2016-17 Centennial Leafs General Team Discussion

[Kin]

It'd be pretty hard to read the market for defensemen recently and see trading JVR for one as doing anything other than making the team worse in the immediate sense. JVR for Tanev, for instance, would make the team worse.

Any team trading for JVR is almost certainly going to want to make their team better so, by definition, what they'll be trading away will be something of less current value to their team than what JVR would bring.

Trading him for picks/prospects is how you get something approaching value.

 

[TBLeafer]

Lou and Shanny have said ad nauseam that any deals they make at this point will still be with an outlook to the future.

You chastising someone for passing off opinion as fact almost broke the internet.

I chastised someone and nearly broke the internet?  LOL.  I merely thought I asked a question.

No, Shannyco isn't looking to trade picks for vets.  I don't think anyone is disputing that.

But to say they aren't looking to move JVR in a way that improves the outlook of the current team both today AND into the future?

Sorry but I think that's a serious stretch.

 

[TBLeafer]

It'd be pretty hard to read the market for defensemen recently and see trading JVR for one as doing anything other than making the team worse in the immediate sense. JVR for Tanev, for instance, would make the team worse.

Any team trading for JVR is almost certainly going to want to make their team better so, by definition, what they'll be trading away will be something of less current value to their team than what JVR would bring.

Trading him for picks/prospects is how you get something approaching value.

How does JVR for Tavev (or Tanev +) make the team worse?  Is your argument based on pure offensive production?  I agree they get less goals, but they allow less, too.

 

[Deebo]

It'd be pretty hard to read the market for defensemen recently and see trading JVR for one as doing anything other than making the team worse in the immediate sense. JVR for Tanev, for instance, would make the team worse.

Any team trading for JVR is almost certainly going to want to make their team better so, by definition, what they'll be trading away will be something of less current value to their team than what JVR would bring.

Trading him for picks/prospects is how you get something approaching value.

How does JVR for Tavev (or Tanev +) make the team worse?  Is your argument based on pure offensive production?  I agree they get less goals, but they allow less, too.

I think he means it makes Vancouver worse.

Edit: Nope, re-read it.. I now think he means it makes the Leafs worse

 

[TBLeafer]

It'd be pretty hard to read the market for defensemen recently and see trading JVR for one as doing anything other than making the team worse in the immediate sense. JVR for Tanev, for instance, would make the team worse.

Any team trading for JVR is almost certainly going to want to make their team better so, by definition, what they'll be trading away will be something of less current value to their team than what JVR would bring.

Trading him for picks/prospects is how you get something approaching value.

How does JVR for Tavev (or Tanev +) make the team worse?  Is your argument based on pure offensive production?  I agree they get less goals, but they allow less, too.

I think he means it makes Vancouver worse.

Edit: Nope, re-read it.. I now think he means it makes the Leafs worse

That's how I read it, too. I think the Leafs become a little less dynamic offensively (given what we have in the pipeline), but much more well rounded defensively and we may even get an additional high pick or prospect out of a deal like that.

 

[Frank E]

I don't quite get the allure of Tanev?

Vancouver really isn't much of a trading partner here, and I doubt have any interest in JVR, but if you're going to go after a defenseman in Vancouver, I'd go after Stecher or another younger guy like Ben Hutton.

 

[Kin]

How does JVR for Tavev (or Tanev +) make the team worse?  Is your argument based on pure offensive production?  I agree they get less goals, but they allow less, too.

But fundamentally then the reverse would be true for Vancouver. We do have some measurements to sort of try and get to the bigger picture when weighing up a forward vs. a defenseman and I think the ones we have tell us JVR's overall contributions(because keep in mind possession is as much about keeping the puck out of your net as it is in theirs) are greater than Tanev's. I think you recognize that too as now JVR for Tanev would be Tanev+, implicitly recognizing that Tanev isn't as valuable as JVR. 

 

[TBLeafer]

How does JVR for Tavev (or Tanev +) make the team worse?  Is your argument based on pure offensive production?  I agree they get less goals, but they allow less, too.

But fundamentally then the reverse would be true for Vancouver. We do have some measurements to sort of try and get to the bigger picture when weighing up a forward vs. a defenseman and I think the ones we have tell us JVR's overall contributions(because keep in mind possession is as much about keeping the puck out of your net as it is in theirs) are greater than Tanev's. I think you recognize that too as now JVR for Tanev would be Tanev+, implicitly recognizing that Tanev isn't as valuable as JVR.

All in all, Vancouver being a much older team leads me to believe they are worse overall possession team, so Tanev's possession numbers could very well be positively impacted by getting traded here.

If we didn't manage anything other than a straight up trade (I'm really just looking for a 2nd or equivalent here) I still might pull the trigger on that deal if Leipsic and/or Kap are healthy.

 

[herman]

Vancouver really isn't much of a trading partner here, and I doubt have any interest in JVR, but if you're going to go after a defenseman in Vancouver, I'd go after Stecher or another younger guy like Ben Hutton.

Haven't they been looking for a scoring winger still after crashing and burning on Eriksson? and Gudbranson is hurt, so I think they could really use Roman Polak for the rough and tumble Western Conference.

I've been crossing my fingers for Vancouver to stay in the wildcard hunt into the deadline (thanks, Pacific division!) so their ownership goes for the stupid push to maximize their remaining Sedin glory. They've got some pieces that you mentioned that might work, and their 2018 or 19 draft picks will be nice and high.

 

[Kin]

All in all, Vancouver being a much older team leads me to believe they are worse overall possession team, so Tanev's possession numbers could very well be positively impacted by getting traded here.

So in determining whether or not Vancouver is a worse possession team than Toronto you're going to look at their average ages and not, say, their relative possession numbers?

 

[rdowdall]

Vancouver really isn't much of a trading partner here, and I doubt have any interest in JVR, but if you're going to go after a defenseman in Vancouver, I'd go after Stecher or another younger guy like Ben Hutton.

Haven't they been looking for a scoring winger still after crashing and burning on Eriksson? and Gudbranson is hurt, so I think they could really use Roman Polak for the rough and tumble Western Conference.

I've been crossing my fingers for Vancouver to stay in the wildcard hunt into the deadline (thanks, Pacific division!) so their ownership goes for the stupid push to maximize their remaining Sedin glory. They've got some pieces that you mentioned that might work, and their 2018 or 19 draft picks will be nice and high.

The 2017 Leafs need to trade with the 2009 Leafs.

 

[Frank E]

Vancouver really isn't much of a trading partner here, and I doubt have any interest in JVR, but if you're going to go after a defenseman in Vancouver, I'd go after Stecher or another younger guy like Ben Hutton.

Haven't they been looking for a scoring winger still after crashing and burning on Eriksson? and Gudbranson is hurt, so I think they could really use Roman Polak for the rough and tumble Western Conference.

I've been crossing my fingers for Vancouver to stay in the wildcard hunt into the deadline (thanks, Pacific division!) so their ownership goes for the stupid push to maximize their remaining Sedin glory. They've got some pieces that you mentioned that might work, and their 2018 or 19 draft picks will be nice and high.

Following the NHL would probably be boring if teams did what we fans think is logical all the time, so you could be right.

I was trying to figure out which teams that are in the mix this year that might be looking to inject some scoring on the wing...I thought maybe our old buddy Anaheim for one of their studs.

LA looks to need some scoring help there too, and some people seem to like Jake Muzzin...27 years old and $4 mil cap hit until he's 30.  San Jose is another one that probably only has a few years left with the current bunch, and could use a little scoring, but I have no idea what kind of d-man they'd have that's interesting.

 

[Zee]

He'll be bringing back diminishing returns as he gets older.  His trade value right now should be very good, so the Leafs should try and maximize that trade chip and bring back 1-2 younger players with high potential.

I think something to emphasize about JVR's value right now is that in addition to just the simple reality that a productive player on a below-market contract is more valuable the more time is left on their deal, a team that trades for JVR would then be confronted with the same reality about signing him to an extension and could, at next year's deadline, flip him to recoup some of their investment.

Agreed.  I can see a "win now" team making a move for a guy like JVR, hoping it puts their Cup aspirations over the top, and if it doesn't work out they can look to move him either in the summer or at the next deadline since he still has a contract for next season.  Much more valuable than a player whose contract is set to expire this year.

 

[herman]

Following the NHL would probably be boring if teams did what we fans think is logical all the time, so you could be right.

I was trying to figure out which teams that are in the mix this year that might be looking to inject some scoring on the wing...I thought maybe our old buddy Anaheim for one of their studs.

LA looks to need some scoring help there too, and some people seem to like Jake Muzzin...27 years old and $4 mil cap hit until he's 30.  San Jose is another one that probably only has a few years left with the current bunch, and could use a little scoring, but I have no idea what kind of d-man they'd have that's interesting.

Nik mentioned this a few times in the actual Armchair GM thread, that because of the market set by Hall-Larsson, getting good value in a JvR for defenseman trade will be slim pickings (one team was already burned pretty good trading away JvR for a defenseman). Seems more likely we will get prospects/picks that we can then turn around into something else.

Anaheim has some attractive pieces with an aging core still in contention (and their coach is familiar with JvR, who sort of thrived in his system). Nashville is another, as is Minnesota (less compelling). Maybe Philly tires of semi-regular healthy scratch Gostisbehere (typed this out first try, no lie), or St. Louis does a U-turn and extends Shattenkirk to trade Parayko like a crazy team...

 

[TBLeafer]

All in all, Vancouver being a much older team leads me to believe they are worse overall possession team, so Tanev's possession numbers could very well be positively impacted by getting traded here.

So in determining whether or not Vancouver is a worse possession team than Toronto you're going to look at their average ages and not, say, their relative possession numbers?

Just hypothesising that an older/slower team is gonna have a harder time producing a positive possession rating, than a younger/faster team in big, broad, general terms.

CorsiRel is not a hard and fast rule, either and has to be taken in context with other factors.

 

[Kin]

Just hypothesising that an older/slower team is gonna have a harder time producing a positive possession rating, than a younger/faster team in big, broad, general terms.

CorsiRel is not a hard and fast rule, either and has to be taken in context with other factors.

Relative, in this context, not referring to Corsi Relative but rather why you'd hypothesize about their possession numbers rather than looking at them and comparing the two teams based on what they actually are.

 

[bustaheims]

But to say they aren't looking to move JVR in a way that improves the outlook of the current team both today AND into the future?

Sorry but I think that's a serious stretch.

That's also not what I said. I said it's not the primary focus of a JvR trade. The primary focus will be able the long-term improvement. Everything Lou and Shanny have said about the process, the plan, building the team, not getting too excited about their success so far this season, etc., has made that entirely clear. If they get an offer than provides the kind of long-term value they're looking for and improves the team, I have no doubt that's what they'd prefer, but improving this season's team is absolutely a secondary concern.

 

[Frank E]

Following the NHL would probably be boring if teams did what we fans think is logical all the time, so you could be right.

I was trying to figure out which teams that are in the mix this year that might be looking to inject some scoring on the wing...I thought maybe our old buddy Anaheim for one of their studs.

LA looks to need some scoring help there too, and some people seem to like Jake Muzzin...27 years old and $4 mil cap hit until he's 30.  San Jose is another one that probably only has a few years left with the current bunch, and could use a little scoring, but I have no idea what kind of d-man they'd have that's interesting.

Nik mentioned this a few times in the actual Armchair GM thread, that because of the market set by Hall-Larsson, getting good value in a JvR for defenseman trade will be slim pickings (one team was already burned pretty good trading away JvR for a defenseman). Seems more likely we will get prospects/picks that we can then turn around into something else.

Anaheim has some attractive pieces with an aging core still in contention (and their coach is familiar with JvR, who sort of thrived in his system). Nashville is another, as is Minnesota (less compelling). Maybe Philly tires of semi-regular healthy scratch Gostisbehere (typed this out first try, no lie), or St. Louis does a U-turn and extends Shattenkirk to trade Parayko like a crazy team...

Sure, but markets adjust, and Edmonton had some pretty specific needs in terms of a guy that could step right in on an affordable deal with a bunch of term (so that they wouldn't have to worry about him leaving).

I really don't know what the trade market looks like today because we really haven't seen much for comparables lately.  I'll admit that I think Hall has a lot more value than JVR does, but I also think that things can change pretty quickly if you're a team suddenly in contention, and you've got the green light from ownership, so you decide to take a run...basically, teams do crazier things in February than they might in August.

 

[TBLeafer]

Just hypothesising that an older/slower team is gonna have a harder time producing a positive possession rating, than a younger/faster team in big, broad, general terms.

CorsiRel is not a hard and fast rule, either and has to be taken in context with other factors.

Relative, in this context, not referring to Corsi Relative but rather why you'd hypothesize about their possession numbers rather than looking at them and comparing the two teams based on what they actually are.

I was in Corsica at the time, looking at the team possession numbers of both when I made that post.

And yes, the Leafs have a positive team possession rating (by a very slight margin of 0.2) and Vancouver, a negative team possession rating (by a slightly more substantial rating of -1.52).

Who the players, play with is a factor.  I like GF% better than possession, too.

 

[TBLeafer]

But to say they aren't looking to move JVR in a way that improves the outlook of the current team both today AND into the future?

Sorry but I think that's a serious stretch.

That's also not what I said. I said it's not the primary focus of a JvR trade. The primary focus will be able the long-term improvement. Everything Lou and Shanny have said about the process, the plan, building the team, not getting too excited about their success so far this season, etc., has made that entirely clear. If they get an offer than provides the kind of long-term value they're looking for and improves the team, I have no doubt that's what they'd prefer, but improving this season's team is absolutely a secondary concern.

Or they don't find anything that ends up being to their liking and they end up keeping JVR around for 5 or 6 more years...