Proposal: 2 Toronto trades

[HoweHullOrr]

We keep mentioning the McDonagh & Karlsson trades like there was nothing of value going to their trading partners and like our trade proposals are basically the same.

McDonagh was traded for a roster player, 2 prospects and 2 picks. 5 pieces.

Karlsson was trade for 2 roster players, 2 prospects, and 2 guaranteed picks (a 1st & 2nd), along with two other conditional picks. 6 pieces possibly 8.

Can't see how we get something decent/good for a few scraps, and comparing to those deals just seems to affirm this. Even a #4 (edited) defender lands a 1st and two 2nds and they are not frequently made available.

 

[Team Cozens]

Update - Then there's the most recent loss to a sagging Colorado team last night. The idea that our defense is just fine as is seems to have taken a hit and is fading now.

No worries. I've seen the Chrystal Ball.....

Leafs acquire a high end D at the trade deadline as well as a #5.
Leafs defeat Bruins in a hugely controversial series against the Bruins where the Refs are called into question.
Tampa barely survives a series with the Islanders where Komarov and Matt Martin take suspension worthy cheap shots.

Leafs defeat the ravaged Lightning and make the Cup final against the Predators. I'll let you watch the rest of this play out.

 

[joe dirte]

We keep mentioning the McDonagh & Karlsson trades like there was nothing of value going to their trading partners and like our trade proposals are basically the same.

McDonagh was traded for a roster player, 2 prospects and 2 picks. 5 pieces.

Karlsson was trade for 2 roster players, 2 prospects, and 2 guaranteed picks (a 1st & 2nd), along with two other conditional picks. 6 pieces possibly 8.

Can't see how we get something decent/good for a few scraps, and comparing to those deals just seems to affirm this. Even a #5 defender lands a 1st and two 2nds and they are not frequently made available.

1) I'm not seeing any proposed trades.
2) I don't think anyone thinks they'll get a good defender for nothing.
3) There is no way Karlsson is getting traded for, if those are your thoughts.
4) Third pairing dmen do not go for multiple firsts and more.
5) McDonagh plays first pairing as well?

I really can't make any sense out of your post. What are you trying to say?

 

[joe dirte]

No worries. I've seen the Chrystal Ball.....

Leafs acquire a high end D at the trade deadline as well as a #5.
Leafs defeat Bruins in a hugely controversial series against the Bruins where the Refs are called into question.
Tampa barely survives a series with the Islanders where Komarov and Matt Martin take suspension worthy cheap shots.

Leafs defeat the ravaged Lightning and make the Cup final against the Predators. I'll let you watch the rest of this play out.

The Leafs have been on a tear all year, one slump and people think they're dead in the water. It really isn't a big deal. It's a long season.

They're not going to make any big trades that will effect their salary cap position for the long run. And those same people claiming they're dead, are also phenomenally short sighted. If they're salary crunched next year, the year after that, a lot of space opens up to improve the team.....

 

[leeroggy]

Gudas is playing over 20mins a night. Just saying he isn't a bottom pairing guy

He is a bottom pairing on a WINNING team. Can't you put two and two together on this? Phily is one point out of LAST overall in the league because of more than just goaltending. If he is playing ahead of your young talent on defense that was drafted over the past 5 years that says something doesn't it? And according to the season-long stats he averages 17:54 a game, not 20+. And forget the +/-, last year Adam Pelech managed to be a +7 and Hickey a +20 even as the Isles set the 20-year futility record for goals against. Didn't make them anything more than bottom pairing too.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

1) I'm not seeing any proposed trades.
2) I don't think anyone thinks they'll get a good defender for nothing.
3) There is no way Karlsson is getting traded for, if those are your thoughts.
4) Third pairing dmen do not go for multiple firsts and more.
5) McDonagh plays first pairing as well?

I really can't make any sense out of your post. What are you trying to say?

Huh??? I can't make sense of your post.

1. I'm not seeing any proposed trades. This thread is one, but there have been hundreds of them over the last 2 1/2 years.
2) I don't think anyone thinks they'll get a good defender for nothing. I didn't say "for nothing". I'm saying a decent/good defender isn't getting traded for cheap and a bunch of scraps. See #1.
3) There is no way Karlsson is getting traded for, if those are your thoughts. Karlsson was traded for the assets I listed in the post. Its already happened. Not sure why you are pointing at future trades. The point was we use the McDonagh and Karlsson trades as some kind of indication that good defenders get traded for a cheap (incredibly unspectacular/modest) return.
4) Third pairing dmen do not go for multiple firsts and more. I meant a #4 defender such as Hamonic. I mistakenly typed #5 defender. This was the only legitimate point or catch that you made.
5) McDonagh plays first pairing as well? I don't care where he plays, nor did I state he is 1st pairing. Is Girardi a true 1st pairing defender? McDonagh is a guy that we would like to have in our lineup (if the price was affordable), and he is often used as an example of how little it takes to land good defenders.

You completely missed on 4 out of 5 points (reading comprehension?). Nice try though. If this any sign of things to come, I can't see any point in further discussion.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

No worries. I've seen the Chrystal Ball.....

Leafs acquire a high end D at the trade deadline as well as a #5.
Leafs defeat Bruins in a hugely controversial series against the Bruins where the Refs are called into question.
Tampa barely survives a series with the Islanders where Komarov and Matt Martin take suspension worthy cheap shots.

Leafs defeat the ravaged Lightning and make the Cup final against the Predators. I'll let you watch the rest of this play out.

Its always possible, but you should take that crystal ball and use it somewhere useful, like picking stocks. Your going to be a very rich man.

 

[FerrisRox]

Actually you said "solid". If you go through my posts I never said anything except "decent".

The opening post of this thread claimed he was a "solid defensive defenseman."

That is the post that I responded to objecting to the claim he was a solid defensive defenseman.

You then responded to my post telling me I was wrong.

 

[ToDavid]

I don't think Leaf fans even believe Zaitsev is a value dman. Whenever i see their posts on their own forum, they are trying to dump him at every opportunity.

You're also talking about the fan base that has been non-stop whining about a top 5 team, crying bloody murder over backup goalies and 13th forwards, and condemning a GM who signed the biggest UFA in a decade but didn't magically conjure up an elite right handed defenseman. I would take a lot of that with a grain of salt.

It's certainly not a good contract but he's still a serviceable #4/5 and not a negative value player.

 

[FerrisRox]

He wouldn’t be ahead of toews and he’s probably not playing over strome.

He is better than Strome at every aspect of the game. Of course he's playing over Strome, to suggest otherwise is just plain silly.

 

[FerrisRox]

Zaitsev isn't a cap dump, sure he isn't sexy in his style of play but he can play 20+ MPG of heavy lifting ES and PK minutes and do pretty well out there.

Zaitsev is absolutely a cap dump and no he doesn't do "pretty well out there."

 

[FerrisRox]

A 27 year old defender who can play heavy 20+ MPG and is a decent puck mover having a 4.5 million cap hit until age 32 isn't negative value.

Decent puck mover? Do you even watch him play or do you just look at statistics?

You're embarrassing yourself here.

 

[ToDavid]

We keep mentioning the McDonagh & Karlsson trades like there was nothing of value going to their trading partners and like our trade proposals are basically the same.

McDonagh was traded for a roster player, 2 prospects and 2 picks. 5 pieces.

Karlsson was trade for 2 roster players, 2 prospects, and 2 guaranteed picks (a 1st & 2nd), along with two other conditional picks. 6 pieces possibly 8.

Can't see how we get something decent/good for a few scraps, and comparing to those deals just seems to affirm this. Even a #4 (edited) defender lands a 1st and two 2nds and they are not frequently made available.

McDonagh was traded with J.T. Miller, who is better than the roster player they got back. It's a bit misleading to say that McDonagh landed NYR a roster player. Karlsson did return two roster players, and while they're solid players they're not exactly Marquee guys. Karlsson is also a bit of an exception, he's not just a #1, he's one of the best in the league.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

McDonagh was traded with J.T. Miller, who is better than the roster player they got back. It's a bit misleading to say that McDonagh landed NYR a roster player. Karlsson did return two roster players, and while they're solid players they're not exactly Marquee guys. Karlsson is also a bit of an exception, he's not just a #1, he's one of the best in the league.

I'm not the one using these trade proposals as examples of getting good defenders for really modest and unspectacular returns, and this was the main point in my post. No matter how we split hairs, if our trade proposals offer scraps or lackluster assets, then I think we shouldn't expect much in return independent of how many times we use the Karlsson & McDonagh argument as some kind of supporting evidence. In order to make this idea seem reasonable, we need to really overlook and seriously devalue the assets being returned, which isn't a particularly accurate valuation.

 

[ToDavid]

I'm not the one using these trade proposals as examples of getting good defenders for really modest and unspectacular returns. No matter how we split hairs, if our trade proposals offer scraps or lackluster assets, then I think we shouldn't expect much in return independent of how many times we use the Karlsson & McDonagh argument as some kind of supporting evidence.

McDonagh was arguably a fairly unspectacular, but realistic return. Obviously it wasn't scraps but the Leafs could match something like that.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

McDonagh was arguably a fairly unspectacular, but realistic return. Obviously it wasn't scraps but the Leafs could match something like that.

We could, but many (daresay most) of our proposals (the actual subject here) don't offer much. Of course, what you said is more easily said now as we don't know how those prospects or picks will turn out.

Also, I often wonder how easy it really is to make trades of this ilk. We've been talking about this (and making trade proposals) for 2 1/2 years now, and nothing has materialized. There's maybe a couple of trades like this per year, so given how many teams want to upgrade their blueline, it seems most teams are going empty handed.

 

[joe dirte]

1. I'm not seeing any proposed trades. This thread is one, but there have been hundreds of them over the last 2 1/2 years.

this thread IS one? or is not one? You've listed 2 historical trades, for Dmen that will absolutely not be traded. So what is the proposed trade?

Huh??? I can't make sense of your post.
2) I don't think anyone thinks they'll get a good defender for nothing. I didn't say "for nothing". I'm saying a decent/good defender isn't getting traded for cheap and a bunch of scraps.

okay, who thinks this? I mean, there are always going to be a few in every fanbase that can't guage value, but you're suggesting it's the prevailing mentality.

3) There is no way Karlsson is getting traded for, if those are your thoughts. Karlsson was traded for the assets I listed in the post. Its already happened. Not sure why you are pointing at future trades. The point was we use the McDonagh and Karlsson trades as some kind of indication that good defenders get traded for a cheap return.

But you pointed to a third pairing dmen. How are Karlsson and McDonagh relevant?

4) Third pairing dmen do not go for multiple firsts and more. I meant a #4 defender such as Hamonic. I mistakenly typed #5 defender. This was the only legitimate point or catch that you made.

Well you said #5, now you're saying #4. Hamonic is a pretty solid dman.


And Mcdonagh is fully qualified to play first pairing.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

^^^ In general, you seem to prefer your tangents rather than the actual points that I've made. The McDonagh/Karlsson theory has come up many times, including this thread (page 2, around #40). Can't get into this, & as mentioned, can't see the point in further discussion.