So, about Phil Kessel...

[Kin]

1. "Positive effect on team's draft position" is, I think, minimal. This is team that'll draft well with Kessel in the lineup and will continue to draft well until the 19-22 year-olds are developed and the new high-end talent comes in. I think the benefits of trading Phaneuf, Lupul, maybe Bozak now are greater, and, if they're all gone next season, the Leafs will be plenty bad.

I don't think that's true at all. There were 14 points that separated the Leafs from Buffalo last year. That's a significant difference. 12 points from Arizona. Those teams, not coincidentally, had guys leading their team scoring 46 and 43 points respectively. The difference in goals per game between Buffalo and Toronto was greater than the difference between Toronto and the highest scoring team in the league. The difference between Toronto and Arizona roughly the difference between Toronto and the #3 team in the league.

Lupul, Bozak and Phaneuf aren't going to major dents in this team's offensive output. Kessel, and especially the rejuvenated Kessel you're hoping for, would be and the reality is that if this team is even going to dream of competing in 3 years, they need to hit the jackpot in the Lottery and while, yes, the odds are changing they need to give themselves the best odds. I know it's an unfair comparison but six points separated the Leafs from where the McDavid ball fell. Every bit will count.

2. "8 million... to absorb [bad] contracts and take back other picks" is just cap space. They can get that by moving the guys that we know won't be of any use in 3-4 years (Bozak, Phaneuf, Lupul) -- even if they retain salary on some of those, that's around $10m. And they've got $15m in space right now. The only contracts likely to take much of bite are Kadri's and Bernier's. There should be plenty of room to take bad contracts in order to acquire picks/prospects.

Admittedly, that's a minor consideration. But that's why you shouldn't have skipped over the other bit of that sentence. It's still 8 million to use to build the team. So just by your math I would actually be a little surprised if a good prospect, 1st rounder(if it's used well) and the players you could get for 8 million dollars wouldn't be able to outscore a 32 year old Kessel.

3. "Ice time that can used... on other players in the hopes of increasing their value" is, to my mind, a strange reason to rush moving on Kessel. He's the asset they've got that has the most potential value, and, if he's not going to return much of significance, they should probably use available ice time to increase his value. The ceiling on the "increased value" of whoever might slot in at 1RW is so much lower than Kessel's that this seems like selling short on your Lexus (which needs some work) because you want the garage space to really fix up that Corolla. Whether the extra year is likely to substantially increase his value, I don't know (and don't recall seeing your explanation of why it wouldn't), but, as an elite scorer in his prime, he's the only piece they've got that is likely to return anything worthwhile, so...

Well, ok, but take your analogy. What if you know how to fix a Corolla but not a Lexus. What if it's a choice between fixing a Corolla and trying to fix a Lexus that you very well might damage more and, at best, you'll delay getting on the road by a crucial year.

That's the issue. Even if you want to say that the benefits of dealing Kessel for whatever you can get now vs. a year from now are relatively minor you're still making a huge bet on Kessel having a bounceback year under Babcock and not another tough one that will decrease his value further(and like you say, the team will be plenty bad next year and nobody tends to get out of that smelling like roses). Seriously, how many guys increased their value on Arizona or Buffalo this year?

But you trade him now and you get another year of development on the picks you get for him, you don't risk him having a bad, dispirited year and, yes, you can give some of that PP time to other guys and it might increase their output. More PP time will lead to more points for someone like Holland or whoever. you're not going to improve Kessel's output by giving him more ice time. That's almost impossible. The likelihood is Kessel's going to get exposed further next season and no matter what Kessel does next year, he's not going to turn into a 26 year old two-way center. Look at that list of trades. How many of them are significantly better than what I'm proposing?

You're doubling down on a six here.

 

[Kin]

I'm not sure the Nash deal is really a great example of what Kessel's value is. Nash had one stellar year (40 G 79 P) in his career with Columbus and that was the only time he ever reached 70 points. Kessel is coming off of three consecutive over a point per game seasons and, unlike Nash, isn't requesting a trade. And this down season that apparently has Kessel's value plummeting is around the same point-rate that Nash averaged in his whole tenure in Columbus. I'll take a better deal than the Nash one, thank you very much.

Couple things:

1. Winning the Richard as a 19 year old is a pretty stellar year

2. In the four seasons between 2007-2008 and 2010-2011 Nash averaged 38 goals and 75 points on a per 82 game basis. I think you're overestimating a team's love of round numbers if you think there's a real difference in perception between scoring 70 points over 82 games and scoring 67 points over 76 games. Kessel over his previous four years it works out to 35 goals and 77 points per 82. So there's really minimal difference there with maybe a slight goal scorer's edge to Nash.

3. Kessel isn't asking to be traded but there's going to be a wide perception that the Leafs want him gone. That will probably have the same effect on his value. I mean, if Crosby wanted out of Pittsburgh it wouldn't really drive his value down.

4. I think that most people would agree that Nash is the guy with the edge in terms of intangibles like size, physical play, defensive play and so on.

So I very much question that Kessel's value is going to be higher than Nash's. But heck, I'd love it if it it was.

 

[mr grieves]

LeafsNation article on possible trade partners -- who's got the need, cap space, and assets.

http://theleafsnation.com/2015/5/30/the-top-5-trade-destinations-for-phil-kessel

Also, thought of another roughly comparable trade: Bobby Ryan to Ottawa for Jakob Silfverberg, Stefan Noesen, 2014 1st end pick.

 

[Kin]

Interesting that of the 5 teams mentioned only 2 have a first round pick. I wouldn't be fundamentally opposed to making a trade as suggested around a prospect like Ryan Strome, Barbashev or Fabbri but I really don't think a 2016 first rounder is going to be a huge selling point unless it's packaged along with something of significantly higher value.

 

[mr grieves]

Interesting that of the 5 teams mentioned only 2 have a first round pick. I wouldn't be fundamentally opposed to making a trade as suggested around a prospect like Ryan Strome, Barbashev or Fabbri but I really don't think a 2016 first rounder is going to be a huge selling point unless it's packaged along with something of significantly higher value.

Well, I think the assumption is that the teams that'd be motivated to make a move for Kessel are those who are in their window of contention and either falling short or looking to take the next step (Devils seem to be odd ones out), which are also teams that've likely already been moving high picks to complement their cores... Not sure who else has their first round pick that'd want to add Kessel.

 

[Joe S.]

I haven't done any research on this but it never seems to be brought up that scoring across the league was down this past season.  Only 5 players topped 80 points and 87 won the art ross. 

I just don't think Kessel is the lost cause that is mentioned here.

Sure if you can get a decent return for him go for it... But I don't see why the leafs should dump him.

 

[Kin]

Well, I think the assumption is that the teams that'd be motivated to make a move for Kessel are those who are in their window of contention and either falling short or looking to take the next step (Devils seem to be odd ones out), which are also teams that've likely already been moving high picks to complement their cores... Not sure who else has their first round pick that'd want to add Kessel.

Sure, but to me that would say a team that might finish, say, with a pick in the 12-20 range. A team just on that cusp of contending. The teams mentioned here are either below that(NJ and Florida) or above it(NYI, Nashville, STL). True, most of the teams in that range don't really fit either but that would strike me as the place where Kessel would both be of greatest use as well as yield the fairest return.

A team I've wondered about in that regard is Columbus. They have a more together first line and an internal cap but building a second line around Kessel would give them a pretty good 1-2 punch. Capwise it would be tough but, say this:

To Columbus: Phil Kessel, Stuart Percy
To Toronto: Rene Bourque, Jared Boll, #8 overall pick, Kerby Rychel

Columbus only adds 4 million in cap hit/salary, Leafs eat some bad but expiring contracts, they get a top 10 pick and another former first rounder who had a pretty good AHL year as a 20 year old.

Anyways, just an idea. My original point was just how uninterested I'd be in a 2016 1st rounder being a  big part of the deal. Honestly, I'd almost rather have a 2015 2nd.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

I haven't done any research on this but it never seems to be brought up that scoring across the league was down this past season.  Only 5 players topped 80 points and 87 won the art ross. 

I just don't think Kessel is the lost cause that is mentioned here.

Sure if you can get a decent return for him go for it... But I don't see why the leafs should dump him.

Yeah it's a hard call IMO.

On one hand if they don't want him as part of the future his absence will help make the Leafs 1st rounder next year that much better.

On the other hand, I truly believe he'll have a much better year in the near future and be in much demand. If that happens I can see his value being a fair bit higher.

If the return is there (top 10 pick plus a bit) I'm sure he'll be gone before the draft.

 

[93forever]

I really do not lay fault with Kessel, but more with the coaching style/team style.  Watching Kessel or someone else skate down with the puck, get 1 shot on goal or lose the puck and have no pressure in the offensive zone.  Other team gets the puck, gets into the Leafs zone, makes 2 line changes, has 6 shots on goal.  If Babcock can instill a style that has Leaf players creating offense and pressure in the offensive zone, that would result in less time running around like chickens without heads in their own end. 

Under Babcock I would like to see what Kessel can do when there is structure and a demand to play under an established style.  But if another team is willing to offer a sweet package for Kessel, I would take it. 

 

[mr grieves]

A team I've wondered about in that regard is Columbus. They have a more together first line and an internal cap but building a second line around Kessel would give them a pretty good 1-2 punch. Capwise it would be tough but, say this:

To Columbus: Phil Kessel, Stuart Percy
To Toronto: Rene Bourque, Jared Boll, #8 overall pick, Kerby Rychel

Columbus only adds 4 million in cap hit/salary, Leafs eat some bad but expiring contracts, they get a top 10 pick and another former first rounder who had a pretty good AHL year as a 20 year old.

Yeah, if they can get into the top half of this year's first round and get a top-end prospect who's developing well, I've got no objection to moving Kessel. Middling prospect, low first rounder, and salary dump doesn't hold much appeal though.

 

[Kin]

Yeah, if they can get into the top half of this year's first round and get a top-end prospect who's developing well, I've got no objection to moving Kessel. Middling prospect, low first rounder, and salary dump doesn't hold much appeal though.

When I said "not great" pick what I meant was something in that 10-20 range. Higher than that I think is unlikely. Likewise when I say "not great" player or prospect I mean, you know, not someone who was a top 5 pick in the last few years.

Personally, I think the idea of a good young roster player and, say, a top 12 pick is probably the high range of Kessel's value. Or you'd get one of the two things you're talking about.

 

[jdh1]

Value on Kessel would help if he could get in a conditioning program...He is easily a 40 goal scorer if he does get in great shape.

 

[Andy007]

Good diagnosis. I think an intense conditioning regimen is just the thing to vault a 37-goal scorer with a 3rd line centre into a 40-goal guy. Because scoring the 6th most points and 7th most goals in the NHL since 2011 doesn't mean anything if the player looks like he isn't ripped.

 

[sickbeast]

It would be a shame to lose Kessel for a low pick or a weak prospect unless we are trying to tank next season.

 

[Kin]

It would be a shame to lose Kessel for a low pick or a weak prospect unless we are trying to tank next season.

Sorry, but am I the only one who was under the impression that tanking next season was the way they were going?

 

[Frank E]

It would be a shame to lose Kessel for a low pick or a weak prospect unless we are trying to tank next season.

Sorry, but am I the only one who was under the impression that tanking next season was the way they were going?

Seems to be the strategy.  That's how I see it, it's a strategy that has some evidence of working in the long run.  Phil Kessel is exactly the kind of player that runs counter to this strategy at this stage.

I blame the cap system for forcing the Leafs to do this.  I don't like it, but they have no choice if they want to contend in a hard cap system. 

 

[sickbeast]

So many bad trades. The Kessel trade. The raycroft trade. The Steen trade. The gms have ruined the franchise. They have done serious long term damage. A long and painful full rebuild is probably the only solution. I just hope we get a good gm. The gm is more important than the coach imo.

 

[sickbeast]

Guys just imagine for a second that we had seguin, Hamilton, rask, and Steen. It's so painful.

 

[Kin]

Personally, I like it when a band just plays their greatest hits.

 

[bustaheims]

Guys just imagine for a second that we had seguin, Hamilton, rask, and Steen. It's so painful.

If the Leafs still had Rask, they almost certainly would not have ended up with Seguin or Hamilton. He's good enough to have pushed the Leafs up in the standings a couple spots. So, I mean, it's nice to dream and all, but, no Raycroft deal means no Toskala, and no Toskala means the Leafs are a better team in the first years of Kessel's contract.