Value of: Difference in value between William Nylander and Brett Pesce

[Crosscrease14]

Pesce is the main return, obviously, and a player Toronto could most certainly use. The majority of posters in these two threads seem to agree the canes adding a second is fair to bridge the gap in value.

If you think that’s a lowball then what are you expecting in addition to Pesce?

Pesce alone is not close value wise. Like I said, Jarvis or Necas or Nylander goes elsewhere. You realize if the leafs make Nylander available a number of teams will have offers? They won't take scraps just to move him.

Also LOL at judging value on HF opinions it's all just for fun.

 

[Cardiac Jerks]

Pesce alone is not close value wise. Like I said, Jarvis or Necas or Nylander goes elsewhere. You realize if the leafs make Nylander available a number of teams will have offers? They won't take scraps just to move him.

Also LOL at judging value on HD opinions

Ahh, you’re one of those

You’re going to be mighty disappointed if and when he’s moved if that’s what you think the return will be. I guess only time will tell.

Also, not judging his value based off of opinions of people on hf. Merely pointing out the interesting fact that, aside from a few leafs fans, most everyone else seems pretty much aligned on his value. Then there are a few outliers like yourself. It’s interesting, is all.

 

[Crosscrease14]

Ahh, you’re one of those

You’re going to be mighty disappointed if and when he’s moved if that’s what you think the return will be. I guess only time will tell.

Also, not judging his value based off of opinions of people on hf. Merely pointing out the interesting fact that, aside from a few leafs fans, most everyone else seems pretty much aligned on his value. Then there are a few outliers like yourself. It’s interesting, is all.

Guess we'll see. Ofc I want to see the team I like get a good return on a trade.

It's a bit ignorant to frame yourself and other canes fans as 'neutral'. You obviously have bias too. I'd guess the value is somewhere in the middle. Perhaps Pesce + 1st.

Since Jarvis is a recent mid 1st rounder I don't think the ask is insane or laughable. Just part of negotiation. Seems you just enjoy trolling leafs fans.

 

[Cardiac Jerks]

Guess we'll see. Ofc I want to see the team I like get a good return on a trade.

It's a bit ignorant to frame yourself and other canes fans as 'neutral'. You obviously have bias too. I'd guess the value is somewhere in the middle. Perhaps Pesce + 1st.

Since Jarvis is a recent mid 1st rounder I don't think the ask is insane or laughable. Just part of negotiation. Seems you just enjoy trolling leafs fans.

Sorry, where did I describe canes fans as “neutral”? I believe I said canes fans and neutral fans seem to agree on the value. Heck, a lot of leaf’s fans do, too.

Then there is a small faction like yourself who, on top of Pesce, are asking for Necas, Jarvis, Morrow, Nikishin, a first etc. You’re definitely in the minority.

If anyone is trolling it’s some of y’all with these outrageous asks.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Nice lowball but Gunler or a 2nd does nothing for Toronto. Jarvis was a mid first round pick and hasn't broken out yet. Fair if you want to keep him but the value isn't far off.

Lol the kid is 21 and has only been in the league for 2 years. So sorry he hasn’t broken out yet. The value isn’t close with regards to having him as an add on to Pesce.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Guess we'll see. Ofc I want to see the team I like get a good return on a trade.

It's a bit ignorant to frame yourself and other canes fans as 'neutral'. You obviously have bias too. I'd guess the value is somewhere in the middle. Perhaps Pesce + 1st.

Since Jarvis is a recent mid 1st rounder I don't think the ask is insane or laughable. Just part of negotiation. Seems you just enjoy trolling leafs fans.

There’s absolutely no problem with wanting to include Jarvis in the offer. In return we will ask for Knies + 1st to bridge that gap. Knies is a late 2nd rounder who hasn’t broken out yet so the ask is fair. It’s all just a negotiation

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Yes let’s compare stats of a player who’s been a star for years to a player who just finally broke out last season.

You’re cherry picking stats here

Yes Aho is better in his own end I’ll give you that

Ok, let's just look at the last 2 seasons, but lets also consider usage, system and linemates as well. Over the past 2 seasons (Nylander's best):

Nylander 5v5: 1.07 G/60, 2.37 P/60
Aho 5v5: 1.11 G/60, 2.25 P/60

So Nylander has scored goals at a lower rate 5v5 and had assists at a higher rate 5v5. Overall points/60 are very close with a slight edge to Nylander. Now let's add the context and usage.

Nylander's Most common 5v5 line mates:

• Tavares 76 5v5 points (1056 min w/ Nylander),
• Matthews 118 5v5 points (756 min w/Nylander)
• Kerfoot 67 5v5 points (716 min w/Nylander)
• Bunting 94 5v5 points (714 min w/Nylander

Aho's most common 5v5 linemates

• Jarvis 57 5v5 points (1120 min w/ Aho)
• Teravainen 43 5v5 points (1007 min w/Aho)
• Svechnikov 71 5v5 points (610 min w/Aho)
• Necas 67 5v5 points (508 min w/Aho)

Clearly Nylander is playing with higher scoring forwards than Aho has played with. There's no denying that and it matters, but even so, he has scored at a lower rate (G/60) than Aho 5v5.

Now, on to the PP where Nylander had a higher scoring rate than Aho over these two seasons:

Nylander: 6.58 Points/60 (59 points)
Aho: 5.44 Points/60 (43 points)

But again, we must add context:

1) over these two seasons, Toronto had the 2nd rank PP in the NHL and Carolina had 18th ranked. Clearly Nylander is on a much better PP unit. Now, admittedly, some of that could be due to Nylander himself, but Matthews, Marner and Rielly are excellent PP personnel.
2) Nylander's most common teammates on the PP were: Tavares, Marner, Matthews and Rielly (by a large margin). Aho's most common line mates were Svechnikov, Teravainen, Trocheck/Necas, DeAngelo/Burns.

Clearly Nylander is playing on a much more potent PP with much better talent. Again, I don't think that's debatable.

Lastly, as a center and on a Rod Brind'Amour coached team, Aho can't hover at the blue line and fly the zone early like Nylander can and does. I watched the Leafs a lot and I see it often. I'm not complaining about it as I'd do the same thing as a coach, but I'm pointing out a difference in how they teams play and how it leads to scoring chances.

Based on all this, I don't conclude that Nylander has been better offensively than Aho. I do think Nylander very well could be better though. He's a very skilled guy and I'm a big fan of his, but until he's used in the same situation as Aho, with the same teammates and the same responsibilities, their numbers are close enough that it's not conclusive to me, when accounting for the differences in teammates, system and usage.

 

[Crosscrease14]

There’s absolutely no problem with wanting to include Jarvis in the offer. In return we will ask for Knies + 1st to bridge that gap. Knies is a late 2nd rounder who hasn’t broken out yet so the ask is fair. It’s all just a negotiation

10 games for coming off the bench

Sorry, where did I describe canes fans as “neutral”? I believe I said canes fans and neutral fans seem to agree on the value. Heck, a lot of leaf’s fans do, too.

Then there is a small faction like yourself who, on top of Pesce, are asking for Necas, Jarvis, Morrow, Nikishin, a first etc. You’re definitely in the minority.

If anyone is trolling it’s some of y’all with these outrageous asks.

You didn't read my original post very well. I said Nylander+. There's a lot of wiggle room to what that + could be. You're straw manning.

Since you think a 2nd or Gunler is a fair sweetener in a Nylander Pesce swap why couldn't that + make up the value to Jarvis or Necas?

Oh right because you're not trying to debate in good faith. You were so excited to dunk on leafs fans you didn't read the post correctly.

 

[Cardiac Jerks]

10 games for coming off the bench

You didn't read my original post very well. I said Nylander+. There's a lot of wiggle room to what that + could be. You're straw manning.

Since you think a 2nd or Gunler is a fair sweetener in a Nylander Pesce swap why couldn't that + make up the value to Jarvis or Necas?

Oh right because you're not trying to debate in good faith. You were so excited to dunk on leafs fans you didn't read the post correctly.

What is it with people throwing a “+” on the end of their shitty proposal and then using it to defend said shitty proposal?

As I always say, if you can’t even be bothered to name what it is then it can’t be all that great now can it?

Stop acting like anyone is picking on you because you’re a leafs fan. There are lots of reasonable leafs fans on this board. Lots in this thread with a good handle on player value. You, on the other hand, are a little bit crazy if you think you’re getting Pesce and Necas for Nylander (even including your +). Nylander has already given Toronto fits during contract negotiations in the past and by all accounts tue two sides are not close this time around either. How you think that returns a #2-3 rhd and a young winger who just put up 71 points and is still an rfa after his current contract expires is beyond me. There’s no basis for that and it’s completely out to lunch.

And with that, I think there is no more to be said on this topic. May your wildest dreams come true should your beloved leafs trade Nylander (it just won’t be any of these returns you’re asking for from Carolina).

 

[Unbiased Fan]

Ok, let's just look at the last 2 seasons, but lets also consider usage, system and linemates as well. Over the past 2 seasons (Nylander's best):

Nylander 5v5: 1.07 G/60, 2.37 P/60
Aho 5v5: 1.11 G/60, 2.25 P/60

So Nylander has scored goals at a lower rate 5v5 and had assists at a higher rate 5v5. Overall points/60 are very close with a slight edge to Nylander. Now let's add the context and usage.

Nylander's Most common 5v5 line mates:

• Tavares 76 5v5 points (1056 min w/ Nylander),
• Matthews 118 5v5 points (756 min w/Nylander)
• Kerfoot 67 5v5 points (716 min w/Nylander)
• Bunting 94 5v5 points (714 min w/Nylander

Aho's most common 5v5 linemates

• Jarvis 57 5v5 points (1120 min w/ Aho)
• Teravainen 43 5v5 points (1007 min w/Aho)
• Svechnikov 71 5v5 points (610 min w/Aho)
• Necas 67 5v5 points (508 min w/Aho)

Clearly Nylander is playing with higher scoring forwards than Aho has played with. There's no denying that and it matters, but even so, he has scored at a lower rate (G/60) than Aho 5v5.

Now, on to the PP where Nylander had a higher scoring rate than Aho over these two seasons:

Nylander: 6.58 Points/60 (59 points)
Aho: 5.44 Points/60 (43 points)

But again, we must add context:

1) over these two seasons, Toronto had the 2nd rank PP in the NHL and Carolina had 18th ranked. Clearly Nylander is on a much better PP unit. Now, admittedly, some of that could be due to Nylander himself, but Matthews, Marner and Rielly are excellent PP personnel.
2) Nylander's most common teammates on the PP were: Tavares, Marner, Matthews and Rielly (by a large margin). Aho's most common line mates were Svechnikov, Teravainen, Trocheck/Necas, DeAngelo/Burns.

Clearly Nylander is playing on a much more potent PP with much better talent. Again, I don't think that's debatable.

Lastly, as a center and on a Rod Brind'Amour coached team, Aho can't hover at the blue line and fly the zone early like Nylander can and does. I watched the Leafs a lot and I see it often. I'm not complaining about it as I'd do the same thing as a coach, but I'm pointing out a difference in how they teams play and how it leads to scoring chances.

Based on all this, I don't conclude that Nylander has been better offensively than Aho. I do think Nylander very well could be better though. He's a very skilled guy and I'm a big fan of his, but until he's used in the same situation as Aho, with the same teammates and the same responsibilities, their numbers are close enough that it's not conclusive to me, when accounting for the differences in teammates, system and usage.

How about just compare last season

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

How about just compare last season

Nylander was a better offensive player last season. Aho was better at everything else… just like their entire careers. If Nylander can continue to be better than Aho offensively by a significant margin moving forward then a conversation can be had about him being at Aho’s level or higher.

By your logic of just looking at last year you must be dying to swap Auston Matthews for Ryan Nugent-Hopkins

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

How about just compare last season

Wait, didn't you accuse another poster of "Cherry picking" and now want to just use 1 single season? C'mon. that's the definition of Cherry Picking.

Nylander had 80 points last season and 87 this season. Those are two statistically similar seasons and a large enough sample size to do a valid comparison.

Trying to pick Nylander's very best season vs. Aho's 5th best (when adjusted for games played) is the very definition of Cherry picking.

If I wanted to slant this in Aho's favor, I would have chosen his two best seasons to compare to Nylander's, but I didn't. I chose Nylander's 2 best seasons vs. Aho's 2nd and 5th best.

 

[Unbiased Fan]

Nylander was a better offensive player last season. Aho was better at everything else… just like their entire careers. If Nylander can continue to be better than Aho offensively by a significant margin moving forward then a conversation can be had about him being at Aho’s level or higher.

By your logic of just looking at last year you must be dying to swap Auston Matthews for Ryan Nugent-Hopkins

Who had a better season between Nylander and Mathews?

Wait, didn't you accuse another poster of "Cherry picking" and now want to just use 1 single season? C'mon. that's the definition of Cherry Picking.

Nylander had 80 points last season and 87 this season. Those are two statistically similar seasons and a large enough sample size to do a valid comparison.

Trying to pick Nylander's very best season vs. Aho's 5th best (when adjusted for games played) is the very definition of Cherry picking.

If I wanted to slant this in Aho's favor, I would have chosen his two best seasons to compare to Nylander's, but I didn't. I chose Nylander's 2 best seasons vs. Aho's 2nd and 5th best.

I’m just saying Nylander has been having exponential production increases where Aho is inconsistent season to season. By last season he looked better

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Who had a better season between Nylander and Mathews?


I’m just saying Nylander has been having exponential production increases where Aho is inconsistent season to season. By last season he looked better

Overall Matthews did.

Do you just look at total points and whichever player has more it’s just automatic they had the better season or is the better player?

There is legit not a single coach or GM who would take Nylander over Aho unless contracts were completely lopsided in Nylanders favour.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Who had a better season between Nylander and Mathews?


I’m just saying Nylander has been having exponential production increases where Aho is inconsistent season to season. By last season he looked better

As far as Aho's been inconsistent season to season, that's just BS.

18-19: 83 points in 82 games: 1.01 PPG
19-20: 66 points in 68 games: 0.97 PPG
20-21: 57 points in 56 games: 1.02 PPG
21-22; 81 points in 79 games: 1.03 PPG
22-23. 67 points in 75 games: 0.893 Ppg

Other than this past season, Aho has been the opposite of inconsistent. Taking Nylander's best season in 5 years and comparing it to Aho's worst to make your point is the definition of cherry picking. As I showed, the last two seasons, which includes one of Aho's worst in 5 years, their numbers are very similar in P/60 and G/60 and Nylander has had a much more favorable situation. Unless you have facts to dispute that?

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

Aho's box and whisker plot (min/1st quartile/median/3rd quartile/max) for rolling 10 game samples since 18-19: 2/8/10/12/17. Nylander's since 19-20 (cherrypicking to exclude his wonky 18-19 season): 3/8/10/11/17. Pretty damn close.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Aho's box and whisker plot (min/1st quartile/median/3rd quartile/max) for rolling 10 game samples since 18-19: 2/8/10/12/17. Nylander's since 19-20 (cherrypicking to exclude his wonky 18-19 season): 3/8/10/11/17. Pretty damn close.

No. Only last year. Time did not exist before last season. William is exponential greatness. Aho is garbage turd

 

[KevinRedkey]

To answer the OP:
2nd and a 4th

 

[Blaylock38]

Cap savings is completely irrelevant when making a trade. In most situations. You don’t lose a trade like this just to open up cap space. You get his full value and figure out the rest.

Actually, that's not true at all or there would be way more trades than there are, the cap savings adds value in a deal and is an asset in itself.

 

[Ole Gil]

Cap savings is completely irrelevant when making a trade. In most situations. You don’t lose a trade like this just to open up cap space. You get his full value and figure out the rest.

This is how you end up giving a team Seth Jarvis to buy out Patrick Marleau for you.

 

[shortfuze]

Actually, that's not true at all or there would be way more trades than there are, the cap savings adds value in a deal and is an asset in itself.

I’ve explained to other people what I mean. But I do know what you’re saying also.

This is how you end up giving a team Seth Jarvis to buy out Patrick Marleau for you.

I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about making a bad trade only to use the cap savings in free agency.

 

[Blaylock38]

I’ve explained to other people what I mean. But I do know what you’re saying also.


I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about making a bad trade only to use the cap savings in free agency.

I gotcha, I see what you're saying. Thank you for the reply and the insight!

 

[shortfuze]

Actually, that's not true at all or there would be way more trades than there are, the cap savings adds value in a deal and is an asset in itself.

Ive already explained and answered.

 

[LakeLivin]

That’s not what I’m referring to. You should never just lose a trade because you will be opening up cap space to sign someone else. Torontos GM shouldn’t be happy with trading a guy like Nylander for under market value just because he opened up cap space.

Couple perspectives for consideration if you're open to such; please ignore if not, lol. Note that I'm not arguing how these might apply to a Nylander trade.

Market value is dynamic and at any point in time can be affected by factors unrelated to on ice performance. Let's say you could, in a vacuum, assign what we'll call an "objective value" to a player under consideration to be traded (say based on a 100 point scale). Other factors that might affect that players actual market value in either direction include things like the supply and demand of alternative players at the same position, (UFAs, other trade options, etc.), available cap space across the league to fit the player under a team's cap, projections as to things like fit with another team, potential to extend, etc. There can be gaps between "objective value" and market value for a player, but that doesn't make market value wrong; it is what it is. If a players market value is below the objective value, a team could pull that player from trade condition until conditions were more favorable. It's just a question of whether it's in the bigger interest of the team to do so.

Which brings me to my second point for consideration, and that's the failure to differentiate ends from means. I'd argue that winning a particular trade isn't (or shouldn't be) and an end in and of itself; it's a means of achieving the actual end objective, which is to optimize a teams chances of winning. Most of the time winning a particular trade is the optimal path to that desired end, but not always. To paraphrase, there are times when the willingness to lose a battle might be the optimal path to winning the war.

Note: I'm not posting this to try to talk you into changing your opinion, you're going to do your own calculus. But it might help explain why some (including some Leafs fans) may consider a potential Nylander trade differently than you.

 

[seanlinden]

Neutral fans/canes fans: value is pretty close but canes could add a 2nd or Gunler-type prospect no problem

Leafs fans: we want Slavin, add Necas, add Jarvis, add a first, add Morrow, add Nikishin etc

I don't think many Leafs fans are that unrealistic.

The challenge is -- there really isn't that "perfect piece"... What does Nikishin really do for the Leafs with respect to replacing some of what you lose with Nylander? First round pick? sure, but first round picks don't score goals.

It's not a matter of value, it's a matter of creating a situation where both teams come away from the deal and say "I'm better today then I was yesterday".

Sure, you could maybe do Nylander for Pesce + a 1st and flip that 1st for Scott Laughton.... but making those types of follow-up trades can be difficult to do.

Jarvis is a guy that I think comes close enough to filling that need; although I know Canes fans will rightfully say, no he's too valuable.

Ultimately, I think the "plus" between Nylander for Pesce + is too great to "bridge" with an asset that doesn't directly help. My personal feeling is that the "plus" between Nylander + for Pesce and Jarvis would be smaller, and something that could be bridged by a less than ideal asset of value.

Sure, contracts could be an issue, but at the end of the day, this is one of those situations where both teams might be better suited to sign the other's player.

Nylander's "objection" in Toronto is being paid substantially less than Marner & Matthews.. and that situation potentially continuing. In Carolina, sign him to an 8-year deal at $9.25m, and call it a day. Let Aho come in a little above that, and everyone's happy.

As I understand it, Carolina's objection to Pesce would be centered around wanting to keep him at around the $5-6m mark in line with the depth of defensemen they have today, along with some concern over his long term outlook. For the Leafs, he's likely the perfect Morgan Rielly partner... lock him up at $6.5m x 8, and deal with the problem later.