Confirmed with Link: [TOR/COL] F Denis Malgin for F Dryden Hunt

[Gallagbi]

What’s the spin on Marchment? Did we lose massive value in that or trade or not?
Was it an error in evaluation or not? Why is hindsight admissible in the Rask trade but not the Marchment trade?

Its honestly not even worth me responding when its this far gone for you.

 

[1specter]

Well, my expectations are low but if he goes around hitting and beating up Bruins then I will happily accept him onto this roster.

 

[LeafChief]

If there is such thing as a boomer approved 4th liner and a generation divide over a marginal player type who hits, I’m not understanding why the a new guard fanbase would be so happy about the GM acquiring such a player at the expense of skill. The original dunk made no sense. I’m not even a boomer by a long shot.

The tweet itself is pretty dumb. I just find it amusing that certain posters have taken offense to it considering their post history.

 

[therealkoho]

Twelve pages about a trade of a marginal fourth liner with marginally better offence for a marginal fourth liner with marginally better defence.

Have we hit the midsummer doldrums already?

do you remember when Burkie moved a conditional 6th for Brad May, I think it hit 14 pages of frothy hot garb

3 games into MayDay's Buds career Burkie was having his competence questioned over why he didn't make the move sooner

 

[JT AM da real deal]

To me this is a who cares trade .. 2 crap players with different 4th line styles .. da bigger issue was BRUTAL trade of Mason for Malgin to begin with .. if you watched enough Marlie games like I did back then it was freakin obvious .. but with Dubie eye test means very little clearly .. oh well it was overall BRUTAL but you have to expect this from non hockey guys

 

[saltming]

Well, my expectations are low but if he goes around hitting and beating up Bruins then I will happily accept him onto this roster.

Seconded

 

[Larcos_Unal]

Ironically enough, Hunt for Malgin is what I do when I look at boxscores after each game...he turned out to be quite the elusive prey.

 

[Tarmore]

I watched Marchment on the Leafs and he wasn't good in the 18 minutes or so of NHL time that he played. Seem to remember his only skill was falling down.

That doesn't mean the Leafs staff didn't make a massive error in being able to assess or manage that prospect. That's what they're paid to do. They also traded him well into the season so there was so waiver pressure if they didn't call him up if we're trying to keep facts in order. Some fans can't admit to this error.

That bit of history has nothing to do with this trade today. It was unlikely Malgin was going to hit some developmental curve and justify the original trade. So who cares? Malgin was also just a marginal, whatever piece who was never a good fit and didn't do much in either tenure here. Which makes his trade for Dryden Hunt today a completely neutral, nothing burger. Maybe Hunt will be a better fit.

Agreed for the most part.

Leafs brass made the call to trade him rather than expose him to wavers. He wasn't playing well enough to keep up and they didn't have either the space or the cap (I think one of the two don't 100% remember which)

They might have known more than we do like some team would be putting a claim in for him if he hit wavers and wanted to get something rather than nothing.

Agreed Marchment for Malgin, was a nothing trade as well as hunt.

My philosophy is trades should be evaluated based on what you got at the time, not what players or picks turned into.

 

[Duffman955]

Flipping offensive 5th liners for defensive 4th liners is a win in my books.

Offensive?



Dude has 4 points this year

 

[Notsince67]

If there is such thing as a boomer approved 4th liner and a generation divide over a marginal player type who hits, I’m not understanding why the a new guard fanbase would be so happy about the GM acquiring such a player at the expense of skill. The original dunk made no sense. I’m not even a boomer by a long shot.

Boomer is not used as a demographic description anymore. It's a pejorative term "denoting not young and enlightened" and used by the young and stupid.

 

[Dekes For Days]

What’s the spin on Marchment? Did we lose massive value in that or trade or not?
Was it an error in evaluation or not? Why is hindsight admissible in the Rask trade but not the Marchment trade?

Your "spin" on Marchment is you trying to represent it as some massive L and failure of evaluation, when that's not true at all.

No, we didn't lose massive value in that trade. We got Marchment for free, he wasn't having any impact for our team, and he had next to no value. There was no "massive value" to lose.

No, it was not an error in evaluation. Marchment was 25 and quickly approaching UFA. He could not stick with an NHL team, and it was looking like he never would. Maybe the trade woke him up, maybe the pandemic gifted him an unusual amount of time to dedicate to training, or maybe something just clicked at an extremely abnormal age, but you can only evaluate what you have at the time and how they project based on it. His new team immediately sent him to the AHL after the trade too, because that's all he was.

Even in hindsight, he didn't do anything valuable prior to hitting UFA status. If he stays with us, he likely spends the next year primarily in the AHL or as a healthy scratch on the taxi squad, and then he leaves in UFA anyway.

Hindsight was also never needed to recognize that the Rask trade was horrific. You're trying to represent a 19-year old top-tier goalie prospect who only saw his value rise since being recently drafted in the 1st round as an equivalent "non-NHL asset" to a 25-year old mediocre AHLer signed as a free wallet, but that's obviously incredibly wrong.

You know, it would actually be really entertaining to see what would happen if Denis Malgin emerged as a Martin St Louis for Colorado just for the chaos of it.
I will go on record to say I absolve Dubas of all blame if that happened. I was not a fan of the player, and didn’t think trading him for Hunt today was a bad move.

Lol. So...
A mid-20s depth NHLer who doesn't look like he'll be anything notable is traded to another team for a similar value player and immediately emerges as a top-tier player = Who cares. Absolved.
A mid-20s depth AHLer who doesn't look like he'll be anything notable is traded to another team for a similar value player and years later, after we would have lost him anyway, emerges as a complimentary middle-six player = End of the world and failure of evaluation.
Do you not see you contradicting yourself?

 

[notDatsyuk]

Yeah, the Rask for Raycroft looked bad the moment it was made, but it was a non NHL asset for an NHL asset as was the common defense on Marchment for Malgin. Once you factor in hindsight, the winners and losers becomes pretty obvious.

That's an interesting way to look at it.

With that logic we could have gotten Oskar Olausson for Malgin.

 

[ACC1224]

Agreed for the most part.

Leafs brass made the call to trade him rather than expose him to wavers. He wasn't playing well enough to keep up and they didn't have either the space or the cap (I think one of the two don't 100% remember which)

They might have known more than we do like some team would be putting a claim in for him if he hit wavers and wanted to get something rather than nothing.

Agreed Marchment for Malgin, was a nothing trade as well as hunt.

My philosophy is trades should be evaluated based on what you got at the time, not what players or picks turned into.

Seems like you're letting them off easy. A big part of their job is having the ability to see the potential that is there but hasn't been realized yet.
They got it wrong in this instance, it happens.

 

[Stephen]

Agreed for the most part.

Leafs brass made the call to trade him rather than expose him to wavers. He wasn't playing well enough to keep up and they didn't have either the space or the cap (I think one of the two don't 100% remember which)

They might have known more than we do like some team would be putting a claim in for him if he hit wavers and wanted to get something rather than nothing.

Agreed Marchment for Malgin, was a nothing trade as well as hunt.

My philosophy is trades should be evaluated based on what you got at the time, not what players or picks turned into.

Reasonable takes for the most part and we’re mostly on the same page except the last paragraph.

Marchment for Malgin was a bad trade. I’d say I had no real feelings on Marchment at the time but never liked Malgin at all. Hindsight had made it even worse.

But evaluating what you get at the time doesn’t make sense. Dubas deserves real credit for Douglas for Timmins this year and did a great job with it because he traded a mystery box for another mystery box which is turning out to be a big prize with hindsight. If you took the same philosophy, he wouldn’t get credit for that trade?

 

[Stephen]

That's an interesting way to look at it.

With that logic we could have gotten Oskar Olausson for Malgin.

Raycroft was sold to the fanbase as a recent Calder winning goalie who has just hit a rough patch at the time of trade. He set a record for team wins in 2006-07. So it wasn’t immediately known what the damage of that trade was.

 

[saltming]

Boomer is not used as a demographic description anymore. It's a pejorative term "denoting not young and enlightened" and used by the young and stupid.

Ok boomer

 

[Dekes For Days]

Raycroft was sold to the fanbase as a recent Calder winning goalie who has just hit a rough patch at the time of trade. He set a record for team wins in 2006-07. So it wasn’t immediately known what the damage of that trade was.

Raycroft was a 26-year old goalie with pretty much no pedigree or dominance in any lower level who had one good partial season in an entirely different era, and was coming off a horrific 0.879 season. He set the goalie win record because the win record was embarrassingly low, and they played him for 72 games despite his performance, not because he was any good. That trade was seen as a disaster from the moment it was made, and he was bought out within 2 years.

 

[GoonieFace]

There is no evidence that Marchment would have succeeded here anyway. Sometimes a change of scenery can do wonders. I don’t understand the need for revisionist history on minor trades like this. That being said, I never understood the Malgin love.

 

[Mess]

Asset Management and player Evaluation 101

How the Leafs management turned asset Mason Marchment (a 6-4/215 lbs player who has played both top 6 for Florida the President's trophy winner last year and Dallas a top team in the West) recording 120 games 29 goals 48 assists 77 points & 115 PIMS & +34 +/- since being dealt) for a previous undrafted Dryden Hunt who was recently claimed off waivers by Avs and in 25 games this year has recorded 1-1-1 point).

- Leafs management saw no value in Marchment viewed as a bottom 6 player despite the constant need for size and strength and physicality attempted to be addressed by worn out players like Wayne SImmonds and Kyle Clifford.
- Leafs management thought they could get a cheap top 6 player in 5-9 soft as butter Denis Malgin to play alongside JT and Marner,
- Leafs management mercifully realizes (what 1/2 the fan base already knew even before acquisition) that Malgin "pet project" was a bust and not capable of top 6 player in the NHL and not well suited for a bottom 6 player by style nor play either and probably should have stayed home to play in the Swiss league, where he will sooner than later end up again..
- Leafs management deals Malgin for a player they could have claimed off waivers earlier in the season and one the coach says is a pure 4th liner as they look for a player more suited for the role in the bottom 6.

** Now of course the defense is Leafs can't afford Mason Marchment who would be an ideal player for Leafs to have in their top 6 adding those missing ingredients like physicality and grit because Leafs management decide to spend tooooooo much cap in just 4 forwards, so they have no choice now to play in the shallow end of the pool looking for cheap bargain bin, waiver wire reclamation projects to help "Build their Cup Competitive team".

 

[Dekes For Days]

Why the Maple Leafs traded Denis Malgin for Dryden Hunt
Toronto Maple Leafs' head coach Sheldon Keefe speaks about new left winger Dryden Hunt and discusses what he brings to the team after being traded from the Colorado Avalanche for centre Denis Malgin.
Desperate to fill a gaping second-line left wing hole, preferably for cheap, Malgin was given a legitimate shot to use his best attributes in Toronto, even winning a contentious roster spot over homegrown prospect Nick Robertson coming out of training camp. The man whose name comes up as a search error on HockeyFights.com was a long shot to refashion Toronto’s bottom six. But maybe Malgin’s offence could translate six time zones to the west and he could play third fiddle to a pair of the Maple Leafs’ elite.
Well, in his unceremonious final appearance as a Leaf, Malgin was a dash-2 in Saturday’s 5-2 loss to Washington, despite skating a season-high 15:30 alongside Mitch Marner and John Tavares — two stars who’ve made careers out of elevating those in their orbit. Malgin, 25, leaves Toronto (again) on a 12-game point drought and a 17-game goal drought. He registered two goals and two assists while appearing in 23 of the Leafs’ 32 games.
Enter Dryden Hunt, a pure fourth-line left wing who knows his job.
“Guy that plays hard. Pretty simple game. Physical and competitive,” Leafs coach Sheldon Keefe told reporters. “Not a lot has happened for him offensively in the NHL, but he has scored at the AHL level. Protects the puck well. To that end, brings a little different element to the depth of the team.". “It’s just a different type of player,” Keefe said of the trade. “We’re just trying to change up the depth of our team a little bit here.”
This is a depth move that could give Toronto’s fourth line some bite and flexibility.
But, like Malgin, Hunt doesn’t fill the top-six vacancy.

Why the Maple Leafs traded Denis Malgin for Dryden Hunt (and why another move is coming)

By beating the midnight holiday trade freeze and trading Malgin to the Colorado Avalanche for Dryden Hunt Monday, Dubas has completed another smart but minor deal.

www.sportsnet.ca

That's not an answer to the question.

How the Leafs management turned asset Mason Marchment (a 6-4/215 lbs player who has played both top 6 for Florida the President's trophy winner last year and Dallas a top team in the West) recording 120 games 29 goals 48 assists 77 points & 115 PIMS & +34 +/- since being dealt) for a previous undrafted Dryden Hunt who was recently claimed off waivers by Avs and in 25 games this year has recorded 1-1-1 point).

- Leafs management saw no value in Marchment viewed as a bottom 6 player despite the constant need for size and strength and physicality attempted to be addressed by worn out players like Wayne SImmonds and Kyle Clifford.
- Leafs management thought they could get a cheap top 6 player in 5-9 soft as butter Denis Malgin to play alongside JT and Marner,
- Leafs management mercifully realizes (what 1/2 the fan base already knew even before acquisition) that Malgin "pet project" was a bust and not capable of top 6 player in the NHL and not well suited for a bottom 6 player by style nor play either and probably should have stayed home to play in the Swiss league, where he will sooner than later end up again..
- Leafs management deals Malgin for a player they could have claimed off waivers earlier in the season and one the coach says is a pure 4th liner as they look for a player more suited for the role in the bottom 6.

** Now of course the defense is Leafs can't afford Mason Marchment who would be an ideal player for Leafs to have in their top 6 adding those missing ingredients like physicality and grit because Leafs management decide to spend tooooooo much cap in just 4 forwards, so they have no choice now to play in the shallow end of the pool looking for cheap bargain bin, waiver wire reclamation projects to help "Build their Cup Competitive team".

It's impressive how pretty much everything you said here was incorrect.
The Leafs turned a longshot AHL asset that they got for free into a longshot fringe NHL asset into a different longshot fringe NHL asset. None were acquired for the top-six, and none did anything notable within team control years. Malgin so far has had the most impact for the Leafs of the three.

 

[Stephen]

Asset Management and player Evaluation 101

How the Leafs management turned asset Mason Marchment (a 6-4/215 lbs player who has played both top 6 for Florida the President's trophy winner last year and Dallas a top team in the West) recording 120 games 29 goals 48 assists 77 points & 115 PIMS & +34 +/- since being dealt) for a previous undrafted Dryden Hunt who was recently claimed off waivers by Avs and in 25 games this year has recorded 1-1-1 point).

- Leafs management saw no value in Marchment viewed as a bottom 6 player despite the constant need for size and strength and physicality attempted to be addressed by worn out players like Wayne SImmonds and Kyle Clifford.
- Leafs management thought they could get a cheap top 6 player in 5-9 soft as butter Denis Malgin to play alongside JT and Marner,
- Leafs management mercifully realizes (what 1/2 the fan base already knew even before acquisition) that Malgin "pet project" was a bust and not capable of top 6 player in the NHL and not well suited for a bottom 6 player by style nor play either and probably should have stayed home to play in the Swiss league, where he will sooner than later end up again..
- Leafs management deals Malgin for a player they could have claimed off waivers earlier in the season and one the coach says is a pure 4th liner as they look for a player more suited for the role in the bottom 6.

** Now of course the defense is Leafs can't afford Mason Marchment who would be an ideal player for Leafs to have in their top 6 adding those missing ingredients like physicality and grit because Leafs management decide to spend tooooooo much cap in just 4 forwards, so they have no choice now to play in the shallow end of the pool looking for cheap bargain bin, waiver wire reclamation projects to help "Build their Cup Competitive team".

The horse is out of the barn with losing Marchment - though we technically had an opportunity to get him back as a UFA this past summer.

What is funny to me is how Malgin was perceived by some as quietly representative of the Dubas vision. Remember coming into this season and people said this is the true vision and Dubas is going to sink or swim with his guys. It was going to be skilled Malgin instead of the window dressing size and toughness. Banish Simmonds and Clifford forever. Remember how Robertson had a good second half of camp and made the team. Yet some insisted that Malgin should get the top 6 plum role because they'd couldn't risk him on waivers at the expense of the kid who was finally finding a groove...

In the end, turns out he wasn't that valued by the GM. And how we have something like an Aube-Kubel/Clifford/Nash replacement.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Raycroft was sold to the fanbase as a recent Calder winning goalie who has just hit a rough patch at the time of trade. He set a record for team wins in 2006-07. So it wasn’t immediately known what the damage of that trade was.

I know it was sold that way, but did anyone really believe it?

 

[Stephen]

I know it was sold that way, but did anyone really believe it?

No, but again, if we go with reductio ad absurdum, it was a non NHLer for an NHLer, but proven as a terrible trade with hindsight.

Let's use another example, but a positive example this time so it doesn't upset anyone. Dubas traded Douglas for Timmins which was pretty much a nothing burger non NHLer for barely NHLer. Recent hindsight has proven this trade to be an early win with very big NHL upside for the Leafs and Dubas. Is this trade inadmissible as a success? Or is this a massive W? Similar scenario to Malgin-Marchment, but the results are the underpinnings changing because of favorable results for our team?

 

[Knies iT]

Your "spin" on Marchment is you trying to represent it as some massive L and failure of evaluation, when that's not true at all.

No, we didn't lose massive value in that trade. We got Marchment for free, he wasn't having any impact for our team, and he had next to no value. There was no "massive value" to lose.

No, it was not an error in evaluation. Marchment was 25 and quickly approaching UFA. He could not stick with an NHL team, and it was looking like he never would. Maybe the trade woke him up, maybe the pandemic gifted him an unusual amount of time to dedicate to training, or maybe something just clicked at an extremely abnormal age, but you can only evaluate what you have at the time and how they project based on it. His new team immediately sent him to the AHL after the trade too, because that's all he was.

Even in hindsight, he didn't do anything valuable prior to hitting UFA status. If he stays with us, he likely spends the next year primarily in the AHL or as a healthy scratch on the taxi squad, and then he leaves in UFA anyway.

Lol. So...
A mid-20s depth NHLer who doesn't look like he'll be anything notable is traded to another team for a similar value player and immediately emerges as a top-tier player = Who cares. Absolved.
A mid-20s depth AHLer who doesn't look like he'll be anything notable is traded to another team for a similar value player and years later, after we would have lost him anyway, emerges as a complimentary middle-six player = End of the world and failure of evaluation.
Do you not see you contradicting yourself?

There are a lot of concrete claims in this post for a guy who a) doesn't watch the Marlies, and b) doesn't post about prospects outside of the NHL whatsoever. You are all of a sudden very vocal about Marchment post-trade, when I can't recall one post of your's about his game with the Marlies.

Just referencing Marchment's age and 4 game sample size in the NHL as some mic drop analysis on a player's development is jokes.

I personally have post receipts of myself being high on his NHL future, claiming he had potential as a Kadri lite top 9 winger the season of his call-up. Prospect evaluation is subjective. There was a small group of posters who were advocating for an extended call-up after seeing him win a Calder cup, play a key role in the clinching game, and develop a surprisingly lethal shot in his 2nd-3rd season in the AHL. His offense was very clearly blossoming, and the work with Underhill improved his skating to passable. It didn't "click" overnight because of the pandemic or because the moons aligned he was given extended opportunity in a role >5 mins/night with some leash.

 

[Dekes For Days]

What is funny to me is how Malgin was perceived by some as quietly representative of the Dubas vision. Remember coming into this season and people said this is the true vision and Dubas is going to sink or swim with his guys. It was going to be skilled Malgin instead of the window dressing size and toughness. Banish Simmonds and Clifford forever. Remember how Robertson had a good second half of camp and made the team. Yet some insisted that Malgin should get the top 6 plum role because they'd couldn't risk him on waivers at the expense of the kid who was finally finding a groove...

That's a pretty inaccurate representation of what happened. Malgin was seen as one of a group of players with a chance at grabbing a depth role. People didn't want Clifford or Simmonds making the team because they weren't good enough anymore, not to banish size and toughness. Both Robertson and Malgin had excellent camps, and the consensus was that Malgin should get first shot at the depth role, so we didn't lose him for no reason before seeing what he could do. Which was good, because injuries hit and Robertson was called up very soon after. We also got some good games out of Malgin in the bottom six. You don't seem to have any idea what "Dubas' vision" is, and Malgin was never "his guy" that he was going to "sink or swim" with.