Jump to content

Trade ideas and speculation


Hoss

Recommended Posts

Edmonton should have tried to move RNH at the draft this past year.  I think there was an oppurtunity to trade with Phoenix or Toronto and get the 3rd or 4th pick. If they had done that they could have had say... Pick #4, Morgan Rielly, and insert forward here. That would have made them a much better team.   Edmonton falls in love with players and refuses to move them when they should. Reminds me of someone... oh well the name slipped my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liger, are you saying that RNH would have gotten pick 4 and Morgan Rielly?

Haha whoops, not what I meant.  I am saying pick #4 and something or Morgan Reilly and Something for RNH.  Not combined. Sorry I realized how I wrote it.  My bad.

Basically Noah Hanifin and (a forward) or Morgan Reilly and (a forward).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha whoops, not what I meant. I am saying pick #4 and something or Morgan Reilly and Something for RNH. Not combined. Sorry I realized how I wrote it. My bad.

 

Basically Noah Hanifin and (a forward) or Morgan Reilly and (a forward).

I getcha. I was wondering if you implied pick 1 would also be in the deal or something haha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liger, are you saying that RNH would have gotten pick 4 and Morgan Rielly?

Was just about to post this.  Listening to Leaf media everyday and Reilly is the leafs Savior right now.  Talking heads saying he has no flaws.  Don't watch the leafs enough to know how good he is but the city may burn to the ground if he gets traded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was just about to post this.  Listening to Leaf media everyday and Reilly is the leafs Savior right now.  Talking heads saying he has no flaws.  Don't watch the leafs enough to know how good he is but the city may burn to the ground if he gets traded.

I don't think they would trade him now. But they might have at the draft when they wanted a center badly. 

 

Reilly is an interesting comparison to Ristolainen too IMPO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they would trade him now. But they might have at the draft when they wanted a center badly. 

 

Reilly is an interesting comparison to Ristolainen too IMPO.

Agreed.  Dude played over 24 min last night in a game that ended in regulation.  Same age as Risto too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I continue to be utterly captivated by this whole thing. If he leaves, why? Does he hate Cooper that much? Is the allure of playing in Toronto that high? Did Yzerman lowball him? If so, why did Yzerman lowball him? Or didn't he, and Stamkos (see: his agent) has an inflated sense of his value? 

 

 

He's leaving, and the Leafs are going to regret every loony the spend on him

 

My only concern would be if his drop in play really is because he hates Cooper. I think that would say something pretty negative about Stamkos, but Toronto getting 50-60 goal and 90 point Stamkos would really, really suck. THAT Stamkos + Rielly + Nylander + Marner is a heck of a new core.

Edited by TrueBlueGED
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My only concern would be if his drop in play really is because he hates Cooper. I think that would say something pretty negative about Stamkos, but Toronto getting 50-60 goal and 90 point Stamkos would really, really suck. THAT Stamkos + Rielly + Nylander + Marner is a heck of a new core.

His drop in play is the same date as his leg injury, no? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I continue to be utterly captivated by this whole thing. If he leaves, why? Does he hate Cooper that much? Is the allure of playing in Toronto that high? Did Yzerman lowball him? If so, why did Yzerman lowball him? Or didn't he, and Stamkos (see: his agent) has an inflated sense of his value? 

 

My only concern would be if his drop in play really is because he hates Cooper. I think that would say something pretty negative about Stamkos, but Toronto getting 50-60 goal and 90 point Stamkos would really, really suck. THAT Stamkos + Rielly + Nylander + Marner is a heck of a new core.

 

Well, I think "lowball" and "value" are in the eye of the beholder.  There are probably at least a half-dozen or so players in the league that most hockey people would rather have than Stamkos, so in the abstract, when Stamkos ends up being the highest-paid player in the league this summer -- and, I'd guess, by a nice margin -- the "value" will be skewed.  But in reality, his "value" is whatever someone is willing to pay him. 

 

If Yzerman's offer to him maxed out at $10MM per year, which would make him the 3rd-highest paid-player in the NHL, is that a "lowball?"  Not by the standards of most sane and decent smallfolk in the 7 kingdoms, no.  But Yzerman, Stamkos, Bob McKenzie and DeLuca67 all know that someone is going to give him $12MM+ per year this summer -- so in that sense, it could be viewed as a lowball -- i.e. an offer that is a solid 15% or so below his market value, and one that has little chance of being accepted.

 

As for the drop in play that you and others keep referring to -- he did have 43 goals last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I think "lowball" and "value" are in the eye of the beholder.  There are probably at least a half-dozen or so players in the league that most hockey people would rather have than Stamkos, so in the abstract, when Stamkos ends up being the highest-paid player in the league this summer -- and, I'd guess, by a nice margin -- the "value" will be skewed.  But in reality, his "value" is whatever someone is willing to pay him. 

 

If Yzerman's offer to him maxed out at $10MM per year, which would make him the 3rd-highest paid-player in the NHL, is that a "lowball?"  Not by the standards of most sane and decent smallfolk in the 7 kingdoms, no.  But Yzerman, Stamkos, Bob McKenzie and DeLuca67 all know that someone is going to give him $12MM+ per year this summer -- so in that sense, it could be viewed as a lowball -- i.e. an offer that is a solid 15% or so below his market value, and one that has little chance of being accepted.

 

As for the drop in play that you and others keep referring to -- he did have 43 goals last year.

 

Your first two paragraphs are well taken.

 

As to the bold, it's a drop in performance, which of course is quite different than bad performance. The concern is you're paying for 2009-2013 Stamkos and what you're getting is 2014-15 Stamkos. If his production this year holds (who knows if it will), it'll be his worst scoring rate since his rookie season. His possession metrics are also on a four year skid. Here's a list of his points/60 rate relative Corsi % for his career:

 

08-09: 2.3  9.8%

09-10: 3.4  12.4%

10-11: 3.3  11%

11-12: 3.2  12.5%

12-13: 3.2  12%

13-14: 3.2  11.9%

14-15: 2.6  10.2%

15-16: 2.4  3.1%

 

His production has declined, it's not debatable. I'm not interested in paying him his market value ($11-12 million per year) for seven years for this reason and the reasons I laid out previously. I understand why (probably) most are, nor would I freak out if we paid him. But I see risk sufficient to not go down this path. Unlike many star players, he's showing signs of conforming to the aging curve.

 

If I could get him for in the $9 million dollar range, my tune changes quite a bit. But I'm not about to be the "let's trade Stafford and a pick and get Malkin in here" guy :)

Edited by TrueBlueGED
Link to comment
Share on other sites

His drop in play is the same date as his leg injury, no? 

 

Yup. He hurt it in November 2013, and that's when his production started dropping. Hell, at the beginning of last season he was publicly wondering if it would ever truly be the same: http://news.nationalpost.com/sports/nhl/has-steven-stamkos-of-the-tampa-bay-lightning-fully-recovered-from-last-years-broken-leg

 

I guess I'd be more surprised if having a 16 inch titanium rod fused to his leg didn't have a lasting effect than if it does.

 

“Well, that’s kind of the million-dollar question right there: is it ever going to feel the same as pre-injury? I don’t know the answer to that,” the Tampa Bay sniper said Friday, a practice day for the Lightning in preparation for Saturday’s game against the Vancouver Canucks.
 
“We’re closing in on a year [since he snapped his right tibia against a Boston goalpost last Nov. 11], and usually they say that’s kind of when the body is adjusted to the injury and probably heals to the capacity it’s going to heal, so I’m looking forward to getting to that mark and seeing how it does feel.”
Edited by TrueBlueGED
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your first two paragraphs are well taken.

 

As to the bold, it's a drop in performance, which of course is quite different than bad performance. The concern is you're paying for 2009-2013 Stamkos and what you're getting is 2014-15 Stamkos. If his production this year holds (who knows if it will), it'll be his worst scoring rate since his rookie season. His possession metrics are also on a four year skid. Here's a list of his points/60 rate relative Corsi % for his career:

 

08-09: 2.3  9.8%

09-10: 3.4  12.4%

10-11: 3.3  11%

11-12: 3.2  12.5%

12-13: 3.2  12%

13-14: 3.2  11.9%

14-15: 2.6  10.2%

15-16: 2.4  3.1%

 

His production has declined, it's not debatable. I'm not interested in paying him his market value ($11-12 million per year) for seven years for this reason and the reasons I laid out previously. I understand why (probably) most are, nor would I freak out if we paid him. But I see risk sufficient to not go down this path. Unlike many star players, he's showing signs of conforming to the aging curve.

 

If I could get him for in the $9 million dollar range, my tune changes quite a bit. But I'm not about to be the "let's trade Stafford and a pick and get Malkin in here" guy :)

 

Good data on the production decline, as always.  But here's a question that you may or may not have fancystats for:  how does his decline compare to the leaguewide decline in scoring?  (Leaving aside the falling-off-the-table Corsi decline, which I think is more of a 5-man metric than a 1-man metric, right?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good data on the production decline, as always.  But here's a question that you may or may not have fancystats for:  how does his decline compare to the leaguewide decline in scoring?  (Leaving aside the falling-off-the-table Corsi decline, which I think is more of a 5-man metric than a 1-man metric, right?).

 

NHL scoring hasn't really declined much since 2011. Since the 11-12 season, the average goals per game has fluctuated between 2.72 and 2.74. This season it's down to 2.65, but it's early still, so who knows where it ends up.

 

The reason I used relative Corsi was it controls for team, since it's comparing his individual performance to that of his teammates, rather than comparing team vs. team. That said, if I had to guess, I'd say the modest possession decline was real, while this year's falling off a cliff is more of an outlying result than an indication that he has in fact fallen off a cliff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...