Phaneuf To Sens

[bustaheims]

Mmmmm I don't think there's much difference, but it's hardly an important point in any case.

Well, the difference is that, if Ottawa wasn't interested in Phaneuf, LL wouldn't have felt pressure to get a Phaneuf trade done ASAP. Once Ottawa showed interested and were willing to work out a favourable deal, then there was some urgency.

 

[herman]

Mmmmm I don't think there's much difference, but it's hardly an important point in any case.

Well, the difference is that, if Ottawa wasn't interested in Phaneuf, LL wouldn't have felt pressure to get a Phaneuf trade done ASAP. Once Ottawa showed interested and were willing to work out a favourable deal, then there was some urgency.

i.e. before Murray came to his senses.

 

[bustaheims]

Mmmmm I don't think there's much difference, but it's hardly an important point in any case.

Well, the difference is that, if Ottawa wasn't interested in Phaneuf, LL wouldn't have felt pressure to get a Phaneuf trade done ASAP. Once Ottawa showed interested and were willing to work out a favourable deal, then there was some urgency.

i.e. before Murray came to his senses.

Basically. There was urgency to take advantage of the opportunity. There wasn't urgency to create the opportunity, though.

 

[herman]

Mmmmm I don't think there's much difference, but it's hardly an important point in any case.

Well, the difference is that, if Ottawa wasn't interested in Phaneuf, LL wouldn't have felt pressure to get a Phaneuf trade done ASAP. Once Ottawa showed interested and were willing to work out a favourable deal, then there was some urgency.

i.e. before Murray came to his senses.

Basically. There was urgency to take advantage of the opportunity. There wasn't urgency to create the opportunity, though.

To be fair to Murray, this was a uniquely beneficial opportunity for Ottawa's situation. They dump 11.5 M in actual salary and take on only 7ish M for next year. And then Phaneuf's actual salary starts to drop in the latter years, even though the cap hit is high for his production. Being a budget team, rather than a cap team, Ottawa benefits from having a usable player, rather than the expensive buried contracts or injured players. In other words, a slightly more complicated Clarkson/Horton deal where the Leafs flex financial muscle to the mutual benefit of both teams.

 

[ZBBM]

I don't want to make (and I guess we don't really need) a Stamkos thread, so, since this is about an ex-captain and SS would be the next one were he to come here, I'll just put this here:

http://www.tsn.ca/leafs-have-remote-chance-of-landing-stamkos-1.437040

Here's the lede:

I will amend this story in a future Dreger Report if information unexpectedly materializes that forces me to adjust the position I'm about to present on the likelihood of Steven Stamkos choosing the Toronto Maple Leafs on July 1, otherwise known by TSN faithful as the ?Free Agent Frenzy.?

Note to Darren: if you are trying to be a wet blanket, then soak it -- don't sort of half-piddle on it and then reserve the right to throw it in the dryer if it turns out to stink.

 

[Kin]

I agree with your basic points but -- didn't Lou say something to the effect that he *had* to make this deal?

And Dave Nonis said something to the effect of David Clarkson being a terrific addition to the team. We're not talking about whether or not Lou Lamoriello liked the deal.

 

[Kin]

I agree with the general premise that Lou "had" to make the deal, given what the Sens were offering.  Rhetorically, was there ever going to be a better deal out there for Dion?

Considering how mediocre the return was? Sure. If Phaneuf still had some legs near the end of this deal he might have gotten just as good a return in two or three years when his contract was less of a burden.

And the fact that they may have gotten less for Dion than Winnick last year points to the fact that there wasn't much if any of a market for Dion, really.

Sure, but that's not really relevant to the question you asked. If you get a not very good return on a player there's not much of a market for and you don't really need the cap space...why would anyone consider that a terrific trade?

And (without going on exhaustively hopefully), the trade of Dion does open up, finally, the issue of Gardiner playing the power play on a regular basis, as well as Reilly.  The Leafs future is with these two defencemen, I would argue, rather than one with Dion.

Thinking that Phaneuf was being misused by Babcock doesn't in and of itself create a necessity to trade him since they could have used Gardiner on the PP without trading Phaneuf.

And I agree that Dion is no Clarkson  (who is, really)?  But I've always felt that comparing him to Clarkson was equivalent to minimizing his faults, or suggesting that he is a bona fide player since Clarkson was not.

Phaneuf absolutely is a bona fide player, a legitimate top 4 defenseman, and Clarkson is not.

 

[Kin]

This accepted notion that Phaneuf is a 5 million defenceman kind of confuses me.

The notion is based on what some think he'd be offered on the open market. What he'd accept is entirely dependent on what contract offers he'd have to choose from. You might disagree with how sought after he'd be as a UFA but the consensus you're talking about is a reflection of that, not whatever negotiating stance he might take.

 

[Joe S.]

This accepted notion that Phaneuf is a 5 million defenceman kind of confuses me.

The notion is based on what some think he'd be offered on the open market. What he'd accept is entirely dependent on what contract offers he'd have to choose from. You might disagree with how sought after he'd be as a UFA but the consensus you're talking about is a reflection of that, not whatever negotiating stance he might take.

Is it acceptable if I say 'well obviously'

but yes... I agree.

 

[LuncheonMeat]

I don't want to make (and I guess we don't really need) a Stamkos thread, so, since this is about an ex-captain and SS would be the next one were he to come here, I'll just put this here:

http://www.tsn.ca/leafs-have-remote-chance-of-landing-stamkos-1.437040

Here's the lede:

I will amend this story in a future Dreger Report if information unexpectedly materializes that forces me to adjust the position I'm about to present on the likelihood of Steven Stamkos choosing the Toronto Maple Leafs on July 1, otherwise known by TSN faithful as the ?Free Agent Frenzy.?

Note to Darren: if you are trying to be a wet blanket, then soak it -- don't sort of half-piddle on it and then reserve the right to throw it in the dryer if it turns out to stink.

And about 2 hours prior to Dreger raining on everyone's parade, LeBrun said he'd heard the Leafs were trying to trade for Stamkos' rights. Lou has run a pretty quiet ship to this point, so I have trouble believing these insiders knuckleheads have a clue what's going on with either of Stamkos or the Leafs.

 

[rdowdall]

I don't want to make (and I guess we don't really need) a Stamkos thread, so, since this is about an ex-captain and SS would be the next one were he to come here, I'll just put this here:

http://www.tsn.ca/leafs-have-remote-chance-of-landing-stamkos-1.437040

Here's the lede:

I will amend this story in a future Dreger Report if information unexpectedly materializes that forces me to adjust the position I'm about to present on the likelihood of Steven Stamkos choosing the Toronto Maple Leafs on July 1, otherwise known by TSN faithful as the ?Free Agent Frenzy.?

Note to Darren: if you are trying to be a wet blanket, then soak it -- don't sort of half-piddle on it and then reserve the right to throw it in the dryer if it turns out to stink.

And about 2 hours prior to Dreger raining on everyone's parade, LeBrun said he'd heard the Leafs were trying to trade for Stamkos' rights. Lou has run a pretty quiet ship to this point, so I have trouble believing these insiders knuckleheads have a clue what's going on with either of Stamkos or the Leafs.

Yeah I wouldn't believe that.  It makes next to no sense for the Leafs to trade for Stamkos's rights.  The only reason I could see them doing this would be to legally get world out that they are interested in him.  If your Stamkos though, I would think that you know that the Leafs would probably have some interest in you.  For the most part wouldn't all 30 teams in the NHL have interest in you?

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

I don't want to make (and I guess we don't really need) a Stamkos thread, so, since this is about an ex-captain and SS would be the next one were he to come here, I'll just put this here:

http://www.tsn.ca/leafs-have-remote-chance-of-landing-stamkos-1.437040

Here's the lede:

I will amend this story in a future Dreger Report if information unexpectedly materializes that forces me to adjust the position I'm about to present on the likelihood of Steven Stamkos choosing the Toronto Maple Leafs on July 1, otherwise known by TSN faithful as the ?Free Agent Frenzy.?

Note to Darren: if you are trying to be a wet blanket, then soak it -- don't sort of half-piddle on it and then reserve the right to throw it in the dryer if it turns out to stink.

And about 2 hours prior to Dreger raining on everyone's parade, LeBrun said he'd heard the Leafs were trying to trade for Stamkos' rights. Lou has run a pretty quiet ship to this point, so I have trouble believing these insiders knuckleheads have a clue what's going on with either of Stamkos or the Leafs.

Yeah I wouldn't believe that.  It makes next to no sense for the Leafs to trade for Stamkos's rights.  The only reason I could see them doing this would be to legally get world out that they are interested in him.  If your Stamkos though, I would think that you know that the Leafs would probably have some interest in you.  For the most part wouldn't all 30 teams in the NHL have interest in you?

Well, the one reason the Leafs might arguably consider trading for Stamkos' rights would be that, in that position, they could offer Stamkos an 8-year deal prior to July 1, and the most he could get from other teams is 7 years.  Them having his rights prior to July 1 is a negotiating advantage with him as well as an advantage for him if he wants to come here anyway and/or wants an 8-year deal.

 

[x.jr.benchwarmer]

I agree with the general premise that Lou "had" to make the deal, given what the Sens were offering.  Rhetorically, was there ever going to be a better deal out there for Dion?

Considering how mediocre the return was? Sure. If Phaneuf still had some legs near the end of this deal he might have gotten just as good a return in two or three years when his contract was less of a burden.

And the fact that they may have gotten less for Dion than Winnick last year points to the fact that there wasn't much if any of a market for Dion, really.

Sure, but that's not really relevant to the question you asked. If you get a not very good return on a player there's not much of a market for and you don't really need the cap space...why would anyone consider that a terrific trade?

And (without going on exhaustively hopefully), the trade of Dion does open up, finally, the issue of Gardiner playing the power play on a regular basis, as well as Reilly.  The Leafs future is with these two defencemen, I would argue, rather than one with Dion.

Thinking that Phaneuf was being misused by Babcock doesn't in and of itself create a necessity to trade him since they could have used Gardiner on the PP without trading Phaneuf.

And I agree that Dion is no Clarkson  (who is, really)?  But I've always felt that comparing him to Clarkson was equivalent to minimizing his faults, or suggesting that he is a bona fide player since Clarkson was not.

Phaneuf absolutely is a bona fide player, a legitimate top 4 defenseman, and Clarkson is not.

I will try to respond to your points sequentially (without being overly pedantic hopefully).

The premise that Phaneuf would be better in 2 years or so is not necessarily axiomatic.  His skating, mediocre at best over the last year or so, is ultimately going to hold him back, IMHO, going forward.

You brought up the point about Winnick.  It was a valid point to compare what he brought in as opposed to Dion, which again is pretty minimal.  But perhaps that is the reason why the trade resulted in a minimal return for Toronto because Dion may (I know his supporters might not want to hear it) be a relatively minimal talent.  I'm sorry;  we've all watched him play game in and game out for the past 5 plus years, and it hasn't been pretty good, really.

Phaneuf wasn't "misused" by Babcock.  I was pointing out that he was playing the power play, as one blogger noted, because his totals may have gone up, which would have improved his relatively minimal trade value.  The point I was making (perhaps vainly) was that there wasn't any good hockey reason to keep on playing him as a de facto quarterback of the power play when it was ranked around 28th or 29th, and Gardiner is a terrific young talent who is better now than Phaneuf is offensively, and I think even now Reilly is better offensively.

I think that pretty well every commentator on the trade has considered it a good one for Toronto because of the terrible contract that the Leafs signed with him a couple of years ago.  And also because he was deemed, by Burke and Noonis,  as a star defenceman, and for the team to be built around him on the blueline, but that was obviously flawed.  (And both are no longer GMs coincidentally).

And I agree with you that he is playing on the second defence pairing with Ottawa now.  So that by definition makes him a 3rd or 4th ranked defenceman on an NHL team.  But there were many arguments over the last few years about him being a #1 or a true #1  or a de facto #1A,  or a #2  or a #3, that never seemed to resolve themselves, of course.  The fact that he has been traded for so little may possibly support the premise that he is a 3 or 4 defenceman on a mediocre team.  If that makes him a bona fide player, well, OK.... 

Like pretty well every Leaf fan, you hope that he does well with Ottawa.  He is classy, and was good with the young guys, and seemed to care when the Leafs lost (and lost) while he was the captain.  It's just that he is, well, overrated, and not quick, and not offensive, and perhaps his talent level, and ultimate worth, to an NHL team can be hashed out by the Sens fans now. 

For Toronto fans, arguably, it just doesn't make any difference if the trade "had' to be made or if they should have gotten more (which I haven't read from any "insider/expert" which has indicated that the Leafs should have waited, or gotten more).

 

[Kin]

The premise that Phaneuf would be better in 2 years or so is not necessarily axiomatic.

I didn't say Phaneuf would be better in two years. I said that in a few years he "might" still be a contributing defenseman and that his contract would be less onerous at that point. So just like the return for Kessel might have theoretically been higher at some point in the future(although all evidence we have points to it not being that way), the same is true for Phaneuf.

You brought up the point about Winnick.  It was a valid point to compare what he brought in as opposed to Dion, which again is pretty minimal.  But perhaps that is the reason why the trade resulted in a minimal return for Toronto because Dion may (I know his supporters might not want to hear it) be a relatively minimal talent.

You're missing the point. I'm not disputing what Phaneuf's value is or that what they got for him isn't reflective of that. I'm saying that trading a not very valuable player for a not very good return isn't a great trade unless you needed to get salary off the books, which the Leafs didn't. The assets returned aren't likely to make a huge difference in the rebuild, neither is the cap space. For a trade to be great, I think it would need to qualify for one of those two.

The point I was making (perhaps vainly) was that there wasn't any good hockey reason to keep on playing him as a de facto quarterback of the power play when it was ranked around 28th or 29th, and Gardiner is a terrific young talent who is better now than Phaneuf is offensively, and I think even now Reilly is better offensively.

If you think that Phaneuf isn't the right guy for the #1 PP spot, if Gardiner or Rielly is better suited for it, then yes you're arguing that Babcock was misusing Phaneuf.

Phaneuf being traded doesn't change the fact that Babcock could have used Gardiner or Rielly on the PP any time he wanted. That argument, that those two guys are better suited to QB the #1 PP unit, has nothing to do with the trade.

For Toronto fans, arguably, it just doesn't make any difference if the trade "had' to be made or if they should have gotten more (which I haven't read from any "insider/expert" which has indicated that the Leafs should have waited, or gotten more).

Sure. So the only way to look at this trade as being any better or worse than the Kessel trade is to be entirely inconsistent and contradictory in how it's evaluated because if those things mattered hugely then, they should matter now. The return on Kessel was reflective of his value at the time he was traded, so was Phaneuf's. That's why I'm ok with both.

 

[LuncheonMeat]

I don't want to make (and I guess we don't really need) a Stamkos thread, so, since this is about an ex-captain and SS would be the next one were he to come here, I'll just put this here:

http://www.tsn.ca/leafs-have-remote-chance-of-landing-stamkos-1.437040

Here's the lede:

I will amend this story in a future Dreger Report if information unexpectedly materializes that forces me to adjust the position I'm about to present on the likelihood of Steven Stamkos choosing the Toronto Maple Leafs on July 1, otherwise known by TSN faithful as the ?Free Agent Frenzy.?

Note to Darren: if you are trying to be a wet blanket, then soak it -- don't sort of half-piddle on it and then reserve the right to throw it in the dryer if it turns out to stink.

And about 2 hours prior to Dreger raining on everyone's parade, LeBrun said he'd heard the Leafs were trying to trade for Stamkos' rights. Lou has run a pretty quiet ship to this point, so I have trouble believing these insiders knuckleheads have a clue what's going on with either of Stamkos or the Leafs.

Yeah I wouldn't believe that.  It makes next to no sense for the Leafs to trade for Stamkos's rights.  The only reason I could see them doing this would be to legally get world out that they are interested in him.  If your Stamkos though, I would think that you know that the Leafs would probably have some interest in you.  For the most part wouldn't all 30 teams in the NHL have interest in you?

Well, the one reason the Leafs might arguably consider trading for Stamkos' rights would be that, in that position, they could offer Stamkos an 8-year deal prior to July 1, and the most he could get from other teams is 7 years.  Them having his rights prior to July 1 is a negotiating advantage with him as well as an advantage for him if he wants to come here anyway and/or wants an 8-year deal.

A sign and trade was also discussed, but that makes even less sense. Stamkos would get his 8-year deal, but would then be at the mercy of Tampa to deal him where he wants to go.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

I don't want to make (and I guess we don't really need) a Stamkos thread, so, since this is about an ex-captain and SS would be the next one were he to come here, I'll just put this here:

http://www.tsn.ca/leafs-have-remote-chance-of-landing-stamkos-1.437040

Here's the lede:

I will amend this story in a future Dreger Report if information unexpectedly materializes that forces me to adjust the position I'm about to present on the likelihood of Steven Stamkos choosing the Toronto Maple Leafs on July 1, otherwise known by TSN faithful as the ?Free Agent Frenzy.?

Note to Darren: if you are trying to be a wet blanket, then soak it -- don't sort of half-piddle on it and then reserve the right to throw it in the dryer if it turns out to stink.

And about 2 hours prior to Dreger raining on everyone's parade, LeBrun said he'd heard the Leafs were trying to trade for Stamkos' rights. Lou has run a pretty quiet ship to this point, so I have trouble believing these insiders knuckleheads have a clue what's going on with either of Stamkos or the Leafs.

Yeah I wouldn't believe that.  It makes next to no sense for the Leafs to trade for Stamkos's rights.  The only reason I could see them doing this would be to legally get world out that they are interested in him.  If your Stamkos though, I would think that you know that the Leafs would probably have some interest in you.  For the most part wouldn't all 30 teams in the NHL have interest in you?

Well, the one reason the Leafs might arguably consider trading for Stamkos' rights would be that, in that position, they could offer Stamkos an 8-year deal prior to July 1, and the most he could get from other teams is 7 years.  Them having his rights prior to July 1 is a negotiating advantage with him as well as an advantage for him if he wants to come here anyway and/or wants an 8-year deal.

A sign and trade was also discussed, but that makes even less sense. Stamkos would get his 8-year deal, but would then be at the mercy of Tampa to deal him where he wants to go.

That's not how sign-and-trades work.

 

[LuncheonMeat]

I don't want to make (and I guess we don't really need) a Stamkos thread, so, since this is about an ex-captain and SS would be the next one were he to come here, I'll just put this here:

http://www.tsn.ca/leafs-have-remote-chance-of-landing-stamkos-1.437040

Here's the lede:

I will amend this story in a future Dreger Report if information unexpectedly materializes that forces me to adjust the position I'm about to present on the likelihood of Steven Stamkos choosing the Toronto Maple Leafs on July 1, otherwise known by TSN faithful as the ?Free Agent Frenzy.?

Note to Darren: if you are trying to be a wet blanket, then soak it -- don't sort of half-piddle on it and then reserve the right to throw it in the dryer if it turns out to stink.

And about 2 hours prior to Dreger raining on everyone's parade, LeBrun said he'd heard the Leafs were trying to trade for Stamkos' rights. Lou has run a pretty quiet ship to this point, so I have trouble believing these insiders knuckleheads have a clue what's going on with either of Stamkos or the Leafs.

Yeah I wouldn't believe that.  It makes next to no sense for the Leafs to trade for Stamkos's rights.  The only reason I could see them doing this would be to legally get world out that they are interested in him.  If your Stamkos though, I would think that you know that the Leafs would probably have some interest in you.  For the most part wouldn't all 30 teams in the NHL have interest in you?

Well, the one reason the Leafs might arguably consider trading for Stamkos' rights would be that, in that position, they could offer Stamkos an 8-year deal prior to July 1, and the most he could get from other teams is 7 years.  Them having his rights prior to July 1 is a negotiating advantage with him as well as an advantage for him if he wants to come here anyway and/or wants an 8-year deal.

A sign and trade was also discussed, but that makes even less sense. Stamkos would get his 8-year deal, but would then be at the mercy of Tampa to deal him where he wants to go.

That's not how sign-and-trades work.

The trade is negotiated prior to signing as well?

 

[bustaheims]

The trade is negotiated prior to signing as well?

Yes. The player doesn't sign the contract until the trade is finalized.

 

[Highlander]

What team is going to sell the farm for SS when they can wait until he walks in the summer and then he can to to the highest bidder or the Leafs

 

[Al14]

I trust that Lou has included a no take back clause in the Phaneuf trade paperwork.  8)