Tank Nation UNITE!!!

[CarltonTheBear]

What determined or whose option was it in the Bernier deal in deciding what year LA got that 2nd rounder?

It was a 2014 or 2015 pick, Leafs option. They traded their 2014 2nd rounder to Anaheim in the Holland deal, so the Bernier pick obviously had to be in '15.

 

[Madferret]

What determined or whose option was it in the Bernier deal in deciding what year LA got that 2nd rounder?

It was a 2014 or 2015 pick, Leafs option. They traded their 2014 2nd rounder to Anaheim in the Holland deal, so the Bernier pick obviously had to be in '15.

Right. Thanks Bear

 

[L K]

What determined or whose option was it in the Bernier deal in deciding what year LA got that 2nd rounder?

It was a 2014 or 2015 pick, Leafs option. They traded their 2014 2nd rounder to Anaheim in the Holland deal, so the Bernier pick obviously had to be in '15.

I certainly don't mind the Holland trade in retrospect but it is kind of unfortunate that it was necessitated by an obvious need for center depth that could have been avoided by keeping Colborne.  It's little poor asset management moves like this that are more harmful to Nonis record than anything else.  He never really managed the roster and cap very well during his tenure.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I certainly don't mind the Holland trade in retrospect but it is kind of unfortunate that it was necessitated by an obvious need for center depth that could have been avoided by keeping Colborne.  It's little poor asset management moves like this that are more harmful to Nonis record than anything else.  He never really managed the roster and cap very well during his tenure.

They would have only had to give up a 3rd for Holland too if he played less than 25 games his first season. He ended up playing 39, and in 15 of them he played less than 10 minutes. I think plenty of management groups would have made sure he played less than 25 in that situation.

 

[Kin]

I certainly don't mind the Holland trade in retrospect but it is kind of unfortunate that it was necessitated by an obvious need for center depth that could have been avoided by keeping Colborne.  It's little poor asset management moves like this that are more harmful to Nonis record than anything else.  He never really managed the roster and cap very well during his tenure.

Unfortunate how though? I think the Holland deal makes sense regardless of what happens with Colborne and it's not like Colborne's established himself as a better player than Holland. I mean, ding Nonis for the Colborne decision sure but even that looks pretty minor right now.

 

[Lynx]

Is this an accurate accumulation of the Leafs draft picks for the 2015 NED?
1st + 1st (NAS), 3rd, 4th + 4th (PIT), 5th, 6th, 7th

Yep.  The Pittsburgh 2nd round pick is for next year.  There is a conditional pick attached to Jokinen if he contributes to a deep St. Louis run.

Isn't there a 5th or something from Anaheim in the Holzer-Brewer trade as well?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Is this an accurate accumulation of the Leafs draft picks for the 2015 NED?
1st + 1st (NAS), 3rd, 4th + 4th (PIT), 5th, 6th, 7th

Yep.  The Pittsburgh 2nd round pick is for next year.  There is a conditional pick attached to Jokinen if he contributes to a deep St. Louis run.

Isn't there a 5th or something from Anaheim in the Holzer-Brewer trade as well?

The picks from Anaheim (5th) and St. Louis (6th, turns into 4th if Blues reach Finals and Jokinen plays) are both in 2016.

 

[Deebo]

The 5th round pick from the Ducks is in 2016.

Here is a good breakdown of the Leafs' picks.

http://prosportstransactions.com/hockey/DraftTrades/Future/MapleLeafs.htm

 

[L K]

I certainly don't mind the Holland trade in retrospect but it is kind of unfortunate that it was necessitated by an obvious need for center depth that could have been avoided by keeping Colborne.  It's little poor asset management moves like this that are more harmful to Nonis record than anything else.  He never really managed the roster and cap very well during his tenure.

Unfortunate how though? I think the Holland deal makes sense regardless of what happens with Colborne and it's not like Colborne's established himself as a better player than Holland. I mean, ding Nonis for the Colborne decision sure but even that looks pretty minor right now.

Nothing can be predicted but they likely don't make that trade if they have Colborne instead of Ashton/Orr/McLaren on the roster.  Again, I have no problem with Holland but it was a trade that was also avoidable.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Nothing can be predicted but they likely don't make that trade if they have Colborne instead of Ashton/Orr/McLaren on the roster.  Again, I have no problem with Holland but it was a trade that was also avoidable.

Colborne and Holland have produced fairly identical numbers the past 2 seasons. So yeah I mean if the decision was Colborne plus a 2nd or Holland minus a 2nd the answer is pretty obvious.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Nothing can be predicted but they likely don't make that trade if they have Colborne instead of Ashton/Orr/McLaren on the roster.  Again, I have no problem with Holland but it was a trade that was also avoidable.

Colborne and Holland have produced fairly identical numbers the past 2 seasons. So yeah I mean if the decision was Colborne plus a 2nd or Holland minus a 2nd the answer is pretty obvious.

I guess Holland is a year younger...yay?

 

[Kin]

Nothing can be predicted but they likely don't make that trade if they have Colborne instead of Ashton/Orr/McLaren on the roster.  Again, I have no problem with Holland but it was a trade that was also avoidable.

Colborne and Holland have produced fairly identical numbers the past 2 seasons. So yeah I mean if the decision was Colborne plus a 2nd or Holland minus a 2nd the answer is pretty obvious.

They've produced roughly similar numbers over the last two seasons with Colborne getting 2000 minutes of ice time to Holland's 1300 with Colborne seeing three times as much PP time and half as much PK time. In that same time span the forward Colborne's played the most 5 on 5 time with has been Sean Monahan and the forward Holland has played the most with has been David Clarkson. Holland's also a full year younger.

So...honestly? I don't think it is that easy a call.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

At 5v5 since Holland was traded to Toronto:

Holland 1.5 P/60, 43.8 CF%
Colborne 1.6 P/60, 43.9 CF%

Probably give an edge to Holland as he's a year younger, tougher zone starts, worse linemates.

 

[Highlander]

Holland is from Caledon (my old stompin ground) and Colborne is from Calgary.
It works out for both the lads.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

They've produced roughly similar numbers over the last two seasons with Colborne getting 2000 minutes of ice time to Holland's 1300 with Colborne seeing three times as much PP time and half as much PK time. In that same time span the forward Colborne's played the most 5 on 5 time with has been Sean Monahan and the forward Holland has played the most with has been David Clarkson. Holland's also a full year younger.

So...honestly? I don't think it is that easy a call.

Fair points. I think that their usage has been more similar this season, with Colborne's primary linemates being Raymond and Josh Jooris. And their even-strength points are still similar. Holland was still saddled with Clarkson though. Anyway, I just feel that they both fill similar roles. Cheap/young/effective 3rd line guys. I think the odds of either being a regular 2nd liner are fading. Even if Holland is slightly better I'm just not sure the gap justifies losing a 2nd rounder.

 

[Kin]

Anyway, I just feel that they both fill similar roles. Cheap/young/effective 3rd line guys. I think the odds of either being a regular 2nd liner are fading. Even if Holland is slightly better I'm just not sure the gap justifies losing a 2nd rounder.

That's where I'd get back to saying that Nonis should be rightfully dinged on the Colborne decision but that even if Colborne had stuck around I think the Holland deal would be a pretty defensible one.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

That's where I'd get back to saying that Nonis should be rightfully dinged on the Colborne decision but that even if Colborne had stuck around I think the Holland deal would be a pretty defensible one.

Ok, I'm with you on those points. But I do agree with LK that if Colborne had stuck around I'm not sure the team would have pulled the trigger on the Holland trade. Should they have? Probably, our centre/forward depth was still poor, but I do think they would have stood pat and kept their 2nd rounder. Obviously no way of knowing for sure.

 

[mr grieves]

Anyway, I just feel that they both fill similar roles. Cheap/young/effective 3rd line guys. I think the odds of either being a regular 2nd liner are fading. Even if Holland is slightly better I'm just not sure the gap justifies losing a 2nd rounder.

That's where I'd get back to saying that Nonis should be rightfully dinged on the Colborne decision but that even if Colborne had stuck around I think the Holland deal would be a pretty defensible one.

If Colborne had stuck around, acquiring Holland -- another developing young center who might crack the top six -- wouldn't be defensible, it'd be praiseworthy, exactly the sort of the thing a good GM without enough talent at center should do (and, arguably, with Colborne still around they mightn't have burned through the 25 games and upgraded the 3rd to a 2nd). The trouble is that by trading Colborne, the move for Holland was made necessary to ice a hockey team with 4 NHL centers -- and not a very good team.

One thing we do know for sure is that Nonis went with McLaren/Orr and one young 2nd/3rd line center. Having just Colborne (where the Leafs were before the Colborne trade) or just Holland (where they got a few months later when he acquired him) just wasn't an adequate response to team's horrible center depth issues and calls into question the GM's ability to identify his team's needs. That apart from managing its assets.

 

[Kin]

The trouble is that by trading Colborne, the move for Holland was made necessary to ice a hockey team with 4 NHL centers -- and not a very good team.

Well, no. The thing that necessitated trading for Holland was a freak long-term injury to Bolland. At the time of dealing Colborne(and if we're doing the arithmetic on one or the other it should be Colborne and a 2nd vs. Holland and a 4th) the Leafs had 4 legitimate NHL centres.

 

[mr grieves]

The trouble is that by trading Colborne, the move for Holland was made necessary to ice a hockey team with 4 NHL centers -- and not a very good team.

Well, no. The thing that necessitated trading for Holland was a freak long-term injury to Bolland. At the time of dealing Colborne(and if we're doing the arithmetic on one or the other it should be Colborne and a 2nd vs. Holland and a 4th) the Leafs had 4 legitimate NHL centres.

Bozak, Kadri, Bolland, and... who? McClement? I recall some, at the time Colborne was traded, noting that there were 4 NHL centers on the roster, none in the press box, and no one that could be called up from the minors. You shouldn't need that house of cards to collapse before figuring out shipping out your other center makes acquiring a new one 'necessary.'