Proposal: OTT-TOR (Blockbuster)

[HoweHullOrr]

No thanks. Only player I'd trade Matthews for is McDavid and that's not happening. I want the Leafs to have a player who is with them from day one to near the end of their career.

Matthews is going to hit 60-70 points, great possession numbers, likely 30 goals at the age of 19. Karlsson is great but he's going to get paid and the Leafs don't need to do anything right now.

If Karlsson hits UFA, the Leafs can try to get him but trading for him is a sideways move. Get a #1D, lose a 1C. Not only that, the fan base will absolutely want everyone fired who makes that trade. Matthews is untouchable.

So will Matthews when he hits the same age as Karlsson. Same fate for Marner, Nylander - its inevitable.

Not endorsing the trade proposal in any way though.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

I'm not a Sens fan, also not a Tampa fan, Arizona fan or LA fan.

Don't think you need to tell people which team your a fan of.

 

[Randy Randerson]

So will Matthews when he hits the same age as Karlsson. Same fate for Marner, Nylander - its inevitable.

Not endorsing the trade proposal in any way though.

The AAV of Matthews/Marner/Nylander's remaining years is lower than Karlsson's by virtue of ELC and RFA years though, and there's more years of control/more years of their careers left (probabalistically)

All those have to factor into a valuation

 

[Confucius]

Making that trade would be bailing on the long rebuild and looking for a shortcut. Much like years gone by. I'd wait a couple of years to give our rookies a chance to develop and see exactly what we have.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Don't think you need to tell people which team your a fan of.

the post you dug that out of was in response to an Ottawa fan saying that choosing a defenseman other than Karlsson to build a team around was "spewing ****" (parahrased)

Do you think that Karlsson is the best defenseman in the NHL without comparison?

 

[Rhaegar Targaryen]

Curious if you still feel that way given the condition in the OP that EK doesn't resign?
I wouldn't do it as a leafs fan, but do you value 2 more years with your 1D higher than a 1C on ELC?
(Before anyone jumps on me for saying Matthews is 1C, I'm just going with the assessment I quoted of a step down from generational)

Oh, I didn't read that. I'd value Matthews over Karlsson if I knew EK65 wasn't going to re-sign, of course. But I doubt that will be that case. I see Karlsson signing his extension within a couple months of being eligible to.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

The AAV of Matthews/Marner/Nylander's remaining years is lower than Karlsson's by virtue of ELC and RFA years though, and there's more years of control/more years of their careers left (probabalistically)

All those have to factor into a valuation

Your talking (speculating) about something in the future, or more specifically, a valuation of a future contract when there is no way of knowing contract duration & value.

Our trio is younger, that part is a truism.

I'll leave the prediction business to sage clairvoyants like yourself.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Your talking (speculating) about something in the future, or more specifically, a valuation of a future contract when there is no way of knowing contract duration & value.

Our trio is younger, that part is a truism.

I'll leave the prediction business to sage clairvoyants like yourself.

All 3 get a $16.725M discount over the next 3 years (those contracts are in stone, that is fact). Its certainly reasonable to speculate that Karlsson will get a raise after that, and in a contract that is comprised entirely of UFA years it's very reasonable to expect that AAV to be higher than the following contracts for our trio...unless they earn a near-player max bridge deal....in which case I think it's fair to say we don't want to trade them

Anyway, mathematically it is extremely unlikely that the AAV of the remaining years of Karlsson's career exceed the remaining years of the leaf prospects, unless the cap rises dramatically approaching the end of Karlsson's career when the kids get UFA contracts, and only % of cap matters to MLSE

If you want stand on a soapbox and only discuss things we know for absolute certain, maybe internet hockey message boards aren't the place for you

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Anyway, mathematically .....

Thanks for the explanation. Averages are a tough mathematical concept.

I'll exit the thread and the prediction business to you now. It's late.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Thanks for the explanation. Averages are a tough mathematical concept.

I'll exit the thread and the prediction business to you now. It's late.

It did seem to be troubling you. Anyway, have yourself a nice night

 

[kihei]

I wouldn't do this trade because the future looks very bright, but no way at present is Matthews value in any way comparable to Karlsson's.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

Making that trade would be bailing on the long rebuild and looking for a shortcut. Much like years gone by. I'd wait a couple of years to give our rookies a chance to develop and see exactly what we have.

That's true, but even in a couple of years the leafs would be better with Karlsson than with Matthews. Leafs are not getting anywhere with Rielly as their top defenseman. But they can survive without Matthews since they have some other skill offensive players.

A top defenseman is harder to find than a 1C.

 

[Quiksilver*]

A top defenseman is harder to find than a 1C.

Hilarious coming from a Habs fan.

 

[Domonsky]

Wow tough one

I dont thinks the leafs will want to let go a 1st pick overall even for a top D like Karlsson... Too much potential IMO.

I would like to get opinion of both fan bases if you replace matthews with nylander ....just for fun....

 

[Randy Randerson]

That's true, but even in a couple of years the leafs would be better with Karlsson than with Matthews. Leafs are not getting anywhere with Rielly as their top defenseman. But they can survive without Matthews since they have some other skill offensive players.

A top defenseman is harder to find than a 1C.

Rielly has been pretty good so far this year, and we lose perspective on him alot but he's only 22 years old. He'll need to be better than he is today to be the #1 on a contender, but not by alot and he's made strides even from last year

#1 Centres are harder to come by in the draft than #1D, rarely is one found after the 1st round.
http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?agg...filter=gamesPlayed,gte,100&sort=pointsPerGame

#1 Dmen on the other hand get found regularly outside of the 1st round:
http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?agg...filter=gamesPlayed,gte,100&sort=pointsPerGame

If you mean by trade, I think they're around the same, Dmen have been the hot item this year

Karlsson is a special player, no doubt, but the chances of developing a D corps that's good enough to contend from the draft are a lot higher than finding a Matthews level centre

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

This trade sucks I don't think this guy is even a Sens fan.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Wow tough one

I dont thinks the leafs will want to let go a 1st pick overall even for a top D like Karlsson... Too much potential IMO.

I would like to get opinion of both fan bases if you replace matthews with nylander ....just for fun....

We still don't know if Nylander is a centre at the NHL level, there's good reason to believe he can be, but not something we'd want to gamble on just yet I think

If he is, its still a big step down from Matthews to Nylander

I'd prefer to have Rielly as our #1D and Matthews/Nylander/Kadri down the middle than Karlsson/Rielly/Gardiner/Zaitsev as our top 4 with Nylander/Kadri/Holland down the middle

 

[SensNation613]

Rielly has been pretty good so far this year, and we lose perspective on him alot but he's only 22 years old. He'll need to be better than he is today to be the #1 on a contender, but not by alot and he's made strides even from last year

#1 Centres are harder to come by in the draft than #1D, rarely is one found after the 1st round.
http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?agg...filter=gamesPlayed,gte,100&sort=pointsPerGame

#1 Dmen on the other hand get found regularly outside of the 1st round:
http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?agg...filter=gamesPlayed,gte,100&sort=pointsPerGame

If you mean by trade, I think they're around the same, Dmen have been the hot item this year

Karlsson is a special player, no doubt, but the chances of developing a D corps that's good enough to contend from the draft are a lot higher than finding a Matthews level centre

I don't see why that's being sorted by PPG. With that said, I don't believe #1 defensemen are easier to find than #1 centers. I think there are more legitimate 1Cs in the league than there are 1Ds.

Defensemen are rarely made available as seen with the Larsson/Hall trade. Edmonton had to overpay for a #2/#3 because there simply aren't any legitimately good dmen out there. Teams struggle with creating a good defensive core alot more than having a high power offense.

There are ~15-20 legitimate #1Cs in the NHL and only ~10-15 #1Ds.

I see good reason behind Toronto declining this deal because they don't want to cut corners with their rebuild. That's understandable but for those of you claiming that OEL, Subban and etc are better than Karlsson, that's just false. He is the best defenseman in the NHL and in reality, Keith/Doughty are the only two players you can argue are at the same level. Those are the top three defensemen in the NHL.

 

[PTH]

(I'm a Habs fan, so kind of neutral).

I can't see Toronto doing this - Matthews just has too much potential, and while Karlsson is currently the better player, Matthews is the better asset, with his cost-controlled years still to come, as well as more years ahead of him in this league.

 

[Randy Randerson]

I don't see why that's being sorted by PPG. With that said, I don't believe #1 defensemen are easier to find than #1 centers. I think there are more legitimate 1Cs in the league than there are 1Ds.

Defensemen are rarely made available as seen with the Larsson/Hall trade. Edmonton had to overpay for a #2/#3 because there simply aren't any legitimately good dmen out there. Teams struggle with creating a good defensive core alot more than having a high power offense.

There are ~15-20 legitimate #1Cs in the NHL and only ~10-15 #1Ds.

Legitimate #1C's and #1D's both produce points, so sorted by ppg because its a decent starting point for either (it was also quick and easy to go to NHL.com and do 2 fast searches)

By trade, sure. #1C's are also very rarely made available for trade, the only one that I recall getting traded last year was traded for a defenseman better than Larsson (Johansen for Jones). I think that both are so rarely available that it's easier to look at getting them through the draft, and #1D's are much easier to find outside of the 1st round...I guess you could argue that they're harder to know you've found in the 1st round, but I think throwing a lot of picks at them will net results eventually. For 1C's, high picks are usually necessary

There are 30 of each job available, so the top 30 of each of those guys are #1's. I think by looking at those lists that I'd agree that the top 20 or so centres would stay on the list year to year and the rest migrate around, I still count at least 20 Dmen who I would count as real #1D as well.

Karlsson is what I would consider a Franchise dman, I think there are only 5-6 of those

 

[Voodoo Child]

Karlsson and Matthews have roughly equal value, slight push to ek. The difference certainly isn't the chasm of value between Morgan Rielly and Marc Methot.

Ottawa is stupid not to do this, practically rebuilds their team.

 

[HarrisonFord]

Provided Ottawa does not want to pay Karlsson what they think he will ask when he become a UFA or they think Karlsson may walk regardless of that:



Auston Matthews
Morgan Rielly



Erik Karlsson
Marc Methot

Sens rationale: Need to trade Karlsson in this situation, and need an elite piece that is young coming back in the trade. This gives them that, and a top pairing defenseman to replace Karlsson.

They trade a valuable piece in Methot that they will not be able to protect in the expansion draft.

Leafs rationale: They immediately become competitive and their blueline woes are solved. They can likely compete for a cup before all of their players ELCs are up and they start making higher salaries with higher cap hits.

This deal would obviously require the Leafs to be able to negotiate an extension with Karlsson before the trade.

Thoughts?

 

[HarrisonFord]

Karlsson and Matthews have roughly equal value, slight push to ek. The difference certainly isn't the chasm of value between Morgan Rielly and Marc Methot.

Ottawa is stupid not to do this, practically rebuilds their team.

Matthews has much more value. He's the perfect franchise #1C. He's also very cost controllable for the next 7 years at least. Karlsson is a flawed #1D (granted probably the most exciting to watch #1D in the league by far) and is a pending UFA.

Then there's Rielly who is currently a #2D at worst, with #1D upside, and is locked up for 6 years at an absolute steal of a $5M AAV. Far more valuable than Methot.

You're right, Ottawa would be stupid not to do this. But Toronto would be stupid to do this

 

[SensNation613]

Legitimate #1C's and #1D's both produce points, so sorted by ppg because its a decent starting point for either (it was also quick and easy to go to NHL.com and do 2 fast searches)

By trade, sure. #1C's are also very rarely made available for trade, the only one that I recall getting traded last year was traded for a defenseman better than Larsson (Johansen for Jones). I think that both are so rarely available that it's easier to look at getting them through the draft, and #1D's are much easier to find outside of the 1st round...I guess you could argue that they're harder to know you've found in the 1st round, but I think throwing a lot of picks at them will net results eventually. For 1C's, high picks are usually necessary

There are 30 of each job available, so the top 30 of each of those guys are #1's. I think by looking at those lists that I'd agree that the top 20 or so centres would stay on the list year to year and the rest migrate around, I still count at least 20 Dmen who I would count as real #1D as well.

Karlsson is what I would consider a Franchise dman, I think there are only 5-6 of those

Disagree with the offense part. As an example, I consider Vlasic to be a legitimate #1D which you can win a Stanley Cup with. Johansen was more established as a #1C than Jones was established as a #1D (He isn't) so that deal shows that Columbus valued Jones' potential over Johansens track record.

Players like Seguin, Carter, M.Richards, Spezza, Johansen and others were traded despite being #1Cs. I can't even think of the last time a legitimate #1 D got moved (Pronger? Boyle?).

I disagree with the whole 30 teams = 30 #1Cs & 30 #1Ds. Yes technically players have to fill that role but I'm linking that position to a team looking to succeed. Some players are in positions that they simply can't handle.

#1Ds are harder to acquire/draft than #1Cs.

 

[Quarter]

This is still a ridiculous proposal