Reimer and Morin to Sharks for Stalock, Smith and conditional 4th

[Peter D.]

I don't buy for a second Reimer asked for a contract like that.  No chance.

 

[Jolly good show chaps]

Have we saved any money in this trade (as opposed to cap hit)?

 

[hockeyfan1]

Ah well,  good luck in San Jose,  Optimus Reim. At least, he'll be seeing some playoff action with the Sharks.  He seems quite excited to be with San Jose:

"I had a lot of good years here, my whole NHL career has been in Toronto, so it's definitely a weird feeling to be going somewhere else," Reimer said in Montreal, where the Maple Leafs were to play the Canadiens on Saturday. "But the changes that were being made in Toronto, obviously they're building really good things to be successful in the future. Getting this opportunity to come to a team like San Jose that is poised to do some damage, it's exciting. It's an opportunity where you have to try to make the most of it."

Gentleman James.


Source:  NHL.com

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Morin's turning 25 this summer and didn't seem to be all that impressive for the Marlies. If he has any kind of NHL career I'll eat my hypothetical hat. If you want to hate a deal go back to the one that originally sent him here.

 

[herman]

Stalock ensures Sparks and Bibeau stay with Marlies.

Losing Morin is probably the weakest part of this deal for me, but it's a contract slot freed up for the incoming filler. He was basically free via Panik. Smith can also play NHL minutes to make sure the Marlies are intact.

Better than nothing!

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Cox just reported that only San Jose was interested in Reimer and that Reimer's asking price on an extension was 6 per.

But, you know, keep saying the Leafs were robbed.

So 4 teams with back-up goalies probably negotiating with 1 team with a need for a back-up goalie. Supply and demand people. It's a pretty basic concept.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Stalock ensures Sparks and Bibeau stay with Marlies.

Lou's talked about how this will specifically open up a spot for either Sparks or Bibeau this season. I wouldn't be surprised if Stalock went on waivers after the deadline.

 

[Frank E]

So:

Stalock and Smith have no future with the Leafs.

And all we got for Reimer was a lousy 4th.

Oh wait, we gave them Morin too.  He has no value whatsoever, right?  Except, well, Doug Wilson seems to think he might have a future with the organization.

So, even if one were to accept all this revisionist talk about how Reimer couldn't possibly have brought us more than a bag of pucks, doesn't this mean we traded Morin for a 4th? 

Now I'll stand back and listen as people tell me that's all he was worth.

Let me put it this way...what you're disappointed with is what Reimer was worth yesterday.  We have to assume that was his value yesterday because it's logical to believe the Leafs took the best offer. 

I think what happened here was that Lou & co. miscalculated what the goaltending market would be at this deadline.  We're dealing with a commodities market here, so really it's just a bad educated guess. 

I think it's fairly likely that Reimer could have been dealt for much stronger return earlier in the season when he was among the best in the league in terms of %'s, or even previous to that once they signed Bernier to his 2 year deal. 

I really wish they had because Reimer's numbers in February didn't really help their cause either.

So sure, I guess I think they bumbled the Reimer trade, but not because they made a bad trade yesterday.

 

[Highlander]

They are going to give Sparks and Bibeau a chance to shine, to see what they have. Stalock will play for the Marlies and stay as insurance in case any of our top three go down. Look for the Leafs to draft a goalie this year.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Cox just reported that only San Jose was interested in Reimer and that Reimer's asking price on an extension was 6 per.

But, you know, keep saying the Leafs were robbed.

So 4 teams with back-up goalies probably negotiating with 1 team with a need for a back-up goalie. Supply and demand people. It's a pretty basic concept.

Not to mention that, as a back-up, it's far more likely than not that he doesn't play a single playoff game, or if he does, it's in a game that's already lost.  He's an insurance policy that's unlikely to be needed.  That doesn't carry much value, particularly with the supply and demand situation as you mention.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Not to mention that, as a back-up, it's far more likely than not that he doesn't play a single playoff game, or if he does, it's in a game that's already lost.  He's an insurance policy that's unlikely to be needed.  That doesn't carry much value, particularly with the supply and demand situation as you mention.

Right. The Sharks have 22 games left in the regular season. So even if Reimer takes a quarter of those games, the Sharks will only have him in the net for 5 or 6 games. Why would anyone think that they would give up a 2nd round pick for that type of service?

I talked before about how Carolina would be the perfect fit for Reimer, and how they might have given up a 2nd round pick for him. But that was because they were a potential playoff team who Reimer could have legitimately been a starter on. And they were the only team that really fit that description. No one else was given up that type of draft pick for a back-up to play half a dozen games.

 

[ZBBM]

So:

Stalock and Smith have no future with the Leafs.

And all we got for Reimer was a lousy 4th.

Oh wait, we gave them Morin too.  He has no value whatsoever, right?  Except, well, Doug Wilson seems to think he might have a future with the organization.

So, even if one were to accept all this revisionist talk about how Reimer couldn't possibly have brought us more than a bag of pucks, doesn't this mean we traded Morin for a 4th? 

Now I'll stand back and listen as people tell me that's all he was worth.

Let me put it this way...what you're disappointed with is what Reimer was worth yesterday.  We have to assume that was his value yesterday because it's logical to believe the Leafs took the best offer. 

I think what happened here was that Lou & co. miscalculated what the goaltending market would be at this deadline.  We're dealing with a commodities market here, so really it's just a bad educated guess. 

I think it's fairly likely that Reimer could have been dealt for much stronger return earlier in the season when he was among the best in the league in terms of %'s, or even previous to that once they signed Bernier to his 2 year deal. 

I really wish they had because Reimer's numbers in February didn't really help their cause either.

So sure, I guess I think they bumbled the Reimer trade, but not because they made a bad trade yesterday.

That's well put. You could argue that yesterday just culminated a failure.

To continue looking at it in a larger context, and going back to CTBs post above, at the beginning of the year we had two NHL players, Panik and Reimer. Now we have a 4th who statistically is a long shot to make it to the league. Underwhelming or a failure?  Take your pick but to ridicule those of us who think it's a failure simply isn't justified.

 

[Highlander]

Reimer was picked in the 4th round and he has played in the NHL for a long time. So we get what we picked back. Perhaps take a goalie with that pick?  If Reimer is actually looking for 6 million then it was better to get what we could for him. And I am a huge Reimer fan. Wish it was Knuckles that went but alas Berny is not worth a dime

 

[CarltonTheBear]

That's well put. You could argue that yesterday just culminated a failure.

To continue looking at it in a larger context, and going back to CTBs post above, at the beginning of the year we had two NHL players, Panik and Reimer. Now we have a 4th who statistically is a long shot to make it to the league. Underwhelming or a failure?  Take your pick but to ridicule those of us who think it's a failure simply isn't justified.

Is your issue more that the Leafs didn't trade him earlier in the season when his value might have been higher, or that that the actual return they got for him yesterday was too low? I don't think you really explained that in your earlier posts. You just kept saying "it's a failure, it's a failure".

And if it's the second one, what do you think would have been a fair price for SJ to pay for 5-10 games of James Reimer?

 

[McGarnagle]

I don't buy for a second Reimer asked for a contract like that.  No chance.

I'm sure that Reimer would never get a contract anywhere near that number, but I don't think its the first time a player agent hasn't asked for far more than what they know they'll settle at, especially so far in advance of free agency. So I wouldn't be blown away if it had some truth to it. 

 

[Highlander]

He was in the top two goalies at New Years, I really hope he excels with the Sharks, he has been through the hell years with the Loafs

 

[ZBBM]

My response yesterday was a reaction to the disappointing return. Frank's post was more thoughtful.

A 4th is arguably an overpayment for a few games from backup. But why are you assuming the Sharks won't try to sign him  if he does well?  Leaving aside the canard of his supposed absurd asking price which of course he's never going to get.

 

[McGarnagle]

My response yesterday was a reaction to the disappointing return. Frank's post was more thoughtful.

A 4th is arguably an overpayment for a few games from backup. But why are you assuming the Sharks won't try to sign him  if he does well?  Leaving aside the canard of his supposed absurd asking price which of course he's never going to get.

I think Reimer's only of interest above backup money as a free agent to teams that are committed to a platoon arrangement, which limits the market. I see they've got Jones committed through 2017 at $3M... would the sharks throw another 3.5-4.5M at Reimer for split duty? I guess it's possible...

 

[Kin]

To continue looking at it in a larger context, and going back to CTBs post above, at the beginning of the year we had two NHL players, Panik and Reimer. Now we have a 4th who statistically is a long shot to make it to the league.

But you can similarly be reductive about any sort of similar trade. We had Matthias, an NHL player, now we have a 4th. That doesn't make trading expiring contracts of not very good players a bad decision. We would rather have a pick, any pick, than the limited services of a player for 20+ games the team doesn't want to win. What does Reimer or Matthias being around for those games help the team with? If, for whatever reason, the team doesn't want to re-sign Reimer why keep him on board?

But then if the argument is "Well, if they'd traded him earlier they'd have gotten more and it's not like we wanted to win the last 40 games either" then while I can't dismiss that entirely it's not only speculative but it is assuming a pretty high level of stupidity among NHL GMs.

Reimer isn't a rookie. He's been in the league for 5 years now with uneven results. I think any who thinks Reimer's hot start would greatly increase his value is wildly overestimating the effect of 20 or so hot games. Just about everyone reasonable here expected Reimer's numbers to normalize a bit and NHL GMs know that sort of stuff at least as well as we do. They almost certainly would have known the Leafs would be asking them to pay a premium so that when Reimer's numbers came back to earth, he'd be playing for them instead of the Leafs. How valuable is that?

Like I said earlier, Frank's point hinges on the existence of an incredibly narrow sweet spot between where he was coming off a bad season or his hot run was even less significant and a point where his numbers were almost certain to come down and there just weren't that many games left for him to play. Did it exist? Maybe. But I really think finding it meant the difference between what the Leafs got(a conditional 3rd/likely 4th) and a regular 3rd. It's pretty hard to get worked up over that. 

 

[Kin]

Also, while we're at it Panik being an "NHL player" is one of those things that is technically true but almost literally meaningless. That's just evidence of how thin Chicago was outside of their top 6.