Alex Edler - Part II

[PRNuck]

It was Tatar + Sheahan and someone else and Gillis wanted a first thrown in to add a 4th piece. It was a brutal miscalculation by Gillis, whose biggest weakness as a GM (and I'm a big Gillis fan) was overrating his own players after 2011.

Brendan Smith I believe was the third player.

He...did...WHAT??!!

 

[Bleach Clean]

It was Tatar + Sheahan and someone else and Gillis wanted a first thrown in to add a 4th piece. It was a brutal miscalculation by Gillis, whose biggest weakness as a GM (and I'm a big Gillis fan) was overrating his own players after 2011.

http://thecanuckway.com/2013/11/30/...sidered-trading-alex-edler-detroit-red-wings/

Sportnset’s Nick Kypreos said at the time the asking price was three pieces: two roster players and a first round pick for Edler.

Canucks general manager Mike Gillis said after selecting Bo Horvat, ninth overall, that he “wanted to get into the top-10″ to select a player like him.

I wonder if the acquisition of the ninth overall pick for goaltender Cory Schneider quelled any interest to trade Edler. The Canucks didn’t need to move Edler anymore to get the necessary assets to move up in the draft.

With no urgency to move up, the Canucks probably decided they weren’t going to trade Edler unless they got a fourth piece and a deal that they felt was lopsided in their favour.

Couple others re-iterating the same:

http://forum.canucks.com/topic/3472...-2-roster-players-and-1st-pick-in-this-draft/

@RealKyper 1m
Prices remain incredibly expensive at #NHL draft. #Canucks asking for 2 roster players and 1st pick in this draft for Edler

http://fansided.com/2013/12/23/nhl-...ed-wings-have-interest-in-alex-edler/#!bo0OoD


The deal started out with a 3 piece 'ask' (assumed to be 1st + 2 roster players). DET didn't pay it. It then evolved into a 4 piece ask when VAN got a 1st by other means (Schneider). Had DET ponied up well before the draft, thereby alleviating the need to trade Cory, maybe Edler would be a RedWing right now?

I don't think Gillis initially overvalued Edler. I think that his initial price was reasonable (3 pieces (1 being a 1st)), DET refused to pay, VAN traded Cory to get their guy + get under the cap, then DET came back for Eddy, at which point Gillis decided to play hard ball because they didn't need to trade Edler to get the pick or get under the cap.

 

[Dissonance]

It was Tatar + Sheahan and someone else and Gillis wanted a first thrown in to add a 4th piece. It was a brutal miscalculation by Gillis, whose biggest weakness as a GM (and I'm a big Gillis fan) was overrating his own players after 2011.

Wow, if we really could've gotten Tatar/Sheahan/+ for Edler, that was a huge missed opportunity in retrospect.

Although at the time I'm pretty sure I was flatly against trading Edler (if only because he seemed like our best offensive defenseman on a team whose transition game had fallen into the toilet), so I guess I'm not really entitled to gripe.

 

[Kip96]

I still find it find it hard to believe that Edler still has so many supporters

He definitely has great offensive potential and a great shot on the PP. He also had a "bad luck" year offensively

However, Edler is an absolute mess defensively and contributes to a large number of goals against. He wasn't just bad last year, he was horrible in the San Jose series and LA series as well. He is soft as butter and loses defensive checks constantly leading to easy goals.

People can talk about his "bad luck" statistics all they want but his plus minus is always among the worst on the team and he was the worst in the league last year (in just 62 games too). Using the eye test it seems like he's always on the ice when an easy goal is scored by the opponent. Not to mention how much better our record is when Edler is out of the lineup (not sure where I can find the exact stats for this).

I was really thought it would be mutually beneficial for the Canucks to move Edler but now that we are stuck with him I am hoping for a miracle

 

[PRNuck]

I still find it find it hard to believe that Edler still has so many supporters

He definitely has great offensive potential and a great shot on the PP. He also had a "bad luck" year offensively

However, Edler is an absolute mess defensively and contributes to a large number of goals against. He wasn't just bad last year, he was horrible in the San Jose series and LA series as well. He is soft as butter and loses defensive checks constantly leading to easy goals.

People can talk about his "bad luck" statistics all they want but his plus minus is always among the worst on the team and he was the worst in the league last year (in just 62 games too). Using the eye test it seems like he's always on the ice when an easy goal is scored by the opponent. Not to mention how much better our record is when Edler is out of the lineup (not sure where I can find the exact stats for this).

I was really thought it would be mutually beneficial for the Canucks to move Edler but now that we are stuck with him I am hoping for a miracle

He's just having a down half decade, that's all. Happens to the best of us.

 

[Alflives*]

He's just having a down half decade, that's all. Happens to the best of us.

Is his poor play more related to his back injury? Was he this poor before the injury? I remember him being better before, but could be off on that.

 

[Proto]

http://thecanuckway.com/2013/11/30/...sidered-trading-alex-edler-detroit-red-wings/




Couple others re-iterating the same:

http://forum.canucks.com/topic/3472...-2-roster-players-and-1st-pick-in-this-draft/



http://fansided.com/2013/12/23/nhl-...ed-wings-have-interest-in-alex-edler/#!bo0OoD


The deal started out with a 3 piece 'ask' (assumed to be 1st + 2 roster players). DET didn't pay it. It then evolved into a 4 piece ask when VAN got a 1st by other means (Schneider). Had DET ponied up well before the draft, thereby alleviating the need to trade Cory, maybe Edler would be a RedWing right now?

I don't think Gillis initially overvalued Edler. I think that his initial price was reasonable (3 pieces (1 being a 1st)), DET refused to pay, VAN traded Cory to get their guy + get under the cap, then DET came back for Eddy, at which point Gillis decided to play hard ball because they didn't need to trade Edler to get the pick or get under the cap.

Right, but that still fits in to what Botchford reported: Canucks were offered Tatar/Sheahan/Smith for Edler at the draft and also wanted a 1st. That's a grotesque miscalculation by Gillis if he could have had that offer. He seemed to think getting one decent prospect (Horvat) was enough to turn this team around the corner on a youth movement. He was way, way off.

It happens all the times in sports. After the 2011 run Gillis had issues objectively evaluating the roster, in my opinion. He over-valued his own players.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Right, but that still fits in to what Botchford reported: Canucks were offered Tatar/Sheahan/Smithfor Edler at the draft and also wanted a 1st. That's a grotesque miscalculation by Gillis if he could have had that offer. He seemed to think getting one decent prospect (Horvat) was enough to turn this team around the corner on a youth movement. He was way, way off.

Not exactly. The objective was to get a 1st in the deal. That's what Gillis wanted and what DET refused to deal. It hinged on the 1st. With an extra 1st, Gillis has the pieces to move up in the draft and get Horvat. Without it, he gets out from under the cap crunch, but does not get the 1st he needs to move up.

So it's not that he was asking too much, he was asking for 1 piece to be changed in the Tatar + Sheahan + Smith package. The initial talk was still centered around 3 pieces. It's only after they he navigated out of his cap issues (Schneider deal) and had attained his target (Horvat) that they went from the initial ask (reasonable) to the final ask (unreasonable).

Meaning, he didn't ask for too much initially. He only asked for too much later, when he was in the dominant position and didn't need to deal Edler. I would have dealt him anyways, but I can understand why the 'ask' would change given that the major objectives were already achieved.

 

[Proto]

Not exactly. The objective was to get a 1st in the deal. That's what Gillis wanted and what DET refused to deal. It hinged on the 1st. With an extra 1st, Gillis has the pieces to move up in the draft and get Horvat. Without it, he gets out from under the cap crunch, but does not get the 1st he needs to move up.

So it's not that he was asking too much, he was asking for 1 piece to be changed in the Tatar + Sheahan + Smith package. The initial talk was still centered around 3 pieces. It's only after they he navigated out of his cap issues (Schneider deal) and had attained his target (Horvat) that they went from the initial ask (reasonable) to the final ask (unreasonable).

Meaning, he didn't ask for too much initially. He only asked for too much later, when he was in the dominant position and didn't need to deal Edler. I would have dealt him anyways, but I can understand why the 'ask' would change given that the major objectives were already achieved.

You're creating a false scenario here though with before/after the "objective" was achieved. He either passed up on a good deal or he didn't; I don't think that should really effect the value. If your narrative is believed (and let's say it is), then his mistake would be in over-valuing moving into the Top 10 instead of getting the best return possible for Edler. Moving Edler made sense: he's a good enough player, but he's too hard to find an effective partner for.

If anything, requesting a late 1st over one of those prospects is probably an even dumber mistake, as all three look like good NHLers at this point. If that offer was on the table and Gillis passed up on it, he made a mistake. Heck, I'm not saying I would have made the deal at the time, but I'm a complete homer -- I'm not paid to make those decisions

 

[Scurr]

Be honest... how many of you that think Edler is garbage now were calling him a "#1" defenseman and willing to pay him 5.5m+ less than two years ago? I think people forget how good this guy can be. I'm not even talking about how good could be... he was really good and a big part of a really good team. Definitely worth finding out if he can at least regain form for a re-tooling team.

 

[Proto]

Be honest... how many of you that think Edler is garbage now were calling him a "#1" defenseman and willing to pay him 5.5m+ less than two years ago? I think people forget how good this guy can be. I'm not even talking about how good could be... he was really good and a big part of a really good team. Definitely worth finding out if he can at least regain form for a re-tooling team.

I agree somewhat, but I feel the same way I did before his NTC kicked in last year: there's not an obvious fit for him in this line-up. The fact that he simply doesn't work with Bieksa makes him impossibly hard to gameplan pairings for, and Bieksa is significantly better than him at 5v5 (imo). Edler's 5v4 production is strong, but the difficulty in finding a natural spot for him in the line-up coupled with his trade value and fair contract made him an obvious player to move.

That said, I don't think it's unforseeable that he could see somewhat of a return to form this year. If he can be a 40-ish point defenseman and stop looking like a trainwreck inside his own blueline, it would go a long way to rehabbing his value, both to this organization and to others..

 

[arsmaster*]

Be honest... how many of you that think Edler is garbage now were calling him a "#1" defenseman and willing to pay him 5.5m+ less than two years ago? I think people forget how good this guy can be. I'm not even talking about how good could be... he was really good and a big part of a really good team. Definitely worth finding out if he can at least regain form for a re-tooling team.

I'll be honest. I wanted nothing to do with that proposed Detroit move. I thought Edler was due for a bounce back, and with the way the market is shaping up, I thought having a player with his tool box and potential at a paltry $5m was an astute signing.

I thought he would out perform the monetary value of the contract almost immediately, and in years 3 and 4 of the contract, where comparable dmen would be making $7m+ with the cap rise, I thought it was something I wanted.

I also thought Booth and Ballard were good pickups at the time too. Hindsight gives you benefits, and if I could get Smith, Sheahan, and Tatar for him now, I'd do that in a heartbeat. I was wrong. I also didn't want to move him for 5th overall in 2013. Wrong there too. Sean Monahan or Elias Lindholm would look pretty damn nice next to our 4 1st rounders over the last 2 drafts.

The frustration is he hasn't EVER looked like a player capable of playing tough defensive minutes, even in early 11-12 when he was getting some recognition mid-season for the Norris race. He's always had the potential to be more than he is, that is the frustration.

This is a player who doesn't appear to have a competitive bone in his body. He's a large man with a meek demeanour.

Part of my biggest gripes with Edler is because of what I thought he could be. He's not even half what I hoped he could be right now. I guess a lot is my fault based on expectations, but he's not only not living up to expectations, he looks terrible and I hate how people will look to excuse that for him because of coaching or injuries. I think it all has to do with what is between his ears. Some guys have the mentality, some don't. Unfortunately for us, Edler doesn't seem to have that mentality.

 

[Scurr]

I agree somewhat, but I feel the same way I did before his NTC kicked in last year: there's not an obvious fit for him in this line-up. The fact that he simply doesn't work with Bieksa makes him impossibly hard to gameplan pairings for, and Bieksa is significantly better than him at 5v5 (imo). Edler's 5v4 production is strong, but the difficulty in finding a natural spot for him in the line-up coupled with his trade value and fair contract made him an obvious player to move.

That said, I don't think it's unforseeable that he could see somewhat of a return to form this year. If he can be a 40-ish point defenseman and stop looking like a trainwreck inside his own blueline, it would go a long way to rehabbing his value, both to this organization and to others..

I'll be honest. I wanted nothing to do with that proposed Detroit move. I thought Edler was due for a bounce back, and with the way the market is shaping up, I thought having a player with his tool box and potential at a paltry $5m was an astute signing.

I thought he would out perform the monetary value of the contract almost immediately, and in years 3 and 4 of the contract, where comparable dmen would be making $7m+ with the cap rise, I thought it was something I wanted.

I also thought Booth and Ballard were good pickups at the time too. Hindsight gives you benefits, and if I could get Smith, Sheahan, and Tatar for him now, I'd do that in a heartbeat. I was wrong. I also didn't want to move him for 5th overall in 2013. Wrong there too. Sean Monahan or Elias Lindholm would look pretty damn nice next to our 4 1st rounders over the last 2 drafts.

The frustration is he hasn't EVER looked like a player capable of playing tough defensive minutes, even in early 11-12 when he was getting some recognition mid-season for the Norris race. He's always had the potential to be more than he is, that is the frustration.

This is a player who doesn't appear to have a competitive bone in his body. He's a large man with a meek demeanour.

Part of my biggest gripes with Edler is because of what I thought he could be. He's not even half what I hoped he could be right now. I guess a lot is my fault based on expectations, but he's not only not living up to expectations, he looks terrible and I hate how people will look to excuse that for him because of coaching or injuries. I think it all has to do with what is between his ears. Some guys have the mentality, some don't. Unfortunately for us, Edler doesn't seem to have that mentality.

I question whether or not Booth and Ballard were ever good. At least with Edler... we know he can be good. We've seen him contribute to a really good team. He provides things we need when he's playing well that are hard to find anywhere else. He's not that far away either imo, much like Bieksa in the "addition by subtraction" days

 

[Barney Gumble]

He's not that far away either imo, much like Bieksa in the "addition by subtraction" days

Problem is, getting a right side defenseman in the calibre of a Dan Hamhuis or even a Willie Mitchell ain't easy.

 

[Scurr]

Problem is, getting a right side defenseman in the calibre of a Dan Hamhuis or even a Willie Mitchell ain't easy.

Good thing we have Chris Tanev

 

[topheavyhookjaw]

Right, but that still fits in to what Botchford reported: Canucks were offered Tatar/Sheahan/Smith for Edler at the draft and also wanted a 1st. That's a grotesque miscalculation by Gillis if he could have had that offer. He seemed to think getting one decent prospect (Horvat) was enough to turn this team around the corner on a youth movement. He was way, way off.

It happens all the times in sports. After the 2011 run Gillis had issues objectively evaluating the roster, in my opinion. He over-valued his own players.

It also helps that everything that happened this past season makes that deal look way more lopsided towards Vancouver than it did at the time. Tatar and Sheahan both progressed in ideal ways. Not saying I agree with passing up that offer, just that it looked closer before Edler had a horrendous 13-14, and those three players didn't.

 

[Barney Gumble]

Good thing we have Chris Tanev

We hope it works out. If it doesn't, then the problem isn't Torts, AV, Salo, Garrison or Tanev. Maybe Ehrhoff will be available again at at point?

 

[Verviticus]

I question whether or not Booth and Ballard were ever good. At least with Edler... we know he can be good. We've seen him contribute to a really good team. He provides things we need when he's playing well that are hard to find anywhere else. He's not that far away either imo, much like Bieksa in the "addition by subtraction" days

booth was a good player here in vancouver. of course he was good at some point in florida

 

[F A N]

It was Tatar + Sheahan and someone else and Gillis wanted a first thrown in to add a 4th piece. It was a brutal miscalculation by Gillis, whose biggest weakness as a GM (and I'm a big Gillis fan) was overrating his own players after 2011.

How was it a miscalculation? You are assuming that Gillis was sure he wanted to move Edler at the and time and was prepared to make the deal Detroit offered but simply wanted more. Gillis didn't miscalculate anything. He was not prepared to move Edler for what Detroit offered him and I don't blame him. Top 4 defensemen are hard to come by and while the Detroit offer was fair, those were unproven pieces coming back. It's like Flames fan being mad that Bouwmeester wasn't traded to Detroit who reportedly offered Tatar and Nyquist. Well those two guys weren't worth a first round pick back then.

there's not an obvious fit for him in this line-up. The fact that he simply doesn't work with Bieksa makes him impossibly hard to gameplan pairings for.

How is there not an obvious fit for Edler in this lineup? He is paid as the team's #1 defenseman because he was identified as the team's most important defenseman moving forward. It's not like Bieksa can play with anybody. He's only been good with Mitchell and Hamhuis and those two guys can play with anybody. Regardless of Edler's actual place on the depth chart, Edler is 28 and has 5 years left on his contract. Bieksa is 33 and has 2 more years left on his contract. Logic dictates that barring a trade, Edler is part of the defensive core for years to come and Bieksa is not.

 

[Verviticus]

How was it a miscalculation?

calculation: edler will be, in the future, more valuable than [detroit] package. probably wrong. thus miscalculation

 

[Proto]

calculation: edler will be, in the future, more valuable than [detroit] package. probably wrong. thus miscalculation

Yeah, it's not a very confusing calculation. Obviously it was a tough call to make at the time, but I assume Gillis was paid 2 million dollars a year to make those determinations. He made the wrong one in a big way. That's not really up for debate.

---

As for Edler and his partners, the issue is that it's easier to find LHD in this league than RHD. Bieksa has been a positive CF player with everyone he's played significant minutes with except for Edler. Edler has been the same (positive with everyone but Bieksa), but Edler had significantly more value, and it's hard to find RHD to play in the Top 4 with him. It's not hard to find someone to play with Bieksa (see: Stanton, Ryan) if you need to.

I would have traded Edler last spring and then the team could have kept Garrison instead of peddling him for a second. Even if you like Edler, I don't see a very strong argument that Edler + 2nd is better than Garrison + Sheahan/Smith/Tatar (or 2 of those + a 1st).

 

[Scurr]

booth was a good player here in vancouver. of course he was good at some point in florida

Booth had a run or two of good play here. A lot of guys do. IMO he's never shown that he can be a good player on a good team.

 

[bossram]

I don't have a doubt in my mind that he'll score 40 points next year. He's going to be force-fed #1 unit PP minutes all year because we have no other options, and he'll score 20 points there by default.

It doesn't mean he doesn't suck.

Edler's "40 points" is like Dan Cloutier's "30-win seasons" from back in the day. A nice-looking statistic created by favourable circumstances ... that means jack squat.

A 40 point defenseman is still very valuable. Look at what UFA defenseman go for now. Brooks freakin' Orpik has a bigger contract than Edler.

No, Edler's best usage isn't on the top-pair playing against top competition. Utilize his strengths and play him on an offensive oriented 2nd pairing. He ability and value. He's not going to be the #1 everyone hoped, or even close to it. He is what he is, which is still a valuable player.

Some people are clamoring to trade Edler, yet are building up Sbisa to be a high-potential top-four player. Jeez.

 

[Luck 6]

I'll be honest. I wanted nothing to do with that proposed Detroit move. I thought Edler was due for a bounce back, and with the way the market is shaping up, I thought having a player with his tool box and potential at a paltry $5m was an astute signing.

I thought he would out perform the monetary value of the contract almost immediately, and in years 3 and 4 of the contract, where comparable dmen would be making $7m+ with the cap rise, I thought it was something I wanted.

I also thought Booth and Ballard were good pickups at the time too. Hindsight gives you benefits, and if I could get Smith, Sheahan, and Tatar for him now, I'd do that in a heartbeat. I was wrong. I also didn't want to move him for 5th overall in 2013. Wrong there too. Sean Monahan or Elias Lindholm would look pretty damn nice next to our 4 1st rounders over the last 2 drafts.

The frustration is he hasn't EVER looked like a player capable of playing tough defensive minutes, even in early 11-12 when he was getting some recognition mid-season for the Norris race. He's always had the potential to be more than he is, that is the frustration.

This is a player who doesn't appear to have a competitive bone in his body. He's a large man with a meek demeanour.

Part of my biggest gripes with Edler is because of what I thought he could be. He's not even half what I hoped he could be right now. I guess a lot is my fault based on expectations, but he's not only not living up to expectations, he looks terrible and I hate how people will look to excuse that for him because of coaching or injuries. I think it all has to do with what is between his ears. Some guys have the mentality, some don't. Unfortunately for us, Edler doesn't seem to have that mentality.

I don't think this is a fair assessment of Edler to tell you the truth. Up until our two 1st round playoff exits, Edler was generally known as a "playoff performer". Granted, he wasn't a Conn Smythe candidate in our run, but he did play quite admirably for most of the post season. He also managed 9 ES points in those 25 games, that's not a bad number for a defenseman. At least he managed to still produce offense when the refs literally decided to put their whistles away. My point is, to say he doesn't have a competitive bone in his body is quite extreme.

I keep hoping for that year to come where Edler puts it all together. In all honesty, I'm still hoping. He may never be a Norris winner, but I think he can be a physical, offensive minded defenseman who isn't a liability in his own end. He's turning 28 this season, so he is essentially entering his prime as a defenseman. For that reason, I'm not surprised the asking price for Edler was so high. Can you imagine what the reaction would be from this fan base if Edler went to Detroit, and started playing like we all hoped he could? I'd rather ride it out and see if he can give a little more. This last season was abysmal for the entire team, Edler is still young, and he's under contract for years to come. There is no reason to rush trading the guy, if we want to we can evaluate that possibility next summer.

 

[biturbo19]

A 40 point defenseman is still very valuable. Look at what UFA defenseman go for now. Brooks freakin' Orpik has a bigger contract than Edler.

No, Edler's best usage isn't on the top-pair playing against top competition. Utilize his strengths and play him on an offensive oriented 2nd pairing. He ability and value. He's not going to be the #1 everyone hoped, or even close to it. He is what he is, which is still a valuable player.

Some people are clamoring to trade Edler, yet are building up Sbisa to be a high-potential top-four player. Jeez.

The bolded is key.

Use Edler to his strengths. Give him 23 minutes a night...in an "offensive role". Get him back to that role of "supporting" the Twins (and by extension of that, get the Twins back to playing offensive minutes as well) and you'll notice the deficiencies in his game far less. And you'll notice the positives far more often again.

Edler isn't a stud "do everything" Norris Calibre defenceman like Doughty and Weber types, but he's also not paid like one. He's paid a very fair salary to eat up 23 "softer" minutes a night...they may be soft minutes, but he's still shown in the past that he can do very well with them, and that's something.