William Nylander

[ZBBM]

https://theleafsnation.com/2017/07/23/wonderful-gifs-of-wonderful-william-nylander/

If we didn't have Matthews, I could see him taking 1C in a couple of years. He'd also be a really good 1RD if he were so inclined, and a killer 1LW.

Some may remember that WN was on the cover of THN (I think still wearing 62) some months before we got Matthews with a caption to the effect "Bright Blue Skies in Toronto."  If we hadn't gotten Matthews (which of course didn't not happen because I willed it so  8)) WN would be our 1C and none of this idiotic dregertalk would have happened.

Well, maybe it would have.

 

[ZBBM]

In a related debating point, I would argue that Nylander's MVP/gold at the worlds has vaulted him past Marner as our second-best player.

That is, I would argue it but I'd rather just assert it without evidence because I'm lazy.  Also, my gut is that his ceiling is higher than Mitch's.

Admittedly, I'm a sucker for skilled Swedish forwards who wear prime numbers.

 

[Kin]

I think there's probably some recency bias there. Marner had a pretty good WC's himself.

That said, if I absolutely had to trade one of the three...yeah, I probably trade Marner.

 

[herman]

I think we'll see this play out accordingly in the prospect rankings the blogs run the rest of this summer (Nylander > Marner).

Caveats are that Nylander has had one additional year on Marner, and three seasons more playing against adult men rather than Juniors, so of course his development currently tracks higher.

What Marner did this year was pretty amazing, and tied Nylander for points in fewer games played -- the caveat here being Marner had two people to pass to, and average to easy matchups, vs Nylander who had one (generational) recipient and harder matchups for the latter half of the season.

Datarink

HERO

We have both  8) as well as Matthews  ;D

 

[Kin]

I think we'll see this play out accordingly in the prospect rankings the blogs run the rest of this summer (Nylander > Marner).

Caveats are that Nylander has had one additional year on Marner, and three seasons more playing against adult men rather than Juniors, so of course his development currently tracks higher.

So if you had to trade one you'd go with...

 

[herman]

So if you had to trade one you'd go with...

I'd trade Marner if we absolutely had to, but what situation would ever warrant that? Would be hilarious to see Cherry's conniption though.

There's too much value in Nylander's ability to play top-line minutes of all three forward positions, without being a defensive liability.

Nylander is:
- faster (with less apparent effort)
- waaaay better at shooting
- like 95% of Marner's passing creativity but with way more zip
- more patient with the puck

 

[Kin]

I'd trade Marner if we absolutely had to, but what situation would ever warrant that? Would be hilarious to see Cherry's conniption though.

None, it's mainly just a hypothetical based on, I guess, Nylander looking like the better player now compared to the points you were making about Marner being younger and relatively inexperienced. Comparing their ceilings, essentially.

That said, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of the question being in front of the Leafs if in the next couple of years:

A) They look to have hit a wall because of a lack of top flight defensemen

B) Kapanen and/or a couple of the C level forward prospects develop better than expected.

 

[ZBBM]

I'd trade Marner if we absolutely had to, but what situation would ever warrant that? Would be hilarious to see Cherry's conniption though.

None

But Dreger.

dregerdregerdreger

 

[herman]

None, it's mainly just a hypothetical based on, I guess, Nylander looking like the better player now compared to the points you were making about Marner being younger and relatively inexperienced. Comparing their ceilings, essentially.

That said, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of the question being in front of the Leafs if in the next couple of years:

A) They look to have hit a wall because of a lack of top flight defensemen

B) Kapanen and/or a couple of the C level forward prospects develop better than expected.

If B happens, those are the players I'd dangle for a chance to solve A with an RFA in a logjam, a lesser Seth Jones - Ryan Johansen trade for more chances at a defender standing out. There are a couple of teams like Nashville and Anaheim that are defensemen factories at the draft that won't give us their best, but have no room for up and comers either (both in the other conference for us to boot). Anaheim in particular will need cheap scorers to augment Rakell as Getzlaf, Perry and Kesler crash, locking up all their space for the foreseeable future.

 

[Kin]

If B happens, those are the players I'd dangle for a chance to solve A with an RFA in a logjam, a lesser Seth Jones - Ryan Johansen trade for more chances at a defender standing out. There are a couple of teams like Nashville and Anaheim that are defensemen factories at the draft that won't give us their best, but have no room for up and comers either (both in the other conference for us to boot). Anaheim in particular will need cheap scorers to augment Rakell as Getzlaf, Perry and Kesler crash, locking up all their space for the foreseeable future.

Nobody would want to trade any of the big three in that situation but you're probably not making that sort of trade without doing it, no matter how many C level prospects develop. No team has an excess of #1 defensemen lying around or even prospects with a solid chance of becoming one and in a couple years time you're past the point where you want to wait around to see if anyone becomes one.

 

[herman]

Nobody would want to trade any of the big three in that situation but you're probably not making that sort of trade without doing it, no matter how many C level prospects develop. No team has an excess of #1 defensemen lying around or even prospects with a solid chance of becoming one and in a couple years time you're past the point where you want to wait around to see if anyone becomes one.

I'm not sure we could ever trade for a surefire #1D, but I know there are full top-4s and prospects knocking on the doors. Marner or Nylander would both be exceedingly expensive (very much worth it) for a team in a situation like Nashville/Anaheim; but an overachieving prospect being suppressed by the internal cap hit tiers in our system up against Marner/Nylander would be easily achievable for them.

Let's say we lock up Brown for 4 years at 3.25M in August and he somehow nets 25G next season (ya, PP bumper!). I think he'd be prime tradebait for Montour or someone of similar ilk and situation.

 

[Kin]

I'm not sure we could ever trade for a surefire #1D, but I know there are full top-4s and prospects knocking on the doors. Marner or Nylander would both be exceedingly expensive (very much worth it) for a team in a situation like Nashville/Anaheim; but an overachieving prospect being suppressed by the internal cap hit tiers in our system up against Marner/Nylander would be easily achievable for them.

I don't think any team ever has a top 4 that is full to the point that really top flight defensive prospects get traded on the cheap either. Nashville would have been a prime example but they still didn't let Seth Jones go for a couple of 20 goal/40 point guys, they got a 23 year old 70 point C.

Also, if Nashville in the next few years thinks any of their current prospects are the type who can step in and perform at an elite level they're just as likely to look to trade someone like Ekholm and make room for that prospect in their top 4 as they are to trade that prospect because Ekholm(or the equivalent) is just as likely to return Brown-level forwards. I think a team trading a prospect who is just about NHL ready instead of someone like Ekholm is a pretty solid sign they don't think that prospect will be as good as that defenseman which to me is an indication that the prospect isn't the sort of answer I'm talking about.

If the Leafs reach a point where they look around and think they need to improve their defense I think it's pretty undeniable that being open to trade someone like Marner will open many more doors than a much less valuable player, or combination of much less valuable players, would. Whether or not they choose to pursue that is a fair discussion but I don't think we can pretend that you could cobble together something that builds that sort of value in the aggregate.

 

[herman]

I don't think any team ever has a top 4 that is full to the point that really top flight defensive prospects get traded on the cheap either. Nashville would have been a prime example but they still didn't let Seth Jones go for a couple of 20 goal/40 point guys, they got a 23 year old 70 point C.

Also, if Nashville in the next few years thinks any of their current prospects are the type who can step in and perform at an elite level they're just as likely to look to trade someone like Ekholm and make room for that prospect in their top 4 as they are to trade that prospect because Ekholm(or the equivalent) is just as likely to return Brown-level forwards. I think a team trading a prospect who is just about NHL ready instead of someone like Ekholm is a pretty solid sign they don't think that prospect will be as good as that defenseman which to me is an indication that the prospect isn't the sort of answer I'm talking about.

If the Leafs reach a point where they look around and think they need to improve their defense I think it's pretty undeniable that being open to trade someone like Marner will open many more doors than a much less valuable player, or combination of much less valuable players, would. Whether or not they choose to pursue that is a fair discussion but I don't think we can pretend that you could cobble together something that builds that sort of value in the aggregate.

Clearly I forgot that Johansen was a (one-time) 70-pter. I even looked at this hockeydb!

Funny you should bring up Ekholm. Of the top-4 from Nashville I'd take that's not Subban (who is expensive and getting on the old side), it'd be him. I'd be over the moon if we got Ekholm for a Brown-level prospect.

 

[Kin]

Funny you should bring up Ekholm. Of the top-4 from Nashville I'd take that's not Subban (who is expensive and getting on the old side), it'd be him. I'd be over the moon if we got Ekholm for a Brown-level prospect.

I'm sure. But if rumours are true Ekholm is/was the sticking point in the Duchene negotiations. Defensemen don't come cheap.

So I guess the hypothetical situation I'm describing is one where, pretty simply, the level of defenseman the Leafs think they need isn't the kind they can get with lesser players. I wouldn't say that's a certainty or even necessarily a likelihood but I can't rule it out as a possibility either.

 

[herman]

Funny you should bring up Ekholm. Of the top-4 from Nashville I'd take that's not Subban (who is expensive and getting on the old side), it'd be him. I'd be over the moon if we got Ekholm for a Brown-level prospect.

I'm sure. But if rumours are true Ekholm is/was the sticking point in the Duchene negotiations. Defensemen don't come cheap.

So I guess the hypothetical situation I'm describing is one where, pretty simply, the level of defenseman the Leafs think they need isn't the kind they can get with lesser players. I wouldn't say that's a certainty or even necessarily a likelihood but I can't rule it out as a possibility either.

Yeah, I see your point, and it sounds like my hope is not likely. I can't bank on a GM having the smarts to land such a player (1D) and be dumb enough to let him go for beans at the same time.

I didn't hear about that Duchene thing either (but I also think Sakic and Poile are both pretty stubborn about their valuations).

 

[CarltonTheBear]

We could just solve this problem by doing what Howard Berger just suggested today: convert Nylander to a defenceman.

 

[herman]

We could just solve this problem by doing what Howard Berger just suggested today: convert Nylander to a defenceman.

I've jokingly suggested that before, and MuchTruculence waxes poetic about it frequently. Gardiner-Nylander would be epic.

 

[ZBBM]

We could just solve this problem by doing what Howard Berger just suggested today: convert Nylander to a defenceman.

dregerdregerdreger
bergerbergerberger
dregerbergerdregerbergerdregerberger

 

[riff raff]

We could just solve this problem by doing what Howard Berger just suggested today: convert Nylander to a defenceman.

The Reverse Kaberle!!

 

[princedpw]

We could just solve this problem by doing what Howard Berger just suggested today: convert Nylander to a defenceman.

The Reverse Kaberle!!

+1

lol