Hopefully this team learns to sell high

[ShaneFalco]

Sell high and buy low:
from the hotstove

Since the original lockout lifted, this organization has been gun-shy when it comes to trading players enjoying career years and maximize their value. It started with Bryan McCabe way back when it was rumoured Carolina was ready to give up Andrew Ladd. Ultimately, the Leafs kept McCabe, missed the playoffs a few more times, and sold him on the cheap.

We’ve seen more recent examples with Lupul, Franson, and maybe even Reimer. Conversely, this organization has set themselves up to fail in the player-stock-market-game more often than not lately. They will be trading Reimer from an all-time low right now in terms of his value, they bought out Grabovski after a career-worst season, Liles was healthy scratched for the majority of the year before being moved, and so on.

Buy low and sell high are the basics for any good asset management and it just has not happened enough in Toronto over the last decade. There have been awful contracts handed out to players and not enough buying from the scrap heap even though it’s where they have benefitted the most (Raymond and MacArthur vs. Komisarek and Clarkson). Hopefully, Shanahan grew some extremely thick skin working in his previous highly-scrutinized position and will have the guile to make moves like that in this market.

---------------------------------------------------
If Kulemin walks - another asset that could have traded. Same with McClement and Raymond

Click to read more...

 

[SprDaVE]

It's a tough situation to be in.

This team definitely has been bad at selling their assets at the right time but in hindsight, it would have been hard to sell said assets when it looked like they were worth keeping, if that makes sense.

I was very pro-trade the pending UFA's for picks at the deadline, even at our position, especially a player like Raymond. But I also said I understand why they didn't and really, it's hard to blame them. You don't make your team weaker by selling off assets, especially not for a mid-round pick or two. As a fan, it makes sense but as GM trying to win, it makes no sense to get a pick that won't have any impact for 3 to 5 years.

Bottom line, Leafs do need to get better at evaluating their teams position and also their depth coming up. D'Amigo and Ashton showed in their short tenure and ice time that they can be relied upon as bottom 6 players, and I think that makes one or two players expendable... but the Leafs couldn't see much beyond trying to make the playoffs at all cost. It really sucks losing players like Grabovski, MacArthur and probably more now for absolutely nothing in return.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

If you want to rebuild, then selling high is probably selling Kessel.

 

[Banic]

The Leafs are trying to build a core. Unlike Chicago, I don't feel we have the luxury of selling a player coming off a quality season. Asset management is important mind you, and the Leafs could definitely improve at it. But selling house every time we have a Free Agent isn't the way to go to build a "winning" culture. Clearly they thought they'd make the playoffs (not selling) but they knew they had no shot at going far (not buying). The Grabo signing/buying out was a mistake, but there could be some behind the scenes stuff we don't know about.

 

[Al14]

If you want to rebuild, then selling high is probably selling Kessel.

Trading Kessel doesn't automatically mean a rebuild if you trade him for a current NHL roster player and a proven prospect or two. Now, if you trade him for a set of draft picks, then you're probably initiating a rebuild.

 

[desperateblue]

I was thinking the same thing yesturday and i think the leafs would be better off trading bernier than reimer for just this reason.
I know everyone is going to think im nuts but we would get alot more of a trade return.
All the rumours of them trading kadri and gards is just dumb.
Why trade these guys for minimal return?

 

[Suntouchable13]

You know how tough it is to find a quality goalie? You don't just tradesosomeone when their value is high. Why don't Pittsburgh trade Crosby then? They could get a lot for him!

 

[jmart21]

I was thinking the same thing yesturday and i think the leafs would be better off trading bernier than reimer for just this reason.
I know everyone is going to think im nuts but we would get alot more of a trade return.

This is quite possibly the silliest thing I have ever heard around here.

 

[Ari91]

That is easier said than done. Unlike other teams who have a solid core and can sell high on their depth players that are having great seasons, the Leafs are trying to build that solid core. That is likely why they are too slow to pull the trigger. When a player is having a strong year, they risk keeping that player and hoping he becomes a core player rather than risking trading that player and using that pick to find a core piece.

The Leafs have made a habit of betting on the player and it's hardly worked out. I wouldn't mind them risking betting on the pick - but I'd feel better about it if they had better scouting.

 

[egd27]

I would agree only if you want to factor age into the equation. Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to trade players that are performing well if they are only in their mid 20's.

 

[Mess]

I was thinking the same thing yesturday and i think the leafs would be better off trading bernier than reimer for just this reason.
I know everyone is going to think im nuts but we would get alot more of a trade return.
All the rumours of them trading kadri and gards is just dumb.
Why trade these guys for minimal return?

Well Kadri and Gardiner have value so you could be selling high at this point.

Bernier is one of the few players Leiweke singled out as a winner and he is the basic starting point from building for the net out from. Its going to be Reimer that is dealt without question here, but that will become a case of selling low now due to his recent play.

Bernier ---> Reilly --->

 

[desperateblue]

This thread is about selling high versus low.
Anybody with a general understanding of hockey knows that bernier is the better goalie but that also means you get more in return for him too.
Some of you people confuse me too.
Im silly for suggesting we trade bernier while the value is high but your all dying to trade a 23 yr old that put up 50 pts or a young d man that can skate like the wind.
Im sure those guys are easier to replace huh?

What can i say you hockey experts have it all figured out.

 

[jmart21]

This thread is about selling high versus low.
Anybody with a general understanding of hockey knows that bernier is the better goalie but that also means you get more in return for him too.
Some of you people confuse me too.
Im silly for suggesting we trade bernier while the value is high but your all dying to trade a 23 yr old that put up 50 pts or a young d man that can skate like the wind.
Im sure those guys are easier to replace huh?

What can i say you hockey experts have it all figured out.

So what are your thoughts on the Rask trade?
Lets say JFJ was interviewed and said "Poggee wasn't going to bring back nearly as much as Rask" (as its been alluded that the Bruins stated it was Rask they valued/wanted). I bet you're just fine with it, huh?


Now before you say "we didn't sell him @ his high"......The thing about selling high; you don't know when/what "high" is. This is all just another typical Leaf Nation hindsight thread. You say that people are crazy for suggesting Kadri get traded.....how do you know this isn't selling high? Luke Schenn is the perfect example of this (and JVR is a perfect example of the opposite). There's no way to predict the future.

 

[seanlinden]

Trading Kessel doesn't automatically mean a rebuild if you trade him for a current NHL roster player and a proven prospect or two. Now, if you trade him for a set of draft picks, then you're probably initiating a rebuild.

Of course it does.

Our current roster, from a forward perspective, is built around Phil Kessel. If you trade him, you have to rebuild the forward group around somebody else.

As for the general purpose of this thread, just like the stock market, there's no such thing as selling high or selling low, there's only selling at current value. At any point in time, a player's value can go up or can go down.

From a team building / winning perspective, you generally need your most valuable players.

 

[Punch Drunk Loov]

Who played at a higher level this year?
Kessel, JVR, Reilly, Gardiner, Bernier, Bozak

Not exactly guys we want to trade for the most
Should've sold our UFA's at the deadline

 

[desperateblue]

The rask trade is exactly my point.
Everyone had blinders on thinking pogge was by far the better goalie because of the wjc
I would have personally never traded rask but at the time his value was lower than pogges'
The bruins sold high and got rid of raycroft while his value was peaking.

My point in this thread isnt that i want to trade bernier but if we are unloading a bunch of players i think the only way we get anything good in return is if we trade pieces that are valued higher around the league. You cant kick kadri and gards around and think other teams will overpay.

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Trade deadline returns this year were the worst they've ever been and Leafs were in a playoff spot so I understand not selling this past deadline.

However, I'm still ticked we didn't trade Grabo + CMac a few deadlines ago.

Toronto needs to get back to recycling assets like it did by buying low on Versteeg + Beauchemin then selling high on them.

We bought extremely low on Phaneuf but now some people are screaming to trade low on him which doesn't make sense to me.

We also bought low on Bernier well selling high on Frattin-Scrivens partly by retaining some cap space for the 1 year remaining on their contracts.

We bought low on JVR well selling high on Schenn.

I'd like to see the Leafs explore selling high on Kadri + Gunnarson because they could have significant trade value with their low cap hits but I don't view either as top end piece on a contending team to build around. Soon enough there contracts won't be nearly as attractive to other teams (or even us) when they are up for renewal-UFA rights.

I'd also like to see us bring in a few vets on 1 or 2 year deals. I look at a team like Dallas who has been bringing in quality 2nd pairing - 2nd-3rd line forwards who if they help them win in a year great but if they faulter they can be sold at the deadline like Jagr, Roy were.

I'd like to see the Leafs stock up on some short term UFAs this off-season who they can resell if they faulter well also cost controlling and making the next group of players like Leivo, Granberg, Rielly, earn minutes and not just be handed them. Basically Raymond, Ranger type signing except but better quality with names like Gionta, Robidas, Salo coming to mind.

 

[jmart21]

The rask trade is exactly my point.
Everyone had blinders on thinking pogge was by far the better goalie because of the wjc
I would have personally never traded rask but at the time his value was lower than pogges'
The bruins sold high and got rid of raycroft while his value was peaking.

My point in this thread isnt that i want to trade bernier but if we are unloading a bunch of players i think the only way we get anything good in return is if we trade pieces that are valued higher around the league. You cant kick kadri and gards around and think other teams will overpay.

My point is that you seem to be assuming it's easy to tell when a player is at his "high". If you have the ability to do this, please also kindly supply me with a list of lottery winners for the rest of the month, Thanks.

 

[diceman934]

This thread is about selling high versus low.
Anybody with a general understanding of hockey knows that bernier is the better goalie but that also means you get more in return for him too.
Some of you people confuse me too.
Im silly for suggesting we trade bernier while the value is high but your all dying to trade a 23 yr old that put up 50 pts or a young d man that can skate like the wind.
Im sure those guys are easier to replace huh?

What can i say you hockey experts have it all figured out.

You are missing the point...a number one goalie is not an asset you trade unless you have another one waiting. We can not trade Bernier at this point as we have no one to replace him and the likely hood of trading for one is slim.

A player on the leafs roster that we should be trading is Bozak he is coming off a career year and his contract is not that bad. His value is currently at its highest.

 

[diceman934]

The rask trade is exactly my point.
Everyone had blinders on thinking pogge was by far the better goalie because of the wjc
I would have personally never traded rask but at the time his value was lower than pogges'
The bruins sold high and got rid of raycroft while his value was peaking.

My point in this thread isnt that i want to trade bernier but if we are unloading a bunch of players i think the only way we get anything good in return is if we trade pieces that are valued higher around the league. You cant kick kadri and gards around and think other teams will overpay.

We risked lossing Rask as at the time as we were having a hard time signing him to a ELC as he wanted top 10 draft pick money. That was why we traded him over Poggie.

 

[seanlinden]

Trade deadline returns this year were the worst they've ever been and Leafs were in a playoff spot so I understand not selling this past deadline.

However, I'm still ticked we didn't trade Grabo + CMac a few deadlines ago.

Toronto needs to get back to recycling assets like it did by buying low on Versteeg + Beauchemin then selling high on them.

We bought extremely low on Phaneuf but now some people are screaming to trade low on him which doesn't make sense to me.

We also bought low on Bernier well selling high on Frattin-Scrivens partly by retaining some cap space for the 1 year remaining on their contracts.

We bought low on JVR well selling high on Schenn.

I'd like to see the Leafs explore selling high on Kadri + Gunnarson because they could have significant trade value with their low cap hits but I don't view either as top end piece on a contending team to build around. Soon enough there contracts be nearly as attractive to other teams.

I'd also like to see us bring in a few vets on 1 or 2 year deals. I look at a team like Dallas who has been bringing in quality 2nd pairing - 2nd-3rd line forwards who if they help them win in a year great but if they faulter they can be sold at the deadline like Jagr, Roy were.

I'd like to see the Leafs stock up on some short term UFAs this off-season who they can resell if they faulter well also cost controlling and making the next group of players like Leivo, Granberg, Rielly, earn minutes and not just be handed them. Basically Raymond, Ranger type signing except but better quality with names like Gionta, Robidas, Salo coming to mind.

These are really examples of hindsight being 20/20.... not buying low / selling high.

 

[Morguee]

I would say looking at some of the trades that have been made in the past the management was definitely high when they made them.

 

[TheCLAM]

In the early half of 2,000. It should be noted that there was no salary cap. We were a team making it to the conference finals and had some very talented teams. There was no issue in letting free agents walk because we could offer insane money to anyone we wanted.

Approaching the mid-2000 our core starts to get older. A massive salary cap system is enforced and rule changes are implemented. The game turned faster paced making a lot of our players slow and incapable. We locked ourselves into contracts as the game started to change. Our franchise had a belief that veteran talent could get the job done. Now do you trade potential free agents or sacrifice your cup run? When you're a competitive team it's never the later.

Tucker, Kubina, McCabe didn't fit into the new style NHL mixed in with rising ages and terrible contracts. Trading for Andrew Ladd is silly when you have a defenseman scoring like McCabe was at 15+ goals a season. He is the definition of an accurate, power play shot that we've sorely lacked. Off-topic here, hindsight we had some very good players and did not know how the salary cap would work.

There's more of an emphasis now on keeping a young core of cap controlled players rather than going to free agency and offering guys ridiculous contracts. Generally I feel that we've traded low for many assets that have worked out. The problem is that we put the above their market value contract wise and that effects the overall trading value. See Grabovski, McCabe etc. We also throw big money at players who are relatively fringe in the NHL like Clarkson/Komisarek.

Reimer has been the only successful goalie we've developed, it really made no sense trading him for a late first/pair of seconds.

I think our asset management in trades are actually among league best. Look at Nonis/Burkes trades and you can make a debate that a large majority they have the better assets acquired.

Toronto struggles with the idea of a salary cap. They believe they can still sign players in free agency to big $$ and term with no implications. Our salary cap management effects the value added to our players.

 

[-DeMo-]

the leafs have done a terrible job at selling high on players whose contracts are up and need new ones, but are players that should be let go. McCabe, Tucker, Liles, CMac, Grabo. these 5 all were re-signed and then tanked hard and had no trade value. you can't lose assets like this without taking a hit. these guys should have been moved at the deadline, they were kept because we were in a race for the final playoff position, which is terrible even if we made the playoffs in 7-8 we'd lose anyways. that to me is bad asset management. we could be sitting here today with 3-4 1st's, couple 2nd's and some prospects. even in 1 or 2 of those assets turned out we'd be much better off today.

 

[jmart21]

These are really examples of hindsight being 20/20.... not buying low / selling high.

Agreed.

Could a mod please change thread title to more adequately reflect the thread? Maybe something like "Hopefully this team learns to tell the future"...?