Official meeting place of the Kadri Cadre

[Kin]

Who?

Landeskog.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Landeskog won the Calder and is the captain of his team. Not comparable in my books.

 

[Jalili]

I guess this has gotten more ugly than I realized. Hopefully no bad blood comes from this...

 

[Jalili]

Landeskog won the Calder and is the captain of his team. Not comparable in my books.

Sort of. Kadri is a better, more skilled offensive player. But Landeskog's also getting paid for his leadership and his all-around abilities as a potential do-everything power forward.

 

[Kin]

Landeskog won the Calder and is the captain of his team. Not comparable in my books.

Well, as disappointed as I'm sure Kadri will be to hear that can you provide any example of a player finishing 21st or better in the league wide scoring race who then signed the kind of contract that you seem to think Kadri should sign? I mean, anyone can play the extremely narrow precedent game and come up with unique examples.

Your books notwithstanding, Kadri and Landeskog have very similar numbers at this stage in their careers.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Landeskog won the Calder and is the captain of his team. Not comparable in my books.

Well, as disappointed as I'm sure Kadri will be to hear that can you provide any example of a player finishing 21st or better in the league wide scoring race who then signed the kind of contract that you seem to think Kadri should sign? I mean, anyone can play the extremely narrow precedent game and come up with unique examples.

Your books notwithstanding, Kadri and Landeskog have very similar numbers at this stage in their careers.

Your books not withstanding, Landeskog came into the league, played a full 82 games in his first season, scored 22 goals/52 points and was promptly named captain of his team for not only those 52 points but what he brings to the team on and off the ice.

I think Kadri's a one dimensional forward that is in nowhere near the same category as Landeskog, or Skinner.

He came into the league, Played 1 game his first year, 29 games his second year(scoring 12 points), Played 21 games his 3rd year(scoring 7 points). He then was criticized by his coach, criticized for his off ice workout regime, and then called out Wilson publicly. In his 3rd season as a pro, he finally put up some good numbers for 35 games or so and disappeared into thin air. Then, that summer, he tried to paint the picture that the Leafs owed him something, much the way he tried to paint the picture that it was Wilson's fault he was struggling. Perhaps if he didn't come off like such a whiny punk, I'd be able to accept his 'fair' demands.

I apologize if I view a player on a much broader scale than you. I mean, forgive me if I look at a player with a Calder trophy, and the youngest captain ever in the NHL in a better light than a guy who struggled to stick in the NHL, and when he did, put up 35 good games.

But go ahead Nik, tell me why my view of a player is wrong and your's is right. We get it.

 

[Bender]

I think he`s a bit of a brat, honestly. Why chirp the media through Twitter...

 

[Kin]

Your books not withstanding, Landeskog came into the league, played a full 82 games in his first season, scored 22 goals/52 points and was promptly named captain of his team for not only those 52 points but what he brings to the team on and off the ice.

I think Kadri's a one dimensional forward that is in nowhere near the same category as Landeskog, or Skinner.

He came into the league, Played 1 game his first year, 29 games his second year(scoring 12 points), Played 21 games his 3rd year(scoring 7 points). He then was criticized by his coach, criticized for his off ice workout regime, and then called out Wilson publicly. In his 3rd season as a pro, he finally put up some good numbers for 35 games or so and disappeared into thin air. Then, that summer, he tried to paint the picture that the Leafs owed him something, much the way he tried to paint the picture that it was Wilson's fault he was struggling. Perhaps if he didn't come off like such a whiny punk, I'd be able to accept his 'fair' demands.

I apologize if I view a player on a much broader scale than you. I mean, forgive me if I look at a player with a Calder trophy, and the youngest captain ever in the NHL in a better light than a guy who struggled to stick in the NHL, and when he did, put up 35 good games.

But go ahead Nik, tell me why my view of a player is wrong and your's is right. We get it.

Well, the mistake you're making there, one of them anyway, is in trying to frame this as your view of Kadri vs. my view of Kadri when I haven't really talked much about my view of Kadri. The way the NHL CBA is set up so distorts the notions of "value" or what a player is "worth" that I think it's largely meaningless in this sort of a discussion. All that we can really look at is what the salary structure is and where someone fits into it. Kadri's not John Tavares, no, but he's not Carl Hagelin or Kyle Clifford. He's somewhere in the middle.

The reason Landeskog is a good comparison is that like Kadri there are reasons to like the long term approach and reasons not to(and to be fair, a lot of eyebrows raised at the deal he signed). I realize you're selectively choosing facts to make your case but you talk a ton about Landeskog's successful first season and basically none about his kind of disappointing second year. Likewise, you basically dismiss Kadri's 35 games are "good" when the reality is that he was scoring at a pace that 10 or 12 guys in the entire league are capable of doing for an entire season(and I don't buy that his tailing off at the end is somehow more meaningful than if he had in the middle of the season). Moreover, I don't like the Points/60 stat in general but here it highlights something else remarkable. Even with his slowdown near the end of the season among players who played 20 games, Kadri ranked third in the entire league. Behind Sid Crosby and Eric Staal. That's it. Third. 21st overall in total scoring. This despite being 113th among forwards in ice time,  total and on the PP. He did this, mind you, with his most frequent linemates being noted offensive dynamos Leo Komarov and Clarke MacArthur. On the PP, though, the team really helped him out by replacing Komarov with Grabo, so, you know, tons of help.

So, you're free to frame this as Landeskog being the second coming of Jean Beliveau and Nazem Kadri as a flash in the pan if you want but I don't think the facts support it. Even if Kadri is a one dimensional player, and I don't think he is as I think he brought a nice physical game to go along with the scoring touch, he excelled in that dimension last year to a point where the comparison is a lot closer than you want to admit. I don't know that it's exactly the same but the idea that, say, Landeskog deserved to get 37 million and Kadri deserves 6...I don't think there's a leg to stand on there.

Right now it seems like there's a pretty basic pattern for guys in their second contracts. If they've established themselves as really good NHL'ers, they got long term deals at pretty good salaries. If they haven't, but they have potential, they tend to sign the smaller bridge contracts. Kadri doesn't really fit into either category and neither does Landeskog.

 

[L K]

I think he`s a bit of a brat, honestly. Why chirp the media through Twitter...

Why automatically take the team at face value and the player as a liar?

 

[caver]

I can't speak for Bender but that is not what i get from reading his post.

 

[mr grieves]

I think he`s a bit of a brat, honestly. Why chirp the media through Twitter...

Why automatically take the team at face value and the player as a liar?

Do you think the team would smear a player by lying about a his contract demands? I don't see the advantage gained... Leaking actual demands might be a way to hardball someone -- and much of what Poulin and Nonis have said lately suggests the team is playing hardball -- but completely making up demands would, I'd think, risk poisoning the employer-employee relationship.

 

[Redleaf]

Your books not withstanding, Landeskog came into the league, played a full 82 games in his first season, scored 22 goals/52 points and was promptly named captain of his team for not only those 52 points but what he brings to the team on and off the ice.

I think Kadri's a one dimensional forward that is in nowhere near the same category as Landeskog, or Skinner.

He came into the league, Played 1 game his first year, 29 games his second year(scoring 12 points), Played 21 games his 3rd year(scoring 7 points). He then was criticized by his coach, criticized for his off ice workout regime, and then called out Wilson publicly. In his 3rd season as a pro, he finally put up some good numbers for 35 games or so and disappeared into thin air. Then, that summer, he tried to paint the picture that the Leafs owed him something, much the way he tried to paint the picture that it was Wilson's fault he was struggling. Perhaps if he didn't come off like such a whiny punk, I'd be able to accept his 'fair' demands.

I apologize if I view a player on a much broader scale than you. I mean, forgive me if I look at a player with a Calder trophy, and the youngest captain ever in the NHL in a better light than a guy who struggled to stick in the NHL, and when he did, put up 35 good games.

But go ahead Nik, tell me why my view of a player is wrong and your's is right. We get it.

Well, the mistake you're making there, one of them anyway, is in trying to frame this as your view of Kadri vs. my view of Kadri when I haven't really talked much about my view of Kadri. The way the NHL CBA is set up so distorts the notions of "value" or what a player is "worth" that I think it's largely meaningless in this sort of a discussion. All that we can really look at is what the salary structure is and where someone fits into it. Kadri's not John Tavares, no, but he's not Carl Hagelin or Kyle Clifford. He's somewhere in the middle.

The reason Landeskog is a good comparison is that like Kadri there are reasons to like the long term approach and reasons not to(and to be fair, a lot of eyebrows raised at the deal he signed). I realize you're selectively choosing facts to make your case but you talk a ton about Landeskog's successful first season and basically none about his kind of disappointing second year. Likewise, you basically dismiss Kadri's 35 games are "good" when the reality is that he was scoring at a pace that 10 or 12 guys in the entire league are capable of doing for an entire season(and I don't buy that his tailing off at the end is somehow more meaningful than if he had in the middle of the season). Moreover, I don't like the Points/60 stat in general but here it highlights something else remarkable. Even with his slowdown near the end of the season among players who played 20 games, Kadri ranked third in the entire league. Behind Sid Crosby and Eric Staal. That's it. Third. 21st overall in total scoring. This despite being 113th among forwards in ice time,  total and on the PP. He did this, mind you, with his most frequent linemates being noted offensive dynamos Leo Komarov and Clarke MacArthur. On the PP, though, the team really helped him out by replacing Komarov with Grabo, so, you know, tons of help.

So, you're free to frame this as Landeskog being the second coming of Jean Beliveau and Nazem Kadri as a flash in the pan if you want but I don't think the facts support it. Even if Kadri is a one dimensional player, and I don't think he is as I think he brought a nice physical game to go along with the scoring touch, he excelled in that dimension last year to a point where the comparison is a lot closer than you want to admit. I don't know that it's exactly the same but the idea that, say, Landeskog deserved to get 37 million and Kadri deserves 6...I don't think there's a leg to stand on there.

Right now it seems like there's a pretty basic pattern for guys in their second contracts. If they've established themselves as really good NHL'ers, they got long term deals at pretty good salaries. If they haven't, but they have potential, they tend to sign the smaller bridge contracts. Kadri doesn't really fit into either category and neither does Landeskog.

There's no one quite like you Nik. Be loud. Be proud.

 

[gilmourthegreat]

Sometimes it seems like while everyone else is discussing, Nik's competing. He's in a league of his own.

 

[nutman]

Kadri needs to be bridged, its the only fair way to deal with him. I think its a case where he needs to put up or shut up. I like him and think he will be a top six guy for us. But like management, I too want to see it first. If he brings it this season and I am sure he will, then the cash will flow.

 

[Hampreacher]

If Kadri is asking for $5.5 million per year long term,would he given cap limitations this season be better to take the $3 million for one year. If he puts up numbers like the best portion of last season, he might ask and get $6.5 million per  long term next season with the higher cap.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Your books not withstanding, Landeskog came into the league, played a full 82 games in his first season, scored 22 goals/52 points and was promptly named captain of his team for not only those 52 points but what he brings to the team on and off the ice.

I think Kadri's a one dimensional forward that is in nowhere near the same category as Landeskog, or Skinner.

He came into the league, Played 1 game his first year, 29 games his second year(scoring 12 points), Played 21 games his 3rd year(scoring 7 points). He then was criticized by his coach, criticized for his off ice workout regime, and then called out Wilson publicly. In his 3rd season as a pro, he finally put up some good numbers for 35 games or so and disappeared into thin air. Then, that summer, he tried to paint the picture that the Leafs owed him something, much the way he tried to paint the picture that it was Wilson's fault he was struggling. Perhaps if he didn't come off like such a whiny punk, I'd be able to accept his 'fair' demands.

I apologize if I view a player on a much broader scale than you. I mean, forgive me if I look at a player with a Calder trophy, and the youngest captain ever in the NHL in a better light than a guy who struggled to stick in the NHL, and when he did, put up 35 good games.

But go ahead Nik, tell me why my view of a player is wrong and your's is right. We get it.

Well, the mistake you're making there, one of them anyway,

Thanks once again teach, can you use a red marker next time?

Kadri's not John Tavares, no, but he's not Carl Hagelin or Kyle Clifford. He's somewhere in the middle.

I don't disagree with that. Never said I did.

there are reasons to like the long term approach and reasons not to(and to be fair, a lot of eyebrows raised at the deal he signed). I realize you're selectively choosing facts to make your case but you talk a ton about Landeskog's successful first season and basically none about his kind of disappointing second year.

And I realize that you're selectively choosing a 35 game fragment of a player's short career to prove your point but carry on.

Likewise, you basically dismiss Kadri's 35 games are "good" when the reality is that he was scoring at a pace that 10 or 12 guys in the entire league are capable of doing for an entire season(and I don't buy that his tailing off at the end is somehow more meaningful than if he had in the middle of the season).

Many players have done well for half a season before. The problem arises when they can't continue at that pace. Pardon me for not wanting to hand Kadri the keys to the city just yet.

Moreover, I don't like the Points/60 stat in general but here it highlights something else remarkable.

Nothing like using a stat that you don't agree with to prove your point. I personally think the stat is bunk as well. You don't know, nor do I, what his production would be like if that ice time was increased and he played against stiffer competition.

So, you're free to frame this as Landeskog being the second coming of Jean Beliveau

Never said that. Quit putting words in my mouth.

Nazem Kadri as a flash in the pan if you want

Never said that either.

  I don't know that it's exactly the same but the idea that, say, Landeskog deserved to get 37 million and Kadri deserves 6...I don't think there's a leg to stand on there.

Ummmm, didn't say that either but thanks.

Kadri doesn't really fit into either category and neither does Landeskog.

So where do you put him oh wise one?

 

[Kin]

And I realize that you're selectively choosing a 35 game fragment of a player's short career to prove your point but carry on.

Actually, I'm doing the exact opposite of that. Remember earlier when I compared Landeskog to Kadri on the basis of having similar point totals and games played? That encompassed their entire careers. If I were just singling out Kadri's first run last year then I, or anyone, would have to come to the conclusion that Kadri was much, much better than Landeskog. But I'm not doing that. I'm just saying they're comparable.

Likewise, just for the sake of accuracy you should probably stop referring to it as 35 games. For one, game #36 was the game where Kadri had a hat trick against Ottawa so..he didn't fall off a cliff. He had 41 points through 41 games. But, really, if someone scores 44 points in 48 games I don't think we need to point to a relative slow 7 game stretch(where even then he didn't completely disappear) as somehow being more important than the 41 games that came before it.

Many players have done well for half a season before. The problem arises when they can't continue at that pace. Pardon me for not wanting to hand Kadri the keys to the city just yet.

Again, you're confusing the issue. I have no problem with anyone being reluctant to give Kadri a big contract extension. Just like I wouldn't have a problem with a Colorado fan feeling the same way about Landeskog after one good year and one not-so-good year. The issue isn't our respective comforts with these deals, it's trying to get a handle on the league's salary structure and where Kadri fits into it.

Nothing like using a stat that you don't agree with to prove your point. I personally think the stat is bunk as well. You don't know, nor do I, what his production would be like if that ice time was increased and he played against stiffer competition.

The reason I don't like the stat is that it places too high a value on a point scored in limited ice time vs. the total number of points a player scores. This leads to very misleading things like 4th liners with 20 points being 100+ places higher than guys who were up in the NHL scoring leaders. That's not a good reflection of offensive value when, say, Fraser McLaren ranks as the 63rd most effective goal scorer in the league.

But that's something that obviously doesn't apply to Kadri. He was, just in raw totals, one of the best offensive players in the league last year. That's why the stat highlights, not proves, something worth mentioning when we talk about Kadri's season last year. Of the top offensive players in the league, of which Kadri was undeniably one, he probably had the least help in his point totals from factors like linemates and ice time. You have to get to the #89 scorer in the league to find someone with significantly less ice time than Kadri. An ability to score like that, with that little ice time and with that little help from his linemates, is more valuable than the raw numbers suggest.

I don't need the stat to make that argument. It's pretty self-evident. It just expresses it in a handy way.

So where do you put him oh wise one?

Like I said...somewhere in the middle. Now, we don't know exactly where these negotiations are in terms of what Kadri wants vs. what the Leafs are offering but even the very big contract that Kadri is "reported" to have asked for would fall....somewhere in the middle between those two numbers. On the high side of it, sure. But given how closely comparable he is to Landeskog that doesn't strike me as being way outside of the league's salary structure.

Just as an example I'd feel just as comfortable giving Kadri 5 years/4.2 million as I did Bozak.

 

[Britishbulldog]

Sometimes it seems like while everyone else is discussing, Nik's competing. He's in a league of his own.

 

[Zee]

Will Burke offer sheet Kadri once he gets to the Flames?  Would make things exciting around here.

 

[Britishbulldog]

From my incredible vantage point in GM fantasy land I can give the definitive opinion that Kadri should take a 2 year $2.875 per year bridge contract and then cash in for the rest of his career.