Kris Versteeg

[Tigger]

I also don't think Burke is the type of GM that would acquire an NHL calibre player like Lombardi just to bury him in the minors.

I think those principles read better if he's also the type of GM who makes the playoffs.

If that was the lone yardstick in a 'what have you done for me lately' microverse, sure.

 

[Kin]

If that was the lone yardstick in a 'what have you done for me lately' microverse, sure.

True enough. As a Leafs fan I'm inclined to give him frighteningly little credit for what he accomplished for other teams.

 

[Tigger]

Well yes but not without some questions. Lombardi couldn't be counted on to play at the time, couldn't waive him if he's on the IR.

But he's not automatically on the IR to start the season, right? So you'd waive him at the beginning of the season regardless.

Well no, not when you deal Versteeg. If the notion even existed back then I don't think you could accurately predict the nature of what's involved. As far as anyone knew, even leading into the start of camp, he was still a question mark.

MacArthur, who displayed some chemistry on the Grabovski line is signed for one more year where Versteeg, who didn't really mesh with any particular player, is in a contract year. On balance I think Burke made the right choice.

MacArthur was a guy with very little track record of being an impact scorer who was in a contract year when he showed that "chemistry". Now, this year, it looks like he's fallen back to earth. If we're going to attribute success to a guy being in a contract year than that's a good reason to keep Versteeg for this year and, if need be, deal him at this deadline. Looking at what the two of them have actually produced I think the argument that Burke shouldn't have done that with Mac last year is pretty tough to make convincingly.

Mac was actually in his third consecutive contract year and as a complimentary player to Grabovski and Kulemin, coupled with the play of Lupul and Kessel currently, he produced more at the time and his production now is somewhat understandable from that pov to me.

Making the argument on Versteeg versus MacArthur alone might not be convincing but making the argument on Versteeg versus a first rounder and MacArthur seems plausible to me.

 

[Kin]

Well no, not when you deal Versteeg. If the notion even existed back then I don't think you could accurately predict the nature of what's involved. As far as anyone knew, even leading into the start of camp, he was still a question mark.

But the issue would have only presented itself when the Franson trade was brought up in the summer so there's really no impediment to keeping Versteeg and making the deal with Nashville.

Mac was actually in his third consecutive contract year and as a complimentary player to Grabovski and Kulemin, coupled with the play of Lupul and Kessel currently, he produced more at the time and his production now is somewhat understandable from that pov to me.

But that's sort of my point. It seems like a trade that had very little in the way of foresight but rather was entirely dictated by the present situation of a not very good team.

Making the argument on Versteeg versus MacArthur alone might not be convincing but making the argument on Versteeg versus a first rounder and MacArthur seems plausible to me.

But that's assuming Mac doesn't get dealt. So the argument for me would more be Mac + 1st vs. Versteeg + whatever Mac would have fetched in a trade.

 

[Deebo]

MacArthur was a guy with very little track record of being an impact scorer who was in a contract year when he showed that "chemistry". Now, this year, it looks like he's fallen back to earth. If we're going to attribute success to a guy being in a contract year than that's a good reason to keep Versteeg for this year and, if need be, deal him at this deadline. Looking at what the two of them have actually produced I think the argument that Burke shouldn't have done that with Mac last year is pretty tough to make convincingly.

If we adjust their production for ice time, which is fair because I think Versteeg's ice time would be closer to where Mac's is here rather than the level it is at for him in Florida. Versteeg has a point for every 27 minutes he plays at even strength and Mac has one ever 31.5 minutes. On the Power play Versteeg has a point for every 11.5 minutes on the ice  and Mac has one for every 10.3.

That translates to 4 points more for Versteeg over an 82 game season, I know this isn't an exact science because it doesn't take a bunch of factors into consideration. However, relative to their ice time, Versteeg and MacArthur have very similar production. Taking into consideration what the return for Versteeg was versus the unknown return MacArthur would have garnered in a deadline deal, I don't think its as cut and dry as you do.

 

[Tigger]

If that was the lone yardstick in a 'what have you done for me lately' microverse, sure.

True enough. As a Leafs fan I'm inclined to give him frighteningly little credit for what he accomplished for other teams.

Yeah and I get that, I'm all for it in general but you have to include more than just recent success in a question like that one in particular to me.

 

[Kin]

That translates to 4 points more for Versteeg over an 82 game season, I know this isn't an exact science because it doesn't take a bunch of factors into consideration.

cw had a great post on the old board about scoring not relating that directly to ice time so I think you definitely need to take it with a grain of salt. Especially when you include that Versteeg is a more versatile player who's better defensively and so his ES ice time isn't necessarily all high leverage offensive time. We'd probably both have to watch a lot more Florida games to really be able to talk about Versteeg's usage in a way that shines light on those kinds of numbers.

 

[Kin]

Yeah and I get that, I'm all for it in general but you have to include more than just recent success in a question like that one in particular to me.

I really don't think you do. My only real interest in Brian Burke is his success or lack thereof as the GM of the Maple Leafs.

 

[Tigger]

Well no, not when you deal Versteeg. If the notion even existed back then I don't think you could accurately predict the nature of what's involved. As far as anyone knew, even leading into the start of camp, he was still a question mark.

But the issue would have only presented itself when the Franson trade was brought up in the summer so there's really no impediment to keeping Versteeg and making the deal with Nashville.

Well no, if you think you have a better situation with the first you can't wait.

Mac was actually in his third consecutive contract year and as a complimentary player to Grabovski and Kulemin, coupled with the play of Lupul and Kessel currently, he produced more at the time and his production now is somewhat understandable from that pov to me.

But that's sort of my point. It seems like a trade that had very little in the way of foresight but rather was entirely dictated by the present situation of a not very good team.

You could be right there but I have a hunch that it was made with the notion that a team might be vulnerable to a financially based trade.

Making the argument on Versteeg versus MacArthur alone might not be convincing but making the argument on Versteeg versus a first rounder and MacArthur seems plausible to me.

But that's assuming Mac doesn't get dealt. So the argument for me would more be Mac + 1st vs. Versteeg + whatever Mac would have fetched in a trade.

A known versus an unknown... It's not that I'm heavily against what you suggest, fwiw, just that as I said, on balance, what happened makes more sense to me now.

 

[Tigger]

Yeah and I get that, I'm all for it in general but you have to include more than just recent success in a question like that one in particular to me.

I really don't think you do. My only real interest in Brian Burke is his success or lack thereof as the GM of the Maple Leafs.

..and I think that's a bit myopic when considering this question.

 

[Kin]

A known versus an unknown... It's not that I'm heavily against what you suggest, fwiw, just that as I said, on balance, what happened makes more sense to me now.

But I think there are reasonable assumptions to be made about what MacArthur would have landed. Probably not quite as much as Versteeg but in the same neighbourhood. I definitely don't think it's a major factor in an argument to keep Mac.

Although, again, the team could have kept both.

 

[Kin]

..and I think that's a bit myopic when considering this question.

To paraphrase a certain Danish prince, that actually is the question.

 

[Tigger]

..and I think that's a bit myopic when considering this question.

To paraphrase a certain Danish prince, that actually is the question.

Are we running the boiled chicken through the deflavorizing machine again?

As I said, on balance.

 

[Rebel_1812]

another 5 page argument with nik?  This would be okay if half the argument wasn't about what they were arguing over. I don't think trading for Versteeg was a good idea, considering we could have got Dustin Byfuglien or Andrew Ladd with the same package.  Burke thought he was getting a player of similar value, he didn't get that.  I agree with Burke to try and cut the losses Versteeg was shipped out of town.

 

[Sudafederov]

..and I think that's a bit myopic when considering this question.

To paraphrase a certain Danish prince, that actually is the question.

So is the question lemon or cherry?  How cool would that be to be the Prince of Danishes? 

That would be a lot cooler than Versteeg's Audi.

 

[Kin]

another 5 page argument with nik?  This would be okay if half the argument wasn't about what they were arguing over.

You know, poorly thought out, improperly capitalized words can still hurt.

 

[nutman]

Where was this guy when we needed him.

 

[Rebel_1812]

Where was this guy when we needed him.

He was in a line up to join the Muskoka five.

 

[Zee]

Where was this guy when we needed him.

Anaheim is probably saying the same thing about Lupul (if anyone actually watched hockey there)

 

[Madferret]

Where was this guy when we needed him.

Still unpacking his things from Chicago.