189lb enforcers? Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 5 minutes ago, oldnews said: Actually, what some of mock the Leafs for is specifically NOT doing so. Rolling with a lottery blueline years in a row while having a 'contention' worthy top 6 (although Matthews isn't yet the kind of playoff impact player they need/ed him to be). They had Travis Dermott playing with Jake Gardiner getting rekt in their 3rd straight 1st round exit. The Leafs did not build a viable playoff 4th line - and wound up using Tavares as their principal hard minutes/dzone start center in the playoffs - with Mitch friggin Marner out there blocking shots and attempting to preserve leads in the closing minutes of games. Gauthier, Tyler Ennis....are you kidding me? That is on Dubas. And as opposed to making deals to bring in the right complements (ala Miller) - they instead gave 18.75 million to Marleau - while - if we're talking about relative mocking here - a whole lot of people mock the idea of giving (younger) Beagle or Roussel types a fraction of that. The Leafs desperately could have used a Beagle - a legit shutdown, elite faceoff guy.... Benning - appropriately - insulates his young core. The Leafs on the other hand - have watched year after year as their one component - their skilled forwards - get dispatched in the first round because the rest of the supporting cast is entirely incapable of handling their opponents' depth. Sounds like the Canucks. Seriously. And had the Canucks made the playoffs in any of the last few years, it could be argued that each point you cite here could also apply to them. I’m not going to spend anytime on this this summer. It’s money in the bank to me and let’s wait and see which assessment is closer to the truth. The Leafs core is pretty much exactly the age of the Canucks, neither’s window is closing so there’s lots of time left for this to play out. I’m hoping it’s today, just for the sake of this discussion. Like I said, I hope the Leafs nail a few trades just so I can listen to the reactions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post oldnews Posted June 25, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 25, 2019 (edited) 26 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said: As have the Canucks. ... as have the Canucks. I am almost hoping the Leafs pull of a few big trades to secure their D so that I can read the rage in here about them, but from new angles and narratives. I’d rather start with the Leafs’ issues than almost any other team’s as an incoming GM. Why do people make out as if the Leafs are doomed? They are suffocating from a luxury of riches, yet it’s portrayed as if they are incapable of controlling the outcome. You’d think that with all of their assets, even in the AHL, they could arrange a few trades to place them squarely in the elite category of the contender class. The Leafs made a big trade - that some of us complimented - to improve their blueline - Muzzin. However, in spite of the credit given there, these things remained: 1) Muzzin is a LHD - when their principal need was a RHD upgrade. They still wound up having to rolll with a pairing of Gardiner Dermott in the playoffs - nowhere near a viable contending blueline still. So if they're going to go in, they didn't go all-in enough. 2) The price for Muzzin was a 1st, Grundstrom, and Durzi. Muzzin is 29 with 1 year of term remaining. That imo is not as good value as Miller, but there was more of a desperation and window context they were working within, so the expenditure is understandable. 3) But equally important to their principal need being a RHD (Muzzin was arguably a secondary need) - they also did not have a playoff bottom six - they lost the likes of Bozak and Komarov, and replaced them with....Gauthier and Ennis? Sorry - but get real. The Leafs are not doomed - they just are not 'finished' any rebuild - and they haven't shown the abllity to identify the need to flill out their roster, let alone execute that vital part of their build - Dubas seems content year after year to believe his core of shiny forwards is going to propel them to contending regardless of the holes in the supporting cast. They have time to correct those things - but they've also been spending 1sts on arguably secondary need (Muzzin), another 1st to dump Marleau, are losing Hainsey - and Gardiner to free agency - and are still in a tight cap situation. They have difficult, but not impossible work to be done - but looking at their performance in what they apparently considered a window - I don't have a great deal of confidence that they're the proper-rebuild stars they were made out to be. I think Babcock is actually the best hockey mind in the lot - and there are plenty of indicators that he and the Spamaplan aren't necessarily on the same page at various times. Anyhow - when they start building the type of team I like, I'll be all over that bandwagon - but as long as they continue with the Coiler model - I'm going to cringe. If people here want to talk 'desperation' for a right side defenseman - the Leafs are losing Hainsey - by a landslide the best guy they had on the right side - they are left with a guy (Zaitsev) they are looking to cap dump - and beyond that....what? They had a young guy over his head - Dermott - playing his off-side. The Canucks - with Tanev - and Stecher - while also having cap space - are in world's better shape right now on the right side of their blueline -than last year's self-proclaimed "Stanely Cup favorites". Edited June 25, 2019 by oldnews 2 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 10 hours ago, The Lock said: I think he's a good contract and if you're talking just in terms of contract, then his contract is at a good discount. However, trade wise, I think it was a deal that just worked for both sides. No, asking in terms of the player, what someone like him would be worth to acquire at any given point, his actual value. To wit: 2 hours ago, aGENT said: As I said a couple pages ago, Miller under that contract, is likely worth a first, a solid prospect and a 3rd/4th +/- under 'normal' circumstances. So we saved on the prospect IMO by only giving up a throw away goalie instead. Exactly THIS. We got him at a discount. I think people seriously overvalue first round picks as if they are as good as actual players. They are tickets to potential assets, ones that can be stars or complete duds. You don't just pick up firsts and assume that you've got top-pairing D and top-6 players in hand so you can put an "X" in those spots on your roster. As has been said, JT Miller is what one hopes one can get in the first round, but we got him NOW instead of working the Mystery Box over the next couple of years and hoping it contains gold. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 42 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: The Leafs did a good job with the forward corps. They just pooped the bed on building an adequate defense. Dubas has a mountain to climb this off-season to fix it. I'm having deja vu... summer of 2018... summer of 2017... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 3 minutes ago, oldnews said: The Leafs made a big trade - that some of us complimented - to improve their blueline - Muzzin. However, in spite of the credit given there, these things remained: 1) Muzzin is a LHD - when their principal need was a RHD upgrade. They still wound up having to rolll with a pairing of Gardiner Dermott in the playoffs - nowhere near a viable contending blueline still. So if they're going to go in, they didn't go all-in enough. 2) The price for Muzzin was a 1st, Grundstrom, and Durzi. Muzzin is 29 with 1 year of term remaining. That imo is not as good value as Miller, but there was more of a desperation and window context they were working within, so the expenditure is understandable. 3) But equally important to their principal need being a RHD (Muzzin was arguably a secondary need) - they also did not have a playoff bottom six - they lost the likes of Bozak and Komarov, and replaced them with....Gauthier and Ennis? Sorry - but get real. The Leafs are not doomed - they just are not 'finished' any rebuild - and they haven't shown the abllity to identify the need to flill out their roster, let alone execute that vital part of their build - Dubas seems content year after year to believe his core of shiny forwards is going to propel them to contending regardless of the holes in the supporting cast. They have time to correct those things - but they've also been spending 1sts on arguably secondary need (Muzzin), another 1st to dump Marleau, are losing Hainsey - and Gardiner to free agency - and are still in a tight cap situation. They have difficult, but not impossible work to be done - but looking at their performance in what they apparently considered a window - I don't have a great deal of confidence that they're the proper-rebuild stars they were made out to be. I think Babcock is actually the best hockey mind in the lot - and there are plenty of indicators that he and the Spamaplan aren't necessarily on the same page at various times. Anyhow - when they start building the type of team I like, I'll be all over that bandwagon - but as long as they continue with the Coiler model - I'm going to cringe. Heard on the radio this morning that Colorado might have quiet interest in Marner. They have a lot of cap space, and (considering their recent high draft picks look great) they are likely to be a playoff team for the cost of 4 first rounders. (picks 20 and lower are very likely) The Leafs would have to match, knowing that those first round picks, being lower, would not help their current core for several years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 1 hour ago, Horvat is a Boss said: So Benning didn't even try to pay less. #fakenews, according to Tampa themselves. They said they'd been working on this with Benning for quite a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noble 6 Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 1 minute ago, Hutton Wink said: #fakenews, according to Tampa themselves. They said they'd been working on this with Benning for quite a while. Alright, that seems more reasonable. Do you have a link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 18 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said: Sounds like the Canucks. Seriously. And had the Canucks made the playoffs in any of the last few years, it could be argued that each point you cite here could also apply to them. I’m not going to spend anytime on this this summer. It’s money in the bank to me and let’s wait and see which assessment is closer to the truth. The Leafs core is pretty much exactly the age of the Canucks, neither’s window is closing so there’s lots of time left for this to play out. I’m hoping it’s today, just for the sake of this discussion. Like I said, I hope the Leafs nail a few trades just so I can listen to the reactions. yeah - but one considered themselves Stanley Cup favorites / #proper-rebuild / the rebuild was 'finished' - while the other was in the midst of transition And as I said in my last post - if you can find a single person who'd take the present Leafs right side over the Canucks Cap dump Zaitsev, offfside Dermott and no cap space vs Tanev, Stecher and lots of cap.... Then I think that person would probably be dyed blue inside and out from all the koolaid. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post aGENT Posted June 25, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 25, 2019 24 minutes ago, coastal.view said: sorry i don't buy that this is a pretty long standing trend with this club Since Benning took over: 2014 - 3 of 7 picks were D 2015 - 3 of 7 2016 - 2 of 6 2017 - 3 of 8 2018 - 3 of 6 This last year we also added 3 college FA D's. This 'Canucks are anti-D' agenda is a load of manure. NVM that the present issue of fixing the current, NHL level D was in no way, shape or form going to be from D taken in rounds 4-7 in the 2019 draft. The premise is beyond laughable. 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ur a Towel Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 28 minutes ago, coastal.view said: sorry i don't buy that this is a pretty long standing trend with this club From what Judd Brackett said after the draft, it sounds like they identified guys with high compete and/or size. It's possible that they didn't have any defenceman around their picks that they thought were remotely close to any of the players they chose. We took 2 D's with our top 2 picks last year. Not picking any this year even in the later rounds is not a big deal imo if they thought it wasn't worth reaching for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Gaudette Celly Posted June 25, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 25, 2019 32 minutes ago, Zhukini said: I agree, there are no more lifelines for Benning either this team wins and wins often, or he is done. What "lifelines"? Anyone who thinks Benning is desperately clinging for dear life to his job has no idea where things are at in the organization. 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maketherightmove Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 34 minutes ago, gurn said: so in other words they are comparable as all have missed time? Tell me something I already knew. Thanks. Roughly 20 games/season difference is comparable? Sure thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 26 minutes ago, coastal.view said: sorry i don't buy that this is a pretty long standing trend with this club ? what RHD do you propose they 'should have' taken as opposed to Podkolzin? what RHD do you think they 'should have' taken as opposed to Hoglander? hey you're preaching to the converted here. no one would have liked to walk away from this draft with a Seider and a Korczak/Helleson or whomever more than me. But there is no way I'd pass on Podkolzin (who also represents a power game the forward group needs) or Hoglander, who imo 'should have' gone in the range of the mid 20s. So, sorry, but you take the best player available - and if you need to make deals to acquire defensemen (who in general are harder to project / longer term development trajectories) - then at least you may have maximized your chance of hitting on a good young forward asset (like Hoglander) that you may be able to use to get a deal done. Heading into the draft it was arguable in any event - was there a better powerforward prospect in the system than Woo is a RHD prospect? I would love to see more RHD in the prospect pool, but you simply cannot draft for position or you take a greater risk missing out on bpas and winding up with lesser asset value in your system. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhukini Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 1 minute ago, Hutton Wink said: What "lifelines"? Anyone who thinks Benning is desperately clinging for dear life to his job has no idea where things are at in the organization. The lifelines are, we finished at the bottom and we can't score and our defence sucks. BUT Boeser had a good rookie year, then Pettersson, now Hughes. They were moving at a snails pace adding one positive to the team a season. No more of that. He's not desperately clinging to his job. He's just got 2 years to make the playoffs or he's fired and anyone who thinks otherwise has no idea where things are at in the organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 16 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said: Alright, that seems more reasonable. Do you have a link? Saw it in text originally, which may have originated from this interview. He doesn't say specifically how long he worked on it with the Canucks (or other teams), but there's no indication he just threw it out there and Benning snapped it up. Highly doubt that would have been Brisebois' starting point in what he wanted back for Miller, who is a quality asset and certainly NOT a "cap dump". Only speculating of course, but he probably wanted the pick in the current draft, in which case I'd say that's much closer to true value, depending of course which pick we're talking about. He's not worth a top-3 in this draft, but certainly in the ballpark of the next tier. Perhaps it was a first now straight up for Miller, and Benning negotiated it to the future but gave up the third as compensation. Once you put conditions onto and defer picks into the future, especially potentially more than a year out, they lose a whole lot of value. https://www.nhl.com/lightning/video/brisebois-on-jt-miller-trade/t-277437434/c-68535903 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 11 minutes ago, Ur a Towel said: From what Judd Brackett said after the draft, it sounds like they identified guys with high compete and/or size. It's possible that they didn't have any defenceman around their picks that they thought were remotely close to any of the players they chose. We took 2 D's with our top 2 picks last year. Not picking any this year even in the later rounds is not a big deal imo if they thought it wasn't worth reaching for. Yes, we could easily end up picking a half-dozen dmen next draft. Benning said afterwards he's comfortable with the depth they have on D, with prospects as well as the recent college signings. But priority remains to address the current roster D. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 20 minutes ago, Alflives said: Heard on the radio this morning that Colorado might have quiet interest in Marner. They have a lot of cap space, and (considering their recent high draft picks look great) they are likely to be a playoff team for the cost of 4 first rounders. (picks 20 and lower are very likely) The Leafs would have to match, knowing that those first round picks, being lower, would not help their current core for several years. It's a tough call for the Leafs - do you take a step back and cycle again on the permanent rebuild - realizing that they're top heavy without enough real asset depth? If I were them, I'd do what might even be less popular - but I'd move Matthews. Send Matthews to Arizona - take a trio of vital pieces - a center (Keller?) - a D (Chychrun) and a third piece? and get on about competing. I have to wonder if the Leafs fan base - understandably - has the stomach for losing a Marner to future picks at this stage. You just spend a 1st to rid Marleau. A first on an expiring Muzzin. Now if you let Marner walk for futures - what happens if the Leafs slide and that Marleau 1st becomes much higher than they anticipated? They signed Tavares - they have a 1C - and Matthews imo is over-rated, with a prima-donna attitude that I'd shop before Marner, because the return on Matthews imo stands a good chance of being a cumulative uptick on what he brings. They'd avoid waiting years on picks - and get pieces they need now - that are more certain that picks. What if Colorado takes Marner and contends with him, added to that sick group of young D they have, and very talented forward group? A handful of 20 to 30 picks spread out over 4 years? Trade Matthews. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 4 minutes ago, oldnews said: It's a tough call for the Leafs - do you take a step back and cycle again on the permanent rebuild - realizing that they're top heavy without enough real asset depth? If I were them, I'd do what might even be less popular - but I'd move Matthews. Send Matthews to Arizona - take a trio of vital pieces - a center (Keller?) - a D (Chychrun) and a third piece? and get on about competing. I have to wonder if the Leafs fan base - understandably - has the stomach for losing a Marner to future picks at this stage. You just spend a 1st to rid Marleau. A first on an expiring Muzzin. Now if you let Marner walk for futures - what happens if the Leafs slide and that Marleau 1st becomes much higher than they anticipated? They signed Tavares - they have a 1C - and Matthews imo is over-rated, with a prima-donna attitude that I'd shop before Marner, because the return on Matthews imo stands a good chance of being a cumulative uptick on what he brings. They'd avoid waiting years on picks - and get pieces they need now - that are more certain that picks. What if Colorado takes Marner and contends with him, added to that sick group of young D they have, and very talented forward group? A handful of 20 to 30 picks spread out over 4 years? Trade Matthews. I totally agree with the Leafs trading AM. Kadri is a good second line center, who's production dropped dramatically after JT arrived. And like you say, the return for AM would fill Leaf's greater needs. It won't happen though. which is a good thing for a Leaf Hater, like moi. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 6 hours ago, Phat Fingers said: Smashing, Your backing yourself into a corner. JT is a good player and goes a long way to plugging a hole in our top six. The 2 biggest holes on the team were needing 2 top six wingers (Baer is one hopefully) and now Miller is the other. This gives Ep40 and Bo legit players to work with. No more fill ins!!! Remaking the defence is the second giant hole. A top.pairing RHD is the other huge need. You can argue that PK would have been a better get, but 9m per season, 38pts on a good team last year... that's a big pill to swallow. Reports had it down to us and NJ, NJ swallows, Vancouver doesn't. The first move (Miller) predicates another move, RHD. There is time and FA is just around the corner. If JB can land his top 4 RHD, then we will be in the mix. If he still has a giant hole there come training camp... then he and we have problems. Yup this is it. Defense is the biggest hole. Adding JT Miller is great, helps fill our other hole, but without atleast 1 top 4 D we'll still have trouble even with Miller. The RHD is coming. (Myers) just at what cost is the question. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
189lb enforcers? Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, oldnews said: The Leafs made a big trade - that some of us complimented - to improve their blueline - Muzzin. However, in spite of the credit given there, these things remained: Like the Canucks. I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said, I have some contextual differences though, but not worth spelling out for the sake of selling my views. Instead of derailing the topic, I will plainly state that I think Benning’s abandonment of his “rebuild” wasn’t anymore wise or timely than the Leafs’. I know if EP goes down, so will the Canucks, possibly the same for a Horvat injury. Losing AM didn’t stop the Leafs, even with their “lottery caliber” D, which we know was every bit as crappy as the Canucks. Both Anderson and Marky deserve credit there. The Canucks have something to pull of a blockbuster trade or trades with. The Leafs a whole helluva lot. Both need D and both have young core up front. One team has the ELCs expire already as the Canucks wait their turn. The Canucks prospect and filler D are marginally better than the Leaf’s, IMO, but given the Leafs’ capacity for trade upgrades, I’m not about to hold up one team just to put down another. In any hockey world, you have to hand it to the Leafs as they are a profitable rebuild. No two ways about it, even if it’s hedged on lotto luck, which Laine, Tkachuk, etc would have still offset, IMO. The Canucks’ version is now in play as a comparable, albeit a year or two younger in the initial comparison of when each team started to strip itself for a rebuild effort. I’m curious which college kids might want to sign in TO and Van, let alone UFA vets. Edited June 25, 2019 by 189lb enforcers? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now