mr grieves said:
A solid top 4 defenseman, which I think is the greatest need going into next season, can be found on the UFA market -- but it'll consume salary and have a term longer than might be considered good cap management.
If that's so, then bundling your cheap, moderately appealing assets to acquire something those assets do tend to get -- decent top-4 options on not-terrible contracts is not unprecedented return, I don't think -- might have been a better use of Frattin, Scrivens, and a second-rounder.
That such a deal wasn't made is not evidence that such a deal wasn't out there. That the deal remains 'imaginary' only means that it didn't come together, perhaps because it wasn't even pursued. And, given the news that Nonis was after Bernier since his second week on the job, I think there is some evidence for that.
And that's all we who doubt the deal because of how Nonis is spending assets and prioritizing team needs need show.
The mistake, though, that you're still making is the same one that people made when they looked at the Colton Orr signing and concluded that Nonis thought signing Orr was more important than re-signing Kessel, in fact that it was his top priority, simply by virtue of the fact that it happened first. But as I've said recently, although I'm really surprised I have to, things don't really work in that strict a linear sense when it comes to off-season decision making. Not only because Nonis is a capable guy with a large staff who can pursue multiple things at once that play out at their own speed but just because of the nature of the off-season and how it's structured. Some deals are available before the draft, some during and some after.
Unlike you I can't speak for anybody other than myself on this deal but for myself, and I suspect a lot of the people who don't share your concerns would agree, is that Nonis doesn't get to dictate how things play out with other teams or players he has to sign so the order in which things get done is less a reflection on his priorities and more a reflection on circumstances beyond his control . I'm sure you'd agree for instance that, provided we assume that Nonis felt that improving the goaltending was an important part of his off-season plan, that to not make this move for Bernier when it was available because he hadn't already addressed the defense would be kind of tunnel-visioned. A good GM, I think, is one who leaps at the opportunity to improve the club significantly even if it's maybe not according to a strict list of the team's hierarchical needs.
Right? I mean let's say, again bear with me for the sake of argument, that Nonis wants to address the defense via free agency. Let's also assume, and I know this is an area you tend to be skeptical but give me some room, let's even assume there's a player he likes that he's targeted that he believes he can sign to a contract that isn't a gross inflation of his value. Let's pretend that Nonis, who's a smart guy, is fully aware of the options available to him and thinks that this would be the best possible way to improve whatever deficiencies there are on the blue line.
Well, the nature of the beast in that scenario is that no matter what the value Nonis places on that defense, no matter where it ranks in terms of relative import to the goaltending situation is that he can't get it done for a couple weeks. The Bernier trade doesn't reflect on that.
Ah, but of course, you're not one for that regardless because you think that rather than test the waters of free agency where the best laid plans of Gillis and Men are often led astray the Leafs should have
rather used the assets packaged for Bernier on a defenseman who comes at a very reasonable price and is a good addition to the top 4. Well, I'm sorry for maybe seeming obstinate and maybe even a little frustrated but that really is something that I think you have to let play out before you criticize it for not being done. Not only do I think that you're severely underrating what guys like that do get dealt for but even if you're not I do think that you can't just assume that one's available because Nonis might want one to be. If Ryan Mcdonagh gets dealt tomorrow for a second round pick, Ben Scrivens-lite and some team's Matt Frattin level roster player, yeah, give Nonis crap for not being on it but until that happens? I think you have to assume that he's trying to improve his team in any way possible.
And then to take it back to the specific comment you're posting on, which wasn't meant to be all that serious, even if that McDonagh or comparable trade is out there? The Leafs still have the assets to do it. If someone's going for cheap? The Leafs can be in on it. So, no, I still can't get to a point where the Bernier trade plausibly means either that A) Nonis doesn't want to improve the team the way you might want him to or B) that if he does, it ties his hands in any way.
