The easy part is done. Next step: Core overhaul

[ZBBM]

From Siegel's long piece today:

But to suggest this solely being a coaching issue ignores the reality of what?s taken place in Toronto over the course of many seasons, not just a single 40-game stretch. In terms of the very big picture, these are issues that have lingered since the days of Ron Wilson and Brian Burke, issues also tied to a flawed core, one that?s signed up for the long haul no less.

Kessel, van Riemsdyk, Dion Phaneuf, David Clarkson, Joffrey Lupul and Tyler Bozak are all locked up until at least 2018. And they?ve proven to be leaders of a team that?s hardly been good enough to qualify for the playoffs, let alone win a Cup.

Carlyle asked the same things of Kessel that Wilson did a few years earlier, neither able to make more than a slight dent in a player whose negatives ultimately outweigh all the offensive positives. To think that will change under another head coach seems naive at this point.

....

This core has shown itself capable of fringe playoff status and barely even that.

....

Untangling a web ultimately created by Nonis is really the grander challenge Shanahan faces in remaking the Leafs. What to do with Kessel and Phaneuf, who are under contract to 2021 and beyond? Where to turn to with the likes of Bozak and Clarkson? What pieces of the roster are worth salvaging and which pieces are worth spinning off for the betterment of the future? And given the size and length of certain contracts, which players are even capable of being shipped off if that?s deemed the appropriate step?

Of the 5 players in boldface, the one I'd want to keep is JVR, and maybe Bozak although he'd be overpaid as a 3C on a real contender.  I absolutely agree with him about Kessel, and I'm not convinced that the drop in scoring that would almost certainly come if he were moved couldn't be offset by better defensive results.

Clarkson is an albatross who we'll just have to relegate to the 4th line.

Phaneuf has real value in trade, much as I don't like his game.

Lupul wouldn't net you much but I've reluctantly concluded that his injury off-time outweighs his value.

Siegel doesn't address the issue of whether Bernier is the long-term solution in goal ? whether he's part of the core.  IMO the jury is still out, though I will be interested to see how his numbers fare under a team that should be better at Horacheking the opponent.

 

[Stickytape]

This is why I'm glad they dealt with Carlyle now, rather than at the end of the season. We need time to see the players get out from under his system, even just a little bit, to get that contrast between what was likely Carlyle's influence, and what is just the players being crap.  We won't get perfect data - far from it - but it will probably help.

I'm not married to any of the bolded names, though a year ago I wouldn't have been willing to part with any of them, except maaaaybe Phaneuf. But that was one tough year ago..

EDIT: I'll add that I don't see what moving JVR would accomplish, unless it's to pick up a piece that fits better with what we get post-overhaul. I don't think he's part of the problem.

 

[Peter D.]

I've been set for a core overhaul for a while now.  Heck, I wouldn't have thought to go forward with the current core in the first place.  But that's here nor there.

That being said, I'd say each could be useful in their own way when trying to build a contender, but they have to be surrounded better and their roles more defined.  I've ranked them in my order of least valuable (easiest to trade) to most valuable (rather not trade).

Clarkson -- he's an energy guy with some offensive inclinations, but is most suited in a 3rd line role.  Trying to squeeze what you can out of him on the 2nd line and always on the 2nd PP unit is just not going to cut it.

Lupul -- way too injury prone to rely on him. 

Bozak -- he'd be a reasonable 2nd line centre, and a great 3rd line centre.  You're never going to contend for a Cup with him as your 1st line centre.

Phaneuf -- I still question him as the team's #1 D, but line him up with another D which takes the load off him, and I'd think he provides value as your #2 or 3 d-man. 

JvR -- he's a great complement to the team's 1st line.  He scores, does the dirty work, goes in front of the net -- can't really complain about him.

Kessel -- you know what would happen if he were traded?  As soon as the team is ready to elevate itself from playoff contender to Cup contender, the team would pine to have a guy like Kessel around (look at what we've saying about Boston the last few years).  35-goal scorers aren't easy to find nor cheap to acquire.  We have him, so that's already checked off.  The issue now is, how long will it be before his remaining 7.5 years are up before he is surrounded properly. 

And that line there is the biggest stumbling block of all -- how long will it be before this team has the proper pieces in place.  It will be extremely tough to accomplish when nearly $35 million in cap space is taken up in these six guys alone.  Six guys, who as it stands now, form an extremely flawed core.

Nonis and Shanahan have a lot of creative work to do.

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

JVR would fetch the most in a trade.  Very good contract and signed for another couple years.

Everyone who doesn't have RFA status for at least another 5 years needs to be traded.

This team has no other choice other than to strip it down and tank for at least 3-5 years.

Everything else has been tried.  In a cap world, you have to draft your own top end talent.

I'd rather today have Seguin and Hamilton than Kessel.  This team would be in immensely better shape.

 

[Boston Leaf]

Not sure I have ever seen a full court press attack come on a guy in 24 hours like I have seen with Kessel.. An interview witha  former coach, and his interview with a reporter and Leaf land has turned on him.. in a big way... Sort of why I wish they would get a guy like Dale Hunter in here.. He seemd to be the only one to get through to Ovechkin.. He was a different guy under Dale

 

[freer]

JVR would fetch the most in a trade.  Very good contract and signed for another couple years.

Everyone who doesn't have RFA status for at least another 5 years needs to be traded.

This team has no other choice other than to strip it down and tank for at least 3-5 years.

Everything else has been tried.  In a cap world, you have to draft your own top end talent.

I'd rather today have Seguin and Hamilton than Kessel.  This team would be in immensely better shape.

And the Draft seemed to work for Edmonton didn't it. NOT

 

[CarltonTheBear]

And the Draft seemed to work for Edmonton didn't it. NOT

No but it did for like every other single team.

 

[Arn]

Cathal Kelly suggests Phil Kessel needs traded as, as the only true star on the team he's the alpha character and his team mates act as he acts:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/kelly-trading-phil-kessel-is-the-key-to-a-maple-leafs-rebuild/article22324810/

Edit to add pertinent quote:

Kessel is a wonderful athlete, bordering on a savant. It?s difficult to let go of that sort of talent. But the Leafs have to, for the long-term health of this club.

Even if what they get in return isn?t equal to what Kessel provides in performance-terms, they might think of this in terms of a whole rather than its parts.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Clarkson -- he's an energy guy with some offensive inclinations, but is most suited in a 3rd line role.  Trying to squeeze what you can out of him on the 2nd line and always on the 2nd PP unit is just not going to cut it.

Problem is 3rd lines still need to score these days, and Clarkson is pretty much talent-poison. He really needs a perfect duo to be lined up with to have success any kind of success. I think once Nonis is fired the new GM will look to eat a bunch of his contract and get him traded.

Lupul -- way too injury prone to rely on him.

Agreed. What makes it worse is that the Leafs secondary scoring as is pretty much relies on him. He needs to be traded but if the Leafs want to compete at all they need to bring in a replacement still. That might be a tough move to pull off.

Bozak -- he'd be a reasonable 2nd line centre, and a great 3rd line centre.

That's tough to say when he's literally never played either of those roles in his entire NHL career.

Nonis and Shanahan have a lot of creative work to do.

You mean Shanahan, Dubas, and Hunter .

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Cathal Kelly suggests Phil Kessel needs traded as, as the only true star on the team he's the alpha character and his team mates act as he acts:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/kelly-trading-phil-kessel-is-the-key-to-a-maple-leafs-rebuild/article22324810/

He makes some good points from time to time, but Cathal Kelly really does write like an angry 14-year old.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

JVR would fetch the most in a trade.  Very good contract and signed for another couple years.

Everyone who doesn't have RFA status for at least another 5 years needs to be traded.

This team has no other choice other than to strip it down and tank for at least 3-5 years.

Everything else has been tried.  In a cap world, you have to draft your own top end talent.

I'd rather today have Seguin and Hamilton than Kessel.  This team would be in immensely better shape.

And the Draft seemed to work for Edmonton didn't it. NOT

See, as to the point of picking up top end talent, I think it did, it's just that they are such a complete mess in the front office that they don't know how to surround all the talent they have with complimentary pieces and keep rushing these star picks to the NHL.

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

JVR would fetch the most in a trade.  Very good contract and signed for another couple years.

Everyone who doesn't have RFA status for at least another 5 years needs to be traded.

This team has no other choice other than to strip it down and tank for at least 3-5 years.

Everything else has been tried.  In a cap world, you have to draft your own top end talent.

I'd rather today have Seguin and Hamilton than Kessel.  This team would be in immensely better shape.

And the Draft seemed to work for Edmonton didn't it. NOT

Edmonton is a joke.  Throw them out of the equation.  Every time it is suggested the Leafs need to tank for a few years someone drags out the Edmonton example.

Take a look around the league and see how other teams are built.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Mirtle's suggestion:

Dump players moving out of their prime such as St?phane Robidas, Joffrey Lupul, Tyler Bozak and Roman Polak, even for bad contracts that expire sooner (if necessary).

Eat half the salary on disastrous deals such as David Clarkson?s simply to get them off the books.

Explore what you can get for Dion Phaneuf and Phil Kessel, preferably younger players who will a) be cheaper and b) potentially mature during the time period when the Leafs can realistically be contenders.

And start doing it between now and the March 2 trade deadline, which is a mere 54 days away.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/leafs-beat/mirtle-how-to-fix-the-maple-leafs-a-de-build-or-a-teardown/article22328317/

Definitely agree with the first two parts. All of those players listed need to get off the books. The Leafs cap is a mess right now considering the state of the team. I could get behind moves to trade Phaneuf and/or Kessel as long as the return coming back is high enough (in the case of Kessel I basically want somebody who should be around Kessel's level but just in 2-3 years, a return that probably wouldn't be likely).

 

[Arn]

Cathal Kelly suggests Phil Kessel needs traded as, as the only true star on the team he's the alpha character and his team mates act as he acts:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/kelly-trading-phil-kessel-is-the-key-to-a-maple-leafs-rebuild/article22324810/

He makes some good points from time to time, but Cathal Kelly really does write like an angry 14-year old.

Yeah I think I'm kind of coming round to his argument now though. Before I'd have said Kessel would be a keeper, and yes he does have incredible top end talent. But would bring down the team GAA be more of a benefit than the guaranteed 35ish goals he'll score? Probably, and especially if it improves the culture.

Personally I'd like to see us audition Kadri from now til the end of the season as that 1C and if he passes the test (which I think he's about ready to do from what I've seen) I keep him, JVR, Rielly and Gardiner (and maybe Frnason) and I let go Lupul, Bozak, Kessel and Phaneuf somehow.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

But would bring down the team GAA be more of a benefit than the guaranteed 35ish goals he'll score? Probably, and especially if it improves the culture.

I think that you could accomplish that goal without giving up the guy who carries your offence. Hopefully we see some signs of that before the season is done.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Personally I'd like to see us audition Kadri from now til the end of the season as that 1C and if he passes the test (which I think he's about ready to do from what I've seen) I keep him, JVR, Rielly and Gardiner (and maybe Frnason) and I let go Lupul, Bozak, Kessel and Phaneuf somehow.

Kadri, JVR, Rielly, Gardiner, throw Bernier and Nylander in there, plus hopefully a pretty good prospect from this draft, then Kessel or whoever we can get back from him, that's not a terrible collection of players. There's just a lot of clutter there right now.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

But to suggest this solely being a coaching issue ignores the reality of what?s taken place in Toronto over the course of many seasons, not just a single 40-game stretch. In terms of the very big picture, these are issues that have lingered since the days of Ron Wilson and Brian Burke, issues also tied to a flawed core, one that?s signed up for the long haul no less.

Kessel, van Riemsdyk, Dion Phaneuf, David Clarkson, Joffrey Lupul and Tyler Bozak are all locked up until at least 2018. And they?ve proven to be leaders of a team that?s hardly been good enough to qualify for the playoffs, let alone win a Cup.

Carlyle asked the same things of Kessel that Wilson did a few years earlier, neither able to make more than a slight dent in a player whose negatives ultimately outweigh all the offensive positives. To think that will change under another head coach seems naive at this point.

See stuff like this is meaningless to me because it's become basically a buzzword: "the core."  The team hasn't had success so therefore it's flawed.  Siegel doesn't really go any deeper than that and he kind of doubles down on Wilson's comments - even though, IMO, Wilson was wrong and misidentified what went wrong when he was coach (namely that he had terrible goaltending and then the best 2nd line in the league was torpedoed when he was fired).

The list of great players who didn't win a Cup or didn't win anything until late in their career is long.  It seems extremely convenient and an easy cop out to say this team hasn't had success so they CAN'T have success with these players.  How can I argue against that?  There's no way to make an argument that they can or can't have future success because it's unknown, but I see it so often.  Compare it with the arguments against Carlyle - you've seen charts, graphs, comparisons to Anaheim, comparisons to Boudreau, etc - at least you're getting something tangible where if you disagree you can see what the other argument is.

The core. The core. The core.  The team's possession was so bad under Carlyle that I don't even know what to make of it yet at this point, nor do I know who "the core" really is.  Sometimes it's Kessel and Phaneuf.  Sometimes it's 6 guys.

I do think there is still a tendency in the Toronto media to go after the most skilled players as what's wrong with the team rather than that the skilled player isn't surrounded by enough other skill.

 

[Arn]

But would bring down the team GAA be more of a benefit than the guaranteed 35ish goals he'll score? Probably, and especially if it improves the culture.

I think that you could accomplish that goal without giving up the guy who carries your offence. Hopefully we see some signs of that before the season is done.

I'm torn. I actually do very much enjoy watching Kessel. No matter how many times I've seen it, that shot is awesome.

I also actually kind of like him. He's not your standard boring star who serves up banal platitudes to the media. I like that he snapped back at Feschuk, although possibly he went a bit too far.

But will we ever contend with him in the next 3 or 4 years, and can he still produce the way he does now after that? It probably depends what you can get back.

His contract for his level is also pretty good (in comparison to some that have been signed since he signed his). Could you send him to somewhere like LA or Chicago for 2 or 3 younger pieces with a similar cap hit? If you can I think you do at this stage.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

And the Draft seemed to work for Edmonton didn't it. NOT

No but it did for like every other single team.

That's the struggle Mirtle touches on in his article.  That risk that you could end up like Edmonton (especially at this point after so many years of mediocre-to-bad Leafs teams) and wind up with who knows how many years in the wilderness.

The really painful route? Pulling absolutely everything apart and starting anew, focusing solely on the draft to find the high-end players that are so hard to get in today?s NHL.

The trouble there is it doesn?t always work (think Edmonton) and it would take a long time, especially with the draft lottery dramatically reworked to discourage tanking. Being bad to get good isn?t as inviting an option as it?s been in the past.

That may also require trading someone such as Bernier, who has played so well since arriving he threatens to continually limit how good the Leafs draft pick can be.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/leafs-beat/mirtle-how-to-fix-the-maple-leafs-a-de-build-or-a-teardown/article22328317/

I know we criticize moves Nonis makes, but for him, Shanahan, Dubas, etc., it must be extremely difficult to navigate at times like this.

 

[hockeyfan1]

The list of great players who didn't win a Cup or didn't win anything until late in their career is long.  It seems extremely convenient and an easy cop out to say this team hasn't had success so they CAN'T have success with these players.  How can I argue against that?  There's no way to make an argument that they can or can't have future success because it's unknown, but I see it so often.  Compare it with the arguments against Carlyle - you've seen charts, graphs, comparisons to Anaheim, comparisons to Boudreau, etc - at least you're getting something tangible where if you disagree you can see what the other argument is.

I do think there is still a tendency in the Toronto media to go after the most skilled players as what's wrong with the team rather than that the skilled player isn't surrounded by enough other skill.

The coach is but one part of the equation and the G.M. is another part of the equation, along with the rest of the organization.  Which is why I hold Nonis responsible (not solely) for the mess that is the Leafs.


As for the media, they have always, from time immemorial, for as long as I've been following the Leafs, as far as I remember, as soon as something was or went wrong with the team, it was a mentality echoing of "trade this guy, trade that guy", etc.
I think the media, to a certain extent, has been/is also part of the Leaf problem.