Value is pretty close actually (IMO). Kapanen might be in our long term plans as Nylander's winger but you never know. Could definitely see something similar to this after the expansion draft.
Proposal: Toronto and Anaheim
- Thread starter Amadeus
- Start date
Value is pretty close actually (IMO). Kapanen might be in our long term plans as Nylander's winger but you never know. Could definitely see something similar to this after the expansion draft.
lindholmie
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2015
- 1,980
- 60
i wouldnt do it. D men hold more value especially a righty on his elc and has been destroying the AHL
Proven top 4 dmen yes perhaps, but I've yet to see any indication that d prospects are at any sort of premium. Sort of belies the whole reason that top-4's are in such demand- that d prospects don't turn out to a high enough level enough of the time.
On the topic of JVR though the ship has sailed on any sort of "hockey trade" IMO. With every passing game he's getting into "extended rental," best example that comes to mind is Pominville. No reason for a team looking to add a topline winger for two cup pushes to want to subtract a top 4 D from said push, and even in the case of a team looking to turn a 4th d into a 7th forward pre-expansion if that d-man has term/ control they're going to want the same back (assuming dman of comparable quality to JVR as a forward) which IMO sinks the whole "JVR for defensive help" that Leaf fans want. IMO it comes down to re-signing him, trading for a comparable d-man with similar contract terms that they think can be re-signed, trading him for a deadline package of 1st+ A-/B+ Prospect + (dependent on timing of deal and other parts).
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,562
- 39,416
Pretty much unless they get lucky and a team has defensivr depth and can afford to part with them... anaheim kinda fits the mold but i dont think vatanen is the type of dmen toronto really wants/needs and i feel like fowler has been far to good for anaheim to move him before the off season(i hope we resign him) ... guys like theo montour and larsson could be interesting but would take a significant add, little less with theodore
At this point I'd agree, at this point last year and even as recent as the off-season I wouldn't have had a problem. To me it looked he was becoming/ could become a Spurgeon esque two way 2/3 whose defense is chronically underrated because of size. This year not seeing it as much.
Larsson+ I could see as an off season deal, depending on how things shake out. Would IMO come down to Leafs early discussions with JVR and ducks with Fowler. If JVR is willing to sign a team friendly deal like Rielly and Kadri I see him being kept, if he wants to cash in he'd be available. Same situation with Fowler. Where if Fowler comes at reasonable cost that locks in a top 4 of
Lindholm-Manson
Fowler-Montour
with both Theodore and Larsson on the outside looking in.
Ducks in a row
Go Ducks Quack Quack
We have done well with defenseman recently not so great with forwards in the past. Montour is more impressive then Holland was especially when you consider he is a defenseman. Defenseman take longer to develop and less spots on a team for defenseman compared to forwards so Holland being in the NHL sooner means little.
Larsson is a 2015 1st round picked player. He could become a Lindholm like defenseman for us and he is expansion exempt and on his ELC for multiple years good luck getting us to trade him. Us trading him + ain't happening.
Fowler - Montour pair isn't a pair I would like to see just like I don't like the Fowler - Vatanen pair. Montour shouldn't be playing in a top 4 yet he needs to play and prove he can handle 3rd pair before making the top 4.
Halla
Registered User
- Jan 28, 2016
- 14,727
- 3,779
Halla
Registered User
- Jan 28, 2016
- 14,727
- 3,779
yeah especially not for lindholm who has been pretty meh this year.
would love to have lindholm but the leafs laugh at any player that is not named mcdavid offered for auston matthews.
putting up a 36g/61pt pace as a rookie C in toronto is pretty good, no?
Halla
Registered User
- Jan 28, 2016
- 14,727
- 3,779
possibly. I think the ship has sailed on the leafs even considering moving Kapanen though.
leading the AHL in goals as a 20 year old is pretty impressive.
pretty much silenced all the people who tried to devalue him based on his 40pts in 69 games as a junior aged 18-19 year old.
38g/76pt in 76 game pace.
Jesus Take the Wheel
Registered User
Goes to look at stats, sees 39 points twice.. Really thats the argument you're going with?
dracom
Registered User
He's had 2 seasons where he put up 39 points. That's close enough right, I mean you guys fawn over JVR as a 30/30 player, but he's done that once in his career but gets close enough that you still call him one.
Also, being a good player isn't about who puts up the most points. And if Leafs organization believes that, no wonder the team has been bad for so long. Having defensively sound players who can still put up points is key to having a successful team.
Silf is part of the line that shut teams top lines down every night, and he's still putting up points. Not to mention the past few seasons he's started the season with major injury (broken hand, concussion). This is his first season with us where he doesn't start a season injured.
You should actually watch a Ducks game and not just the stats, because it's obvious that's what you're doing. Lindholm is still great defensively, his offensive needs work. He even said he worked on his defense in the off season over his offense.
Also, holy **** is Matthews becoming the most overrated player by some Leafs fans. I get it, you love your future 1C, but you treat him like he's already the greatest player to play the game.
Halla
Registered User
- Jan 28, 2016
- 14,727
- 3,779
i dont have to dig too far into the stats to show JVR is a vastly superior offensive player than him. 0.63ppg vs 0.47. that isnt really close.
no arguing silfervberg is the better defensive player, but too suggest a guy who has a career high of 20g/39pts is far and away better than a guy who has a 30g/59pt full season pace as a leaf is a bit ludicrous
Jesus Take the Wheel
Registered User
Thats probably a better argument to start with imo.. I'd still say they are probably equal as I can see Silfverberg hitting 50 points at least going forward and as you said he is a better defensive player
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,562
- 39,416
Yes you shouldnt move matthews, but strictly value wise its not far off.
Byt eventually you guys will have to put a real defense on your team... andersen is good and your offense will be good for a long time, right now your defense will hold you guys back... and doesnt look like any help is coming from within
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,562
- 39,416
Jvr is better that silf at this point in time, but the difference isnt montour.
Also jvr for a ducks forward is a lateral move for us, we need to add a forward without losing a forward
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
If JVR is traded, it will be for defense. Doesn't look like there is a deal out there....so the Leafs will address issues in the offseason.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,562
- 39,416
Which is likely the best thing fr them to do, hope they get a lowish draft pick and make a move to a team that neess to move a dmen for expansion draft ... draft a decent dmen and then you should be sitting prettty
Morning Dart
Registered User
We're also rebuilding. Rielly/Gardiner/Zaitsev is 3/4 of a pretty good top-4, with hopes one of them pans out into a good #1. We'lll have to make a move for a top 4 RHD, but the idea that a rebuilding team is panicking to trade big assets for that player in a "show me" year for their top 3 offensive Prospects is ludicrous, even more so because it's coming mostly from our own fan base.
As for the OP yeah, it's bad for the Ducks, not because JvR is awful or Silf>JvR, it just doesn't nothing for them. Ducks need top-6 scoring, we have JvR, there's a definite fit there, but subtracting Silfverberg to add him gets them a better player (in my opinion, let's not freak out here) at the cost of addressing the depth, which is the whole point of a budget team acquiring a low cost #1W in the first place.
Any deal here would have to be one of your defence Prospects or Vatanen for JvR, otherwise we're ignoring the obvious fit. If Ducks fans don't want to do that, cool, but God almighty make these stupid proposals stop if that's the case.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,562
- 39,416
Good post im all for vat for jvr, and i think most duck fans are on board with that premise but i think leaf fans want a legit top pairing guy, but dont realize jvr isnt gunna get them that.
Had no clue this was even an acceptable offer for most duck fans but as a leaf fan i like the value although I do wish vats was a bit steadier defensively
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
We all know JVR isn't getting a legit top pair D. That's why we always say "top 4". We would prefer a more defensive D man than Vats however.
Morning Dart
Registered User
See, I would consider Vats. RHD are hard to come by, and we have plenty of defensive minded lefties kicking around in the minors. I think Rielly-Zaitsev Gardiner-Vatanen is a good mix of offence and defence, with excellent transition game. A little lightweight, but a bigger, smooth-skating lefty that fits our team identity is a lot easier to acquire than a top-4 righty. Not saying I absolutely do it but let's not act like acquiring Vatanen means our defence is completely set, it can be the first domino to fall in a series of moves.
Personally, don't even know if I want to move JvR at all, I think he likes Toronto and could be convinced to stay on an Okposo like deal, which would still be affordable for a top line winger in his prime. That being said, Anaheim is a fit, so long as we don't expect them to swap wingers with us. It doesn't fit what they need at all.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,562
- 39,416
Unfortunetly manson is really the only player of his type we have on the backend, he has good chemistry with all of our good dmen and very nice contract.
Value wise he doesnt have much but team wise hes very impirtant would be tough to move him
