Draft Pick Watch - WE PICKED NYLANDER!!1!!
- Thread starter L K
- Start date
Corn Flake
New member
Nik the Trik said:
BREAKING: "NHL team not really interested in a better draft pick. Happy to just get to be there on draft day."
BlueWhiteBlood
New member
CarltonTheBear said:
I get the moving up part, but I'm having a bit of a hard time with that proposed deal and I'm surprised that the writer included it in his article.
I could understand it if something better than Jovanovski was coming our way.
bustaheims
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:
That's my expectation, too. A lot of speculation from the media based on the team really not doing anything all that out of the ordinary, only to lead to no moves happening. At least, this time around, there isn't the added layer of speculation in terms of moving up to draft someone on the team's brother.
Champ Kind
New member
RedLeaf said:
The implication being that Ekblad effectively replaces Phaneuf?
C'mon, now!
Redleaf
Active member
A Weekend at Bernier's said:
Replaces? Absolutely not. If this deal goes down I would hope that in 2-3 years time Ekblad will have made us completely forget Phaneuf was ever a Leaf.
Just for the record, no one is expecting him to step in right away and make an instant impact in the NHL, no matter which team selects him at the draft.
bustaheims
Active member
RedLeaf said:
If the team is going to trade Phaneuf for someone who won't make an impact next season, then they should just commit to full blown rebuild. Otherwise, trading the team's best defenceman to move up in the draft is just madness.
Kin
New member
bustaheims said:
Outside of maybe Lupul, nobody on the team would be in a position where they can't contribute in 2-3 years if that's how long it would take our hypothetical draft pick to start making an impact. The idea that if the Leafs don't have their foot down for next year then they might as well pack it in for the next few doesn't really make much sense.
CarltonTheBear said:
Yeah no kidding....every year when Burke was in Toronto the leafs were going to trade up for the number 1 pick....because burke got the Sedins and Pronger at the draft a hundred years ago :
. It's just the papers making up stuff to create buzz. Toronto sports writers are a bunch of loser hacks if you ask me.
bustaheims
Active member
Nik the Trik said:
Moving Phaneuf for futures is a clear indication that management doesn't believe the current core can get it done. In 3 years, a good chunk of that core will be at the end of or past their prime production seasons. Those that will still be around will either already be on expensive contracts or in need of new and likely expensive contracts, so, cap space will be a premium when whoever taken in this year's draft is fully ready - and, if they make the team this season, they will also be in need of a new contract. The window to get something done with the current core within the cap is very short. The team either needs to make moves to turn the current group into a contender or commit to completely overhauling it. Anything in the middle will just lead to extending the current level of mediocrity.
Kin
New member
bustaheims said:
No, moving Phaneuf is a clear indication that management doesn't believe that Phaneuf can get it done.
bustaheims said:
Who? Kessel will be 29, JVR will be 28, Bozak will be 29, Kadri will be 26, Bernier will be 28, Gardiner will be 26, Rielly 22 and so on. That's nearing the end of their primes for some of them, sure, but without a single guy at 30? And that's before any potential additions from within the system or via trade or free agency
Look, you don't need to convince me that blowing up the team is the right move but Phaneuf is not the lynchpin that fundamentally changes the way the team should be looked at. I think the team can compensate for Phaneuf's absence next year even before that.
bustaheims
Active member
Nik the Trik said:
Which is why I specified moving him for futures. Moving him for something that will help the team now would be an indication they don't believe in him. Moving him without bringing back players that make the team better now is a pretty clear move for the future rather than the present.
Nik the Trik said:
http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2010/1/21/1261318/nhl-points-per-game-peak-age
Prime production seasons are the years between age 23 and 27. So, that's means pretty much everyone that you listed there is past their prime production seasons. That doesn't mean they won't continue to be productive players, but, they'll be players on the approaching downside of their career rather than the peak.
Kin
New member
bustaheims said:
No, because that still discounts the things you can do in the meantime to address both that deficiency and others. Moving him for "futures" can still be a move towards something that ultimately leads to this core challenging. Especially if we're talking about the sort of impact a #1 pick can have even if it's a few years out.
bustaheims said:
Well, provided "almost everyone" means 4 of the 7 mentioned players and ignoring that it's probably not true for goalies or defensemen, sure. They would be a year or two out but, again, trading Phaneuf for players who would be a few years out doesn't mean cashing in on the next two years regardless.
Redleaf
Active member
bustaheims said:
Everything isn't black or white. 28 year old players can still have career years ahead of them. The Leafs can get rid of some older players for future stars without going through a total team rebuild. I really don't see how it has to be one way or another in your eyes. Going for it now, or completely rebuilding the team from youth. I mean, I'm sure you don't think that Nonis is in rebuild mode, just because we are holding onto our first round picks every year. With prospects in the cupboard now, we should be able to improve the team through a successful blend of veterans and prospects.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
RedLeaf said:
No one says they can't.
Champ Kind
New member
Nik the Trik said:
I don't think it's nitpicking for me to indicate that you're being quite liberal in your arithmetic. Bozak, today, is 28, and Kessel will be 30 for the large majority of the 2017-18 season.
While I'll agree that it doesn't necessarily have to be next year for this group of players, it better darn sure be sometime soon. Not only to take advantage of their best and highest paid players' prime seasons, but the addition of guys like Clarkson and Bolland is a clear indication that management, as Busta correctly pointed out, had the intention of winning soon.
So, to me, it's fairly clear that this team has once again come to a crossroads: either tear it down or go all in and try to seriously compete. Trying to occupy the middle ground for any length of time is foolish.
bustaheims
Active member
Potvin29 said:
Of course they can, but, hoping that players outside of their prime years have careers seasons is a pretty terrible team building strategy.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
bustaheims said:
In terms of what you were saying with that link, it's just a prediction based upon the probability. Saying 'these are typically the peak years' doesn't mean 'these are the only years a player can have their peak' - it's saying that it's much more likely that they will fall into the average category than not.
Champ Kind
New member
bustaheims said:
"Dear Mr. Heims, I have an urgent phone call for you"
Kin
New member
A Weekend at Bernier's said:
But that, honestly, makes the point moot. If the choices the team has are between tearing down or hoping that this core is going to compete in the next few years then it's more or less crazytown to argue for the latter. I'm sorry, but you'll never convince me that making small changes over the course of the next three years to augment the current core is tantamount to "occupying the middle ground" but keeping the exact same core around is a serious commitment to winning.
I mean, if nothing else, by the definition of a player's prime that people are using it would seem as though trading Phaneuf right now would be pretty reasonable for any reason.