Phil Kessel

[OldTimeHockey]

But, if that was the way the Leafs had decided to go, Lupul's deal makes no sense. His value(I'd have to believe) would of been higher without 5 years at 5+ million a year attached to it.

Not necessarily. Absent an extension he's a rental player. If you think Lupul got a contract around market value he's way more valuable under contract.

Well, that will all depend on how he comes back from this forearm injury. Yes it was an injury out of his control, but as of now, he's viewed as a player that spends a heck of alot of time on the shelf instead of on the ice. Add that to a 5 year deal and I don't see how his value goes up...not right now anyway. If he comes back and lights it up and stays healthy, well then his deal is seen as a bargain.

I guess the biggest question would be "Is Lupul a rental type player?" or "Is he a player you trade for and want to keep around for 5 more years."

 

[Kin]

Well, that will all depend on how he comes back from this forearm injury. Yes it was an injury out of his control, but as of now, he's viewed as a player that spends a heck of alot of time on the shelf instead of on the ice. Add that to a 5 year deal and I don't see how his value goes up...not right now anyway. If he comes back and lights it up and stays healthy, well then his deal is seen as a bargain.

I guess the biggest question would be "Is Lupul a rental type player?" or "Is he a player you trade for and want to keep around for 5 more years."

Sure, but you were commenting on how signing Lupul to that deal made sense in the context of maybe trading players away. Given that the contract happened pre-forearm injury I don't think it factored into the decision making.

 

[Bullfrog]

I'm not 100% sure on that but perhaps it's just the constant beating into our heads we receive from fans of other teams and the media on how mediocre Kessel is.

I don't know; I'm not receiving the constant head beating you seem to be. I think Kessel comes as advertised: an elite, one-dimensional goal scorer. And that's valuable.

 

[Chett]

I'm not 100% sure on that but perhaps it's just the constant beating into our heads we receive from fans of other teams and the media on how mediocre Kessel is.

I don't know; I'm not receiving the constant head beating you seem to be. I think Kessel comes as advertised: an elite, one-dimensional goal scorer. And that's valuable.

Be sure to avoid "comments" on tsn articles then. Those people are ridiculous.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Well, that will all depend on how he comes back from this forearm injury. Yes it was an injury out of his control, but as of now, he's viewed as a player that spends a heck of alot of time on the shelf instead of on the ice. Add that to a 5 year deal and I don't see how his value goes up...not right now anyway. If he comes back and lights it up and stays healthy, well then his deal is seen as a bargain.

I guess the biggest question would be "Is Lupul a rental type player?" or "Is he a player you trade for and want to keep around for 5 more years."

Sure, but you were commenting on how signing Lupul to that deal made sense in the context of maybe trading players away. Given that the contract happened pre-forearm injury I don't think it factored into the decision making.

So prior to the contract being signed Lupul was viewed as a healthy ox of a man who hadn't missed much hockey in the last 3 years? Forearm removed, Lupul has been injury prone(whether it's been pure fluke or not).

My only point of bringing up the forearm injury was I think his contract value took a hit when he went down. Like I said, if he can come back strong and put up some good numbers in the latter half of the year, the value of the contract may go up....but that's yet to be seen.

 

[Joe S.]

This trade is up there with the raycroft for Rask
And the Kordic for courtnall.
Dougie Hamilton is looking good and I'd take seguin over kessel straight up right now.

No it isn't.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I'm not 100% sure on that but perhaps it's just the constant beating into our heads we receive from fans of other teams and the media on how mediocre Kessel is.

I don't know; I'm not receiving the constant head beating you seem to be. I think Kessel comes as advertised: an elite, one-dimensional goal scorer. And that's valuable.

While I agree he's a very good goal scorer, I'm just not sold on how valuable he may be. I mean, I see his value to the Leafs, and I'm not bashing his skillset at all. I'm just not completely sure how the rest of the league views him.

 

[Kin]

So prior to the contract being signed Lupul was viewed as a healthy ox of a man who hadn't missed much hockey in the last 3 years? Forearm removed, Lupul has been injury prone(whether it's been pure fluke or not).

No, but prior to the injury I'd guess that Lupul was seen as no more or less susceptible to getting hit in the arm by a slapshot than anyone else.

 

[bustaheims]

But, if that was the way the Leafs had decided to go, Lupul's deal makes no sense. His value(I'd have to believe) would of been higher without 5 years at 5+ million a year attached to it.

Now, the question is, is Lupul's signing a sign that Nonis 'thinks' Kessel is staying, or 'hopes' that Kessel is staying.

Well, obviously, they haven't decided to go that way yet, but, if this summer, Nonis approaches Kessel about an extension and finds out there's no interest from Kessel's side in sticking around if the team doesn't show significant improvement or whatever, then a decision has to be made - and that decision would really come down to either gutting the team and rebuilding or gutting the farm to bring in developed talent.

 

[Tigger]

It's amazing how much can be stirred up by one Cox.

Anywho, busta's last post pretty much sums up the situation and it's something practically every team has to do with the talent on their roster.

 

[bustaheims]

Anywho, busta's last post pretty much sums up the situation and it's something practically every team has to do with the talent on their roster.

At some point, yeah, every team has to make similar decisions.

 

[Champ Kind]

But, if that was the way the Leafs had decided to go, Lupul's deal makes no sense. His value(I'd have to believe) would of been higher without 5 years at 5+ million a year attached to it.

Not necessarily. Absent an extension he's a rental player. If you think Lupul got a contract around market value he's way more valuable under contract.

Well, that will all depend on how he comes back from this forearm injury. Yes it was an injury out of his control, but as of now, he's viewed as a player that spends a heck of alot of time on the shelf instead of on the ice. Add that to a 5 year deal and I don't see how his value goes up...not right now anyway. If he comes back and lights it up and stays healthy, well then his deal is seen as a bargain.

I guess the biggest question would be "Is Lupul a rental type player?" or "Is he a player you trade for and want to keep around for 5 more years."

If memory serves, Lupul's current deal was a fairly substantial one.  $4.25 over 4 years, I believe.  That deal, arguably, was based on his potential.  The deal he recently signed is based on actual performance (granted, one year).  At any rate, Lupul's previous deal didn't seem to hinder other team's ability to move him so so why should this deal?

 

[Joe S.]

Did you already explain why you think they came out so well in those trades that I missed?

I suppose I must have done.

Unless I'm missing something, didn't LA end up with both of them and subsequently won the cup?

Or are we talking about 2 different guys?

 

[OldTimeHockey]

But, if that was the way the Leafs had decided to go, Lupul's deal makes no sense. His value(I'd have to believe) would of been higher without 5 years at 5+ million a year attached to it.

Not necessarily. Absent an extension he's a rental player. If you think Lupul got a contract around market value he's way more valuable under contract.

Well, that will all depend on how he comes back from this forearm injury. Yes it was an injury out of his control, but as of now, he's viewed as a player that spends a heck of alot of time on the shelf instead of on the ice. Add that to a 5 year deal and I don't see how his value goes up...not right now anyway. If he comes back and lights it up and stays healthy, well then his deal is seen as a bargain.

I guess the biggest question would be "Is Lupul a rental type player?" or "Is he a player you trade for and want to keep around for 5 more years."

If memory serves, Lupul's current deal was a fairly substantial one.  $4.25 over 4 years, I believe.  That deal, arguably, was based on his potential.  The deal he recently signed is based on actual performance (granted, one year).  At any rate, Lupul's previous deal didn't seem to hinder other team's ability to move him so so why should this deal?

I didn't say they'd be hindered by his deal...I said his value would decrease.

In the previous deal that Lupul was moved, it cost the Leafs Beauchemin and they also got Gardiner to go along with Lupul..so yeah, I'd say his value wasn't overly high.

 

[Kin]

Unless I'm missing something, didn't LA end up with both of them and subsequently won the cup?

Or are we talking about 2 different guys?

Well, I guess it would then depend on whether you thought the way to judge a trade is if the team got back assets that were worth as much as what they gave up or you just judged it on how the respective teams did after the trade.

Because if it's the latter then Toronto got hosed in the Kaberle trade, I suppose.

 

[Jay-Mar]

Ive been a Kessel supporter since he arrived here. The trade that brought him here just happened to be a fluke that the leafs ended up where they did in the standings that year. This year Kessel just seems disinterested on whats going on, the offside last night was a perfect example of him skating around with his head in the clouds. If he's no longer motivated to play here than its time to trade him, an annual 30+ goal scorer will get you a Nash type deal. Not to mention its a strong draft year.

 

[Kin]

The trade that brought him here just happened to be a fluke that the leafs ended up where they did in the standings that year.

It really wasn't a fluke that a team with Vesa Toskala as its #1 goalie finished the year in the basement.

 

[Jalili]

The trade that brought him here just happened to be a fluke that the leafs ended up where they did in the standings that year.

It really wasn't a fluke that a team with Vesa Toskala as its #1 goalie finished the year in the basement.

Damn, beat me to it.

That's not mentioning that Stajan was the 1st line center, Ponikarovsky was #1 LW, etc.

 

[Redleaf]

Ive been a Kessel supporter since he arrived here. The trade that brought him here just happened to be a fluke that the leafs ended up where they did in the standings that year. This year Kessel just seems disinterested on whats going on, the offside last night was a perfect example of him skating around with his head in the clouds. If he's no longer motivated to play here than its time to trade him, an annual 30+ goal scorer will get you a Nash type deal. Not to mention its a strong draft year.

I don't see Kessel as being disinterested at all. If anything, he's trying too hard to put the puck in the net. He needs to get back to playing his game, the goals will come, and everyone will be happy with his production again.

 

[Jay-Mar]

The trade that brought him here just happened to be a fluke that the leafs ended up where they did in the standings that year.

It really wasn't a fluke that a team with Vesa Toskala as its #1 goalie finished the year in the basement.

Damn, beat me to it.

That's not mentioning that Stajan was the 1st line center, Ponikarovsky was #1 LW, etc.

Vesa had a 22 win season prior to the trade and had 33 wins the year before. I still blame Allaire for Vesa's demise but had a few of the free agents panned out and had Wilson's defensive schemes he preached worked then the leafs although not a play-off team were also not supposed to be as bad as they finished.