Phaneuf being shopped

[Big Daddy]

Phaneuf being traded to SJ for the right to negotiate with Thornton and Boyle

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Phaneuf being traded to SJ for the right to negotiate with Thornton and Boyle

On the off chance that this is not just a joke, I'm fairly certain you can't negotiate with a player who has a contract.  Or I guess you could do it, only pointlessly.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

He shouldn't be difficult to move if they wanted to, his deal isn't outrageous.

His no-trade clause won't kick in until July 1st too, so there's nothing stopping Nonis from dealing him to Edmonton or Winnipeg.

 

[Peter D.]

I do not like the sounds of retaining $1 to $1.5 million in a potential deal.

 

[bustaheims]

His no-trade clause won't kick in until July 1st too, so there's nothing stopping Nonis from dealing him to Edmonton or Winnipeg.

Under the current CBA, NTCs can come into effect the moment the extension is signed, and I'm pretty sure that's the situation with Phaneuf.

 

[Redleaf]

So Shanahan apparently disagrees with the 2nd biggest decision Nonis made as Leafs GM but he trusts him enough to let him go out and fix that mistake.

edit: If this is all true then it should answer any questions to as to who is making the hockey decisions here.

From Mirtle-Phaneuf has more value signed than as a pending UFA, so I'm not sure you can rip the fact the Leafs locked him up. That helps a trade.

 

[pmrules]

Semantics aside of whether he is being "shopped" or "available" (like everyone on this team should be), I am of the opinion we should focus on obtaining a worthy partner for Phaneuf by bringing in another 1st pairing defenseman to help him out...maybe even drop Phaneuf to #2 status if possible. 

 

[Kaberle15]

How could trading the best defense men be a step forward?  Who are you going to trade him for that is better?

Is Gunnarsson been shopped?

 

[hap_leaf]

The ability to do those things, the ability to turn up nuggets of gold in unlikely methods in addition to drafting at the top of the draft is how teams speed up that process. 7 years may be a fair benchmark for a rebuilding team reaching their full potential but a base built by superstars at the top of the draft and augmented in other ways does not take 7 years to become an entertaining playoff team or even a contender.

For sure, the Av's turned it around in a big hurry via the draft: MacKinnon (1), Landeskog (2), Duchene (3), O'Reilly (33) and of course Stastny (44).
From 39 points in 48 games last year to 112 points in 82 games this year, its one of the most remarkable turnarounds ever. 
So I think in some ways you are cherry picking the teams in your examples as having to have won the Cup in recent years.  Plenty of teams have improved after having done well in the draft for successive years but just haven't put it all together for the ultimate prize.
As you rightly point out it doesn't have to be a top 10 pick to make a huge impact.  Look at Palat (208) leading Tampa in scoring this year.

I would say Pittsburgh, Colorado, Tampa, Chicago (today's Chicago, not necessarily the Thomas-era Chicago) and Anaheim can say their level of success is directly due to great successive draft choices.

 

[Kin]

For sure, the Av's turned it around in a big hurry via the draft: MacKinnon (1), Landeskog (2), Duchene (3), O'Reilly (33) and of course Stastny (44).

Although there's still no defensemen on the list and the single biggest factor in the turn-around, goaltending, had nothing at all to do with the draft. Regardless, that teams can turn it around quickly with a few years of high draft picks is the point I'm making in response to the suggestion that a full scale rebuild takes 7 years to complete. The Avs only went 3 seasons between playoff appearances.

So I think in some ways you are cherry picking the teams in your examples as having to have won the Cup in recent years.

If I'm using winning the cup as the aim then I'm kind of limited to cup winners in my evaluation, unfortunately

 

[Champ Kind]

Semantics aside of whether he is being "shopped" or "available" (like everyone on this team should be), I am of the opinion we should focus on obtaining a worthy partner for Phaneuf by bringing in another 1st pairing defenseman to help him out...maybe even drop Phaneuf to #2 status if possible.

I agree with this.  However, if the rumours are true, then Shanahan's evaluation of the team must have concluded that Phaneuf is ineffective as a captain.  It's likely tjhat it's easier to trade a captain than strip a core player of their captaincy and expect them to play hard and well for the next seven years.

I don't know, for me this team is not in rebuild mode.  The time for that was in 2009, which of course is now ancient history.  What's needed here is some patience and likely a reallocation of assets: ie. Trade Phaneuf for, oh I don't know, say Jordan Eberle (spitballing here), then trade Lupul for Alex Edler.  Boom goes the dynamite and, in my opinion, the Leafs are a better team next year.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Semantics aside of whether he is being "shopped" or "available" (like everyone on this team should be), I am of the opinion we should focus on obtaining a worthy partner for Phaneuf by bringing in another 1st pairing defenseman to help him out...maybe even drop Phaneuf to #2 status if possible.

I agree with this.  However, if the rumours are true, then Shanahan's evaluation of the team must have concluded that Phaneuf is ineffective as a captain.  It's likely tjhat it's easier to trade a captain than strip a core player of their captaincy and expect them to play hard and well for the next seven years.

It could also be that he feels the team needs some cap flexibility and that Phaneuf is the best chance to free up space + get a decent return since Wendel Clarkson isn't moving, and Kessel is a few years younger.

It's interesting that Dreger shot it down on his official account though.  He tends not to post things on there unless he knows for sure.  He saves the random chatter to his radio appearances where he spitballs stuff a lot of the time.

 

[Kin]

Trade Phaneuf for, oh I don't know, say Jordan Eberle (spitballing here), then trade Lupul for Alex Edler.  Boom goes the dynamite and, in my opinion, the Leafs are a better team next year.

They might be better(although that's why I wouldn't make either of those trades if I were the Oilers or Canucks) but probably not to the point where anyone would look at the Leafs as legit contenders. At some point they're going to have to address closing that gap.

 

[Champ Kind]

Trade Phaneuf for, oh I don't know, say Jordan Eberle (spitballing here), then trade Lupul for Alex Edler.  Boom goes the dynamite and, in my opinion, the Leafs are a better team next year.

They might be better(although that's why I wouldn't make either of those trades if I were the Oilers or Canucks) but probably not to the point where anyone would look at the Leafs as legit contenders. At some point they're going to have to address closing that gap.

Yeah, you're right.  Trades of that ilk would likely mean the Leafs are a playoff team, but not a serious contender.  For as much as we point the Flyers dramatic overhaul of their roster a few years ago as a template (I count myself as having done this), really what did it get them?  Ok, an aging Chris Pronger might have made some difference, but despite the fact that they've been decent enough regular season performers they really haven't had any sort of meaningful success.

It's a stark, cold reality, but as we sit here right now the Leafs lack the pipeline of elite talent to seriously contend.  I mean, when you stack up Toronto's lineup against that of Colorado, or at least in terms of depth of top-end players, it's quite grim.

 

[Champ Kind]

Also wanted to add that, although I'm quite sure Old Man Bill Watters is one of his sources, Kypreos' claim that San Jose is interested in Phaneuf makes a great deal of sense to me.  I also wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see him go there (or a similar team) and be really successful.

 

[Corn Flake]

Reports from Kypreos suggest that Phaneuf is being shopped out West.

Perhaps this is the first step in the culture change, thoughts on potential trading partners and potential returns we'd be happy with?

How could trading the best defense men be a step forward?  Who are you going to trade him for that is better?

If they are indeed going to do this, I see it as 99.9% about instituting a culture change from within the core of the team.  I am mostly a Phaneuf supporter but the reality is he has been captain of record during three major season-destroying collapses.  His leadership seems to mostly be about yelling a lot and it was pretty obvious at the end of this year the other guys were getting tired of it. (see: Kessel caught on viewo telling Dion to "shut his f***king mouth")

If Shanny has determined that Dion is not the type of leader he wants on the ice for this team, then so be it.  It will be a huge gut to the core and will create a gaping hole on defense, but if it's the means to the right long-term end, then go for it. We can live with the re-growing pains.

To be honest, I think if the rest of the defense wasn't so awful, Phaneuf wouldn't have been so heavily relied on.  Meaning if he moves Dion and overhauls the rest of the defense then I think they can actually get better and not worse.

 

[nutman]

I think Phaneuf is more of a problem on the defense then a help. I don't think he is liked by the core players, and I don't think they like the fact he gets caught flat footed as well as gives up the blue line so much.
I think his best value to the Leafs is the cap we would save , and the value we could get for him in a trade. I bet management is thinking the same.

 

[mc]

They brought in the same coach from last year's disaster. Unless they want a repeat a year from now, they better make drastic changes to the roster. Whether that means trading the captain or stripping the C from his chest and giving it to another player - I am all for it. The current team is far far far from a championship calibre roster. Too many passengers.

 

[Rebel_1812]

I do think that people fail to calculate the amount of time a tear-it-down rebuild takes.  Suppose you need 4 really good players to compete for a championship.  That's 4 years in a row of top draft picks (with none of those years being a bust).  Then you have to let those 4 players mature a number of years each.  If the last of the 4 takes 3 years to mature (unlikely for a defenseman, so you have to draft your star defenseman early, which, Edmonton, for example, didnt do, meaning they have to wait several more years for a guy like Nurse to be a force).  Anyway, we are at 4+3 = 7 years minimum for a normal burn-it-down rebuild.  We might be a little better than that because we already have Rielly and Gardiner, who have some chance at turning in to those top defencemen that one needs.

Except that's not a realistic portrait of how any top teams were actually built. In order for a team to be competitive you're right that they probably need at least 4 exceptional players but exceptional players can be acquired in any number of ways. Here's the recent champions and a reasonable guess at their four best players and how they obtained them:

Blackhawks: Kane(1st overall), Toews(3rd overall), Keith(54th overall), Sharp(trade) or Hossa(UFA) or Crawford(52nd overall)

Kings: Quick(72nd overall), Kopitar(11th overall), Doughty(2nd overall), Mike Richards(trade)

Bruins: Thomas(UFA), Chara(UFA), Bergeron(45th overall), Lucic(50th overall)

Penguins: Crosby(1st overall), Malkin (2nd overall), Fleury(1st overall) Gonchar(UFA)

Even if you want to throw a bone to the argument and say that the Penguins 4 best players were the four guys they drafted at the top of the draft, making them the only team that really fits your mold, then there's still the noticeable absence of any defensemen on the list. 

Teams who are rebuilding still get to make trades. They still have draft picks beyond the first round(and can have multiple first round picks). Those four exceptional players can come from anywhere and while the smart money is on finding those players at the top of the draft it's the ultimate strawman argument favoured by defenders of MLSE's seeming religious objection to proper rebuilding that simply drafting high for multiple years will guarantee a team that eventually contends for a cup, Truth is in order to build a cup contender a team does have to sign good free agents and make good trades and draft well outside of the top ten.

The ability to do those things, the ability to turn up nuggets of gold in unlikely methods in addition to drafting at the top of the draft is how teams speed up that process. 7 years may be a fair benchmark for a rebuilding team reaching their full potential but a base built by superstars at the top of the draft and augmented in other ways does not take 7 years to become an entertaining playoff team or even a contender.

The Leafs wouldn't be rebuilding from nothing. They'd still have Rielly. They'd still have guys like Finn and Percy. They'd still have the assets trading guys like Phaneuf would bring back. Heck, they might even still have Kadri and Gardiner. There's no denying that the first few years of a rebuilding process would be tough to watch but can get better fairly quickly.

If your arguement is that good draft picks don't lead to success, you have disproved yourself with your own examples.  Most of those guys are high draft picks.  If the leafs really want to rebuild with the draft then don't just trade Phaneuf; also trade kessel, bozak and JVR.

 

[jdh1]

I think Phaneuf is more of a problem on the defense then a help. I don't think he is liked by the core players, and I don't think they like the fact he gets caught flat footed as well as gives up the blue line so much.
I think his best value to the Leafs is the cap we would save , and the value we could get for him in a trade. I bet management is thinking the same.

Agreed,I am glad that he might be traded..I was in the camp of trading him before they signed him for 7 years.As you say his cap relief can leave the team freed up for future moves.