Armchair GM 2017-2018

[Kin]

I don't see the leafs trading for any older, established and expensive defensemen.  I do see them trading excess forwards for prospects with the potential to become core guys.  Or someone like Shultz when he was still in Edmonton. A guy with upside who wasn't working out and needed a fresh start.  Don't forget, they're going to need a lot of cap space in a couple years.

With the caveat that we won't know where the Cap will be in a couple years it's worth pointing out just how good the Leafs cap situation is in that regard. When the Marner and Matthews extensions figure to kick in, the Leafs only have 33 million in salary commitments With most of that 33 million going to core players on team friendly deals(Andersen, Rielly, Kadri, Zaitsev) and LTIR(Horton). Yes, between now and then they'll have to sign Gardiner and Nylander but even if they get, say, 15 million between them you're still going to have 35 million dollars or so if the cap stays stagnant, 41 if Marleau is off the books.

 

[mr grieves]

I'd target defensemen in trade. Demers, Tanev, Barrie, Trouba ...

He isn't my 1st choice but Barrie seems to be the next best realistic option after Demers. And I sort of feel like if a Demers trade was going to happen it would have happened by now. Trade JVR to either the Rangers or Blue Jackets for picks (both lost out in the Kovalchuk sweepstakes) and then send picks to Colorado for Barrie. Maybe try and get the Avs to eat a $1mil or so of his cap hit too.

Of that bunch, Trouba would, of course, be most appealing. Then Tanev and Demers, I guess. Barrie seems to replicate a lot of what we already have, but he's a talented defenseman on a bad team -- so, they tend to look weird.

But these guys? and Hamonic, Miller, Vatanen, etc. etc. It?s hard to get excited for any of them.

I?m still in favor of trading Lupul and a pick to whoever?s collecting garbage for futures, jettisoning Komarov, Bozak, JvR, and anything else necessary for picks/prospects, and then throwing an insane amount of money at Parayko (and number of picks at St Louis), as Dellow, Mirtle, and Marek have suggested.

We missed the opportunity to grab the last top-pairing guy who was reluctant to sign. Leafs didn?t know what they had, where they were, fair enough ? but now? the time?s right.

We've still a few hours anyway, I think.

EDIT: Was more like minutes. Arbitration case filed: http://www.tsn.ca/blues-d-parayko-files-for-arbitration-1.797089

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

He isn't my 1st choice but Barrie seems to be the next best realistic option after Demers. And I sort of feel like if a Demers trade was going to happen it would have happened by now. Trade JVR to either the Rangers or Blue Jackets for picks (both lost out in the Kovalchuk sweepstakes) and then send picks to Colorado for Barrie. Maybe try and get the Avs to eat a $1mil or so of his cap hit too.

I read an article a little bit ago that did an analysis of the guys that would fit Toronto's needs. It may have been either Mirtle or Johnson that wrote it, but a few of the names were Demers, Barrie, Tanev, Harmonic and a few others. Surprisingly, Tanev was the best fit.

To me, I think we need to really nail down a top flight youngish guy for that spot. Even if it costs us a bit more in trade, I think it is worth it to maximize on the talent leaving, in our case. I see JvR as a really good player that holds good value, even Bozak I think still holds a bit of value also. If we have to add a younger player, I have confidence in the people there to pick the right one to add, if possible. Stay tuned I guess...

 

[herman]

Some chatter that the Rangers might be sniffing around Bozak to replace Stepan.

I think Bozak is still a prime candidate for teams that missed out on the Bonino-ganza, or the MoJo discount sale, or perhaps the ones that find Duchene too rich for their tastes.

Him or JvR to Nashville for one of their top 3 defense prospects + top 50 pick would be a suitable return, in my opinion.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Some chatter that the Rangers might be sniffing around Bozak to replace Stepan.

I think Bozak is still a prime candidate for teams that missed out on the Bonino-ganza, or the MoJo discount sale, or perhaps the ones that find Duchene too rich for their tastes.

Him or JvR to Nashville for one of their top 3 defense prospects + top 50 pick would be a suitable return, in my opinion.

Hey, my Fabbro for JVR proposal still makes sense even with Dante's correct team involved!

 

[Frank E]

Just a couple of thoughts...

If the reports are true that the Leafs made a big pitch for Thornton, then I doubt they'd trade Bozak at this point unless they had a plan B for filling that 50 points of centre production.

And as far as trading Connor Brown for picks, I think this is the first of the tough decisions that are going to have to be made with young'ish guys in terms of considering cashing them in for futures after a high-production season.  I agree that Kapanen looks able to fill the position.

 

[Kin]

Him or JvR to Nashville for one of their top 3 defense prospects + top 50 pick would be a suitable return, in my opinion.

I think you've got to do better in a deal for JVR than a team's #3 defensive prospect and a late 1st.

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/Berger_BYTES/status/884459588648669185
www.twitter.com/Berger_BYTES/status/884459588648669185

 

[herman]

Him or JvR to Nashville for one of their top 3 defense prospects + top 50 pick would be a suitable return, in my opinion.

I think you've got to do better in a deal for JVR than a team's #3 defensive prospect and a late 1st.

I'll be pleased as punch if something better goes through.

 

[Kin]

Him or JvR to Nashville for one of their top 3 defense prospects + top 50 pick would be a suitable return, in my opinion.

I think you've got to do better in a deal for JVR than a team's #3 defensive prospect and a late 1st.

I'll be pleased as punch if something better goes through.

Or, to put it another way, if that's what the market for him has fallen to it's a pretty solid sign of just how badly they bungled that situation.

 

[Frank E]

Him or JvR to Nashville for one of their top 3 defense prospects + top 50 pick would be a suitable return, in my opinion.

I think you've got to do better in a deal for JVR than a team's #3 defensive prospect and a late 1st.

I'll be pleased as punch if something better goes through.

Or, to put it another way, if that's what the market for him has fallen to it's a pretty solid sign of just how badly they bungled that situation.

I'm not sure how the Leafs have any control of the market on JVR?

Fallen from what?

 

[Kin]

Fallen from what?

From what you should be able to get for a player of JVR's quality. If the market's so low on him that said return would get it done then it's probably a pretty good sign that the reason you can't get more is because he's determined to get to free agency and teams don't want to pay much for one year of him.

Or, alternately, that the time to trade him wasn't after everyone had spent on free agents and/or made alternate plans to bring in scoring wingers.

 

[Frank E]

Fallen from what?

From what you should be able to get for a player of JVR's quality. If the market's so low on him that said return would get it done then it's probably a pretty good sign that the reason you can't get more is because he's determined to get to free agency and teams don't want to pay much for one year of him.

I'm starting to wonder if this was the issue the whole time in trading JVR.  I was pounding the "trade JVR" drum pretty consistently all of last year, given he was healthy and performing well, and still had 1.5 years of term left.

Or, alternately, that the time to trade him wasn't after everyone had spent on free agents and/or made alternate plans to bring in scoring wingers.

Assuming that he isn't hellbent on getting to UFA, then we're obviously in agreement on this.

But if he was telling everyone that knocked on his door that he's not signing an extension, then I can see why they'd have a hard time moving him for anything that we'd be pumped about.

 

[Kin]

But if he was telling everyone that knocked on his door that he's not signing an extension, then I can see why they'd have a hard time moving him for anything that we'd be pumped about.

But that's sort of my point. By letting it get to this stage, where he's within sight of free agency and has reduced his value accordingly, then it's really a bad calculation on their part.

Even with that said though I think a year of a 28 year old 30ish goal scorer with a bargain of a cap hit should get you more than the lower end of what Herman suggested.

 

[Coco-puffs]

But if he was telling everyone that knocked on his door that he's not signing an extension, then I can see why they'd have a hard time moving him for anything that we'd be pumped about.

But that's sort of my point. By letting it get to this stage, where he's within sight of free agency and has reduced his value accordingly, then it's really a bad calculation on their part.

Even with that said though I think a year of a 28 year old 30ish goal scorer with a bargain of a cap hit should get you more than the lower end of what Herman suggested.

If Taylor Hall (younger, much better) only nets you Adam Larsson, I fail to see how we would have done MUCH better last year at the deadline than we may get now.  I'm not saying it wouldn't have been better- as the team acquiring him gets him for 1.3 seasons and 2 playoff runs (or that would be their thinking) instead of 1 each.  But there was also value to the Leafs:  taking JVR out of the lineup before the deadline last year also may have meant missing the playoffs.  I think the run at the end of the season and the playoffs were a great learning experience for the young core of the team and if that means diminished return on trading JvR I'm happy to accept that.

 

[herman]

Re: Hall/Larsson;

Many GMs have since let it be known that they would've offered more for Hall if they had known he was available.

i.e. Chiarelli is a doofus.

Source: one of the podcasts I was listening to several weeks ago. Might have been Marek, or Mirtle.

 

[Coco-puffs]

Re: Hall/Larsson;

Many GMs have since let it be known that they would've offered more for Hall if they had known he was available.

i.e. Chiarelli is a doofus.

I completely agree Hall was worth more than Larsson and Chiarelli is a doofus.  It is definitely an example which stretches the truth on how low value scoring wingers have on the trade market.  But I still stand by my statement that scoring wingers don't have as much value as many here are hoping to get for JvR- whether it was last year or now. 

 

[Kin]

Re: Hall/Larsson;

Many GMs have since let it be known that they would've offered more for Hall if they had known he was available.

More for Hall as in more than they originally offered or more for Hall as in more than Larsson? Because if so, "more than Larsson" is kind of a subjective concept. Edmonton was looking for a defenseman to come in and contribute right away so unless "More" really means a defenseman who's unquestionably better than Larsson it's not all that meaningful a statement.

 

[herman]

Re: Hall/Larsson;

Many GMs have since let it be known that they would've offered more for Hall if they had known he was available.

More for Hall as in more than they originally offered or more for Hall as in more than Larsson? Because if so, "more than Larsson" is kind of a subjective concept. Edmonton was looking for a defenseman to come in and contribute right away so unless "More" really means a defenseman who's unquestionably better than Larsson it's not all that meaningful a statement.

They would have offered more value in return for getting Hall, than Larsson. My read on the statement was even if the primary return in question was merely a serviceable NHL-ready defenseman on par with Larsson, those GMs would have been been happy to add picks or prospects on top of the deal.

 

[Frank E]

Re: Hall/Larsson;

Many GMs have since let it be known that they would've offered more for Hall if they had known he was available.

More for Hall as in more than they originally offered or more for Hall as in more than Larsson? Because if so, "more than Larsson" is kind of a subjective concept. Edmonton was looking for a defenseman to come in and contribute right away so unless "More" really means a defenseman who's unquestionably better than Larsson it's not all that meaningful a statement.

They would have offered more value in return for getting Hall, than Larsson. My read on the statement was even if the primary return in question was merely a serviceable NHL-ready defenseman on par with Larsson, those GMs would have been been happy to add picks or prospects on top of the deal.

Edmonton also said that the fact that Larsson had 5 years of affordable term on his deal was a big factor in targeting him.