Phaneuf being shopped

[Corn Flake]

Very true, but he also should be on a team where he is not the captain, or even in the leadership group it will benefit him.

I get the impression that, regardless of whether or not he has a letter on his sweater, Phaneuf will always find himself as part of the leadership group. He just seems to have that kind of personality. Moving him down the chain would be good for him, but I don't think he'll ever be able to be completely removed from it.

Yeah you are probably right. But if you dropped him on a team like say the Sharks, they have such a well established veteran leadership group that I think it would keep him in check vs. what he did here which was walk in the dressing room on day 1 and basically took over.

edit: Now if you dropped him in on the Colorado roster, it might go a lot differently and potentially could be an issue.

 

[Redleaf]

Well Stastny is a pending UFA so I'd hope you wouldn't give up that much for the right to negotiate with him.

If anything, because Stastny is a pending UFA, Colorado would have to add for the Leafs to make the deal. At the very least, it would have to be a sign and trade situation for the Leafs to even consider a straight up swap.

You think Colorado lets him walk?

 

[Kin]

Very true, but he also should be on a team where he is not the captain, or even in the leadership group it will benefit him.

I get the impression that, regardless of whether or not he has a letter on his sweater, Phaneuf will always find himself as part of the leadership group. He just seems to have that kind of personality. Moving him down the chain would be good for him, but I don't think he'll ever be able to be completely removed from it.

I don't think that can be divorced from the fundamental question of what Phaneuf will be asked to do. If he's brought anywhere that he's expected to be one of the core guys who the team is built around then, yeah, there's no way he won't be one of the players looked to as a leader. If he's brought into an ideal situation where he's the #3 defenseman(or #2 defenseman but on the team's second pairing) then I don't think his personality is going to be that much of a consideration. If you dropped him onto Chicago tomorrow, guys like Patrick Sharp or Marian Hossa aren't going to sit around worrying about Dion Phaneuf.

 

[bustaheims]

You think Colorado lets him walk?

I think they'll do everything in their power to try to sign him, but, if they can't, the right to negotiate with him for a few extra days or so does not have anywhere near the value you're placing on it.

EDIT: And, if they do re-sign him, it's highly unlikely that he'll be a player they trade this summer.

 

[Redleaf]

You think Colorado lets him walk?

I think they'll do everything in their power to try to sign him, but, if they can't, the right to negotiate with him for a few extra days or so does not have anywhere near the value you're placing on it.

EDIT: And, if they do re-sign him, it's highly unlikely that he'll be a player they trade this summer.

I was placing the value on the signing not the negotiating rights, but I think it may be more of an equal value trade if they went after O'Reilly instead. I'd be pretty happy if Nonis could swing a deal with the Avs for either guy really.

 

[bustaheims]

I was placing the value on the signing not the negotiating rights, but I think it may be more of an equal value trade if they went after O'Reilly instead. I'd be pretty happy if Nonis could swing a deal that brought him to the Leafs.

Even in a sign and trade scenario, I don't think Colorado would get as much as Phaneuf, never mind more. That type of trade is basically an admission by the team that they're either not going to re-sign the player or they're not able to re-sign the player. Their leverage is significantly reduced. It's hard to judge exactly what kind of return there would be in that scenario, since we've yet to see a true sign and trade in the NHL, but, it's not a situation where the team executing the sign and trade is likely to get full value for the player they're trading.

 

[Redleaf]

I was placing the value on the signing not the negotiating rights, but I think it may be more of an equal value trade if they went after O'Reilly instead. I'd be pretty happy if Nonis could swing a deal that brought him to the Leafs.

Even in a sign and trade scenario, I don't think Colorado would get as much as Phaneuf, never mind more. That type of trade is basically an admission by the team that they're either not going to re-sign the player or they're not able to re-sign the player. Their leverage is significantly reduced. It's hard to judge exactly what kind of return there would be in that scenario, since we've yet to see a true sign and trade in the NHL, but, it's not a situation where the team executing the sign and trade is likely to get full value for the player they're trading.

Fair enough. I just hope they are able to land someone like a Statsny or O'Reilly this summer.

Like someone else mentioned in this thread, getting 2 dimes and a nickel for a quarter (Phaneuf) isn't my idea of a good return. And I think Nonis and Shanny need to get a 'good' return for Dion.

 

[Bullfrog]

I don't think that can be divorced from the fundamental question of what Phaneuf will be asked to do. If he's brought anywhere that he's expected to be one of the core guys who the team is built around then, yeah, there's no way he won't be one of the players looked to as a leader. If he's brought into an ideal situation where he's the #3 defenseman(or #2 defenseman but on the team's second pairing) then I don't think his personality is going to be that much of a consideration. If you dropped him onto Chicago tomorrow, guys like Patrick Sharp or Marian Hossa aren't going to sit around worrying about Dion Phaneuf.

The ideal situation is him as the no.3? He's a no.1 on many teams and a no.2 on some of the better teams. The ideal situation is to start using him more effectively on the power play while maintaining top line status.

I can buy a no.2 on the second line, but I really don't see that as being necessary.

 

[Kin]

The ideal situation is him as the no.3? He's a no.1 on many teams and a no.2 on some of the better teams.

Even if that were true, and I think it's well established that you and I have very different opinions about how good Phaneuf is relatively, then it doesn't really dispute that on the teams with the best defenses in the league he would be a #3 or even #4 guy. So, again, ideally #3 is where you want him.

 

[princedpw]

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?

It must be Christmas! I'd be happy with any partner that would take him off our hands quite honestly since it would open up lots of possibilities. I'm drooling at the thought....

Trading Phaneuf will definitely make the Leafs worse next year (are you aware of that?).  I doubt he'll be traded because the Leafs management are aware he is the best defenseman we have (he plays the most minutes).  And I just don't see the Leafs ever intentionally throwing away a year.

But as a return, I'd be happy with Edmonton's 1st and maybe a salary dump like Ference.

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.

Anyway, when Burke said "I don't want to be a part of a 5-year rebuild" I don't think he was doing the math properly -- a burn-it-down-sell-all-good-players rebuild will often take longer than that.  The key is drafting and developing defencemen. That just takes a long, long, long time.

It would depend on the return, therefore not definitive in any manner.

Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "definitely."  Phaneuf is one of the leafs most valuable players (in terms of minutes and situations he plays) and he is in his prime.  If the Leafs trade him, they will have a huge hole in their defense -- it doesn't seem likely to me that the return on the trade, be it forwards, goaltenders, futures, or cap space will be able to make up for the loss of Phaneuf (this year).

 

[Kin]

If the Leafs trade him, they will have a huge hole in their defense -- it doesn't seem likely to me that the return on the trade, be it forwards, goaltenders, futures, or cap space will be able to make up for the loss of Phaneuf (this year).

Why couldn't they also get a defenseman back in a deal?

 

[Redleaf]

If the Leafs trade him, they will have a huge hole in their defense -- it doesn't seem likely to me that the return on the trade, be it forwards, goaltenders, futures, or cap space will be able to make up for the loss of Phaneuf (this year).

Why couldn't they also get a defenseman back in a deal?

Pretty sure he meant any player they would get in a trade couldn't make up for the loss at the 'D' position caused from Phaneufs departure, included another defensemen.

 

[Leaflifer]

Good defensman, terrible captain, and the Leafs need a captain.

 

[Kin]

Pretty sure he meant any player they would get in a trade couldn't make up for the loss at the 'D' position caused from Phaneufs departure, included another defensemen.

That doesn't really square with saying that if he's traded the Leafs would have a "huge hole" on their defense. Even if you believe that you could only get someone who gave you 70% of what Phaneuf did in a trade that wouldn't be a huge loss, especially because it seems pretty likely that the Leafs young defensemen like Gardiner and Rielly are probably going to improve next year.

Again, if someone thought Phaneuf's departure would cause a "huge hole" that the Leafs couldn't address from within or via free agency then I'd think they'd also believe that he could be traded for pieces of significant value.

 

[ZBBM]

Dear God,

Seeing as you're God, you already know what's in my mind before I do so it is redundant for me to have to frame this as a prayer, but anyhow I have a very simple request and I will never bother you again: change the "o" in this thread's title to "i."

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Shanahan doing some media today.  From The Star's Kevin McGran:

@kevin_mcgran  ? 

Will Leafs strip C off Phaneuf? "I hope not. It's not something I've contemplated in the time that I've been here." - SHANAHAN

@kevin_mcgran 

"I don't know if (stripping C) is a solution. I think it's a cop-out, to a certain degree an easy way out."

@kevin_mcgran

On Phaneuf and #Leafs collapse: "There are certain times when less is more. Really felt that he was trying to be all things at once." Shanny

@kevin_mcgran 

"I want to help enhance the player and leader that Dion is." SHANAHAN #Leafs

@kevin_mcgran 

"I've heard too many times in my life, talking about leadership, this team can't succeed with this leadership group. Until they do." 

 

[hap_leaf]

So square peg, round hole...just force it!!

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

So square peg, round hole...just force it!!

The way he describes it is more akin to a malleable or pliable square peg.

 

[Bullfrog]

Maybe he's just being photo-shopped?

 

[Tigger]

Maybe he's just being photo-shopped?