Hindsight is 20/20, were these the right decisions?

[ShaneFalco]

I don't understand this fear so many people seem to have of "making the team worse" or "sending the kids the wrong message". Progress isn't always linear and if we stubbornly resist trading vets for futures and let them walk instead, I really don't see us winning a cup in the Matthews era no matter how many good messages we send, we just don't have the depth and that depth is highly unlikely to magically appear out of nowhere. Sometimes you need to take a step back to take a step forward later, refusing to ever do that is nothing but impatience and I've seen enough of that in Leafland to last me a lifetime. JMHO.

 

[LeafGrief]

I don't understand this fear so many people seem to have of "making the team worse" or "sending the kids the wrong message". Progress isn't always linear and if we stubbornly resist trading vets for futures and let them walk instead, I really don't see us winning a cup in the Matthews era no matter how many good messages we send, we just don't have the depth and that depth is highly unlikely to magically appear out of nowhere. Sometimes you need to take a step back to take a step forward later, refusing to ever do that is nothing but impatience and I've seen enough of that in Leafland to last me a lifetime. JMHO.

I don't understand why nobody in this thread is willing to use the quote feature. Do I smell bad?

I'm actually so confused by this new narrative that the Leafs don't have depth, or that we won't any time soon. We have the best farm team in the AHL and have been carrying NHL quality players in the press box and even on the Marlies this entire season. We're absolutely chock-full of depth at every position other than C. Fortunately, you don't have to break the bank to acquire bottom 6 centres and our top6 centre pool is elite if you believe in Nylander. The Marlies have a ton of talented young players with NHL upside and we still have a full compliment of draft picks for this year and next, that's where your depth comes from. If we didn't already have a strong farm system in place, two top60 picks from a JVR trade alone isn't going to fix that.

This thread is actually the first time that I've seen it said that we have no depth. Normally it's the other way around, where it is the strength of our depth that makes JVR and Bozak expendable. If you think that the Leafs are missing out on depth, wouldn't you want to be keeping those two and Gardiner? Even if we traded Van Riemsdyk at the draft last year, the players we picked up in the 2017 draft would optimistically be on the roster in 2019/2020. That's after the ELC's of our young stars are over, meaning that we completely passed over an opportunity to surround them with depth and try to go deep.

I'm frustrated by the attitude that I see around here which boils down to "There's no point in going for a cup unless you're the 80's Oilers". Teams with far worse records than the 2017/2018 Leafs go deep into the playoffs and even win Cups and have been doing it for years. I hate the idea of "making the team worse" and intentionally "taking a step back" because I believe that the team as it is has the talent to be an elite team in the league and I see no reason to keep the rebuild going longer than it should be. There are lots of areas where our team can improve, but I'd love to hear about the team that doesn't. The only two that come to mind are Winnipeg and Tampa Bay, who both just paid huge package of futures at the deadline this year. I have all the patience in the world for our prospects and for the Leafs to actually become that elite team. We're building around a bunch of kids and I know that these things take time. But I think that we're just wasting years of Matthews' career if we're always waiting on the next batch of kids.

 

[Tonka]

1. We are not a rebuilding team. Our roster was good enough for us to be contenders, but Babcock is a bad coach and didn't have us playing to our potential for a number of reasons.

2. Marleau contract was good because the alternative is just to have un-used cap space which would have probably just gone to waste. Leivo didn't have to miss the entire year. Martin could have gotten a rest, Komarov could have gotten a rest. Plenty of opportunities to rotate him into the lineup even with Marleau.

3. I think the 2nd round picks (Boyle and Plekanec) were a mistake. We should have either made more significant upgrades, or trade off JVR and don't sign anyone. I didn't like the middle of the road approach. Either go for it, or accumulate more assets and take your chances with young players.

Babcock lead us to our first back to back playoffs in like 14 years. Sure we are not a rebuilding team, but we are a retooling team. We are no where close to being contenders, we are missing consistent goaltending, stay at home D's and a strong 2C.

Marleau contract hinders us from signing players this season and next season that are younger and better.

Last point, agreed.

 

[Tonka]

The thing is what if Vegas lose in the playoffs and their UFAs walks, is that bad management for them?
Hindsight is always going to be 20/20 and what if will always trump what actually happened.

What if Lou actually called Vegas and traded Bozak and Karlsson straight up in the summer. If that deal took place, we will all be like, Lou had gone mad.

IMO Vegas should not be used as a model at all. They are the anomaly of anomalies. The only thing I would take from their success is, give the skilled guys more time on ice, no not starting in the playoffs, but in the regular season.

Guys like KAPANEN, BROWN AND JOHNSSON, have to capitalize them because it annoys me beyond belief, need more playing time. One of these guys could turn out to be a 30-30, and we will never know because we stick them on the third and fourth line, whereas a guy we know who is completely unskilled (sure hardworker), is a first line winger.

 

[ToMaLe]

I don't understand this fear so many people seem to have of "making the team worse" or "sending the kids the wrong message". Progress isn't always linear and if we stubbornly resist trading vets for futures and let them walk instead, I really don't see us winning a cup in the Matthews era no matter how many good messages we send, we just don't have the depth and that depth is highly unlikely to magically appear out of nowhere. Sometimes you need to take a step back to take a step forward later, refusing to ever do that is nothing but impatience and I've seen enough of that in Leafland to last me a lifetime. JMHO.

Have been saying that for awhile, we have been doing this crap being too impatient for 50 years and have gotten us diddly squat. Two 2nds traded for 2 4th line c, UFAs walking for nothing when we had capable players to fill. Those picks could have helped gotten us what we really needed, instead is now wasted. We are still a very young team and probably still 2 more years away to be serious contenders. Too impatient, instead of sticking to the plan. Foolishness really.

 

[Gabriel426]

Patience is the key. Just take a look at the Jets, they made the playoffs three years ago and got swept by the Ducks. Then missed the playoffs two years in a row and now they are in the Final Four.
Did they panic and fired the GM or the Coach, or think some of their young guys are not good enough and trade them away? Beside Kane, who had major character issue, they pretty much kept the team together.
That's something I don't think Leafs fans and the media can tolerate. Take a quick look at the comments about trading Willie, or Andersen is not good enough, heck some even doubt if Matthews is good enough to be our Franchise C.

 

[PuckMagi]

Babcock lead us to our first back to back playoffs in like 14 years. Sure we are not a rebuilding team, but we are a retooling team. We are no where close to being contenders, we are missing consistent goaltending, stay at home D's and a strong 2C.

Marleau contract hinders us from signing players this season and next season that are younger and better.

Last point, agreed.

Matthews and Andersen lead us to our first back to back playoffs. No team is perfect on paper. Andersen has been very consistent. Nylander is a good 2C. Ya, our defense isn't great... but Lou didn't help us out any and Borgman or Holl might have been good enough to crack the lineup.

How in the world does the Marleau contract hinder us from signing players this season and next? Please explain that.

We have a boat load of cap space this year. What the heck are we supposed to do with it all? Sign jumbo joe for 1 year? We would still have tons of space even if we overpaid him.

We can easily trade Marleau after this next season because of the way his contract is structured.

Please tell me who are these younger and better players that we for some reason can't sign because of Marleau's contract?

Look at all the cap space that just got freed up. JVR, Bozak, Komarov, Plekanec, Moore, Polak. Also no longer paying Gleason or Cowen.

 

[Willchel Marlynder]

If we want to attract top UFA's who say they're looking to win cups, the Leafs have to prove that they're serious. Teams that think they're contenders, or that even have a shot to go deep in the playoffs don't trade away their UFA's. It is a gamble, but the message is an important one. If we want to attract top talent, then we must do what top talent wants to see. Build the culture and expectation of winning and good things will follow. It would be nice to have a basket full of draft picks every year, but we've already got the best team in the AHL and a deep system. Playoff experience and sending a message directly to guys like Doughty and Tavares is an important consideration.

So do we look more like contenders now that the teams leading goal scorer is walking for nothing? Or are we replacing him with Tavares?

I agree OP. Tried to rush things and it resulted in first rounds exits. I don't mind the Marleau signing but not trading Bozak and JVR last year was bad asset management. We could have gotten a nice haul for JVR. Bozak would have return something modest. However, the real win would have been that instead of now relying on free agency or a green to the position Nylander on being a center, Nylander would have had some ample time and experience and would be talking the next step as a C next season.

Luckily it was only a few minor mistakes and nothing to major.

 

[Blanche Blanche]

IMO Vegas should not be used as a model at all. They are the anomaly of anomalies. The only thing I would take from their success is, give the skilled guys more time on ice, no not starting in the playoffs, but in the regular season.

Guys like KAPANEN, BROWN AND JOHNSSON, have to capitalize them because it annoys me beyond belief, need more playing time. One of these guys could turn out to be a 30-30, and we will never know because we stick them on the third and fourth line, whereas a guy we know who is completely unskilled (sure hardworker), is a first line winger.

Yeah we need lines akin to

Marner - Matthews - Marleau

Johnsson/Nylander - Kadri/Nylander - Kapanen

Leivo/Hyman - Nylander - Brown/Johnsson

Our speed/Talent just went up notches, and the work ethic level went up as well.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

I honestly do not know.
if i had to choose between Brassard, Stastny, Turris and Bozak, Bozak is the 4th choice and I don't even have an issue with the guy. (Turris was my hope for this off-season but he signed that big contract extension).

I think because Kane has a bit o'nasty in his play, i could see why the Sharks would want him vs. JVR (who is more cerebreal in his play. and his foots speed is slower). that was the only real high-end winger (Nash is a different class imo) who left.

so again people are like we shoulda traded them -- to who?
who was offering the picks?
who was willing to offer the prospect/NHL roster player?

it's all this lament how we could have so many picks now, but that's going off the premise we were being offered all of this and Lou turned it down. If people want to argue that we could have traded them sooner - I'll always agree wtih that because that was my stance.

if you are arguing - that the 7th best team in the NHL should strip off pieces of their team because they'd lose in the 1st round I don't think you'll have many people (fans, executives, etc) who would do the same thing.

It was a bad decision, in hindsight that is obvious to pretty much everyone.

You can’t argue that by hiding behind questions that nobody but an NHL GM can answer.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Actually my point is that we're not fooked next season because players like Kappy/Dermott/Johnson are further in their development because we held onto JVR/Bozak/Koma.

Would we have made the playoffs without them?? Can't say. A large part of why we made the playoffs this year was also due to Matthews/Marner/Nylander who were likely advanced in their development the previous year having had JVR/Bozak/Koma on the team and them making it into the playoffs by a point in the 2nd last game.

See the post below - it would seem that players can develop just fine without even making the playoffs.

Patience is the key. Just take a look at the Jets, they made the playoffs three years ago and got swept by the Ducks. Then missed the playoffs two years in a row and now they are in the Final Four.
Did they panic and fired the GM or the Coach, or think some of their young guys are not good enough and trade them away? Beside Kane, who had major character issue, they pretty much kept the team together.
That's something I don't think Leafs fans and the media can tolerate. Take a quick look at the comments about trading Willie, or Andersen is not good enough, heck some even doubt if Matthews is good enough to be our Franchise C.

Excellent example! It drives me nuts when people justify keeping JVR because "what message would it send to the kids if we trade him at the TDL" and we couldn't trade him in the off-season because we were a bubble team last year and again, what kind of message would that send to the kids. We'd be telling them that they're not good enough and so on.

This message stuff is such BS. Everyone knows this organisation wants to win and will spend in order to do so. Trading a vet or two won't crush the players ego's and doom the franchise. If there was any truth to this then WPG would suck but just look at them. That's a great team over there and I think they're winning the cup this season.

Another idiocy that keeps being repeated is how draft picks "might not pan out". Well I guess we're screwed anyway then because where the hell are the players supposed to come from that take the places of JVR, Bozak, Plecanek, Komarov and later Hainsey and so on? Almost all the players on our roster were drafted just like almost all the players in the NHL were drafted at one point. But no, god forbid we trade for picks because even if they do pan out, they "won't help us for 3-4 years". Great, let's let everyone walk instead, that's what all the good teams do right?

I wish I could say that if they let Gardiner walk then I'm done with team but who am I kidding, I'm a fan for life no matter what. I really hope that this obvious mistake is the last obvious mistake they make for a long time to come though. I don't think it was a fatal mistake and we're doomed or anything but I'm not sure we can afford to make another mistake like that. Another year of asset mismanagement like this one and the hole we've dug for ourselves might be too deep to climb out of, no matter how good our kids are a couple years from now.

Oh well. Go Jets I guess. FML.

 

[Willchel Marlynder]

I don't understand this fear so many people seem to have of "making the team worse" or "sending the kids the wrong message". Progress isn't always linear and if we stubbornly resist trading vets for futures and let them walk instead, I really don't see us winning a cup in the Matthews era no matter how many good messages we send, we just don't have the depth and that depth is highly unlikely to magically appear out of nowhere. Sometimes you need to take a step back to take a step forward later, refusing to ever do that is nothing but impatience and I've seen enough of that in Leafland to last me a lifetime. JMHO.

Eloquently put. We can't put not hurting Marners feelings ahead of future success. A rental like JVR would have returned a better package than what NY got for Nash. But instead we kept him for what? A first round exit? The young guys already know what it feels like to be bounced in round one. We didn't need to waste valuable assets just so they can get a second dose of it.

Hopefully management see's this as a learning experience.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

is a studly Defenseman just sitting there waiting for us in the 2nd round

and this 2nd rnd D will be ready in 4 years ? if we are lucky ?

 

[HamiltonNHL]

I don't understand this fear so many people seem to have of "making the team worse" or "sending the kids the wrong message". Progress isn't always linear and if we stubbornly resist trading vets for futures and let them walk instead, I really don't see us winning a cup in the Matthews era no matter how many good messages we send, we just don't have the depth and that depth is highly unlikely to magically appear out of nowhere. Sometimes you need to take a step back to take a step forward later, refusing to ever do that is nothing but impatience and I've seen enough of that in Leafland to last me a lifetime. JMHO.

This plus.

Our chances of winning the cup wouldn't have decreased much trading JVR.
Our chances of winning the cup wouldn't have decreased much trading Bozak.
and
We were guaranteed a playoff spot in January.

 

[Gary Nylund]

This plus.

Our chances of winning the cup wouldn't have decreased much trading JVR.
Our chances of winning the cup wouldn't have decreased much trading Bozak.
and
We were guaranteed a playoff spot in January.

Exactly. Because we all but locked into a playoff spot and all but locked into being a 1st round underdog and therefore almost guaranteed not to win the cup, this the absolute perfect time with all the stars aligned to trade a pending UFA for futures regardless of the fact that we were "a playoff team". We still get the playoffs experience either way.

Opportunity missed, period.

 

[LeafGrief]

So do we look more like contenders now that the teams leading goal scorer is walking for nothing? Or are we replacing him with Tavares?

I agree OP. Tried to rush things and it resulted in first rounds exits. I don't mind the Marleau signing but not trading Bozak and JVR last year was bad asset management. We could have gotten a nice haul for JVR. Bozak would have return something modest. However, the real win would have been that instead of now relying on free agency or a green to the position Nylander on being a center, Nylander would have had some ample time and experience and would be talking the next step as a C next season.

Luckily it was only a few minor mistakes and nothing to major.

We look like we can be contenders because we have an elite forward core and can handle losing JVR because we have the youth to fill in for him. It's a loss, sure, but it's one that we can easily move past.

Rushing things is forcing Nylander to play C before he is ready. Rushing things is trying to push Marlies into spotlight roles before they're ready for them and have finished their development in the AHL. For years during the rebuild people talked about the Detroit model of letting players develop until they're overripe and now it seems like all of that has gone out the window, we've got to be trading players to give them opportunities!

I feel like I'm living in an upside down world, am I the only one who expects the Leafs to be even better next year? Another year of development for all the kids, a healthy Matthews, a dominant Marner, and (with any luck) a breakout season from Nylander and I think the Leafs can really make some noise. There were some questions about if the Leafs were actually a quality team or just a fluke, but those questions were answered by 20 games into 2017/2018. Now the real question is just how good they can be. Instead on the Leafs board there's a developing narrative that we lost to Boston because we were supposed to and we never should have tried in the first place. Sorry, but that's a chicken attitude. The Leafs played a hard fought series against a good opponent and they lost. There's no shame in losing, especially with such a young team. There is no shame in trying your best and coming up short.

 

[Gary Nylund]

We look like we can be contenders because we have an elite forward core and can handle losing JVR because we have the youth to fill in for him. It's a loss, sure, but it's one that we can easily move past.

Rushing things is forcing Nylander to play C before he is ready. Rushing things is trying to push Marlies into spotlight roles before they're ready for them and have finished their development in the AHL. For years during the rebuild people talked about the Detroit model of letting players develop until they're overripe and now it seems like all of that has gone out the window, we've got to be trading players to give them opportunities!

Potential return for JVR and Bozak and Komarov plus the pick we traded for Plecanek, that's what we lost. How easy it will be to "move past" that remains to be seen.

Trading those guys doesn't mean we would have had to rush the kids, we could just as easily play guys like Ben Smith and Colin Greening (just as an example) not to mention Josh Leivo who has played well when given the chance and is overripe. You can always find cheap vets, foregoing the return for a prime asset like JVR just because we need a place holder so the kids aren't rushed makes no sense.

 

[ShaneFalco]

The Leafs played a hard fought series against a good opponent and they lost.

I would argue it wasn't exactly hard-fought. They were outplayed most of the series and over-matched. Couldn't get the puck out of their own zone, and as hard as they tried to match lines, Marchand's line just killed them.

 

[LeafGrief]

Excellent example! It drives me nuts when people justify keeping JVR because "what message would it send to the kids if we trade him at the TDL" and we couldn't trade him in the off-season because we were a bubble team last year and again, what kind of message would that send to the kids. We'd be telling them that they're not good enough and so on.

This message stuff is such BS. Everyone knows this organisation wants to win and will spend in order to do so. Trading a vet or two won't crush the players ego's and doom the franchise. If there was any truth to this then WPG would suck but just look at them. That's a great team over there and I think they're winning the cup this season.

Another idiocy that keeps being repeated is how draft picks "might not pan out". Well I guess we're screwed anyway then because where the hell are the players supposed to come from that take the places of JVR, Bozak, Plecanek, Komarov and later Hainsey and so on? Almost all the players on our roster were drafted just like almost all the players in the NHL were drafted at one point. But no, god forbid we trade for picks because even if they do pan out, they "won't help us for 3-4 years". Great, let's let everyone walk instead, that's what all the good teams do right?

I wish I could say that if they let Gardiner walk then I'm done with team but who am I kidding, I'm a fan for life no matter what. I really hope that this obvious mistake is the last obvious mistake they make for a long time to come though. I don't think it was a fatal mistake and we're doomed or anything but I'm not sure we can afford to make another mistake like that. Another year of asset mismanagement like this one and the hole we've dug for ourselves might be too deep to climb out of, no matter how good our kids are a couple years from now.

Oh well. Go Jets I guess. FML.

Because you're getting hung up on the "message" part, I'll disavow it. Fine, don't care, it's all bunk.

What I really do care about more than anything is the quality of team that the Maple Leafs are putting out onto the ice. At the end of the day, that is the only thing that matters. Prospects support that team, developments support that team, draft pick support that team. What is driving me nuts is that people are actually arguing like we're still in the tear-down phase or the asset accumulation phase. Meanwhile, the teams that we're floating around in the standings with are stocking up on rentals and trying their luck in the playoffs. The Jets picked up Stastny, the Lightning picked up McDonagh, the Penguins picked up Brassard, the Bruins picked up Nash (okay, that one was really dumb lol), the Sharks picked up Kane, VGK picked up Tatar (another mistake), the Devils picked up Maroon and Grabner, and we picked up Plekanec and kept the UFA's. All of the above kept their UFA's as well. Why are we the lame ducks who need to take steps back before we can take the next step forward?

I really don't understand your third paragraph about the idiocy of draft picks not panning out. We're not screwed because we already have an elite farm team and a full set of picks this year and moving forwards. We're well ahead of the average NHL team in prospect pool and at the average for incoming draft picks. If we're screwed, then 80% of the NHL is screwed; I don't think we're screwed at all. I'm really struggling to understand why you think that we need to trade JVR and Gardiner to replace them through the draft, when we've already got the best farm system and a league-average amount of picks. We've made 27 picks in the last three years (the Jets have only made 22) and have 23 picks over the next three drafts while our competitors have significantly less (the Jets have 18, the Lightning are missing two top60 picks, the Bruins traded this year's first, the list goes on), so how far ahead of the average do we have to be?

Some of them will pan out, some of them will not pan out. Of course we want to maximize our picks, but we have to examine if the odds of success are worth making the NHL team worse in the present. In my opinion, keeping Van Riemsdyk and forgoing a late 1st and a 2nd is fine. Trading Gardiner for the 10th overall is actually a pretty sweet deal and I could get behind that in a heartbeat. Replacements will come from players that we already have in the system, from the draft picks that we will make, through trades, and as UFA's. There's more ways to add to a team than through the draft alone. Drafting and development is the most important, but we're already above average there so I don't understand your perspective. Trading players away for picks is fine, but it's absolutely important to keep in mind how long those picks are going to take to bring a positive impact to the NHL squad. 3 years from now is 25% of the way through Matthews' and Marner's 8 year deals and has just one year left on Kadri and Rielly’s contracts. That is a whole lot of potential Cup window to be leaving on the table. This isn't to say that letting players walk is always the right answer, it's just trying to bring perspective to what "trading for picks" really means. Asset management is great, but a treasure trove of draft picks isn't going to make our franchise players any younger.

When I look at the Leafs, I see a squad that can be truly elite with just a few more tweaks, some experience, and probably a good top4 RHD. We’re already better than a dark horse. We should be making some moves that help the team win now, and not 3 years down the road because we have a team right now that can win. I don’t mean sell the farm here, I mean think about what we can do to make this team win sooner rather than later. Trading UFA’s for draft picks helps us win later, but sometimes it’s just too far away.

At the end of the day, it all boils down to what I think of the Leafs right now. If I thought that we were miles away from being competitive, I would be in favour of more asset accumulation and trading away the rentals like we did for years. But I don't think we're miles away, I think we've got a young squad that has the tools to be truly competitive and we should be looking to add to the roster where we can.

 

[Gary Nylund]

What is driving me nuts is that people are actually arguing like we're still in the tear-down phase or the asset accumulation phase. Meanwhile, the teams that we're floating around in the standings with are stocking up on rentals and trying their luck in the playoffs. The Jets picked up Stastny, the Lightning picked up McDonagh, the Penguins picked up Brassard, the Bruins picked up Nash (okay, that one was really dumb lol), the Sharks picked up Kane, VGK picked up Tatar (another mistake), the Devils picked up Maroon and Grabner, and we picked up Plekanec and kept the UFA's. All of the above kept their UFA's as well. Why are we the lame ducks who need to take steps back before we can take the next step forward?

I think what it comes down to is that you think we're farther along than I do. WPG, TB, PIT, BOS, VGK and even SJ (not NJ) are all teams for which IMHO, TDL pickups make a lot more sense for than they do for us. More veteran players and/or a smaller window to win the cup. I guess I do think that we should have considered us to be in the asset accumulation phase, not forever (and it drives me nuts when people say things like perpetual rebuild and so on) but for just one more year. If we were where we are today and had another 1st and couple more seconds down the road we'd be better off for sure. The picks might not pan out but there's a good chance that at least one of those picks can contribute for many years, starting maybe 3 years from now which would be perfect with then on ELC's and our current young stars in their prime. And all it would have cost us was what - reduced our chances of winning the 1st round this year from 46% to 44% or something like that? And reduced our cup chances this year from 4.5% to 4.2% or something like that? Oh yeah, I would have gladly paid that price considering what we gain is a chance to increase our cup chances for many years to come. Plus the fact that we may not need to wait 3-4 years for those picks to help us, we can always use them as part of another deal to get more immediate help, a 1st rounder and a few 2nd round picks is a lot of ammo. Sure we still have our picks but that in no way reduces the value of having more.

 

[Trapper]

I think what it comes down to is that you think we're farther along than I do. WPG, TB, PIT, BOS, VGK and even SJ (not NJ) are all teams for which IMHO, TDL pickups make a lot more sense for than they do for us. More veteran players and/or a smaller window to win the cup. I guess I do think that we should have considered us to be in the asset accumulation phase, not forever (and it drives me nuts when people say things like perpetual rebuild and so on) but for just one more year. If we were where we are today and had another 1st and couple more seconds down the road we'd be better off for sure. The picks might not pan out but there's a good chance that at least one of those picks can contribute for many years, starting maybe 3 years from now which would be perfect with then on ELC's and our current young stars in their prime. And all it would have cost us was what - reduced our chances of winning the 1st round this year from 46% to 44% or something like that? And reduced our cup chances this year from 4.5% to 4.2% or something like that? Oh yeah, I would have gladly paid that price considering what we gain is a chance to increase our cup chances for many years to come. Plus the fact that we may not need to wait 3-4 years for those picks to help us, we can always use them as part of another deal to get more immediate help, a 1st rounder and a few 2nd round picks is a lot of ammo. Sure we still have our picks but that in no way reduces the value of having more.

The trouble is nobody cares about those teams and only see where they currently are today. That's when they start paying attention. Not the long years it took to get there. Go back through those teams and see the list of moves they made. The drafting. Moving on from players not in the plan.
Oh but then here comes the Chicago model, they did it with Toews/Kane in 2 years. Again, not really. They had built up the Keith/Seabrook/Buff/Versteeg/trades for Sharp/Ladd/etc. etc. When they added those players, it wasn't from scratch. We had to purge the entire organization. All the years of Ross/Ryan/Caputi/makes me sad going down the list was the support we had. We didn't add Matthews to a strong system, (welcome to Boston Pastrnak/Debrusk/McAvoy/etc. meet Bergeron/Marchand/Chara/Krejci/and on) these players pretty much were the start of it. Big difference.

 

[pheasant]

Just because we know the team got bounced in the 1st round doesn't mean that we never should have believed the team could win. Gaining a few picks wouldn't have been better than taking a real shot at going deep.

If you were told you could have a $50 Burger King gift card or one dice roll that pays you a grand if you roll a hard 6, would you be "wrong" in hindsight if you tried the dice and rolled a 3? I don't think so.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Just because we know the team got bounced in the 1st round doesn't mean that we never should have believed the team could win.

I always believed we "could win". I also didn't think our chances of doing so were very good and that would have been the same with or without trading JVR.

Gaining a few picks wouldn't have been better than taking a real shot at going deep.

It depends on the picks. Based on analogous trades I think the picks we got would have been worth it so I'll disagree here.

If you were told you could have a $50 Burger King gift card or one dice roll that pays you a grand if you roll a hard 6, would you be "wrong" in hindsight if you tried the dice and rolled a 3? I don't think so.

Not really a valid analogy in this case. Perhaps something like this would better:

You get to roll the dice every year for the next 10 years to win a million dollars. Would you be willing to increase your odds of winning this year by 0.2% if it meant reducing your odds of winning by 0.1% for the next 10 years?

You can tweak the numbers if you like, obviously there's no way to calculate them exactly. Your $50 vs a grand analogy is ridiculous though.

 

[LeafGrief]

I think what it comes down to is that you think we're farther along than I do. WPG, TB, PIT, BOS, VGK and even SJ (not NJ) are all teams for which IMHO, TDL pickups make a lot more sense for than they do for us. More veteran players and/or a smaller window to win the cup. I guess I do think that we should have considered us to be in the asset accumulation phase, not forever (and it drives me nuts when people say things like perpetual rebuild and so on) but for just one more year. If we were where we are today and had another 1st and couple more seconds down the road we'd be better off for sure. The picks might not pan out but there's a good chance that at least one of those picks can contribute for many years, starting maybe 3 years from now which would be perfect with then on ELC's and our current young stars in their prime. And all it would have cost us was what - reduced our chances of winning the 1st round this year from 46% to 44% or something like that? And reduced our cup chances this year from 4.5% to 4.2% or something like that? Oh yeah, I would have gladly paid that price considering what we gain is a chance to increase our cup chances for many years to come. Plus the fact that we may not need to wait 3-4 years for those picks to help us, we can always use them as part of another deal to get more immediate help, a 1st rounder and a few 2nd round picks is a lot of ammo. Sure we still have our picks but that in no way reduces the value of having more.

I do agree that the crux of the issue is where we stand in the rebuild. The way I see it is that the Leafs are good right now, way earlier than we expected them to be. This is an opportunity to open up that cup window even earlier. Sure, if I had a crystal ball and knew that the Leafs were going to lose in the first round, I'd have traded JVR and Bozak. Having more draft picks is great and I'm a believer in developing talent in-house. But we'll never have that crystal ball, so I have to ask if the process that lead to making that decision was the right one. We've got an NHL squad that finished 6th in the league, a juggernaut AHL team, and all of our draft picks for the future. At some point the value of experience in a playoff run is worth it in developing our young players. I would have been quite pleased if the Leafs had made it to the conference finals this year and think that would have been worth letting the UFA's walk for. We ended up losing that gamble and therefore losing value at the end of the day, but the thought process makes sense to me. It's okay to make well-reasoned choices and still lose.

I bolded "just one more year" in your comment because I'd like it if you could clarify; do you mean one more year from now - end of 2018/2019, or one more year meaning 2017/2018?

I'd have been totally in favour of trading JVR for picks and then using those picks to trade for another NHL player that can help the Leafs win. That's a good hockey trade with an extra step in the middle. I have zero problems with that and would be quite happy to do it with Gardiner as well.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I do agree that the crux of the issue is where we stand in the rebuild. The way I see it is that the Leafs are good right now, way earlier than we expected them to be. This is an opportunity to open up that cup window even earlier. Sure, if I had a crystal ball and knew that the Leafs were going to lose in the first round, I'd have traded JVR and Bozak. Having more draft picks is great and I'm a believer in developing talent in-house. But we'll never have that crystal ball, so I have to ask if the process that lead to making that decision was the right one. We've got an NHL squad that finished 6th in the league, a juggernaut AHL team, and all of our draft picks for the future. At some point the value of experience in a playoff run is worth it in developing our young players. I would have been quite pleased if the Leafs had made it to the conference finals this year and think that would have been worth letting the UFA's walk for. We ended up losing that gamble and therefore losing value at the end of the day, but the thought process makes sense to me. It's okay to make well-reasoned choices and still lose.

I bolded "just one more year" in your comment because I'd like it if you could clarify; do you mean one more year from now - end of 2018/2019, or one more year meaning 2017/2018?

I'd have been totally in favour of trading JVR for picks and then using those picks to trade for another NHL player that can help the Leafs win. That's a good hockey trade with an extra step in the middle. I have zero problems with that and would be quite happy to do it with Gardiner as well.

Fair enough, I don't agree but I get where you're coming from and I respect your opinion. And yes, the key is where we are in our rebuild, I say yes we're better than we thought we would be by now and ahead of schedule etc. but still, not quite good enough to sacrifice futures to go for it, especially when we're already underdogs in round 1! Were we in a different division then it might be a different story - I really think that the fact that we'd likely be underdogs for all 4 playoff rounds is a HUGE factor.

Of course we didn't know that we would lose in the 1st round, my thinking though is that we knew we would be underdogs and JVR doesn't make that much of a difference anyway. We could win or lose with him or without him. And last year he kind of sucked in the playoffs so it wasn't totally a surprise that he wasn't much of a factor this season either.

I meant one more year meaning 2017-18. I would also not let Gardiner walk, I would trade him or resign him but my thinking was always that JVR is overrated anyway, we're not quite ready to win the cup anyway so all the conditions are perfect to gather assets this one last time. Then next year I think we'd be ready to really make some noise (and this would especially be true if we were to package those assets we got for JVR and/or Bozak for some immediate help like perhaps that Dman we've all been dreaming of).

And yes, we're not doomed, we can still make noise next year and so on. I just really hope we can sign Tavares, that would make me forget about those picks we didn't get in a big hurry. I'm also thrilled that Dubas is now at the helm, I have big hopes for him.