The decision to keep the expiring contracts - is it going to backfire

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

It's my opinion the Leafs wasted valuable assets that very well could have been used to move up in the draft or acquire more players.

With all due respect, that is not how it works.

You're upset at the opportunity cost. Nothing has actually been tangibly "wasted". Perhaps that's why some people are so upset.

The deadline was too late. Most are referring to last summer.

Are they, though? I think there's a good amount going on about the TDL.

 

[ACC1224]

The deadline was too late. Most are referring to last summer.

I said last summer they should be moved. Once that didn't happen by New Year, there really wasn't any going back.

 

[ShaneFalco]

With all due respect, that is not how it works.

You're upset at the opportunity cost. Nothing has actually been tangibly "wasted". Perhaps that's why some people are so upset.



Are they, though? I think there's a good amount going on about the TDL.

True, there are some. I shouldn't speak for others.
The only one I could see moved at the deadline was Komarov. But AJ hadn't emerged yet and the return wouldn't have been worth it I don't think

 

[Gary Nylund]

And how do you expect to become a team that knows how to win? By selling and telling the players on the roster that management doesn't believe in them? Or by bringing in players who do know how to win, and bettering their chances of winning themselves?

And yes, it's possible we win with Kapanen in JVR's spot. Any change could make that possible, because we were that close. It's possible playing Komarov and Martin would have would have helped us beat Boston. I kind of doubt that, too. And it sure isn't a good argument to make.

I think the closest we were getting was with Bozak, JVR, and Plekanec. I'd happily try that combination again. But, sadly, the Leafs might not have this kind of forward depth for years to come, so I'm glad they tried it while they had the chance.

I don't believe that trading JVR in the off-season would have sent any such a message. Also, had we traded JVR for futures we may have been able to package those futures with other assets to got a good Dman, what kind of a message would that have sent?

Trades happen all the time, it's a business and players understand that. I also think everyone knows we're trying to build a winner here, it's not like if we traded JVR the players would go OMG, what are they doing.

They gambled and lost. Not the end of the world and I can understand their logic for doing what they did. In the end though it's pretty clear that going in another direction would have been better and I don't see what's wrong with saying so.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Did they? Wow, which playoffs? AHL?

Meant Shatty, typed Stastny. Was obviously talking about the 2017 playoffs.

 

[New User Name]

With all due respect, that is not how it works.

You're upset at the opportunity cost. Nothing has actually been tangibly "wasted". Perhaps that's why some people are so upset.

I get what you're saying. Point is, the assets we might have received.

 

[Gallagbi]

Last year's 99-point St. Louis Blues team sold off Kevin Shattenkirk at the deadline.

You can pretend it's an unprecedented idea to sell off assets you don't plan to retain even during a winning season, but that doesn't make it true.

It wouldn't be the first time ever, just a very rare occurrence.

Montreal did it with Rivet in a playoff race, STL has done it twice now.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I said last summer they should be moved. Once that didn't happen by New Year, there really wasn't any going back.

I thought we could still have done it in January when we were 16th overall at one point. Then again, some people seem to think our players are so fragile that their psyche's would have been completely crushed had we done so. I'm skeptical myself but who knows.

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

I get what you're saying. Point is, the assets we might have received.

See, now that's a slippery slope. You can imagine all kinds of things that could have been acquired in exchange for JVR (or Bozak, or Komarov, etc.). The people who are assuming those assets would have been material enough to really move the needle, or packaged along with another pre-existing asset in order to become material, are able to allow their imaginations to run wild. Thus the bemusing level of annoyance.

 

[Gary Nylund]

It wouldn't be the first time ever, just a very rare occurrence.

Montreal did it with Rivet in a playoff race, STL has done it twice now.

I'll be interested to see what happens going forward. Will it stay as a very occurrence or will more teams start doing it? I think we'll see it happen more as time goes by simply because rentals are almost never worth it and it's only a matter of time before teams start catching on. I think a lot of teams understand this already but are still following the old ways because of optics and the ever-present pressure to win now. JMHO.

 

[pheasant]

I don't believe that trading JVR in the off-season would have sent any such a message. Also, had we traded JVR for futures we may have been able to package those futures with other assets to got a good Dman, what kind of a message would that have sent?

Trades happen all the time, it's a business and players understand that. I also think everyone knows we're trying to build a winner here, it's not like if we traded JVR the players would go OMG, what are they doing.

They gambled and lost. Not the end of the world and I can understand their logic for doing what they did. In the end though it's pretty clear that going in another direction would have been better and I don't see what's wrong with saying so.

When was this thread about trading JVR in the offseason? Unless I missed some serious change in the topic (and I admittedly didn't read every post on every page) this is about selling pending UFA's at the deadline, rather than keeping them for a playoff run. Trading JVR's rights now would be fine. I mean, as opposed to what? Most expect him to walk.

And trading JVR and flipping the return for blueline help is great, too. I think many here would have supported that at the TDL, and it sounds good in hindsight now too. But, again, that's not the point. The point is keep JVR/Bozak or liquidate them.

Keeping the expiring contracts was the right move at the time. The fact that we played in a game 7 with like 4 lead changes showed we could (and did) compete.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Colorado traded Duchesne because he was a problem in the dressing room as well.

They did?! You have a good memory to remember details from trades they made back when they were the Nordiques.

 

[Gary Nylund]

When was this thread about trading JVR in the offseason? Unless I missed some serious change in the topic (and I admittedly didn't read every post on every page) this is about selling pending UFA's at the deadline, rather than keeping them for a playoff run. Trading JVR's rights now would be fine. I mean, as opposed to what? Most expect him to walk.

And trading JVR and flipping the return for blueline help is great, too. I think many here would have supported that at the TDL, and it sounds good in hindsight now too. But, again, that's not the point. The point is keep JVR/Bozak or liquidate them.

Keeping the expiring contracts was the right move at the time. The fact that we played in a game 7 with like 4 lead changes showed we could (and did) compete.

Last off-season, the JVR discussion has been going on for at least a a year and a half. As the TDL approached the possibility of trading JVR was still being discussed but it was mostly a theoretical discussion, I think almost all of us knew it wasn't going to happen when we were 6th overall, even those of us who though it was still a possibility worth considering.

 

[ACC1224]

I thought we could still have done it in January when we were 16th overall at one point. Then again, some people seem to think our players are so fragile that their psyche's would have been completely crushed had we done so. I'm skeptical myself but who knows.

I don't think the Team saw themselves as being a 16th over all team.

 

[Nithoniniel]

It's easy to argue now that we should have sold last summer. Bozak was good, but not a big factor. JvR had some goals, but was also very lackluster in the rest of his performance. Komarov barely played. Say we sell them for about market value in the summer? Would we have rolled into the playoffs with a top pairing of Rielly - McDonagh then? Very possible, and that could have been a game changer.

Acquiring assets for positions of strength where there are in-house replacements doesn't necessarily mean that you forego your chances now for some diffuse future gain. It might be to gain assets so we can afford to address an actual problem.

 

[pheasant]

Last off-season, the JVR discussion has been going on for at least a a year and a half. As the TDL approached the possibility of trading JVR was still being discussed but it was mostly a theoretical discussion, I think almost all of us knew it wasn't going to happen when we were 6th overall, even those of us who though it was still a possibility worth considering.

This thread is like 10 days old. No one here is discussing last off-season.

The conversation is about whether or not it would have been a better idea to sell the pending UFA's at this deadline, instead of keeping them for these playoffs.

I'm not debating what could have been done with JVR over a year ago. That would bring up possible changes to the Marleau signing, changes in playoff standings, cap space implications, and about a thousand other things that would veer completely off topic.

I'm glad we added at this TDL, and held on to our "own rentals".

 

[thewave]

It's easy to argue now that we should have sold last summer. Bozak was good, but not a big factor. JvR had some goals, but was also very lackluster in the rest of his performance. Komarov barely played. Say we sell them for about market value in the summer? Would we have rolled into the playoffs with a top pairing of Rielly - McDonagh then? Very possible, and that could have been a game changer.

Acquiring assets for positions of strength where there are in-house replacements doesn't necessarily mean that you forego your chances now for some diffuse future gain. It might be to gain assets so we can afford to address an actual problem.

Key...

The D was weak and the D problem was not truly addressed. Everyone knew this. Dermott made the team over his peers and so did Aaltonen and Leivo. Johnsson would later prove worthy as well.

What happened is Babcock wanted Vets because he simply does not have much faith in youth. All the players I marked for the press box eventually got there except Polak (Carrick is absolutely a better hockey player especially with Jake.)

Martin
Moore
Komarov

Tired of this conversation already, stubborn coach doesn't trust kids, doesn't play them when he should. Costs team assets and development time, gets put out in the 1st round and is left with a bunch of inexperienced kids for next year.

 

[Gary Nylund]

This thread is like 10 days old. No one here is discussing last off-season.

If that's what you think you've missed a whole bunch of posts.

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

Specifically regarding JVR, there was absolutely validity in trading him last offseason. I think the vast majority were onboard with this. Whether it had been for futures or a veteran defenseman in the similar price range.

That said, this thread seems to have been started with the viewpoint of this TDL. I believe we're talking about apples and oranges, and its important to separate the two debates.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

With all due respect, that is not how it works.

You're upset at the opportunity cost. Nothing has actually been tangibly "wasted". Perhaps that's why some people are so upset.

I see the point you’re making, just don’t buy it myself.

It’s like a gambler telling his wife, “Honey, I didn’t actually lose the house for nothing, I had a chance at a million dollars! Opportunity cost, you see.”

Bottom line, he’s now got nothing. Just like the Leafs.

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

Key...

The D was weak and the D problem was not truly addressed. Everyone knew this. Dermott made the team over his peers and so did Aaltonen and Leivo. Johnsson would later prove worthy as well.

What happened is Babcock wanted Vets because he simply does not have much faith in youth. All the players I marked for the press box eventually got there except Polak (Carrick is absolutely a better hockey player especially with Jake.)

Martin
Moore
Komarov

Tired of this conversation already, stubborn coach doesn't trust kids, doesn't play them when he should. Costs team assets and development time, gets put out in the 1st round and is left with a bunch of inexperienced kids for next year.

You had me onboard until "left with a bunch of inexperienced kids for next year".

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

I see the point you’re making, just don’t buy it myself.

It’s like a gambler telling his wife, “Honey, I didn’t actually lose the house for nothing, I had a chance at a million dollars! Opportunity cost, you see.”

Bottom line, he’s now got nothing. Just like the Leafs.

I fail to see the logic in the metaphor. In fact, I get the gambling, "mystery box", vibe from people pining over a hypothetical package highlighted by a 2nd round pick. Or the possibility of the 2nd round pick being packaged for a higher pick. Its a whole lot of intangible, contrived asset imagination vs. the tangible player's contribution.

If JVR re-signs (heaven forbid, imo), does the viewpoint of said fan change? Or are they more upset, stating "see, we could have gotten an asset or two for him, and still re-signed him." At what point does the speculation end?

 

[Daisy Jane]

I fail to see the logic in the metaphor. In fact, I get the gambling, "mystery box", vibe from people pining over a hypothetical package highlighted by a 2nd round pick. Or the possibility of the 2nd round pick being packaged for a higher pick. Its a whole lot of intangible, contrived asset imagination vs. the tangible player's contribution.

If JVR re-signs (heaven forbid, imo), does the viewpoint of said fan change? Or are they more upset, stating "see, we could have gotten an asset or two for him, and still re-signed him." At what point does the speculation end?

i think if JVR re-signs, there will be a lot of crank(ier) Leafs fans.

 

[thewave]

You had me onboard until "left with a bunch of inexperienced kids for next year".

Do the math on the avg team age. The point isn't a knock on kids, it's that normal development would have this year as gaining experience and next a hard run. Losing JVR Bozak is a step back. We may need to trade Jake or other to fix the inbalance as well. Perhaps even Kadri may go, we don't know.

Don't take that as a slight. The kids are good, they should have gained experience this year and it was a miscalculation.

 

[ShaneFalco]

i think if JVR re-signs, there will be a lot of crank(ier) Leafs fans.

I'll be one of them