You’re kidding right?

Texier played 7 AHL games, 2 regular season NHL games, and 8 playoff games for CBJ, so yeah he's played in North America. Even if he hadn't played in NA yet, he was really good in Liiga last year and figures to be CBJ's 2 or 3C.

Andersen is one of the very best goalies in the NHL on an insanely good contract, and that is an objective fact. Trading him away as a cap dump is something that no currently employed GM would consider.

this covers about 1/5 of Andersen's value lol

I know you're a caps fan so I understand the biased 2nd trade (although some fans can make reasonable trades with/for their team). But Texier has played in the AHL and the NHL.

Foligno won't be on 1st, Hannikainen 13th F, Dano/Gerbe/Dalpe/Clendening will be down, Kukan and Harrington as scratches since Werenski (unsigned) and Gavrikov will play.

Likely a troll but hockey isn't back yet so I have time to waste

beauty

caps fans say the funniest SHIZZZZZZZZZZZZz

More nuanced than that. Responding to a much more ridiculous Texier for Stephenson offer: https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1403764 Peace?





Hutchinson posted .914 and 2.85 in Toronto last year. Basically interchangeable with Andersen's 2.77 and .917. Andersen got signed/traded after taking the Ducks to the conference finals. Counting those conference finals, he's lost his last four straight playoff rounds. Toronto can sign Neuvirth around 800k, who has played in parts of five rounds, but only one whole one, which he won. Yes, Andersen is 25-20, career, playoffs, and Neuvirth is only 14-14, but if the difference means whether you can lock up Marner for eight years or not, Neuvirth is fine, even before you realize that Andersen in Toronto is only 11-13 in the playoffs, while Neuvirth is 14-14 with the Caps and Flyers, so he's probably a much better goalie?

No... to everything you just said. Leafs have losses in the playoffs as a team. Andersen has been incredibly reliable with a heavy work load. Small sample backup goalies are not going to step in on a team that wants to compete now.

If leafs really wanted to overpay marner (they do ‘t) they could move Hyman or ceci.

This should go without saying, but 5 NHL games is far too small of a sample size to draw conclusions on, so comparing 18-19 Hutchinson to 18-19 Andersen proves nothing about either player. Per evolving-hockey.com, Andersen has saved 41.76 goals above expected since coming to Toronto, placing him third in the league behind Gibson and Bobrovsky, and 8 GSAx better than fourth place Braden Holtby over that span, so I'd recommend looking past such bad stats as GAA if you want a better idea of how good a goalie he actually is (GSAx is still not perfect, but it's pretty close). Also, you as a Caps fan should know how truly stupid it is to place blame for playoff failures on just one player (remember all those "trade Ovi" columns from years past?), and regardless of who you root for, playoff wins and losses are ludicrously stupid stat to evaluate a player's overall value or skill. By that logic, Chris Osgood is better than Dominik Hasek because Osgood had more playoff wins than Hasek.

Hyman, I believe, but he's on IR, and the coach loves him so trading him won't happen and wouldn't help much. Ceci, I'm not sure. I think they need his puck movement and shot blocking enough to gamble on his positional play, and nobody else wants his salary without retention, because he's minus infinity.

I agree Andersen is super-reliable... until March. Columbus would love to get back to the postseason and keep on building, after a big year last year. He'd be a great fit, there. Toronto couldn't miss this year's playoffs if they tried. They need someone who hasn't lost their last four playoff rounds, to help them get through at least the first round for a change.

Columbus has a backup goalie and a bunch of rookies. They'd probably trade for Hutchinson, instead, but Andersen would be way better for Toronto. Keep arguing, though? Because as a Caps fan, I kinda hope the Leafs don't figure this one out.

That’s some good weed you got

Figure what out? The money for marner is there and Andersen is a great goalie. Figured any team in the east would love to see us trade off a legit number 1 goalie as a cap dump.

Moving Hyman would give us money to sign Mitch to 12.5m ceci would allow us to give him 15m Andersen would allow us to give him 15.5 m. I think we give him 10m and keep everyone.

(Note to the 90% of NHL fans in the 21st century: here in Flyover, this is still an insult of someone's intelligence!)

Oh, dear. You sure have insulted me. Gosh. I must be one of those creative hippies like Steve Jobs and Paul Allen. What was I thinking, being so divergent with my ideas? I do apologize, Mister Pretend Kekalainen.

I mean, you did call Texier an unknown prospect that has never played in NA yet, but okay Stevie, thanks for iPhone

My pleasure. As I mentioned above, with a link, I'm responding to someone who suggested Texier for Stephenson and a 1st. Can we agree that was unreasonable, since Stephenson plays 1st PK, has won a Cup, and has played two full seasons pretty well in the NHL, plus parts of two others, while Texier has four points in his first ten games?


Yep. Ten, also.

I would still guess that Texier is not the Blue Jackets' top forward prospect behind, Robinson (half an NHL season played) and first round picks like Foudy, Milano, and Dano.

I do think that Stephenson is available for a mid-round pick or a prospect who's showing some improvement. Maybe Fix-Wolansky? I don't know. What's a cheap, established NHLer worth?

Sounds good. Might be tough after that Matthews deal, but keeping together a winning team is usually a good idea.

Going back to your jab at "small sample size backup goalies," that sounds more like Hutchinson than Neuvirth? Do you have a prediction at backup? A Hutchinson trade and Neuvirth signing might help Marner at ten and change fit when all the defense is healthy. If so, what do you think the Leafs would ask from Columbus?

I think you need to reassess how you value players. PK1 doesn’t really mean much. Texier is CBJ top prospect, you don’t trade those for dime-a-dozen 4th liners. To be fair, just leave all CBJ prospects out of your trades unless you offer something of value

Robinson has played 14 NHL games, so again, I'm not sure where you're getting all this bad info about CBJ prospects and how many games they've played and where. He was about a 0.5 point per game player for AHL Cleveland last year in 45 games and hasn't scored at the NHL level yet, but sure, I bet he's behind Texier, who scored nearly 0.75 ppg against men in Liiga at 19 years old, or Bemstrom, who led the SHL in goal scoring also in his age 19 season (and also against grown men), or even Foudy, who is a phenomenal skater and played well in the OHL last year. Furthermore, Bemstrom and Texier are rated as their #1 and #2 prospects by The Athletic (in the tier "very good NHL prospect), while Robinson is #9 (in the tier "legit/chance bubble"), so there's that too.

Finally, Chandler Stephenson has no NHL value. He is an offensive black hole, mediocre defensively, and is only average on the PK. Just because someone continues to inexplicably get NHL playing time doesn't mean that they are an intrinsically valuable player (take Milan Lucic, Nikita Zaitsev, Cody Ceci, etc. for examples), and in Stevie's case I think he'd be more likely to get claimed off waivers than get traded for anything.

This makes sense. You could say some of the same things about Brandon Dubinsky, though, and CBJ pay him $5.8M a year?

The Athletic has the Caps' prospects ranked 30th, overall, and the Hurricanes' prospects listed at 8th. The Caps' prospects just beat a team of Canes prospects 10-3. So.... I'm gonna stick with sleepily looking up individual stats, even if I get it wrong half the time, and not paying a former ESPN.com journalist to do quite all of my thinking for me? Given the error-correcting capability of internet forums, there's just no need!

Bemstrom and Texier might come out ahead of Foudy, Milano, and Dano, on someone's spreadsheet, but the latter three have years of North American experience. Bemstrom has none. Texier has, like, almost a month, counting a terrific stint in the AHL? There's certainly no harm in Columbus giving them a try, and I agree that Stephenson isn't worth either, if that's still what we're arguing about, but like I said above, I was responding to a trade of Texier for Stephenson plus Washington's first round pick, which I hope you'll agree is not reasonable, based on three weeks of pretty good North American hockey? I mean... people post Dano and Milano trades on here all the time, and I find them all unrealistic, because it's too soon and they could still pan out?

You literally just agreed in this thread that 5 or even 10 games is too small of a sample size to draw conclusions from, and now you're saying that one prospect tournament game is enough to totally discredit a guy whose whole job is to scout and evaluate prospects. Simply remarkable levels of unearned confidence on display here

Whether a sample size is big enough to be significant, in stats, depends on how different the data in that sample are from the expected results. You take an undrafted college player who scores 42 points in 22 games as a 20 year old Freshman, and it starts to look reasonable to assume he might turn into something: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=4052

Putting Texier ahead of a bunch of 1st round draft picks because of four points in ten NHL games seems to discount the tradition among veteran NHL players to help the new guy get his first couple of goals by passing to him a whole lot. And four points in ten games is just not that different from the two points an average rookie might get in their first ten games to discount that it's a couple of lucky bounces making him look good.

If the Caps' prospects beat Carolina's prospects 5-3, no one cares. 10-3 makes a statement that they're at least able to keep up with the supposedly much better group. Now, if the ranking doesn't exist, do they even feel the need to keep trying to score goals after 5-3? Maybe not. But it does, and they responded to it pretty well.

Most people remember learning about sample size on a yes/no survey: https://sciencing.com/meaning-sample-size-5988804.html

When there are only two possible outcomes (yes/no) then you can absolutely define a minimum sample size.

When you're sampling for something that can be infinitely high, like point totals, I mean, Stephenson could hypothetically score 30 goals on opening night this year, add another 30 in game two, and people who mistake rules of thumb and generalities for actual statistical practices might say, well, it's too small of a sample size to say if he's any better than last year.

Yeah, in an offhand way, without putting much thought into it, I agreed with the rule of thumb above. Thanks for pointing out my lack of intellectual rigor. I suppose depending on what null hypothesis you're trying to disprove, and to what confidence interval, Texier's 10 games might make some kind of a statement, but I'm guessing it would have to be a really guarded statement. Like.... does this guy have a 50% chance to 20 points next year? Yeah. Sure. He might. So might Stephenson.