17 juin 2019
Maple Leafs de Toronto
Deuxième équipe favorite
Canucks de Vancouver
Messages dans les forums
Messages par jour
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>HabsForEver</b></div><div>I imagine Johnsson or Kerfoot are gone before Kapanen though</div></div>
I think the opposite! I think Kapanen will go before Johnsson and Johnsson before Kerfoot.. Not to throw shade, but I think Kapanen's value is really only his speed....his shooting/shot selection is pretty terrible, hes not particularly physical and his playmaking is well.....non...existent...
Johnsson's got great physicality, esp on the forecheck, something we need, OK playmaking, OK shot selection, I see him as more well rounded than Kap.
Kerfoot, I havent watched too much of, but he comes across as a younger, less skillful, less physical 3C. Clear downgrade from Kadri
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mytduxfan</b></div><div>Exactly!
Even adding Kapanen wouldn't be enough. We'd be losing our only RD to add a RW. We're stacked on the RW. It's just a terrible trade all-around and doesn't take into consideration our needs.
I agree with your assessment of Manson. I think he tends to get overrated because of "advanced stats". At his best, he's a gritty, borderline #2 willing to make hits and fight if called upon. However, more often than not, he's an inconsistent 2nd pairing D-man. He'll still make those hits and fight if necessary, but he's prone to mistakes.
However, I think what makes Manson so attractive is that he's a RD with a rare skillset (size, willing to fight and hit, mobility) and on a beauty of a contract. Not many teams have a player that does what Manson does. He's very valuable asset. I agree he often gets talked about as if he's an out-and-out top pairing D-man. He's not, but he's worth more than 2 cap dumps and late 2nd round pick. Given that he's our only RD, I don't think I'd trade him for anyone realistically available in TOR and I certainly wouldn't move him for a package.
The position of a 1st does matter to some degree. Regardless, would you trade your only RD and a player with a skillset that is very hard to replace for 2 cap dumps and 1st round pick next year? Forget the cap dumps, I wouldn't do it for the 1st alone.
The offer is quite frankly ridiculous and doesn't consider our team needs at all.</div></div>
To summarize what has been said so far and my contribution:
I do think the deal has potential, specifically if the leafs increase what they are giving to Anaheim for Manson. Manson's greatest value (aside from his ability on the ice as a well rounded offensive d-man) is his cap hit and term. Dubas has indicated that he prefers to trade for players that have term on their contracts, so Manson fits the bill there as well as being a RHD.
Now, in terms of add ons, I do think there is very little difference between a 1st round or a 2nd round pick in shallow draft years. If we are talking about a deep draft year (which unless I am mistaken, 2020 will likely not be), then the difference between a 1st and a 2nd becomes more salient.
Perhaps something by way of increasing the deal to make it more "fair" for both parties could entail adding on another 1st or 2nd round pick and/or throwing in someone like Connor Brown.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Claebom</b></div><div>These stats only track partial seasons, so they're not very accurate. But breaking them down and comparing relative is probably fine... In 2018-2019's 15 or so games they tracked, Ceci maintained possession on entries nearly as much as Maatta, but maintained possession on exits much more. Their entry defense was relatively similar. However, Maatta dominated in only one area: shot contributions. In 2017-2018, in Ceci's 25 games and Maatta's 54 that were tracked, they had comparable entries, Ceci had better exit percentages and did a good job of limiting entries from the opposing team per 60, but Maatta did have better numbers outside of that. In 2016-2017, Ceci was better across the board apart from shot contribution. Shocking that a guy relied upon to only play the defensive zone had lesser offensive numbers than a guy starting more in the offensive zone (and on a much better team). So no, these numbers further establish that these are both guys who are inconsistent from year to year and that their defensive abilities are a shot in the dark. Maatta is locked up on a contract much like Ceci's will be; it's arbitration so of course he went high and the Sens went low. The 3rd party arbitrator settled at $4.3M while Maatta makes $4.1 for the next three years. I.e. Comparable. By this rationale, Maatta is no better than Ceci and his trade is market value for a player of Ceci's caliber. Don't get me wrong, Ceci is not very good... but market price is market price.
I do agree that Puljujarvi deserves a chance and that he's probably better than what he's shown, but let's pump the brakes on his value here. He's shown nothing except being drafted high. He's not much better than Kahun is, although he is younger. Direct comparisons to Yakupov are early, but at least Yak was putting up 30 point seasons vs Puljujarvi not being able to crack the weakest forward group in the league.</div></div>
I strongly agree with your analysis. I do think that market value on Ceci is high primarily based on who is available for trade or via trade agency. Ceci is comparable to Maatta, and I think arguing that one is better than the other is splitting hairs at this point.
For Puljujarvi, you hit it spot on. All he has going for him is that he was drafted high, and he has not proven himself at the NHL level yet. Couple that with the statements he made about wanting out of Edmonton, if he is to go anywhere, I would imagine any GM worth his salt willing to trade for him would put him on a bridge deal.