Phaneuf To Sens

[Frank E]

Meh.

 

[dappleganger]

Shea Weber has 3 more career points than Dion Phaneuf, both drafted in 2003.

 

[rdowdall]

Similar analysis has been shown that there's not a world of difference between having the #31 pick or the #99 pick. Despite that, I think you'd agree that in terms of asset value Columbus' or the Leafs' second round pick right now is significantly more valuable than, say, Montreal's 4th.

You aren't comparing the same thing though.  Those picks are 68 picks apart in difference, where the difference in the comparison that I was making is likely 25 picks and at the most 38 picks in difference.  Even if you want to talk about round numbers you are going from the 2nd to 4th as opposed to 1st to the 2nd.

Likewise, the second rounder being a year out doesn't just throw its value into question based on where it is, it also makes any player taken with it a year further away.

I would buy that argument if the rebuild hinged on trading Phanuef.  I don't think it does.  They could have kept Phanuef, and I would have been okay with it.  A pick in any draft still has value as it is an added prospect in the talent pool.

And, again, no garbage. And, again, this with the assumption that Phaneuf is a player you're pumped to have on the team for 5 years.

Even still some of that could be offset by the fact that the prospect that they got is perceived to be better than the prospects that were shipped back to Calgary and a prospect that they wanted to get in to the system.  Again, perhaps a bit tilted towards the Calgary trade, but not significantly so.

Who is pumped about having Phanuef on the team?  The Leafs or the Sens?  If it's the Leafs, some of that might have been apple polishing.  I don't mind if they are singing the praises of their players in order to drive the price up to an acceptable level for them.  If they took the approach of "This player is the absolute best player we have" and fielded offers on him, and then took the best one, then I think they took the right approach. 

 

[Kin]

You aren't comparing the same thing though.  Those picks are 68 picks apart in difference, where the difference in the comparison that I was making is likely 25 picks and at the most 38 picks in difference.  Even if you want to talk about round numbers you are going from the 2nd to 4th as opposed to 1st to the 2nd.

I'm absolutely comparing the same thing because you brought up talking about the relative value of picks according to data-specific analysis that tries to peg their value in a historical context. You can't bring that up when it suits your purpose and then pretend you didn't. If you want to talk about the relative perceived value of picks based on their rounds then look at how many people think Polak might land a 2nd vs. how many think he'll land a 1st.

I would buy that argument if the rebuild hinged on trading Phanuef.  I don't think it does.  They could have kept Phanuef, and I would have been okay with it.  A pick in any draft still has value as it is an added prospect in the talent pool.

It isn't about "buying" an argument. You'd rather have a pick when you have a better understanding of the draft class/where the pick will be. Sure, it still has value. Just less.

Even still some of that could be offset by the fact that the prospect that they got is perceived to be better than the prospects that were shipped back to Calgary and a prospect that they wanted to get in to the system.  Again, perhaps a bit tilted towards the Calgary trade, but not significantly so.

Perceived by who? You? Did you read a lot of how Reto Berra was perceived when Calgary traded him? What's the basis for that comparison. Lindberg is a 4th round pick with 5 goals in 34 AHL games. Also, you can't just ignore that Toronto also included prospects here. Hockey's Future, which I admit isn't a bible or anything, doesn't have Lindberg ranked significantly higher than Casey Bailey. The prospects in this deal might very well be a wash.

Who is pumped about having Phanuef on the team?  The Leafs or the Sens?  If it's the Leafs, some of that might have been apple polishing.

I'm saying that if you're genuinely excited about adding a player, having them under contract for five years as opposed to one is a good thing, not a bad thing.

 

[bustaheims]

It wasn't known but it might speak to the idea that he was a "worse" prospect than what the Leafs got.

I'd say it's more that Colorado overpaid to acquire him. Everyone on the deadline day panels seemed pretty shocked that they were willing to part with a 2nd round pick for a 27 y/o goalie who, at the time, had a sub-.900 Sv% in 29 NHL games. He's been a capable backup goalie for Colorado in the two seasons since, but that's still an overpayment.

 

[Kin]

I'd say it's more that Colorado overpaid to acquire him. Everyone on the deadline day panels seemed pretty shocked that they were willing to part with a 2nd round pick for a 27 y/o goalie who, at the time, had a sub-.900 Sv% in 29 NHL games.

Well, ok, but by that same rationale I don't think anyone hearing this trade was saying "We got Tobias Lindberg?!?!?" and then breaking into spontaneous dance. Outside of "he's a guy the Leafs like" there's not much to go on.

But, you know, to bring this back to where I was if this is the best the Leafs could do...alright. I'm not mad at it.

 

[rdowdall]

You aren't comparing the same thing though.  Those picks are 68 picks apart in difference, where the difference in the comparison that I was making is likely 25 picks and at the most 38 picks in difference.  Even if you want to talk about round numbers you are going from the 2nd to 4th as opposed to 1st to the 2nd.

I'm absolutely comparing the same thing because you brought up talking about the relative value of picks according to data-specific analysis that tries to peg their value in a historical context. You can't bring that up when it suits your purpose and then pretend you didn't. If you want to talk about the relative perceived value of picks based on their rounds then look at how many people think Polak might land a 2nd vs. how many think he'll land a 1st.

I would buy that argument if the rebuild hinged on trading Phanuef.  I don't think it does.  They could have kept Phanuef, and I would have been okay with it.  A pick in any draft still has value as it is an added prospect in the talent pool.

It isn't about "buying" an argument. You'd rather have a pick when you have a better understanding of the draft class/where the pick will be. Sure, it still has value. Just less.

Even still some of that could be offset by the fact that the prospect that they got is perceived to be better than the prospects that were shipped back to Calgary and a prospect that they wanted to get in to the system.  Again, perhaps a bit tilted towards the Calgary trade, but not significantly so.

Perceived by who? You? Did you read a lot of how Reto Berra was perceived when Calgary traded him? What's the basis for that comparison. Lindberg is a 4th round pick with 5 goals in 34 AHL games. Also, you can't just ignore that Toronto also included prospects here. Hockey's Future, which I admit isn't a bible or anything, doesn't have Lindberg ranked significantly higher than Casey Bailey. The prospects in this deal might very well be a wash.

Who is pumped about having Phanuef on the team?  The Leafs or the Sens?  If it's the Leafs, some of that might have been apple polishing.

I'm saying that if you're genuinely excited about adding a player, having them under contract for five years as opposed to one is a good thing, not a bad thing.

Okay.  The leafs got significantly less than Calgary did for Bouwmeester.

 

[Kin]

Okay.  The leafs got significantly less than Calgary did for Bouwmeester.

Hey, I said it was an ok trade if it was the best they could do. If the return is significantly less than Bouwmeester, all that means to me is that the way Phaneuf is perceived around the league is different to how Bouwmeester was perceived which, again, I understand.

 

[Rebel_1812]

Wow, they got nothing for Phaneuf.  You guys are saying no retained salary like it is a victory.  This guy was not one to just dump.  He is a good player and has value.  They should have tried to get something back for him.

 

[rdowdall]

Okay.  The leafs got significantly less than Calgary did for Bouwmeester.

Hey, I said it was an ok trade if it was the best they could do. If the return is significantly less than Bouwmeester, all that means to me is that the way Phaneuf is perceived around the league is different to how Bouwmeester was perceived which, again, I understand.

That wasn't facetious.  I was agreeing with you.  I could stand by my argument or I could agree.  I went with the latter.

 

[Kin]

That wasn't facetious.  I was agreeing with you.  I could stand by my argument or I could agree.  I went with the latter.

Sorry. I'm not used to people not being sarcastic.

 

[rdowdall]

That wasn't facetious.  I was agreeing with you.  I could stand by my argument or I could agree.  I went with the latter.

Sorry. I'm not used to people not being sarcastic.

No worries.  I was trying to word it in a way that would not be misconstrued.  I thought simpler would be better.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

He's on the table for 5 years/27.5 and you couldn't be happier. You're really excited about him filling that role at that cost for the next five years.

So then negotiations hit a snag. He's still available but now it's 5 years/35. Does your interest vanish? Is that a hard pass? Are cap dollars so valuable that overpaying a player by 1.5 million turns you off like that?

I agree with you that $5.5mil is probably a fair price for Phaneuf on the open market. Right now there's a handful of defencemen who recently signed for that rate as UFAs and I think they're all pretty comparable to Phaneuf (or at least are perceived as comparable in the league): Petry, Sekera, Orpik, Girardi. I'm assuming the teams that those players signed with were happy with the deals and see those players are defencemen that can help them.

To your 2nd point, do you really think if push came to shove any of them would have upped their offer to $7mil on a long-term deal? To me that would definitely have been a hard pass for all of them.

 

[Bender]

Wow, they got nothing for Phaneuf.  You guys are saying no retained salary like it is a victory.  This guy was not one to just dump.  He is a good player and has value.  They should have tried to get something back for him.

I find it funny that people think the group we have now wouldn't, you know, do their job.

 

[Kin]

To your 2nd point, do you really think if push came to shove any of them would have upped their offer to $7mil on a long-term deal? To me that would definitely have been a hard pass for all of them.

For those guys? No. Because, to me anyway, those guys are all 3/4 guys(and really more 4's). They're good players to add but if any of those guys are in your top 3, there's a pretty safe bet that nobody is talking about your top 3 like it's one of the best in the league. All of those guys are good, NHL defensemen but how excited do you suppose any fans were to add them?

Conversely, when I've been down-ish on Phaneuf some of his bigger advocates here have essentially said that the idea that he's a #3 is ridiculous. That he's an ok #1 or great #2. 25 minutes a night, the other team's best forwards and so on.

So I'm not saying this in an "I was right" sort of sense because like I said I've gone back and forth on him but I was maybe a little higher on him this year and so this return, like I said, is a bit disappointing but not in a "the team did a bad job" sense.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

For those guys? No. Because, to me anyway, those guys are all 3/4 guys(and really more 4's). They're good players to add but if any of those guys are in your top 3, there's a pretty safe bet that nobody is talking about your top 3 like it's one of the best in the league. All of those guys are good, NHL defensemen but how excited do you suppose any fans were to add them?

Conversely, when I've been down-ish on Phaneuf some of his bigger advocates here have essentially said that the idea that he's a #3 is ridiculous. That he's an ok #1 or great #2. 25 minutes a night, the other team's best forwards and so on.

So I'm not saying this in an "I was right" sort of sense because like I said I've gone back and forth on him but I was maybe a little higher on him this year and so this return, like I said, is a bit disappointing but not in a "the team did a bad job" sense.

Fair enough. I see him firmly as a #3 guy now, especially going forward. But obviously these terms are all subjective. Like a #2 defencemen is probably one of the rarest players in the league to me. Brent Seabrook is the classic example of one and I'd rank Phaneuf a slot below him.

 

[mr grieves]

Likewise, the second rounder being a year out doesn't just throw its value into question based on where it is, it also makes any player taken with it a year further away.

I would buy that argument if the rebuild hinged on trading Phanuef.  I don't think it does.  They could have kept Phanuef, and I would have been okay with it.  A pick in any draft still has value as it is an added prospect in the talent pool.

In the absence of CapGeek or time to explore its replacements, it's hard for me to know... But perhaps it won't be too insulting to ask here: what about keeping a young, emergent just-about-contending core together in 2019 or 2020? Reilly and Kadri need raises now. Before then (?), Nylander, Marner, and this year's first will need a not insubstantial post-ELC contracts. One or two of the scads of 'top 6 potential' prospects might pan out. And aside from needing cap space to pay all those guys, you'll likely want to find value -- not an overpayment -- on the second pairing. The rebuild itself mightn't be contingent on getting rid of Phaneuf, but maybe enjoying its fruits will be.

 

[rdowdall]

Likewise, the second rounder being a year out doesn't just throw its value into question based on where it is, it also makes any player taken with it a year further away.

I would buy that argument if the rebuild hinged on trading Phanuef.  I don't think it does.  They could have kept Phanuef, and I would have been okay with it.  A pick in any draft still has value as it is an added prospect in the talent pool.

In the absence of CapGeek or time to explore its replacements, it's hard for me to know... But perhaps it won't be too insulting to ask here: what about keeping a young, emergent just-about-contending core together in 2019 or 2020? Reilly and Kadri need raises now. Before then (?), Nylander, Marner, and this year's first will need a not insubstantial post-ELC contracts. One or two of the scads of 'top 6 potential' prospects might pan out. And aside from needing cap space to pay all those guys, you'll likely want to find value -- not an overpayment -- on the second pairing. The rebuild itself mightn't be contingent on getting rid of Phaneuf, but maybe enjoying its fruits will be.

I understood the point he was making, that the sooner the prospects are taken the sooner they can start to contribute to winning on a cheaper contract.  I was looking at it from the other angle where having a pipeline of prospects coming in isn't necessarily a bad thing. 

 

[sickbeast]

I have to say that I was never one of those fans that hated Phaneuf.  I actually always liked him.  He seemed like a decent enough player, a good teammate, and he had a good reputation off the ice.  Do I think he was ever worth $7 million per season?  Absolutely not.  Should he have been the captain?  No.  But he wasn't as terrible as a lot of people have made him out to be.  I wish him nothing but the best in Ottawa.  I do have to say, however, that Lou Lamoriello really pulled a rabbit out of his hat with this one.  He hit this one out of the park.  He got a good prospect, a 2nd rounder, plus 3 players that he can trade at next year's deadline.  I can really see Babcock bringing those guys around as well.  Who knows what we will get for them.  As a fan I'm starting to get really excited about this rebuild.  The end is getting closer.  We will bottom out this year and we should see some interesting things starting next season.  The tank is very strong this season now.  I love it!

 

[McGarnagle]

While I'm not against the trade, I think he'll help Ottawa quite a bit. He played a lot of hard minutes, rarely got injured, and was one of the few players that showed up to compete almost every night.

I think there will be a number of leaf fans holding their breath when Nylander goes up the ice with his head down against the Sens next year.