Your premise that they won't need a winger isn't exactly accurate is kind of the point. They need all three of those positions on some level or another.
Value of: Chris Tierney or Mikkel Boedker at the draft
- Thread starter Kcoyote3
- Start date
Your premise that they won't need a winger isn't exactly accurate is kind of the point. They need all three of those positions on some level or another.
Yea... on one level or another.... C/D being on the level you might trade a 50 point defensemen for... winger being on the other level... the one you wouldn’t
No. You can have any player opinion you want... but the doozy... that was the crazy statement that the Sabres wouldn’t have been a terrible team if McCabe was a top 4 D....
And I disagree with that statement considering they're going to lose a big portion of their offense from the wing when JVR leaves and they don't have a suitable replacement and quite frankly Gardiner doesn't have the kind of value necessary to pull in a better defenseman nor likely a center. You vastly overestimate Gardiner's trade value right now.
yea... I totally remember when you guys lost Patrick Marleau... and your solution was to trade Vlasic to replace him... I mean, how could you ever expect to replace that scoring with growth from Meier, Hertl, Tierney, Donskoi, ec etc... clearly, subtracting a top 4 defensemen was the only way to do it... I mean, you need 3 good scoring lines right?
From an outsider perspective... I very much dislike Toronto
..... this Boedker/Gardiner thing is simply one sided trade logic.yea... I totally remember when you guys lost Patrick Marleau... and your solution was to trade Vlasic to replace him... I mean, how could you ever expect to replace that scoring with growth from Meier, Hertl, Tierney, Donskoi, ec etc... clearly, subtracting a top 4 defensemen was the only way to do it... I mean, you need 3 good scoring lines right?
From an outsider perspective... I very much dislike Toronto
Yeah because the Sharks situation then and the Leafs situation now is exactly the same and Vlasic and Gardiner after their respective seasons are totally comparable, right? Oh wait, they're not. It's not one-sided trade logic. It's you being incapable of understanding the logic because you don't give a crap to. That's fine but stop pretending like your logic is better when it is in fact worse. Leafs will probably keep Gardiner because his trade value is very low right now after such a horrific game 7. Any other GM knows that and would take advantage of it if the Leafs wanted to move Gardiner, plain and simple. His 50 points don't really mean a damn especially with one year left on his deal. His defensive play is very suspect and that game 7 plummeted his trade value whether you care to acknowledge it or not.
TomasHertlsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
No, don’t take his word. McCabe had a higher GF/60 Rel than Brenden Dillon and Joakim Ryan; he would be an upgrade in San Jose.
My logic is better. The situations don't need to be identical. You're logic is that JVRs production needs to be replaced, and that subtracting from a much weaker area of the team, is a logical to replace lost production from one of the strongest/youngest areas of the team... all while they have significantly more important needs elsewhere.
It's terrible logic. It's the type of logic invented when you want to trade someone (Boedker) and want a video game based return.
More bad logic.... a single game does not impact trade value. ever.
Or he simply played more difficult deployments, more effectively.... but when you've dug in, you're unlikely to take on new information, and instead will latch on to a single counter point (I shouldn't of used Rel stats, as our teams are at two different ends of the spectrum).
Regardless, McCabe has been better than Dillon.... at every stage of their development.
LouJersey
Registered User
You're right. The situations don't have to be identical but they do have to be close and your logic brings two situations that quite simply aren't close. Replacing production comes down to the options that a team has. The Sharks had a lot more internal options to replace Marleau's production than Toronto does to replace JVR's. And in reality, Toronto would consider moving Gardiner to help accomplish this because they want to improve their defensive play. One way to do that is to move on from one of your worst defensive defensemen on the team. And in doing so, also address a need for replacement production up front. The Leafs will have a better chance pursuing a Gardiner replacement in the free agent market than they will finding a trade partner to take Gardiner for another d-man and I doubt they'd move Gardiner for a 3C when they can get a top six winger instead. Your premise that Gardiner is a positive to their weaker area is a false one. Your premise that the Leafs are strongest on the wing is also a false one. Therein lies your problem with your bad logic. You make false assumptions. You also made more of it than what that proposal was. It was an off-hand example proposal of what the Sharks could do with Boedker depending on how their situations plays out this off-season. It was never meant to be looked at with a great amount of scrutiny. The Sharks could pull off a deal where they send Boedker for a d-man in some fashion or another if that's the direction they want to go in. You can argue the Gardiner case specifically if you like but the overall point that the Sharks could do that is true regardless.
And it's hilarious that you actually believe it never happens that a single game doesn't impact trade value ever. It's rare but it has happened before and will happen again. That's just you ignoring history at this point. lol
yea... bullshit
Replacing production isn't a 1:1
Matthews, Marner, Nylander can be fairly expected to have huge growth in years 3-4 of their careers
They'd definitely take a 3C over a top 6 winger... that's an absolute no brainer... as they are losing Bosak. Where as they have Marner, Nylander, Marleau, AND Hyman who are all better than, more cost effective, and out produce Boedker.
That's not a premise I've ever stated.
Thier depth their is greater. It's not up for debate... they do not have an NHL 3rd or 4th line center under contract. They are losing the guy who led the team in faceoffs (Bozak).
Meanwhile, they have 5 wingers who play bigger roles/more minutes than Boedker does.... and they have a young player in Kapanen who will be a regular. To go along with Carl Grundstrom who just came over after a fantastic SHL playoff run with Frolunda, and was a difference make in the Marlies playoff run...
Kettle Black
Believe me, I am fully aware that you made an off hand remark, and now our doing the cowboy dance trying to defend it.
One bad game has never impacted trade value. If there is an example, it's accompanied by one of the worst GMs in the league at the time.
TomasHertlsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
Having a higher GF60 rel doesn’t mean he was more effective at all. That is literally one statistic and it is one category where it is so much easier excel on a 31st place team than a 100 point team and it is one where random variance is particularly friendly towards players that may or may not actually have a significant effect on their team scoring while they are on the ice. When it comes to defensemen like Ryan, McCabe, and Dillon - all 3 of whom have limited offensive upside - comparing their GFrel/60 is a terrible method of analysis. If one of these guys is on the ice for a lot of goals for, it’s probably due to one of the other 4 skaters on the ice, because all 3 of them are usually the worst offensive player wearing their team’s colors on the ice. Dillon and McCabe are probably roughly comparable, but Ryan and McCabe are in two different leagues. Ryan had a significantly better GF% Rel than McCabe despite playing on a good team. And at any rate, we’re not looking for a player who is roughly comparable to Dillon; we’re looking for a bottom pairing D with offensive upside who is comparable to Chris Tierney. That is not Jake McCabe.
McCabe’s GA/60 rel, HDCA/60 rel, and SCA/60 rel are actually positive, which is a bad thing. Given that McCabe is a defensive defenseman who is tasked primarily with preventing GA, HDCA, and SCA, why is it that the worst team in the NHL is worse at preventing those events while he is on the ice? Which one do you think Jake “Never scored more than 20 points” McCabe has a larger effect on: creating offense for or preventing offense against? Which one of those stats do you think is more likely to repeat itself over a large period of time?
You either know very, very little about using metrics to analyze and compare hockey players, or you intentionally cherry picked one stat where McCabe does better than a couple of Sharks players and ran away with it. Again, Jason Pominville had a higher GF/60 rel than any other player on the Sharks or Sabres. Is he better than any player on either team?
Last edited:
This last point is just your way of conceding that point. You know it happens and sometimes it results in everyone involved just saying they need a fresh start. It happens and sometimes it's for the best. Even in this case, it wouldn't be solely because of one game but that that one game was the tipping point.
At the end of the day, what this comes down to though is you just want to distract from the original points because you know you can't support anything that you've claimed with anything respectable so you'll do what you consistently have done in this thread and pick out something else to try and counter on, move on from other points you've failed to support, and pretend like it didn't happen.
I already conceded the GFRel point.
So we're back to using GFREL?????
Ryan looks pretty solid playing sheltered baby minutes... McCabe really stood out 3 years ago when he had the sheltered baby role.... he produced more offense than Ryan did this year too... when he was 21.
Right. McCabe is better than Dillon. An upgrade.
Say what? When McCabe was 21, he played 2 NHL games that year. He was 22 that year and that year was 14 points in 77 games compared to Ryan's 12 points in 62 games. That's not something to thump your chest over. And I don't think it matters whether you believe McCabe is an upgrade on Dillon or not. It's not worth the hassle to move deal elsewhere, acquire McCabe, to get a similar style and similar effectiveness. It doesn't move the needle in a meaningful manner. Both are meh.
Not gonna cut out all those sub quotes
My last statement was prepping for the inevitable Patrick Roy reference... so I could have a good laugh.
Happy to revisit if when Boedker or Gardiner are traded so we can play the I told you so game
I don't play those petty games. If you do, have at it. I really wouldn't care. lol
No matter how Boedker is traded in this situation, if he is the one moved, I would be right. Your original point was to try and malign his value to be a cap dump. I gave you one instance where that may be true and many other instances where it wouldn't be. I will be right no matter how it plays out. lol
TomasHertlsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
Comparing offensive production, especially at 5V5, between defensemen is not the way to go when considering that most of it is just based on teammates and random variance. Paul Martin was near the top-20 in 5V5 points amongst defensemen last year, and Justin Braun/Marc-Edouard Vlasic were up near the top this year. If you’re comparing two defensemen like Brent Burns and Erik Karlsson, who truly do drive play and create a lot of scoring chances at 5V5, and you have the metrics to defend that their offensive production at 5V5 is sustainable, then go for it. But in the case of McCabe scoring 14 points in 77 games, and Joakim Ryan scoring 12 points in 62 games...wait, what? Did you actually decide to bring up their scoring rates?
Ryan played with Brent Burns, those are hardly baby minutes at all. You can’t use ZS% and QOC CF% to determine the difficulty of minutes of a player you clearly never watch.
I fail to see how comparing their offensive statistics has any bearing on either's effectiveness. At no point has McCabe been significantly better offensively than Ryan because it's not the focal point of their games so who cares?
TomasHertlsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
It's both him knowing very little about using the metrics properly and he cherry-picks.
