Kessel signs long term extension (8 yrs, 64M, 8M AAV)

[losveratos]

So here goes....I'm gonna say it. The Kessel trade was a great one, and I'd do it again in a heartbeat. Burke should be commended for making it, even with all the backlash that followed.

Nonis should also be given credit for signing him to a very reasonable long term contract.

Kessel is awesome, no doubt.  That was never in question when Burke acquired him.  It will always be about how much he gave up for Kessel.  Burke misjudged the quality of his team.  Kessel turning into one of the top players in the league doesn't change that.

Phil Kessel's first four years vs. Tyler Seguin's first four years (plus projected pace to finish this 4th season)
Kessel- 96G 85A 181P
Seguin- 93G 111A 204P

I'll take Kessel everyday and twice on Sunday, but if Burke had adjusted the trade to have that first pick be top 5 protected or something like that the Leafs would have been a billion times better off.  Burke was so sure of himself that he could avoid a rebuild and it set the team back. That the Leafs are where they are currently is partially luck and the result of a roster that is still heavily flawed.

Kessel is awesome though.  He keeps adding small elements to his game that make it look like he is going to definitely end up as one of the Leafs all-time greats.

Sure.... just forget that the guy got cancer and all... no worries though. I'm sure Seguin had some life altering hormone changing 12 game missing setback as well in the same time span.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Phil Kessel's first four years vs. Tyler Seguin's first four years (plus projected pace to finish this 4th season)
Kessel- 96G 85A 181P
Seguin- 93G 111A 204P

Put another way it is 0.62 PPG for Kessel and 0.68 PPG for Seguin through their first 4 years (just including Seguin up to this point in the season).

 

[Jalili]

Kessel is awesome, no doubt.  That was never in question when Burke acquired him.  It will always be about how much he gave up for Kessel.  Burke misjudged the quality of his team.  Kessel turning into one of the top players in the league doesn't change that.

Phil Kessel's first four years vs. Tyler Seguin's first four years (plus projected pace to finish this 4th season)
Kessel- 96G 85A 181P
Seguin- 93G 111A 204P

I'll take Kessel everyday and twice on Sunday, but if Burke had adjusted the trade to have that first pick be top 5 protected or something like that the Leafs would have been a billion times better off.  Burke was so sure of himself that he could avoid a rebuild and it set the team back. That the Leafs are where they are currently is partially luck and the result of a roster that is still heavily flawed.

Kessel is awesome though.  He keeps adding small elements to his game that make it look like he is going to definitely end up as one of the Leafs all-time greats.

I think of it in a similar way as you do. Kessel has lived up to his end of the deal and then some.

The only problem is that the Leafs gave up way more than they had intended to (remember, back on draft day 2009 the Leafs declined an offer of Kessel for Kaberle and the 7th overall pick which became Kadri. Kessel's value at that time was not as high as people might think.)

But does it equal itself out that Kessel has exceeded expectations and that they were able to extend him another 8 seasons? That's where it gets interesting.

 

[Kin]

Sure.... just forget that the guy got cancer and all... no worries though. I'm sure Seguin had some life altering hormone changing 12 game missing setback as well in the same time span.

Except the fundamental point remains the same. Kessel is a very good player. Seguin looks like he's going to be one too. If we're retroactively evaluating the deal on that basis, which we shouldn't but regardless, you still have to weigh what was given up.

I'm as happy as anyone that the trade hasn't blown up in the Leafs' faces but in the end all that may mean is that the enduring legacy of the trade is that too much has been and will be expected out of Kessel.

 

[Bender]

Why are we looking at Kessel's first years in the league? It's irrelevant to the trade. The only relevance is what his point totals were when he started here.

 

[maplesyrup]

Why are we looking at Kessel's first years in the league? It's irrelevant to the trade. The only relevance is what his point totals were when he started here.

Good question!

 

[Kin]

Why are we looking at Kessel's first years in the league? It's irrelevant to the trade.

Not if, say, the point is to put Seguin and his talent into context. Again, Seguin shouldn't factor into our evaluation but if he does he needs to be seen in his proper light along with Kessel.

 

[2badknees]

I think the lesson here is how "expensive" it is to an organization to build a team if they don't understand the value of retaining picks and drafting well.

I don't know the answer, but I'd be curious out of the top say, 25 players in points in the NHL, how many of them were drafted by the team they currently play for.

 

[Jalili]

I think the lesson here is how "expensive" it is to an organization to build a team if they don't understand the value of retaining picks and drafting well.

I don't know the answer, but I'd be curious out of the top say, 25 players in points in the NHL, how many of them were drafted by the team they currently play for.

Interesting point. I would bet most of the top 25 were drafted by the team they're playing for now.

I think one of the biggest lessons warns against trading your 1st round pick without having a good idea of where it'll end up, especially if you're a questionable team (see: Ottawa Senators and New York Islanders, who are both in that predicament right now).

 

[bustaheims]

I don't know the answer, but I'd be curious out of the top say, 25 players in points in the NHL, how many of them were drafted by the team they currently play for.

18 of the current top 27 point getters (there's a 3-way tie for 25th in total points) are playing for the teams that drafted them.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I think the lesson here is how "expensive" it is to an organization to build a team if they don't understand the value of retaining picks and drafting well.

I don't know the answer, but I'd be curious out of the top say, 25 players in points in the NHL, how many of them were drafted by the team they currently play for.

Interesting point. I would bet most of the top 25 were drafted by the team they're playing for now.

I think one of the biggest lessons warns against trading your 1st round pick without having a good idea of where it'll end up, especially if you're a questionable team (see: Ottawa Senators and New York Islanders, who are both in that predicament right now).

I think in the case of the Kessel trade, it was also trading an unknown (the picks) for a known, or more known, quantity.  You already had evidence of Kessel putting up numbers in the NHL, whereas with a draft pick you never really know if they're going to be the one that doesn't pan out or not.  I can see the perspective of taking the risk that you're getting a known player, still young and with his peak ahead of him, while giving up potentially a higher ceiling player or potentially a worse player.

I actually think looking back it comes out fairly even.  You can go back and analyze this trade from so many different moments along the way though.

 

[Deebo]

I'll take Kessel everyday and twice on Sunday, but if Burke had adjusted the trade to have that first pick be top 5 protected or something like that the Leafs would have been a billion times better off.

Would Boston have made the deal with Toronto if Burke insisted on that?

 

[Redleaf]

I'll take Kessel everyday and twice on Sunday, but if Burke had adjusted the trade to have that first pick be top 5 protected or something like that the Leafs would have been a billion times better off.

Would Boston have made the deal with Toronto if Burke insisted on that?

We've been over every aspect of the Kessel trade over the years in this forum, and the answer to that question is a resounding 'NO'.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

So this is a real headline:  http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2014/02/03/phil_kessels_ascent_a_lesson_for_david_clarksons_doubters_cox.html

And no, I haven't read it.

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

So this is a real headline:  http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2014/02/03/phil_kessels_ascent_a_lesson_for_david_clarksons_doubters_cox.html

And no, I haven't read it.

Cox actually admits he was wrong;

You don?t hear loud criticisms of the Boston deal any more. Me? I feel like either I misread the situation by suggesting a trade would ultimately happen, or that I misread the ability of the situation to change so drastically.

 

[ZBBM]

So this is a real headline:  http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2014/02/03/phil_kessels_ascent_a_lesson_for_david_clarksons_doubters_cox.html

And no, I haven't read it.

Typical Cox.  He references how "some writers" were ready to get rid of Kessel last year, but never mentions himself as among them, or offers a mea culpa.

At least I'm willing to stand here and say that I was wrong in thinking that Kessel would never raise his game on the other side of the puck.  He's done that.

 

[Kin]

I think the Clarkson point, about how GM's should be more reluctant to sign players they aren't overly familiar with to long term deals, is a fair one though.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

So this is a real headline:  http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2014/02/03/phil_kessels_ascent_a_lesson_for_david_clarksons_doubters_cox.html

And no, I haven't read it.

Typical Cox.  He references how "some writers" were ready to get rid of Kessel last year, but never mentions himself as among them, or offers a mea culpa.

At least I'm willing to stand here and say that I was wrong in thinking that Kessel would never raise his game on the other side of the puck.  He's done that.

Well you've got something Cox doesn't have, rhymes with shmintegrity.

 

[Zee]

So this is a real headline:  http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2014/02/03/phil_kessels_ascent_a_lesson_for_david_clarksons_doubters_cox.html

And no, I haven't read it.

Typical Cox.  He references how "some writers" were ready to get rid of Kessel last year, but never mentions himself as among them, or offers a mea culpa.

At least I'm willing to stand here and say that I was wrong in thinking that Kessel would never raise his game on the other side of the puck.  He's done that.

Cox admitted he was wrong, he even linked his own article where he said they should trade Kessel.

 

[ZBBM]

So this is a real headline:  http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2014/02/03/phil_kessels_ascent_a_lesson_for_david_clarksons_doubters_cox.html

And no, I haven't read it.

Typical Cox.  He references how "some writers" were ready to get rid of Kessel last year, but never mentions himself as among them, or offers a mea culpa.

At least I'm willing to stand here and say that I was wrong in thinking that Kessel would never raise his game on the other side of the puck.  He's done that.

Cox admitted he was wrong, he even linked his own article where he said they should trade Kessel.

Errr, in a pretty oblique way.  First, he says "this space suggested" instead of "I" ? a pretty obvious dodge despite the labored wording.  Then later on he admits to having "misread the situation" instead of just flat out saying he was wrong.  More fudging IMO.

But yeah, he deserves credit for not pretending like his previous column didn't exist.  That would be Don Cherry-level tactics.