bluedevil58
Registered User
- Oct 19, 2017
- 2,168
- 3,126
Value of: Brett Pesce
- Thread starter The List Of Jericho
- Start date
Svechhammer
THIS is hockey?
- Jun 8, 2017
- 25,458
- 92,837
You all have seen Pesce's contract, right?
Are you offering us your entire farm and Nylander? Because that's pretty much what its going to take to pry him away. We have no incentive to move him. We're happy with him. His value to this team is going to exponentially rise as his play improves. Our foundational core right now is Aho-Svech-Slavin-Pesce. Nothing short of a Lindros-level overpayment is going to even have us considering a move.
This isn't a Hanifin situation where his growth is stagnating and we're looking to cash out. Pesce is already excellent for us and he's still improving by the game. The only way we move him is if we get back a player who is undisputedly heads and shoulders better, because of the value we place on him.
Are you offering us your entire farm and Nylander? Because that's pretty much what its going to take to pry him away. We have no incentive to move him. We're happy with him. His value to this team is going to exponentially rise as his play improves. Our foundational core right now is Aho-Svech-Slavin-Pesce. Nothing short of a Lindros-level overpayment is going to even have us considering a move.
This isn't a Hanifin situation where his growth is stagnating and we're looking to cash out. Pesce is already excellent for us and he's still improving by the game. The only way we move him is if we get back a player who is undisputedly heads and shoulders better, because of the value we place on him.
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 49,314
- 102,001
We tried to trade JVR to Carolina last year but that required him moving his feet so it fell through.
mashedpotato
full stack.
- Jan 10, 2012
- 2,153
- 385
I dont' see this happening - Toronto values Marner as much as they do Matthews; They're going to have to find some defensive help for Nylander and maybe some depth.
HoweHullOrr
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2013
- 11,871
- 2,375
Ya, based on HF posts, it was Carolina and just about every other NHL team. Looks like JVR and 2nd (or other scraps) just wasn't enough to interest other GMs and to get it done. Big surprise
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 49,314
- 102,001
Well I’m sorry. You can’t just let these van Riemsdyks and Carricks get away for nothing and expect van Riemsdyks and Carricks to be handed to you. Canes aren’t UNICEF.
HoweHullOrr
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2013
- 11,871
- 2,375
No kidding, and especially when you throw in a 2nd and a NHL/AHL tweener. Should easily fetch a stud defender no doubt.
Let's leave the hyperbole to other fanbases.
There, that's better. I'd rather keep Pesce and his contract than be stuck with Willie and his.
mashedpotato
full stack.
- Jan 10, 2012
- 2,153
- 385
Toronto will have to continue winning games by outscoring opponent until they find something that falls in their favor. Alternatively, they could target a player that isn't a 1A/1B defence... that may not require a trade for Nylander which would be the best scenario for the Leafs.
I'm no Pesce expert, but I'm having a hard time getting on board in trading a top line forward coming off an ELC with two consecutive 60 point seasons who can play at C for a very good but not a "star" player. I get it, competent RHD is highly valued, but Nylander going for such a return seems like a last resort situation and probably is the result of an uncertain contract valuation than anything else. The Leafs need to sign Nylander to a bridge in order to get a realistic return for him. I can't see the Leafs trading him unsigned as it seriously impacts his value.
SnizzNasty88
Registered User
I'm not buying Nylander's value being more than that of a Brett Pesce base, now or later. This may be a controversial opinion, but I think his value will remain pretty static if he hits on his potential and will go down down if he doesn't improve. He's going to be locked to the wing with Matthews, Tavares and Kadri blocking him from a center spot. His potential to play C will become less and less valuable as time progresses. Nylander is close enough to the time that he was a Top 5 prospect in the world that you don't view him in the prism of being Matthews' wingman so much. The more time he spends there, the more questions there will be about his individual ability.
Ignore need, do you trade Morgan Rielly for Jakub Voracek?
Ignore need, do you trade Morgan Rielly for Jakub Voracek?
firstemperor
Registered User
- May 25, 2011
- 8,755
- 1,445
Re: Rielly- Voracek- no
As for Nylander, I think he's a natural C. He does not help Matthews totals as much as its a pairing by default. I think they work well together because they are both uber talented, but it's not a natural fit. They are both puck dominant, and both would be suited better by wingers that drive the net harder/hound pucks more.
Whereas Kapanen is clearly a passenger on that line, and Matthews maximizes his talent (and game-breaking element- speed). Nylander is capable of driving his own line and has fared well at C, at the NHL level over a small sample size.....throughout his development as a young player, and as recently as last Worlds where he won the WC (played some C as well).
His ceiling is closer to a Kuznetsov to me.
Also, I don't think Nylander->C is out of the question. My personal expectation is Kadri will be moved to wing eventually as Nylander grows into the role, under the pretenses of Babs. Babs is tough on his young players and of all players, has probably been the toughest on Willy and Marner thus far. I would put the over/under around 3 years when this happens.
Kadri is already getting short-shifted on the wing. Nylander is a better fit there because of his skating/strength on the puck/play-making- among other facets.
The problem with this argument is that the longer Kapenen plays with Matthews and does really well, the more people will question whether or not Nylander's success is his own, or the coattails of Matthews. Personally, as a Canes fan and a fan of Pesce, I wouldn't pull the trigger on a one for one deal until near the end of November. If Kapanen has the sustained success he is having now, you'd have to add to Nylander to get me to move Pesce.
Youre vastly overrating Pesce, if he’s traded for Nylander The deal would be Pesce, Luostarinen and an unprotected first for Nylander.
Canes
Registered User
That's absolutely laughable taking into consideration Pesce's contract and what Nylander wants long term.
So, if the Leafs want a RHD could the hurricanes make Hamilton available? Cause outside of him, I don’t see Faulk being a target for the Leafs. And TVR isn’t what the Leafs need either.
That contract of Pesce, really makes it hard for the canes to want to move him. Very good value.
So Hamilton for Nylander and fill in whatever needs to balance that off. Does that work? Or has Hamilton proven too valuable in his short time in Carolina?
firstemperor
Registered User
- May 25, 2011
- 8,755
- 1,445
There are some metrics posted on the Leafs board that point to Nylander being equally capable off the line of Matthews, then on- in addition to the eye test. The rest is just optics I can't really dispute.
Again, as a Leafs fan, I don't want to move Nylander. I am also reluctant to bring up any numbers, because both sides here know nothing about the Leafs offer, Nylander's ask. For all we know, the Leafs could have low-balled him, based on that Shanny speech about sacrifices- as much as Nylander could have asked for Draisaitl money. Both extremes could/have been used as straw-man's to create favourable narratives.
My expectation is still Nylander will be here long-term and will allow us to run a 3-headed monster down the middle for many years to come- when Kadri is eventually shifted to wing. I don't buy that Kadri will stay at C for the rest of his contract/tenure with the Leafs. I've watched every Leaf game +/- a few periods over the last 2 years and it's clear to anyone that Nylander will be moved to C eventually- it's just not going to be under convenient circumstances for him.
I've said this before, but it would cost at minimum, Pesce + a 1st for me to be ok with moving Nylander, at any point- let alone when the leverage for a deal is at its lowest, and I'd personally still see that as taking a loss- depending on where that pick lands.
Canes
Registered User
Pesce + 1st is not happening. Nylander is more likely to get 10 million dollars from the Leaves before that.
Well, after a very small sample size I'd rank them as such: Pesce>>Faulk>=Hamilton>>>TVR. So if you want Hamilton for Nylander, I'd do that. No problem. The Leafs would be making a mistake in taking him over Pesce, though that would be fine by me.
bluedevil58
Registered User
- Oct 19, 2017
- 2,168
- 3,126
I fail to see why Marner or Nylander are so much more valuable than Pesce. Can someone please explain the reasoning to me without stating that Pesce is a 3rd pairing dman. Because that is like me saying Tavaras or Matthews isn't a 1C due to the other being in the top line.
so if you had a team and could start from scratch and you could only pick 1 0f 3 players to build your team around. Are you telling me youd choose pesce
Tripod
I hate this team
FWIW, Sportsnet was even saying the Leafs would trade Nylander for Pesce given their need, and his age and contract value.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Round of 16 (7) Eisbären Berlin vs (10) Sheffield SteelersWagers: 7Staked: $2,076.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-