[Trade] Kings trade Tyler Toffoli to Canucks for Tim Schaller, Tyler Madden, 2020 2nd-round pick, conditional 2022 4th-round pick

[The Great 8]

I hope Madden holds out for 4 years and signs back with us. That would be hilarious.

[Alflives]

12 hours ago, The Lock said:

I tend to be of the mentality that you can't really base trades on what may or may not happen in the future. Obviously, value probably changes somewhat depending on what you think you can or cannot do on acquiring a player, but at least we have first dibs on trying to sign him if that's the goal. We at least know that if he wants to stay here then he can (provided it doesn't break the bank for us of course).

 

It's really a similar mentality I have with Madden. We can't say whether he would have signed with us or not and the accusations to say he wouldn't are completely unfounded unless if evidence is brought forward to support them. I don't get why we expect our prospects to be like that automatically with no rhyme or reason, but I guess people like to jump to conclusions rather than think logically about it.

I think the idea that Madden wouldn’t have signed with us is based on logic.  He’s very light, and clearly needs to physically mature before even competing for any NHL spot.  He can spend two years maturing in the AHL riding buses and getting paid 70,000.  Or he can stay in college, play fewer games, work out a lot more, be in a successful program, and then (after the two years) pick the team where he sees his best chance to play.  I think he’s happy to be a King.  That’s a team where he might have a chance to play after his junior year.  

[Ballisticsports.]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

I think the idea that Madden wouldn’t have signed with us is based on logic.  He’s very light, and clearly needs to physically mature before even competing for any NHL spot.  He can spend two years maturing in the AHL riding buses and getting paid 70,000.  Or he can stay in college, play fewer games, work out a lot more, be in a successful program, and then (after the two years) pick the team where he sees his best chance to play.  I think he’s happy to be a King.  That’s a team where he might have a chance to play after his junior year.  

Apparently we should believe Benning saying that Madden not signing was never a  concern or issue in trading and Dhaliwal saying Maddens intent was always to be a Canuck

If they just saw that there was no room in the future of this team -fine

 

I really like Tyler, but his position isn't as big of a concern as defence and a big luxury (Kinda building like the Leafs,- Forwards, Goalie)

Could you imagine having traded for a defenceman like Tyler?

Canucks with the forwards and potential forwards coming, along with Quinn and another defenceman (equivalent of Tyler) would be better off, rather than stacking on forwards, and keeping D who have limits in creating offence

 As has been said before Defence wins Championships 

 

Defencemen with skill also make the forwards better

Another top dman for the 2nd line and putting the 2 on the PP together would be way more effective imo

 

I am not a big fan of trading picks and tradeable prospects, unless it's to improve positions you are weaker on

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, ba;;isticsports said:

Apparently we should believe Benning saying that Madden not signing was never a  concern or issue in trading and Dhaliwal saying Maddens intent was always to be a Canuck

If they just saw that there was no room in the future of this team -fine

 

I really like Tyler, but his position isn't as big of a concern as defence and a big luxury (Kinda building like the Leafs,- Forwards, Goalie)

Could you imagine having traded for a defenceman like Tyler?

Canucks with the forwards and potential forwards coming, along with Quinn and another defenceman (equivalent of Tyler) would be better off, rather than stacking on forwards, and keeping D who have limits in creating offence

 As has been said before Defence wins Championships 

 

Defencemen with skill also make the forwards better

Another top dman for the 2nd line and putting the 2 on the PP together would be way more effective imo

 

I am not a big fan of trading picks and tradeable prospects, unless it's to improve positions you are weaker on

Hey that’s a great post.  

[oldnews]

On 3/18/2020 at 9:02 AM, Alflives said:

How bad is the Tofu trade (hurts us while helping a rival) if we don’t sign Tofu, and he’s just a rental?  

how many times have you reposted this?

you're becoming a broken record of premature glooming

give it a rest?  wait until - if - it becomes a worthwhile whining point?

[Alflives]

21 minutes ago, oldnews said:

how many times have you reposted this?

you're becoming a broken record of premature glooming

give it a rest?  wait until - if - it becomes a worthwhile whining point?

Even Mrs Alf says I worry too much.  I just want us to win a friggin’ Cup at some point.  Let’s sign Tofu then. 

[oldnews]

43 minutes ago, ba;;isticsports said:

Apparently we should believe Benning saying that Madden not signing was never a  concern or issue in trading and Dhaliwal saying Maddens intent was always to be a Canuck

If they just saw that there was no room in the future of this team -fine

 

I really like Tyler, but his position isn't as big of a concern as defence and a big luxury (Kinda building like the Leafs,- Forwards, Goalie)

Could you imagine having traded for a defenceman like Tyler?

Canucks with the forwards and potential forwards coming, along with Quinn and another defenceman (equivalent of Tyler) would be better off, rather than stacking on forwards, and keeping D who have limits in creating offence

 As has been said before Defence wins Championships 

 

Defencemen with skill also make the forwards better

Another top dman for the 2nd line and putting the 2 on the PP together would be way more effective imo

 

I am not a big fan of trading picks and tradeable prospects, unless it's to improve positions you are weaker on

This might be a valid point - if it weren't a hypothetical in a vacuum.  Otherwise, there's so much wrong with it.

 

First - your comparable of 'kinda building like the Leafs' is absurd.   This team has Markstrom, Demko, DiPietro - it's own pipeline of goaltenders - and no shortage of D prospects.

 

Second, can I imagine if they'd traded for a defenseman like Tyler?  Yeah - I can - and that sure as hell wasn't happening for a 2nd round pick and prospect.  When was the last time you saw a legitimate top 6 D dealt for that price?    Let's be real - and look at D who were actually available and dealt at the deadline = Skjei cost a 1st round pick (and he has 23 pts - in other words, a few more points than Tanev or Myers - and not really someone that would improve this blueline).  Sami Vatanen - likewise - and again - cost a high end prospect (Kuokkanen). 

 

Third - the Canucks added Toffoli - because Boeser's health is/was an uncertainty - and you need to combine that - in context - with the fact they've also lost Ferland, lost Leivo, and have suffered primarily losses to their forward group this year.   Benning bought early and arguably low relative to the way the market played out.  Imagine the present team - without Toffoli, and without Boeser (his health could not be presumed) - and without the forwards already noted - and you have huge holes on the wing.   They addressed a real, existing need, not a hypothetical one - and are not a front, top heavy built team in any event - that is a flippant mischaracterization.

 

And that is coming from someone that is borderline categorically opposed to rentals.  I make an exception in this instance for the reasons the team cited - first, they had a glaring need emerge that threatened to tank their otherwise very successful season.  They sent a message that this group was worth the expenditure - people can debate that - but arguably, they also represent a good opportunity for Toffoli, to play with high end team-mates who can uptick his career (as has been evident), they have his best friend on the roster, and they are a rising team = no reason to believe/presume he's simply going to walk.  If he re-signs, he came at an extremely reasonable cost.  Two things were entirely unpredictable - Markstrom's injury - and a virus outbreak.   Those, really, are the two contingencies that put the Toffoli acquisition in a different light - and neither of them can be predicted - or ignored -when it comes to the eventual benefits/wisdom of having acquired this player - and again, that calculation would be merely dependent on the assumption that he does not sign here, or that the team does not make the playoffs.

 

On that last note - if the season does not progress - Toffoli still played a signficant role in hanging onto the 3rd seed in the division - which impacts the value of the pick that moves in the Miller deal - so arguably the closure on a late 1st itself has some value.

 

Edited March 19, 2020 by oldnews

[oldnews]

28 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Even Mrs Alf says I worry too much.  I just want us to win a friggin’ Cup at some point.  Let’s sign Tofu then. 

I have no idea how Toffoli would/will feel about re-signing here.

 

However:

1) he has scored 6 goals and 10 pts in 10 games here - which translates over 82 to about a 50 goal season and ppg production.  I would assume he doesn't mind the impact/effect of playing with guys like Miller and EP.   Toffoli has has one 30 goal season in his career, and 2 x 20 goal seasons - and broke 50 pts once. He could sign a mid range value deal presently (based on being a 40-50 pt player/large sample performance to this point of his career) , or sign a 2 or 3 year deal and then go to the bank with his next contract after having spent a few years riding with Miller and EP.

 

2) In spite of Boeser's presence/return, there remains a spot in the top 6 for Toffoli - a spot otherwise occupied by LE on Horvat's line.   The team has youth RW like Virtanen pushing - and Podkolzin - however, that does not preclude re-signing a player like Toffoli - and Virtanen has proven a versatile, two way young forward who can be effective up and down the lineup.  

 

3) His best friend is here (Pearson) - who is having a career year playing with Horvat - already surpassed his career best production (in 69 games) - and has done so, arguably in conditions that leave more room for uptick.  Pearson has had 45.8% ozone starts this year, has 32 even strength pts in spite of Horvat's line being drawn into matchup/shutdown roles (in the absences of Sutter and Beagle) - and the Horvat Pearson line has had a relatively unproductive empty-net-specialist on their opposing wing - as a shutdown complement (LE has 13 pts this year).   Hard to imagine that Pearson's production, too, would not have been better had he been playing with a Boeser or Toffoli throughout the season.

 

So - who knows - but that looks like a pretty solid foundation to sell as a good landing spot to re-sign.

 

Edited March 19, 2020 by oldnews

[WHL rocks]

Just now, ba;;isticsports said:

Apparently we should believe Benning saying that Madden not signing was never a  concern or issue in trading and Dhaliwal saying Maddens intent was always to be a Canuck

If they just saw that there was no room in the future of this team -fine

 

I really like Tyler, but his position isn't as big of a concern as defence and a big luxury (Kinda building like the Leafs,- Forwards, Goalie)

Could you imagine having traded for a defenceman like Tyler?

Canucks with the forwards and potential forwards coming, along with Quinn and another defenceman (equivalent of Tyler) would be better off, rather than stacking on forwards, and keeping D who have limits in creating offence

 As has been said before Defence wins Championships 

 

Defencemen with skill also make the forwards better

Another top dman for the 2nd line and putting the 2 on the PP together would be way more effective imo

 

I am not a big fan of trading picks and tradeable prospects, unless it's to improve positions you are weaker on

Why are you using first names?

[Wanless]

7 hours ago, oldnews said:

This might be a valid point - if it weren't a hypothetical in a vacuum.  Otherwise, there's so much wrong with it.

 

First - your comparable of 'kinda building like the Leafs' is absurd.   This team has Markstrom, Demko, DiPietro - it's own pipeline of goaltenders - and no shortage of D prospects.

 

Second, can I imagine if they'd traded for a defenseman like Tyler?  Yeah - I can - and that sure as hell wasn't happening for a 2nd round pick and prospect.  When was the last time you saw a legitimate top 6 D dealt for that price?    Let's be real - and look at D who were actually available and dealt at the deadline = Skjei cost a 1st round pick (and he has 23 pts - in other words, a few more points than Tanev or Myers - and not really someone that would improve this blueline).  Sami Vatanen - likewise - and again - cost a high end prospect (Kuokkanen). 

 

Third - the Canucks added Toffoli - because Boeser's health is/was an uncertainty - and you need to combine that - in context - with the fact they've also lost Ferland, lost Leivo, and have suffered primarily losses to their forward group this year.   Benning bought early and arguably low relative to the way the market played out.  Imagine the present team - without Toffoli, and without Boeser (his health could not be presumed) - and without the forwards already noted - and you have huge holes on the wing.   They addressed a real, existing need, not a hypothetical one - and are not a front, top heavy built team in any event - that is a flippant mischaracterization.

 

And that is coming from someone that is borderline categorically opposed to rentals.  I make an exception in this instance for the reasons the team cited - first, they had a glaring need emerge that threatened to tank their otherwise very successful season.  They sent a message that this group was worth the expenditure - people can debate that - but arguably, they also represent a good opportunity for Toffoli, to play with high end team-mates who can uptick his career (as has been evident), they have his best friend on the roster, and they are a rising team = no reason to believe/presume he's simply going to walk.  If he re-signs, he came at an extremely reasonable cost.  Two things were entirely unpredictable - Markstrom's injury - and a virus outbreak.   Those, really, are the two contingencies that put the Toffoli acquisition in a different light - and neither of them can be predicted - or ignored -when it comes to the eventual benefits/wisdom of having acquired this player - and again, that calculation would be merely dependent on the assumption that he does not sign here, or that the team does not make the playoffs.

 

On that last note - if the season does not progress - Toffoli still played a signficant role in hanging onto the 3rd seed in the division - which impacts the value of the pick that moves in the Miller deal - so arguably the closure on a late 1st itself has some value.

 

I didn't read all of you post, just the first paragraph

 

You are so right

 

If we are to trade for a top 4 dman we are looking at Virtanen, a second and likely Woo. Anything below that we have in spades. 

 

Also, if we were to trade for a dman I would prefer to entertain the idea of trading Boeser and something to get a minute munching 2 way/defensive guy who can play top pairing, on the right side and in any situation

 

Edit-

Went back and finished reading, worth it

 

Great point on basically using madden and a second to devalue the first we have up

 

Another thing I can see happening is if toffoli re-signs maybe in 3 years he's dealt at the trade deadline for picks. Same with Miller

Edited March 20, 2020 by Wanless

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, Wanless said:

I didn't read all of you post, just the first paragraph

 

You are so right

 

If we are to trade for a top 4 dman we are looking at Virtanen, a second and likely Woo. Anything below that we have in spades. 

 

Also, if we were to trade for a dman I would prefer to entertain the idea of trading Boeser and something to get a minute munching 2 way/defensive guy who can play top pairing, on the right side and in any situation

 

Edit-

Went back and finished reading, worth it

 

Great point on basically using madden and a second to devalue the first we have up

 

Another thing I can see happening is if toffoli re-signs maybe in 3 years he's dealt at the trade deadline for picks. Same with Miller

I like your post, but don’t completely understand the concept of devaluing the first to Tampa, by giving up Madden and a second to get Tofu.  Yes, that does make that first to Tampa a lower pick, but how does that help us other than we can say, “see, we got Miller for a great price”?  When we connect the two trades together like you’re suggesting, isn’t It  like we added Madden and a second to get Miller?  Apologies but I don’t get the connection.  

[Wanless]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

I like your post, but don’t completely understand the concept of devaluing the first to Tampa, by giving up Madden and a second to get Tofu.  Yes, that does make that first to Tampa a lower pick, but how does that help us other than we can say, “see, we got Miller for a great price”?  When we connect the two trades together like you’re suggesting, isn’t It  like we added Madden and a second to get Miller?  Apologies but I don’t get the connection.  

The thought, from what I interpreted of what old news said, is that instead of the first being 17th overall it could be more like 20th overall 

 

This because Tyler came in a put up points to keep us 3rd in the division based on points/game

[Alflives]

Just now, Wanless said:

The thought, from what I interpreted of what old news said, is that instead of the first being 17th overall it could be more like 20th overall 

 

This because Tyler came in a put up points to keep us 3rd in the division based on points/game

I understand that part, but don’t see how giving up Madden and a second to devalue the first to Tampa helps us?  I’m hoping we sign 

Tofu, and then we got Miller and Tofu for a (not in the lottery) first, a second, a third, and Madden.  That would be great!  If we don’t sign Tofu, then we gave up all that for Miller.  Still, I think Miller is worth that.  He’s a fabulous player, in his prime, and on a great contract.  

[Wanless]

18 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I understand that part, but don’t see how giving up Madden and a second to devalue the first to Tampa helps us?  I’m hoping we sign 

Tofu, and then we got Miller and Tofu for a (not in the lottery) first, a second, a third, and Madden.  That would be great!  If we don’t sign Tofu, then we gave up all that for Miller.  Still, I think Miller is worth that.  He’s a fabulous player, in his prime, and on a great contract.  

I see

 

I think because toffoli makes us a better team. A 17th is technically worse than a 15th.

 

Either way. If we can keep toffoli and somehow get our d systems sorted out I can see us having a good chance to make it to the Conference finals 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Wanless said:

I see

 

I think because toffoli makes us a better team. A 17th is technically worse than a 15th.

 

Either way. If we can keep toffoli and somehow get our d systems sorted out I can see us having a good chance to make it to the Conference finals 

That’s what I’m hoping for too!  

[Ballisticsports.]

9 hours ago, oldnews said:

This might be a valid point - if it weren't a hypothetical in a vacuum.  Otherwise, there's so much wrong with it.

 

First - your comparable of 'kinda building like the Leafs' is absurd.   This team has Markstrom, Demko, DiPietro - it's own pipeline of goaltenders - and no shortage of D prospects.

 

Second, can I imagine if they'd traded for a defenseman like Tyler?  Yeah - I can - and that sure as hell wasn't happening for a 2nd round pick and prospect.  When was the last time you saw a legitimate top 6 D dealt for that price?    Let's be real - and look at D who were actually available and dealt at the deadline = Skjei cost a 1st round pick (and he has 23 pts - in other words, a few more points than Tanev or Myers - and not really someone that would improve this blueline).  Sami Vatanen - likewise - and again - cost a high end prospect (Kuokkanen). 

 

Third - the Canucks added Toffoli - because Boeser's health is/was an uncertainty - and you need to combine that - in context - with the fact they've also lost Ferland, lost Leivo, and have suffered primarily losses to their forward group this year.   Benning bought early and arguably low relative to the way the market played out.  Imagine the present team - without Toffoli, and without Boeser (his health could not be presumed) - and without the forwards already noted - and you have huge holes on the wing.   They addressed a real, existing need, not a hypothetical one - and are not a front, top heavy built team in any event - that is a flippant mischaracterization.

 

And that is coming from someone that is borderline categorically opposed to rentals.  I make an exception in this instance for the reasons the team cited - first, they had a glaring need emerge that threatened to tank their otherwise very successful season.  They sent a message that this group was worth the expenditure - people can debate that - but arguably, they also represent a good opportunity for Toffoli, to play with high end team-mates who can uptick his career (as has been evident), they have his best friend on the roster, and they are a rising team = no reason to believe/presume he's simply going to walk.  If he re-signs, he came at an extremely reasonable cost.  Two things were entirely unpredictable - Markstrom's injury - and a virus outbreak.   Those, really, are the two contingencies that put the Toffoli acquisition in a different light - and neither of them can be predicted - or ignored -when it comes to the eventual benefits/wisdom of having acquired this player - and again, that calculation would be merely dependent on the assumption that he does not sign here, or that the team does not make the playoffs.

 

On that last note - if the season does not progress - Toffoli still played a signficant role in hanging onto the 3rd seed in the division - which impacts the value of the pick that moves in the Miller deal - so arguably the closure on a late 1st itself has some value.

Sorry Old News

I was uninformed that the Leafs had no prospects

My point was, like the Leafs we both have good goaltending, high end forwards, but not the same abundance in dmen 

How many of those Unproven prospects will be offensive talent?

Why is it so hard  to think they couldn't have got a dman similar to Toffoli?

Toffoli wasn't producing like was with us, maybe we could have reacted early like we did with TT and got a similar player in a D You don't grab a top line player for what we got one could argue, so why not have it be a dman?

I never thought it was a good idea to be chasing after injuries late in a season to replace players that will return , I even said what happens if one of our elites go down, what will we give up then to save a season? Luckily the trade deadline stopped in Markstroms case (Dempster hopefully will grow from this experience, maybe he thought he was already there before this)?

 

They sent a message to the group it was worth the expenditure?

Will the players at contract time send a message to the group as well, in taking less to be a part of this?

IMO (lol) I believe it was more a business decision and get into the playoffs than what your opinion is

 

Not sure why you believe your opinion is the right one?

Everyone takes something from what they see, hear and feel and base an opinion on that

It does not make it 100 % factual, I doubt you are personally in contact with any players or management on the team 

So your opinion is no more right or wrong, it is just your opinion, that others may share

Notice how i never attacked your opinion?

Neither of our opinions mean anything or change anything

Were just sharing them without the need to control the other 

I take in what some say (on both sides of an issue) and helps form an opinion

My opinions change as I don't have 1st hand knowledge from the horses mouth

Much bigger issues in life than putting down someones opinion to worry about don't you think?

9 hours ago, oldnews said:

 

 

[Provost]

I heard MacKenzie suggesting that there is word around about deals around the trade deadline.  If the season doesn’t go ahead, there will be some compensation to teams who traded for the players since the rental didn’t really get to happen.

 

 

[WHL rocks]

https://edmontonjournal.com/sports/hockey/nhl/cult-of-hockey/should-edmonton-oilers-fans-have-a-serious-case-of-toffoli-envy

 

Edmonton Journal Toffoli envy.

[Guest]

2022 4th round pick is a conditional one if Toffoli resigns with us.  

 

The whole hockey world now collectively holding their breath in anticipation of what will happen with that 4th round pick. 

[Googlie]

I wouldn't be gutted if Toffee didn't sign with us or if Bening decided not to offer a renewal.  He was a rental replacement for Brock to get us over the hump into the playoffs.  Mission acccomplished. Prior to the last 3 games I would have said Benning's priorities were to resign Marky, Tanev then Toffee, if cap space were available.  With TD's emergence as a bona fide superstar,  I think the priorities have shifted slightly.  Tanev first, then Marky, then see if Toffee can be enticed with a cheap longer term deal.

 

If he is asking for the moon, then walk away.

 

I may be out on a limb, but I see Baertschi fighting hard for a roster spot this November training camp.   He is over his concussion issues ( which management acknowledged by calling him up for the bubble - which he understandably declined, to spend time with his sweetheart and kid) - and the Killer Bees could reunite.  I could see Jake signing a one year "show me" contract and getting an extended look with Millsy and Petey on the #1 line, with TP dropping to the 3rd 

 

Toffee is a luxury, not a necessity, in my book.

 

The flat cap is going to cripple about 20 GMs and be a wonderful opportunity for about 10.  Unfortunately we are one of the 20