Schenn's Next deal

[Bender]

Don't key me wrong, I liked the Giguere part of that trade too, but for me, getting rid of Blake was key IMO.

I don't know that Blake was all that bad a guy. A useless hockey player, sure, but I think the idea of him "infecting" other players is overstating things.

And the Giguere part of the deal, maybe more than any single personnel decision, probably cost the team the playoffs last year.

In one way I think you're right. I mean, it seems odd that they didn't get a good look at Reimer earlier on in the year and think "Hey, he's playing very well!" Jiggy was clearly not getting the job done but they, at best, split games between him and Goose. I think they could've given Reimer a shot earlier just to hedge their bets.

 

[Deebo]

So 15 contracts on the books now for next year with ~16.5 mil. to burn for 8/9 players. Likely much closer to 20 mil. to burn the way the cap has been going. As stated earlier, the key UFAs are Grabovski, Liles, and Gustavsson and the key RFAs are Kulemin, Franson, and Aulie. Without taking a hard look at the other teams situations, I don't think we're in horrible shape going in to the following season. Perhaps Komisarek gets moved (though I'm dying to see how) and who knows, perhaps Grabovski or another forward is spun in to something else.

Has anyone taken a look at how we're set-up next for next year compared to the competition?   

I think the cap will raise another couple million or so at the very least due to the TV deal.

http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/nhl/article/977406--cox-u-s-television-deal-a-financial-win-for-nhl

Here it says it's a 10 year, $2 billion deal and under the previous deal, they got $77M from versus and $0 guaranteed from NBC. It was a profit sharing deal with NBC, and from what I remember, the amount the NHL actually received from NBC was very small, like single digit millions small. Assuming, its $200 million a year now, thats around 120M more revenue and 55% of that divided by 30 teams is  2.2 Million. That would bring our available space close to 19. Depedning on other revenue growth elsewhere, it could go even higher. Of course there is the issue of the new CBA which could change the cap in unforseen ways.

Grabovski and Kulemin will take up probably half of the remaining space. I think Aulie might get a deal similar to Gunnarsson's, Franson may get a little more.

Maybe we could get the 4 of them signed for 13-15 million or so. This is the time that we hope guys like Gardiner can take the next step and fill the spot left by Liles or Kadri takes Lupul's spot and Lupul can be moved out for futures, leaving a hopefully healthy Lombardi on the 3rd line.

There are lots of ways things can play out, but it all depends on the development of the younger players.

 

[Deebo]

So 15 contracts on the books now for next year with ~16.5 mil. to burn for 8/9 players. Likely much closer to 20 mil. to burn the way the cap has been going. As stated earlier, the key UFAs are Grabovski, Liles, and Gustavsson and the key RFAs are Kulemin, Franson, and Aulie. Without taking a hard look at the other teams situations, I don't think we're in horrible shape going in to the following season. Perhaps Komisarek gets moved (though I'm dying to see how) and who knows, perhaps Grabovski or another forward is spun in to something else.

Has anyone taken a look at how we're set-up next for next year compared to the competition? 

I strongly believe that if he under performs again this year, and there are no takers trade wise, management strongly considers a buyout.

It's not that bad, actually...$2.1 mil cap hit for the first two years, and $1.1 the 3rd & 4th year.  It's just the issue of Tucker's buyout already being there too that really makes it difficult, because then you have $3 mil in dead cap space. :S

The Tucker buy out isn't relivant when deciding what to do with Komisarek. If he doesn't pick up his play and ends up the 7th defenseman. you could probably fill that role without a significant dropoff in play for less than the cap savings, its a net gain on cap space.

 

[WAYNEINIONA]

Looks like a pretty reasonable deal for Schenn and maybe a real good deal if he continues to improve and shows a little more offence. I'm also hoping Kadri has a breakout year and sticks with the big club for the season.

 

[Tigger]

Getting rid of that is the most important part of the trade. While the Leafs possibly could have moved Blake to a cap floor team this summer, there are no guarantees, and freeing up that $4M from this year's cap makes the deal a win, IMO.

For me, it was actually getting rid of Blake all together and not having him here to taint any of our current group, as well as the 4 million, but mostly just getting rid of him.

For me I was glad to see both of them gone. When I think of Kaberle over the years the only person I've ever heard him make a comment that I might categorize as 'negative' was about Toskala during a between period interview. It was pretty minor but actually hearing him say something like 'he needs to make a save too' in response was telling to me.

Inheriting Giggy might have been a saw off in terms of cap hits what have you but losing those two was a great move for the dressing room I thought.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Looks like a pretty reasonable deal for Schenn and maybe a real good deal if he continues to improve and shows a little more offence.

Glad the Leafs signed Schenn and good for him.  Looking forward to seeing him and the Leafs improve ever more!

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

I know this is an old thread, but I didn't see any other Schenn thread out there. I just wanted to give the boy some props, as he's been playing much better of late and actually leads the team in +/ - right now, with a plus 8.

He is also continuing his hitting pace with 171 right now, so it's safe to probably say he'll hit last year's total of 271, if he continues on that pace. This number also leads the league again, for defensemen.

Somebody had mentioned earlier in another thread that he's also on pace to beat his career best in points also, currently at 15, even though most of us don't really care for him to achieve this. He's doing all this, while averaging almost 5 minutes a game less ice time.

So, good going Schenn, keep it up!

 

[cw]

A chance encounter with Brian Burke
http://mapleleafshotstove.com/2012/02/26/a-chance-encounter-with-brian-burke/
On Luke Schenn: Burke intimated that as many as 20 teams have kicked tires on Luke?s availability, but held steadfast that he has not ever initiated a trade conversation dangling Luke?s name.  Burke sees Schenn as a 4/5 defenseman, and is compensating him thusly and is happy with him on the team.

$3.6 mil x 5 years seems stiff if a GM regards him as a 4/5 dman.

Schenn is the highest paid #4 in the league. His cap hit is 53rd among all NHL dmen this season (which is arguably a top 2 dman result as there are 60 top 2 dmen in the league)

 

[ZBBM]

Luke is getting raked over the coals in the GDT, and deservedly.  He has been awful lately.

Would I have taken a #1 for him on the deadline, as Dreger reported?  For me, no.  As inconsistent as he's been over his career, I want to see him play under a coach who can run a defensive system before I write him off as a semi-bust.  In fact, Schenn projects to be exactly the kind of d-man we need to build around: a physical force who stays at home.

The fact that he's failed to live up to his billing is no reason to give up on him yet, at such a young age.  I hope to see him thrive post-Wilson.  (And that day may be closer than we all think, if this collapse continues.)

 

[Mikhail Bloodnovsky]

A chance encounter with Brian Burke
http://mapleleafshotstove.com/2012/02/26/a-chance-encounter-with-brian-burke/
On Luke Schenn: Burke intimated that as many as 20 teams have kicked tires on Luke?s availability, but held steadfast that he has not ever initiated a trade conversation dangling Luke?s name.  Burke sees Schenn as a 4/5 defenseman, and is compensating him thusly and is happy with him on the team.

$3.6 mil x 5 years seems stiff if a GM regards him as a 4/5 dman.

Schenn is the highest paid #4 in the league. His cap hit is 53rd among all NHL dmen this season (which is arguably a top 2 dman result as there are 60 top 2 dmen in the league)

This is the same GM that gave Mike Komisarek 22.5 million to sit in the press box.

 

[cw]

Luke is getting raked over the coals in the GDT, and deservedly.  He has been awful lately.

Would I have taken a #1 for him on the deadline, as Dreger reported?  For me, no.  As inconsistent as he's been over his career, I want to see him play under a coach who can run a defensive system before I write him off as a semi-bust.  In fact, Schenn projects to be exactly the kind of d-man we need to build around: a physical force who stays at home.

The fact that he's failed to live up to his billing is no reason to give up on him yet, at such a young age.  I hope to see him thrive post-Wilson.  (And that day may be closer than we all think, if this collapse continues.)

I'd have simple 'rules' for Schenn:
- never pinch or go deep in the opposition zone unless the Leafs are down by more than a goal and time is running out
- always play Schenn with a decent puck moving veteran while Schenn's focus is defence and covering defensively for his better skilled partner who will be the one taking chances offensively
- when Schenn gets the puck, he should use the veteran puck moving dman partner he's playing with to advance the puck as much as possible/reasonable

In that simple role, Schenn can be effective as a crease clearer, winning battles along the boards as a defensive dman, etc and probably be a top 4 when he settles down in that role.

Any deviation from that is likely where he'll get into trouble.

 

[ZBBM]

Luke is getting raked over the coals in the GDT, and deservedly.  He has been awful lately.

Would I have taken a #1 for him on the deadline, as Dreger reported?  For me, no.  As inconsistent as he's been over his career, I want to see him play under a coach who can run a defensive system before I write him off as a semi-bust.  In fact, Schenn projects to be exactly the kind of d-man we need to build around: a physical force who stays at home.

The fact that he's failed to live up to his billing is no reason to give up on him yet, at such a young age.  I hope to see him thrive post-Wilson.  (And that day may be closer than we all think, if this collapse continues.)

I'd have simple 'rules' for Schenn:
- never pinch or go deep in the opposition zone unless the Leafs are down by more than a goal and time is running out
- always play Schenn with a decent puck moving veteran while Schenn's focus is defence and covering defensively for his better skilled partner who will be the one taking chances offensively
- when Schenn gets the puck, he should use the veteran puck moving dman partner he's playing with to advance the puck as much as possible/reasonable

In that simple role, Schenn can be effective as a crease clearer, winning battles along the boards as a defensive dman, etc and probably be a top 4 when he settles down in that role.

Any deviation from that is likely where he'll get into trouble.

Exactly.  I'm sure a set of similarly simple rules could be tailored to each of our dmen's strengths/weaknesses, and then match partners so that they mesh.  It wouldn't be a panacea but it would have to help cut back on the enforced errors in our zone.

And I would have another rule that applies to the whole team in our end: get the puck out along the boards, never up the middle.  Even though other teams can defend against this, I think the benefits outweigh the downside.  All these turnovers in the middle of the ice end up in our net because we don't have world-class goalies to cover for those kind of mistakes.  So make it easier on everyone and keep it to the sides.

 

[cw]

Luke is getting raked over the coals in the GDT, and deservedly.  He has been awful lately.

Would I have taken a #1 for him on the deadline, as Dreger reported?  For me, no.  As inconsistent as he's been over his career, I want to see him play under a coach who can run a defensive system before I write him off as a semi-bust.  In fact, Schenn projects to be exactly the kind of d-man we need to build around: a physical force who stays at home.

The fact that he's failed to live up to his billing is no reason to give up on him yet, at such a young age.  I hope to see him thrive post-Wilson.  (And that day may be closer than we all think, if this collapse continues.)

I'd have simple 'rules' for Schenn:
- never pinch or go deep in the opposition zone unless the Leafs are down by more than a goal and time is running out
- always play Schenn with a decent puck moving veteran while Schenn's focus is defence and covering defensively for his better skilled partner who will be the one taking chances offensively
- when Schenn gets the puck, he should use the veteran puck moving dman partner he's playing with to advance the puck as much as possible/reasonable

In that simple role, Schenn can be effective as a crease clearer, winning battles along the boards as a defensive dman, etc and probably be a top 4 when he settles down in that role.

Any deviation from that is likely where he'll get into trouble.

Exactly.  I'm sure a set of similarly simple rules could be tailored to each of our dmen's strengths/weaknesses, and then match partners so that they mesh.  It wouldn't be a panacea but it would have to help cut back on the enforced errors in our zone.

And I would have another rule that applies to the whole team in our end: get the puck out along the boards, never up the middle.  Even though other teams can defend against this, I think the benefits outweigh the downside.  All these turnovers in the middle of the ice end up in our net because we don't have world-class goalies to cover for those kind of mistakes.  So make it easier on everyone and keep it to the sides.

There's one other option that to me they do not pursue enough to fight the hot potato syndrome in today's faster game - that includes giveaways up the middle as a result of throwing the puck away. When the play isn't there to move the puck to safety,  a big guy like Schenn can eat the puck and start a puck battle along the boards. Even if he loses that puck battle, the puck battle itself can buy his teammates time to position themselves so that a good scoring chance doesn't result like it would with a hot potato turnover when his teammates are headed the wrong way up the ice.

Too often, it seems the option of "do nothing" is overlooked in life. If the lanes are blocked to get the puck out off the glass or up the ice with a short pass to a teammate, then it's more likely a lane/direction is open to skate the puck to safety along the boards to start a scrum. That gives his teammates time to reset to defend that puck battle. Schenn has a better chance defending trying to win a puck battle he draws his opponents into than he does trying to chase down an errant turnover that's sprung an odd number of opponent forwards quickly coming back at him after catching his hand grenade.

I don't know how others feel about that but it's something I would explore more with guys like Schenn. It's a little like the quarterback who elects to throw the ball out of bounds when the play isn't there. At least it prevents an interception.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

A chance encounter with Brian Burke
http://mapleleafshotstove.com/2012/02/26/a-chance-encounter-with-brian-burke/
On Luke Schenn: Burke intimated that as many as 20 teams have kicked tires on Luke?s availability, but held steadfast that he has not ever initiated a trade conversation dangling Luke?s name.  Burke sees Schenn as a 4/5 defenseman, and is compensating him thusly and is happy with him on the team.

$3.6 mil x 5 years seems stiff if a GM regards him as a 4/5 dman.

Schenn is the highest paid #4 in the league. His cap hit is 53rd among all NHL dmen this season (which is arguably a top 2 dman result as there are 60 top 2 dmen in the league)

Did Burke actually say that?  Or is the writer just assuming Burke thinks that of him?

 

[cw]

A chance encounter with Brian Burke
http://mapleleafshotstove.com/2012/02/26/a-chance-encounter-with-brian-burke/
On Luke Schenn: Burke intimated that as many as 20 teams have kicked tires on Luke?s availability, but held steadfast that he has not ever initiated a trade conversation dangling Luke?s name.  Burke sees Schenn as a 4/5 defenseman, and is compensating him thusly and is happy with him on the team.

$3.6 mil x 5 years seems stiff if a GM regards him as a 4/5 dman.

Schenn is the highest paid #4 in the league. His cap hit is 53rd among all NHL dmen this season (which is arguably a top 2 dman result as there are 60 top 2 dmen in the league)

Did Burke actually say that?  Or is the writer just assuming Burke thinks that of him?

He's reporting that is what Burke said.

 

[Mack674]

If thats the case then Burke, Ive got news for you, 4/5/6 dmen come alot cheaper than that.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

He's reporting that is what Burke said.

I'm thinking typo, or Burke didn't mean to say that. I think we all know that Schenn could have a 3-4 ceiling, he's 22.

 

[hockeyfan1]

A chance encounter with Brian Burke
http://mapleleafshotstove.com/2012/02/26/a-chance-encounter-with-brian-burke/
On Luke Schenn: Burke intimated that as many as 20 teams have kicked tires on Luke?s availability, but held steadfast that he has not ever initiated a trade conversation dangling Luke?s name.  Burke sees Schenn as a 4/5 defenseman, and is compensating him thusly and is happy with him on the team.

$3.6 mil x 5 years seems stiff if a GM regards him as a 4/5 dman.

Schenn is the highest paid #4 in the league. His cap hit is 53rd among all NHL dmen this season (which is arguably a top 2 dman result as there are 60 top 2 dmen in the league)

Did Burke actually say that?  Or is the writer just assuming Burke thinks that of him?

He's reporting that is what Burke said.

In spite of what Burke said, there's always the possibility Schenn could get traded as part of a package in a deal, in the near future.

Personally speaking, I would like to see Schenn develop further and improve to become one of the Leafs top d-man. He's so young and has plenty of good years to give.  Staying with the Leafs should be the priority.

 

[cw]

He's reporting that is what Burke said.

I'm thinking typo, or Burke didn't mean to say that. I think we all know that Schenn could have a 3-4 ceiling, he's 22.

Because he's basically a one dimensional defensive dman, I don't see him higher than a #4. Puck movers are the premium skill set under the new rules. This season, his coach has given him 16 mins/game  - which is 5/6 ice time.

At 22, he's still very young for dmen - a lot don't solidify defensively until they're 25 or so. He'll improve. I wouldn't trade him right now because they'd be selling low. He could turn out to be a really good shutdown dman in the relative near future.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

Because he's basically a one dimensional defensive dman, I don't see him higher than a #4. Puck movers are the premium skill set under the new rules. This season, his coach has given him 16 mins/game  - which is 5/6 ice time.

But he could be playing with one of those top guys to compliment them with his defense, I think that is what they are trying to do by pairing him with Gardiner right now. I think that pair could end up being our top pair in the future.

I pay little to the amount of ice time they get, when determining their ceiling really. I've seen Schenn playing a lot more minutes and play a very solid game. I think he's just having a tough year really and things will get better for him in the future.

At 22, he's still very young for dmen - a lot don't solidify defensively until they're 25 or so. He'll improve. I wouldn't trade him right now because they'd be selling low. He could turn out to be a really good shutdown dman in the relative near future.

This is all I'm saying really. People that are writing him off right now, seem to be short sighted about this stuff. Could they be right? I suppose anything is possible, but I don't see Schenn in that light, I think he is going to get better and shore up his game when he figures the whole NHL game out.