Sun: Leafs interested in Joe Thornton

[jdh1]

Deon could fetch us a much younger top line center. Sorry I am not a fan of trading to get older.

I with you there.I've seen too many GM's come in over the years to try to make there mark on the team,for a short term fix,and as a result set the team back long term.

Youth only please...Mr.Shanahan

 

[Champ Kind]

Deon could fetch us a much younger top line center. Sorry I am not a fan of trading to get older.

I with you there.I've seen too many GM's come in over the years to try to make there mark on the team,for a short term fix,and as a result set the team back long term.

Youth only please...Mr.Shanahan

But it's not an either-or scenario.  Look at Chicago, sure their core players are in their mid 20's, but they also have extremely valuable complimentary pieces that are a bit older (I'm thinking of Hossa primarily). 

I don't know why it has to be black or white.  If the acquisition cost is right, this is absolutely the type of deal you make.

 

[Kin]

it changes the voice in the dressing room and if Phaneuf is as polarizing in the room as he is with the fans, then it could be a good thing.  Joe is a very different type of person and leader at least from what we can see and seems far more of an easy going guy off the ice than Phaneuf.  If Shanny thinks there truly is a leadership issue with Dion then this allows him to hit the reset button there, strengthen his team at one of its weakest positions, and look at options to shore up the defense in other ways.

Those ifs are too many and too based on conjecture for me to give it a lot of credence. I'm not a guy who completely dismisses the impact of leadership on a hockey club but I'm also not going to give it the kind of weight you are giving it here. I'm certainly not going to make a move on that basis when the guy the Leafs would be acquiring is someone with a pretty modest history of team accomplishment himself.

 

[Andy007]

Deon could fetch us a much younger top line center. Sorry I am not a fan of trading to get older.

I with you there.I've seen too many GM's come in over the years to try to make there mark on the team,for a short term fix,and as a result set the team back long term.

Youth only please...Mr.Shanahan

But it's not an either-or scenario.  Look at Chicago, sure their core players are in their mid 20's, but they also have extremely valuable complimentary pieces that are a bit older (I'm thinking of Hossa primarily). 

I don't know why it has to be black or white.  If the acquisition cost is right, this is absolutely the type of deal you make.

Not to mention the value in erasing the last few years of Phaneuf's contract from the books.

 

[Champ Kind]

Deon could fetch us a much younger top line center. Sorry I am not a fan of trading to get older.

I with you there.I've seen too many GM's come in over the years to try to make there mark on the team,for a short term fix,and as a result set the team back long term.

Youth only please...Mr.Shanahan

But it's not an either-or scenario.  Look at Chicago, sure their core players are in their mid 20's, but they also have extremely valuable complimentary pieces that are a bit older (I'm thinking of Hossa primarily). 

I don't know why it has to be black or white.  If the acquisition cost is right, this is absolutely the type of deal you make.

Not to mention the value in erasing the last few years of Phaneuf's contract from the books.

Well, that, too.  But this assumes that the deal is Phaneuf for Thornton (which, by the way, I would strongly entertain).

 

[Kin]

But it's not an either-or scenario.  Look at Chicago, sure their core players are in their mid 20's, but they also have extremely valuable complimentary pieces that are a bit older (I'm thinking of Hossa primarily). 

Except in that case the "older" player Chicago acquired was basically the same age as the "younger" one the Leafs would be giving up here.

 

[bakeapples]

Meanwhile in Mimico, David Clarkson falls down again.

 

[jdh1]

Deon could fetch us a much younger top line center. Sorry I am not a fan of trading to get older.

I with you there.I've seen too many GM's come in over the years to try to make there mark on the team,for a short term fix,and as a result set the team back long term.

Youth only please...Mr.Shanahan

But it's not an either-or scenario.  Look at Chicago, sure their core players are in their mid 20's, but they also have extremely valuable complimentary pieces that are a bit older (I'm thinking of Hossa primarily). 

I don't know why it has to be black or white.  If the acquisition cost is right, this is absolutely the type of deal you make.

I'm OK with veteran presence on a team,it's actually needfull...however I like to see that primarily when a team is a serious contender,not when a team like the Leafs are in a halfway rebuild.

All though moving Phanuef at his age of upper 20's with his contract so long,that might have to be a exception.

 

[Champ Kind]

But it's not an either-or scenario.  Look at Chicago, sure their core players are in their mid 20's, but they also have extremely valuable complimentary pieces that are a bit older (I'm thinking of Hossa primarily). 

Except in that case the "older" player Chicago acquired was basically the same age as the "younger" one the Leafs would be giving up here.

Well, ok, at the time of acquisition, you're right..  But my point being they built a pretty good team with some important complimentary pieces that are significantly older than the core.  Maybe Iginla would have been a better example.

 

[Kin]

Well, ok, at the time of acquisition, you're right..  But my point being they built a pretty good team with some important complimentary pieces that are significantly older than the core.  Maybe Iginla would have been a better example.

To clarify, I don't fundamentally disagree with your premise, bringing in Thornton wouldn't necessarily be a bad decision, just that it's important to frame it in the correct sense. When the Blackhawks brought in Hossa they had good reason to think that he could be a very productive player for 5 or 6 years and so he was still a part of a building process. Bringing in Thornton, and I know we've talked about the Leafs' motivations in this regard before, is a move you're making for the purpose of competing immediately. In that sense it's more or less a finishing touch which, at least with regards to the Leafs, seems fairly premature.

So Iginla may be a better example although he's really more of an example of how a team that's already built can supplement themselves. He provided some good hockey for the Bruins, sure, but nobody looked at that acquisition and said "Well, now the Bruins can really make some noise".

 

[Sudafederov]

Meanwhile in Mimico, David Clarkson falls down again.

while trying to power through a 1 on 4

 

[dappleganger]

Going after Stastny makes more sense.

Unless it's a swap of Phaneuf for Thornton. The Leafs can't give up talented youth for 3 years of Thornton. The Leafs aren't one piece away or else picking up Joe would make more sense in that case.

 

[Redleaf]

Going after Stastny makes more sense.

Unless it's a swap of Phaneuf for Thornton. The Leafs can't give up talented youth for 3 years of Thornton. The Leafs aren't one piece away or else picking up Joe would make more sense in that case.

Statsny is more age appropriate for this team. However, I'd still do my best to try and find a top 3 defenseman ahead of a centerman, especially if they move Phaneuf this summer. If that's the case they'd really need to find 2 top 6 guys on the blueline.

 

[bustaheims]

Going after Stastny makes more sense.

Unless it's a swap of Phaneuf for Thornton. The Leafs can't give up talented youth for 3 years of Thornton. The Leafs aren't one piece away or else picking up Joe would make more sense in that case.

Even Phaneuf for Thornton doesn't really make sense, for all the reasons Nik has pointed out. The Leafs need the help on the backend more than they need the help on the top line right now. Honestly, the only way a trade for Thornton really makes sense for the Leafs is if it's for a package of Bozak and Gleason or Clarkson.

 

[Kin]

Unless it's a swap of Phaneuf for Thornton. The Leafs can't give up talented youth for 3 years of Thornton.

Just to expand on this, I really think people are underestimating what it means to be 35 or older in the NHL. I know that a lot of us tend to think of guys like Jagr, who seems like he'll be playing top flight hockey forever, or Sundin who basically never slowed down but the reality is that there are tons of players who really did hit a wall at 36 or 37 whether based on ability or injury. Good players. Hall of Fame calibre players.

Sergei Fedorov scored 31 goals and 65 points at 34 and then never scored 20 or 50 again.  Doug Gilmour at 36 scored 25 goals and 73 points, then played three more years topping out at 41 points. Steve Yzerman scored 79 points at 34, then was never able to stay healthy again. Mike Modano had 77 points at 35, then never hit 60 again. Again, this isn't to say that Thornton couldn't be a good player for the next three years, there are exceptional players who are effective at 38 and beyond but the reality for a lot of these guys is that it's not gradual. They lose a step and they're just not the same players they were.

So Thornton putting up good numbers last year...it's a good sign, sure, but it doesn't mean all that much for next year or the year after.

 

[freer]

Unless it's a swap of Phaneuf for Thornton. The Leafs can't give up talented youth for 3 years of Thornton.

Just to expand on this, I really think people are underestimating what it means to be 35 or older in the NHL. I know that a lot of us tend to think of guys like Jagr, who seems like he'll be playing top flight hockey forever, or Sundin who basically never slowed down but the reality is that there are tons of players who really did hit a wall at 36 or 37 whether based on ability or injury. Good players. Hall of Fame calibre players.

Sergei Fedorov scored 31 goals and 65 points at 34 and then never scored 20 or 50 again.  Doug Gilmour at 36 scored 25 goals and 73 points, then played three more years topping out at 41 points. Steve Yzerman scored 79 points at 34, then was never able to stay healthy again. Mike Modano had 77 points at 35, then never hit 60 again. Again, this isn't to say that Thornton couldn't be a good player for the next three years, there are exceptional players who are effective at 38 and beyond but the reality for a lot of these guys is that it's not gradual. They lose a step and they're just not the same players they were.

So Thornton putting up good numbers last year...it's a good sign, sure, but it doesn't mean all that much for next year or the year after.

Jaromir Jagr  had 67 pts at 42. Just Saying

 

[Kin]

Jaromir Jagr  had 67 pts at 42. Just Saying

Right, that's why I mention him in my post.

 

[Courtnall]

Is it just me or does it seem like the big skilled players can play at a high level for longer?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Is it just me or does it seem like the big skilled players can play at a high level for longer?

I think generally speaking speed is the most important thing players lose when they age. And so players who never really relied on speed in the first place to be effective, like Thornton, have a better chance of remaining a top player into their late 30s than somebody who is losing their best asset.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Is it just me or does it seem like the big skilled players can play at a high level for longer?

I think generally speaking speed is the most important thing players lose when they age. And so players who never really relied on speed in the first place to be effective, like Thornton, have a better chance of remaining a top player into their late 30s than somebody who is losing their best asset.

Case in point, Jason Allison.