Confirmed with Link: [TOR/ANA] Frederik Andersen for 30th Overall + 2017 2nd Round Pick

[shakes]

You think 10 days a ago a majority would have preferred moving a 1st and 2nd and giving out a 5X5 deal to a goalie with 130 games of experience?

I think most would have laughed at the thought of Shanahan and Lou Lam pulling a Nonis/JFJ-like goaltending move in the lead up to the draft.

Like I said earlier...first trade in 2 years where I felt like we were back in an era of "make the playoffs at all costs" rather then the patient pain enduring rebuild we were told was coming and apparently only had to last a season and a half.

You are really reaching with this post. If either of those picks were used to pick some maybe goalie or player, no one would have said anything, even if they busted like so many prospects do. However, since the Leafs used two picks in two different years to get a fairly proven commodity, now all of a sudden they are going off some path? The Leafs have always said that they weren't above trading for players as long as they fit the mold of the team. Freddie is 26 years old and is good. In what reality is this a "make the playoffs at all costs" trade?

 

[BertCorbeau]

Yep and that's fair.

Giving this group the benefit of the doubt over the last few groups definitely makes sense.

My biggest complaint about Bernier, that I assume management agrees with and did heavy scouting on Andersen in regards to the same, is his mental game. I honestly think he's more concerned with being a celebrity hockey player with the reality show wife then he is about being a top 5 NHL goaltender.

If Andersen's mental game is strong then he should have no issues in this market.

All Lou Lam had to do to test his mental game was make Freddy sit in a dark room staring at the Babcock stare for an extended period of time to see if he flinches.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Should be a few teams that would look to make a move out of fear of the expansion draft.

Without really looking I can think of the following:

Lack or Ward
Greiss or Halak
Schneider or Kinkaid
Miller or Markstrom

Probably more on the market causing prices to drop a bit if we waited until next year.

That's what I see too - and to be honest I'm happy with the Andersen trade even more now. I can't saw any of those options are more appealing (I'm not including the Schneider one because there isn't a chance Jersey considers moving him over Kinkaid)

You have to think management considered options now and who would be coming up next year because of the expansion draft, and went with "their" guy ... There's risk, no doubt, but there's always a risk for goalies unfortunately. Maybe the Leafs actually get one that pan out for once - I think we've overdue.

 

[darrylsittler27]

One thing is certain....

It has potential to be one bad move. Since we don't know who may drop to 30th or how Andersen will fare here. If I was GM, it would take a lot to convince me to do this trade, especially now. There is a piece missing in the rationale here, unless Lou thinks he is as good or better than Schneider. I am curious where Lou rates him in the ranks of number one goalies currently playing.

 

[LWOSLEAFS]

My question is: what do those who are against this trade expect?

If we hypothetically acquire Bishop that is 5.9m a year for an aging goaltender, who right now is great, but will not fit the age of the group - especially when we compete.
On top of this, we would give up 30th pick, 2nd, Kapanen level prospect and potentially more. EVERYONE WOULD BE FREAKING OUT. The same people complaining about the Andersen deal would be saying "should have gotten Andersen for a cheaper price".
If we hypothetically got a goaltender like Calvin Pickard who has no playoff experience, 36 games played with a small sample to draw from - EVERYONE WOULD BE FREAKING OUT. The same people complaining about the Andersen deal would be saying "Should have gotten Andersen, a more mature & slightly experienced goaltender".
If we stick with Bernier (which I was originally hoping for) then we miss the boat on Andersen - who is a perfect fit for our organization and our immediate and future needs.
Yes, we could draft a goaltender and wait 7 years while we just hop from one **** goalie to the next.

Some of you fans are never happy, but this is the best avenue to take at this time. He could turn out to be a complete dud but that is the risk you take with ANY young goaltender.

Point being: We do not have the proper assets to acquire a Bishop, nor does someone over 28/29 fit the Toronto Maple Leafs culture. It has been obvious since day 1 that Management is not high on Bernier. And I am sure management has done their homework on Freddy.

Provide a better alternative and try rationalizing it before claiming that this hockey move is the wrong move.

Short answer: PATIENCE. There was no need to make a 25 million dollar goaltending commitment yesterday. Zero. Bernier is in a contract year. Since the deadline, he had nobody like Reimer chipping at his heels and played decently down the stretch. This would have been the year to let him acquit himself and look at a deal around the deadline for a goalie with some term for the next few years. Fleury would have been ideal. And the notion that coming to Toronto would equate to throwing in the towel as Andi Petrillo suggested today on Leafs Lunch isn't altogether true either. Ideally, he plays 60 games for the next two years and gets traded to a contender in 2019. Im sure he'd rather play meaningful hockey in a major market with a great lifestyle than ride the pine in PITT or end up in some non-traditional market where hockey means almost nothing.

That 30-pick might have been better utilized by picking up a depth forward or a defender like Lucas Johansen. A later pick would land them a Parsons or a Fitzpatrick, and those guys are probably at least future 1B types.

The Leafs didn't need to anoint a starter, especially one who has never played 60 games in an NHL season. I don't get the lack of patience.

 

[Jack Bauer]

You are really reaching with this post. If either of those picks were used to pick some maybe goalie or player, no one would have said anything, even if they busted like so many prospects do. However, since the Leafs used two picks in two different years to get a fairly proven commodity, now all of a sudden they are going off some path? The Leafs have always said that they weren't above trading for players as long as they fit the mold of the team. Freddie is 26 years old and is good. In what reality is this a "make the playoffs at all costs" trade?

I didn't say that was currently reality. I said the move brought me back to the era when that was the only plan in place. 2 different things.

We're already back to the building vs rebuilding topic. Picks in this thread are worthless maybe's when 2 weeks ago those maybe's were what our rebuilding plan was focused on and why Hunter was being given all those picks to worth with because finding good players with 2 or 3 picks in that range is either then with say 0 or 1 like we always had in the past.

And as will continue to be brought up, it's not just the picks. It's picks plus term of extension that many are discussion. They go together when you commit to the player immediately like we have.

I'm taking your word that he's good because I haven't seen enough to be sure of that. I thought Bernier and Toskala were good, too.

 

[Mess]

Leaf fans...

Trade away a 27 year old, $8 million Conn Smythe finalist for draft picks "Whoohoo it's all part of the plan"

Trade away those draft picks for a 26 year old, $5 million back up goalie and make him your starter "Woohoo it's all part of the plan"

Perfect sense.

But that is the glass half empty perspective so here is the glass half full.

1) Take a product that is broken and doesn't work.

Tear it to the ground, scorching the earth dumping Kessel and Phaneuf and recaputing $15 mil in cap X 7 years (minus retention)

Draft rebuild by finishing as low as possible in the standings to obtain the highest pick and best lottery odds. Finishing 30th without Phil and Dion and winning the lottery to select #1OA your big #1 franchise center a perfect outcome.

2) Take a product that is at the bottom and build it back up again.

Spend $5 mil on a starting #1G, and perhaps $10 mil on Stamkos (reinvesting the $15 mil you saved and recaptured when you dealt Kessel and Phaneuf.

Come back stronger and better and younger with Andersen, Stamkos?, Matthews, (+Kapanen and Harrington) for about the same cap hit you invested in the broken team to start.

Whoohoo it's all part of the plan" - 1 step back to move many steps forward.

 

[Daisy Jane]

you're going to get a wide range of opinions on every move because we have more fans than any other team in the league.

This move is by no means a no brainer. At the end of the day we paid $5 for 5 years for a guy who had essentially the same numbers as James Reimer. If James was playing for the Ducks, do you not think his numbers would have improved vs. his numbers here?

If we had paid $5M x 5 for JR, would you be happy with that just because its better to be positive than it is to be negative? I would have been pissed, because I dont think JR will ever be a starter on a good team in the NHL.

Andersen put up average starter numbers, and is now being paid like an average starter with above average term. That means all the risk is in our court. If Ansdersen becomes the Clarkson of goalies (good couple seasons, then flops for us), then were screwed for half a decade. Thats not something to just go "well, hopefully it all works out". Its a risky move, it deserves to be critiqued.

i didn't say it didn't deserve to be critiqued.

like i pointed out - i don't see where the cheaper options would have been. going by everything being said by management, having crap/shaky goaltending next year was never going to be an option.

What I am saying is - why is it automatically default = bad. or default = negative thinking. It very easily could blow up in our face. It could. I'm not denying it. but it equally could work out for us. for the most part people always want to look at the dinged side of the penny. all I am saying is - it takes the same amount of energy to be critical, but look at the positive side of things, as it does being critical and only see the negative.

but from where i am seeing it - any goalie we got would have had the same issue. having really good numbers, then going to a team that isn't very good - is going to be a risk, unless you are elite. and I don't think we really are at a place to give up those assets yet.

 

[Jack Bauer]

That's what I see too - and to be honest I'm happy with the Andersen trade even more now. I can't saw any of those options are more appealing (I'm not including the Schneider one because there isn't a chance Jersey considers moving him over Kinkaid)

You have to think management considered options now and who would be coming up next year because of the expansion draft, and went with "their" guy ... There's risk, no doubt, but there's always a risk for goalies unfortunately. Maybe the Leafs actually get one that pan out for once - I think we've overdue.

What about Kinkaid in a years time? Maybe he costs the same but would he be any less proven? He's the only one from those I listed that I can see available and a team willing to spend the assets on at that point.

No doubt we're overdue for luck to tilt towards our side on this stuff.

 

[Daisy Jane]

All Lou Lam had to do to test his mental game was make Freddy sit in a dark room staring at the Babcock stare for an extended period of time to see if he flinches.

and Lou in the corner saying nothing. Poor Matthews couldn't handle the silent Lou.

 

[A1LeafNation]

You know you got a good one when you shut HFboards up with stats:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2093199

 

[Jack Bauer]

But that is the glass half empty perspective so here is the glass half full.

1) Take a product that is broken and doesn't work.

Tear it to the ground, scorching the earth dumping Kessel and Phaneuf and recaputing $15 mil in cap X 7 years (minus retention)

Draft rebuild by finishing as low as possible in the standings to obtain the highest pick and best lottery odds. Finishing 30th without Phil and Dion and winning the lottery to select #1OA you big #1 franchise center.

2) Take a product that is at the bottom and build it back up.

Spend $5 mil on a starting #1G, and perhaps $10 mil on Stamkos (reinvesting the $15 mil you saved and recaputed when you dealt Kessel and Phaneuf.

Come back stronger and better and younger with Andersen, Stamkos, Matthews, (+Kapanen and Harrington) for about the same cap hit you invested in the broken team to start.

Whoohoo it's all part of the plan"

As long as your money is spent on the Leafs #1G for 5 years and not the Marlies #1G after Christmas.

 

[drfunc]

I love it. The timing may never have been perfect but clearly Lou and co. targeted Anderson and were able to get their man. We're not going to tank every year hoping for high picks.

Who knows what Edmonton could have done with a real goalie the last couple of years. It sure can't hurt the development of our youngers players having a guy back there they can trust. I think Anderson can be that guy. In our management team I trust.

 

[Joey Hoser]

Short answer: PATIENCE. There was no need to make a 25 million dollar goaltending commitment yesterday. Zero. Bernier is in a contract year. Since the deadline, he had nobody like Reimer chipping at his heels and played decently down the stretch. This would have been the year to let him acquit himself and look at a deal around the deadline for a goalie with some term for the next few years. Fleury would have been ideal. And the notion that coming to Toronto would equate to throwing in the towel as Andi Petrillo suggested today on Leafs Lunch isn't altogether true either. Ideally, he plays 60 games for the next two years and gets traded to a contender in 2019. Im sure he'd rather play meaningful hockey in a major market with a great lifestyle than ride the pine in PITT or end up in some non-traditional market where hockey means almost nothing.

That 30-pick might have been better utilized by picking up a depth forward or a defender like Lucas Johansen. A later pick would land them a Parsons or a Fitzpatrick, and those guys are probably at least future 1B types.

The Leafs didn't need to anoint a starter, especially one who has never played 60 games in an NHL season. I don't get the lack of patience.

I made a few arguments already as to why having competent goaltending now is worthwhile, which you ignored.

As for the bolded, assuming second-or-later round picked goalies will become "at least" 1B goaltender, is frankly absurd. If that were remotely true, then you would be totally right, but just no.

 

[Jack Bauer]

I made a few arguments already as to why having competent goaltending now is worthwhile, which you ignored.

As for the bolded, assuming second-or-later round picked goalies will become "at least" 1B goaltender, is frankly absurd. If that were remotely true, then you would be totally right, but just no.

I agree with you in regards to the prospects.

Some of those kids are having troubles at the junior level with becoming trusted #1 goalies.

This might sounds insane but the best thing for goalie development might be not even being able to draft them until they're 19 or 20 because at 17/18 there's way too much unknown which is why goalies are trending way down in drafts lately.

If we could pick 2 prospects and assume 1 at least becomes a 1B then that would be great but it doesn't happen that way.

It's easily the most volatile position in hockey. Perhaps in all of pro sports.

 

[Vexed]

I agree with you in regards to the prospects.

Some of those kids are having troubles at the junior level with becoming trusted #1 goalies.

This might sounds insane but the best thing for goalie development might be not even being able to draft them until they're 19 or 20 because at 17/18 there's way too much unknown which is why goalies are trending way down in drafts lately.

If we could pick 2 prospects and assume 1 at least becomes a 1B then that would be great but it doesn't happen that way.

It's easily the most volatile position in hockey. Perhaps in all of pro sports.

Yea if you could tell me a goalie would have say a 50% chance of being 1b, he would be picked in the top 10

 

[Morgs]

Found this, thought it was interesting. Not sure if it was posted yet.

 

[Jeypic]

Bishop/Vasilevski will be available. You could also widen that to include potentially elite goalies.

I'll say this though. It's amusing to see some of the same posters who anointed Reimer as a starter despite lacking the work load in any of his seasons now dismissing every season like that by Andersen.

Bishop will be a ufa that summer, and not subjected to the expansion draft from my understanding.
http://nypost.com/2016/06/07/nhl-teams-dont-have-to-protect-2017-free-agents-in-expansion-draft/

 

[TheDoldrums]

Found this, thought it was interesting. Not sure if it was posted yet.

I mean...we all know Reimer was amazing last year. The problem is his career stats make that look like an outlier, not something that should be expected in the future.

 

[Muston Atthews]

It has potential to be one bad move. Since we don't know who may drop to 30th or how Andersen will fare here. If I was GM, it would take a lot to convince me to do this trade, especially now. There is a piece missing in the rationale here, unless Lou thinks he is as good or better than Schneider. I am curious where Lou rates him in the ranks of number one goalies currently playing.

Trading 30th overall + a future second = trading the 9th overall pick?

I fail to see the math here. Why should Andersen be as good or better than Schneider?

 

[saltming]

You’re not just getting what you have in Andersen now. You’re getting a goaltender who is motivated to constantly evolve, to constantly improve, and he’s always looking for details in his game where he can get better.

Woodley: Understandably, and yet he never let it become an issue in the Ducks locker room, right? Credit to him there. Again, we didn’t hear much from him when John Gibson started in the playoffs. As I said, I thought that was the wrong call. He took a shot in practice, and then wasn’t really well diagnosed; they tried to get him to play a couple nights later in Edmonton and he wasn’t right, so he missed some time. He was kind of the victim of circumstances a little bit. He had not missed that time and needed a little time to get back, maybe he is the guy for the Ducks. I believe firmly – and I get to say this because I said it before the playoffs started – Freddie should’ve been the number one there. Not that Gibson was bad, but they needed better than that. I just think there were just some situations there where there were some saves that I see Freddie Andersen making.

https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2016...hares-wealth-of-insight-on-frederik-andersen/

I think we have a winner here. Woodley talks a lot about Andersen's work ethic and drive to get better.

Remember at the start of the season there was 1 team worse than the Toronto Maple Leafs. It was the Ducks. They couldn't score. Andersen had a .940 save % and under 2 GAA in that time.
Welcome to Toronto Freddie.

Gosh could you imagine Freddie Andersen and Freddie the goat standing together!!

 

[Drew75]

Short answer: PATIENCE. There was no need to make a 25 million dollar goaltending commitment yesterday. Zero. Bernier is in a contract year. Since the deadline, he had nobody like Reimer chipping at his heels and played decently down the stretch. This would have been the year to let him acquit himself and look at a deal around the deadline for a goalie with some term for the next few years. Fleury would have been ideal. And the notion that coming to Toronto would equate to throwing in the towel as Andi Petrillo suggested today on Leafs Lunch isn't altogether true either. Ideally, he plays 60 games for the next two years and gets traded to a contender in 2019. Im sure he'd rather play meaningful hockey in a major market with a great lifestyle than ride the pine in PITT or end up in some non-traditional market where hockey means almost nothing.

That 30-pick might have been better utilized by picking up a depth forward or a defender like Lucas Johansen. A later pick would land them a Parsons or a Fitzpatrick, and those guys are probably at least future 1B types.

The Leafs didn't need to anoint a starter, especially one who has never played 60 games in an NHL season. I don't get the lack of patience.

First off, If Parsons or Fitzpatrick are there at 30, there is a pretty damn good chance they will be there at 31. They may even, and at least one likely WILL be there at 57. Trading for Anderson does NOT mean the Leafs are no longer allowed to draft a goalie this week-end.

Personally - I think the timing is perfect. Anderson is turning 27 in October - he's entering his prime. We will have a roster with a significant number of kids on it, and having competent goaltending means that every mistake they make will not show up on the scoreboard. I actually hope they keep Bernier until at least the Trade Deadline in order to shelter Sparks & Bibeau who are clearly not ready - nor should they be due to age & experience.

Anderson has had an above average save percentage at every level of professional hockey. He is a #1 goalie in the NHL right now. He will buy us the time to draft and develop his replacement - whomever that may be.

People are acting like we just traded for a 37 year old goalie. As far as I can see, Bishop would cost a TONNE, and not necessarily be that much better. MAF is a non-starter. Elliot is too old. Other options like Subban & Kinkaid are completely unproven and too big of a risk.

Lou got the best available goalie at the best possible age for the rebuild. Solid goaltending is like having veterans in your lineup - necessary to avoiding Edmontonitis. The cost was in line if not better than what San Jose paid for Jones and Buffalo paid for Lehner. Anyone drafted at #30 would have been 4 years away from having an impact if at all.

 

[NikoEhlers]

Andersen couldn't consistently hold down the #1 goalie job on his own team which is why he was available and not Gibson. He's also 26 and not 18.

The Ducks only parted with Andersen because they could not afford him and had Gibson on a favourable contract already. They are not a cap team and got other key contracts to worry about too. What Toronto also get with Andersen is a guy who has proven he can step his play up for the playoffs. I think Andersen have taken big steps forward the last few seasons with the Ducks, it has been a good place to grow for him, and he has not reached his potential yet I think.

 

[Unhealthy Scratch]

I mean...we all know Reimer was amazing last year. The problem is his career stats make that look like an outlier, not something that should be expected in the future.

Yeah, one thing I like about Andersen's stats is their consistency.

- .920 or above in all three seasons in Denmark
- .943 in the SHL
- .930 in the AHL
- .918 in the NHL so far, never once dipping below .914 in the men's pro ranks (which coincidentally is the average save percentage in the NHL over the past five seasons)

Basically we have a goaltender who, at his worst, is about average, and at his best, is at least slightly above average. I think that's more suited to a rebuilding team's needs, rather than a guy who is absolutely lights-out one game and flopping all over the place the next.

I'd be interested to see a chart comparing Andersen/Reimer's past three combined seasons.

 

[LWOSLEAFS]

I made a few arguments already as to why having competent goaltending now is worthwhile, which you ignored.

As for the bolded, assuming second-or-later round picked goalies will become "at least" 1B goaltender, is frankly absurd. If that were remotely true, then you would be totally right, but just no.

I ignored nothing. Bernier in a contract year, is every bit as capable of a lights-out campaign as Reimer was last year, in his.

Those goalies slated to go in the 2nd or 3rd round this year have the upside I described them as having. Nothing absurd there at all. Is that a lock? Never is with goalies. Ever. But the tools are there in this case, and with patience, in a structured, winning environment, a Carter Hart, Evan Fitzpatrick or a Tyler Parsons could emerge 5-6 years from now. Matt Murray went 83rd. Martin Jones was undrafted. Petr Mrazek went 141st. Andersen went 187th. Why is absurd to suggest a third rounder could emerge as a 1B?