Tyson Barrie

[ZBBM]

That's an interesting analysis (and if TBL ever wins add Kucherov & Point to the list).  What gives your challenge to Dubas and the 800 Wunderkinder even more bite is the fact that even if Liljegren and/or Sandin ever make it bigtime that wouldn't satisfy the criterion you've laid down.

 

[Kin]

That's an interesting analysis (and if TBL ever wins add Kucherov & Point to the list).  What gives your challenge to Dubas and the 800 Wunderkinder even more bite is the fact that even if Liljegren and/or Sandin ever make it bigtime that wouldn't satisfy the criterion you've laid down.

I mean, sure, but only if you focus narrowly on the bit about the 1st round. Practically speaking there's not a huge difference between where Sandin was picked and a high-mid 2nd rounder.

Either way, broadly speaking, my point is more that for the Leafs to take the next step someone that Dubas drafts or has drafted is going to have to be the sort of 1st pairing defenseman/elite goalie/top line forward that significantly bumps up the talent pool on the team. If he does it with a mid-1st, great.

 

[herman]

This is less about 'winning the Kadri deal' and more about taking stock of what's on hand, what's needed, what are the restrictions, and what's the most reasonable and expedient solution to pushing the team forward.

I wholeheartedly agree that the Leafs need some of their picks outside of the top 10 to be homeruns, and at the time of this writing, the Leafs are looking at Dermott, Sandin, and Liljegren as extra bases at least.

Given the Cap, the upcoming Expansion, and the core being largely settled pending Marner's signing, the Leafs are in a good position to make a push on the RD conundrum. Ideally, a Trouba or Parayko would be the get, but Barrie is an interesting option that we have first crack at signing.

 

[Kin]

I wholeheartedly agree that the Leafs need some of their picks outside of the top 10 to be homeruns, and at the time of this writing, the Leafs are looking at Dermott, Sandin, and Liljegren as extra bases at least.

I'm not sure if you mean that the Leafs look at those guys as successful picks already or that we should but if it's the former then, well, I don't think it speaks much to how they evaluate these things and if it's the latter than I think that's straight up laughable. I'm going to wait until either guy plays a game in the NHL before I make any judgements whatsoever, let alone call them a successful NHLer.

And again, I think the only real way for the Leafs to be successful in the long run is if one of their current defensive prospects be so successful that the idea of signing someone like Barrie(or really anyone) to a 7-8 million dollar contract seems at least a little redundant. If we think of Rielly and as of yet unknown in-house superstar as the team's 1-2 punch on the blueline, paying UFA prices for a #3 guy should be at best a questionable use of a limited resource.

 

[Bates]

I wholeheartedly agree that the Leafs need some of their picks outside of the top 10 to be homeruns, and at the time of this writing, the Leafs are looking at Dermott, Sandin, and Liljegren as extra bases at least.

I'm not sure if you mean that the Leafs look at those guys as successful picks already or that we should but if it's the former then, well, I don't think it speaks much to how they evaluate these things and if it's the latter than I think that's straight up laughable. I'm going to wait until either guy plays a game in the NHL before I make any judgements whatsoever, let alone call them a successful NHLer.

And again, I think the only real way for the Leafs to be successful in the long run is if one of their current defensive prospects be so successful that the idea of signing someone like Barrie(or really anyone) to a 7-8 million dollar contract seems at least a little redundant. If we think of Rielly and as of yet unknown in-house superstar as the team's 1-2 punch on the blueline, paying UFA prices for a #3 guy should be at best a questionable use of a limited resource.

Aren't we seeing these days that it really doesn't matter whether It's your own developed player or a free agent signing when thinking about how it relates to the Cap.

 

[herman]

I'm not sure if you mean that the Leafs look at those guys as successful picks already or that we should but if it's the former then, well, I don't think it speaks much to how they evaluate these things and if it's the latter than I think that's straight up laughable. I'm going to wait until either guy plays a game in the NHL before I make any judgements whatsoever, let alone call them a successful NHLer.

And again, I think the only real way for the Leafs to be successful in the long run is if one of their current defensive prospects be so successful that the idea of signing someone like Barrie(or really anyone) to a 7-8 million dollar contract seems at least a little redundant. If we think of Rielly and as of yet unknown in-house superstar as the team's 1-2 punch on the blueline, paying UFA prices for a #3 guy should be at best a questionable use of a limited resource.

It's largely my own evaluation, but it's also in line with how the Leafs have been gestating them, and walling off trades.

I'd like one of our prospects to make a Barrie-like signing redundant, but barring a significant trade mid-season that brings in something that fits that bill, that's not what we have.

 

[Kin]

I'd like one of our prospects to make a Barrie-like signing redundant, but barring a significant trade mid-season that brings in something that fits that bill, that's not what we have.

I'm not saying that either guy has to be that now, exactly, but if they're not that within a year or two(and nobody else is from within the organization) then I'm not sure Barrie is likely to be the difference between the results we want and the results we don't want.

 

[bustaheims]

Aren't we seeing these days that it really doesn't matter whether It's your own developed player or a free agent signing when thinking about how it relates to the Cap.

Yes and no. It's almost always going to be cheaper - whether in terms of cap hit or acquisition cost - to build your team predominantly with players you develop rather than players you acquire through other means. You finish the team off in the free agent and trade markets, but you largely build from within.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

I wholeheartedly agree that the Leafs need some of their picks outside of the top 10 to be homeruns, and at the time of this writing, the Leafs are looking at Dermott, Sandin, and Liljegren as extra bases at least.

I'm not sure if you mean that the Leafs look at those guys as successful picks already or that we should but if it's the former then, well, I don't think it speaks much to how they evaluate these things and if it's the latter than I think that's straight up laughable. I'm going to wait until either guy plays a game in the NHL before I make any judgements whatsoever, let alone call them a successful NHLer.

Among the guys you listed as draft successes, here's the age they were when they first stuck in the NHL:

Keith: 22
Parayko: 22
Holtby:  23
Letang: 20
Quick: 22
Murray: 21

Did you have all of those guys pegged as future all-stars by the age of 20?  Because Sandin is 19 and Liljegren is 20.

There are only 3 defensemen drafted after Liljegren in 2017 who've played in NHL game, and they've played 62 games between them.  And in Sandin's draft, the combined NHL games played of all players picked between #24 and #217 (Sandin was picked #29) is 0.

 

[Frank E]

I'd like one of our prospects to make a Barrie-like signing redundant, but barring a significant trade mid-season that brings in something that fits that bill, that's not what we have.

I'm not saying that either guy has to be that now, exactly, but if they're not that within a year or two(and nobody else is from within the organization) then I'm not sure Barrie is likely to be the difference between the results we want and the results we don't want.

I see this issue coming to a head this coming February.  I was in the "trade out JVR and Bozak at the deadline" camp. 
 

 

[Kin]

Among the guys you listed as draft successes, here's the age they were when they first stuck in the NHL:

Keith: 22
Parayko: 22
Holtby:  23
Letang: 20
Quick: 22
Murray: 21

Did you have all of those guys pegged as future all-stars by the age of 20?  Because Sandin is 19 and Liljegren is 20.

This is a fair point but it's also a reflection of the reality of how this team was built. If the team had slow rolled things, really torn it down in the rebuild and accumulated as many assets as possible before trying to win games then not only would they be likely to have slightly better top end prospects than Sandin and Liljegren but they'd also probably just have more defensive prospects who represent shots at landing that particular high impact player.

Not doing that does put a ton of pressure on Sandin and Liljegren to be those guys. So did using a bunch of other picks on forwards and not defensemen(the Korshkov pick, the Bracco/Dzierkals picks) and so on.

That may not be fair to Sandin or Liljegren but I do think that given the nature of the team and when contracts are going to be expiring that having those impacts quicker rather than later is probably going to be needed.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Among the guys you listed as draft successes, here's the age they were when they first stuck in the NHL:

Keith: 22
Parayko: 22
Holtby:  23
Letang: 20
Quick: 22
Murray: 21

Did you have all of those guys pegged as future all-stars by the age of 20?  Because Sandin is 19 and Liljegren is 20.

This is a fair point but it's also a reflection of the reality of how this team was built. If the team had slow rolled things, really torn it down in the rebuild and accumulated as many assets as possible before trying to win games then not only would they be likely to have slightly better top end prospects than Sandin and Liljegren but they'd also probably just have more defensive prospects who represent shots at landing that particular high impact player.

Not doing that does put a ton of pressure on Sandin and Liljegren to be those guys. So did using a bunch of other picks on forwards and not defensemen(the Korshkov pick, the Bracco/Dzierkals picks) and so on.

That may not be fair to Sandin or Liljegren but I do think that given the nature of the team and when contracts are going to be expiring that having those impacts quicker rather than later is probably going to be needed.

It's almost as if Lou Lamoriello isn't the most forward-thinking and best-drafting GM in the league.

 

[Bender]

Among the guys you listed as draft successes, here's the age they were when they first stuck in the NHL:

Keith: 22
Parayko: 22
Holtby:  23
Letang: 20
Quick: 22
Murray: 21

Did you have all of those guys pegged as future all-stars by the age of 20?  Because Sandin is 19 and Liljegren is 20.

This is a fair point but it's also a reflection of the reality of how this team was built. If the team had slow rolled things, really torn it down in the rebuild and accumulated as many assets as possible before trying to win games then not only would they be likely to have slightly better top end prospects than Sandin and Liljegren but they'd also probably just have more defensive prospects who represent shots at landing that particular high impact player.

Not doing that does put a ton of pressure on Sandin and Liljegren to be those guys. So did using a bunch of other picks on forwards and not defensemen(the Korshkov pick, the Bracco/Dzierkals picks) and so on.

That may not be fair to Sandin or Liljegren but I do think that given the nature of the team and when contracts are going to be expiring that having those impacts quicker rather than later is probably going to be needed.

Don't you draft BPA and not position? If one of your forwards turn out you should be able to turn that into a d-man that's more of a sure bet.

 

[Kin]

It's almost as if Lou Lamoriello isn't the most forward-thinking and best-drafting GM in the league.

Eh...there were a lot of people here willing to give Dubas and his side of the organization credit for their innovative and non-conformist approach to the draft when they were selecting all of those 20 year olds ringing it up against juniors so I'm not sure I'm quite willing to say that his hands are clean now that most of them look like busts.

 

[Kin]

Don't you draft BPA and not position? If one of your forwards turn out you should be able to turn that into a d-man that's more of a sure bet.

I think the idea of drafting the best player available is a good rule of thumb if all else is equal but it's not some sort of all encompassing dogma. I think a team wants to be drafting a wide range of players at various positions and of various skillsets.

We've seen pretty conclusively that just having a good forward doesn't mean you can snap your fingers and turn them into a good defenseman of roughly equivalent value. So you do need to plan ahead for the reality that the trade market is outside of your control.

 

[L K]

Best player available is also largely a matter of opinion outside of a handful of draft positions.  So most of the time drafting for need is probably still fine when the talent gap is not significant.

 

[herman]

Slightly related note from someone who watches the Marlies about as close as possible outside of the organization:
https://twitter.com/jeffveillette/status/1148978448951599105

I don?t see a problem with signing Barrie for a 6-7 year deal but moving on after 3 years if necessary.

 

[Zee]

Slightly related note from someone who watches the Marlies about as close as possible outside of the organization:
https://twitter.com/jeffveillette/status/1148978448951599105

I don?t see a problem with signing Barrie for a 6-7 year deal but moving on after 3 years if necessary.

Ha, I remember the Dermott vs. Nielsen talk, even Bob McKenzie on one of his podcasts was saying that Nielsen was seen as "ahead" of Dermott on the depth chart. 

 

[Kin]

I don?t see a problem with signing Barrie for a 6-7 year deal but moving on after 3 years if necessary.

I don't want my central point to be lost here. If you, or anyone, think that signing Barrie or Muzzin or whoever is a good use of the extremely limited cap space the Leafs are going to have going forward, that may be the case. My point was really just about how the Leafs are going to need to have very significant pieces come from within and they're going to have to do that without drafting in high spots.

 

[herman]

I don?t see a problem with signing Barrie for a 6-7 year deal but moving on after 3 years if necessary.

I don't want my central point to be lost here. If you, or anyone, think that signing Barrie or Muzzin or whoever is a good use of the extremely limited cap space the Leafs are going to have going forward, that may be the case. My point was really just about how the Leafs are going to need to have very significant pieces come from within and they're going to have to do that without drafting in high spots.

I agree with your point. We just have a gap in our prospect pool that will take time to build up that we have needed UFA to cover for the time being.