oldnews
Members-
Posts
53,830 -
Joined
-
Days Won
186
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by oldnews
-
Lindholm is 23, a center, 54.5% faceoffs and far more upside than Ferland wadr. We'll see if Ferland plays with a Gaudreau and Monahan types in Carolina. I like Ferland, but I'd never, NEVER give up a Lindholm for him, and he has only one year of term to UFA. Hamilton's plus/minus - playing with Mark Giordano isn't very relevent imo. Plus/minus out of context is useless. I'll take the 21 yr old Hanifin and his overall toolbox over Hamilton, despite the production at this point. Calgary bought RFA years and mobility - I like Hanifin's chances of being better than Hamilton in due course. I doubt Lindholm or Hanifin break the bank on bridge deals. I'd be thrilled with this deal if I were a Flames fan, despite the inclusion of Adam Fox - who remains unsigned and no certainty he'd sign with Calgary (no compensation if he walks).
-
I like the deal for Calgary. I think Hamilton is over-rated. The Lindholm / Ferland aspect of this deal is significant, I'm not looking forward to what a guy like Hanifin might look like with the right partner. He spent most of the year with Van Reimsdyk - whereas Hamilton alongside Giordano.....Gio makes anyone better. Adam Fox is a good prospect, but he'll have to turn out imo to close that gap between Lindholm and Ferland.
-
Frack him. He got Soderlund last year. It's our turn lol.
-
Michael Peca V2.0!
-
reminds me of the Lockwood pick
-
Crazy draft. Many thanks to John Chayka, most popular man in Vancouver this evening. Happy to see Alexeyev to Washington at 31. couldn'ta planned that better.
-
[Official] 2018-19 Minor Signings Thread
oldnews replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Look here for all your offseason Leafs signings. -
I wish fn fantrax would stop dropping player's eligibility positions = pita.
-
TJ Brodie Patrick Berglund Derek Grant available out of Winnipeg. Darcy Kuemper's rights available for any pick.
-
Not gonna lie. There are a lot of fantasy GMs on CDC that I'd take over Mark Bergevin.
-
Kyle Connor – Boone Jenner - Brian Little Marcus Johansson - Nolan Patrick – Ryan Hartman Andre Burakovsky - Tyler Bozak - Jack Roslovic Austin Watson - Andrew Copp - Andrew Cogliano Derek Grant - Patrick Berglund - Mikka Salomaki Mark Giordano© - John Carlson Hampus Lindholm - Josh Morrissey TJ Brodie - Stephen Johns Jamie Oleksiak - Ryan Pulock Matt Grzelcyk - Ben Chiarot Brett Kulak John Gibson Joonas Korpisalo Portage La Prairie Dogs Marko Dano - John Hayden – Tyler Motte Nikita Gusev - Vladislav Kamenev - Troy Terry Erik Foley - Cole Cassels - Justin Bailey Mark McNeil Ethan Bear - Jake Walman Jordan Schmaltz - Ville Pokka Carl Neill - Parker Wotherspoon Jon Gillies Jordan Binnington Unsigned prospects: Jesper Boqvist Jonah Gadjovich Kirill Maksimov Kyle Olson Ben Mirageas German Rubtsov Cam Morrison Trent Frederic Adam Fox Aapeli Rasanen Matthew Philips Mikhail Berdin
-
-
Your thinking tends to be clearer when the whistle on your kettle isn't blowing. Your riding a lot of contradictions there wadr. I'm not sure you've earned the credibility to be laughing so hard.. Pretty sure your tune about the stage of their rebuild has changed signficantly - let alone the projections of the next dynasty. And the narrative about Boston being the most dominant team in the NHL will certainly be tested. I personally do not like their chances at all - of beating a team like Tampa. let alone a Winnipeg or Nashville. Those are the standards the realism of the Leafs rebuild being over needed to be measured against imo. I think they're about to take some steps backward when they had the option of setting a better trajectory. What does a group like Reilly, Matthews, Marner, Nylander look like if they'd added those 2nds to their pool, dealt a few veterans like JVR, Bozak, Komarov for futures if there were a market, and stayed a true longer term course than the divided approach they did actually take, which stands to compromise their future chances. Sorry, but that core and prospect pool does not match up favourably to other contenders - not even close. They have a lot of work to do to recover, and aside from Babcock, the LouLam/Shanaplan doesn't instill a great deal of confidence. All of a sudden first round defeats - are 'moral victories'. Cool story. The tank narrative though goes like this - first round defeats are the worst possible result. Cup or nothing, remember? All that accomplishes is a bad draft position and 'mediocrity' of a purgatory mid range team. I guess the tank narrative is a convenient one, to be selectively applied. If you're thinking with a more level head - and using the standards you typically apply to Benning - your tone would be nowhere near the overcompensation it is in posts like this. Anyhow, those two 2nds they spent - when apparently they're now still a few years away from being a 'true contender' - are the Marlies. They have been trading their future Marlies - so mocking the idea of acquring Tanev is less real than mocking the purchase of rentals prematurely, in areas that didn't address their primary weaknesses. Add to that the loss of future Marlies by not attempting to deal the Bozaks - as a real rebuild would. Those are lost future Marlies. Your #proper-rebuild is riddled with as many contradictions as you are. They've neither built with a clear view to the future, nor did they take enough short term steps to be a realistic contender. The result are half measures - caught in between - a turd that only a true Leafs homer could polish. "The Toronto Maple Leafs headed into 2017–18 knowing some important long-term decisions loomed. They made a bold and interesting choice: They would wait and see how things turned out, allowing the results to determine the organization’s path. “If you have time, use it,” GM Lou Lamoriello is fond of saying. Sooner than they hoped, time is up." https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/toronto-maple-leafs-decisions-31-thoughts/ Interesting side-note - aparently Babcock urged the Leafs to take a D in 2015 - with Hanifin, Provorov and Werenski at the top of that draft...hmmm.
-
I think the window has changed for both teams. If Toronto had approached with a realistic offer in the past - when it probably made more sense for them, it may have been worth hammering out. At that point, it may have also made sense for the Canucks to divide assets with a rething move. However, like the Leafs situation, ours has also changed. There is no shortage of forward prospects in our system and many of them at or near NHL readiness - so dangling a Kapanen, while attractive, probably isn't as tempting as previously. In addition,Dermott is a comparable situation that doesn't necessarily improve our roster nor would he be the best LHD prospect we have. They have no real NHL assets they can afford to offer - perhaps Nylander aside - and does this team need to add a skilled forward as much as keeping a top 4 RHD? In addition, our primary need is arguably a RHD - pmd - and while Liljegren may fit that prospect pool need - the Canucks presently sit on a top 10 pick that tracks in a very good way towards adding an arguably better RHD prospect - so the draft could change this one way or the other. If the Canucks add a forward, perhaps a Liljegren type deal gains a bit of traction, but for me most signs point towards the Leafs having missed an opportunity - going with half measures and secondary needs the past two years, when adding Tanev to the group in the past makes more sense than moving forward. Moving forward they may have little choice given the exposure their blueline just took and the potential heat they may take in that market - but was it so hard to foresee that blueline not holding up in a playoff run? I'll be making popcorn regardless. But I'll have to go buy some more, having gone through a lot last night lol.
-
I don't agree, needless to say. Carrick is a worthless asset for us - why would we bother? We already have tweener D like Hutton on the outskirts of the roster - Carrick is a non-starter. There are no NHL assets in that proposal - a longshot 24th pick and an overvalued Liljegren - not a deal I'd entertain. Is that deal likely to improve this team? The odds are less than other options or retaining Tanev. In other words, the Leafs need to dig deeper into reality - with a realistic substitute and upgrade over Carrick - and that is where the price starts to hurt them. Kapanen, Dermott - good pieces, not really primary needs for this franchise, but if they were involved it enters maybe territory imo. And you have to remember something key here - the Leafs are facing the loss of multiple - a handful - of roster spots to free agency - Bozak, JVR, Komarov. Moore, Plekanec. Nylander stands to eat a significant chunk of the cap that is clearling. Matthews and Marner the following season (has NHL numbers ever gotten useless btw). Who knows how prudent they are with their cap moving forward, but they ought to be. The Leafs imo are in the unenviable position of having graduated most of their realistic prospect pool - beyond players like Kapanen, Johnsson, Dermott - wadr - where is the next wave? Not simply a hater here - the Leafs just don't look anywhere near as healthy moving forward. They are going to have to go to free agency - which is rarely an opportune way to build/retool a team. I personally would have drafted a couple more players with those 2nds they wasted on Boyle and Plekanec - and staring at the task ahead of them this summer, I wouldn't be looking to strip mine the futures I do have in order to add a Tanev. The time for that has passed imo - if that was their m.o. they should have acted at the last deadline. Realistically, Tanev's value is higher than a B+ prospect and a longshot 25% 1st - and there are other teams far better equipped to make a deal like that than Toronto. Toronto doesn't really have the assets - and the base they're building on has shifted considerably.
-
even a depth defenseman would have made the Leafs chances more realistic they're getting ripped, and rightly so, for leaning far too heavily on the likes of Gardiner. well they also rolled with a 21 year old rookie in Dermott, who needed to be heavily sheltered (over 20% higher ozone starts than anyone else on that blueline) - and he still looked overwhelmed. that also contributed to being overmatched in their top 4 (even moreso as a result).... But the geniuses behind the Shanaplan saw fit to spend a 2nd round pick on a depth forward rental. even a relativel inexpensive depth D would likely have fared better than the rookie, and regardless, certainly wouldn't have required sheltering, and would not have cost as much as their rental... But the Shanaplan did neither. I don't think they have the assets to acquire Tanev. .
-
It will be - but at the same time, it's misleading to believe those are 'prospect pools' head to head. For example - Utica went to the Calder Finals in 2015 - but if someone believed that was on the backs of the Canucks 'prospect pool' they'd be mislead. Markstrom, Gaunce, Shinkaruk, Baertschi played (big) roles in that run, but realistically, so did guys like Cal O'Reilly, Grenier, Bobby Sanguinetti (R,I.P Desi), Alex Friesen. The Canucks kinda maximized that slim prospect pool to that point, but Utica's success wasn't really a sign of a boon at the AHL level. This year - Boucher, Chaput, Wiercioch, MacEwen, Holm..... are more definitive of Utica than our 'prospect pool'. Goldobin spent 30ish games there, Sautner had a callup... But whateve - what I'm really excited to see is how Jasek and Dahlen do. Both arrived to Utica at the 11th hour and hit the ground running and could be a big boost to that team, as could Motte, Lind and the return of Goldobin. The Marlies are the more touted regular season team, but as often happens in the A, they lost key players like Dermott and Kapanen (and even Andreas Johnson) to the Leafs who are still alive in the playoffs. For them they'll still have their key players - veterans like Ben Smith, Chris Mueller, Miro Aaltonen - but unlike us, they've had more migration out as opposed to in. Who knows wheher those things in the short run are enough to tilt things enough for Utica, but here's hoping. If they manage to knock off Toronto, we'll have to revise the story to forget the absence of some of their better prospects lol.
-
Very good post imo. It's true that solid picks in later rounds seems to fuel the idea that those Gaudette, Demko, Tryamkin type picks can be expected, when realistically they are outliers. Part of the 'problem' is that Benning broke in with a draft of Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Tryamkin, and Forsling with his first five picks. It's still 'early' but that's a home run of a draft by any standard. The longest shot there appears to be Demko (by virtue of simply being a goaltender and nearly impossible to project into the NHL too early) - the other 4 have all owned NHL roster spots as young players / are realistic NHL quality assets. How good they become / whether they're players you win Stanley Cups with is somewhat pointless to debate or try to project. He followed that up in 2015 with Boeser (who alone at 23 is enough,really, to call that draft a success) - and added Gaudette, Brisebois and Jasek in that draft. Again, it's early, but Boeser has already broken out at the NHL level (hopefully can sustain that) and Gaudette, as the top player in the NCAA has to be seen as a bonafide bluechip as well - while Brisebois is a reasonable AHL talent and Jasek is making waves in short order in Utica. Hard to imagine Gaudette failiing to secure an NHL career - which is the standard of the percentages we assign to picks (not whether they become 'stars' or not). Clearly through two years he was killing it relative to an expected mean. Also signed Sautner as a FA that summer. The 2016 trade deadline was a disappointment - from Hamhuis and Vrbata to the unwillingness of other assets to waive - and probably the low point in this regime's drafting with Juolevi possiblty the only NHL asset out of that draft - although Lockwood was also a very good pick who's been limited by injuries but when healthy has shown well in the NCAA and commanded a spot on the US WJC team. Added Stecher in free agency that summer (with obviously the value of a 'successful' outlier pick). 2017 there is not much point trying to project aside from Pettersson obviously earning bluechip status in his historic SweHL showing while Lind has also maintained his trajectory. Gadjovich might be harder to assess, but did earn that Canada WJC spot. The other factor though that is generally underplayed is that we don't know who remained unpicked on draft lists - we don't know if extra picks would have resulted in anything of value - or whether the team 'missed' out on good players as the perception that they didn't have 'enough' picks suggests. When you dig in - the reality is that although they drafted 5 or 6 or 7 NHL players in their first few drafts, they also took players like Carl Neill (certainly looked good at the time, and in his +1 season) but selected Carl Neill before Gaudette..... If Benning hadn't managed that magic of making something of Jannick Weber lol, there may be no Gaudette - or they may have taken him with their next pick at 174 and then taken Jasek in the next round (and what the team would have 'missed out' on would be Tate Olson). It's easy to suggest that 'if only we had another pick we coulda taken Troy Terry and Gaudette' - but it all hinges on something we don't know - who the team's scouting had on their lists at those times. In the end, as much as a guy like Benning loves to have those additional picks, the reality is that (despite it being early) the team has already gotten more outliers in his time than can be expected, but believing that there were that many more in the works isn't necessarily realistic. Benning knows this - so when he lets one of those go in favour of someone they've been able to pro-scout in those draft plus seasons, overall those prospects should be weighed against the mean value of those picks (which are all longshots) - not against the impression that outliers were lost - as a result of Pouliot for example (or by virture of 'failing' to get a pick for Vanek/Holm). My opinion is that all other things being equal, you take a Brendan Leipsic over a 3rd round pick every time - and in this context, particularly when you have the kind of forward spots opening up that the Canucks do. The same imo was true in the wake of an extremely scarce prospect pool - the sense in adding the Baertschis etc was clear - the team lacked propsects at all levels and needed to uptick their odds where possible. I think they did a good job of maximizing both sides of that equation. I hope they can add a pick or two this draft - but at a certain point you simply don't need the volume - what you need is quality - and it's literally impossible to argue that they haven't extracted the quality they 'should' have out of their draft record. That said - I don't see a re-re-whatchamacallit being 99.5% re-re-ed. I think there are still a handful of spots at the NHL level that stand to be upgraded - some held by placeholders, some vacated spots - the team may have good young potential assets to step into those spots, but until they're realistically filled by NHL assets, that re-re-meter sits far below 99.5%