Confirmed with Link: (TOR/COL) Leafs Acquire Colin Smith + 4th Round Pick in 2016 for Shawn Matthias

[crump]

a 4th rd.pick
how exciting

Missing the first part of your sentence pif ..."Hunter with a 4th round pick, how exciting!"

 

[Ovate]

Wouldn't be surprised to see Matthias get re-signed by the Avs.

 

[burpsalot]

I'm like 80% sure we will be trading up for specific players Hunter wants.

Lou even said 13 draft picks is a bit too much.. I know there can never be enough picks ve we also need to sign these players eventually and some may not have a decent shot at a good look because of how full we are.

So trading up for better quality and a higher floor type players is what I expect. Our pool is big enough.

More picks mean more success. I could see us getting rid of a few later picks in order to get more quality picks though. In other words, if PAP gets us a 3rd but we want to haggle for more, does PAP & a 6th get us a 2nd. But on draft day does that 2nd get us a later 2nd & a 3rd.

I want us to get as many draft picks as possible, but preferably most in the 4th round & earlier. We'll keep our 1st first though.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

Wouldn't be surprised to see Matthias get re-signed by the Avs.

Good for him. At least his prove-it contract would be successful in parlaying into another contract, hopefully with some more term. Unlike Winnik, there isn't any space for him on next year's team. Bottom 6 should be filled with Marlies and vets like Greening, Winnik and Froese (considering he has a full season under his belt now).

 

[Krylian]

And...here...we...go!

It begins.

It didn't begin with Phaneuf?

 

[Mikeyg]

people who suggest that we are going to bundle picks to move up are so out of touch with reality. Smart teams don't trade up. Hunter knows this, shanny knows this, lou knows this. If the pick is positioned near the end of a skill cluster, you pick there. If there are lots of players in that cluster you like, you trade back. "Our pool is full enough" is a joke of a comment. We still need top d prospects, top goalie prospects, a top 2 C prospect, among other things. We need everything people, we arent in a position to start getting picky and burning picks to move up. More picks = more chances to address some of these needs. It's been proven time and time again that you get more value with more picks than you do with trading up at the cost of picks.

Also I don't understand how some of you still fail to comprehend the kessel trade. We still own their 2016 2nd rounder people, if they make the playoffs they get the 2016 2nd and we get their 2016 first. No playoffs = we keep the 2nd and the 1st defers with the other conditions to next year.

 

[Riellyfan04]

was expected with these UFAs. hoping more!!!

 

[Krylian]

I'd assume Smith is just a contract coming back.

He is. His ELC expires after this season and he probably won't get qualified.

 

[Ovate]

people who suggest that we are going to bundle picks to move up are so out of touch with reality. Smart teams don't trade up. Hunter knows this, shanny knows this, lou knows this. If the pick is positioned near the end of a skill cluster, you pick there. If there are lots of players in that cluster you like, you trade back. "Our pool is full enough" is a joke of a comment. We still need top d prospects, top goalie prospects, a top 2 C prospect, among other things. We need everything people, we arent in a position to start getting picky and burning picks to move up. More picks = more chances to address some of these needs. It's been proven time and time again that you get more value with more picks than you do with trading up at the cost of picks.

Also I don't understand how some of you still fail to comprehend the kessel trade. We still own their 2016 2nd rounder people, if they make the playoffs they get the 2016 2nd and we get their 2016 first. No playoffs = we keep the 2nd and the 1st defers with the other conditions to next year.

It really hasn't been proven. The allocations of "value" to each pick is based on some deeply flawed assumptions. It clearly doesn't apply to individual cases. If you're near the top of a skill cluster, you certainly should trade up and get the better player. We're not going to add a top D, G or C prospect by trading back and hoping we luck on to one in the later rounds. Even looking at last year's draft, our best prospects from the later rounds are Nielsen and Timashov. Certainly doing well, but still total longshots to be great NHL players.

There are a ton of times when trading up has worked out well for a team. Karlsson is a great example. Trading up to grab him was the best move Ottawa has made in the last decade.

And people understand how the Kessel trade works. It's just that there's a 99% chance of the Penguins making the playoffs, so people assume we'll have their first.

 

[Menzinger]

In terms of odds of getting an NHLer - there really isn't a huge difference between picks 3-7th.

Hunter did some very interesting things last draft - getting an extra pick for him to work his magic for a player who wouldn't be resigned is great.

 

[Bullseye]

4th round pick = 9,912 views wtf?

 

[Bluelines]

I'm like 80% sure we will be trading up for specific players Hunter wants.

Lou even said 13 draft picks is a bit too much.. I know there can never be enough picks ve we also need to sign these players eventually and some may not have a decent shot at a good look because of how full we are.

So trading up for better quality and a higher floor type players is what I expect. Our pool is big enough.

That many picks becomes a problem if it pushes us over the Reserve List max player threshold.

We can have 80 players on the reserve list defined as:

Reserve Lists
The list of players "belonging" to an NHL team is comprised of the following, the total of which may not exceed 80:
Pro players (maximum of 50)
Signed junior players (who have played less than 11 professional games)
Unsigned draft choices
Defected players (unsigned draft choices who are playing in Europe)

I can't find how many players we have under the reserve lists, anyone have a link?

 

[SeaOfBlue]

He is. His ELC expires after this season and he probably won't get qualified.

Once again, I don't know about that. On a crap team without much offensive support, he was 3rd (or T-16 in the AHL). If you transfer those numbers over to the offensively stacked Marlies (who are like 21 goals over 2nd place in the AHL), he'd be 6th. Plus he's only 23 years of age. I think he gets a cheap QA to play for the Leafs next year, to keep some of the younger guys from coming up early while still having some youth in our Leafs line up.

 

[Bluelines]

In terms of odds of getting an NHLer - there really isn't a huge difference between picks 3-7th.

Hunter did some very interesting things last draft - getting an extra pick for him to work his magic for a player who wouldn't be resigned is great.

Interesting odds on playing 100 games or more depending on where you are picked.

http://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-expected-value-of-nhl-draft-picks-1.317819

 

[Mikeyg]

It really hasn't been proven. The allocations of "value" to each pick is based on some deeply flawed assumptions. It clearly doesn't apply to individual cases. If you're near the top of a skill cluster, you certainly should trade up and get the better player. We're not going to add a top D, G or C prospect by trading back and hoping we luck on to one in the later rounds. Even looking at last year's draft, our best prospects from the later rounds are Nielsen and Timashov. Certainly doing well, but still total longshots to be great NHL players.

There are a ton of times when trading up has worked out well for a team. Karlsson is a great example. Trading up to grab him was the best move Ottawa has made in the last decade.

And people understand how the Kessel trade works. It's just that there's a 99% chance of the Penguins making the playoffs, so people assume we'll have their first.

Nope, there are way to many holes in this argument you present. First, the value doesn't change between the beginning and end of a cluster. Hunter clusters prospects based on skill. Therefore, within a cluster it shouldn't matter which prospect you pick, since they are all similarly valued. This is where things like safety and positional needs come into play. So your first argument is flawed.

Your second argument is also flawed because you didn't read what I said. You never would trade back out of a cluster. So this right here "We're not going to add a top D, G or C prospect by trading back and hoping we luck on to one in the later rounds." is nonsense. Hunter has publicly stated that they make the pick if the cluster is close to ending or they don't like anyone else there. You dont trade back from cluster to cluster, you trade back within the same cluster. Therefore you maintain value and you gain assets.

There's just way to many holes in your line of thinking. By trading back within the same cluster, you don't lose value for your asset. Hunter ranks these guys based on skill and talent almost exclusively. If a group of players all have similar talent/skill, you are picking one of the similarly skilled players anyways so you mise well trade back within the cluster to acquire additional assets. If players 5-10 are all similarly skilled, as long as I get player 10, I have successfully acquired a player in that cluster range. That's the goal.

Also heres proof of the concept: https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2016...and-kyle-dubas-may-have-outplayed-the-league/

 

[Canada4Gold]

He is. His ELC expires after this season and he probably won't get qualified.

doubt it, his QO would be very small, basically meaningless, if they see anything in him they'll qualify him sign him for a year, maybe 2 and let him play center on the marlies next year. What centers will we have on the Marlies next year? Gauthier? Might as well keep this guy for another year and see if he turns into anything.

He's younger than someone like Hyman, and putting up just as good of a season on a worse team. He's not some Tyler Biggs scrub contract throw in. 0.6 ppg is quite impressive on a bad team.

 

[A1LeafNation]

This means Marlies are losing a center if Smith is a replacement; probably Nylander.

If the Leafs get Nylander, does that mean Bozak is gone?

 

[showtime8]

Once again, I don't know about that. On a crap team without much offensive support, he was 3rd (or T-16 in the AHL). If you transfer those numbers over to the offensively stacked Marlies (who are like 21 goals over 2nd place in the AHL), he'd be 6th. Plus he's only 23 years of age. I think he gets a cheap QA to play for the Leafs next year, to keep some of the younger guys from coming up early while still having some youth in our Leafs line up.

You also have the ability to play him for a full year with the Marlies.

If the expectation is to have Nylander graduate to the Leafs next year, the depth isn't very promising.

That basically leaves Carrick, Gauthier & Findlay at the moment without signing any AHL contracts or have anyone come up from junior/NCAA. Actually not sure on Toninato or Cameranesi.

But, they need a couple bridge players like Arcobello and I'm sure Smith can fill the void.

 

[TheProspector]

I think most thought Shawn was going to potentially beworth a little more in trade, but this guy obviously wasn't the quality of player is flukey goal scoring seasons indicated he might be.

It was a mediocre and slightly overpaid pickup, and we should be pretty glad there was a market for him.

 

[LeafalCrusader]

This means Marlies are losing a center if Smith is a replacement; probably Nylander.

If the Leafs get Nylander, does that mean Bozak is gone?

They already lost two recently in Rupert and Arcobello.

 

[Razz]

people who suggest that we are going to bundle picks to move up are so out of touch with reality. Smart teams don't trade up. Hunter knows this, shanny knows this, lou knows this. If the pick is positioned near the end of a skill cluster, you pick there. If there are lots of players in that cluster you like, you trade back. "Our pool is full enough" is a joke of a comment. We still need top d prospects, top goalie prospects, a top 2 C prospect, among other things. We need everything people, we arent in a position to start getting picky and burning picks to move up. More picks = more chances to address some of these needs. It's been proven time and time again that you get more value with more picks than you do with trading up at the cost of picks.

Also I don't understand how some of you still fail to comprehend the kessel trade. We still own their 2016 2nd rounder people, if they make the playoffs they get the 2016 2nd and we get their 2016 first. No playoffs = we keep the 2nd and the 1st defers with the other conditions to next year.

If there was no 50 contract limit, I'd agree with a lot of what you said, but since there is, I don't.

The Leafs can only stockpile picks for so long before it becomes a problem. At some point you have to consolidate, whether it's sending a bunch of guys off like we did in the Phaneuf Trade or the Grabner trade or we start consolidating picks for higher talent players.

The mindset of more is better is not always correct. There are only so many youngsters that an organization can bear before you start letting them go. I'd rather they draft smarter rather than just draft quantity and hope the odds get better. That works fine for a team needing prospects, the Leafs are no longer that team. Case in point - The Marlies.

 

[A1LeafNation]

They already lost two recently in Rupert and Arcobello.

but only beause of injury which shouldnt be the case soon.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

doubt it, his QO would be very small, basically meaningless, if they see anything in him they'll qualify him sign him for a year, maybe 2 and let him play center on the marlies next year. What centers will we have on the Marlies next year? Gauthier? Might as well keep this guy for another year and see if he turns into anything.

He's younger than someone like Hyman, and putting up just as good of a season on a worse team. He's not some Tyler Biggs scrub contract throw in. 0.6 ppg is quite impressive on a bad team.

Most likely one of Hyman or Smith will be in the NHL next year. The other could easily be a top 6 center for the Marlies. Smith will have to pass through waivers next year however, so if he really turns on the jets with the Marlies, he may not make it back.

Gauthier is a top 9 center. Leipsic can be a top 6 center if necessary (especially since we have a lot of depth on the wings). Cameranesi may be brought in if he's not traded (PPG in the NCAA). Then we have some good young guys on AHL contracts in Foster, Vail and Findlay to pick from. All are around PPG in the ECHL, if not more. Then whoever else we decide to bring in on AHL or two-way deals to play for the Marlies.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

but only beause of injury which shouldnt be the case soon.

Well they traded Rupert, and they could very well trade Arcobello soon too.

Bringing in Smith doesn't mean anyone is being called up. If anything, it's just an upgrade on Findlay or play 2C to make our team that much better. He also plays RW, so he could be upgrading someone there also.

 

[Clark4Ever]

Lou is going to get squeeze everything he can out of our castoffs. That is more than anyone could have reasonably expected for Mathias given his performance this season.