretty bad teams, and he's on an affordable contract.

It think he's worth a first round pick, or the equivalent prospect.

EDIT:  We got 2nds for Polak.  Lee Stempniak went for a second and a 4th.

Hudler, coming off a 30+ goal, 70+ point season and producing at a similar level to Bozak went for a 2nd and a 3rd. The extra season on Boak's contract makes things interesting. To some teams, it will be an asset, to others, it's a cap issue ($4.2M is a decent contract for what he brings, but teams are facing the real possibility of a flat cap, making Boak's cap hit just enough to cause a potential issue). Even still, I'd say a 1st round pick is pretty much off the table unless the market has drastically shifted from last year. Most likely, we're talking, at most, a 2nd and an equivalent prospect who is still a couple years away, or a pair of 2nds in different drafts.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on December 31, 2016, 01:47:02 PM
I think you guys are light on Bozak.  He's a pretty consistent 40-50 point producer on some pretty bad teams, and he's on an affordable contract.

It think he's worth a first round pick, or the equivalent prospect.

EDIT:  We got 2nds for Polak.  Lee Stempniak went for a second and a 4th.

Hudler, coming off a 30+ goal, 70+ point season and producing at a similar level to Bozak went for a 2nd and a 3rd. The extra season on Boak's contract makes things interesting. To some teams, it will be an asset, to others, it's a cap issue ($4.2M is a decent contract for what he brings, but teams are facing the real possibility of a flat cap, making Boak's cap hit just enough to cause a potential issue). Even still, I'd say a 1st round pick is pretty much off the table unless the market has drastically shifted from last year. Most likely, we're talking, at most, a 2nd and an equivalent prospect who is still a couple years away, or a pair of 2nds in different drafts.

Why are you trying to ruin 2017 for me?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: McGarnagle on December 31, 2016, 01:50:12 PM
EDIT:  We got 2nds for Polak.

You are not technically correct. The best kind of correct.

And whatever laptop you bought, it was the wrong one.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: LuncheonMeat on December 31, 2016, 02:42:18 PM
I think you guys are light on Bozak.  He's a pretty consistent 40-50 point producer on some pretty bad teams, and he's on an affordable contract.

It think he's worth a first round pick, or the equivalent prospect.

EDIT:  We got 2nds for Polak.  Lee Stempniak went for a second and a 4th.

Hudler, coming off a 30+ goal, 70+ point season and producing at a similar level to Bozak went for a 2nd and a 3rd. The extra season on Boak's contract makes things interesting. To some teams, it will be an asset, to others, it's a cap issue ($4.2M is a decent contract for what he brings, but teams are facing the real possibility of a flat cap, making Boak's cap hit just enough to cause a potential issue). Even still, I'd say a 1st round pick is pretty much off the table unless the market has drastically shifted from last year. Most likely, we're talking, at most, a 2nd and an equivalent prospect who is still a couple years away, or a pair of 2nds in different drafts.

That's where I'm at. I think there are a pretty wide range of players that could fetch a second of varying positions in the draft order, but 1st round picks seem much more difficult to pry away these days. I think Nik is on to a more likely scenario with Bozak fetching a prospect/prospects. Hopefully with a higher perceived value than a late first.  ;)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on December 31, 2016, 08:20:37 PM
Retaining salary on Bozak or JVR might get you more, maybe a lot more and the Leafs could do both without blinking much.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bullfrog on January 01, 2017, 01:47:48 PM

Was working on another Leafs brass 'speed up the process' pov and wondered if some of the beneficial by product might be added value to minus one year ufa contracts at the following deadline, Komarov, JVR, Bozak

FORWARDS

L. Komarov ($ 2,950,000) --- A. Matthews ($ 925,000) --- W. Nylander ($ 894,166)
J. Van Riemsdyk ($ 4,250,000) --- N. Kadri ($ 4,500,000) --- C. Brown ($ 1,200,000)
N. Soshnikov ($ 736,666) --- T. Bozak ($ 4,200,000) --- M. Marner ($ 894,166)
K. Kapanen ($ 863,333) --- F. Gauthier ($ 863,333) --- Z. Hyman ($ 900,000)
...

That's a LTIR team, but, between Horton and Lupul it could be interesting. I'm not convinced selling JVR now is a slam dunk better choice than waiting til next year, unless the Leafs really are willing to keep bottoming out and maybe retains now to make it a more attractive option.

Maybe someone can weigh in on this, but Matthews is definitely hitting some of his bonuses and will have a higher cap hit.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on January 01, 2017, 05:03:36 PM
Bozak is one of those players that teams tend to pay a lot for at a deadline.  Very much like an Antoine Vermette, who went for a 1st round pick.  Bozak is not as good at faceoffs as Vermette is, but is much more offensively inclined.  I would say a late 1st is definitely fair value for him, or at the very least, a 2nd + something...

I wonder about the Vermette comparison. I think that there are two problems there. One, I think NHL GMs aren't above attaching real value to the sorts of round number plateaus that Vermette has done better with in his career. He has hit 50 and even 60 points and scored 20 goals four times. It's all well and good for us to say Bozak has had years where, pro-rated, his numbers project to 50 points over an 82 game span or that 49 points is essentially the same but I really think some people are retrograde to attach some value to those arbitrary heights.

The other one is I think Vermette is more seen as a guy who you can put on a 3rd line and have him provide some offense there even without the greatest linemates. The year before Vermette got traded for that 1st he scored 24 goals playing primarily with Mikael Boedker and Rob Clinkhammer(Although that was mainly because of his PP role). I don't know if Bozak is seen as a depth guy in that same way.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on January 01, 2017, 09:03:27 PM
For argument, how about a poor man's Vermette for 2.1 per for the rest of this year and next.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on January 01, 2017, 09:14:55 PM
For argument, how about a poor man's Vermette for 2.1 per for the rest of this year and next.
 

I'm sure eating money on Bozak makes him a little more appealing but I don't see it answering the more pressing question. Do teams legitimately see him as a top 6 guy? Do they think he contributes enough away from the scoresheet for the bottom 6? Or that he drives enough offense to make for a more modern style third line even with not great linemates?

Because I think in order for a team to give up something really valuable for a player they have to really want them, regardless of the price.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on January 01, 2017, 09:20:23 PM
Vermette was also a regular contributor on the Coyotes penalty kill. The fact that he had that on his resume and had a reputation of being a defensive player probably played a big role in Chicago coughing up a 1st for him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: McGarnagle on January 02, 2017, 12:12:11 PM
Although it might not be a popular opinion, there's always the option of trading Kadri and extending Bozak at likely a very reasonable cap hit. Their stats aren't all that different, but they could get a really top end D prospect for Kadri at 26, vs relatively little for Bozak.

If the plan is to put Nylander at center at some point, doesn't Bozak make more sense than Kadri in the #3 spot, with a solid D acquisition to boot?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on January 02, 2017, 12:35:01 PM

Was working on another Leafs brass 'speed up the process' pov and wondered if some of the beneficial by product might be added value to minus one year ufa contracts at the following deadline, Komarov, JVR, Bozak

FORWARDS

L. Komarov ($ 2,950,000) --- A. Matthews ($ 925,000) --- W. Nylander ($ 894,166)
J. Van Riemsdyk ($ 4,250,000) --- N. Kadri ($ 4,500,000) --- C. Brown ($ 1,200,000)
N. Soshnikov ($ 736,666) --- T. Bozak ($ 4,200,000) --- M. Marner ($ 894,166)
K. Kapanen ($ 863,333) --- F. Gauthier ($ 863,333) --- Z. Hyman ($ 900,000)
...

That's a LTIR team, but, between Horton and Lupul it could be interesting. I'm not convinced selling JVR now is a slam dunk better choice than waiting til next year, unless the Leafs really are willing to keep bottoming out and maybe retains now to make it a more attractive option.

Maybe someone can weigh in on this, but Matthews is definitely hitting some of his bonuses and will have a higher cap hit.

One time I want to see a guy blow his bonus's into Space.  Worth every dime and we will be losing some big contracts at the end of this year. I believe Laitch and Greening are gone aren't they?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Tigger on January 02, 2017, 01:17:45 PM
Sure, I can see teams, managers, needing to feel like they really want the player first and feeling like he isn't quite any of those things but then I can also see it coming from a function of need, dollars and sense. Might get into that low first territory for Bozak.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on January 02, 2017, 04:37:15 PM
If the plan is to put Nylander at center at some point, doesn't Bozak make more sense than Kadri in the #3 spot, with a solid D acquisition to boot?

Only if you're as comfortable giving Bozak some of the defensive assignments Kadri has handled this year. Personally, I don't think Bozak has that kind of range to his game.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bullfrog on January 02, 2017, 04:51:34 PM
Maybe someone can weigh in on this, but Matthews is definitely hitting some of his bonuses and will have a higher cap hit.

One time I want to see a guy blow his bonus's into Space.  Worth every dime and we will be losing some big contracts at the end of this year. I believe Laitch and Greening are gone aren't they?

Robidas, Polak, Hunwick, Smith, Laich, Michalek, and Greening are all off the books after this year.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on January 02, 2017, 05:51:22 PM
So how many 2nds to we get for a Roman this year? 8)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: McGarnagle on January 02, 2017, 06:27:00 PM
If the plan is to put Nylander at center at some point, doesn't Bozak make more sense than Kadri in the #3 spot, with a solid D acquisition to boot?

Only if you're as comfortable giving Bozak some of the defensive assignments Kadri has handled this year. Personally, I don't think Bozak has that kind of range to his game.

Well, I had assumed that Tavares would help with some of the heavy lifting.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on January 04, 2017, 10:47:43 AM
Maybe someone can weigh in on this, but Matthews is definitely hitting some of his bonuses and will have a higher cap hit.

One time I want to see a guy blow his bonus's into Space.  Worth every dime and we will be losing some big contracts at the end of this year. I believe Laitch and Greening are gone aren't they?

Robidas, Polak, Hunwick, Smith, Laich, Michalek, and Greening are all off the books after this year.

That tranlates to $14.75 MIL.

Next year it is JVR, Bozak and Komarov that need to be addressed at a combined $11.4 MIL.

Next year having non-roster players Lupul, Gleason and Cowen coming of the books will create another $7.333 of cap space leaving only Kessel's $1.2 MIL until 2021/22. 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on January 04, 2017, 06:29:19 PM
32 million is not chump change
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on January 05, 2017, 12:26:55 PM
JvR 'news'
www.twitter.com/DarrenDreger/status/816834629852348420

http://theleafsnation.com/2017/1/5/the-leafs-might-want-to-wait-out-a-van-riemsdyk-trade

Quote
Toronto's most opportune time, should they choose to go that route, will likely be at this year's draft. Teams will likely be scrambling after Las Vegas' expansion selections, and with Alexander Radulov likely to be extended by the Montreal Canadians far before then, van Riemsdyk will likely be the best winger with the best contract value on the market for acquisition. This way, as well, Toronto doesn't have to worry about exposing Connor Carrick to said Vegas Draft, which any trade for a big-minutes defenceman will do, unless they choose to go for the just-as-risky "eight skater" protection list.

Eehhh...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on January 05, 2017, 12:57:18 PM
There isn't much in terms of quality top 6 forwards in the UFA market this summer, so, there may be some advantage there - though, that being said, that also means the market of teams focused on top 6 upgrades will be smaller, as more teams will have theirs locked up.

As for the expansion draft - with teams being able to protect 7 forwards, there's not likely to be a whole lot of scrambling there. Honestly, I think the impact of the expansion draft is being over-stated. There'll be a few defencemen and maybe a couple other goalies that get moved because of it, and some teams may be a little more hesitant to add certain players with term, but it's not going to be a huge craze or anything.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on January 05, 2017, 02:20:56 PM
32 million is not chump change

It's also not mad money. That's Matthews + Marner + Nylander + Gardiner extension money. Realistically the Leafs will have some of it to use on a key UFA or two but good cap management but that's about it.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on January 05, 2017, 03:02:53 PM
32 million is not chump change

It's also not mad money. That's Matthews + Marner + Nylander + Gardiner extension money. Realistically the Leafs will have some of it to use on a key UFA or two but good cap management but that's about it.

Yeah. It sounds like a lot of money, but it gets used up awfully quickly. If you figure an average of $5.5M per on the 4 extensions you reference, that's already $22M gone.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on January 05, 2017, 03:09:40 PM
It really irks me that the Leafs lost those 2 draft picks.  I would really like to see the Leafs getting the 3rd round picks back for Lou and Babcock.  After they were taken by the NHL, the powers that be realized how ridiculous it was they rescinded the rule but did not return the 2 picks.

I wish the Leafs could offer a 'Frattin' deal to NJ and Det with Greening, Laich and Michalek that they get traded to the teams like Frattin did to Ottawa and then have them all loaned to the Marlies so that the Leafs pay their salaries and they don't have to be uprooted.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on January 05, 2017, 03:50:39 PM
If I am 'Armchair GM'ing 2016-2017 at this point in the season I would like to see a couple of moves but I am still torn on moving JVR at his age as he probably with have an impact for another 6 years still.

      1st MOVE:
Marincin, M ($625,000 retained)
Polak, R ($1,125,000 retained)
Leipsic, B
Corrado, F

for
Manson, J
Stoner, C

Since Manson will most likely not be able to be protected by Anaheim they can translate him into 2 prospects, a 6th dman and a rough and tumble UFA Polak who can try to fill Manson's role for the playoff push.

Marincin also gives Anaheim a dman to expose, Corrado is a young-ish RH dman to develop and Leipsic gives them a decent LH LW prospect that can be sent to the minors without having to pass through waivers to save on cap space.

The retained salaries help the Leafs to sweeten the deal for Anaheim who is currently over $4 MIL over the cap.

Manson gives the Leafs a decent #4 dman and Stoner fits the criteria for expansion to replace Marincin if he can play 5 games for the Leafs and is the logical salary dump for Anaheim to help the Leafs sweeten the deal by helping Anaheim get over $3 MIL off the cap.

      2nd MOVE:
Bracco, J
Hyman, Z
Soshnikov, N
Dermott, T

for

Kane, E

This is a bit of a risk as E Kane seems to have character issues and if he doesn't settle down then the Leafs are out a 4 good players. Atlanta, Winnipeg and Buffalo haven't been able to do it but maybe Shanahan, Lou and Babcock might be able to get him to mature. If not then he should not be re-signed which would be a shame.

OTOH, if he settles down and plays at his potential on Matthews LW for the next 10 years it could be a great trade.

Bracco is a solid RW prospect where the Leafs have decent depth. Hyman and Soshnikov are good skating grinders with a bit of an offensive touch. Dermott is one the Leafs better dman prospects. This trade is basically the classic 4 dimes for a quarter.

All 4 Leaf players in the deal are Expansion Draft Exempt.

POTENTIAL LINEUP:
Kane / Matthews / Brown
JVR / Bozak / Marner
Komarov / Kadri / Kapanen
Martin / Gauthier / Nylander
Leivo / Smith

Rielly / Zaitsev
Gardiner / Manson
Stoner (Hunwick) / Carrick

Andersen / Bibeau

Roster Size    Salary CapCap HitCap Overage Penalty     BonusesCap Space
23$73,000,000   $65,026,666   $512,000   $5,702,500   $7,973,334

That would only leave Brown and Zaitsev as key pieces to re-sign at $2,500,000 per year for 3 years and $5,000,000 per year for 6 years respectively leaving next years payroll at $67,688,000 and bonuses at $4,782,500 which they where all met by every player on an ELC would put the potential payroll at $72,470,500 including Gleason's $1.3 MIL buyout and Cowen's $0.75 MIL buyout not including Lupul on LITR which I believe can't be used to absorb ELC bonuses.  If the cap does not increase from $73,000,000 then the Leafs might have another penalty slapped on them.

The only other thing I was wondering was adding JVR and Ritchie to the Anaheim trade with 50% of JVR's salary retained instead of Marincin salary to help the numbers work for Anaheim. 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on January 05, 2017, 04:00:22 PM

I'm pretty sure a team can only retain salary on two players and the Leafs are already doing so on Kessel.

Likewise, something to keep in mind is that if the Leafs plan on protecting 4 defensemen(which in that scenario would be Gardiner, Reilly, Zaitsev and Manson) they'll need to expose either Bozak or Komarov in the expansion draft(assuming JVR, Kadri and Kane are guys you'd then protect).

Personally, I don't think the potential benefits of Kane living up to his "potential" come anywhere close to the the downsides of having him around a young/developing club. Especially not if the trade for him involves some of the team's better prospects and depth players.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on January 05, 2017, 04:08:12 PM
I'm pretty sure a team can only retain salary on two players and the Leafs are already doing so on Kessel.

Likewise, something to keep in mind is that if the Leafs plan on protecting 4 defensemen(which in that scenario would be Gardiner, Reilly, Zaitsev and Manson) they'll need to expose either Bozak or Komarov in the expansion draft(assuming JVR, Kadri and Kane are guys you'd then protect).

Personally, I don't think the potential benefits of Kane living up to his "potential" come anywhere close to the the downsides of having him around a young/developing club. Especially not if the trade for him involves some of the team's better prospects and depth players.

In addition, Leipsic would have to be protected in the expansion draft, and is not waiver exempt next season.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on January 05, 2017, 04:11:56 PM
In addition, Leipsic would have to be protected in the expansion draft, and is not waiver exempt next season.

True but in the above scenario we've traded Leipsic to Anaheim already.

Which, and I haven't had time to look at it, probably raises the issue for Anaheim of losing a good player in the expansion draft anyway.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on January 05, 2017, 04:27:46 PM
We can retain salary on three contracts. Kessel leaves us with two slots.

Edit: pls Lou, no Kane. Not even Patrick Kane, tbh.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on January 05, 2017, 04:44:21 PM
In addition, Leipsic would have to be protected in the expansion draft, and is not waiver exempt next season.

True but in the above scenario we've traded Leipsic to Anaheim already.

Which, and I haven't had time to look at it, probably raises the issue for Anaheim of losing a good player in the expansion draft anyway.

Yeah, I meant in terms of him being slightly less appealing to Anaheim than the initial post suggests.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on January 05, 2017, 07:43:41 PM
I'm pretty sure a team can only retain salary on two players and the Leafs are already doing so on Kessel.

Likewise, something to keep in mind is that if the Leafs plan on protecting 4 defensemen(which in that scenario would be Gardiner, Reilly, Zaitsev and Manson) they'll need to expose either Bozak or Komarov in the expansion draft(assuming JVR, Kadri and Kane are guys you'd then protect).

Personally, I don't think the potential benefits of Kane living up to his "potential" come anywhere close to the the downsides of having him around a young/developing club. Especially not if the trade for him involves some of the team's better prospects and depth players.

In addition, Leipsic would have to be protected in the expansion draft, and is not waiver exempt next season.

Oh...you are right Busta regarding Leipsic.  He is NOT exempt from the waiver draft.

A team can have the maximum of 3 retained salaries at a time so when Polak becomes a UFA July 1st the Leafs would have a space open again. 

Nik, Zaitsev is draft exempt.  I was thinking he would join Rielly, Gardiner, and Manson being the top 4 next year and leaving Carrick and Stoner exposed with Stoner meeting the criteria as the dman signed for next year if he plays 5 more games this season.

The Leafs might have to get Smith and Froese signed for next season to have 2 eligible forwards.  They also need 12 games each in the NHL this season.  That would leave 7 spots up front.  I would pick Kadri, JVR, Bozak, Komarov, Martin, Brown and E Kane. 

I would expect to lose Carrick, Leivo, or Rychel.

Otherwise if the Leafs and Ducks added JVR and Ritchie then I might protect Leivo as well.

E Kane does seem to be a high risk.  It is just with his speed, hard hitting and scoring touch it would be a great compliment to Brown and Matthews.  Hyman seems to have great character, speed and hitting but he doesn't have the softest hands to finish a lot of plays he is given.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on January 05, 2017, 07:50:21 PM
In addition, Leipsic would have to be protected in the expansion draft, and is not waiver exempt next season.

True but in the above scenario we've traded Leipsic to Anaheim already.

Which, and I haven't had time to look at it, probably raises the issue for Anaheim of losing a good player in the expansion draft anyway.

Anaheim is in trouble with the draft with Bieksa having to be protected with his NMC as well as 4 other dmen they want to keep including Vatanen, Fowler, Manson and Lindholm.  At the forward position they have 3 NMCs with Getzlaf, Perry and Kesler with Rackell and Silfverberg still to protect.

They will lose someone they want to keep.

That is why I was wondering about Manson.  Smooth skating, hard nosed RH dman.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on January 06, 2017, 08:51:23 AM
32 million is not chump change

It's also not mad money. That's Matthews + Marner + Nylander + Gardiner extension money. Realistically the Leafs will have some of it to use on a key UFA or two but good cap management but that's about it.

Yeah. It sounds like a lot of money, but it gets used up awfully quickly. If you figure an average of $5.5M per on the 4 extensions you reference, that's already $22M gone.

This summer 2017 I was thinking that Zaitsev would get a pay raise from $0.925 to $5 MIL x 6 years and Brown from $0.687 to a $2.5 MIL bridge contract to 2019/20.

The summer of 2018 I figured Nylander would get at most 'Kadri' money $4.5 MIL 3 year bridge contract but wonder if he might get even less.

The summer of 2019 I thought Marner would get $6.5 MIL 3 year bridge contract, Matthews would get $7.5 and Gardiner would get $5 MIL x 7 years taking him to 35 years old.  This is the 1st summer the Leafs would need some real cap room.   

If the cap went up to $79 MIL in 3 years then I created a few place holders.  The Leafs could re-sign JVR until he is 35 years old or a Okposo type UFA to an 'Okposo' type deal of $6 MIL x 7 years, have a LW for Matthews and Brown at $5.25 MIL like E Kane, and add a defensive 4th dman for $3.5. 


2019-20   $75,980,834

Left WingCentreRight Wing
Kane, EvanderMatthews, AustonBrown, Connor
$5,250,000$7,500,000$2,500,000* rfa
282225
             
Van Riemsdyk, James    Nylander, WilliamMarner, Mitchell
$6,000,000$4,500,000$6,500,000
302322
             
Komarov, LeoKadri, NazemKapanen, Kasperi
$2,950,000$4,500,000$3,500,000
322923
             
Martin, MattGauthier, Frederik    ELC or UFA??
$2,500,000$1,250,000$1,500,000   
302421
            
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender   
Rielly, MorganZaitsev, NikitaAndersen, Frederik
$5,000,000$5,000,000$5,000,000
252830
             
Gardiner, JakeManson, JoshBibeau, Antoine
$5,000,000$3,500,000$950,000
292825
         
Nielsen, AndrewCarrick, Connor   
$686,667$1,500,000      
2325   
         
Dermott, Travis
$894,167
23         


Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on January 06, 2017, 09:19:08 AM
Evander Kane is going to be Chris Stewart all over again, isn't he?

For serious though, I think you might want to re-evaluate Nylander. Right now he's scoring at a 59/82 pace while getting tossed around the line-up.

For double serious, no Evander Kane. If a guy with those attributes is important, the Leafs should develop one. Or sign one. If the complaints against him in the Nightclub incident are true I would rather the Leafs be a less good hockey team than a better one with him on it.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on January 06, 2017, 10:34:35 AM
I will personally cane Lou if he signs Kane
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on January 06, 2017, 12:13:51 PM
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/1/6/14148860/the-next-nine-months-and-the-leafs-rebuild-matthews-shattenkirk-boyle-kruger-pokka-kulikov

There's a lot in this, some that I agree with and some that I don't, but it's interesting nonetheless.

This part in particular:
Quote
Acquiring exposed players for exempt ones
As currently positioned, the Leafs have more forward protection slots than they need, and if you can envision a team that’s likely to have more forwards than it’s able to protect—for example, Anaheim looks positioned to lose Jakob Silfverberg, and Nashville has too many depth forwards—there might be a deal to be made there. The Leafs also have several expansion-exempt wing prospects, headed by Kasperi Kapanen, who could be appealing to a team caught in this kind of position.

As I’ve written elsewhere, the expansion draft exposes defenders more so than forwards, and here the Leafs have a bit more of a bind—acquiring another expansion-available defender would likely force them to expose Connor Carrick, so it would have to be a definitive upgrade. (Brief reminder—the Leafs are likely to be able to protect three defencemen. Jake Gardiner and Morgan Rielly are obvious choices, and Nikita Zaitsev is exempt. If the Leafs get another d-man, they’ll probably want to protect the guy they acquired with their final protection slot, which means they can no longer use it to shield Carrick.)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on January 06, 2017, 12:48:44 PM
Evander Kane is going to be Chris Stewart all over again, isn't he?

 ;D   I am that predictable huh.  Scatchard...Stewart...

You're seeing the dark side of the moon of a really good trait I have.


For serious though, I think you might want to re-evaluate Nylander. Right now he's scoring at a 59/82 pace while getting tossed around the line-up.

Fair enough.  I suspect you are right.  I have been reading the media ripping Nylander for inconsistency, being in Babcock's doghouse, etc which taints my perspective of his stats and the talent I see on the ice. 

For double serious, no Evander Kane. If a guy with those attributes is important, the Leafs should develop one. Or sign one. If the complaints against him in the Nightclub incident are true I would rather the Leafs be a less good hockey team than a better one with him on it.

All joking aside, this is quite serious and had forgotten it when looking at rosters and salaries around the league on various websites.  Point taken and agreed with.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on January 07, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
so if the leafs make the playoffs does babcock win the adams?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on January 07, 2017, 11:27:59 AM
so if the leafs make the playoffs does babcock win the adams?

I doubt it. It's pretty hard right now to imagine any scenario in which Tortorella doesn't have it sewn up.

Beyond him there's Boudreau and, if we're going to make a deal about a team doing better than expected, there's Desjardins.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on January 07, 2017, 12:36:03 PM
so if the leafs make the playoffs does babcock win the adams?

I doubt it. It's pretty hard right now to imagine any scenario in which Tortorella doesn't have it sewn up.

Beyond him there's Boudreau and, if we're going to make a deal about a team doing better than expected, there's Desjardins.

yeah, I forgot about torts
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on January 13, 2017, 10:41:39 AM
http://theleafsnation.com/2017/1/12/if-the-market-for-a-steady-defenceman-is-bad-don-t-play-it

This article was spawned in response to:

Mark Spector: noted critic of the Leafs
Quote
Today, when the Toronto Maple Leafs consider trading a winger like James van Riemsdyk for a much-needed defenceman, they won’t be looking at the Subban for Weber deal as a comparable.

The deal that set the bar for the Leafs — and any other team that is rich in forwards but desperate to shore up an Achilles heel blue-line — was the Taylor Hall-for-Adam Larsson trade between the New Jersey Devils and Edmonton Oilers.

[...]

If Leafs fans thought Chiarelli got fleeced in the Hall deal, at least one scout we spoke with said Toronto won’t get a player as good as Larsson in return for the older van Riemsdyk, who has a modified no-trade clause and is one season away from becoming an unrestricted free agent.

“There’s no comparison between Hall and JVR,” said the scout, who thinks the Leafs will have to sweeten the pot. “You’re not trading (Mitch) Marner, so (William) Nylander has got to be the guy. He’s skilled, but how good?”

The Leafs are exactly where Edmonton was a year ago: Stocked with young talent up front, but with a blue-line corps that needs at least two quality NHL defencemen. Chiarelli knew he could deal from strength, though even he must have been surprised when he found himself trading a 70-point winger for a 15-point defenceman.

While it is a good article (the one that Jeff wrote), the best part is reading the comments.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on January 13, 2017, 11:59:45 AM
Considering the market, our playstyle, and the assets that we have to deal with, I think we should be targeting an on-the-cusp defenseman from an on-the-cusp team (think Carrick with Washington), probably from the Western Conference, with an already stable-ish top-6.

How does this sound?
To CalgaryTo Toronto
Tyler BozakMatt Stajan
Brandon Bollig or whatever cap dump
Rasmus Andersson (http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=86137)

Calgary is a bit thin in the middle and Bozak is going to be a scoring upgrade, pushing either Bennet or Monahan down to the 4th line. Stajan gets to come home (vet presence who has done the Leafs dance) and can anchor the 4th line with skill and class. Bollig is a cap dump they've already buried; this could flex to a higher number (Wideman) if mid-range picks come back our way.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on January 13, 2017, 12:34:44 PM
Considering the market, our playstyle, and the assets that we have to deal with, I think we should be targeting an on-the-cusp defenseman from an on-the-cusp team (think Carrick with Washington), probably from the Western Conference, with an already stable-ish top-6.

How does this sound?
To CalgaryTo Toronto
Tyler BozakMatt Stajan
Brandon Bollig or whatever cap dump
Rasmus Andersson (http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=86137)

Calgary is a bit thin in the middle and Bozak is going to be a scoring upgrade, pushing either Bennet or Monahan down to the 4th line. Stajan gets to come home (vet presence who has done the Leafs dance) and can anchor the 4th line with skill and class. Bollig is a cap dump they've already buried; this could flex to a higher number (Wideman) if mid-range picks come back our way.

You can do better than that herman, I expect more from you.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on January 13, 2017, 12:50:49 PM
You can do better than that herman, I expect more from you.

Friday, man.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on January 13, 2017, 12:52:28 PM
http://www.tsn.ca/landeskog-duchene-could-be-on-the-table-as-avs-rebuild-1.649580

OK boys and girls, anyone think they should try to get Shattenkirk before July 1?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on January 13, 2017, 01:21:46 PM
http://www.tsn.ca/landeskog-duchene-could-be-on-the-table-as-avs-rebuild-1.649580

OK boys and girls, anyone think they should try to get Shattenkirk before July 1?

If, and only if, he comes with an extension already signed.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on January 13, 2017, 02:28:39 PM
http://www.tsn.ca/landeskog-duchene-could-be-on-the-table-as-avs-rebuild-1.649580

OK boys and girls, anyone think they should try to get Shattenkirk before July 1?

If, and only if, he comes with an extension already signed.

FINE...and the problem with trading with the Avs is that they're obviously going to want futures in return, and I don't think the Leafs are ready to start trading away picks/prospects at this point.

I know that article herman posted was suggesting that the Leafs just hold off until the market adjusts, but JVR and Bozak have a best-before date with their contracts and stuff, so I'm not sure that "just wait" is really a viable option.

I'm all for patience with developing the young talent, but this is still a rebuild, and assets need to be converted.  I think they should want to make a move by this deadline with those guys. 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on January 13, 2017, 02:30:04 PM
http://www.tsn.ca/landeskog-duchene-could-be-on-the-table-as-avs-rebuild-1.649580

OK boys and girls, anyone think they should try to get Shattenkirk before July 1?

If, and only if, he comes with an extension already signed.

FINE...and the problem with trading with the Avs is that they're obviously going to want futures in return, and I don't think the Leafs are ready to start trading away picks/prospects at this point.

I know that article herman posted was suggesting that the Leafs just hold off until the market adjusts, but JVR and Bozak have a best-before date with their contracts and stuff, so I'm not sure that "just wait" is really a viable option.

I'm all for patience with developing the young talent, but this is still a rebuild, and assets need to be converted.  I think they should want to make a move by this deadline with those guys. 

You know Shattenkirk plays for St. Louis, right?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on January 13, 2017, 02:34:07 PM

If you figure on what St. Louis would want in terms of a rental for Shattenkirk...no?

Unless, I mean, if you could work out a JVR for Shattenkirk thing with an extension agreed to beforehand then I suppose so but even then I'd rather deal JVR for futures and then try to just sign Shattenkirk.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on January 13, 2017, 02:36:59 PM
http://www.tsn.ca/landeskog-duchene-could-be-on-the-table-as-avs-rebuild-1.649580

OK boys and girls, anyone think they should try to get Shattenkirk before July 1?

If, and only if, he comes with an extension already signed.

FINE...and the problem with trading with the Avs is that they're obviously going to want futures in return, and I don't think the Leafs are ready to start trading away picks/prospects at this point.

I know that article herman posted was suggesting that the Leafs just hold off until the market adjusts, but JVR and Bozak have a best-before date with their contracts and stuff, so I'm not sure that "just wait" is really a viable option.

I'm all for patience with developing the young talent, but this is still a rebuild, and assets need to be converted.  I think they should want to make a move by this deadline with those guys. 

You know Shattenkirk plays for St. Louis, right?

Damn it...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on January 13, 2017, 02:40:41 PM

If you figure on what St. Louis would want in terms of a rental for Shattenkirk...no?

Unless, I mean, if you could work out a JVR for Shattenkirk thing with an extension agreed to beforehand then I suppose so but even then I'd rather deal JVR for futures and then try to just sign Shattenkirk.

NEVERMIND!
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Jolly good show chaps on January 13, 2017, 02:48:16 PM
Prospects/picks for Tyson Barrie? Anything we can realistically offer that they would take without giving up any of Marner, Matthews and Nylander?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on January 13, 2017, 03:12:37 PM
Damn it...

Friday :D
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on January 13, 2017, 03:18:42 PM
Prospects/picks for Tyson Barrie? Anything we can realistically offer that they would take without giving up any of Marner, Matthews and Nylander?

I don't know that I'd be in the market for trading from our prospect pool unless it was either lateral (e.g. prospect forward for prospect defenseman) or shedding chaff (prospects that need a fresh look elsewhere). We have a some good 'win-now' pieces in JvR, Bozak, Komarov, Polak, Hunwick that should be prioritized for moving.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Jolly good show chaps on January 13, 2017, 04:10:58 PM
^ that's kind of why I wondered. We give up some prospects and picks for a defenceman and then look to shift Bozak, Komarov and JVR to other teams to restock.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on January 13, 2017, 04:25:45 PM
^ that's kind of why I wondered. We give up some prospects and picks for a defenceman and then look to shift Bozak, Komarov and JVR to other teams to restock.

For the right defenseman, I'd bite, but the ones I want are currently on contending teams. Additionally, the teams we'd be moving those expiring players to are generally higher up in the standings and therefore lower on the draft order, so that might be considered a downcycle even if we replenished picks round for round.

The type of crazy gamble trade I'd like to see are the ones where we move a vet to a flash-in-the-pan team that has not assessed their future correctly for 2018 1st rounders (Rasmus Dahlin pls). Then when they inevitably crash and burn the next season, everything comes up Milhouse. Jim Benning and the Canucks might be such a target.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: pmrules on January 13, 2017, 05:09:46 PM
What about Sergachev out of Montreal?    Montreal is in win now mode for sure with Price/Weber.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on January 13, 2017, 06:20:05 PM
^ that's kind of why I wondered. We give up some prospects and picks for a defenceman and then look to shift Bozak, Komarov and JVR to other teams to restock.

For the right defenseman, I'd bite, but the ones I want are currently on contending teams. Additionally, the teams we'd be moving those expiring players to are generally higher up in the standings and therefore lower on the draft order, so that might be considered a downcycle even if we replenished picks round for round.

The type of crazy gamble trade I'd like to see are the ones where we move a vet to a flash-in-the-pan team that has not assessed their future correctly for 2018 1st rounders (Rasmus Dahlin pls). Then when they inevitably crash and burn the next season, everything comes up Milhouse. Jim Benning and the Canucks might be such a target.

I wouldn't be opposed to that personally, but I'm fairly certain the players and coach would be more than a little upset if they moved their best LW for a pick two drafts from now, especially if they are still in the hunt.

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on January 13, 2017, 06:59:50 PM
Damn it...

Friday :D

Cheers!
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bill_Berg on January 14, 2017, 10:25:56 PM
What would Down go for? I wouldn't give up much, but what a story to have Down and Matthews head into a playoff series together.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on January 14, 2017, 11:24:06 PM
What would Down go for? I wouldn't give up much, but what a story to have Down and Matthews head into a playoff series together.

I don't want Lou involved in the overpaying for vets syndrome that plagues GM's at the deadline.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bill_Berg on January 14, 2017, 11:46:21 PM
What would Down go for? I wouldn't give up much, but what a story to have Down and Matthews head into a playoff series together.

I don't want Lou involved in the overpaying for vets syndrome that plagues GM's at the deadline.

Not sure a 40 year old would inspire that. Maybe. But then I agree that It's not a good fit for the Leafs. But if not, what's Doan worth to Lou? A 4th? Would they even be trading him for value, or just to do him a favour?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: louisstamos on January 15, 2017, 12:07:58 AM
If it's me (and my name is Lou too  :P), if the team is in a playoff positions come the deadline, at least with forwards I stand pat.  Go with the guys that brought you to the dance, and save the assets.

On the back end, though, because regardless of the playoff position, I'd be looking to trade one of (if not both) of Polak and Hunwick, you probably look to replace them.  A healthy Marincin probably takes one of their spots, but if you don't trust Corrado and the price is right, maybe you bring in a veteran guy to be that #6 D man?  Johnny Oduya?  Brendan Smith?  Cody Franson?

Not a priority, though.  Again, this isn't the year you go for broke.  Keep as many picks as possible and keep building the team through the draft.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on January 15, 2017, 12:44:25 AM
Not a priority, though.  Again, this isn't the year you go for broke.  Keep as many picks as possible and keep building the team through the draft.

Agreed. Avoid the high profile rentals, ignore the standings, and stick to the plan. At most, you ease back on the sell job with JvR and Bozak, and look at bringing in a cheap depth defenceman. Still more than 6 weeks until the deadline. A lot can happen in that time.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on January 15, 2017, 01:08:45 AM
Myers (D)

An almost Dr. Seuss title:  Who's Myers on the Flyers?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: hockeyfan1 on January 15, 2017, 01:16:46 AM
Myers (D)

An almost Dr. Seuss title:  Who's Myers on the Flyers?


Philippe Myers.  A Flyer prospect from 2015.. Not on the roster right now.  He plays defence for the QMJHL's Rouyn-Noranda Huskies, and was a Silver medallist for Team Canada at the 2017 WJHC.

That's who.

P.S.  What's laughable is your username.  An almost Dr.Seuss-ish title, indeed.   ::) 8)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: hockeyfan1 on January 15, 2017, 01:30:29 AM
Just wondering if,  and a big if, should Philadelphia continue on a playoff run ,and to bolster their offence...

JVR to the Flyers
P.Myers and a 1st Round pick in the 2017 Entry Draft, (plus a player to be named later as part of the package) to the Leafs.

The Flyers would get that extra offensive boost, while the Leafs would be getting not only a young prospect in Myers but that 1st Round pick.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on January 15, 2017, 01:58:28 AM
Myers (D)

An almost Dr. Seuss title:  Who's Myers on the Flyers?


Philippe Myers.  A Flyer prospect from 2015.. Not on the roster right now.  He plays defence for the QMJHL's Rouyn-Noranda Huskies, and was a Silver medallist for Team Canada at the 2017 WJHC.

That's who.

P.S.  What's laughable is your username.  An almost Dr.Seuss-ish title, indeed.   ::) 8)

Myers on the Flyers
Is a defenseman most keen!
He was signed by the Flyers
In twenty-fifteen.
If you're asked by Trebek,
Myers plays in Quebec.
And just had to settle
For the second-best medal.

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on January 16, 2017, 10:04:50 AM
Bravo HS
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on January 18, 2017, 11:28:07 AM

Hey, so here's a wacky idea. I know some people are lukewarm on the idea of trading JVR because of where the team is in the standings right now but, that said, the reality exists that JVR is going to get very expensive in a couple of years and the Leafs have a real opportunity to set a market right now.

So what if you could kind of do both? Trade JVR but also land a good, young scoring LW who would be around for a bunch of years at a reasonable cost. Something, effectively, like this:

To Team X: JVR
To Colorado: The package of picks/prospects JVR could fetch
To Toronto: Gabriel Landeskog

Kind of fits for everyone, right? Landeskog is under contract at a pretty reasonable 5.5 for five more years and though in the midst of a down year this year has been a consistent 25 goal/60 point player.

Of course, this is assuming Colorado wouldn't just want JVR himself. Unlikely, sure, but they don't really seem to know what they're doing over there.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on January 18, 2017, 12:08:51 PM
Solid idea to parlay pieces to suit Colorado where we otherwise would not. If not Landeskog, I wouldn't mind doing something similar for Duchene

To Team-X: JvR for prospects/picks
To Team-Y: Bozak for prospects/picks

To Colorado: prospects/picks package for Matt Duchene (6M until 2019)

Hyman - Matthews - Brown
Leipsic - Kadri - Marner
Nylander - Duchene - Kapanen

Basically gives Nylander another year or two of runway to Centering, then swap them positionally when ready, and move Duchene for prospects and picks at the 2019 deadline.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: char on January 24, 2017, 09:54:30 PM
I don't know. In light of the underwhelming return the Oilers got for Hall, I'd wager that JVR might net us a defenseman like, say, Luke Schenn.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on January 25, 2017, 08:22:49 AM
I don't know. In light of the underwhelming return the Oilers got for Hall, I'd wager that JVR might net us a defenseman like, say, Luke Schenn.

Don't even suggest that man, you just ruined my morning.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: KadriFan on January 27, 2017, 07:56:41 AM
Wonder what it would take to get micheal stone.   Not having a great year but lots of potential.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on February 01, 2017, 10:24:41 PM
http://theleafsnation.com/2017/2/1/why-a-flat-salary-cap-would-be-extremely-beneficial-to-the-toronto-maple-leafs

via Friedman's 30 Thoughts, it looks likely the Cap will stay flat next season.

This bodes well for the Leafs because money is awesome.
(http://thenationnetwork.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/images/de/95/article_de95805e-0d62-4833-a089-0dae6d497683.png)

I'd add Hyman and Brown to the list, but neither are looking like huge expensive spends (thanks be to their Stone Hands %), and are easily replaceable on the free agent market (Winniks) when the time comes (Brown might elevate but stay cheap due to love).

Assuming no trades this and next year, the following year we drop 17.98M in Lupul, Bozak, JvR, Komarov, and Gleason's buyout, in time for Nylander (and Carrick hopefully) to get paid. We also only have one year of overlap with Martin and Horton being paid alongside Matthews/Marner on contract #2.

As long as we're not stupid about throwing UFA money at middling older players, it's a pretty solid 3 year window as our flotsam expires to start making a heavy push while a good number of other teams are hamstrung. I don't think it'll be Shattenkirk, but someone in the 1RD slot pushing Zaitsev and Carrick down will go a long way towards making other expenses worthwhile.

I would not mind primarily standing pat and picking up assets with dumps and only making a push when the 1D lands.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on February 14, 2017, 01:12:33 PM
Getting hammered out here on the East Coast with quite a storm.

Looking at how the Leafs have played after the Allstar Break and here are some of my opinions:

Who are the 'veteran' leadership on the Leafs?  I suspect Bozak, JVR, Uncle Leo, Martin, Hunwick and Polak.

Out of them who can the Leafs afford to lose by the TDL?  Bozak, JVR, Polak??

JVR / Bozak / Marner 

JVR still plays a soft game, doesn't have a defensive game to speak of BUT has soft hands and size.  Playing with Getzlaf and Perry would be a fantastic 1st line in the playoffs.   So to Anaheim for Lindholm before the TDL or the offseason?

Bozak is great in the faceoff circle...and Columbus needs that as well for the playoffs... so would they trade struggling Jenner straight up for Bozak before the TDL? 

That would rush Nylander into the role of playing center but I don't think the trade would be available in the offseason which is when I would prefer to see it.

Marner has fantastic chemistry with JVR and Bozak and I would hate to break it up but for these TDL trades that I feel are hockey trades and for the future... do you do it?

Hyman / Matthews / Brown

As someone pointed out Matthews is anchored with Hyman and Brown who have a COMBINED 1 REGULATION GOAL in the last 12 games.  I have seen some passionate Leaf fans argue that they are both going to get close to $3 MIL a year in their bridge deals from Lou.  Get real!!

Komarov / Kadri / Nylander

If Bozak gets moved before the summer I can see Nylander leaving this line and taking the center spot with Marner.

Komarov is a player I like a lot.  He is barely a 3rd line winger skill-wise though and is over paid for the 4th line.  Rychel has decent skill and seems to be pulling his game together finally on the Marlies.  I am hoping that Rychel will be hitting on all cylinders by next season or at the latest next season's TDL and will be able to take the 3rd line LW position.

Martin / Smith / Soshnikov

Martin is Martin and will be with the team for another 3 years.

Smith is 6 games away from matching Draft Expansion criteria.  That is Thursday Feb 23 against the NYR...not that I am counting.  I feel that Gauthier was better suited for the role but is also getting top minutes on the Marlies.  I hope Feb 24th the Leafs recall center man Froese who has 23 goals in 46 games to replace Smith for at least 12 games to make him Draft Expansion qualifying as well.

Soshnikov is a player a really like.  Skill, speed and tenacity.  He is draft exempt.  I think he is excellent trade bait.

Reilly / Zaitsev  - better than I thought they would be.  Not sure how much higher their ceiling is but they are still getting better.

Gardiner /  Carrick
Gardiner was finally becoming a favorite player of mine with his consistent play but since the All Star break has been making bad/weird decisions again every game which negates his positive impact.

Carrick is solid but more suited for sheltered 3rd pairing minutes.

Offseason trade of Gardiner and Carrick for Trouba makes sense for both teams.  I don't put much stock in the reports that Trouba only wants to play for a US team.  That is like Stamkos wanting to play in Toronto.  These guys are professionals and will play where they are paid and fit in. 

Hunwick / Polak

Polak is a warrior and I expect will be going to a playoff team before the TDL.

Hunwick I suspect will stay but could also being going to a playoff team before the TDL.

Marincin and Marchenko are big, soft dmen.  Don't really care if they stay or if they go.

So in summary I am hoping:

TDL deals:
Polak for 3rd pick or included in trade with Anaheim
Hunwick for 4th pick

Offseason (possibly before the Expansion Draft)
Bozak for Jenner

Gardiner and Carrick for Trouba

Blockbuster:
JVR, Marincin, Polak, Soshnikov, Lindberg and Corrado for Lindholm, Manson, Ritchie, Stoner

Edit: Started this post Sunday night
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on March 17, 2017, 06:11:07 AM
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-whats-delaying-nhls-olympic-decision/

Quote
1. Initially, the plan was to give Las Vegas 48 hours with the protected list before the expansion draft. That is being increased to 72. At the GM meetings, the Golden Knights’ George McPhee let everyone know that once the lists are handed to him, it’s an auction for any unprotected player another team might want. This has outstanding potential.

Great opportunity for something interesting to happen.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on March 17, 2017, 08:10:16 AM
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-whats-delaying-nhls-olympic-decision/

Quote
1. Initially, the plan was to give Las Vegas 48 hours with the protected list before the expansion draft. That is being increased to 72. At the GM meetings, the Golden Knights’ George McPhee let everyone know that once the lists are handed to him, it’s an auction for any unprotected player another team might want. This has outstanding potential.

Great opportunity for something interesting to happen.

I find it weird that they give them such a small window. Why not make it a full week or something? What's the harm?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on March 17, 2017, 08:26:39 AM
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-whats-delaying-nhls-olympic-decision/

Quote
1. Initially, the plan was to give Las Vegas 48 hours with the protected list before the expansion draft. That is being increased to 72. At the GM meetings, the Golden Knights’ George McPhee let everyone know that once the lists are handed to him, it’s an auction for any unprotected player another team might want. This has outstanding potential.

Great opportunity for something interesting to happen.

Sorry George, Forsberg won't be left unprotected for you.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on March 17, 2017, 08:49:47 AM
I find it weird that they give them such a small window. Why not make it a full week or something? What's the harm?

My guess is the league is concerned the lists will be leaked, and they're trying to protect the players who may or may not be on those lists from . . . something, I guess. Honestly, though, 80%+ of those lists are pretty much givens already, so it's not like they'll need a ton of time to figure out what they want to do. For the most part, they probably already know.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on March 17, 2017, 08:52:30 AM
I find it weird that they give them such a small window. Why not make it a full week or something? What's the harm?

My guess is the league is concerned the lists will be leaked, and they're trying to protect the players who may or may not be on those lists from . . . something, I guess.

Also there's so many "good guesses" and projections of which players may be left unprotected by teams already.  I'm sure Vegas has a team of people analyzing potential lists already and what players they would target, not like they'll be surprised 72 hours before they have to choose.  There may be certain surprises on the list for them, but by and large I think they already know who they're looking at.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on March 17, 2017, 08:58:01 AM
I find it weird that they give them such a small window. Why not make it a full week or something? What's the harm?

My guess is the league is concerned the lists will be leaked, and they're trying to protect the players who may or may not be on those lists from . . . something, I guess. Honestly, though, 80%+ of those lists are pretty much givens already, so it's not like they'll need a ton of time to figure out what they want to do. For the most part, they probably already know.

Butthurt. This is purely about butthurt.

It's a business, but this league is also almost entirely about relationships and intangibles (see who hires whom and which managers frequently pick up the same players).

VGK is open for discussion, so I'm pretty sure there are irons in the fire and pages that really just need signatures and a phone call.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on March 17, 2017, 08:59:16 AM
My guess is the league is concerned the lists will be leaked, and they're trying to protect the players who may or may not be on those lists from . . . something, I guess. Honestly, though, 80%+ of those lists are pretty much givens already, so it's not like they'll need a ton of time to figure out what they want to do. For the most part, they probably already know.

Oh, the lists are leaking regardless. Especially if McPhee is putting all the unprotected guys on them up for auction. I'm not sure the size of the window will really effect that.

And yes, if all Vegas was concerned about was selecting players from the list, then it wouldn't really be a big deal. But from the sounds if it they're going to be really active in exploring all options in terms of side deals and stuff. That's going to keep them very busy likely.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: L K on March 17, 2017, 09:39:20 AM
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-whats-delaying-nhls-olympic-decision/

Quote
1. Initially, the plan was to give Las Vegas 48 hours with the protected list before the expansion draft. That is being increased to 72. At the GM meetings, the Golden Knights’ George McPhee let everyone know that once the lists are handed to him, it’s an auction for any unprotected player another team might want. This has outstanding potential.

Great opportunity for something interesting to happen.

I find it weird that they give them such a small window. Why not make it a full week or something? What's the harm?

Risk of a leaked list?  No clue.  It seems like putting someone on your unprotected list will largely be a pretty straightforward process after reasonable efforts are made to do last minute trades.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on March 17, 2017, 09:44:01 AM
I find it weird that they give them such a small window. Why not make it a full week or something? What's the harm?

My guess is the league is concerned the lists will be leaked, and they're trying to protect the players who may or may not be on those lists from . . . something, I guess. Honestly, though, 80%+ of those lists are pretty much givens already, so it's not like they'll need a ton of time to figure out what they want to do. For the most part, they probably already know.

It strikes me as being less about protecting players from anything than it is protecting GMs from criticism about what decisions they make.

The League has pretty consistently adopted a policy of denying fans information that could potentially embarrass GMs(see, for instance, not having a cap-info site at NHL.com).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on March 17, 2017, 09:44:26 AM
What would be the point of extending it?  Giving McPhee a week to extort as much as he can?

I'm fine with the short window, and I'll bet the rest of the teams would rather it be 2 minutes.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on March 17, 2017, 09:47:42 AM
What would be the point of extending it?  Giving McPhee a week to extort as much as he can?

Well, other than giving a team a reasonable amount of time to scout/discuss the players that will form the bulk of their organization going forward?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on March 17, 2017, 09:54:25 AM
What would be the point of extending it?  Giving McPhee a week to extort as much as he can?

I'm fine with the short window, and I'll bet the rest of the teams would rather it be 2 minutes.

The league has been very open about wanting to give Vegas every opportunity to start their franchise on a positive note. That's why they've added all those new stipulations to the expansion draft, to try to ensure that actual NHLers are getting picked. Granted, it's not going to work and the team will still be awful right out the gate, but they want to give future $500mil investors a sign that they're actually investing in something that might be good.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on March 17, 2017, 10:43:56 AM
Well, other than giving a team a reasonable amount of time to scout/discuss the players that will form the bulk of their organization going forward?

Not really going to be any opportunity to scout, as the lists won't be finalized until after the Finals. As for discussions, as noted above, for the most part, they have a pretty solid idea of what's going to be available to them. An extra few days isn't going to improve things much in that regard.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on March 17, 2017, 10:49:48 AM
Not really going to be any opportunity to scout, as the lists won't be finalized until after the Finals. As for discussions, as noted above, for the most part, they have a pretty solid idea of what's going to be available to them. An extra few days isn't going to improve things much in that regard.

Won't be able to scout in-person, no, but they will be able to watch tape and a "pretty solid" idea is one thing but having the actual list and being able to put together a real strategy in terms of potential team building seems like the kind of thing that should be done with at least some prep time.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Coco-puffs on March 17, 2017, 10:59:33 AM
Well, other than giving a team a reasonable amount of time to scout/discuss the players that will form the bulk of their organization going forward?

Not really going to be any opportunity to scout, as the lists won't be finalized until after the Finals. As for discussions, as noted above, for the most part, they have a pretty solid idea of what's going to be available to them. An extra few days isn't going to improve things much in that regard.

I agree that VGK have done all the scouting they need prior to the lists being given to them, and, have a pretty good idea who will be available.  The longer window won't really buy them much.

The point of the longer window is to allow Vegas to work out deals with other teams for players available.  If I was McPhee that extra 24 hours might be very handy as you'll have lots of teams calling offering stuff for players on the expansion list.  If I was McPhee, I'd maximize the number of defensemen I pick (and there will be some good ones available) and start trading some of them for more- since they come at a premium on the trade market.  Knowing what you can get back for some of these players will go a long way to help decide who else to pick from other teams.

Anyways, I do hope this expansion draft does cause a huge ripple effect of trades and not just a simple draft of players from teams.  It could get really exciting for fans to see it all happen.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on March 17, 2017, 11:05:42 AM
The point of the longer window is to allow Vegas to work out deals with other teams for players available.  If I was McPhee that extra 24 hours might be very handy as you'll have lots of teams calling offering stuff for players on the expansion list.  If I was McPhee, I'd maximize the number of defensemen I pick (and there will bmore- since they come at a premium on the trade market.  Knowing what you can get back for some of these players will go a long way to help decide who else to pick from other teams.

If I'm McPhee I'd be very careful about trading some of the better players available to him as part of the expansion draft if the return is draft picks who won't materialize for 4-5 years. I think part of the reason the Expansion draft is shaped the way it is is because the NHL sees the follies of going into a new market, one that's very sketchy as a hockey market and may very well have to compete with the NFL, and being absolute garbage for 4-5 years.

He's not going to be able to put together a good team immediately but if he's not looking at the expansion draft primarily as a way to take players who'll actually play minutes for him then I think he'll have badly misjudged the market he's in.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on March 17, 2017, 11:05:47 AM
Won't be able to scout in-person, no, but they will be able to watch tape and a "pretty solid" idea is one thing but having the actual list and being able to put together a real strategy in terms of potential team building seems like the kind of thing that should be done with at least some prep time.

Even in terms of tape, there's nothing that's stopping them from having watched and analyzed game film on all the players that have a possibility of being available. A few more days isn't going to really provide much more information there.

McPhee was interviewed around the All Star Game, and said he and his front office team had already been going a wide range of scenarios based on potential availability lists. It's probably fair to say that, barring any massive surprises, they'll have done more than enough prep by the time they get the official lists. At that point, the discussions will be which already developed strategy they'll choose to follow.

Honestly, outside of some extra time to negotiate trades, anything that can be accomplished in those extra few days can and should be in the process of being accomplished already - to the point that the benefit of those extra days is pretty minimal - and opens up more possibility of paralysis through analysis.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on March 17, 2017, 11:09:04 AM
The point of the longer window is to allow Vegas to work out deals with other teams for players available.  If I was McPhee that extra 24 hours might be very handy as you'll have lots of teams calling offering stuff for players on the expansion list.  If I was McPhee, I'd maximize the number of defensemen I pick (and there will be some good ones available) and start trading some of them for more- since they come at a premium on the trade market.  Knowing what you can get back for some of these players will go a long way to help decide who else to pick from other teams.

I'm actually not sure that's true. I've gone through the process using the tool at Cap Friendly, and, really, I'm not coming up with a significant number of players I see other teams really being excited about or aggressively pursuing. There's a small number of good 2nd pairing type defencemen, and a couple lower-end 2nd line type forwards, but, really, that's about it.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on March 17, 2017, 11:15:57 AM
Even in terms of tape, there's nothing that's stopping them from having watched and analyzed game film on all the players that have a possibility of being available. A few more days isn't going to really provide much more information there.

No, not unless there are a couple of genuine surprises in terms of who gets made available. In which case I think you want to give them a fair amount of time to look at things that may have fallen outside some of the preparation they've done.

McPhee was interviewed around the All Star Game, and said he and his front office team had already been going a wide range of scenarios based on potential availability lists. It's probably fair to say that, barring any massive surprises, they'll have done more than enough prep by the time they get the official lists. At that point, the discussions will be which already developed strategy they'll choose to follow.

Honestly, outside of some extra time to negotiate trades, anything that can be accomplished in those extra few days can and should be in the process of being accomplished already - to the point that the benefit of those extra days is pretty minimal - and opens up more possibility of paralysis through analysis.

I'm not sure we disagree about any of the broad strokes of what Vegas will actually be doing, just on what's a reasonable amount of time for them to actually do it.

Giving them a week probably won't result in any massive improvement but the idea that it would cause active harm seems entirely unfounded. 7 days seems like a fair amount of time to move from hypothetical to "this is what's actually going to happen" planning.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on March 17, 2017, 11:22:14 AM
Is this where we offer JvR and Bozak to them as a set? Built in 1st line right there. Short term hits at great value, for the measly cost of draft picks that they won't be putting to immediate use anyway, which can also be recouped or spent from expansion draft deals.

Or a JvR for a defenseman deal using VGK as a bounce pass point where there wasn't a direct fit with the other team.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on March 17, 2017, 11:33:24 AM
Is this where we offer JvR and Bozak to them as a set? Built in 1st line right there. Short term hits at great value, for the measly cost of draft picks that they won't be putting to immediate use anyway, which can also be recouped or spent from expansion draft deals.

Or a JvR for a defenseman deal using VGK as a bounce pass point where there wasn't a direct fit with the other team.

They're not going to be trading a first round pick so they seem like a bad team to target with high value guys. Personally I can't see a JVR trade that doesn't return a 1st or a prospect from the 1st.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on March 17, 2017, 12:45:17 PM
They're not going to be trading a first round pick so they seem like a bad team to target with high value guys. Personally I can't see a JVR trade that doesn't return a 1st or a prospect from the 1st.

 :'(

I had silly hopes they'd part with their 1st (or two) for pieces that could expedite their competitiveness. Nevada, like Florida, doesn't have that pesky state income tax, so they could potentially squeeze JvR in at a lower cap hit long term.

Okay new ideas.

This is probably crazy, so bust it down as required.

Assuming the Rangers bag Shattenkirk as expected:
JvR + Kapanen for Rick Nash + 1st (2018) + Sean Day

The Rangers' time is 2017-18 and they need to load up to make it through PIT and WSH (and maybe CBJ). They get a younger, less bulldozey but more productive Nash who grew up a huge NYR fan, cheap RW depth they're lacking, and free up about 3M more towards Shattenkirk's mega deal.

We get a deferred 1st + defensive prospect project with upside + veteran LW power forward on a short term to sell at the deadline.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on March 17, 2017, 12:57:20 PM
I had silly hopes they'd part with their 1st (or two) for pieces that could expedite their competitiveness. Nevada, like Florida, doesn't have that pesky state income tax, so they could potentially squeeze JvR in at a lower cap hit long term.

In theory that makes some sense. In practice, we've had first row seats to JVR and Bozak being on a team's first line and what that does for competitiveness.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Coco-puffs on March 17, 2017, 01:04:15 PM
The point of the longer window is to allow Vegas to work out deals with other teams for players available.  If I was McPhee that extra 24 hours might be very handy as you'll have lots of teams calling offering stuff for players on the expansion list.  If I was McPhee, I'd maximize the number of defensemen I pick (and there will bmore- since they come at a premium on the trade market.  Knowing what you can get back for some of these players will go a long way to help decide who else to pick from other teams.

If I'm McPhee I'd be very careful about trading some of the better players available to him as part of the expansion draft if the return is draft picks who won't materialize for 4-5 years. I think part of the reason the Expansion draft is shaped the way it is is because the NHL sees the follies of going into a new market, one that's very sketchy as a hockey market and may very well have to compete with the NFL, and being absolute garbage for 4-5 years.

He's not going to be able to put together a good team immediately but if he's not looking at the expansion draft primarily as a way to take players who'll actually play minutes for him then I think he'll have badly misjudged the market he's in.

Obviously McPhee can't just pick a bunch of NHL players (even if they are middle or bottom of the lineup guys) and trade them away for draft picks.

1.  He needs to get to the Cap Floor
2.  He needs a team that isn't completely noncompetitive.
3.  As much as draft picks are great currency for building a franchise, I don't see many teams giving up the ones VGK would want anyways- not for the players available in the expansion draft.

However, there are teams in the NHL today that are too close to the salary cap but don't want to lose players for nothing- so they will protect those players.  I'm sure those teams would be willing to trade a higher-end player, especially if it helps them dump a bad salary in the process and recoup a middle of the lineup player.

This is entirely hypothetical and probably won't happen because the players I'm naming have NMC's and won't want to go to Vegas-  But I'm just putting it together as an example because I haven't looked at each team's roster and cap commitments moving forward.

As herman pointed out- NYR may want to part with Rick Nash but you can be sure they won't let him go for nothing.  I'm sure they'd love to also like to move on from Dan Girardi.  Moving both of those players out and getting someone from the available expansion players would benefit both sides:

Vegas gets to the cap floor much easier- and get a bit of star power in Nash.  Rangers move out salary to go after their UFA target Shattenkirk and still get a serviceable player back.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on March 17, 2017, 02:15:32 PM
In theory that makes some sense. In practice, we've had first row seats to JVR and Bozak being on a team's first line and what that does for competitiveness.

I totally agree, personally, but this is where a GM/owner might be emotionally sold.

Semi-seriously, but not really:
We could, theoretically, point to how well they still produced without Kessel, and how well the rookie on their line is producing "thanks to them", and what exemplary leadership/dressing room influences they are. Instant 'star power' of an American Olympiad and semi-local star (Bozak/Denver?) for their team to put bums in seats and money in the coffers, but not so cost prohibitive or long term that they gum up a build. They'll be immediately better than whatever 1st rounders they land in the next two/three years.

Still, you're right. It'd take way more than that to pry away 1st rounders from an Expansion team.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on March 17, 2017, 02:21:35 PM
I still like to think something can be done with JVR + for Trouba.

Right now, Ehlers and Perreault might now (EDIT: not) be enough on the LW.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bullfrog on March 17, 2017, 05:29:11 PM
I can't see Las Vegas giving up many draft picks. Considering they'll be last in the league (or near it), these are valuable picks.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on March 17, 2017, 09:47:59 PM
I can't see Las Vegas giving up many draft picks. Considering they'll be last in the league (or near it), these are valuable picks.

Same. Unless they're getting prospects/young players of a roughly equivalent expected talent level, their 1st and 2nd round picks are basically off the table. Mid and late round picks might be a different story, but, they're also less interesting acquisitions.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on March 17, 2017, 10:09:25 PM
In theory that makes some sense. In practice, we've had first row seats to JVR and Bozak being on a team's first line and what that does for competitiveness.

I totally agree, personally, but this is where a GM/owner might be emotionally sold.

Semi-seriously, but not really:
We could, theoretically, point to how well they still produced without Kessel, and how well the rookie on their line is producing "thanks to them", and what exemplary leadership/dressing room influences they are. Instant 'star power' of an American Olympiad and semi-local star (Bozak/Denver?) for their team to put bums in seats and money in the coffers, but not so cost prohibitive or long term that they gum up a build.

"Sure, Tyler Bozak might not seem like such a big deal but remember, he played his college hockey 750 miles away in a different state. Think of the tickets he'll sell!"

The excitement of being able to see someone who went to university a mere 11 hour drive away aside, expansion teams typically don't have to worry too much about selling tickets right out of the gate. What gums them up is being bad for a protracted period of time. Trading away picks that are likely to be top 5 picks are what is most likely to do that.

I mean, if we can maybe come up with some sort of Lyle Lanley song for Shanahan to play at the GM meetings, sure:

Bozak! Bozak! Bozak!

McPhee: He doesn't score a lot I see,
Shanahan: He's the best choice for your Captaincy
McPhee: But no one here knows who they are?
Shanahan: Pfft, Denver's really not that far!
McPhee: His advanced stats sure lack Pizazz
Shanhan: They're off the charts, just ask Dubas!

Shanahan: I swear Bozak's near pure perfection, and just for your first round selection, Bozak! Bozak! Bozaaaaaaaaaak!

Lamoriello: Bozak is, er, ah, real....d'oh.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on March 18, 2017, 08:48:57 AM
Well done, sir! I tip my hat to you.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: AvroArrow on April 23, 2017, 10:31:38 PM
Alright, time to move JvR and improve the defence...  Get it on Lou.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on April 23, 2017, 10:37:57 PM

Things I'm sure about:

X-Matthews-Marner
X-Nylander-Kapanen
X-Kadri-Brown
X-X-X

Gardiner-Zaitsev
Rielly-X
X-X

Andersen
X

Everything else is negotiable.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on April 23, 2017, 11:27:48 PM

Things I'm sure about:

X-Matthews-Marner
X-Nylander-Kapanen
X-Kadri-Brown
X-X-X

Gardiner-Zaitsev
Rielly-X
X-X

Andersen
X

Everything else is negotiable.

I agree 100%

I hope the 3rd pairing has pending UFA ex-Red Wing Brendan Smith on LHD.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Guilt Trip on April 24, 2017, 01:19:18 AM
And we want no part of Shattenkirk...He didn't impress me at all...I think the Leafs will be calling the Ducks...They can't protect all of their D.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on April 24, 2017, 08:04:32 AM
Are there any young Matt Niskanen type defense in UFA this year? He was more the type of player I think the Leafs could conceivably make a pitch for, and kind of the characteristic opposite to Shattenkirk.

Lower goal scoring = cheaper, but defensively sound puck mover (i.e. Who I hope Zaitsev will be long term).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on April 24, 2017, 08:39:10 AM
Are there any young Matt Niskanen type defense in UFA this year? He was more the type of player I think the Leafs could conceivably make a pitch for, and kind of the characteristic opposite to Shattenkirk.

Lower goal scoring = cheaper, but defensively sound puck mover (i.e. Who I hope Zaitsev will be long term).

It's really not a buyer's market for defensemen of any kind this year.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on April 24, 2017, 08:51:16 AM
Are there any young Matt Niskanen type defense in UFA this year? He was more the type of player I think the Leafs could conceivably make a pitch for, and kind of the characteristic opposite to Shattenkirk.

Brendan Smith is probably the closest there is:

(http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p205/CarltonTheBear/Story%201%201_1.png)

Good skater, but basically no threat offensively. Could form a good 2nd pairing with Rielly to help get his shots against numbers down or with Carrick to get a stabilizing 3rd pairing.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on April 24, 2017, 09:04:43 AM
Are there any young Matt Niskanen type defense in UFA this year? He was more the type of player I think the Leafs could conceivably make a pitch for, and kind of the characteristic opposite to Shattenkirk.

Brendan Smith is probably the closest there is:

(http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p205/CarltonTheBear/Story%201%201_1.png)

Good skater, but basically no threat offensively. Could form a good 2nd pairing with Rielly to help get his shots against numbers down or with Carrick to get a stabilizing 3rd pairing.

Good Mimico kid, Shanahan will like that.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: cabber24 on April 24, 2017, 09:14:40 AM
Karl Alzner would be high on my wish list. Not flashy but has a lot of what the Leafs need. Minute crunching defensively sound D-man.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on April 24, 2017, 09:17:22 AM
Karl Alzner would be high on my wish list. Not flashy but has a lot of what the Leafs need. Minute crunching defensively sound D-man.

He was quite possibly their worst defencemen through 2 games and the team was almost definitely better off with Nate Schmidt in the line-up over him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: cabber24 on April 24, 2017, 09:21:21 AM
Karl Alzner would be high on my wish list. Not flashy but has a lot of what the Leafs need. Minute crunching defensively sound D-man.

He was quite possibly their worst defencemen through 2 games and the team was almost definitely better off with Nate Schmidt in the line-up over him.
His career does consist of 2 games... he plays close to 20 minutes most night and is usually quite dependable.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on April 24, 2017, 09:23:13 AM
I was definitely depending on Alzner to return to the series, but my hopes were misplaced.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on April 24, 2017, 09:28:59 AM
I know that this won't exactly be popular, and no I'm not basing it entirely on his performance in the playoffs, but I really think that trading Zaitsev for a quality left-winger might be something that the Leafs should look into this offseason. I don't think that we'll get as lucky as New Jersey did with Larsson for Hall, but if we can get anything close to that it's something we should at the very least explore. I'm also just not convinced that his value will ever be higher than it is right now.

I will add the one condition being obviously that we need somebody to replace his minutes on the right side for next season if we want to still compete. But since this is an armchair GM thread I'm going to armchair GM.

-Trade Zaitsev for 'mystery top-6 left winger for Matthews'
-Sign Shattenkirk and Brendan Smith
-Clear cap space where necessary, starting with Bozak. While his play has absolutely won me over, I think his value too is at the highest it will ever be
-If we end up losing Martin in the expansion draft or trading him, I'd bring back Boyle for the 4C
-*shudders* bring back Hunwick. If it's a cheap deal, the extra depth can't hurt. I just hope he doesn't get guaranteed minutes again

(Zaitsev)-Matthews-Marner
Leipsic-Nylander-Kapanen
Komarov-Kadri-Brown
Hyman-Boyle-Soshnikov
Leivo

Gardiner-Shattenkirk
Rielly-Smith
Marincin-Carrick
Hunwick

Andersen
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on April 24, 2017, 09:33:58 AM
His career does consist of 2 games... he plays close to 20 minutes most night and is usually quite dependable.

Honestly, you're right. But I don't think his play in these playoffs was anything very different from his play throughout the season. He was arguably their worst defenceman throughout the regular season too. Alzner probably used to be a very good defenceman, but his play has seriously dropped and it's not going to get any better.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on April 24, 2017, 09:51:59 AM
I know that this won't exactly be popular, and no I'm not basing it entirely on his performance in the playoffs, but I really think that trading Zaitsev for a quality left-winger might be something that the Leafs should look into this offseason. I don't think that we'll get as lucky as New Jersey did with Larsson for Hall, but if we can get anything close to that it's something we should at the very least explore. I'm also just not convinced that his value will ever be higher than it is right now.

I will add the one condition being obviously that we need somebody to replace his minutes on the right side for next season if we want to still compete. But since this is an armchair GM thread I'm going to armchair GM.

-Trade Zaitsev for 'mystery top-6 left winger for Matthews'
-Sign Shattenkirk and Brendan Smith
-Clear cap space where necessary, starting with Bozak. While his play has absolutely won me over, I think his value too is at the highest it will ever be
-If we end up losing Martin in the expansion draft or trading him, I'd bring back Boyle for the 4C
-*shudders* bring back Hunwick. If it's a cheap deal, the extra depth can't hurt. I just hope he doesn't get guaranteed minutes again

(Zaitsev)-Matthews-Marner
Leipsic-Nylander-Kapanen
Komarov-Kadri-Brown
Hyman-Boyle-Soshnikov
Leivo

Gardiner-Shattenkirk
Rielly-Smith
Marincin-Carrick
Hunwick

Andersen

I find your strange and crazy ideas intriguing.  Do you have a newsletter that I can sign up for? 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on April 24, 2017, 10:23:16 AM
-Trade Zaitsev for 'mystery top-6 left winger for Matthews'
-Sign Shattenkirk and Brendan Smith

I have two problems here. One, and I've said this before, I think scoring wingers are probably where you can best use the UFA market. Using a commodity like Zaitsev in search of one seems like a bad use of assets.

Two, I think you're almost certainly paying a heavy premium for defensemen on that market. I think Shattenkirk is better than we saw in this series but I think we have to be realistic about the fact that signing him probably means committing to pay him in the area of 7 million a year for his 34-36 seasons.

That said, ignoring defense for a second, I do agree that the one piece the Leafs could really use is a sort of Andrew Ladd scoring but also tough and good in battles winger to play with(hopefully) Matthews and Marner next year.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on April 24, 2017, 10:26:06 AM
On the blueline, I wonder if maybe Kulikov can be picked up on a cheaper, short-term deal. He's not the right-handed shot people crave, but he's decent with the puck and could be decent defensively in a 3rd pairing type role.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on April 24, 2017, 10:32:45 AM
I have two problems here. One, and I've said this before, I think scoring wingers are probably where you can best use the UFA market. Using a commodity like Zaitsev in search of one seems like a bad use of assets.

Two, I think you're almost certainly paying a heavy premium for defensemen on that market. I think Shattenkirk is better than we saw in this series but I think we have to be realistic about the fact that signing him probably means committing to pay him in the area of 7 million a year for his 34-36 seasons.

I think that my general feeling here is that if we're going to use the UFA market to improve our team we have to accept that whoever we get is almost certainly going to be overpaid. That's just how that market works. So I'd rather overpay for a top-3 defenceman than a top-6 forward.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on April 24, 2017, 10:38:53 AM
I think that my general feeling here is that if we're going to use the UFA market to improve our team we have to accept that whoever we get is almost certainly going to be overpaid. That's just how that market works. So I'd rather overpay for a top-3 defenceman than a top-6 forward.

That's sort of my point though. I think there's lots of evidence that you can use the Free Agent market to add a scoring winger without paying a huge price(Justin Williams, for instance) and there's not much to suggest the same with top 3 defensemen.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on April 24, 2017, 11:01:21 AM
That's sort of my point though. I think there's lots of evidence that you can use the Free Agent market to add a scoring winger without paying a huge price(Justin Williams, for instance) and there's not much to suggest the same with top 3 defensemen.

I guess it all depends on who that winger is. I mean last year we saw Backes, Ericsson, Lucic, Okposo, and Ladd all get $6mil with varying degrees of term. If those are the type of options available to us I think Shattenkirk at $7mil with term would probably be better for our team.

And just to expand a little on my original though: I only really brought this up because I felt that a) we could get a team to possibly considerably overpay for Zaitsev by exploiting the idea that right-handed defencemen are worth a ton more than scoring wings and b) we could replace/even improve on Zaitsev's contributions to the team through just the use of cap space. I do admit that being successful on both those counts is a bit pipe-dreamy.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on April 24, 2017, 12:02:00 PM
www.twitter.com/mirtle/status/856334161577226244

On the surface: pass.

Digging a bit deeper: pass.

Yeah, we don't have much NHL-ready depth at LW, so unless JvR is okay with 5M for 3 yrs (an insulting underpayment, really) as he's a sheltered complementary scorer (of which we have oodles), I'd rather play it out with our cheaper options from the Marlies grads like Leipsic, Rychel, Aaltonen, maybe Moore, or Timashov, and tack on a middle six LW from UFA (WINNIK?!).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: AvroArrow on April 24, 2017, 12:15:29 PM
In regards to CtB's idea, what about instead of a left winger, you target a team that's gonna lose a good defender to the X draft.  IE: send Zaitsev to Anaheim for Manson (probably not one for one, obviously) - Z is exempt.

The Wild is another option I brought up a while back.  Send Z+ for two of their dmen (since they have to expose 2).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: caveman on April 24, 2017, 06:06:12 PM
are Hunwick or Marincin under contract for next year ?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on April 24, 2017, 06:45:20 PM
are Hunwick or Marincin under contract for next year ?
Hunwick no, Marincin yes.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on April 24, 2017, 07:22:25 PM
are Hunwick or Marincin under contract for next year ?
Hunwick no, Marincin yes.

Marchenko's also under contract. It'd be nice if we could make that disappear.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on April 24, 2017, 08:45:24 PM
I guess it all depends on who that winger is. I mean last year we saw Backes, Ericsson, Lucic, Okposo, and Ladd all get $6mil with varying degrees of term. If those are the type of options available to us I think Shattenkirk at $7mil with term would probably be better for our team.

Well, yeah, it depends on who the winger is. Sure we saw all of those guys last year but we also saw Radim Vrbata go for 1 year/3.25 or Vanek get 1 year, 2.6 or Perron get 2 years, 3.75 aav.

Sure, none of those guys necessarily fit all our needs and they're not sure things but my point, again, is we have evidence that teams can go into the UFA market and find decent scoring wingers for reasonable prices and it happens just about every year. Let's keep in mind that with Matthews and Nylander and Marner driving things the Leafs don't need to hit homeruns, some solid doubles will do the trick.

As for Shattenkirk, let's wait and see if he does get 7 million.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Andy on April 25, 2017, 08:10:25 AM
JVR is an interesting player. He has great hands, can skate, goes to the front of the net and some of the dirtier areas, and is pretty much a lock for 25-30 goals. But there are stretches of games where he is downright invisible and his defensive game is about as strong as Ezequiel Carerra's. I don't know, at his current cap hit I'd say, sure, an extension wouldn't hurt. At the price he's probably going to get, well, kiss that mouthguard goodbye!
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: L K on April 25, 2017, 08:54:48 AM
JVR strikes me as the one player (short of breaking up the big three rookies) who gives the Leafs the shot of adding a defenseman via trade.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Andy on April 25, 2017, 09:05:43 AM
JVR strikes me as the one player (short of breaking up the big three rookies) who gives the Leafs the shot of adding a defenseman via trade.

Yea, I think that would be a good deal/avenue to explore. I'd use any combination of JVR, Brown, Carrick and/or Dermott and Neilson if that could bring in a legitimate top-pairing defenseman.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on April 25, 2017, 09:06:00 AM
Are there any young Matt Niskanen type defense in UFA this year? He was more the type of player I think the Leafs could conceivably make a pitch for, and kind of the characteristic opposite to Shattenkirk.

Brendan Smith is probably the closest there is:

Good skater, but basically no threat offensively. Could form a good 2nd pairing with Rielly to help get his shots against numbers down or with Carrick to get a stabilizing 3rd pairing.

Hear hear!

I realize that he isn't flashy and doesn't produce offense but I feel he could be a 'Bob Rouse'.  -He skates well -He is tough as nails.  -Doesn't get a lot of PIMs but is a top fighter when the situation calls for it. -knows Babcock and the systems already from Detroit.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on April 25, 2017, 09:28:40 AM
I guess it all depends on who that winger is. I mean last year we saw Backes, Ericsson, Lucic, Okposo, and Ladd all get $6mil with varying degrees of term. If those are the type of options available to us I think Shattenkirk at $7mil with term would probably be better for our team.

Well, yeah, it depends on who the winger is. Sure we saw all of those guys last year but we also saw Radim Vrbata go for 1 year/3.25 or Vanek get 1 year, 2.6 or Perron get 2 years, 3.75 aav.

Sure, none of those guys necessarily fit all our needs and they're not sure things but my point, again, is we have evidence that teams can go into the UFA market and find decent scoring wingers for reasonable prices and it happens just about every year. Let's keep in mind that with Matthews and Nylander and Marner driving things the Leafs don't need to hit homeruns, some solid doubles will do the trick.

As for Shattenkirk, let's wait and see if he does get 7 million.

I might be in the minority here but I don't think Shattenkirk is the style of player we need with Rielly and Gardiner already on the roster. 

I feel that paying B Smith and a Manson/Gudbranson a combined $7 MIL will be better for the Leafs in playoff hockey.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on April 25, 2017, 09:47:54 AM
I might be in the minority here but I don't think Shattenkirk is the style of player we need with Rielly and Gardiner already on the roster. 

I feel that paying B Smith and a Manson/Gudbranson a combined $7 MIL will be better for the Leafs in playoff hockey.

I don't know how familiar you are with Shattenkirk or if there's some recency bias going on here where you're basing a lot of this off of this one series but personally, while I'm not all that high on signing Shattenkirk myself, I don't think it's because of a duplication issue. In fact I think Shattenkirk gives them a weapon they don't really have right now and that's a real scoring threat from the point.

That said I don't think the alternatives you mention move the needle at all so I don't think either option represents a significant improvement in the Leafs situation going forward.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on April 25, 2017, 09:49:45 AM
I might be in the minority here but I don't think Shattenkirk is the style of player we need with Rielly and Gardiner already on the roster. 

I feel that paying B Smith and a Manson/Gudbranson a combined $7 MIL will be better for the Leafs in playoff hockey.

One of these is very much not like the others...

We should also be careful with lusting after defensemen who have good numbers in their play slot, and hoping they will have the same positive effect on the game at a higher TOI.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on April 25, 2017, 10:03:52 AM
I might be in the minority here but I don't think Shattenkirk is the style of player we need with Rielly and Gardiner already on the roster. 

I feel that paying B Smith and a Manson/Gudbranson a combined $7 MIL will be better for the Leafs in playoff hockey.

One of these is very much not like the others...

We should also be careful with lusting after defensemen who have good numbers in their play slot, and hoping they will have the same positive effect on the game at a higher TOI.

Did you see the bad stats of Gudbranson in Florida and continued in the few games in Vancouver?  I was hoping you wouldn't catch that...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on April 25, 2017, 10:30:05 AM
Did you see the bad stats of Gudbranson in Florida and continued in the few games in Vancouver?  I was hoping you wouldn't catch that...

I can't say he's ever had good numbers*, per se, but his playstyle is one that lends itself to difficulty in measuring value. He's still quite young though, so maybe it can turn around for him in the right context. We've already got a small handful of defensemen like him in the prospect pool (Desrocher, Mattinen, Middleton) and I'm not sure I even want any of those.

* his poor numbers have a lot to do with his deployment as well, as he is swamped with DZone starts. He's a baby Polak.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: AvroArrow on April 25, 2017, 01:07:56 PM
I also think we should try to pry Columbus' 2018 1st round pick... I still think they implode next year.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on April 25, 2017, 01:09:31 PM
I also think we should try to pry Columbus' 2018 1st round pick... I still think they implode next year.

We should be trying to get as many 2018 1sts as possible, but I'm thinking most teams will be holding on pretty tightly, relative to this season.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on April 25, 2017, 01:19:47 PM
I also think we should try to pry Columbus' 2018 1st round pick... I still think they implode next year.

Really? They've got solid goaltending and a really good young defense. Strikes me as a team with room to grow.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on April 25, 2017, 02:16:34 PM
I also think we should try to pry Columbus' 2018 1st round pick... I still think they implode next year.

Really? They've got solid goaltending and a really good young defense. Strikes me as a team with room to grow.

I don't see them imploding, either. I figure they'll settle back into the middle of the pack, but, if they stay relatively healthy, they're not likely to end up with a particularly high draft pick.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 01, 2017, 04:30:12 PM
Just in case there were still anyone longing for Alzner this off season:
Invalid Tweet IDwww.twitter.com/JeffVeillette/status/859092209982992386

His injury cost us the series.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on May 03, 2017, 10:40:12 AM
I wonder who would take JVR if half of his salary is retained?  could they get hanifin out of carolina?  I still think that trouba out of winnipeg is more of a pipe dream.

what if they packaged JVR at 2.1 million with their first round pick and kapanen/leipsic/dermott?

that looks like a pretty darn good package but I just don't know if there is anyone who would be worth that available.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 03, 2017, 10:53:25 AM

I don't really know that eating half of JVR's final year adds a ton to his value. Anyone trading for him is going to want to re-sign him and he's probably due for a significant raise.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on May 03, 2017, 11:25:42 AM

I don't really know that eating half of JVR's final year adds a ton to his value. Anyone trading for him is going to want to re-sign him and he's probably due for a significant raise.

maybe, but a team like carolina who have the cap space to resign him but money makes a difference might want savings this year and still be able to sign him long term.

also that could be a reason to include younger pieces in a package because it becomes a rental for JVR with longer term pieces in picks and prospects.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on May 03, 2017, 11:45:29 AM
I don't really know that eating half of JVR's final year adds a ton to his value. Anyone trading for him is going to want to re-sign him and he's probably due for a significant raise.

It might open up the market to teams that are particularly strapped for cap space in 17/18, but have room from 18/19 on - so, some quality assets that may not have been available could be in play. That could have some impact on negotiations, but, probably still doesn't add much to what other teams would be willing to give up for him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 03, 2017, 12:25:05 PM
maybe, but a team like carolina who have the cap space to resign him but money makes a difference might want savings this year and still be able to sign him long term.

Sure but then let's say JVR gets a deal in the neighbourhood of what Okposo got(7 years, 42 million). Is JVR at 8 years and 44.1 million considerably more valuable than JVR at 8 years and 46.2?

Busta is right that it may open some more teams up but you're still ultimately talking about a fairly minor difference.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 03, 2017, 04:42:13 PM
Unofficial (multiple choice) poll time:

[] Pony up for Shattenkirk (7M+)
[] Trade whatever (south of Nylander/Marner) for Josh Manson/Jonas Brodin
[] 2-3 years of Brendan Smith at 3M
[] 1-2 years of Cody Franson at 1.75-2M
[] Do nothing
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 03, 2017, 05:24:34 PM

I'm still going with option 6. Target teams looking to be competitive now and going after some of their Draft +1 or Draft +2 defensive prospects. Philly, Anaheim, Nashville...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 03, 2017, 06:22:42 PM

I'm still going with option 6. Target teams looking to be competitive now and going after some of their Draft +1 or Draft +2 defensive prospects. Philly, Anaheim, Nashville...

I'd be looking to do this every year we have a non-core expiring contract.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on May 03, 2017, 06:45:31 PM

I'm still going with option 6. Target teams looking to be competitive now and going after some of their Draft +1 or Draft +2 defensive prospects. Philly, Anaheim, Nashville...

100% this, JVR at 2.2 is a major asset for teams relatively tight to the cap and in win now mode.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Dappleganger on May 03, 2017, 07:23:52 PM
Unofficial (multiple choice) poll time:

[] Pony up for Shattenkirk (7M+)
[] Trade whatever (south of Nylander/Marner) for Josh Manson/Jonas Brodin
[] 2-3 years of Brendan Smith at 3M
[] 1-2 years of Cody Franson at 1.75-2M
[] Do nothing

Any interest in Brandon Montour? He's a real smooth skater. He's the guy I'd target instead of Manson. I guess you could say he's more of the same with Rielly and Gardiner but I like him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 03, 2017, 09:17:05 PM
Any interest in Brandon Montour? He's a real smooth skater. He's the guy I'd target instead of Manson. I guess you could say he's more of the same with Rielly and Gardiner but I like him.

He's exempt from the expansion draft, so it'd take more than I'd be interested in giving to acquire him at this time.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on May 03, 2017, 10:06:50 PM
He's exempt from the expansion draft, so it'd take more than I'd be interested in giving to acquire him at this time.

And, yet, you include giving up the farm for Josh Manson in your list of possible options...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 03, 2017, 10:10:11 PM
He's exempt from the expansion draft, so it'd take more than I'd be interested in giving to acquire him at this time.

And, yet, you include giving up the farm for Josh Manson in your list of possible options...

Seemed like a lower threshold to fulfillment. If Anaheim is stupid, I'd be down for Lindholm.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on May 03, 2017, 10:14:20 PM
Seemed like a lower threshold to fulfillment. If Anaheim is stupid, I'd be down for Lindholm.

Lindholm, I'm down with. Manson? That there is a prime overpayment option.

EDIT: I'm much more interested in exploring the rumours that Justin Faulk may be available...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 03, 2017, 10:55:06 PM
Seemed like a lower threshold to fulfillment. If Anaheim is stupid, I'd be down for Lindholm.

Lindholm, I'm down with. Manson? That there is a prime overpayment option.

EDIT: I'm much more interested in exploring the rumours that Justin Faulk may be available...

Hm, I am seeing chatter that Anaheim values Manson quite significantly (but they also do the same for Lindholm and Fowler, and obviously their ducklings in Theodore and Montour).

I looked up the HERO chart for Justin Falk accidentally.

Justin Faulk does sound intriguing... 25 years old, 37 pts the last two seasons in a row, 4.83M AAV until 2019-20 seems like it would hit a few sweet spots...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: sneakyray on May 04, 2017, 08:14:32 AM
offer sheet time?  there are some interesting rfas.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 08, 2017, 10:58:16 AM
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/5/7/15568890/toronto-maple-leafs-evgeni-dadonov-nhl-free-agent-target-khl-vadim-shipachev-evgeny-russia

Colour me intrigued to see a potential Dado - Papi - Nylander line.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on May 08, 2017, 11:41:12 AM
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/5/7/15568890/toronto-maple-leafs-evgeni-dadonov-nhl-free-agent-target-khl-vadim-shipachev-evgeny-russia

Colour me intrigued to see a potential Dado - Papi - Nylander line.

Just to be critical of your hypothetical line configuration here...wouldn't that line be lacking in defensive prowess?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 08, 2017, 12:00:52 PM
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/5/7/15568890/toronto-maple-leafs-evgeni-dadonov-nhl-free-agent-target-khl-vadim-shipachev-evgeny-russia

Colour me intrigued to see a potential Dado - Papi - Nylander line.

Just to be critical of your hypothetical line configuration here...wouldn't that line be lacking in defensive prowess?

Traditionally speaking, maybe. Matthews and Nylander are exceptional pickpockets. Dadonov, Nylander, and Matthews are all exceptional zone entry machines. Back them up with a cycle breaker on defense if you must, but I don't really see a problem with having the puck nearly all the time.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on May 08, 2017, 12:20:40 PM
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/5/7/15568890/toronto-maple-leafs-evgeni-dadonov-nhl-free-agent-target-khl-vadim-shipachev-evgeny-russia

Colour me intrigued to see a potential Dado - Papi - Nylander line.

Definitely going to come down to price on this one. If he's asking near what Shipachev got, I'd be inclined to pass. If he's willing to come over on a cheaper short-term "show me" type deal, I'd go for it.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 08, 2017, 12:36:18 PM
Definitely going to come down to price on this one. If he's asking near what Shipachev got, I'd be inclined to pass. If he's willing to come over on a cheaper short-term "show me" type deal, I'd go for it.

There's some wooing overhead here, but it should come lower than Shipachyov's (and Radulov's). a) winger, b) no expansion team markup, c) scored slightly fewer points than Shipachyov. Other teams in the running: VGK (who appear to have offered him a 2-year deal <$9M), MTL, his old KHL team (but they seem to really be jumping ship).

He'd get a pretty plum spot here if he picked us.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 08, 2017, 12:41:43 PM
The other KHL player we were in on, from earlier in the season: Vladimir Tkachyov (http://Vladimir Tkachyov).

Probably most well known for this: https://streamable.com/x4ps
Should come in handy seeing as how we were nearly goose eggs on the shootout.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on May 08, 2017, 01:24:19 PM
The other KHL player we were in on, from earlier in the season: Vladimir Tkachyov (http://Vladimir Tkachyov).

Probably most well known for this: https://streamable.com/x4ps
Should come in handy seeing as how we were nearly goose eggs on the shootout.

I believe he signed a KHL deal a few days ago.

EDIT: He did - 2 year deal.

http://www.letsgoleafs.com/2017/05/03/vladimir-tkachyov-re-signs-in-the-khl/
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 08, 2017, 01:41:30 PM
I believe he signed a KHL deal a few days ago.

EDIT: He did - 2 year deal.

http://www.letsgoleafs.com/2017/05/03/vladimir-tkachyov-re-signs-in-the-khl/

*shakes fist at Olympics garbage
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: AvroArrow on May 10, 2017, 03:47:05 PM
Looking at the current draft order, 5 teams stick out as potential targets to either pickup another 1st rounder or move up if certain players start to fall a bit:

Florida @ 10
LA @ 11
Jets @ 13
Tampa @ 14
Isles @ 15

All should be targeting playoffs and might be open to moving their picks or dropping down.

Trade bait includes:

JvR
Bozak (who I believe the Leafs will hold onto unless someone overpays for him)
Leivo
Leipsic
Carrick
Marincin
Picks
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on May 10, 2017, 05:31:23 PM
People keep talking about the big three rookies and their pay day. I wonder if all three take shorter term deals for mid tier money in the interests of remaining on a deeper, more competitive team.

All three could take 4-6 million on 2-4 year deals and take Toews and Kane money on their third deals?

Probably a pipe dream, we shall see.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 10, 2017, 06:18:28 PM
People keep talking about the big three rookies and their pay day. I wonder if all three take shorter term deals for mid tier money in the interests of remaining on a deeper, more competitive team.

All three could take 4-6 million on 2-4 year deals and take Toews and Kane money on their third deals?

Probably a pipe dream, we shall see.

Paying 3 players market rate second contracts isn't really an impediment to a team being competitive. In fact, if you look at what Kane/Toews got on their second deals the length of keeping them signed at those relatively low rates(which still would be a higher % of the cap than the numbers you're talking about) was probably was a major reason why Chicago was able to build the team they did.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on May 10, 2017, 06:38:04 PM
People keep talking about the big three rookies and their pay day. I wonder if all three take shorter term deals for mid tier money in the interests of remaining on a deeper, more competitive team.

All three could take 4-6 million on 2-4 year deals and take Toews and Kane money on their third deals?

Probably a pipe dream, we shall see.

Paying 3 players market rate second contracts isn't really an impediment to a team being competitive. In fact, if you look at what Kane/Toews got on their second deals the length of keeping them signed at those relatively low rates(which still would be a higher % of the cap than the numbers you're talking about) was probably was a major reason why Chicago was able to build the team they did.

If Matthews, Marner and Nylander's next deals pay them a combined 15 million as opposed to say 22.5-25, it would allow the team to be more competitive for longer, no?

I'm probably missing what you're saying. Sorry.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 10, 2017, 07:19:19 PM
If Matthews, Marner and Nylander's next deals pay them a combined 15 million as opposed to say 22.5-25, it would allow the team to be more competitive for longer, no?

I'm probably missing what you're saying. Sorry.

Well, you said they would be 2-4 year deals after which they'd get Kane/Toews money on their third deals(I'm assuming this doesn't mean Kane/Toews 2nd deal money).

So assuming their third deals pay them an average of 8.5 each is this total combined cap hit:

Years 1-3: 15
Years 4-6: 25.5

Really make the team more long term competitive than

Years 1-6: 22.5

It seems to me like the only savings you're talking about would be in the early years, when the team doesn't really need to save it, and in years 7+ but even then the long term savings only figure to be the difference of whatever you figure the difference would be between combined cap hit of the third deals they sign in each scenario.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on May 10, 2017, 08:34:05 PM
If Matthews, Marner and Nylander's next deals pay them a combined 15 million as opposed to say 22.5-25, it would allow the team to be more competitive for longer, no?

I'm probably missing what you're saying. Sorry.

Well, you said they would be 2-4 year deals after which they'd get Kane/Toews money on their third deals(I'm assuming this doesn't mean Kane/Toews 2nd deal money).

So assuming their third deals pay them an average of 8.5 each is this total combined cap hit:

Years 1-3: 15
Years 4-6: 25.5

Really make the team more long term competitive than

Years 1-6: 22.5

It seems to me like the only savings you're talking about would be in the early years, when the team doesn't really need to save it, and in years 7+ but even then the long term savings only figure to be the difference of whatever you figure the difference would be between combined cap hit of the third deals they sign in each scenario.

This is where we disagree I guess, from next season until the expiry of Marner and Matthews entry level deal is basically the "first" window the team has to really challenge. If the Leafs can supplement the roster between now and then and then save approximately 10 million combined on their second deals, they will have a longer window with which to really load up the team and try to win the cup.

I guess my overall point being that as soon as the Leafs get to the point where the trio is making $25million they are probably going to have depth concerns at the bottom of the lineup. They'd need to fill out significant portions of the lineup with low-cost players at that point and that's something that provides a little less certainty for a team looking to compete.

I don't think the Leafs are going to sell the farm, but I definitely think we've moved into the next stage of the rebuild and management will be looking make hay while they have three budding superstars on ELC's.

I'm sure you'll have a very well thought out counter point Nik, I'm mostly parroting the likes of @Mirtle(much less eloquently) here when it comes to the overall roster makeup projections going forward.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 10, 2017, 08:53:59 PM

I don't really have a counter-argument because I guess I'm just not getting your point. It seems like you're saying that somehow structuring deals so that the financial advantage the team gets is as soon as possible(the first few years after the Marner/Matthews ELC deals are up) somehow provides a longer term benefit than deals where the financial savings would be down the road. Aren't they better served long term to pay less in the long term rather than the short?

Also if you get the three of them signed to second deals where they have a combined cap hit of 21 million or so I guess I don't see that as automatically resulting in depth problems. Especially considering they don't have any particularly expensive pieces anywhere else.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on May 10, 2017, 09:24:35 PM

I don't really have a counter-argument because I guess I'm just not getting your point. It seems like you're saying that somehow structuring deals so that the financial advantage the team gets is as soon as possible(the first few years after the Marner/Matthews ELC deals are up) somehow provides a longer term benefit than deals where the financial savings would be down the road. Aren't they better served long term to pay less in the long term rather than the short?

Also if you get the three of them signed to second deals where they have a combined cap hit of 21 million or so I guess I don't see that as automatically resulting in depth problems. Especially considering they don't have any particularly expensive pieces anywhere else.

I think they'll be dynamic offensively enough that a number of guys will be looking for around the $4million mark after their ELC's and over time that's too much to be paying depth parts of your lineup, they'll be forced to cut parts off via trade and hope that what's coming in the pipeline will be able to replicate the production, as Chicago and L.A. discovered this inevitably over time catches up with you and it means you're surrounding you stars with guys like Richard Panik instead of Brandon Saad.

So basically, the less you pay the triplets in years 1-5/6, the deeper the rest of your lineup can be in terms of real talent you've developed and potentially some supplemental impactful free agent/trade acquisitions.

The triplets are going to get paid, the lower you keep their salary, the better the rest of your lineup can be.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 10, 2017, 09:54:02 PM
I think they'll be dynamic offensively enough that a number of guys will be looking for around the $4million mark after their ELC's and over time that's too much to be paying depth parts of your lineup, they'll be forced to cut parts off via trade and hope that what's coming in the pipeline will be able to replicate the production, as Chicago and L.A. discovered this inevitably over time catches up with you and it means you're surrounding you stars with guys like Richard Panik instead of Brandon Saad.

So basically, the less you pay the triplets in years 1-5/6, the deeper the rest of your lineup can be in terms of real talent you've developed and potentially some supplemental impactful free agent/trade acquisitions.

The triplets are going to get paid, the lower you keep their salary, the better the rest of your lineup can be.

Right, I get the fundamental concept of "the less you pay your stars, the more money you have for depth". Where you're losing me is the idea that paying them less in years 1-3 post-ELCs but more in years 4-6 post-ELCs is better in the long term than, say, a 6 year second contract that spreads that money out.

I mean, let's get specific here. The first three years post-ELC for Marner and Matthews will be 19-20, 20-21 and 21-22. What I'm saying is that they need the cap savings the least in those years because those are also the years where they already have Rielly, Kadri and Andersen locked up at pretty reasonable rates. Under what I think you're proposing in the summer of '22 the Leafs would have to re-sign Kadri and Rielly and start paying Marner and Matthews 3rd contract money.

So like I said, I get why paying the three of them less between 2019-2022 could be beneficial if the team wants to build for the immediate future with UFA signings but long-term it seems you're asking for a ton of cap trouble all at once after they all hit the five or six year mark. 

Right? I mean say what you will about Chicago or LA now but they are still sort of the gold standard for team building and their cap problems didn't really start until Kane, Toews and Kopitar started getting their big 3rd contract money. It seems like you're arguing for Marner/Matthews/Nylander to get to their third contracts sooner rather than later.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 10, 2017, 11:29:07 PM

So obviously we'll have to wait and see how things shake out but if there's sort of a vague plan to move JVR this year, I'd definitely explore TJ Oshie or Justin Williams as short term replacements who could be open to team friendly deals.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on May 11, 2017, 08:05:10 AM

So obviously we'll have to wait and see how things shake out but if there's sort of a vague plan to move JVR this year, I'd definitely explore TJ Oshie or Justin Williams as short term replacements who could be open to team friendly deals.

I can't see Oshie being open to a team friendly deal. He's going to cash in hard this offseason. 30 year old who just had a career year (playing with two of the best players on the planet). He's definitely getting a contract that will be quickly regretted by the team who signs it.

Williams I would look into yeah. Although as a righty/right-winger Babcock would need to be open to moving Nylander to the left side or centre to make room.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on May 16, 2017, 04:13:48 PM
Mirtle had a good article in TheAthletic suggesting that the Leafs ought to use some of their ~$15m in cap space to do something short term and big at forward -- since pickings on D are so slim. Thorton, Marleau, or Williams on a 2-3 year deal would be a nice bridge to moving out Bozak and JvR.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: AvroArrow on May 16, 2017, 06:02:30 PM
Marleau - Thornton - Marner

Could be a pretty good line, assuming Marleau and Thornton still have gas in the tank.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on May 16, 2017, 07:22:59 PM
Marleau - Thornton - Marner

Could be a pretty good line, assuming Marleau and Thornton still have gas in the tank.

Marner could circle the rink twice before Thornton got out of the defensive zone.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: AvroArrow on May 16, 2017, 07:36:14 PM
Marleau - Thornton - Marner

Could be a pretty good line, assuming Marleau and Thornton still have gas in the tank.

Marner could circle the rink twice before Thornton got out of the defensive zone.

Is he actually that bad now, or is it just exaggeration for comedic effect?
(I know he was never fast, but he wasn't ever Jason Allison slow either)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on May 16, 2017, 08:13:55 PM
Is he actually that bad now, or is it just exaggeration for comedic effect?
(I know he was never fast, but he wasn't ever Jason Allison slow either)

Age and injuries have slowed him down pretty seriously. He'll be coming back from major knee surgery, too.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on May 18, 2017, 10:50:25 AM
Rumours are swirling that Nino Niederreiter might be available for trade because of salary cap concerns in Minny. He's a RFA on July 1st. I think that's exactly the type of trade the Leafs should be looking to make by dangling a guy like Kapanen. Like Columbus picking up Brandon Saad. The two players are almost eerily comparable too. If we could somehow figure out a way to get Dumba in there too even better.

This was a pretty good look at Nino though for those who haven't followed him: https://flamesnation.ca/2017/05/17/the-flames-should-be-calling-about-nino-niederreiter/
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on May 18, 2017, 11:13:12 AM
Size, speed, skill, and a pain in the butt to play against? Yeah, definitely a guy the Leafs should be looking at. Ideally, without having to dangle Kapanen, obviously.

Also, man, have Minnesota ever put themselves into a rough spot for the expansion draft. Those mega-term deals and NMCs are killing them.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 18, 2017, 11:16:37 AM

I'm happy to be the one to say it at the risk of repeating myself but unless you have concrete plans to move JVR and such for help on the blueline I'd really question moving any of the team's better assets for wingers.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 18, 2017, 01:03:30 PM
Nino was one of my targets a couple years ago as a potential Kessel-trade piece, and he has since blossomed into a key cog. We're pretty flush with wingers now (parking the shooting righties on the left), so I think the window has closed. I can see Arizona making a pretty good pitch for his services, as they have a lot to work with in the prospect pool.

If we're getting a winger, I'd prefer a Grabner-esque deal. A useful overpaid LW vet for a handful of C-prospects.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on May 20, 2017, 10:48:24 AM
Dallas has said that they will move the 3rd overall pick for help now.  Leafs should be interested in that.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 20, 2017, 11:15:58 AM
Dallas has said that they will move the 3rd overall pick for help now.  Leafs should be interested in that.

Problem there is Dallas' biggest needs by far are in net and on the blueline.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on May 20, 2017, 11:19:01 AM
Dallas has said that they will move the 3rd overall pick for help now.  Leafs should be interested in that.

Problem there is Dallas' biggest needs by far are in net and on the blueline.

They're in pretty good shape cap-wise, as long as they get rid of a goalie:  https://capfriendly.com/teams/stars
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on May 20, 2017, 11:23:01 AM
I'd give them our first, take one of their problem goalies and give them JVR if you can get #3 and a prospect.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 20, 2017, 11:26:21 AM
Sounds like Trouba would be an obvious fit for Dallas to target, and Winnipeg could probably pick up a goalie too.

Edit: eh, maybe they'd prefer a lefty.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 20, 2017, 11:31:05 AM
Dallas has said that they will move the 3rd overall pick for help now.  Leafs should be interested in that.

Problem there is Dallas' biggest needs by far are in net and on the blueline.

Although apparently I missed that they've signed Ben Bishop so just the blueline then.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: wnc096 on May 20, 2017, 11:41:35 AM
Dallas has said that they will move the 3rd overall pick for help now.  Leafs should be interested in that.

Dallas needs D...the leafs have no D.  Doesn't seem like a fit. 
Besides, the leafs don't need to move all the way up to 3 to get a decent defenseman
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 20, 2017, 12:20:08 PM
But if we get the third, we can still parlay it into further options: pull off a three-way deal, or generate multiple picks in the top 40, and shave off contracts as sweeteners with each transaction.

Per Dubas' thinly veiled answer to Scott Wheeler's question at the Marlies locker clean out, Leafs management is expecting to wheel and deal and bodies will be flying.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 20, 2017, 12:25:35 PM
Dallas has said that they will move the 3rd overall pick for help now.  Leafs should be interested in that.

Problem there is Dallas' biggest needs by far are in net and on the blueline.

Although apparently I missed that they've signed Ben Bishop so just the blueline then.

Nill indicated that Bishop was not even his first choice, let alone giving a 30+ goalie 6 years at that AAV. His window was forced open and now he has to dump more assets into making it count.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 20, 2017, 12:55:37 PM
Nill indicated that Bishop was not even his first choice, let alone giving a 30+ goalie 6 years at that AAV. His window was forced open and now he has to dump more assets into making it count.

Maybe. The cynic in me though thinks that with a pretty clear cut top 2 there may be more of a drop off at #3 than we think.

It's definitely an interesting avenue to explore but I think sort of thing might be predicated on there being someone who is going to really value a #3 pick that may not contribute next year along the lines of Dubois last year.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on May 20, 2017, 05:14:58 PM
Nill indicated that Bishop was not even his first choice, let alone giving a 30+ goalie 6 years at that AAV. His window was forced open and now he has to dump more assets into making it count.

Maybe. The cynic in me though thinks that with a pretty clear cut top 2 there may be more of a drop off at #3 than we think.

It's definitely an interesting avenue to explore but I think sort of thing might be predicated on there being someone who is going to really value a #3 pick that may not contribute next year along the lines of Dubois last year.

Imagine the Leafs got Liljegren and Brannstrom.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 20, 2017, 06:48:54 PM
Imagine the Leafs got Liljegren and Brannstrom.

To some extent that's my point. That'd obviously be good for the prospect base but Liljegren has fallen quite a bit in some eyes. On Marek's draft rankings he's at #7 and McKenzie has him at #12. Heiskanen is now the top ranked defenseman it seems.

So you can build the prospect pool but the idea that you're going to be able to draft defensemen who'll make an immediate impact seems unlikely.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 20, 2017, 10:46:44 PM
Some of Liljegren's drop is due to his bout with mono and injury. Less information about his development path as a result.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 20, 2017, 11:00:54 PM
Maybe. The cynic in me though thinks that with a pretty clear cut top 2 there may be more of a drop off at #3 than we think.

It's definitely an interesting avenue to explore but I think sort of thing might be predicated on there being someone who is going to really value a #3 pick that may not contribute next year along the lines of Dubois last year.

I definitely agree this was a huge factor in the pick's availability. Dallas also has the Ducks' 1st. Outside the first 2, all the others are at least D+2 to make their jumps if at all. A team like Minnesota might make a play for it though, with their cap and expansion issues and being bereft of picks until round 3.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on May 22, 2017, 11:31:14 AM
Imagine the Leafs got Liljegren and Brannstrom.

To some extent that's my point. That'd obviously be good for the prospect base but Liljegren has fallen quite a bit in some eyes. On Marek's draft rankings he's at #7 and McKenzie has him at #12. Heiskanen is now the top ranked defenseman it seems.

So you can build the prospect pool but the idea that you're going to be able to draft defensemen who'll make an immediate impact seems unlikely.

Well drafting a defenseman who was going to make an immediate impact was probably unlikely anyway given the quality of the draft.  At that point it's probably better to draft a lot of prospects so that hopefully in a couple of years you have someone who looks like a #1 d-man. 

The Leafs are in a weird spot.  They are probably a little better off than when the Islanders got Tavares, but at the same time they are a bit incomplete. 

Letang was drafted the same year as Crosby.  It took him longer to get to the NHL, and even then he was good, but not the impact defensemen he is today.  Although the Pens also had Gonchar.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: AvroArrow on May 22, 2017, 07:53:19 PM
I'm warming up to the idea of picking up Vatanen from Anaheim - assuming, as always, that the price make sense.

Of course, there are other guys I'd prefer, but I think Vatanen is much more realistic to actually acquire.

We'd have no true #1 but we would have 4 top 4 guys to go along with Borgman, Rosen, and Dermott.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on May 28, 2017, 02:28:52 PM
Elliotte Friedman had some interesting thoughts on the potential McDavid extension, it might be worth keeping in mind regarding our triplets too.

Quote
We’ve all assumed the Oilers will give their captain eight years at eleventy-billion dollars if necessary, but allow me to paint an alternate scenario. What if McDavid opts for the Sidney Crosby-Patrick Kane-Evgeni Malkin-Steven Stamkos-Jonathan Toews route? All five of those players took five-year terms on their second contracts, opening the door for another massive deal around age 25-27. Crosby’s second contract totalled $43.5 million, and his third is $104.4 million. (That one is 12 years, which can’t be done now. The others are eight, which does fit.) Malkin also did $43.5, then $76 million. Kane and Toews copied each other, from $31.5 million to $84 million. Stamkos went from $37.5 million to $68 million. We’ll see what McDavid wants, but don’t be shocked if this is the template.



Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on May 28, 2017, 02:41:25 PM
Elliotte Friedman had some interesting thoughts on the potential McDavid extension, it might be worth keeping in mind regarding our triplets too.

Quote
We’ve all assumed the Oilers will give their captain eight years at eleventy-billion dollars if necessary, but allow me to paint an alternate scenario. What if McDavid opts for the Sidney Crosby-Patrick Kane-Evgeni Malkin-Steven Stamkos-Jonathan Toews route? All five of those players took five-year terms on their second contracts, opening the door for another massive deal around age 25-27. Crosby’s second contract totalled $43.5 million, and his third is $104.4 million. (That one is 12 years, which can’t be done now. The others are eight, which does fit.) Malkin also did $43.5, then $76 million. Kane and Toews copied each other, from $31.5 million to $84 million. Stamkos went from $37.5 million to $68 million. We’ll see what McDavid wants, but don’t be shocked if this is the template.

My post on it seems to have been swallowed up but there's also some good stuff in this week's 30 thoughts columns about the potential of the Leafs making a trade with Anaheim for a defenseman. Brown is specifically mentioned as potentially being a piece going the way.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 28, 2017, 02:54:38 PM
Both Vatanen and Lindholm are recovering from labrum surgery, which might impact valuation. Lindholm is a non-starter, but Vatanen is probably the loosest Duck if a team were to shake that tree.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on May 29, 2017, 01:25:39 PM
My post on it seems to have been swallowed up but there's also some good stuff in this week's 30 thoughts columns about the potential of the Leafs making a trade with Anaheim for a defenseman. Brown is specifically mentioned as potentially being a piece going the way.

Poile had an interesting quote yesterday or the day before when someone brought up Nashville's past of making pretty big hockey trades:

"Sometimes we fall in love with our players. We probably overrate or overestimate our players. I really try with myself and our staff to be as honest as we can about the value of our players."

I think that this is something that the Leafs management (plus Babcock in particular) is going to have to overcome too.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on May 29, 2017, 11:31:17 PM
My post on it seems to have been swallowed up but there's also some good stuff in this week's 30 thoughts columns about the potential of the Leafs making a trade with Anaheim for a defenseman. Brown is specifically mentioned as potentially being a piece going the way.

Poile had an interesting quote yesterday or the day before when someone brought up Nashville's past of making pretty big hockey trades:

"Sometimes we fall in love with our players. We probably overrate or overestimate our players. I really try with myself and our staff to be as honest as we can about the value of our players."

I think that this is something that the Leafs management (plus Babcock in particular) is going to have to overcome too.

This is my biggest worry about what Mirtle's been reporting re: Dubas and the analytics team being side-lined by Lou, Babcock, and Hunter. Babcock came into Toronto with the reputation for holding onto his favorites, and the last year's shown that's pretty well deserved rep. When Dubas had Shanahan's ear, I had no concerns that the Leafs would be smartly turning over the non-core, but now...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 30, 2017, 11:02:36 PM
Mirtle: Should the Maple Leafs give up some of the future to bolster their blueline?
https://theathletic.com/57785/2017/05/03/mirtle-should-the-maple-leafs-give-up-some-of-the-future-to-bolster-their-blueline/

Mirtle's talking obvious things.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on May 30, 2017, 11:20:32 PM
I wonder if Tyler Myers might be the best realistic option available to us. 27 years old. Right-handed. 6'8", 229 lbs. He had an injury-riddled season this year appearing in just 11 games. He's also never really been the healthiest of players, missing about 10 games per season the few seasons prior to this one. He's got 2 years left on his contract with a $5.5mil cap hit. The actual salary paid in those 2 years is only $3.5mil and $3mil (you might remember he received an insane $10mil signing bonus in the 1st year of his deal). His advanced stats aren't exactly the greatest but they improved after he left Buffalo and a guy like Gardiner could help his shot suppression numbers.

Winnipeg's in a bit of a bind as they need to protect Buff, Trouba, and Enstrom (NMC). They could go the 8 skaters route but I don't think that's preferred by them. Moving Myers would also probably appease Trouba a bit as that frees up the right side for him and maybe that helps get him to sign a long-term contract extension. I would imagine that with Myers' injury history, cap hit, and the impending expansion draft, his trade value wouldn't exactly be very high right now.

So, all in all, he's definitely not the greatest option. But, if healthy, he could be a good stop-gap measure for a couple of years. The fact that his contract expires at the same time as Mathews and Marner is a pretty big bonus too.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 31, 2017, 09:32:09 AM
Yeah, Myers might be a good buy low opportunity. Trouba is a better target if both requires a stupid spend (thanks, Chevy).

(http://i.imgur.com/IEJUS50.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/NvdLZK5.png)

I wouldn't be surprised if Arizona makes a pitch for Myers. High cap hit with lower salary is their jam.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on May 31, 2017, 10:04:11 AM
Trouba would be my absolute #1 target to fill that void, but I'm really not sure Winnipeg trades him and if they do I don't think we really have the assets they'll be looking to acquire if they do.

Some of the other names on the potential D list like Tanev and Vatanen are good players for sure and they could obviously help our team, but I think that they're closer to being #4 defenceman than they are #2 and I feel like they'll be valued more like #2 defenceman in trade talks. So I'm wary about that.

Myers could probably give us about the same on-ice value as those guys for a couple of years while we still get to keep our bigger trade chips available for a more long-term solution to that hole.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 31, 2017, 10:11:46 AM
Trouba would be my absolute #1 target to fill that void, but I'm really not sure Winnipeg trades him and if they do I don't think we really have the assets they'll be looking to acquire if they do.

Some of the other names on the potential D list like Tanev and Vatanen are good players for sure and they could obviously help our team, but I think that they're closer to being #4 defenceman than they are #2 and I feel like they'll be valued more like #2 defenceman in trade talks. So I'm wary about that.

Myers could probably give us about the same on-ice value as those guys for a couple of years while we still get to keep our bigger trade chips available for a more long-term solution to that hole.

How about Justin Faulk, as busta (and Mirtle) mentioned upthread?
I think Carolina is looking for a kingly sum there as well, but we've got more toys in the forward department that they'd be interested in. They're about to turn the corner and they've got their defense pairing of the future right now in Slavin and Pesce. If they keep Faulk, then Hanafin, while not Expansion eligible, is another piece they'd be open to moving for more consistent scoring *cough* JvR *cough*.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on May 31, 2017, 10:12:40 AM
Off-topic for a second, I wonder if Arizona goes hard after Hossa, Chicago is in a bit of a bind and Hossa only makes $1 million this year despite a 5.5ish cap hit.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bullfrog on May 31, 2017, 10:16:59 AM
Making a move for a young D will be tricky. I know the point of acquiring these young assets is so we can move them for the right pieces, but damn it, I like my new shiny toys and I don't want to share.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on May 31, 2017, 10:20:39 AM
How about Justin Faulk, as busta (and Mirtle) mentioned upthread?

I think Carolina is looking for a kingly sum there as well, but we've got more toys in the forward department that they'd be interested in. They're about to turn the corner and they've got their defense pairing of the future right now in Slavin and Pesce. If they keep Faulk, then Hanafin, while not Expansion eligible, is another piece they'd be open to moving for more consistent scoring *cough* JvR *cough*.

I'd put Faulk right behind Trouba. Those 2, off the top of my head, are probably the only legit top-pairing defenceman "rumoured" to be available. I just didn't include Faulk because despite all the speculation I really can't understand why Carolina would move him.

I could see them moving Hanifin in a 'Jones for Johansen' type of trade. There's actually a lot of similarities between those two situations. Only problem is JVR isn't Johansen.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: louisstamos on May 31, 2017, 10:29:09 AM
I still think Minnesota is going to move one of their D this summer, but would probably want picks or protected assets.  But if either Dumba or Spurgeon are available, I would definitely be up for grabbing one of them.  Dumba more so because of age...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 31, 2017, 10:30:48 AM
How about Justin Faulk, as busta (and Mirtle) mentioned upthread?

I think Carolina is looking for a kingly sum there as well, but we've got more toys in the forward department that they'd be interested in. They're about to turn the corner and they've got their defense pairing of the future right now in Slavin and Pesce. If they keep Faulk, then Hanafin, while not Expansion eligible, is another piece they'd be open to moving for more consistent scoring *cough* JvR *cough*.

I'd put Faulk right behind Trouba. Those 2, off the top of my head, are probably the only legit top-pairing defenceman "rumoured" to be available. I just didn't include Faulk because despite all the speculation I really can't understand why Carolina would move him.

I could see them moving Hanifin in a 'Jones for Johansen' type of trade. There's actually a lot of similarities between those two situations. Only problem is JVR isn't Johansen.

And they have a competent analytics person, so we can't reverse Hall-Larsson them either. I also don't think Hanifin is Jones either.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on May 31, 2017, 10:39:04 AM
I also don't think Hanifin is Jones either.

Their first 2 seasons were both eerily similar:

Jones, drafted 4th overall. First 2 seasons: 52 points in 159 games. 51.8 CF%, 44.7 GF%
Hanifin, drafted 5th overall. First 2 seasons: 51 points in 160 games. 50.4 CF%, 45.5 GF%

I don't think Jones really broke out until his 4th season (this year). Jones does have the size and handedness advantage though so that would bump his value a little higher. Still think Hanifin could bring someone closer in value to Marner than JVR. And we're obviously not trading them Marner.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: AvroArrow on May 31, 2017, 10:45:28 AM
I'm a little weary of Myers - hasn't he had some injury troubles lately?

Another possibility might be Demers?  Seems Florida will have issues at expansion draft and he might be the odd man out.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 31, 2017, 10:47:38 AM
I also don't think Hanifin is Jones either.

Their first 2 seasons were both eerily similar:

Jones, drafted 4th overall. First 2 seasons: 52 points in 159 games. 51.8 CF%, 44.7 GF%
Hanifin, drafted 5th overall. First 2 seasons: 51 points in 160 games. 50.4 CF%, 45.5 GF%

I don't think Jones really broke out until his 4th season (this year). Jones does have the size and handedness advantage though so that would bump his value a little higher. Still think Hanifin could bring someone closer in value to Marner than JVR. And we're obviously not trading them Marner.

I didn't realize their raw numbers were so similar.
The HERO Chart comparison shows Jones is better rounded and a solid play driver that has gone to new heights with Werenski. Hanifin is a strong primary point producer on sheltered minutes, but struggles to drive play. Even if he's available to us, at the going rate, it'd probably be better to get someone in the prime of his curve so we can backfill developing defensemen.

Best bet is probably Shattenkirk from an asset management point of view, even if he's not the perfect option (still drives play).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on May 31, 2017, 10:52:45 AM
Another possibility might be Demers?  Seems Florida will have issues at expansion draft and he might be the odd man out.

Do they have a crunch? Ekblad, Demers, and Yandle (NMC)? Who else do they not want to lose?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: princedpw on May 31, 2017, 02:10:03 PM
Off-topic for a second, I wonder if Arizona goes hard after Hossa, Chicago is in a bit of a bind and Hossa only makes $1 million this year despite a 5.5ish cap hit.

Does Hossa have a no-trade clause?  If he does, not sure why he'd agree to go to Arizona ...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: AvroArrow on May 31, 2017, 02:57:02 PM
Another possibility might be Demers?  Seems Florida will have issues at expansion draft and he might be the odd man out.

Do they have a crunch? Ekblad, Demers, and Yandle (NMC)? Who else do they not want to lose?

Petrovic - though, it remains to be seen who they value more, they might prefer him due to age, cost, and upside.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on June 01, 2017, 08:35:16 AM
Off-topic for a second, I wonder if Arizona goes hard after Hossa, Chicago is in a bit of a bind and Hossa only makes $1 million this year despite a 5.5ish cap hit.

Does Hossa have a no-trade clause?  If he does, not sure why he'd agree to go to Arizona ...
You have never been to AZ, best place on the planet to live IMHO
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 01, 2017, 08:57:16 AM
You have never been to AZ, best place on the planet to live IMHO

While I'm sure it's a lovely place to live, I'm pretty sure the question has more to do with the team than the location.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 01, 2017, 09:52:42 AM
You have never been to AZ, best place on the planet to live IMHO

While I'm sure it's a lovely place to live, I'm pretty sure the question has more to do with the team than the location.

Although you never know, there may be a confluence of the two. He may want to spend his last years playing low pressure hockey and sampling the finest methamphetamine America has to offer.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: RedLeaf on June 01, 2017, 02:13:29 PM
You have never been to AZ, best place on the planet to live IMHO

While I'm sure it's a lovely place to live, I'm pretty sure the question has more to do with the team than the location.

Although you never know, there may be a confluence of the two. He may want to spend his last years playing low pressure hockey and sampling the finest methamphetamine America has to offer.

mmmmmm....methamphetamine....Arizona....
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: princedpw on June 01, 2017, 02:42:16 PM
Off-topic for a second, I wonder if Arizona goes hard after Hossa, Chicago is in a bit of a bind and Hossa only makes $1 million this year despite a 5.5ish cap hit.

Does Hossa have a no-trade clause?  If he does, not sure why he'd agree to go to Arizona ...
You have never been to AZ, best place on the planet to live IMHO

I have been to Arizona to see the grand canyon 😉. It seems like a nice place to visit.  For a variety of reasons, I can be sure it isnt a place I'd like to live but I can appreciate the fact there can be differences of opinion.   The yotes just seem like the opposite of Hossa's current situation (living in a big metropolitan city and playing on a competitive team) and Ive never seen him indicate he dislikes those things and wants a change. Hence the yotes seem like an unlikely destination.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 01, 2017, 10:50:19 PM
https://theathletic.com/64103/2017/06/01/dellow-maple-leafs-should-table-huge-offer-sheet-for-blues-defenceman-colton-parayko/

Hmm...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 02, 2017, 09:05:33 AM
https://theathletic.com/64103/2017/06/01/dellow-maple-leafs-should-table-huge-offer-sheet-for-blues-defenceman-colton-parayko/

Hmm...

I was about to post this.  He suggests the Leafs should go after this guy and give up 4 first round draft picks.  This sounds like a recipe for disaster.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: princedpw on June 02, 2017, 11:36:25 AM
https://theathletic.com/64103/2017/06/01/dellow-maple-leafs-should-table-huge-offer-sheet-for-blues-defenceman-colton-parayko/

Hmm...

I was about to post this.  He suggests the Leafs should go after this guy and give up 4 first round draft picks.  This sounds like a recipe for disaster.

When is the last time a team used an offer sheet and got the player?  A simple trade seems like a more plausible route (a la Kessel).

Suggestions concerning offer sheets seem a lot like suggestions that NHL teams make 3-way trades.  They never happen (at least not to my memory, but I'm happy to hear of counter-examples!)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: princedpw on June 02, 2017, 11:37:27 AM
https://theathletic.com/64103/2017/06/01/dellow-maple-leafs-should-table-huge-offer-sheet-for-blues-defenceman-colton-parayko/

Hmm...

I was about to post this.  He suggests the Leafs should go after this guy and give up 4 first round draft picks.  This sounds like a recipe for disaster.

I'm not a subscriber -- What contract does he suggest?

(I also don't know this guy ... he must be good, I guess ...)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 02, 2017, 11:37:37 AM
https://theleafsnation.com/2017/06/02/the-maple-leafs-should-weaponize-offer-sheets-this-summer/

Here's the aforementioned article being discussed on TLN.

I'm generally wary of offer sheets, but our window where one makes sense is currently open and will close within two years. This is one area where MLSE has a huge advantage over most of the field, in that they can splash actual cash without sweating it.

Then there's this fun point:
Quote
The obvious drawback here? Making other General Managers angry and not want to make deals with you afterwards. At the same time, though, Lamoriello is heading to the last year of his deal with many expecting him to step down afterward, so he doesn’t have a lot of need to maintain clout for much longer, not to mention that Toronto doesn’t exactly have a lot of outside acquisition left to do before they hit the maintenance stage.

[...]

It’s a bit sociopathic.

Watching Lou drop the mic like that would be kind of crazy interesting.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 02, 2017, 11:58:24 AM
When is the last time a team used an offer sheet and got the player?  A simple trade seems like a more plausible route (a la Kessel).

Suggestions concerning offer sheets seem a lot like suggestions that NHL teams make 3-way trades.  They never happen (at least not to my memory, but I'm happy to hear of counter-examples!)

Last offer sheet success was Edmonton and Dustin Penner.

In terms of 3-way deals, there's been some minor ones - the Tinordi to Arizona, via Nashville from Jan 2016, for example - but, significant ones are certainly rare.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 02, 2017, 02:09:21 PM
https://theathletic.com/64103/2017/06/01/dellow-maple-leafs-should-table-huge-offer-sheet-for-blues-defenceman-colton-parayko/

Hmm...

I was about to post this.  He suggests the Leafs should go after this guy and give up 4 first round draft picks.  This sounds like a recipe for disaster.

I'm not a subscriber -- What contract does he suggest?

(I also don't know this guy ... he must be good, I guess ...)

Quote from: Dellow
Say, for the sake of discussion, that the Leafs extended an offer sheet worth $12-million to Parayko.  In order to be under the salary cap going into the season while matching that offer sheet, the Blues would need to shed $9-million worth of contracts before considering the fact that they would need to replace those players on the roster.  Even if they spent only $1-million on each replacement, which isn’t particularly realistic, it would mean that they actually needed to clear $11-million.  When you look over St. Louis’ roster, it becomes clear that this would be awfully difficult for the Blues to do without blowing out a rather large chunk of their roster for next year.

He's suggesting a 1 year deal @ 12million.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bullfrog on June 02, 2017, 02:35:23 PM
That's cute.

But never going to happen. It's a ridiculous waste of draft picks.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on June 02, 2017, 05:47:56 PM

Quote from: Dellow
Say, for the sake of discussion, that the Leafs extended an offer sheet worth $12-million to Parayko.  In order to be under the salary cap going into the season while matching that offer sheet, the Blues would need to shed $9-million worth of contracts before considering the fact that they would need to replace those players on the roster.  Even if they spent only $1-million on each replacement, which isn’t particularly realistic, it would mean that they actually needed to clear $11-million.  When you look over St. Louis’ roster, it becomes clear that this would be awfully difficult for the Blues to do without blowing out a rather large chunk of their roster for next year.

He's suggesting a 1 year deal @ 12million.

I am not sure why we would offer $12 MIL and lose 4 1st round picks when offering $9.8 MIL would only lose 2 1st round picks, a 2nd round pick and 3rd round pick.

Currently St Louis needs to sign 2 forwards and 2 defence (including Parayko) with only $4.5 MIL cap space.  They need around $0.7 for performance bonuses so they have about $0.9 MIL per player.

If my math is correct that would mean that St Louis would have to shed at least $9 MIL in contracts WITHOUT replacing those players with $1 MIL players.  So each player traded would add an additional $1 MIL needed in cap space.  Assuming they wouldn't want to trade their top salary, Tarasenko, the only players without NTC/NMC with significant salaries are:
Schwartz, 24, $5.35
Lehtera, 29, $4.7
Sobotka, 29, $3.5
Gunnarsson, 30, $2.9

So basically the St Louis Blues would have to fill the 3 other positions and replace Schwartz, Sobotka and Gunnarsson with 6 $1 MIL players to match a $9.8 MIL offer sheet.

Mind you a $12 million offer sheet would mean St Louis would have to trade all 4 of those players and sign 7 $1 MIL players and still only have $0.45 MIL is cap space.

Maybe there could be a "Chris Gratton" "Flyers" trade where the picks could be traded back for assets or a blend of the 2: 
- the 2 1sts, 2nd and 3rd could maybe be
- 2017 1st Pick, 2018 2nd Pick (San Jose's), Dermott, Bracco, and Soshnikov

Then sign him to a 'Seth Jones' $5.4 MIL x 6 year bridge deal.

Unfortunately Arizona could offer:
2017 1st Pick (7th overall), Duclair, Strome and Calgary's 3rd pick which I feel is a better offer
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 02, 2017, 07:57:44 PM
Then sign him to a 'Seth Jones' $5.4 MIL x 6 year bridge deal.

But unless Parakyo is saying he absolutely won't sign with St. Louis (which he isn't), why wouldn't the Blues just sign him to that contract? Those trade options don't really make any sense for them.

Unfortunately Arizona could offer:
2017 1st Pick (7th overall), Duclair, Strome and Calgary's 3rd pick which I feel is a better offer

I'm pretty sure Arizona wouldn't trade Strome straight up for Parayko.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on June 02, 2017, 11:24:29 PM
Then sign him to a 'Seth Jones' $5.4 MIL x 6 year bridge deal.

But unless Parakyo is saying he absolutely won't sign with St. Louis (which he isn't), why wouldn't the Blues just sign him to that contract?

Currently St Louis needs to sign 2 forwards and 2 defence (including Parayko) with only $4.5 MIL cap space.  They need around $0.7 for performance bonuses so they have about $0.9 MIL per player. 

To sign Parayko to a $5.4 MIL contract the Blues would have to move 2 or 3 of:
Schwartz, 24, $5.35
Lehtera, 29, $4.7
Sobotka, 29, $3.5
Gunnarsson, 30, $2.9

Like I mentioned below, to match a $12 MIL 1 yr offer sheet the Blues would have to move all 4 contracts to create enough cap space.

I just am doing the math though since I haven't seen this guy play.  Is he a Bobby Orr, Scott Stevens, Brent Burns?  Is he a tough, crease clearer?  An offensive juggernaut?  I have no clue.  I just read the hype.

Josh Manson was hyped like a franchise defense man who was worth more the Erik Karlsson in a trade.  I noticed he had 3rd pairing TOI this season and stayed up to watch some playoff games and didn't feel he was a superstar at all like some fans made him out to be.

What is this Parayko worth, what is his strengths and style of play?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 03, 2017, 08:14:58 AM
Currently St Louis needs to sign 2 forwards and 2 defence (including Parayko) with only $4.5 MIL cap space.  They need around $0.7 for performance bonuses so they have about $0.9 MIL per player. 

To sign Parayko to a $5.4 MIL contract the Blues would have to move 2 or 3 of:
Schwartz, 24, $5.35
Lehtera, 29, $4.7
Sobotka, 29, $3.5
Gunnarsson, 30, $2.9

Doesn't seem like that tricky a juggle. According to what I'm seeing the Blues have 12 forwards, 5 defensemen and 2 goalies under contract with 4.5 million of cap room. If Parayko gets 5.4 then they're at -900k. They trade Perron and Gunnarson and have 6 million in space to sign 2 forwards(they don't need to carry 14) and a defenseman.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Jolly good show chaps on June 06, 2017, 02:22:57 PM
Reading on TSN that St Louis *may* consider trading a first to get rid of two years left on Lehtera's contract. If so, perhaps worth the Leafs pursuing, even if it is later in round 1? That first is then either another young asset or something in the bank to put towards a d-man in a trade.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 06, 2017, 03:02:45 PM
Reading on TSN that St Louis *may* consider trading a first to get rid of two years left on Lehtera's contract. If so, perhaps worth the Leafs pursuing, even if it is later in round 1? That first is then either another young asset or something in the bank to put towards a d-man in a trade.

Lehtera's play really fell off there eh? I wonder what happened. I'm going to go investigate and hope there aren't any parallels to a player in our current organization that I was worried about.

*comes back 5 minutes later*

Goddamnit.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 06, 2017, 03:06:44 PM
Anyway, the armchair GM in me wonders if that can be expanded to a point where JVR for Fabbro is worked in too. St. Louis could use some help on the left side it seems as well. Maybe we take Gunnarsson's contract back too in addition to Lehtera's.

edit: Sorry, not Fabbro. He's of course in Nashville. I could have sworn there was a defensive prospect that St. Louis picked that I liked recently, but it appears I was mistaken.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on June 06, 2017, 03:19:27 PM
Anyway, the armchair GM in me wonders if that can be expanded to a point where JVR for Fabbro is worked in too. St. Louis could use some help on the left side it seems as well. Maybe we take Gunnarsson's contract back too in addition to Lehtera's.

edit: Sorry, not Fabbro. He's of course in Nashville. I could have sworn there was a defensive prospect that St. Louis picked that I liked recently, but it appears I was mistaken.

Fabbri?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 06, 2017, 03:26:02 PM
It really pays to have an unsustainably high shooting percentage in your contract season. His actual salary actually ramps up, which probably puts Cap Space poachers like Arizona out of the running.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Jolly good show chaps on June 06, 2017, 03:41:43 PM
What about a 3 way trade that is something like :

St Louis gets JVR
Leafs get Tanev, Lehtera and one of STL's 1sts
Vancouver gets the other St Louis 1st, Gunnarsson and a prospect from St Louis and a prospect from the Leafs.

Feasible or cloud cuckoo land?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 06, 2017, 03:56:13 PM
What about a 3 way trade that is something like :

St Louis gets JVR
Leafs get Tanev, Lehtera and one of STL's 1sts
Vancouver gets the other St Louis 1st, Gunnarsson and a prospect from St Louis and maybe a later pick from the Leafs.

Feasible or cloud cuckoo land?

Honestly, I don't think it's crazy. I could see the Blues wanting JVR, but only offering up picks while the Leafs would prefer a defenceman. I could see the Leafs wanting Tanev, but only offering JVR while the Canucks would prefer picks.

I mean, 3-way deals are unrealistic in nature but that's at least one that has a lot of logic behind it.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 06, 2017, 04:10:28 PM
Anyway, the armchair GM in me wonders if that can be expanded to a point where JVR for Fabbro is worked in too. St. Louis could use some help on the left side it seems as well. Maybe we take Gunnarsson's contract back too in addition to Lehtera's.

edit: Sorry, not Fabbro. He's of course in Nashville. I could have sworn there was a defensive prospect that St. Louis picked that I liked recently, but it appears I was mistaken.

Jake Walman, maybe? Or, maybe I'm overrating him because of how much his cousin was pumping his tires on facebook.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 06, 2017, 04:14:33 PM
Anyway, the armchair GM in me wonders if that can be expanded to a point where JVR for Fabbro is worked in too. St. Louis could use some help on the left side it seems as well. Maybe we take Gunnarsson's contract back too in addition to Lehtera's.

edit: Sorry, not Fabbro. He's of course in Nashville. I could have sworn there was a defensive prospect that St. Louis picked that I liked recently, but it appears I was mistaken.

Jake Walman, maybe? Or, maybe I'm overrating him because of how much his cousin was pumping his tires on facebook.

Nah, I'm pretty sure Fabbro WAS the defenceman I was thinking of and just mixed up who drafted him. Probably from all that time I spent trying to forget the Preds nabbed 3 awesome defenceman I wanted all in one draft while we picked some middle-aged Russians.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 07, 2017, 02:00:14 PM
What about a 3 way trade that is something like :

St Louis gets JVR
Leafs get Tanev, Lehtera and one of STL's 1sts
Vancouver gets the other St Louis 1st, Gunnarsson and a prospect from St Louis and a prospect from the Leafs.

JVR is a big bullet in the Leafs gun to try and land an upgrade on the blueline. If they're dealing him and a prospect I'd sure hope they could do better than Tanev, a low first and a bad contract.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: L K on June 07, 2017, 02:17:41 PM
What about a 3 way trade that is something like :

St Louis gets JVR
Leafs get Tanev, Lehtera and one of STL's 1sts
Vancouver gets the other St Louis 1st, Gunnarsson and a prospect from St Louis and a prospect from the Leafs.

JVR is a big bullet in the Leafs gun to try and land an upgrade on the blueline. If they're dealing him and a prospect I'd sure hope they could do better than Tanev, a low first and a bad contract.

I don't know.   Could that be an overvaluation on JVR?  He's bad defensively and doesn't seem to be a guy who has that extra gear to take over a game.  He's a really good player but are we really going to get something better than tanev for him?  Unless the prospect is of the Kapanen level I think  3/4 defender is the best we get
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 07, 2017, 02:36:43 PM
I don't know.   Could that be an overvaluation on JVR?  He's bad defensively and doesn't seem to be a guy who has that extra gear to take over a game.  He's a really good player but are we really going to get something better than tanev for him?  Unless the prospect is of the Kapanen level I think  3/4 defender is the best we get

I think our disagreement may be more centered around what Tanev is than what JVR's value is. I agree they shouldn't be expecting much more than an NHL-ready #3 or #4 but Tanev, at a glance, looks like a guy with 0 offensive game, ok but not special possession numbers and some inability to stay healthy(he's averaged 64 games over the last 4 years). Is he someone who bumps any of our top 3? Does he necessarily bump Carrick? Is he markedly better than someone the Leafs could sign as a mid-range UFA like Smith?

It's the last one that really prompts the question. I'd rather keep JVR than deal him for not much more than they could get via smart UFA moving. I may be woefully unfamiliar with Tanev and maybe he's an all-world penalty killer or some new stat has him as being really, really valuable but from an in the dark place it sure doesn't look like you're getting a #3 or even #4 that stacks up with where we want to be at those spots.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 07, 2017, 03:16:51 PM
This was a good article on Tanev from yesterday for those who don't know much about him: http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/6/6/15743666/toronto-maple-leafs-trade-target-chris-tanev-morgan-rielly-right-hand-defence-vancouver-canucks

He does sound to me like somebody who would be a good #3 or #4 defenceman. His shot suppression numbers are pretty elite, for those who value that sort of thing. His point totals are certainly unimpressive, especially this past season. But I think he could get back into the 20-30 point range over 82 games while playing for a team with a little (actually, a lot) more offensive talent. The biggest problem to me is, will he ever play 82 games? Like Nik said, he's consistently missed a lot of games the past 4 seasons.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 07, 2017, 03:22:41 PM
Benning is certainly using the media to try to drive up the price.
Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman with The Instigators (WGR 550) (https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2017/06/07/leafs-links-friedman-maple-leafs-interest-chris-tanev-mckenzie-torontos-free-agency-prospects-mitch-marner-stars-nhl18-teaser/)
Quote
On the interest in Tanev, including potential inquiries from Toronto:

I know a lot of teams have asked about him… Tanev is from Toronto, so I don’t think he’d have a big problem coming East. I think Dallas would love to have him. I could even see a team like Toronto wanting to have him. Chris Tanev is not the biggest name in the world, but he’s a solid guy and he plays a very smart game.

But I think Vancouver has told teams he’s not coming out of here easily. They really need a lot, Vancouver. They need scorers. I think if you can get them a scorer, it would pique their interest. But I think it’s going to cost a lot, and there is a lot of competition. The thing that [Vancouver] told one team was that the moment we trade this guy, we’re going to need someone like him. I would think he’s only getting dealt if he we hear the trade and we go, “oh, okay. That’s why he’s getting traded, because he’s worth that much.”

That’s a big deal. That costs you a lot.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: L K on June 07, 2017, 07:32:17 PM
I don't know.   Could that be an overvaluation on JVR?  He's bad defensively and doesn't seem to be a guy who has that extra gear to take over a game.  He's a really good player but are we really going to get something better than tanev for him?  Unless the prospect is of the Kapanen level I think  3/4 defender is the best we get

I think our disagreement may be more centered around what Tanev is than what JVR's value is. I agree they shouldn't be expecting much more than an NHL-ready #3 or #4 but Tanev, at a glance, looks like a guy with 0 offensive game, ok but not special possession numbers and some inability to stay healthy(he's averaged 64 games over the last 4 years). Is he someone who bumps any of our top 3? Does he necessarily bump Carrick? Is he markedly better than someone the Leafs could sign as a mid-range UFA like Smith?

It's the last one that really prompts the question. I'd rather keep JVR than deal him for not much more than they could get via smart UFA moving. I may be woefully unfamiliar with Tanev and maybe he's an all-world penalty killer or some new stat has him as being really, really valuable but from an in the dark place it sure doesn't look like you're getting a #3 or even #4 that stacks up with where we want to be at those spots.

I think that's fair.  I agree on the health issues with Tanev.  That being said, I do think that his defensive play is probably of the level that puts him in the 3-4 range. If he could play a full season a #3 and with his health issues a #4.  I certainly wouldn't want to pay a premium for him JVR+ but I'm not sure that we get a better option than a Tanev in a trade for JVR.  I do think the Leafs need to start making moves to find defensemen however.  Any defensemen drafted in the next year or two are likely 4-5 years away from being meaningful contributors.  4-5 years from now is when the Leafs will start to feel the cap crunch of Marner/Matthews/Nylander's second contracts.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: princedpw on June 07, 2017, 07:43:56 PM
the injury risk combined with the purported asking price seems too high for Tanev to me.  I think I'd rather pay 7 million for Shattenkirk, if that was an option.

Josh Manson seems like the guy I'd like the most.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: L K on June 07, 2017, 07:49:54 PM
the injury risk combined with the purported asking price seems too high for Tanev to me.  I think I'd rather pay 7 million for Shattenkirk, if that was an option.

Josh Manson seems like the guy I'd like the most.

See, I would think quite the opposite on Shattenkirk.  I think Shattenkirk is better than he showed in the postseason but he's more of an offensive guy.  One thing the Leafs are lacking is good defensemen who can play well in the defensive zone.  I'm not sure that Shattenkirk makes the Leafs better in that regard although I do acknowledge that we could use his shot on the point.

The PP is likely to continue to be run with 4 forwards given that we have: Nylander, Marner, Matthews, Kadri, JVR*, Kapanen* as more offensive guys and then having guys like Brown, Komarov as "sit in front of the net" players.  Realistically we are mostly going to see Gardiner/Rielly/Carrick playing the defenseman role on the PP. 

Where the Leafs are going to need help is on the penalty kill, especially with a guy like Polak likely done/not brought back.  Marincin is a good penalty killer and after that we are really just rotating through Gardiner/Rielly who aren't best suited for stationary penalty killing.

The Leafs need more guys who are good in their own zone rather than busting the bank on a guy who got exposed pretty bad against Toronto and Pittsburgh.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 07, 2017, 08:29:27 PM
It's the last one that really prompts the question. I'd rather keep JVR than deal him for not much more than they could get via smart UFA moving.

That's kinda where I'm at in terms of a trade involving JvR. The Leafs probably come out ahead by keeping him and signing someone like Smith instead of moving him for Tanev. I do think the Leafs can do a better in a deal, but, if the reality is that they can't, I'd rather see them move JvR for a highly thought of D prospect that's on the cusp of breaking into the league than move him in a deal that I don't think really moves the team forward.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 07, 2017, 09:53:34 PM
I think that's fair.  I agree on the health issues with Tanev.  That being said, I do think that his defensive play is probably of the level that puts him in the 3-4 range. If he could play a full season a #3 and with his health issues a #4.

Again, I'm not watching him night in and night out but I think even if he's some sort of defensive juggernaut that's pushing it. Look around at some of the teams who've had success this playoffs and the kind of guys who are #3 defensemen on good teams are guys like Ryan Ellis or Cam Fowler(or whoever on Anaheim you want to say is #3) or Bouwmeester or whoever we want to say is #3 on Washington. Sure, Pittsburgh's an exception but Pittsburgh are driven by 2 guys down the middle who we don't have and it still looks like their lack of blue end talent will catch up with them.

Remember, with the presumptive idea that Rielly-Gardiner are the #1-2 guys in the mix we're already at a disadvantage with the teams who have really elite defensemen. I don't really think this team can expect a lot of success if their top three is those two and Tanev. It very well might be a pipe dream but you at least have to aim for a #3 that at least puts you in that group because otherwise you're asking the Leafs to a Blueline without star power or real depth and I just don't see that working.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on June 07, 2017, 11:56:20 PM
It's the last one that really prompts the question. I'd rather keep JVR than deal him for not much more than they could get via smart UFA moving.

That's kinda where I'm at in terms of a trade involving JvR. The Leafs probably come out ahead by keeping him and signing someone like Smith instead of moving him for Tanev. I do think the Leafs can do a better in a deal, but, if the reality is that they can't, I'd rather see them move JvR for a highly thought of D prospect that's on the cusp of breaking into the league than move him in a deal that I don't think really moves the team forward.

This. Smith seems like a safe, boring, effective choice compared to most of the other spec I've been reading.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Jolly good show chaps on June 09, 2017, 03:24:26 AM
Ok, so how about the previous Lehtera and a 1st from St Louis for a minor prospect if that was on offer and either draft a prospect or put it into the bank towards an alternative dman?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 09, 2017, 11:11:23 AM
Ok, so how about the previous Lehtera and a 1st from St Louis for a minor prospect if that was on offer and either draft a prospect or put it into the bank towards an alternative dman?

Sounds fine. Seems unlikely that it would be though.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on June 09, 2017, 11:42:55 AM
Is the idea that Lehtera replaces Boyle then?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 13, 2017, 09:32:23 AM
Given the options, I think my D-plan for the offseason is officially "sign Smith, trade for Demers, convince Vegas to take somebody other than Carrick in the expansion draft, *edit* fire Marchenko into the sun".

Rielly-Demers
Gardiner-Zaitsev
Smith-Carrick

Riely, Gardiner, Zaitsev, and Carrick can all handle PP duties. I get it'd be weird to shake up one of the best PP's in the league from last season, but I'd really like to see Rielly and Carrick become the primary guys in the 1-3-1 system. I don't know. Just a gut feeling really. I don't really think either of Gardiner or Zaitsev were really super key in our PP's success. They helped move the puck around, but Carrick and Rielly can both do that too and I think create a little more as well. I'd also just like to see Carrick used on the speciality teams in some way, and he's obviously not going on the PK probably.

Smith and Demers could eat up a bunch of PK minutes. They'd basically be the new Hunwick-Polak except they're actually top-4 defenceman. If Rielly gets moved to the PP then I'd like to see Gardiner get his PK minutes. Again, more of a gut feeling and something I've talked about in the past too. I think Jake would perform better on the PK than Rielly did/would.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bender on June 13, 2017, 12:02:45 PM
Given the options, I think my D-plan for the offseason is officially "sign Smith, trade for Demers, convince Vegas to take somebody other than Carrick in the expansion draft, *edit* fire Marchenko into the sun".

Rielly-Demers
Gardiner-Zaitsev
Smith-Carrick

Riely, Gardiner, Zaitsev, and Carrick can all handle PP duties. I get it'd be weird to shake up one of the best PP's in the league from last season, but I'd really like to see Rielly and Carrick become the primary guys in the 1-3-1 system. I don't know. Just a gut feeling really. I don't really think either of Gardiner or Zaitsev were really super key in our PP's success. They helped move the puck around, but Carrick and Rielly can both do that too and I think create a little more as well. I'd also just like to see Carrick used on the speciality teams in some way, and he's obviously not going on the PK probably.

Smith and Demers could eat up a bunch of PK minutes. They'd basically be the new Hunwick-Polak except they're actually top-4 defenceman. If Rielly gets moved to the PP then I'd like to see Gardiner get his PK minutes. Again, more of a gut feeling and something I've talked about in the past too. I think Jake would perform better on the PK than Rielly did/would.

What about the Swedes we just signed?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 13, 2017, 12:18:16 PM
What about the Swedes we just signed?

I don't know much about the Swedes obviously, but from the reports I'd be hesitant to consider either of them more than bottom pairing guys who need sheltering right now. If we brought in a legit top pairing defenceman I'd be more comfortable having one of those guys or Dermott getting sheltered minutes, but since that likely won't happen we need to have a reliable 3rd pairing.

Maybe if we lost Carrick I could see one of them or Dermott taking his spot. I basically see our D as this I guess:

Rielly-Gardiner-Zaitsev-#3/4 D-#3/4 D-#5/6 D

If we want to compete without a legit top pairing guy we really only have room for 1 bottom pairing defenceman I think. As things stand, Carrick currently holds that position.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 13, 2017, 01:26:08 PM
Of the Swedes, I think only Rosen has a chance to make the team this season, but more than likely will begin with the Marlies. They're both on 2-year ELCs, so there isn't a rush. Rosen plays RD too, and is older than Borgman. Both of them make for yo-yo options should injuries crop up, being exempt from waivers and having played in a mens league previously.

From the scouting reports:
Rosen is a puck-mover with great wheels (seems standard for Swedish defenders these days), a great shot, and a smart two-way game. His flaws are with consistency

Borgman is a more physical defender with a stout frame (similar to Dermott and a slightly lighter Kulemin) that also plays well at both ends of the ice. His highlights look a bit like Rielly with a bit less skating and more shooting.

Highlight packs sadly only emphasize offense:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovIZD2gZHaI
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on June 13, 2017, 07:39:25 PM
I have a feeling about Borgman, looks like a brick sh_t house and probably can stop a moose in full run. If he can shoot and get it done, all the better. Perhaps both spend a year with the Marlies and can be called up or one of them makes the team out of camp. Just better to have more competition at all places, its a no brainer.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Britishbulldog on June 16, 2017, 02:55:49 PM

Quote from: Dellow
Say, for the sake of discussion, that the Leafs extended an offer sheet worth $12-million to Parayko.  In order to be under the salary cap going into the season while matching that offer sheet, the Blues would need to shed $9-million worth of contracts before considering the fact that they would need to replace those players on the roster.  Even if they spent only $1-million on each replacement, which isn’t particularly realistic, it would mean that they actually needed to clear $11-million.  When you look over St. Louis’ roster, it becomes clear that this would be awfully difficult for the Blues to do without blowing out a rather large chunk of their roster for next year.

He's suggesting a 1 year deal @ 12million.

I am not sure why we would offer $12 MIL and lose 4 1st round picks when offering $9.8 MIL would only lose 2 1st round picks, a 2nd round pick and 3rd round pick.


Plot thickens in how insane it would be to offer another teams player to a ridiculous offer sheet....an RFA has to be qualified at 100% of the previous contract to keep his rights.

Getting locked in at $12 MIL or even $9.8 MIL is impossible to maintain.  This is a broken system for offer sheets.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 16, 2017, 02:59:10 PM

Quote from: Dellow
Say, for the sake of discussion, that the Leafs extended an offer sheet worth $12-million to Parayko.  In order to be under the salary cap going into the season while matching that offer sheet, the Blues would need to shed $9-million worth of contracts before considering the fact that they would need to replace those players on the roster.  Even if they spent only $1-million on each replacement, which isn’t particularly realistic, it would mean that they actually needed to clear $11-million.  When you look over St. Louis’ roster, it becomes clear that this would be awfully difficult for the Blues to do without blowing out a rather large chunk of their roster for next year.

He's suggesting a 1 year deal @ 12million.

I am not sure why we would offer $12 MIL and lose 4 1st round picks when offering $9.8 MIL would only lose 2 1st round picks, a 2nd round pick and 3rd round pick.


Plot thickens in how insane it would be to offer another teams player to a ridiculous offer sheet....an RFA has to be qualified at 100% of the previous contract to keep his rights.

Getting locked in at $12 MIL or even $9.8 MIL is impossible to maintain.  This is a broken system for offer sheets.

He also suggested making most of that 12M offer a signing bonus, so the qualifying offer would come back down to a more normal 4-5M.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 16, 2017, 03:59:35 PM
http://www.tsn.ca/radio/audio/dreger-leafs-trade-assets-will-include-jvr-bozak-likely-not-nylander-1.780870

Transcript courtesy of MLHS:
https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2017/06/16/leafs-links-dont-surprised-leafs-make-splash-take-advantage-two-year-cap-window-says-friedman-drew-doughty-discusses-future-la-shouldve-stopped-talking-long-ago-tradi/

Quote
[Something like 6×6] is my sense, too. I guess what I would wonder is if they established the market by signing Zaitsev to a seven-year contract extension? The money would be less, of course, in the Zaitsev case, but I’m talking about the term here. They recognize that Nikita Zaitsev is part of the core going forward. Well, William Nylander has to be in that core.

I can tell you that, in the time I spent with Mike Babcock in Paris, the players he talked about were pretty obvious — of course Auston Matthews, of course Mitch Marner, but he brought up William Nylander and how well he thought he played, how far he thought his development curve spiked. That doesn’t sound like a player that the Toronto Maple Leafs are willing to dick around with in terms of trying to bridge or a shorter-term thing. They recognize the talent and the skill set of William Nylander and I’m sure they’ll do everything they can to get him into that five, six, seven-year term area.

If Toronto is going to acquire a defenceman — and they still feel they should add to their blue line — what is the piece? Who are the pieces they’re going to use? Even from an age perspective, and contractually, it’s going to be James van Riemsdyk or Tyler Bozak or pieces like that. We can stop — and should’ve stopped long ago — if we’re talking about William Nylander and the younger guys.

Lol.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: digdug on June 21, 2017, 09:21:31 AM
http://www.tsn.ca/golden-knights-leafs-in-trade-talks-as-deadline-nears-1.784337


what do you guys think about Leafs acquiring Methot?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 21, 2017, 09:26:04 AM
http://www.tsn.ca/golden-knights-leafs-in-trade-talks-as-deadline-nears-1.784337

what do you guys think about Leafs acquiring Methot?

On the one hand, sens fans would be really mad.

On the other hand, Leafs fans would be really mad.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 21, 2017, 10:06:59 AM
http://www.tsn.ca/golden-knights-leafs-in-trade-talks-as-deadline-nears-1.784337

what do you guys think about Leafs acquiring Methot?

On the one hand, sens fans would be really mad.

On the other hand, Leafs fans would be really mad.

Methot at 32 probably isn't in the Leafs best interests going forward.  I'd prefer to see a younger guy in the 23-25 age range.  I can't imagine the Leafs would be targeting him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 21, 2017, 10:36:07 AM
http://www.tsn.ca/golden-knights-leafs-in-trade-talks-as-deadline-nears-1.784337


what do you guys think about Leafs acquiring Methot?

I think that would not be the way to go. Should they decide to go that route to improve the bottom end of the blue line (as Methot doesn't crack the team's top 3 - and would get pushed to the 3rd pairing if/when the Leafs add another top pairing guy), the Leafs can probably pick up a Methot-lite type as a UFA for no asset cost, or for much cheaper on the trade front - and with a less onerous cap hit.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 21, 2017, 10:58:44 AM
I'd rather just bring back Hunwick, and that's saying something.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 21, 2017, 11:14:24 AM
I'd rather just bring back Hunwick, and that's saying something.

Yeah. Babcock wants him back too.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 21, 2017, 11:15:28 AM
I'd rather just bring back Hunwick, and that's saying something.

But Hunwick shoots left.  Can we just make him play on the backhand all the time so he's a righty?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 21, 2017, 11:26:43 AM
I'd rather just bring back Hunwick, and that's saying something.

But Hunwick shoots left.  Can we just make him play on the backhand all the time so he's a righty?

Methot shoots left too.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: digdug on June 21, 2017, 12:01:58 PM
based on the article ...  maybe Colin Miller ?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 21, 2017, 12:23:17 PM
based on the article ...  maybe Colin Miller ?

Miller is most interesting name that may actually go to Vegas as part of the expansion draft. He's also a guy that fills in more at the bottom of the lineup than the top, but he could also be relatively inexpensive to acquire, and probably has some more development in him.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 22, 2017, 09:47:39 AM
Feeling crazy:
Gardiner for Trouba
Package of prospects for Schmidt

Rielly - Trouba
Schmidt - Zaitsev
Dermott - Carrick
Rosén
Marcincin
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 22, 2017, 02:50:21 PM
Friedman and McKenzie both said they wouldn't be surprised if Hamonic moves soon. LeBrun just said that Demers is definitely available for the right price. And Minny's own GM said they "may absolutely" trade one of their defenceman soon. Then there's also Colin Miller and probably a couple other defenceman from Vegas that will move soon. Shattenkirk and Smith will be waiting to sign contracts on July 1st.

Lots and lots of defenceman are actually available right now. Wonder if that drives prices down a little.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on June 22, 2017, 04:31:57 PM
Vegas sniffing around Boyle, I'd be a little pissed if they get both him and Leipsic.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 22, 2017, 05:54:49 PM
Quote
Louis Jean‏Verified account @LouisJean_TVA  12 minutes ago
Told @MapleLeafs interested in @GoldenKnights Nate Schmidt. Would 2nd rounder get it done?

A 2nd rounder would seem like a very good deal for us. I think I've talked myself into a Carrick for Miller swap too. Add Demers somehow as well and you get:

Rielly-Demers
Gardiner-Zaitsev
Schmidt-Miller
Marincin

Not bad.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 22, 2017, 06:40:14 PM
Schmidt for a second only? Please be all over this, Leafs. Sweeten the deal with a waiver-exempt prospect. Do it now.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Deebo on June 22, 2017, 07:59:02 PM

Pierre LeBrun ✔ @PierreVLeBrun
Asked GM GM about Nate Schmidt, says he's not trading any of his young players. Keeping Schmidt.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 22, 2017, 08:06:16 PM
I feel like every quote/statement from a GM about not moving a player needs to end with the qualifier "today."
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on June 22, 2017, 09:34:30 PM
Pierre LeBrun ✔ @PierreVLeBrun
Asked GM GM about Nate Schmidt, says he's not trading any of his young players. Keeping Schmidt.

That would seem to rule out Miller as well.

Methot it is!
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 22, 2017, 10:54:13 PM
Methot it is!

(https://media.tenor.com/images/e27f5986ae15800bd4d72376e0e3cd9a/tenor.gif)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on June 23, 2017, 12:25:16 AM
Oh, I agree.

HF Boards trade incoming! Next year's 1st, Bracco, and/or an expiring contract (JvR or Bozak?) for the best thing you can get from a team with lots of D, who might've traded picks, is desperate for scoring and/or to make the post-season (NYI, MIN, CAR, WPG)?

Reilly - Shattenkirk
Gardiner - [Hamonic/ Dumba/ Brodin/ Faulk/ Hanifin/ Trouba]
Dermott - Zaitsev
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 23, 2017, 01:03:48 PM
So, Dreger wants us to know he believes the Leafs are in on Hamonic.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 23, 2017, 01:07:40 PM
So, Dreger wants us to know he believes the Leafs are in on Hamonic.

I like Hamonic but I'm worried of the rumoured high cost. Friedman keeps saying two 1st rounders. We'll see.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: princedpw on June 23, 2017, 01:08:11 PM
Oh, I agree.

HF Boards trade incoming! Next year's 1st, Bracco, and/or an expiring contract (JvR or Bozak?) for the best thing you can get from a team with lots of D, who might've traded picks, is desperate for scoring and/or to make the post-season (NYI, MIN, CAR, WPG)?

Reilly - Shattenkirk
Gardiner - [Hamonic/ Dumba/ Brodin/ Faulk/ Hanifin/ Trouba]
Dermott - Zaitsev

Reilly - Shattenkirk
Gardiner - Zaitsev
Hunwick - Carrick
Dermott
Polak

Would be fine with me.  The only question is whether the leafs can afford Shattenkirk's 7-9 million/year contract 3 years from now when Matthews, Marner and Gardiner cash in.  Can they?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 23, 2017, 01:09:15 PM
I like Hamonic but I'm worried of the rumoured high cost. Friedman keeps saying two 1st rounders. We'll see.

Yeah. THat's a lot to give up for a 2nd pairing guy - a very good 2nd pairing guy, but still a 2nd pairing guy.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on June 23, 2017, 01:16:01 PM
Would be fine with me.  The only question is whether the leafs can afford Shattenkirk's 7-9 million/year contract 3 years from now when Matthews, Marner and Gardiner cash in.  Can they?

Rangers just cleared cap space, and Shattenkirk is a "New Yorker at heart," so I don't think it'll matter.

Unless he goes for that big dollar 2-3 year deal so he can with a Cup with the Leafs before settling into his old age with Rangers.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: princedpw on June 23, 2017, 01:17:16 PM
I like Hamonic but I'm worried of the rumoured high cost. Friedman keeps saying two 1st rounders. We'll see.

Yeah. THat's a lot to give up for a 2nd pairing guy - a very good 2nd pairing guy, but still a 2nd pairing guy.

That does sound like a lot to give up and he apparently wasn't very good last year.

Toronto needs its first rounders now so that in 2 years when the big 3 salaries spike, they can fill out the bottom half of their roster with good entry-level contracts.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: princedpw on June 23, 2017, 01:18:48 PM
Would be fine with me.  The only question is whether the leafs can afford Shattenkirk's 7-9 million/year contract 3 years from now when Matthews, Marner and Gardiner cash in.  Can they?

Rangers just cleared cap space, and Shattenkirk is a "New Yorker at heart," so I don't think it'll matter.

Unless he goes for that big dollar 2-3 year deal so he can with a Cup with the Leafs before settling into his old age with Rangers.

Prime age hockey UFAs simply don't seem to sign short term deals.  The perceived risk of injury is probably just too high.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 23, 2017, 01:26:56 PM
So, Dreger wants us to know he believes the Leafs are in on Hamonic.

I like Hamonic but I'm worried of the rumoured high cost. Friedman keeps saying two 1st rounders. We'll see.

Two first rounders should be reserved for star players, I don't buy this.  Sounds like Islanders are smoking some weed here.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 23, 2017, 01:28:33 PM
I like Hamonic but I'm worried of the rumoured high cost. Friedman keeps saying two 1st rounders. We'll see.

Yeah. THat's a lot to give up for a 2nd pairing guy - a very good 2nd pairing guy, but still a 2nd pairing guy.

The good news is, it sounds like nobody is going that high.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bates on June 23, 2017, 01:33:45 PM
Hamonic missed a great deal of last season, he's better than last year.  I think he fits nicely in most teams 2/3 spot.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: cabber24 on June 23, 2017, 03:09:08 PM
Any solid Leafs gossip? Not hearing anything with traction. We need D!
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Peter D. on June 23, 2017, 03:30:28 PM
I'm leery of the cost of Hamonic, but I think he'd be perfect for this team and as Rielly's partner.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: L K on June 23, 2017, 04:05:45 PM
I'm leery of the cost of Hamonic, but I think he'd be perfect for this team and as Rielly's partner.

I think 2 1sts is way too much but yeah he does seem like a perfect fit.  Maybe we can convince them of JVR
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: hockeyfan1 on June 23, 2017, 04:27:54 PM
Hamonic missed a great deal of last season, he's better than last year.  I think he fits nicely in most teams 2/3 spot.


If he can stay injury-free, then he'd be a decent addition for the Leafs. 

Having seen him play for the Islanders, he was agile and steady on the backend, easily one of their best.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: AvroArrow on June 26, 2017, 10:49:48 AM
Kapanen - Matthews - Marner
Komarov - Kadri - Brown
Kovalchuk - Nylander - Radulov
Hyman - Boyle - Martin
Soshnikov

Reilly - Demers/Shattenkirk
Gardiner - Zaitsev
Smith - Borgman/Rosen

Andersen


Not sure it would fit cap- and asset-wise, but seems kind of drool worthy to me.

JvR/Bozak traded.


Edit: slight adjustment to account for Radulov being a RW.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 26, 2017, 10:52:07 AM

Radulov is pretty emphatically not a centre but it works(at least positionally) if you flip him and Nylander.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 26, 2017, 10:52:47 AM
Not sure it would fit cap- and asset-wise, but seems kind of drool worthy to me.

JvR/Bozak traded.

If we're going droll-worthy and we're allowed to trade JVR and Bozak I'm pushing for the Marleau/Thornton combo instead.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Deebo on June 26, 2017, 02:42:07 PM
With all the talk seemingly focused around getting an established top 4 defenseman. I don't think there should be a sense of urgency to get it done this summer, if there is a deal out there that makes sense then go for it but I'd also be happy to go into the season with what we have plus some depth accqusitions.

That way we see how the two swedish UFA defensemen work out as well as how Dermott and Neilsen's second pro years go. We also get to see how Liljegren's D+1 year goes.

How important do you all think it is to get an established top 4 D prior to the season?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 26, 2017, 02:43:11 PM
With all the talk seemingly focused around getting an established top 4 defenseman. I don't think there should be a sense of urgency to get it done this summer, if there is a deal out there that makes sense then go for it but I'd also be happy to go into the season with what we have plus some depth accqusitions.

That way we see how the two swedish UFA defensemen work out as well as Dermott/Neilsen. We also get to see how Liljegren's D+1 year goes.

How important do you all think it is to get an established top 4 D prior to the season?

I'm with you.  Let's see what the 2 Swedes turn out to be, also give Dermott a fair shot.  Worst comes to worst you try and re-sign Hunwick or some other depth dman.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Dappleganger on June 26, 2017, 02:47:44 PM
I'm curious if Leafs have any interest in Shattenkirk. He's the only UFA that's a clear upgrade over what was on the team last year but he's definitely a signing that wouldn't be without some downside.
 
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 26, 2017, 02:50:10 PM
I agree that it shouldn't be a matter of urgent priority as another year of development for the guys on defense we have could yield some solid returns on its own.

That said, I think dealing JVR and Bozak is a priority and I don't know how much it makes sense right now to get back draft picks for them. So it seems like it makes a lot of sense to add a defenseman this summer. That said I don't think it needs to be an established defenseman.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 26, 2017, 03:24:23 PM
Franson please
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Deebo on June 26, 2017, 03:34:13 PM
I agree that it shouldn't be a matter of urgent priority as another year of development for the guys on defense we have could yield some solid returns on its own.

That said, I think dealing JVR and Bozak is a priority and I don't know how much it makes sense right now to get back draft picks for them. So it seems like it makes a lot of sense to add a defenseman this summer. That said I don't think it needs to be an established defenseman.

The problem that might arise with moving JVR and Bozak for something other than futures is that the short term remaining on their deals would restrict the suitors to teams that aren't looking to move players that are ready to contribute at the NHL level.

What type of return do you see as a possible fit to our situation?

I struggle to see anything other than futures, and perhaps moving some of those futures for something to upgrade the current roster.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bullfrog on June 26, 2017, 03:35:34 PM
I agree that it shouldn't be a matter of urgent priority as another year of development for the guys on defense we have could yield some solid returns on its own.

That said, I think dealing JVR and Bozak is a priority and I don't know how much it makes sense right now to get back draft picks for them. So it seems like it makes a lot of sense to add a defenseman this summer. That said I don't think it needs to be an established defenseman.

Agreed 100%. In general, I think there's no urgency to grab a top four D. As someone pointed out in another thread, our core forwards are 20, 20, and 21 (at start of 2018 season.)

The one point I'd differ is that I'd be OK with draft picks coming back. My preference, though, would be a young defenseman with a top-3 projection.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 26, 2017, 03:46:46 PM
I agree that it shouldn't be a matter of urgent priority as another year of development for the guys on defense we have could yield some solid returns on its own.

That said, I think dealing JVR and Bozak is a priority and I don't know how much it makes sense right now to get back draft picks for them. So it seems like it makes a lot of sense to add a defenseman this summer. That said I don't think it needs to be an established defenseman.

The problem that might arise with moving JVR and Bozak for something other than futures is that the short term remaining on their deals would restrict the suitors to teams that aren't looking to move players that are ready to contribute at the NHL level.

What type of return do you see as a possible fit to our situation?

I struggle to see anything other than futures, and perhaps moving some of those futures for something to upgrade the current roster.

Well obviously the ideal situation would be JVR being amenable to signing an extension with whoever we dealt him to so that would be less of an issue.

But I guess what I'm thinking of is a team that's sort of in contend now mode but that has also drafted reasonably well in recent years. So I've mentioned Travis Sanheim or Jacob Larsson or Gabriel Carlsson  as possibilities.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on June 26, 2017, 04:05:21 PM
Back-up candidate?

http://www.tsn.ca/report-stars-set-to-buyout-g-niemi-1.789172

Stats aren't too hot though:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=94168
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Deebo on June 26, 2017, 04:37:28 PM

Looks like the Coyotes won't be qualifying Peter Holland.

So the Leafs won't get a pick for him as the condition was we receive the pick if he was traded or re-signed by the Coyotes.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bender on June 26, 2017, 04:57:26 PM
Back-up candidate?

http://www.tsn.ca/report-stars-set-to-buyout-g-niemi-1.789172

Stats aren't too hot though:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=94168

Is Brian Elliot available?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 26, 2017, 05:07:13 PM
Barring a good return, it might actually be more beneficial to hang onto Bozak/JvR, loathe as I am to think it, because it means another contender doesn't have them during our open window.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 26, 2017, 05:09:27 PM

Looks like the Coyotes won't be qualifying Peter Holland.

So the Leafs won't get a pick for him as the condition was we receive the pick if he was traded or re-signed by the Coyotes.

AHL contract, please Dubas.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Deebo on June 26, 2017, 06:16:29 PM
No qualifying offer for Griffith:


Sorry herman.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 26, 2017, 06:17:30 PM
Barring a good return, it might actually be more beneficial to hang onto Bozak/JvR, loathe as I am to think it, because it means another contender doesn't have them during our open window.

Why do we care if another team has Bozak or JVR?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 26, 2017, 07:38:37 PM
No qualifying offer for Griffith:


Sorry herman.

(http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/justinlong_0.gif)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 26, 2017, 07:42:00 PM
Barring a good return, it might actually be more beneficial to hang onto Bozak/JvR, loathe as I am to think it, because it means another contender doesn't have them during our open window.

Why do we care if another team has Bozak or JVR?

They would be most tradeable to contenders willing to spend futures, who we are up against in the playoffs?

I wanted to trade them before now, but they're not going to get back as much value now as they would have when we weren't playoff bound.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 26, 2017, 07:50:52 PM
They would be most tradeable to contenders willing to spend futures, who we are up against in the playoffs?

Again, so what? If there's a contender out there looking to add a scoring wing or a centre then JVR or Bozak being off the market wouldn't change that and that same contender might go out and spend more futures and get players who, and I know this is hard to imagine, are even better than Bozak or JVR.

Meanwhile the whole point of moving those guys is improving the team, whether that's from adding players you receive for them or reallocating their cap space to more pressing needs or ideally both.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 26, 2017, 07:59:33 PM
Not qualifying Bibeau and Kalinin was obvious.

Not qualifying Griffith was also rather obvious (but saddening), and opens up minutes and room for the wave of 2015/6 draft picks coming up to join the existing LOGJAM:

Exiting: Kapanen (graduated), Leipsic (wasted), Griffith, Kalinin, Michalek, Laich, Greening, Bibeau, Rychel (waiver wire fodder)

Incumbents: Timashov, Johnsson, Lindberg, Moore, Dermott (maybe graduating), Neilsen, Holl, Gauthier, Sparks

Incoming: Aaltonen, Bracco, Brooks, Grundstrom, Rosen (maybe Leaf), Borgman, Kaskisuo, Piccinich

Question marks: Dzierkals, Walker, Lindgren, Engvall

Edit: Forgot Fish-bulb.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on June 26, 2017, 09:16:39 PM
Nothing on Rosen or the other Swede? I think these guys have huge potential upside. When we look back at things who wouldn't love to have Stralman back in the fold.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 26, 2017, 10:28:04 PM
So the Leafs won't get a pick for him as the condition was we receive the pick if he was traded or re-signed by the Coyotes.

They could still re-sign him. They may just have chosen not to qualify him to avoid arbitration or to try to get his salary down a few hundred grand. It wouldn't be super unusual.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 27, 2017, 05:49:55 AM
They would be most tradeable to contenders willing to spend futures, who we are up against in the playoffs?

Again, so what? If there's a contender out there looking to add a scoring wing or a centre then JVR or Bozak being off the market wouldn't change that and that same contender might go out and spend more futures and get players who, and I know this is hard to imagine, are even better than Bozak or JVR.

Meanwhile the whole point of moving those guys is improving the team, whether that's from adding players you receive for them or reallocating their cap space to more pressing needs or ideally both.

Haha, I'd like to think I understood that as a given.

What I'm trying to say is, there is value in keeping their value out of the competition's pool, and I couldn't see any obvious deal where we would get something useful back other than non-roster options. The freed up space and return, as you mention, being leveraged in a follow-up move is a good way to get around all that though.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 27, 2017, 07:46:52 AM
Haha, I'd like to think I understood that as a given.

What I'm trying to say is, there is value in keeping their value out of the competition's pool, and I couldn't see any obvious deal where we would get something useful back other than non-roster options. The freed up space and return, as you mention, being leveraged in a follow-up move is a good way to get around all that though.

I understand what you're trying to say, I'm saying that it seems to be based on some pretty far fetched notions about how teams behave. Teams in contention trade roster players all the time if they're looking to upgrade or address balance issues or clear cap space. Plus, quite frankly, if this team is ever going to win anything they're going to have to go through players a lot better than JVR or Bozak so that "value" is almost entirely imaginary provided you're not at the point of thinking you're Christopher Walken in the Dead Zone predicting our eventual demise at the hands of a JVR overtime goal.

JVR and Bozak can be turned into assets, maybe immediate roster players or maybe just pieces that can be used for that purpose like we just saw Calgary do. The whole point of Lamoriello was supposed to be that he could work out trades the way, frankly, a lot of other teams are. You seem to be preemptively defending an inability to go out and do what should be some pretty basic stuff for a GM to do.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Highlander on June 27, 2017, 08:08:36 AM
Did they retain Sparks?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 27, 2017, 08:30:26 AM
Did they retain Sparks?

Yeah Sparks was qualified.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 27, 2017, 08:39:45 AM
I understand what you're trying to say, I'm saying that it seems to be based on some pretty far fetched notions about how teams behave. Teams in contention trade roster players all the time if they're looking to upgrade or address balance issues or clear cap space. Plus, quite frankly, if this team is ever going to win anything they're going to have to go through players a lot better than JVR or Bozak so that "value" is almost entirely imaginary provided you're not at the point of thinking you're Christopher Walken in the Dead Zone predicting our eventual demise at the hands of a JVR overtime goal.

JVR and Bozak can be turned into assets, maybe immediate roster players or maybe just pieces that can be used for that purpose like we just saw Calgary do. The whole point of Lamoriello was supposed to be that he could work out trades the way, frankly, a lot of other teams are. You seem to be preemptively defending an inability to go out and do what should be some pretty basic stuff for a GM to do.

Good points. I'd like to think I was merely gauging the market with my limited perspective, rather than making excuses for a lacklustre management performance, but I can see where my words would be interpreted that way. Purely from the Leafs' perspective, I was thinking we'd be chopping 50ish goals/105 pts from our roster, and putting those points into what we're up against, ostensibly towards stronger goal prevention. I am not well-versed in contender-contender trade patterns; if you have a couple of examples to jog my memory, that'd be great!

JvR, and to a lesser extent Bozak and Komarov are weapons we should have wielded on the trade market the offseason before. It sounds like there is a strong hesitancy to throw in the 2018 1st to grease those wheels this year as the Leafs are both on the cusp of greatness and 1-2 key injuries away from the draft lottery.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 27, 2017, 09:15:29 AM
Purely from the Leafs' perspective, I was thinking we'd be chopping 50ish goals/105 pts from our roster, and putting those points into what we're up against, ostensibly towards stronger goal prevention.

Sure, except those 50ish goals and 105 points would be countered both from internal ways such as players like Leivo getting a shot or maybe Kapanen being used in more of an offensive role or externally by bringing in some scoring help on short term deals. You probably can't make up for the entirety of what JVR brings but you should be able to make up 70-80% of those 50ish goals and 100ish points at least via internal replacements or affordable short term UFAs.

I am not well-versed in contender-contender trade patterns; if you have a couple of examples to jog my memory, that'd be great!

I mean, off the top of my head Nashville and Montreal traded #1 defensemen going into a year where they were both expecting to contend. Chicago, the #3 team in the league last year, just straight up swapped scoring wingers with the #4 team in the league. St. Louis traded Shattenkirk to Washington, Tampa traded Drouin to Montreal, the Zibanejad/Brassard deal, St. Louis trading Elliott to Calgary...

All cases where contenders, or teams who were certainly trying to win now, traded roster players off their roster to other contenders.

JvR, and to a lesser extent Bozak and Komarov are weapons we should have wielded on the trade market the offseason before. It sounds like there is a strong hesitancy to throw in the 2018 1st to grease those wheels this year as the Leafs are both on the cusp of greatness and 1-2 key injuries away from the draft lottery.

Yes, they should have been traded before now. That said, the Leafs going forward still aren't in a position to re-sign those guys if they're looking for anything approaching market value so where is the sense in not turning them into what assets you can? Provided you don't re-sign them, and I have to think you're not advocating for re-signing them, they're going to be out there in the league competing with the Leafs anyway so the "value" you're talking about in keeping them disappears when they leave as UFAs regardless. 

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 27, 2017, 09:16:31 AM
Is Brian Elliot available?

Elliott or Chad Johnson would be my top-2 picks. Although both might be in line to make more than the Leafs would want for their back-up position.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bender on June 27, 2017, 09:32:56 AM
I understand what you're trying to say, I'm saying that it seems to be based on some pretty far fetched notions about how teams behave. Teams in contention trade roster players all the time if they're looking to upgrade or address balance issues or clear cap space. Plus, quite frankly, if this team is ever going to win anything they're going to have to go through players a lot better than JVR or Bozak so that "value" is almost entirely imaginary provided you're not at the point of thinking you're Christopher Walken in the Dead Zone predicting our eventual demise at the hands of a JVR overtime goal.

JVR and Bozak can be turned into assets, maybe immediate roster players or maybe just pieces that can be used for that purpose like we just saw Calgary do. The whole point of Lamoriello was supposed to be that he could work out trades the way, frankly, a lot of other teams are. You seem to be preemptively defending an inability to go out and do what should be some pretty basic stuff for a GM to do.

Good points. I'd like to think I was merely gauging the market with my limited perspective, rather than making excuses for a lacklustre management performance, but I can see where my words would be interpreted that way. Purely from the Leafs' perspective, I was thinking we'd be chopping 50ish goals/105 pts from our roster, and putting those points into what we're up against, ostensibly towards stronger goal prevention. I am not well-versed in contender-contender trade patterns; if you have a couple of examples to jog my memory, that'd be great!

JvR, and to a lesser extent Bozak and Komarov are weapons we should have wielded on the trade market the offseason before. It sounds like there is a strong hesitancy to throw in the 2018 1st to grease those wheels this year as the Leafs are both on the cusp of greatness and 1-2 key injuries away from the draft lottery.

At the same time now that I think about it, why couldn't we have offered the same package for Hamonic? I think JVR is more valuable than a 1st at 20th or wherever.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bender on June 27, 2017, 09:36:15 AM
Is Brian Elliot available?

Elliott or Chad Johnson would be my top-2 picks. Although both might be in line to make more than the Leafs would want for their back-up position.

At the same time you get a bit more out of your backup and a move to average in terms of shootout wins and we're not that far off from being very competitive. As it stands I think we're missing a first pairing D and maybe depth D and a backup and I think we should be in pretty good shape.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 27, 2017, 09:49:24 AM
I mean, off the top of my head Nashville and Montreal traded #1 defensemen going into a year where they were both expecting to contend. Chicago, the #3 team in the league last year, just straight up swapped scoring wingers with the #4 team in the league. St. Louis traded Shattenkirk to Washington, Tampa traded Drouin to Montreal, the Zibanejad/Brassard deal, St. Louis trading Elliott to Calgary...

All cases where contenders, or teams who were certainly trying to win now, traded roster players off their roster to other contenders.

Yo those are super recent, so my brain is clearly ignoring them for some reason. How could I forget Subban-Webber? Thanks!

Gotta say though, some of those trades were done for some silly reasons.

Yes, they should have been traded before now. That said, the Leafs going forward still aren't in a position to re-sign those guys if they're looking for anything approaching market value so where is the sense in not turning them into what assets you can? Provided you don't re-sign them, and I have to think you're not advocating for re-signing them, they're going to be out there in the league competing with the Leafs anyway so the "value" you're talking about in keeping them disappears when they leave as UFAs regardless.

I think my original premise here with their evaporating value was the hypothetical: what if Marner didn't get mono, and the Leafs had all of their lines going against Washington... but that's stupid. JvR/Bozak weren't and have never really been the drivers of that line (they do a great job riding shotgun, at least in the OZ), but they're the higher end of rental depth a contender might want to pick up to become a champion.

I'm curious what the locker room cost might be to lose so many big (and positive) influences at once, when the group is on the verge of crossing the proverbial Jordan. The metaphor does bring to mind that the previous generation must first pass.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 27, 2017, 10:05:14 AM

Gotta say though, some of those trades were done for some silly reasons.

Maybe but I don't think we're in danger of reaching a point where GMs stop making bad decisions. One of the things trading these guys would do is give the Leafs a warchest of sorts of picks prospects that could be moved if/when the need arises.


I'm curious what the locker room cost might be to lose so many big (and positive) influences at once, when the group is on the verge of crossing the proverbial Jordan. The metaphor does bring to mind that the previous generation must first pass.

I think any "but leadership?" cards the Leafs had to play probably got played when they protected Matt Martin.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 27, 2017, 10:22:56 AM
Maybe but I don't think we're in danger of reaching a point where GMs stop making bad decisions. One of the things trading these guys would do is give the Leafs a warchest of sorts of picks prospects that could be moved if/when the need arises.

McPhee seems to be giving out sweetheart deals for whatever reason (haha, Ottawa). I have yet to see us swindle Sweeney or Benning, for which I am disappointed.


I'm curious what the locker room cost might be to lose so many big (and positive) influences at once, when the group is on the verge of crossing the proverbial Jordan. The metaphor does bring to mind that the previous generation must first pass.

I think any "but leadership?" cards the Leafs had to play probably got played when they protected Matt Martin.

Martin looks like a really good hugger so I think we'll be okay.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 27, 2017, 10:52:13 AM
McPhee seems to be giving out sweetheart deals for whatever reason (haha, Ottawa). I have yet to see us swindle Sweeney or Benning, for which I am disappointed.

I have yet to see this front office swindle anyone. Lou's not getting "fell off the truck" prices anywhere. 

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Andy on June 27, 2017, 10:56:04 AM
McPhee seems to be giving out sweetheart deals for whatever reason (haha, Ottawa). I have yet to see us swindle Sweeney or Benning, for which I am disappointed.

I have yet to see this front office swindle anyone. Lou's not getting "fell off the truck" prices anywhere.

Yes, definitely nothing that remotely compares to the Schenn for JVR or Beauchemin for Lupul and Gardiner swindles. It's a shame Burke couldn't draft or sign a reasonable contract; his trading was pretty sweet.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 27, 2017, 12:44:32 PM
The only trades I've liked from this group so far have been the asset management moves (Grabner!) and Dubas' draft day shenanigans.

I don't like that we didn't trade off some UFAs last year, but those are marginal at best.

We haven't really been in position to make player-for-player hockey-trades until now. I've heard the Leafs reticence to move any of their medium forwards as they're still in valuation mode (e.g. Brown) might be holding some moves off the board, and that's fine.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 27, 2017, 01:02:57 PM
We haven't really been in position to make player-for-player hockey-trades until now. I've heard the Leafs reticence to move any of their medium forwards as they're still in valuation mode (e.g. Brown) might be holding some moves off the board, and that's fine.

I'm not even going to begin to try and figure out what that second sentence means.

As to the first though, why would a team's situation preclude them from making good player for player deals? New Jersey did very well trading for Hall despite not being a team on the cusp of contender-dom.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bender on June 27, 2017, 01:31:49 PM
Emelin appears to be available. Could we take a flyer on him or is he crap?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 27, 2017, 01:39:09 PM
We haven't really been in position to make player-for-player hockey-trades until now. I've heard the Leafs reticence to move any of their medium forwards as they're still in valuation mode (e.g. Brown) might be holding some moves off the board, and that's fine.

I'm not even going to begin to try and figure out what that second sentence means.

As to the first though, why would a team's situation preclude them from making good player for player deals? New Jersey did very well trading for Hall despite not being a team on the cusp of contender-dom.

Translation: the players other teams want to trade for are not available for trade (at least not for what they were offering), which relates to our pre-contention lack of player for player deals.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 27, 2017, 03:01:48 PM
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-trade-value-first-round-pick/

Some Toronto content for the clicks:
Quote
1. Snow and Toronto GM Lou Lamoriello had a seven-minute conversation on the draft floor prior to Round 1. As has been reported, the name James van Riemsdyk came up. The Islanders felt Andrew Ladd and Anders Lee fit the same pattern, so they passed.

5. He’s staying low profile — and there is serious doubt he actually wants to leave San Jose — but there is a list of teams who want to peer inside Joe Thornton’s head. At the draft, there was a lot of talk it would take a three-year deal to lure him. Potential suitors include Columbus, Los Angeles, Montreal and the Rangers. I could see Toronto having interest, but I’m not certain... Toronto is quieter about its intentions, but don’t forget that Mike Babcock has plenty of Team Canada history with both Marleau and Thornton.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 27, 2017, 03:12:54 PM
Jooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 27, 2017, 03:19:05 PM
Jooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

#6 says he might also look into prolonging his career in the Swiss League, as he met his missus during his first pass through HC Davos.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 27, 2017, 03:37:39 PM
Jooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

As if he'd cut that beard to play for the Leafs.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 27, 2017, 03:48:41 PM
Jooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

As if he'd cut that beard to play for the Leafs.

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oXi11N4VBDI/TX3O1P5UmHI/AAAAAAAABD0/h7XKqS77FxU/s1600/MattinglySimpsons.png)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 27, 2017, 03:59:23 PM
Emelin appears to be available. Could we take a flyer on him or is he crap?

Cap hit is way too high for what he provides.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 27, 2017, 04:06:40 PM
Jooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

As if he'd cut that beard to play for the Leafs.

Ah yes, that moment when you remember you cheer for this stupid team.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 27, 2017, 04:31:40 PM
Marleau linked to here now too:

Quote
Craig Custance‏ @CraigCustance
Lots of interest in Patrick Marleau coming off 27-goal season. Toronto, Anaheim, NYR, SJ, Carolina, Nashville, LA all in the mix.

I've brought this up a couple of times, but trading JVR and Bozak for a defenceman and/or futures and replacing them with Marleau and Thornton for the next 2 years would be a heck of a move.

Even if they lose a bit offensively because of their age, those 2 are miles ahead of JVR and Bozak defensively. Miles. The upgrade there would also make getting another top defenceman less of a priority.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 27, 2017, 04:58:53 PM
Jooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

As if he'd cut that beard to play for the Leafs.

Ah yes, that moment when you remember you cheer for this stupid team.

Years from now, we'll be discussing the wisdom of the Joe Thornton beard exception.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on June 27, 2017, 05:00:36 PM
$10m X 2 between the 2?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 27, 2017, 05:03:00 PM
$10m X 2 between the 2?

I'd guess $6mil for Thornton and $5mil for Marleau.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bullfrog on June 27, 2017, 05:48:50 PM
Translation: the players other teams want to trade for are not available for trade (at least not for what they were offering), which relates to our pre-contention lack of player for player deals.

We're still in pre-contending mode, no?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on June 27, 2017, 06:02:55 PM
What about Winnik for 4th line centre?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on June 27, 2017, 06:47:58 PM
I agree that it shouldn't be a matter of urgent priority as another year of development for the guys on defense we have could yield some solid returns on its own.

That said, I think dealing JVR and Bozak is a priority and I don't know how much it makes sense right now to get back draft picks for them. So it seems like it makes a lot of sense to add a defenseman this summer. That said I don't think it needs to be an established defenseman.

The problem that might arise with moving JVR and Bozak for something other than futures is that the short term remaining on their deals would restrict the suitors to teams that aren't looking to move players that are ready to contribute at the NHL level.

What type of return do you see as a possible fit to our situation?

I struggle to see anything other than futures, and perhaps moving some of those futures for something to upgrade the current roster.

Well obviously the ideal situation would be JVR being amenable to signing an extension with whoever we dealt him to so that would be less of an issue.

But I guess what I'm thinking of is a team that's sort of in contend now mode but that has also drafted reasonably well in recent years. So I've mentioned Travis Sanheim or Jacob Larsson or Gabriel Carlsson  as possibilities.

Yeah, getting a guy better pedigreed and bit further developed than Bracco/Lily would be pretty good. I'm not sure if this is setting my sights higher or lower, but a Jake Gardiner or Cody Franson like deal would be something I'd hope the Leafs could pull off and which would move the needle on defense (if not get them the next Drew Doughty).
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 27, 2017, 08:20:05 PM
Translation: the players other teams want to trade for are not available for trade (at least not for what they were offering), which relates to our pre-contention lack of player for player deals.

We're still in pre-contending mode, no?

I think we are in that inflection point where both deals for futures and deals for the present make sense as the team gets a read on its prospects and team weaknesses.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 28, 2017, 10:56:40 AM
Quote
Tom Hunter‏ @PuckDontLie
"They (The Leafs) are tying to do something very big to help them win in the next few seasons" - @FriedgeHNIC

There's also been a lot of talk about how Thornton wants to see if San Jose will re-sign Marleau before deciding what he'll do. They'd really like to keep playing together. If San Jose is out then there probably aren't a lot of other teams that can offer both of them deals.

LeBrun also said yesterday that he's pretty sure Demers will be traded, maybe even this week. If the Leafs could get all 3 of those guys while trading JVR and Bozak, they become contenders to win the East without needing to jeopardize the long-term future of the team.

edit: Ah man I completely forgot Demers played for San Jose too. I bet all 3 are best friends.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 28, 2017, 11:09:03 AM
Quote
Tom Hunter‏ @PuckDontLie
"They (The Leafs) are tying to do something very big to help them win in the next few seasons" - @FriedgeHNIC

There's also been a lot of talk about how Thornton wants to see if San Jose will re-sign Marleau before deciding what he'll do. They'd really like to keep playing together. If San Jose is out then there probably aren't a lot of other teams that can offer both of them deals.

LeBrun also said yesterday that he's pretty sure Demers will be traded, maybe even this week. If the Leafs could get all 3 of those guys while trading JVR and Bozak, they become contenders to win the East without needing to jeopardize the long-term future of the team.

edit: Ah man I completely forgot Demers played for San Jose too. I bet all 3 are best friends.

Who is Tom Hunter and why should I believe him?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 28, 2017, 11:11:24 AM
Who is Tom Hunter and why should I believe him?

He's quoting Friedman, who said it on the Jeff Blair show on the Fan 590 this morning.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 28, 2017, 11:12:22 AM
Who is Tom Hunter and why should I believe him?

He's quoting Friedman, who said it on the Jeff Blair show on the Fan 590 this morning.

Was Friedman eating a cruller when he made that pronouncement?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on June 28, 2017, 11:28:50 AM
OK, I'm doing lines...

Hyman-Matthews-Nylander
Marleau-Thornton-Brown
Leivo-Kadri-Marner
Martin- ??? - Kapanen
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 28, 2017, 11:33:43 AM
OK, I'm doing lines...

Hyman-Matthews-Nylander
Marleau-Thornton-Brown
Leivo-Kadri-Marner
Martin- ??? - Kapanen

I'd go with:

Marleau-Matthews-Marner
Komarov-Kadri-Brown
Hyman*-Thornton-Nylander

*-assuming he's definitely in the top-9 somewhere

Thornton played a lot with Pavelski in San Jose, a right-handed shot. They also switched centre/wing duties a lot. Nylander checks those 2 boxes and plays a similar-ish style too I think.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Peter D. on June 28, 2017, 11:55:31 AM
Marleau linked to here now too:

Quote
Craig Custance‏ @CraigCustance
Lots of interest in Patrick Marleau coming off 27-goal season. Toronto, Anaheim, NYR, SJ, Carolina, Nashville, LA all in the mix.

I've brought this up a couple of times, but trading JVR and Bozak for a defenceman and/or futures and replacing them with Marleau and Thornton for the next 2 years would be a heck of a move.

Even if they lose a bit offensively because of their age, those 2 are miles ahead of JVR and Bozak defensively. Miles. The upgrade there would also make getting another top defenceman less of a priority.

Getting Thornton and Marleau for two years, which would bridge the team over until the big money kicks in for all three kids, while scooping up assets for JvR and Bozak, would be brilliant.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: cabber24 on June 28, 2017, 04:00:58 PM
Franson please
A whole lot of "meh" on that suggestion. Been there done that, we need a minute crunching shut down guy.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: cabber24 on June 28, 2017, 04:13:07 PM
We'll probably do nothing. That Dman deal does not appear available of palatable at this time. The UFAs are under whelming. Keep JVR and see what shakes out with the D in the system.

I still wonder about the Marner draft pick over Hanifin? What might have been?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on June 28, 2017, 04:23:33 PM
Anyone know much about Jordan Weal other than what his hockeydb shows?

Supposedly had a visit with the Leafs earlier this week.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Zee on June 28, 2017, 04:49:53 PM
Franson please
A whole lot of "meh" on that suggestion. Been there done that, we need a minute crunching shut down guy.
Franson would be alright paired with either Rielly or Gardiner. We're not bringing back Mark Fraser.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on June 28, 2017, 04:58:07 PM
I don't think Franson has the wheels to play Babcock's system, I'd say Polak is a better skater and he struggled to recover from the aggressive dman pinch the Leafs use.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: CarltonTheBear on June 28, 2017, 05:09:00 PM
Anyone know much about Jordan Weal other than what his hockeydb shows?

Supposedly had a visit with the Leafs earlier this week.

There was a lot of talk about the Leafs being interested in him a couple of years ago, especially around when we were linked to maybe taking on Richards' contract. He was buried in LA back when they were good, and then got sent to Philly before he really got a chance there.

Played 23 games with the Flyers this season. Had a 55.8 CF%, 56 GF%, and a P/60 of 2.29. Those are all very good numbers, led the Flyers in all 3 categories. Granted, small sample size of course.

He primarily played on the wing during that time, but came up as a centre. He could fill in that 4C spot pretty nicely. Although, he also doesn't really seem like a prototypical Babcock 4C.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Frank E on June 28, 2017, 05:55:52 PM
So tsn.ca McGuire is suggesting that if McDavid gets $13.25, teams will offer sheet Draisaitl. 

I don't about you guys, but I think it would have to be one helluva offer sheet for Edmonton not to match.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Nik on June 28, 2017, 06:03:10 PM
So tsn.ca McGuire is suggesting that if McDavid gets $13.25, teams will offer sheet Draisaitl. 

I don't about you guys, but I think it would have to be one helluva offer sheet for Edmonton not to match.

I think at this point I'm going to believe any rumours about offer sheeting once I actually see it done.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bullfrog on June 28, 2017, 06:29:53 PM
Since it's no longer the '90s and the St. Louis Blues are probably less nuts, an offer sheet is pretty unlikely, but it could happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NHL_players_who_have_signed_offer_sheets

Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on June 28, 2017, 06:40:36 PM
Since it's no longer the '90s and the St. Louis Blues are probably less nuts, an offer sheet is pretty unlikely, but it could happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NHL_players_who_have_signed_offer_sheets

Lou and Shanahan were involved in those, no? Maybe Lou uses an OS to blow up STL by signing Parayko. Dellow says they shed the salary to match if we go to 9+...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bates on June 28, 2017, 06:46:08 PM
You giving up those draft picks for Parayko??  He's not worth near that.
Since it's no longer the '90s and the St. Louis Blues are probably less nuts, an offer sheet is pretty unlikely, but it could happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NHL_players_who_have_signed_offer_sheets

Lou and Shanahan were involved in those, no? Maybe Lou uses an OS to blow up STL by signing Parayko. Dellow says they shed the salary to match if we go to 9+...
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: bustaheims on June 28, 2017, 06:55:50 PM
Lou and Shanahan were involved in those, no? Maybe Lou uses an OS to blow up STL by signing Parayko. Dellow says they shed the salary to match if we go to 9+...

And, if they don't, then the Leafs have to shed a bunch of salary just to fill out the roster.

So, that's a no.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on June 29, 2017, 12:31:11 AM
Lou and Shanahan were involved in those, no? Maybe Lou uses an OS to blow up STL by signing Parayko. Dellow says they [can't] shed the salary to match if we go to 9+...

And, if they don't, then the Leafs have to shed a bunch of salary just to fill out the roster.

So, that's a no.

Yeah, it'd require a fire sale of JvR, Bozak, Komarov, maybe Martin -- which the Leafs ought to do anyhow. And you'd have to trust that internal options are ready to fill in. Nylander could slide into Bozak's spot. Platooning Rychel, Johnsson, and Leivo in JvR's spot could add some scoring, but probably not replace his, and any number of plugs could replace Martin and Komarov. You downgrade a number of positions, but add a 1D.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bates on June 29, 2017, 04:38:50 AM
Parayko isn't a 1D.
Lou and Shanahan were involved in those, no? Maybe Lou uses an OS to blow up STL by signing Parayko. Dellow says they [can't] shed the salary to match if we go to 9+...

And, if they don't, then the Leafs have to shed a bunch of salary just to fill out the roster.

So, that's a no.

Yeah, it'd require a fire sale of JvR, Bozak, Komarov, maybe Martin -- which the Leafs ought to do anyhow. And you'd have to trust that internal options are ready to fill in. Nylander could slide into Bozak's spot. Platooning Rychel, Johnsson, and Leivo in JvR's spot could add some scoring, but probably not replace his, and any number of plugs could replace Martin and Komarov. You downgrade a number of positions, but add a 1D.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: Bender on June 29, 2017, 08:45:33 AM
Parayko isn't a 1D.
Lou and Shanahan were involved in those, no? Maybe Lou uses an OS to blow up STL by signing Parayko. Dellow says they [can't] shed the salary to match if we go to 9+...

And, if they don't, then the Leafs have to shed a bunch of salary just to fill out the roster.

So, that's a no.

Yeah, it'd require a fire sale of JvR, Bozak, Komarov, maybe Martin -- which the Leafs ought to do anyhow. And you'd have to trust that internal options are ready to fill in. Nylander could slide into Bozak's spot. Platooning Rychel, Johnsson, and Leivo in JvR's spot could add some scoring, but probably not replace his, and any number of plugs could replace Martin and Komarov. You downgrade a number of positions, but add a 1D.

I don't recall that clearly but didn't St. Louis make a move after that article was written?
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 29, 2017, 09:06:17 AM
I don't recall that clearly but didn't St. Louis make a move after that article was written?

They got Schenn (5.125M) for Lehtera (4.7), a 2017 1st, and a 2018 conditional 1st. They also moved Reaves (1.125M) for the 31st overall pick.
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: mr grieves on June 29, 2017, 02:42:42 PM
Parayko isn't a 1D.

 ;)

(http://i.imgur.com/1TApXik.png)
Title: Re: Armchair GM 2016-2017
Post by: herman on June 30, 2017, 05:45:56 AM
;)

(http://i.imgur.com/1TApXik.png)

That's only effective persuasion if your persuadee recognizes that system of belief.