The trade deadline and the ostensibly perplexing Phaneuf issue

[x.jr.benchwarmer]

With the trade deadline at the end of February, and with the usual names being thrown out  (Polak, Bernier, and Winnick),  perhaps this might be the best time for the Leafs to try to maximize their captain's trade value.

Say what you will about his mobility, puck movement, lack of scoring, penchant for penalties,  idiotic contract,    etc. etc.  etc.  there seems to be  a consensus that he is playing better than he has in some time  (maybe as many as 4 years) .  And with Lou L.  picked as the guru of the Leafs, it may be the case that it might be a good time to try to get the most value in terms of picks, etc. for Dion.  In addition,  a trade  (even if some salary would have to be taken back)  might open up the Leafs for a potential signing of free agents in the next couple of years  (might it even be Stamkos?).

Hopefully, there might be some interest out there for Phaneuf, and if so, hopefully Lou is in a position to maximize his trade potential.

But then again, I might just be dreaming a bit.

 

[ZBBM]

I'm not against trading anybody on the roster except Rielly, and that certainly includes Phaneuf.  On the face of it, it might not seem like anybody would be interested in a 2/3 30+ defenseman making the money Dion does and whose offense has diminished.  But then again, GMs under pressure to win are always looking for defensemen at the deadline.  His value will never be higher going forward, of that I'm pretty sure.

Still, having said all that, I'd be surprised to see him traded.

 

[Kin]

What can the Leafs do to maximize his or anyone elses trade value? Isn't a player's trade value decided by other teams?

 

[losveratos]

What can the Leafs do to maximize his or anyone elses trade value? Isn't a player's trade value decided by other teams?

For a goalie, attempt to inflate the stats by starting them against the weakest competition possible and playing on the front half of a back to back. For defensemen, put them up against weaker competition to inflate their +/- and possibly point totals. Give them more power play and penalty killing time to keep the TOI high but the goals for and against not counted as strictly during penalty killing. And for forwards.... not sure. Perhaps give them your best assist making line mates but theres more importance to chemistry there.

Not saying any team would do any of these things or that the end result would be a huge difference. But if you had everyone from the coach to the GM on board with the idea you could upgrade a few returned prospects or turn some 4th round pick returns into 3rd rounders. Things like that. But it might not be easy to hide.

Just a couple ideas to answer your question there.

 

[Kin]

For a goalie, attempt to inflate the stats by starting them against the weakest competition possible and playing on the front half of a back to back. For defensemen, put them up against weaker competition to inflate their +/- and possibly point totals. Give them more power play and penalty killing time to keep the TOI high but the goals for and against not counted as strictly during penalty killing. And for forwards.... not sure. Perhaps give them your best assist making line mates but theres more importance to chemistry there.

I suppose it seems to me that most of those things would be counter-productive given that other teams would see what you were doing. It's not like PP ice time leading to defensemen scoring points or the effect of linemates on a forward's scoring are secrets.

 

[losveratos]

For a goalie, attempt to inflate the stats by starting them against the weakest competition possible and playing on the front half of a back to back. For defensemen, put them up against weaker competition to inflate their +/- and possibly point totals. Give them more power play and penalty killing time to keep the TOI high but the goals for and against not counted as strictly during penalty killing. And for forwards.... not sure. Perhaps give them your best assist making line mates but theres more importance to chemistry there.

I suppose it seems to me that most of those things would be counter-productive given that other teams would see what you were doing. It's not like PP ice time leading to defensemen scoring points or the effect of linemates on a forward's scoring are secrets.

It's true. This was entirely off the top of my head and not very well thought out. But NHL teams are filled with people who are solely responsible for improving the club in any way they can. I could imagine more subtle ways of manipulating stats and such that could increase the value of a player. I refuse to believe it hasn't been done and I also refuse to believe it's not on their minds if an opportunity arises.

Now... how successful is it? How often does it happen? No idea. I'd like to believe that they're good enough at doing it that some random poster on the internet (me) can't see it very clearly.

 

[Kin]

Now... how successful is it? How often does it happen? No idea. I'd like to believe that they're good enough at doing it that some random poster on the internet (me) can't see it very clearly.

In this hypothetical though, they're not trying to fool you or me, they're trying to hoodwink another NHL team into believing a player is more valuable than he is. Like you say, both teams are staffed with people whose jobs it is to improve the team. So it's not about manipulating the stats so it's undetectable to dopes like me, it's about fooling pro scouts/stats guys who'll be working just as hard to accurately gauge a player's value as the other team is to mask it.

 

[losveratos]

Now... how successful is it? How often does it happen? No idea. I'd like to believe that they're good enough at doing it that some random poster on the internet (me) can't see it very clearly.

In this hypothetical though, they're not trying to fool you or me, they're trying to hoodwink another NHL team into believing a player is more valuable than he is. Like you say, both teams are staffed with people whose jobs it is to improve the team. So it's not about manipulating the stats so it's undetectable to dopes like me, it's about fooling pro scouts/stats guys who'll be working just as hard to accurately gauge a player's value as the other team is to mask it.

I agree with that and I think that's why some front offices are better than others at getting the right players at the right time for the right prices and other aren't. These little games they play (hypothetically) are what separates the good from the greats. Or maybe it doesn't.

I choose to live in the reality of back room meetings trying to figure out how to squeeze the most out of every prospect and sneakily finding prospects on another team that they aren't watching closely enough to see that they've taken a step up. Then trying to acquire them of course.

It's also entirely possible that reality is much less interesting... but I reject that reality and substitute my own ^_^

 

[hobarth]

I'm not against trading anybody on the roster except Rielly, and that certainly includes Phaneuf.  On the face of it, it might not seem like anybody would be interested in a 2/3 30+ defenseman making the money Dion does and whose offense has diminished.  But then again, GMs under pressure to win are always looking for defensemen at the deadline.  His value will never be higher going forward, of that I'm pretty sure.

Still, having said all that, I'd be surprised to see him traded.

Seabrook just signed for 6.875 mil and he's also 30 years old and I would call him Chicago's #2. I don't think anyone complains that Seabrook got signed for so much yet he's actually receiving more $s than their #1 d-man, Duncan Keith. Some other strange things that are noticeable if you check out their careers, Phanny outscored Seabrook until he was traded to TO, Ohanny also had a superior +/- rating until he played for TO.

We all know how good Seabrook is but I wonder if the shoe would be on the other foot if Seabrook was playing for TO and Phanny for Chicago?

 

[Kin]

Not that it particularly matters but Phaneuf, in his five years in Calgary, was a +19. Seabrook, in his first five years with the Hawks, was a +55.

 

[hobarth]

Better team, better team mates, there's all kinds of factors that could explain why Seabrook is considered better than Phanny but most of factors can be rationalized by where they play. I think the comparison is apples(superior players) justifiably, one apple got to play with other apples and the other played with lemons.

 

[Kin]

Better team, better team mates, there's all kinds of factors that could explain why Seabrook is considered better than Phanny but most of factors can be rationalized by where they play. I think the comparison is apples(superior players) justifiably, one apple got to play with other apples and the other played with lemons.

Again, I think +/- is meaningless. I was just pointing out that Phaneuf's wasn't "superior" to Seabrook's when he was in Calgary as you'd said.

 

[Highlander]

I would trade him for six walk/don't walk signs and some old crosswalk markers that didn't tell you when he light will change.

 

[x.jr.benchwarmer]

I would trade him for six walk/don't walk signs and some old crosswalk markers that didn't tell you when he light will change.

That is certainly one interesting perspective on his trade value....

I find it interesting that he is viewed by some, I surmise,  as a power play stalwart yet he hasn't had a power play goal this year, and last had one in February last year.  And this is playing virtually every Leaf power play (or perhaps close to 95%)  during that period.  So if Toronto could trade him, and get any draft pick that might help, even minimally, somewhere down the line, I would suggest that the Leafs should seriously consider it.

In addition to everything else, if Dion's salary is somehow off the books, over the next 4 to 5 years, this might make the Leafs have more cap space to sign Stamkos, if that would ever happen, but more importantly, in a couple of years to sign a very fine UFA,  or even Bishop to help cure any goaltending issues in the future.

But of course we can conjecture all we want about his trade value, and talent, etc.  There has to be a willing partner to trade with, and I can't see any team wanting him, unfortunately...

 

[LuncheonMeat]

I think the best case scenario for the Leafs is Phaneuf plays well the rest of the year and they try to move him in the off-season. I think he becomes a must-move player if the Leafs are able/choose to sign Stamkos. They'll need his cap dollars, and probably the C off the front of his shirt. They'll likely do better in a Phaneuf trade once there are more teams that can take on his contract, especially if they're willing to retain some of it.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I don't think Phaneuf becomes a must-move until after Nylander and Marner's ELCs are up. I also think that'll be around when other teams start to feel comfortable taking the rest of his contract (assuming he can maintain a level of play similar to what we've seen this season).

 

[bustaheims]

I don't think Phaneuf becomes a must-move until after Nylander and Marner's ELCs are up. I also think that'll be around when other teams start to feel comfortable taking the rest of his contract (assuming he can maintain a level of play similar to what we've seen this season).

Agreed. There are easier options to move to create cap space this summer. Bozak and Lupul can probably be shipped out, and, if the Leafs have to retain on them, it's only for 2 seasons rather than 5. Also, JvR and Komarov can be moved in deals where the Leafs probably get value in return AND don't have to retain cap. It'll be at least 3 years until Phaneuf's cap hit becomes a significant issue, and, at that point, he'll also only have 2 years left on his deal, so biting the bullet and retaining then won't be as painful.

 

[Kin]

I think the best case scenario for the Leafs is Phaneuf plays well the rest of the year and they try to move him in the off-season. I think he becomes a must-move player if the Leafs are able/choose to sign Stamkos. They'll need his cap dollars, and probably the C off the front of his shirt. They'll likely do better in a Phaneuf trade once there are more teams that can take on his contract, especially if they're willing to retain some of it.

I think busta and CtB are right about the cap/roster elements of "needing" to trade Phaneuf but I wonder if, like you say, the Captaincy doesn't play a big role in their thinking. Not so much that Phaneuf is a "bad" captain but just that there might be an internal desire to make a break from the group that Burke put together, even if it's just a symbolic one.

 

[bustaheims]

I think busta and CtB are right about the cap/roster elements of "needing" to trade Phaneuf but I wonder if, like you say, the Captaincy doesn't play a big role in their thinking. Not so much that Phaneuf is a "bad" captain but just that there might be an internal desire to make a break from the group that Burke put together, even if it's just a symbolic one.

There might be, but I imagine that's not something management sees as a pressing issue until they either have someone they feel is the right candidate to replace Phaneuf as captain (which may or may not be Stamkos - and, I feel it's more likely that it's not) or when the team is reaching the point where they're nearly finished tearing away the pieces of the old guard and have assembled most of what they consider to be the new foundation - which is likely still a couple seasons away.

 

[Kin]

There might be, but I imagine that's not something management sees as a pressing issue until they either have someone they feel is the right candidate to replace Phaneuf as captain (which may or may not be Stamkos - and, I feel it's more likely that it's not) or when the team is reaching the point where they're nearly finished tearing away the pieces of the old guard and have assembled most of what they consider to be the new foundation - which is likely still a couple seasons away.

See, I think the trend in recent years though is for teams to really throw their young players into the deep end and say, essentially, "this is your team". I'm thinking specifically of how guys like Toews, Landeskog and so on were given the C's so early in their careers.

With next years team likely to feature Nylander, Marner, Rielly and hopefully this year's #1 pick I do sort of think Phaneuf would be a little out of place, especially if he's not playing at a level that really says "see our captain? Be like him."

So, yeah, you're probably right that it's not pressing in the sense that they'll move heaven and earth to trade him but I would not be surprised if there was a concerted effort in that direction.