yikes...

So let's say that
Nylander = Klinger + Faska
Lily = Robertson
Honka = 3rd

Why is Toronto paying so much? And they don't even need Honka since they have Sandin

No.

Klinger+Honka = Nylander
Lily = Robertson
Faksa = 2nd+3rd.

This would be an easy no for me.

I’d say no to Dallas deal from both sides really. There’s just too many additional parts that don’t add up for me.

Since when is a 30 pt player worth a 2nd and a 3rd? If Kerfoot, who is fairly consistently 40 pts on a fair salary is worth a 2nd then Faksa IS NOT worth a 2nd and a 3rd.
We don't need or want Honka either, he would be burried in the AHL.

Also just thought I would point out the prod minute for Faksa compared to our depth C option

Faksa: 52. 26


Spezza: 25. 07
Gauthier: 47. 43
Kerfoot: 34. 17

So ya, we have 3 of our depth C options producing at a higher rate then Faksa. Even if we move Kerfoot then Gauthier is still the better option.

I like that breakdown. And using that, I say it maybe a 3rd rounder too much. That's steep for Faska.

Overall, I don't do it. Leafs fans are quick to move Nylander, and although Klingberg is a good return here it won't offset things enough to say I am doing that. Not sure the Stars have the depth at RD to pull that off either.

Because Faksa is close to elite defensively. He was 24th last year in Selke voting, 7th year before that...

He doesn't contribute that much offensively, but defensively he's a stud.

Let's just say that DAL is not moving him without 2nd and 3rd. He brings so much on the ice for his team.

I made a post regarding Stars, where this trade was borrowed from.

Johnsson for Bennett is actually pretty interesting thought, now dump Kerfoot also and than the Leafs got cap space.

Not trying to sound condescending, but genuinely curious: Do you have any numbers to back that up? It's just that everything I've seen on the guy shows that, yeah he plays tough competition, but really doesn't perform very well against it.

Admittedly, this year hasn't been as good for him as the latest. But mostly I could say the biggest factor is the amount of d-zone starts he takes in comparison to how little goals DAL lets through. Last year, the ratio between the defensive compared to offensive zone starts was 74% to 26%, and the on ice save percentage with Faksa on ice was 93.5% in 2017-18 and 92.7% in 2018-19.

In comparison, these stats are higher than that of Cirelli's and Danault's respective stats for example, which are regarded as a great defensive centers. Obviously why those two are more valuable than Faksa is because they contribute offensively as well.

Also the guy doesn't fail the eye test, although that's a tad harder to prove. The only way to do that would be watching DAL games.

You can see more here: https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/f/faksara01.html and https://frozenpool.dobbersports.com/frozenpool_playerusage.php?team=DAL

Drop Honka and the picks and I think it’s even

Klinger and Fox = Nylander
JRob = Gren

Fox could probably contribute quite a bit more offense if he didn’t have Cogs and Comeau chained to his ankles

That's true

Nah I disagree.

I get the context - he's plays a shut down role. But given his subpar possession/shot rates over the last two years, isn't that indicative that he's benefiting from the high Sv% rather than the reverse?

That’s fair. I’d be thrilled to get more from the trade. I just figired Klinger only having two years left...

I personally think he's one of the big reasons why the sv% is so high, but he's offensively quite strapped since he's constantly playing with weaker wingers such as Cogliano and Comeau. Granted they're a shutdown line, but in my opinion Faksa could do much better with better linemates. I see potential on the guy.

Problem is that DAL has many Cs at the moment, and Faksa's not getting past Seguin and Hintz for a TOP6 role.

Also almost all DAL players have quite poor possession numbers to be fair, mostly because they're defense first team and thus they're not the team that is most active with the puck. Rather they live by counterattacks and letting as small amount of goals as possible. This particularily explains why for example Lindell has so poor numbers, but he's still very highly rated D in the organisation, since he works so much on his over-defensive role.

But why do you think that he's a big reason why the Sv% is so high? If he kept high danger chances to a minimum that would make sense, but he's been only average in that area over the last two years and ranks 8th (2nd last) among Dallas forwards with min 100 games played in terms of high danger corsi against and hdcf%.

And yes, Dallas isn't a particularly possession focused team, but his numbers are shocking, ranking low in most categories either by a league standpoint or relative to his teammates (often both). Now, is there something to be said for context (i.e QoC, QoT, and Zone starts)? Of course. He would definitely have better numbers if he were a little more sheltered, but it's just a tough sell to me that he's some elite shutdown center when that's the role he's been playing with results that have been far from dazzling over the last two years.

I honestly am amazed by the fact how bad numbers pretty much all DAL players have, but still the team keeps being winning in a rate good enough to get us safe from the qualification round. It was sort of funny when I started to watch those numbers, because they just don't tend to add up. Normally the team with DAL possession numbers would be in the bottom of the league, but apparently they can defend well enough that the fact the numbers are poor don't really have an effect on how the team ACTUALLY performs. It's a weird concept, really.

This is my personal view which numbers can't really back up (partly due to how he's being used his whole career), but I'm almost 100% sure that Faksa would flourish in an environment that doesn't force him to be in the defensive zone two thirds of every single game. Or if he played with players that can shoot the puck to even some extent. Cogliano is fast and durable, but he can't do sh*t with the puck, and Comeau is basically just a block of meat on the ice with a stick on his hands...he don't really get much help from his linemates. Also why I personally wouldn't want to let him go for cheap.

I noticed that Stars started to use him on power plays as a power forward playing front of the goal, and it actually worked pretty well. So the guy is versatile in a sense.

As for why I think he's the big reason why our sv% is so high, it's particularily due to the fact that he's the only capable player of our shutdown line(s), as I previously explained.

As a team, what they do actually works quite well. Their basic possession numbers aren't horrible, not great either - just kind of average. Where they capitalize as a team is the high danger chances; they get a lot and don't allow much. And they're pretty much right in that sweet spot in terms of PDO, so it looks like it's sustainable for them.

As for Faksa, though, he was riding an absolute bender with that 93.5%, indicating a significant luck factor and likely regression which is what happened. In terms of a different environment, I'm sure it would help, but I can't speak to 'flourishing' because I haven't seen enough of him.

Indeed.

That description of how DAL plays actually fits quite well.

Imo Faksa's former performance justifies a return of 2nd+3rd, despite his offensive totals have room for improvement.

Yeah, I admire it from an outside perspective - they sacrifice quantity and instead dominate the quality in terms of shots/chances. It's a good philosophy and obviously works for them.

I'm just personally not there, regarding Faksa's value but I suppose it's just an agree to disagree scenario.

Yeah.

I recall from those times when PIT was contending, trying to win 3rd time in a row and PIT fans on the site demanded a 3C for them. Faksa was the most usual option back in 2018.

And he was almost always valued at 1st round pick due to his defensive abilities.

We've come far from those times, but I still view him to be of high value. Some people don't, and they're entitled to think that way.