The Leo Komarov Question
- Thread starter Arn
- Start date
bustaheims
Active member
Bates said:
What's the point in holding on to him now? What tangible benefit does holding on to him - that can't be provided by a wide range of other players - provide the Leafs when they're ready to compete and he's entering his mid 30s, when players that play his style generally become less effective, or, sometimes, flat out ineffective?
The return from trading Komarov - under the safe assumption that it's assets of legitimate value in the mould that the team has been focusing on acquiring since Shanahan and Co. started down the current path - could provide significant value to the team when, in 5 years, they're a legit contender. Komarov, on the other hand, is unlikely to be able to. Again, no one is promoting simply giving him away, but if a team offers legitimate value - even if the value of the return is not as high as some people would like - it's in the Leafs' best interest to make that move.
I haven't seen the return so can't fully answer on why not just deal. But for me I want the kids to learn the right way by someone who leads by example and the previous list was a little short in that department. And as a fan I want to be entertained every year by a team that's in the entertainment business and not the Stanley Cup business.
bustaheims said:
Kin
New member
Bates said:
If you don't have the confidence that the guys running the team are competent to the point that among the available 3rd line types they're able to sign decent ones to reasonable deals or develop prospects of that magnitude then the return on trading the current 3rd line types on the team should be the least of your concerns.
herman
Well-known member
Bates said:
My comment was referring to the point that players of similar performance to Komarov's brief history with the Leafs are attainable via UFA or internal promotion for <2M, not that Nik's list necessarily contained <2M players.
We agree on selling high for Komarov, because he is peaking right now, at a time when our team should be at its lowest. It's the same premise behind moving out Bozak, JvR, Phanuef, Lupul, Kadri, Gardiner, etc.. As busta pointed out, trading Komarov for picks or prospects would align those potential returning players to peak when the Leafs need to peak as a team. Trading Komarov while he is at his peak will yield the highest return.
Those who wish to hang onto Komarov like the way he plays and all the intangibles he brings to the table. I'm just saying we can get a lot of Komarov's on-ice contributions from cheaper sources when the time comes that we 'need' it.
bustaheims
Active member
Bates said:
Well, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that. I think there were players on that list who are likely to be just as good examples. It's observation bias that makes it seem like Komarov would be better - as Leaf fans, we naturally navigate towards stories about Komarov and other Leafs and ignore/forget about those about other players. If some of those guys were Leafs, and Komarov was not, we'd be calling them the better examples.
Also, the kids aren't going to just learn from one player. They learn from the coaches they've had at every level, their family, their friends, etc. By the time they get to the NHL, the kind of things we talk about them wanting to learn are already largely formed within them. It's really going to up to them and their personality as to whether or not they become the kind of hard working NHL players we hope they will be - and if they are, then there's going to be plenty of teachers for them around, regardless of what team Komarov plays for (and, truth be told, the guys they really need to learn the most from are the coaching staff at all levels of the organization).
B
brothert
Guest
Remember when the leafs traded Antropov (a serviceable centre) to the Rangers for a 2nd round pick who turned out to be Kenny Ryan who never played a game for the Leafs. Turned an asset with some entertainment value into nothing.
And if we all think this is a one season fluke what makes us think that an nhl gm will be offering a first rounder for komarov.
And if we all think this is a one season fluke what makes us think that an nhl gm will be offering a first rounder for komarov.
Kin
New member
JohnK's Revenge said:
Remember when the Leafs had Cody Franson, a defenseman who was on pace to score 48 points despite never scoring more than 33 in a season, and they traded him and another guy on pace for a career year to the Predators for a 1st round pick and a good prospect?
NHL GMs overvalue players having career years all the time.
The last time this organization took advantage of a situation like this it ultimately yielded four pretty good prospects in Leipsic, Dermott, Bracco and Dzierkals. Will they all be good or great or even NHL players? Probably not but a smart front office knows to cast a wide net. This is a smart front office. You don't assemble a group like this and then get gun shy about actually trusting them to use picks well. A less smart group drafting Kenny Ryan reduces the value of a 2nd round pick in the exact same way that the Thrashers whiffing on Patrik Stefan reduced the value of the 1st overall pick.
Franson has 12 points in 57 games since the trade, the Leafs replaced him with Hunwick. Santorelli has 10 points in 53 games since the trade, the Leafs replaced him with PAP. Many people said Santorelli was really well liked/respected/a good example in the dressing room. Some people probably liked watching Franson play. Anyone want to take that trade back?
Smart management bought low, sold high, then bought low. Letting smart management be smart results in a good hockey team. As a fan, I'm eager to root for one of those again.
2badknees
New member
jdh1 said:
Back for another 1000! Prepare ignore lists accordingly. Some other sites out there really suck. Took a long time to get to 1k.
Regarding Komorov, I was waiting for this thread to come up. Clearly, if they can move him for a "return" (quoted for ambiguity) it has to be done. The problem with this particular player overachieving is that he was a bit of a fan favorite even at his average output. Combine this with a pretty bare cupboard of likable players, ratings/profitability decline, and the possibility of a lot more losing - and I'm not surprised this is a bit more complicated for some fans than if, say, Parenteau or Boyes had 14 goals.
bustaheims
Active member
JohnK's Revenge said:
It didn't work out once, so they should never do it again? They made a bad choice with that pick. Had they gone with Tyson Barrie or Tomas Tatar - both of whom were chosen shortly after - the Leafs would have come out of that awfully nicely. The problem with what happened with the Antropov trade wasn't the trade, it was the philosophy the management team had towards the draft at the time.
bustaheims
Active member
Bates said:
Management is going to what's best for the team's long-term interests. If that means the team being awful for a few months again, then they'll be awful for a few months.
L K
Active member
I get the appeal on Komarov. He's probably my favourite Leaf outside of Kadri at this point. But if the Leafs are going to get a top prospect/1st round pick I'll take it. What Komarov is doing today is largely irrelevant to when it will matter for the team in 3-4 years. If we can get something of value in the mean time I'll take it.
Highlander
Active member
Merry Christmas Nutman?.wherever you are?.come back to the board?