Value of: Can anyone fix the Leafs defense without leaving the team worse than it is?

[Liferleafer]

Seabrook for JVR.

Seabrook is an excellent D...that contract is horrible though.

 

[Liferleafer]

I've been reading all this stuff (different threads about the Leafs D) and it seems every defenesman floated around that could improve their team is either not good enough, too old, contract is too long, cap hit is too much...

It's hilarious.

My opinion:

Green=yes...depending on cost
Tanev=absolutely...again, if the cost isn't outrageous
Seabrook=no...that contract is awful
Trouba=pipe dream...Jets shouldn't deal him
Hamonic=absolutely
Myers=no...to injury prone

I see the Leafs targeting Alzner and other UFA D men.

 

[Hawksfan2828]

My opinion:

Green=yes...depending on cost
Tanev=absolutely...again, if the cost isn't outrageous
Seabrook=no...that contract is awful
Trouba=pipe dream...Jets shouldn't deal him
Hamonic=absolutely
Myers=no...to injury prone

I see the Leafs targeting Alzner and other UFA D men.

And the Leafs aren't getting any one of them with the exception of Green and Seabrook without moving one of Nylander or Marner..

 

[Viqsi]

I've been reading all this stuff (different threads about the Leafs D) and it seems every defenesman floated around that could improve their team is either not good enough, too old, contract is too long, cap hit is too much...

It's hilarious.

That's because you're getting a variety of replies from multiple wild dreamers. There are some folks who really genuinely believe that they can get someone like Seth Jones back for JvR, and they keep speaking up. If you keep an eye out you'll see that such a perspective hardly qualifies as universal among Leafs fans.

* * *​

And the Leafs aren't getting any one of them with the exception of Green and Seabrook without moving one of Nylander or Marner..

I dunno, I think Tanev might be doable without one of those guys. Depends on how Vancouver is handling their personnel needs. Hamonic, OTOH... I suspect at this point he's not really available at all.

And frankly, the Leafs shouldn't be moving one of Marner or Nylander unless they're getting that Jones-level guy back. Age and cost control are also valuable things. I just don't think they'll get one because I don't see any available outside of Carolina, and even that's a bit of a stretch.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

And the Leafs aren't getting any one of them with the exception of Green and Seabrook without moving one of Nylander or Marner..

Harmonic is not worth Marner or Nylander

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Sign Alzner that would go a LONG way to fixing the D.

 

[Pyrophorus]

And the Leafs aren't getting any one of them with the exception of Green and Seabrook without moving one of Nylander or Marner..

Have a good day, Sir.

 

[Starat327]

Harmonic is not worth Marner or Nylander

Worth either of them in a vacuum, probably not. But take in the Isles desire to keep him, and the fact that they may lose one of their other top 4 to the ED, and that's probably what it would take.

For the record, I don't think the leafs should make the trade, but people need to realize that players' values are very abstract. There is no set 'price' on people. You pay what the other team values the player at based on the circumstances (age/contract/requested trade/etc), or you don't get the asset.

 

[Liferleafer]

And the Leafs aren't getting any one of them with the exception of Green and Seabrook without moving one of Nylander or Marner..

Green/Seabrook/Hamonic/Tanev...all could be acquired without Marner/Nylander IMO.

 

[Liferleafer]

Worth either of them in a vacuum, probably not. But take in the Isles desire to keep him, and the fact that they may lose one of their other top 4 to the ED, and that's probably what it would take.

For the record, I don't think the leafs should make the trade, but people need to realize that players' values are very abstract. There is no set 'price' on people. You pay what the other team values the player at based on the circumstances (age/contract/requested trade/etc), or you don't get the asset.

It truly amazes me how under valued Marner/Nylander are. These are 2 rookies approaching 60 point seasons. We are talking about players just behind Laine... is Hamonic worth Laine? If these guys were on any other team; their perceived values would be astonomically higher.

 

[Starat327]

It truly amazes me how under valued Marner/Nylander are. These are 2 rookies approaching 60 point seasons. We are talking about players just behind Laine... is Hamonic worth Laine? If these guys were on any other team; their perceived values would be astonomically higher.

Please don't give me the persecution complex. We've had conversations in the past, and youre much better than that.

Both players are amazing, and everyone would love to have them. But one only need look at the last few years of the Oilers to see where having no defense and amazing forwards gets you. It has nothing to do with Marner or Nylander's value. It has everything to do with the fact that the Isles would probably be a worse team after making that trade and the ED than they would be before it.

 

[Liferleafer]

Please don't give me the persecution complex. We've had conversations in the past, and youre much better than that.

Both players are amazing, and everyone would love to have them. But one only need look at the last few years of the Oilers to see where having no defense and amazing forwards gets you. It has nothing to do with Marner or Nylander's value. It has everything to do with the fact that the Isles would probably be a worse team after making that trade and the ED than they would be before it.

While this may be true, the Leafs are actually pressing for a playoff spot early in the rebuild....something the Oilers didn't do. Also, there is this weird beleaf that because the Leafs should/need to fix the defense, that somehow lowers the value on Marner/Nylander. And then there are those that will continually say "the Hall/Larsson deal sets the bar"....to which i will respond, Marner...IMO holds more value than Hall. One is younger and on an ELC while having a great season....the other is at 6 million, older and has had injuries.

It isn't a persecution complex, i will ask this....if your team had a rookie that is pushing 60 points and challenging for the Calder, would you consider trading him for Hamonic or Tanev? Seriously, if Marner or Nylander were to be made available, i would think we'd get better offers than that.

 

[Starat327]

While this may be true, the Leafs are actually pressing for a playoff spot early in the rebuild....something the Oilers didn't do. Also, there is this weird beleaf that because the Leafs should/need to fix the defense, that somehow lowers the value on Marner/Nylander. And then there are those that will continually say "the Hall/Larsson deal sets the bar"....to which i will respond, Marner...IMO holds more value than Hall. One is younger and on an ELC while having a great season....the other is at 6 million, older and has had injuries.

It isn't a persecution complex, i will ask this....if your team had a rookie that is pushing 60 points and challenging for the Calder, would you consider trading him for Hamonic or Tanev? Seriously, if Marner or Nylander were to be made available, i would think we'd get better offers than that.

No, I wouldn't. And I clearly stated that in my original post. Not once have I devalued either of the two players "because they are a leaf" - or devalued them all, to be honest. You took that post and made it seem like i slighted them because they are leafs, which is not the case, and wasn't even remotely mentioned. I'm saying that the Isles and Canucks (in the case of Tanev) have every right to ask for those players, because trading their top pairing defensemen makes the team much worse than adding something like Kapanen and the leafs first, which is the offer that we see a lot of since the big 3 aren't available (and shouldnt be).

What you are implying is that because player A has more value than player B, someone should make that trade, and that's not the case. Team needs have to be taken in to account. It'd be like someone saying the Leafs should trade Rielly for a high end forward, (for arguments sake, let's say Backstrom). Backstrom is pretty clearly the better player, but its just not a good fit or use of the Leafs assets.

 

[Mattavarner]

What would Hjalmarsson cost?

 

[Liferleafer]

No, I wouldn't. And I clearly stated that in my original post. Not once have I devalued either of the two players "because they are a leaf" - or devalued them all, to be honest. You took that post and made it seem like i slighted them because they are leafs, which is not the case, and wasn't even remotely mentioned. I'm saying that the Isles and Canucks (in the case of Tanev) have every right to ask for those players, because trading their top pairing defensemen makes the team much worse than adding something like Kapanen and the leafs first, which is the offer that we see a lot of since the big 3 aren't available (and shouldnt be).

What you are implying is that because player A has more value than player B, someone should make that trade, and that's not the case. Team needs have to be taken in to account. It'd be like someone saying the Leafs should trade Rielly for a high end forward, (for arguments sake, let's say Backstrom). Backstrom is pretty clearly the better player, but its just not a good fit or use of the Leafs assets.

I apologize if you thought that's what bi was doing, i was just speaking in general. And no, i'm not implying or pushing any trade. Obviously, deals would only happen if the Isles or Nucks were open to dealing Hamonic/Tanev, if they aren't, it doesn't matter. But if thet were....i don't think it would take one of our rookies...if that was the demand, i would hope our management turns it down quickly.

 

[tempest2i]

What would Hjalmarsson cost?

A good player on an ELC who can step into Chicago's lineup immediately and contribute.

 

[Starat327]

I apologize if you thought that's what bi was doing, i was just speaking in general. And no, i'm not implying or pushing any trade. Obviously, deals would only happen if the Isles or Nucks were open to dealing Hamonic/Tanev, if they aren't, it doesn't matter. But if thet were....i don't think it would take one of our rookies...if that was the demand, i would hope our management turns it down quickly.

Quoting my post then saying "if they werent leafs..." gave that impression, yeah. :p

Its all good though. Too often people just look at the value of a player and say they are more valuable than another, so it the other team needs to add. I suppose its just a pet peeve when people think that trades only need to work for one side, that's all.

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Similar to the Oilers, NOBODY will want to help the Leafs acquire a top dman. That's their major missing piece. And you dont want to overpay for players in free agency if you plan on building a contender. If they can somewhow get Alzner/Shatty on a reasonable deal then go for it.
Otherwise get ready to pay top dollar for a dman, just a reality in todays NHL. To get quality you have to give quality.

I'd also argue there was a lot of other factors that improved the Oilers blueline a lot more than the Larsson trade like:

-Forward growth (them learning the defensive side of the game is massive)
-Health of Klefbom
-Bringing in Sekera & Russell
-Development of Nurse

Leafs D situation isn't nearly as dire as people are making it out to be. They've got 3 legit top 3 Quality D. Even adding a # 4 Russell type and development of one of Carrick or Dermott into a quality # 4 would be massive.

 

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

Find the teams that are going to have to leave a decent Dman unprotected in the expansion draft (Calvin De Haan or Brayden McNabb). Trade a 2nd round pick for one of them.