So, about Phil Kessel...

[hockeyfan1]

Trade proposal:  To Islanders >>> Kessel.
                       To Leafs >>> Michael Grabner >>> a 2nd round pick >>> a defensive prospect (Scott Mayfield /  Matt Donovan)

Kessel + Tavares = dynamic pairing (or something thereof)

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Trade proposal:  To Islanders >>> Kessel.
                      To Leafs >>> Michael Grabner >>> a 2nd round pick >>> a defensive prospect (Scott Mayfield /  Matt Donovan)

Kessel + Tavares = dynamic pairing (or something thereof)

A bottom 6 forward, a 2nd round pick, and a mediocre prospect? Wow, sign me up!

 

[Highlander]

Kessel is worth a low first round pick and a good prospect at the least. If we have to take back someone like Semin so be it.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Trade proposal:  To Islanders >>> Kessel.
                      To Leafs >>> Michael Grabner >>> a 2nd round pick >>> a defensive prospect (Scott Mayfield /  Matt Donovan)

Kessel + Tavares = dynamic pairing (or something thereof)

A bottom 6 forward, a 2nd round pick, and a mediocre prospect? Wow, sign me up!

A very weak proposal, indeed.  I already knew that, but posted it anyways.

May I ask, what's yours?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

May I ask, what's yours?

I mean I don't have a proposal set for every team, but at the very least I would be looking for a somewhat high draft pick (top-10/15) or a prospect with top line potential.

 

[Redleaf]

It's funny, a lot of Leaf fans have a propensity to overvalue Leaf players in general. With Kessel, after one so-so season, fans are going to the opposite side of the spectrum and are willing to give him away for peanuts, or at the very most a low-end return.

 

[Highlander]

The real problem we have to ask: "is Phil coachable", will Babcock tolerate his way just for talents sake? My gut feeling on this is no. I am a Kessel fan and think he can score 50 in the league with the right centre.
So a top 6 first rounder and a great prospect Top 3 or 6 would be the least I would take for him.  The question is can Marner replace his firepower?

 

[herman]

I'm not good at this sort of thing, but I've been wanting to play:

Initially I thought:
To Minnesota: Phil Kessel (8M until 21/22), Roman Polak (2.75M until 15/16)
To Toronto: Tomas Vanek (6.5M until 16/17), Jason Zucker (0.9M EL until 15/16), Nino Niedderreiter (2.66M until 16/17), 2015 1st Rd

Phil gets to go 'home' and finally play with a good line (Koivu/Parise) because they need scoring and that's what he does. Minnesota gets some D depth as well, as well as dumping some heavier salary from their bottom six.
Toronto gets shorter terms with some underachiever projects (Vanek, Niedderreiter) that can potentially be rehabbed into deadline deals; rounding out the trade are good potential pieces going forward (Zucker/Pick).

 

[Redleaf]

The real problem we have to ask: "is Phil coachable", will Babcock tolerate his way just for talents sake? My gut feeling on this is no. I am a Kessel fan and think he can score 50 in the league with the right centre.
So a top 6 first rounder and a great prospect Top 3 or 6 would be the least I would take for him.  The question is can Marner replace his firepower?

Which brings up an important question, at least in my mind. Is he uncoachable or has he had coaches in Toronto that just couldnt relate to him well enough? I don't know if he's already punched his ticket out of town yet or not, but it wouldn't surprise me if Babcock could turn his game around. I mean, it's worth a shot isn't it? If he's able to, it gives the club more options moving forward.  Keep a sniper that isn't all that great at playing defense, or deal him for way more than some of the low end returns getting thrown out there now.

 

[Kin]

It's funny, a lot of Leaf fans have a propensity to overvalue Leaf players in general. With Kessel, after one so-so season, fans are going to the opposite side of the spectrum and are willing to give him away for peanuts, or at the very most a low-end return.

Or they're just willing to trade him for whatever the market actually is for him and think that it's probably low.

I think some people don't really understand what "rebuilding" means.

 

[Redleaf]

It's funny, a lot of Leaf fans have a propensity to overvalue Leaf players in general. With Kessel, after one so-so season, fans are going to the opposite side of the spectrum and are willing to give him away for peanuts, or at the very most a low-end return.

Or they're just willing to trade him for whatever the market actually is for him and think that it's probably low.

I think some people don't really understand what "rebuilding" means.

I'm quite aware of what rebuilding means Nik. Thank-you. What I'm unsure of is what the plan entails as far as Kessel goes. Does Babcock want to keep him for the rebuild or does management want to get whatever the current market yields and be happy with that?

 

[Kin]

I'm quite aware of what rebuilding means Nik. Thank-you. What I'm unsure of is what the plan entails as far as Kessel goes. Does Babcock want to keep him for the rebuild or does management want to get whatever the current market yields and be happy with that?

Everyone's unsure of that. But the fans "willing to give him away for peanuts" are fans who want to trade him for current market value. If it's high, great, if it's low...well, again, that's what rebuilding is.

 

[Redleaf]

I'm quite aware of what rebuilding means Nik. Thank-you. What I'm unsure of is what the plan entails as far as Kessel goes. Does Babcock want to keep him for the rebuild or does management want to get whatever the current market yields and be happy with that?

Everyone's unsure of that. But the fans "willing to give him away for peanuts" are fans who want to trade him for current market value. If it's high, great, if it's low...well, again, that's what rebuilding is.

There's also a possibility they go ahead with the rebuild and keep Kessel for one more year, right?

 

[Highlander]

quite possible and if he looks great then trade him when his value is peaking

 

[Kin]

There's also a possibility they go ahead with the rebuild and keep Kessel for one more year, right?

Sure. But it's an option that is pretty undesirable to a lot of people who think that A) It'll delay the rebuild B) It's not likely to improve Kessel's value C) It actually will probably decrease Kessel's value and D) You'll miss out on a year of development for the prospects/picks you could get for Kessel right now.

Wanting to trade Kessel right now for whatever the market will bear isn't really a statement on Kessel's value. Just an acknowledgment that rebuilding isn't really about what you get for the players you trade.

 

[Redleaf]

quite possible and if he looks great then trade him when his value is peaking

Right. Maximize your assets. It's the same reason traders don't sell their shares when the market is at an all time low. Patience is big part of a rebuild. This is just another aspect of that.

 

[Kin]

quite possible and if he looks great then trade him when his value is peaking

And what if he doesn't look great? What if you're then stuck trying to trade him next year after two bad seasons and with him a year older? What's the return on him then?

"Maximizing your assets" means selling at the right time, not that values only ever go up.

 

[Redleaf]

quite possible and if he looks great then trade him when his value is peaking

And what if he doesn't look great? What if you're then stuck trying to trade him next year after two bad seasons and with him a year older? What's the return on him then?

"Maximizing your assets" means selling at the right time, not that values only ever go up.

You also have to take into consideration his past play, and logically analyze the decision. I think there are more reasons for him rebounding than there are for further depreciation. Than again, if he fails under Babcock, he might lose more value. I think the smart money is on him having a better season than last though.

 

[Kin]

Than again, if he fails under Babcock, he might lose more value.

There's no "might" about it. If Kessel has another bad year he's going to lose more value.

"Cutting your losses" is also a pretty solid financial concept and I believe that it's more likely than not that Kessel struggles next year if he stays around.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Let's be serious, no team is trading for Phil thinking that he's a 60-point player. They might be a little wary of his poor season but anyone willing to give up assets for him is fully expecting him to get back to scoring 70-80 points. Also, any increase in value that keeping him for another season provides would likely be cancelled out by the fact that any team trading for him is getting 1 less season of Phil Kessel in his prime.