Rebuild Thread III: Buckle up, new season starts NOW!

[Woll Smoth]

Philosophy for teams is always to build and develop through the draft. This is nothing new for the majoity of the league.

What we have here in the Grabner deal is a clear change of not trading youth for older players mantra this team was saying.

The reason is obvious, the plan has changed to winning sooner than later. I don't know how anyone can view the Grabner deal any other way!

He is an upgrade to our top 9.

How is trading 5 prospects with no future on the Leafs a sign that any plan has changed? Unless you have trouble understanding what the plan outlines, this changes nothing.

 

[Dreakmur]

How is trading 5 prospects with no future on the Leafs a sign that any plan has changed? Unless you have trouble understanding what the plan outlines, this changes nothing.

Pretty much. This trade may be a mistake, but that will be due to poor talent evaluation rather that not following a plan.

They needed to move contracts, so they picked guys they didn't like.

 

[Swervin81]

I disagree with your assessment of how remote the chances are of this team finishing a few spots out of the playoffs. First off, this team isn't nearly as bad as they showed in the second half last year, some players clearly quit halfway through the season once Carlyle was fired. Secondly, a good year from Bernier and a significant upgrade in defensive play from Babcock could make a big difference, let alone improvements from guys like Reilly and Kadri.

Regardless, my main point wasn't about where this team will finish, my point was about where Babcock seems to want this team to finish. I don't expect him to purposely coach bad, but I didn't expect him to be talking about worrying about how they would replace kessel's scoring so that they can get to a certain number that gives them a chance to make the playoffs. And some people on this board seem to also want this team to compete this year, which I don't get.

It think by compete, they mean a team that plays hard night in and night out. I really don't care about team results, I just wanna see hard work out there. Babcock can want the team to finish one way, but if the team's not good enough... well, unless he rips of the tux and reverse a Superman shirt, it's not gonna be good enough.

Babcock is always gonna coach to win, or at least what he thinks is the way to win. That's what every single coach does regardless of the situation, and that's how every coach has to think. I wouldn't put much stock into the replacing Kessel's goals comment.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

How is trading 5 prospects with no future on the Leafs a sign that any plan has changed? Unless you have trouble understanding what the plan outlines, this changes nothing.

How are you sure, they have no future? They are prospects.

Rask, Steen, Stralman were once prospects also. How did we know then too?

 

[Woll Smoth]

How are you sure, they have no future? They are prospects.

Rask, Steen, Stralman were once prospects also. How did we know then too?

I'm 99% sure they have no future on the Leafs since they were just traded away by them.

I am sure you don't understand the concept of "the plan" since every time Shanahan has sneezed you've called it a change in the plan.

And since you asked.
Steen wasn't a prospect when the Leafs traded him. Not sure who the comparable is in this trade. Stralman also played parts of 2 seasons with the Leafs. And the Rask for Raycroft trade was one of the worst in Leafs history by one of the worst GMs in Leaf history.

So I don't really know why you asked about them.

 

[Menzinger]

How are you sure, they have no future? They are prospects.

Rask, Steen, Stralman were once prospects also. How did we know then too?

The Leafs wouldn't have dumped them for a 3rd liner if they thought in the slightest they'd become Impact NHLers

 

[Menzinger]

I wonder what you will say if Leafs get Stamkos next summer. They are still in a long and painful rebuild?

They'd still be pretty awful - until prospects start developing. he'd plug one hole of a team full of them.

 

[Menzinger]

Since Taylor Beck was acquired this past July by Kyle Dubas was he only included in the trade today because of the contract limit? He was never apart of the Burke/Nonis era.

They took a gamble on him, and likely felt after a year of evaluation that he wasn't worth keeping.

Still, it's noticeable how many prospects the new management has discarded for virtually nothing.

 

[LeafsNation75]

They took a gamble on him, and likely felt after a year of evaluation that he wasn't worth keeping.

Still, it's noticeable how many prospects the new management has discarded for virtually nothing.

I assume you mean a year of evaluation when he was in Nashville. Still if he wasn't worth keeping why even trade for him only 2 months ago?

 

[Swervin81]

I assume you mean a year of evaluation when he was in Nashville. Still if he wasn't worth keeping why even trade for him only 2 months ago?

Trade away a useless goon taking up a contract spot and just sign a goon to an AHL deal so he doesn't take up a contract spot.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

It seems like the mood has changed in here, especially with all the Stamkos talk. There's lots of optimism.

When/if we sign Stamkos, will we consider ourselves "rebuilt" at that point and hence are now competing for the Cup?

IMHO - whether we sign Stamkos or not (I don't think it'll happen, but I didn't think we'd get Babcock either!) .... I see this rebuild shaping up on a set timeline that's maybe not as long as some are assuming.

We currently have nicely stocked cupboards, but not enough prospect depth that we dip into the pool if needed to improve the team without impacting the long term.

I see this year has been set up as a transition year - the prospects will kept down, and the roster will undergo a little bit of chaos with players being shipped out throughout the season.

By next draft, at least some (not all) of our existing core (Bozak, Lupul, Phaneuf, Kadri, JVR, Reimer / Bernier) will be moved out for future assets. Some of the one-year wonders will be shipped as well, with others whom Babcock falls in love with being resigned to short term (1 - 3 years) extensions. We'll likely enter the draft with at least 13 / 14 picks, and likely a few more for 2017.

After the draft, we'll have a top 5 prospect pool, with enough depth to use some of those assets if the right opportunity comes along (read: Saad / Hamilton type RFA a team can't sign). The team will be pretty much completely torn down, and management will know exactly who they want to keep long term (possibly Kadri, Phaneuf, Bernier or JVR depending how they respond this year).

With the team on the upswing and with a more positive environment even through the chaos - we'll be a more attractive FA destination, but I can see management refusing to overpay - there is nothing like winning in Toronto, and if you want to be a part of it, you'll have to leave money on the table.

For next season, I can see Lou using some of the asset wealth to target a good young player or two on the trade market, add some solid vets via reasonable deals in free agency, and the promotion of a number of NHL ready prospects such as Nylander and Brown.

The tear down will be over, and it will be about "building" rather than rebuilding - with the team likely improving year over year starting the 2016/17 season (not saying playoffs - just that the team will be moving in an upward direction).

We're not starting from scratch here - and already have some fantastic pieces in Nylander, Marner, Reilly, Brown, Kapanen, etc. I can see us being in a position to do some damage by the 2017/18 season with the right moves.

So, at the end of the 16/17 season then the rebuild will be complete. That "seems" to be what you are saying.

 

[Ovate]

So, at the end of the 16/17 season then the rebuild will be complete. That "seems" to be what you are saying.

At the end of the 16/17 is when we start making moves to improve the team immediately, like Buffalo has done this offseason. Not necessarily at the expense of the future, but things like signing free agents without the intent to flip them.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

At the end of the 16/17 is when we start making moves to improve the team immediately, like Buffalo has done this offseason. Not necessarily at the expense of the future, but things like signing free agents without the intent to flip them.

Would you say that's a quick rebuild - record breaking maybe even?

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

When all of this first began there was a lot of talk about cleaning house and doing a proper rebuild and building a team the way teams like Chicago and Tampa did, which means being very bad for a few seasons and getting a few high draft picks. It was definitely implied by Shanny and the media that the plan was to clean house and be a bad team for a few years. I noticed as the spring and summer went on that that message seemed to be changing.

It's harder to move out the old core than we all thought. I thought Bozak and Lupul were going to be gone last TDL but it's evident now that they have such little or negative value that the Leafs probably can't get what they feel is fair value. Phaneuf's contract is huge and we wouldn't be able to trade him without retaining salary which nobody here wants to do. Kadri, JVR, Bernier, and Gardiner are all in wait and see mode I feel. It could be argued that they were part of the old core, but they're young and talented enough that they could be part of the solution.

It took Buffalo years to move out their old core. Expecting it to happen in the span of 8 months was unrealistic.

 

[hockeywiz542]

TSN hockey insider Darren Dreger joins Leafs Lunch to discuss the Michael Grabner deal, the Toronto Maple Leafs' farm system approach, and expectations for the season.

Darren Dreger says the Michael Grabner trade shows that the Toronto Maple Leafs are not doing the traditional rebuild.

http://iphone.tsn.ca/tsnpodcasts/darren dreger on leafs lunch september 17th.mp3

TSN hockey insider Darren Dreger joins TSN Drive with Dave Naylor hosts Dave Naylor and Steve Simmons to talk about the trade the Maple Leafs made to get Michael Grabner. They also talked about how the Maple Leafs aren't taking a traditional route to rebuilding the hockey club.

http://iphone.tsn.ca/tsnpodcasts/TD_Dreger_Hour 3_Jul 17.mp3

 

[The Winter Soldier]

I'm 99% sure they have no future on the Leafs since they were just traded away by them.

I am sure you don't understand the concept of "the plan" since every time Shanahan has sneezed you've called it a change in the plan.

And since you asked.
Steen wasn't a prospect when the Leafs traded him. Not sure who the comparable is in this trade. Stralman also played parts of 2 seasons with the Leafs. And the Rask for Raycroft trade was one of the worst in Leafs history by one of the worst GMs in Leaf history.

So I don't really know why you asked about them.

What is the difference of trading young unproven players like Colaiacovo and Steen for a vet like Stempniak and trading 5 young unproven players for a vet like Grabner?

I thought many here didn't want the Leafs to repeat past mistakes? And this was why Shanahan was lauded. For the record, I don't think it was a bad trade. But don't tell me you do not see the hyprocrisy here.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

The Leafs wouldn't have dumped them for a 3rd liner if they thought in the slightest they'd become Impact NHLers

You do not know that? They were young players like Colaiacovo and Steen were at one point. Stempniak was that 3rd liner we once dealt for.

So one cannot keep bringing up the traded Steen mistake, and now say that maybe one of these 5 players may not become the next Steen.

No one knows the final outcome of this deal will be. It took years for Steen to become the player he is.

 

[Semantics]

You do not know that? They were young players like Colaiacovo and Steen were at one point. Stempniak was that 3rd liner we once dealt for.

Colaiacovo and Steen were never 50th on the organizational depth chart.

So one cannot keeping bringing up the traded Steen mistake, and now say that maybe one of these 5 players may not become the next Steen.

None of these players anything like Steen.

 

[hotpaws]

What is the difference of trading young unproven players like Colaiacovo and Steen for a vet like Stempniak and trading 5 young unproven players for a vet like Grabner?

I thought many here didn't want the Leafs to repeat past mistakes? And this was why Shanahan was lauded. I don't think it was a bad trade, but don't tell me you do not see the hyprocrisy here.

Steen and Cola were NHLers

this trade as has been mention a 1000 times is about clearing up spots to sign other prospects and or the vets we've brought in on pto's and who can be flipped at the t/d

maybe one of these guys comes back to bite us in the ass but that would be a long shot and depth/role (which these prospects project out to be at best ) players have become a dime a dozen and easily acquired for cheap in the off season

 

[Drew75]

So, at the end of the 16/17 season then the rebuild will be complete. That "seems" to be what you are saying.

Would you say that's a quick rebuild - record breaking maybe even?

How is that record breaking when it's been going on for a while? 5th (2008) - now JVR, 7th (2009) - Kadri, 5th (2012) - Reilly, 8th (2014) - Nylander. Add Gardiner, Gauthier, Brown, etc and you'll realize we didn't become an expansion team the day Shanny was hired. If by the end of June we have a deep, top 5 prospect pool, and a torn down roster - why wouldn't they start building it back up?

At the end of the 16/17 is when we start making moves to improve the team immediately, like Buffalo has done this offseason. Not necessarily at the expense of the future, but things like signing free agents without the intent to flip them.

This is what I meant.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Steen and Colaiacovo were young players with forthcoming upside traded for a veteran 3rd line winger.

This was considered a mistake by most here. So I am confused, why some feel that it is okay now for the Leafs to deal young players with forthcoming upside for a 3rd line winger.

I am okay with it, but I wonder where all those people that keep referring to the Steen deal as a mistake are suddenly okay with this change in philosophy by Leafs Mgt.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Colaiacovo and Steen were never 50th on the organizational depth chart.



None of these players anything like Steen.

Steen was just an OK player when he was traded from the Leafs. He didn't blossom until he played under Hitchcock and had a career high in his 10th pro season. No one back then when the Leafs had him knew Steen was going to be that good.

 

[Drew75]

You do not know that? They were young players like Colaiacovo and Steen were at one point. Stempniak was that 3rd liner we once dealt for.

So one cannot keep bringing up the traded Steen mistake, and now say that maybe one of these 5 players may not become the next Steen.

No one knows the final outcome of this deal will be. It took years for Steen to become the player he is.

Your example would work if we traded Gardiner - a 20-something former first round pick, established in the league, showing flashes of being an impact player but not quite there yet (akin to Carlo and Steen when dealt).

However - you seem to be confusing that with mid round prospects struggling to make the top of the Marlies roster...... But I can see where you are coming from - why move borderline prospects for contract flexibility,and a tradable asset when there is a like - 3% chance one of those kids could become a 4th liner one day!

 

[Gallagbi]

Steen and Colaiacovo were young NHLers with good potential. Most of the assets moving out are prospects with low ceilings and/or not much chance of becoming decent NHLers.

Pretty obvious difference.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Your example would work if we traded Gardiner - a 20-something former first round pick, established in the league, showing flashes of being an impact player but not quite there yet (akin to Carlo and Steen when dealt).

However - you seem to be confusing that with mid round prospects struggling to make the top of the Marlies roster...... But I can see where you are coming from - why move borderline prospects for contract flexibility,and a tradable asset when there is a like - 3% chance one of those kids could become a 4th liner one day!

Well the year is still young, we do not know what other moves Lou will be making.

The argument is accurate. We were not supposed to get older, but younger.

Now I always thought after Babcock came on, we would ice a competitive team capable of making the playoffs. That seems to be the direction we are taking.

Win now, and continue to draft and develop.