Confirmed with Link: [TOR/COL] Nazem Kadri, Calle Rosen for Tyson Barrie (50% retain), Alex Kerfoot trade (continued)

[4thline]

1. He acquired Muzzin and Barrie at a cost of Kadri, Rosen, Gardiner, a 1st and two 2nds.

Given that we likely can't sign both long term, that seems like a hefty price for two playoff runs. Especially since one of those runs is already behind us and was wildly unsuccessful. 2. Obviously his valuation of the roster and its potential was off.

3. We could have kept Gardiner long term for the cap hit of Muzzin short term. So then are the rest of those assets worth a one year Barrie rental plus Kerfoot. It seems really steep to me.

1. Kerfoot was acquired as well. 2 time 40 point C's at 24 years old are fairly valuable things

2. That they didn't win is not evidence that they weren't good enough to win. That's primary school thinking. Unless you think that the St. Louis Blues were the only team that was good enough and had the potential to win the cup last season.

3. So basically you're advocating for keeping a worse version of a roster that you (erroneously) classified as not having the potential to win. Brilliant! Makes a lot of sense. Not to mention that you're ignoring that A. the trade's timing let us have both Muzzin and Gardiner for a playoff run and B. At the time of the trade no one would have predicted Gardiner being available for 4m

 

[GoonieFace]

Its really hard to argue that this wasnt a really good trade for the Leafs. I like Kadri, but I think we fleeced Colorado on this one. The only concern is the overpayments by Dubas on RFA contracts might cost us the ability to re-sign Barrie. It has already cost us the ability to pluck a good backup goalie off waivers.

 

[Boutette]

Oh don't get me wrong, Kadri had to go. That trade was amazing for us. Kerfoot fits much better into the 3C position for the usage, he's cost controlled for multiple years, we get a top-pairing RHD who plays our style perfectly (possibly re-sign too).

I'm just speaking out to those who are ready to jump the gun, and say Kerfoot > Kadri or even Kerfoot = Kadri when that's simply not the case. Kadri being tied to a fringe 40 year old NHL player for the whole season is totally different than Kerfoot playing with two energetic wingers who have something to prove (I.e Fight their way into a potential Hyman/Johnsson spot).

Kadri wouldn't have done any better with Moore/Mikheyev/Kapanen than he did with Marleau/Brown/Kapanen because he does not pass the puck and therefore would help bring the whole line down.

 

[1specter]

Kadri wouldn't have done any better with Moore/Mikheyev/Kapanen than he did with Marleau/Brown/Kapanen because he does not pass the puck and therefore would help bring the whole line down.

That's definitely not accurate. Many times Marleau and Brown were set up nice and couldn't convert. Mik and Moore are much better suited to play alongside him.

 

[The CyNick]

1. Kerfoot was acquired as well. 2 time 40 point C's at 24 years old are fairly valuable things

2. That they didn't win is not evidence that they weren't good enough to win. That's primary school thinking. Unless you think that the St. Louis Blues were the only team that was good enough and had the potential to win the cup last season.

3. So basically you're advocating for keeping a worse version of a roster that you (erroneously) classified as not having the potential to win. Brilliant! Makes a lot of sense. Not to mention that you're ignoring that A. the trade's timing let us have both Muzzin and Gardiner for a playoff run and B. At the time of the trade no one would have predicted Gardiner being available for 4m

Part of the job of a good GM is to predict the future.

The Kessel trade seemed like fair value. But burke is rightly criticized because one of the pics turned into a 2nd overall pick and a star player.

So the fact that our GM didn't know he could get Gardiner for long term at $4M shows he didn't understand the market. Also trading major assets for Muzzin meant almost no matter what Gardiner wanted, he wouldn't be able to be brought back. So part of the equation of the Muzzin trade had to be that Gardiner would be sacrificed. I don't think Muzzin is superior enough to Gardiner to justify that.

It would be like bringing in a Erik Karlsson right now would likely mean no room to lock up Morgan Reilly long term. Any trade for Karlsson would have to also factor in the likely loss of Reilly.

 

[kb]

That's definitely not accurate. Many times Marleau and Brown were set up nice and couldn't convert. Mik and Moore are much better suited to play alongside him.

Kadri is not a distributor of the puck. He tried to go it alone far too much.

 

[1specter]

Kadri is not a distributor of the puck. He tried to go it alone far too much.

I don't agree, I think his vision is one of his best assets. He was turned into more of a shooter by Babcock and it worked well when he had a guy like Marner but with Brown and Marleau he had to do more of everything on his own.

 

[kb]

I don't agree, I think his vision is one of his best assets. He was turned into more of a shooter by Babcock and it worked well when he had a guy like Marner but with Brown and Marleau he had to do more of everything on his own.

Didn't see that myself, but to each their own. It's why I am liking Kerfoot a lt better in the #3C role, he's the distributor and defensive conscience of that line.

Kadri was being stifled, and pushed into a role that really didn't suit him.

 

[Albi34]

If kerfoot continues to play this well, this trade is a home run. If barrie signs an extension...grand slam

 

[Boutette]

Part of the job of a good GM is to predict the future.

The Kessel trade seemed like fair value. But burke is rightly criticized because one of the pics turned into a 2nd overall pick and a star player.

So the fact that our GM didn't know he could get Gardiner for long term at $4M shows he didn't understand the market. Also trading major assets for Muzzin meant almost no matter what Gardiner wanted, he wouldn't be able to be brought back. So part of the equation of the Muzzin trade had to be that Gardiner would be sacrificed. I don't think Muzzin is superior enough to Gardiner to justify that.

It would be like bringing in a Erik Karlsson right now would likely mean no room to lock up Morgan Reilly long term. Any trade for Karlsson would have to also factor in the likely loss of Reilly.

No one in Jan 2019 believed that Gardiner would be getting anything less than $6 million AAV, likely for a minimum of 6 years. Dubas read the market fine. Expecting GMs to have magic powers to spot well in advance that a debilitating injury would strik a player who's missed all of 8 games in 5 years and does his best to avoid contact, seems a bit rich.

 

[Suntouchable13]

As far as Barrie is concerned, I think he will be too rich for us to sign. 7-8 Mil for a guy that will play on the 2nd PP unit for us and 2nd pairing is way too rich. He can get that easily somewhere else and play 1st PP unit time.

 

[The CyNick]

No one in Jan 2019 believed that Gardiner would be getting anything less than $6 million AAV, likely for a minimum of 6 years. Dubas read the market fine. Expecting GMs to have magic powers to spot well in advance that a debilitating injury would strik a player who's missed all of 8 games in 5 years and does his best to avoid contact, seems a bit rich.

When he made the Muzzin trade, based on Muzzin's term, he knew he wasn't going to be able to sign Gardiner because of it (regardless of what Gardiner's number was expected to be). Had he passed on Muzzin he could have signed Gardiner long term at a team friendly number. He would have also had a boatload of additional assets in his toolbox.

It's important for a GM to have a long range vision. It seemed shortsighted to trade major assets for Muzzin when he may only give us two playoffs and when at least half of those playoffs were utter failures. Top me that's not good asset management.

Now he's potentially made the same mistake again by trading for Barrie. He may very well lose that player too and be out an elite 3rd line centre. Given our lack of organizational depth at centre, that could also look like a blunder like the Muzzin-Gardiner swap has proven to be.

 

[Boutette]

When he made the Muzzin trade, based on Muzzin's term, he knew he wasn't going to be able to sign Gardiner because of it (regardless of what Gardiner's number was expected to be). Had he passed on Muzzin he could have signed Gardiner long term at a team friendly number. He would have also had a boatload of additional assets in his toolbox.

It's important for a GM to have a long range vision. It seemed shortsighted to trade major assets for Muzzin when he may only give us two playoffs and when at least half of those playoffs were utter failures. Top me that's not good asset management.

Now he's potentially made the same mistake again by trading for Barrie. He may very well lose that player too and be out an elite 3rd line centre. Given our lack of organizational depth at centre, that could also look like a blunder like the Muzzin-Gardiner swap has proven to be.

Congrats. You've gone plaid. This argument is just ridiculous.

 

[hobarth]

When he made the Muzzin trade, based on Muzzin's term, he knew he wasn't going to be able to sign Gardiner because of it (regardless of what Gardiner's number was expected to be). Had he passed on Muzzin he could have signed Gardiner long term at a team friendly number. He would have also had a boatload of additional assets in his toolbox.

It's important for a GM to have a long range vision. It seemed shortsighted to trade major assets for Muzzin when he may only give us two playoffs and when at least half of those playoffs were utter failures. Top me that's not good asset management.

Now he's potentially made the same mistake again by trading for Barrie. He may very well lose that player too and be out an elite 3rd line centre. Given our lack of organizational depth at centre, that could also look like a blunder like the Muzzin-Gardiner swap has proven to be.

It is important for GMs to have a long range vision but if you have a team that might be on the cusp of greatness, now, why would you not try to feed that. All of the assets Dubas traded might never amount to much and being available to trade for Muzzin might be their biggest value.

I think Dubas is into results management, now.

 

[ITM]

When he made the Muzzin trade, based on Muzzin's term, he knew he wasn't going to be able to sign Gardiner because of it (regardless of what Gardiner's number was expected to be). Had he passed on Muzzin he could have signed Gardiner long term at a team friendly number. He would have also had a boatload of additional assets in his toolbox.

It's important for a GM to have a long range vision. It seemed shortsighted to trade major assets for Muzzin when he may only give us two playoffs and when at least half of those playoffs were utter failures. Top me that's not good asset management.

Now he's potentially made the same mistake again by trading for Barrie. He may very well lose that player too and be out an elite 3rd line centre. Given our lack of organizational depth at centre, that could also look like a blunder like the Muzzin-Gardiner swap has proven to be.

In the first (bolded) instance, how do you know that? In the second, that's a completely false premise and so naturally, the conclusion is incorrect.

If anything, it appears the decision not to retain Gardiner, like Kadri, was a move made independent of acquiring anyone else. The die was cast and neither would be a Maple Leaf for the litany of reasons repeated ad nauseum. They simply weren't returning. Who replaced them was secondary.

The Muzzin acquisition for what it appears to be on face value is that of a Stanley Cup champion, top four physical D with offensive upside. Something this club didn't have prior to acquiring Muzzin. And while Gardiner is a talented offensive defenceman, he is no Jake Muzzin in a comparison of physical impact and intimidation and experience.

 

[frog]

who else is gonna watch kadri vs the bruins tn

 

[darrylsittler27]

The trade makes total sense to me. Kerfoot is young and the Leafs are over extended on high price offense. The way Barrie is playing the Leafs may just walk away at the of this year.. and that works too. We reset and took Kerfoot at 24 and get a year of Barrie. But you don't just replace the heart and grit.

 

[The CyNick]

It is important for GMs to have a long range vision but if you have a team that might be on the cusp of greatness, now, why would you not try to feed that. All of the assets Dubas traded might never amount to much and being available to trade for Muzzin might be their biggest value.

I think Dubas is into results management, now.

Muzzin is a fine player, but he's not significantly better than Gardiner.

If the logic is we were all in last season and wanted Gardiner plus Muzzin, well the results show that the GM didn't read the tea leaves very well because they couldn't even get out of the first round.

As I mentioned before, Burkie gets tons of heat in this market because he incorrectly read the tea leaves and acquired an actual all star level player. Imagine how much worse it is when you swing and miss on your guess and you're just getting a middling D man.

 

[The CyNick]

In the first (bolded) instance, how do you know that? In the second, that's a completely false premise and so naturally, the conclusion is incorrect.

If anything, it appears the decision not to retain Gardiner, like Kadri, was a move made independent of acquiring anyone else. The die was cast and neither would be a Maple Leaf for the litany of reasons repeated ad nauseum. They simply weren't returning. Who replaced them was secondary.

The Muzzin acquisition for what it appears to be on face value is that of a Stanley Cup champion, top four physical D with offensive upside. Something this club didn't have prior to acquiring Muzzin. And while Gardiner is a talented offensive defenceman, he is no Jake Muzzin in a comparison of physical impact and intimidation and experience.

It's all just a matter of understanding the math. Everyone knew the leafs would be tight to the cap going into the 19-20 season. Gardiner was making $4M and due for a new contract. You bring in Muzzin making $4M. Unless another major move was made to shed salary, they couldn't keep Muzzin and Gardiner. So the acquisition of Muzzin is essentially saying Gardiner is done here.

You talked about the attributes that Muzzin brings. But what value did he bring against Boston? Where was the intimidation factor in that series? I just saw the Bruins do what they want against him and the rest of the team.

Here's what Muzzin's game really is. He'll throw a nice hit every 4th game and he'll blast a nice shot now and then. Other than that, he's just a middling D. Nothing special.

I don't think he's terrible or anything, I just would have rather had Gardiner plus a first and a couple upper level prospects. Especially when one of them is a RHD with upside.

 

[Koolboss]

who else is gonna watch kadri vs the bruins tn

Good game so far

 

[darrylsittler27]

I think we did well LT(Kerfoot) but don't forget..we could make Barrie a TD biddin war. Toronto doesn't need offense if Sandin develops and Liljegren moves ahead. We lost JVR, we lost Gardiner, we don't have to lose Barrie.

 

[Stephen]

I'm kind of surprised that I like Kerfoot more than Barrie so far.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

I'm kind of surprised that I like Kerfoot more than Barrie so far.

Agreed, and I like both more than Kadri so far

 

[notDatsyuk]

I always wondered if Kadri was truly a shut down Centre why did he never play PK for us?

He was a good pest and a decent shutdown guy, when paired with Komarov. Komarov was the real shutdown player, which is why he did a lot of PK, and why Kadri was so much worse after they were split up.

 

[GoonieFace]

The hot takes on this board are hilarious. After 2 games, everyone thinks Barrie is the next Bobby Orr, now 3 games later hes the next Aki Berg.