Gomez vs Kessel trade - Which one was worse?

Habs 4 Life

No Excuses
Mar 30, 2005
41,015
4,793
Montreal
Hamilton and McDonagh are a wash so it comes down to which is worse

Higgins for Gomez

or

Seguin for Kessel

The Kessel deal is clearly worse
. Especially if you factor into the results achieved by each team.

How is it clearly worse? Kessel is a star and an impact player for the Leafs and out produced Seguin in each year despite playing on a **** team

And don't talk about achievements, I mean yes he won a Cup but besides 1 game he was a non factor for the Bruins during that Cup year. He was drafted by a team that was a Cup contender, they got really lucky.
 

Habs 4 Life

No Excuses
Mar 30, 2005
41,015
4,793
Montreal
True but you could argue Kessel was a big part of that nose dive. They were relying on him to carry the offence his failure to do that was one of the reasons they drafted so low.

In his 2 seasons he has picked up

55, 64 and 82 pts per year and was the leading scorer on the Leafs in all 2 years. Burke was the one that didn't surround him well enough, cause Kessel actually produced
 

Lafleurs Guy

Guuuuuuuy!
Jul 20, 2007
73,942
43,025
Hamilton and McDonagh are a wash so it comes down to which is worse

Higgins for Gomez

or

Seguin for Kessel

The Kessel deal is clearly worse. Especially if you factor into the results achieved by each team.
I don't understand this logic at all.

Higgins for Gomez is clearly worse. We get stuck with a bad player and horrible contract.

Kessel for Seguin is far more even. I read some people arguing that Seguin is the better player now? I really disagree with that. Kessel is clearly better right now. That might change in the future but for now Kessel is better. And to balance out the contract situation in your example Seguin would have to be significantly better and that hasn't been the case so far.

The reason its so bad for the Leafs is that they set their rebuild back by a few years. They should've just stayed patient... and giving up Rask was just terrible.
 

Poulet Kostopoulos

Registered User
Oct 23, 2009
4,918
1
Funny to see last night, that a team puts their "best player" as a substitute in the penalty box for the 5 min.

Does that happen often? lol
 

llamateizer

Registered User
Mar 16, 2007
13,672
6,770
Montreal
Funny to see last night, that a team puts their "best player" as a substitute in the penalty box for the 5 min.

Does that happen often? lol

you send your best player if he doesnt play PK at all. he gets a chance for a breakaway when he exit the penalty box

I find this stupid, if your team gets a 4v3 pp, can you replace him?
 

Poulet Kostopoulos

Registered User
Oct 23, 2009
4,918
1
you send your best player if he doesnt play PK at all. he gets a chance for a breakaway when he exit the penalty box

I find this stupid, if your team gets a 4v3 pp, can you replace him?

Yeah, that's what I was wondering as well. If the Habs got penalized and they play 4-on-4, they can't put Kessel out there. Pretty stupid.
 

fufonzo

Registered User
Feb 28, 2004
2,578
4
In terms of the actual trade, I'd say Gomez's was worse. In hindsight, I'd say the Kessel trade was worse.

In the end it's, would you rather:

Kessel
McDonaugh
Higgins

or

Seguin
Hamilton
Knight
Gomez

Considering we were able to buy out Gomez, I'd go with the second group.

Both really sucked. In the end, the Habs lost a great defenceman. Toronto lost a potential franchise player in Seguin, a big D with really high potential, and a good player in Knight, but got a good player in Kessel.

What I think tilts this even further was that the Leafs were nowhere near the point where a guy like Kessel could put them over the top. They should have been rebuilding through the draft.
 

JMMR

Registered User
Mar 21, 2006
9,375
1
Ottawa
How is it clearly worse? Kessel is a star and an impact player for the Leafs and out produced Seguin in each year despite playing on a **** team

And don't talk about achievements, I mean yes he won a Cup but besides 1 game he was a non factor for the Bruins during that Cup year. He was drafted by a team that was a Cup contender, they got really lucky.

It was 2 games but I understand your argument, he did for 95% of the playoffs have an insignificant role.
 

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,939
5,394
In his 2 seasons he has picked up

55, 64 and 82 pts per year and was the leading scorer on the Leafs in all 2 years. Burke was the one that didn't surround him well enough, cause Kessel actually produced

The 82 points is irrelevant since the picks happened during his 55 and 64 point seasons. Kessel wasn't the only reason they finished as bad as they did, probably wasn't even the biggest. But people didn't predict a 29th place finish in part because Kessel was expected to be better than he was.
 

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,939
5,394
How is it clearly worse? Kessel is a star and an impact player for the Leafs and out produced Seguin in each year despite playing on a **** team

And don't talk about achievements, I mean yes he won a Cup but besides 1 game he was a non factor for the Bruins during that Cup year. He was drafted by a team that was a Cup contender, they got really lucky.

We gave up a 2nd/3rd liner who was liklely going to be gone in a couple of years for an overpaid 2nd liner who was sent packing after a few years. It's basically a wash. It cost Molson money but the Habs nothing. We still went hard after UFAs like Brad Richards so clearly we had the go ahead to bury Gomez if need be so he didn't prevent us from aquiring anyone.

Toronto gave up a guy you can build around for a good to great complementary player. By the way comparing Kessels points to Seguin is not fair, you're comparing a guy whose was 18-19 to someone in their early-mid 20s. If you compare their first 2 years Kessel had 29 and 37 points. Seguin has produced 22 and 67.
 

Analyzer*

Guest
At the time of the deal it was:

Kessel: A young up and coming scoring winger

For

2 unknown 1sts and 1 2nd.

Gomez + others

For
Known, blue chip dman McDonagh + others.

Also, part of the deal helped the Rangers land Prust.
 

habsfanatics*

Registered User
May 20, 2012
5,051
1
Gomez easily. We got the worst player in the deal and gave up the best. Kessel to this point is the best player involved in the kessel trade. He might still be for years to come. They got a great player, sure they may have overpaid and the timing was incredibly stupid, but they at least got a great player.
 

LyricalLyricist

Registered User
Aug 21, 2007
37,909
5,814
Montreal
At the time of the deal it was:

Kessel: A young up and coming scoring winger

For

2 unknown 1sts and 1 2nd.

Gomez + others

For
Known, blue chip dman McDonagh + others.

Also, part of the deal helped the Rangers land Prust.

And gave them space to sign gaborik.:laugh:
 

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,939
5,394
At the time of the deal it was:

Kessel: A young up and coming scoring winger

For

2 unknown 1sts and 1 2nd.

Gomez + others

For
Known, blue chip dman McDonagh + others.

Also, part of the deal helped the Rangers land Prust.

Well to be fair some people felt McDonagh had stalled development wise. Higgins was the only known quantity that we gave up and he was regressing and continued to regress after we traded him.
 

Sined

The AndroidBugler!
Jun 25, 2007
7,129
25
Gomez trade.
Hell the Rask for Raycroft trade was worse than the Kessel trade.
 

Souffle

A soupçon of nutmeg
Aug 9, 2003
3,648
35
Le Creuset
Visit site
I have to say the Kessel trade is worse. It's always a gamble when you make a trade. Hindsight just tells you whether the gamble paid off.

As I see it, noting that Gomez turned into a horrible suck job is the same as remarking that the Leafs gave up two very high 1st round picks. Neither was expected at the time of the trade. It was just part of the risk inherent in the deal.

In terms of tangible benefits, I think you have to acknowledge that Gomez was a part of the Habs' magical playoff run. That's something. Not saying that losing McDonagh for that was worth it. But it is something. Going by "butterfly effect" reasoning, that led to Eller and -- why not -- at least contributed heavily to drafting Galchenyuk.

The Leafs just don't have much to show for Kessel's time with them. I find it hard to believe that any GM of a team that's missed the playoffs for as long as the Leafs have would take Kessel instead of Seguin, Hamilton and Knight.

In any event, if I had to choose between those two bad deals, I would take the Gomez one without hesitating, going by everything that happened since those deals were made.
 

Harry22

Registered User
Mar 28, 2005
20,534
2,304
Montreal
Kessel is a great player. We traded a legit top pairing defenseman for a player with a huge salary and on the downside.
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,673
16,395
Kessel's deal was just ill-advised, as Burke really overrated his own team. But they AT LEAST got a very good contributor, with a rather low pricetag.

Gomez deal was plain terrible. The B's return for Kessel was better, but at least, the Leafs got a legit NHL-er. The Habs got a player who was, for more than half of his stint here, a replacement-level player.
 

Frank Drebin

He's just a child
Sponsor
Mar 9, 2004
33,478
19,467
Edmonton
Ive always said the Gomez trade was worse.

Kessel and Seguin cancel eachother out. So Toronto essentially lost D. Hamilton for nothing. Montreal lost McDo.

Right now, and likely in the future, McDo > Hamilton. Plus we got a boat anchor in Gomez that we had to buy out.

We lost the better player, and got the worse asset back.
 

Habs4ever

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,535
0
Montreal, (Quebec)
Visit site
From what I remeber

Michael Camellari and Gionta agreed to sign with habs as a free agent right after Goimez trade was finalised, and they moved mainly because Gomez was coming to habs; and Camellari was later traded for 2nd round pick, Rene Bourque, Patrick Holland and we still have Gionta who can contribute or be traded away for more assets.

So, why no one remember the reason why this two other free agents signed that off season in Montreal?

It's sometimes good to look at the Big picture and this two acquisitions were very important for habs that off season.

So guys stop *****ing about losing Mcdo because we did get a better return if you know where to look.
 

Harpo

Lyle forever
Sep 20, 2007
1,655
299
Quebec City
Michael Camellari and Gionta agreed to sign with habs as a free agent right after Goimez trade was finalised, and they moved mainly because Gomez was coming to habs; and Camellari was later traded for 2nd round pick, Rene Bourque, Patrick Holland and we still have Gionta who can contribute or be traded away for more assets.

So, why no one remember the reason why this two other free agents signed that off season in Montreal?

It's sometimes good to look at the Big picture and this two acquisitions were very important for habs that off season.

So guys stop *****ing about losing Mcdo because we did get a better return if you know where to look.
I'm calling bullshiit. There's no way Cammalleri thought it was an incentive to play with Gomez over all other centers he could have played with when he had the opportunity to choose.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->