Phaneuf being shopped
- Thread starter WhatIfGodWasALeaf
- Start date
RedLeaf said:
Please don't sign Brooks Orpik Please don't sign Brooks Orpik Please don't sign Brooks Orpik Please don't sign Brooks Orpik Please don't sign Brooks Orpik Please don't sign Brooks Orpik Please don't sign Brooks Orpik Please don't sign Brooks Orpik Please don't sign Brooks Orpik
bustaheims
Well-known member
CarltonTheBear said:
This times a billion.
louisstamos
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:
I'm with you. Niskanen? Absolutely (although he'll probably cost a fortune).
Orpik? No, thank you.
You guys know that we're totally signing Brooks Orpik though, right?
bustaheims
Well-known member
CarltonTheBear said:
My head knows, but the rest of me hasn't accepted it as a foregone conclusion yet.
L K said:
Bolland wears the C next season with Orpik and McClement as the As.
Nik the Trik said:
Let me preface this comment by saying I really don't think the Leafs are going to trade Phaneuf. I just made an offhand comment that I didn't expect to be taken too seriously ...
But supposing they did trade him, I do think Phaneuf should have significant value. The cap is going to go up a fair amount so there are going to be quite a number of teams who will be thinking about how to use that extra cap space they now have. At the same time, there aren't that many great free agent defensemen (or great free agents of any kind) on the market. So supply and demand suggests that a guy like Phaneuf, even with his salary, would have some suitors (especially if we can facilitate the trade by taking back some salary).
It would be unusual to see a trade of a quite good 28-year-old player at position X for an even better player at position X in their prime or younger. In other words, I'm all for the Phaneuf-for-Doughty trade, but it doesn't seem likely IMHO.
I'm also all for the Phaneuf-for-Crosby (or insert some other not-Crosby 1st line center that might make a difference to our team) trade too, but I don't think that will happen either. Teams just don't trade those top-line guys very often.
As suggested, we could get back a 70%-as-good-defenseman plus some other mediocre players or just a whole bunch of mediocre players or mediocre players and mediocre picks. I think such a trade would be silly. We can re-sign or own mediocre players (Kulemin, Bolland, etc) or grab a couple through free agency or via other trades.
May be I'm just not that imaginative but the most beneficial and realistic trades I can see are those where the "good" stuff we get back for Phaneuf are younger parts that we hope will be good later and take some time to mature. That's why I'd speculate a Phaneuf trade won't make us better next year.
Kin
Active member
princedpw said:
I think you're kind of mashing up two separate points here. The first being Phaneuf's relative value around the league and the second being Phaneuf's value to the Leafs specifically.
The "70% as good" defenseman I used as a hypothetical wasn't an example of something the Leafs should look for in a trade but rather an example of how you could add someone who isn't as good as Phaneuf and the end result wouldn't be "a huge hole" on defense but rather a small hole that could be filled by the natural improvement of players already on the roster.
I didn't really respond much to the idea that trading Phaneuf would likely make the team worse next year because I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing but, again, I think this is where I see a discrepancy between what people claim Phaneuf's value to be and what they think it might be in a trade.
Imagine, if you will, the Penguins were interested in trading Evgeni Malkin. The fundamental nature of how good Malkin is means that, almost certainly, they won't be getting someone as good in return. How a trade of Evgeni Malkin would make the Penguins better, therefore, is by the combination of players they might receive. If San Jose offered Couture and Vlasic, for instance, neither player is as good as Malkin but neither player is "mediocre" or the sort easily attainable through free agency.
RedLeaf said:
Than Orpik? Of course. Boyle won't be looking for a long-term contract because of his age. Still, he wouldn't really be near the top of my list and I've said this before but I'm 98% certain he signs with the Rangers this summer.
Rebel_1812
New member
CarltonTheBear said:
You'd rather have a dinosaur on the team?
Rebel_1812 said:
You realize that dinosaur led one of the best teams in the league this season in ice-time, right?
Nik the Trik said:
I totally understand how that works, I just don't think that is the likely outcome of a Phaneuf trade for a variety of reasons (and I don't think a Phaneuf trade is likely in the first place). And if Phaneuf was traded, I'd hope it was for futures that would see the Leafs worse next year but better some time further in the future ...
L K
Well-known member
CarltonTheBear said:
Thanks, I just checked myself onto the liver transplant list in advance of all the drinking I am doing. Seriously I feel like we are going to see a lot of bad decisions this offseason. It would be reasonable to wait and see what happens but I'm not banking on that happening.
Kin
Active member
princedpw said:
I don't necessrily think the Leafs are likely to trade Phaneuf either but I wasn't really commenting on that. I was just responding to the assertion that trading him would necessarily leave a huge hole in the team's defense along with the seeming incongruity between the relatively high regard expressed for his contributions to the team and the relative low regard for what he might fetch in a trade.