Trades and UFA’s - Trade Deadline Edition

[Americanadian]

I look at Weegar as the guy he was before his offensive breakout. He's a guy I had wanted before that. At that point in time, he was a very solid defensive guy, physical, and put up an acceptable amount of points.

Then Ekblad got injured, and Weegar was thrust into a points producing position, as they didn't have anyone... it kind of changed his game focus and the way he played. Manson went through the same type of deal.

With Calgary, Weegar went back to the level of opportunity he is best made for last year.... a 30 point D, physical, a secondary at best offensive threat. 3rd in PP time, and 5th in PK time, more of a 5v5 guy, but strong at it.

As far as which stats aren't good.... one point, 5 hits in 7 games... so it seems less physical so far.. I'm not sure why, on ice for two goals for, six against, though... expected goals is above 50%... you never know why the variance... is it because of goaltending, forwards not scoring, or is Weegar part of the problem? Which is why I ask.

To your earlier point - small sample. I look at the underlying numbers and associate the GF/GA discrepancy to variance. His goal scoring is on par with his career, his assists are down but I wouldn't look at him to make plays and that Calgary team seems to have scoring issues so far. It's all to say that I wouldn't be too concerned about him falling off a cliff at 29.

What does he cost to obtain? That's a pretty big contract really, for what he brings.

I agree - the cost of acquisition and the risk of having him on that deal until 37 is a non-starter.

 

[Americanadian]

That was not a report. That was vague and incomplete "I think" speculation about pieces potentially discussed in preliminary trade discussions

I don't know if you listen to Friedman's podcast but anytime he throws out wild speculation he cautions the listeners not to take it as a report.

more than 3 years ago.

I do appreciate your effort to diminish the report and I get who you are trying to defend here but referring to a report that is documented on the internet as if it was outdated is a bad faith argument given it was relevant news when it was reported.

 

[TheMadHatTrick]

Tanev works for what we need and won't cost as much.

 

[SprDaVE]

Don't think I'd want to pay Weegar 6.25m for even just this year, let alone for 8 more years until he's 37.

With a rising cap and his stock at the lowest it's been in awhile, I would bet that he'll make people regret not trading for him if he's relatively cheap to acquire. Maybe we can dump Kampf and Reaves in the process.

And for the record, I have no idea if he's available if at all. Seems logical he might be if the Flames season goes south.

 

[leafan11]

Tanev works for what we need and won't cost as much.

He’s Muzzin 2.0 when it comes to injuries. No thanks

 

[Dekes For Days]

I don't know if you listen to Friedman's podcast but anytime he throws out wild speculation he cautions the listeners not to take it as a report.

Yes, Friedman would be the first to tell you that when he says "I think" "I think" "I think", it's not a report. And yet here we are, with you claiming it's a report.

referring to a report that is documented on the internet as if it was outdated is a bad faith argument given it was relevant news when it was reported.

There was no report. If you mean the random speculation, that was later shown to be wrong, it actually was also outdated when it was spread. The statement was made way after the supposed trade discussions would have happened.

 

[Americanadian]

With a rising cap and his stock at the lowest it's been in awhile, I would bet that he'll make people regret not trading for him if he's relatively cheap to acquire.

And for the record, I have no idea if he's available if at all. Seems logical he might be if the Flames season goes south.

There's a real possibility the Flames lose Zadorov, Tanev and Hanifin leaving Weegar and Andersson as their only NHL D under contrat next year. It also depends what they get back in trades if they decide to move off any of the 3 pending UFA D or Lindholm.

 

[SprDaVE]

There's a real possibility the Flames lose Zadorov, Tanev and Hanifin leaving Weegar and Andersson as their only NHL D under contrat next year. It also depends what they get back in trades if they decide to move off any of the 3 pending UFA D or Lindholm.

Yep, it's a good time for them to hit the reset button. Like I said, taking advantage of that situation would be wise for Treliving.

 

[Americanadian]

Yes, Friedman would be the first to tell you that when he says "I think" "I think" "I think", it's not a report. And yet here we are, with you claiming it's a report.

I listen to every podcast he puts out - he's very clear when he says something and it doesn't want to be taken as a report.

that was later shown to be wrong

I don't know why you continue to derail this thread with this statement when there is 0 proof to back it up. If he said it there would be some piece of evidence on the internet.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I listen to every podcast he puts out - he's very clear when he says something and it doesn't want to be taken as a report.

A good way to know something isn't a report is when somebody very specifically says "I think" repeatedly.

I don't know why you continue to derail this thread with this statement when there is 0 proof to back it up.

You're the one that brought up an irrelevant tweet with retracted speculation from 3 years ago. Correcting it isn't derailing anything.

 

[Americanadian]

You're the one that brought up a retracted, irrelevant tweet with speculation from 3 years ago. Correcting it isn't derailing anything.

My apologies for bringing up the Weegar discussion in response to the Weegar discussion. It's a shame this retraction wasn't documented anywhere on the internet.

 

[Dekes For Days]

With a rising cap and his stock at the lowest it's been in awhile, I would bet that he'll make people regret not trading for him if he's relatively cheap to acquire. Maybe we can dump Kampf and Reaves in the process.

And for the record, I have no idea if he's available if at all. Seems logical he might be if the Flames season goes south.

I think Calgary is going to resist the rebuild as much as possible. The time to do it was last year, and they doubled down. Now they're going to fall into the sunk cost fallacy and it's going to be even harder to do what they should. I don't think he'd be as cheap to acquire as he should be.

Weegar is alright as a player, but that cap hit and term is ugly, and relies on him being something he's only been in a couple years of his career. I don't know how we make that fit, and I don't think he's the final solution to anything.

My apologies for bringing up the Weegar discussion in response to the Weegar discussion.

More like you brought up a 3 year old Weegar discussion in response to a current Weegar discussion.

 

[SprDaVE]

I think Calgary is going to resist the rebuild as much as possible. The time to do it was last year, and they doubled down. Now they just have sunk costs and it's going to be even harder to do what they should.

Weegar is alright as a player, but that cap hit and term is ugly, and relies on him being something he's only been in a couple years of his career. I don't know how we make that fit, and I don't think he's the solution to anything.

Not sure what we expect out of a 6M cap hit player, but it ain't a superstar. Nothing about the cap hit is ugly, the term is as expected with most players of his ilk but it's 100% the issue with his contract. He's capable of playing a lot of hard minutes and do well. He's a great skater and capable offensively.

If we can find a 6M defenseman that can do all that and be younger, better and/or not signed long-term, then sign me up. What are the alternatives here?

Going into next season, we have an expiring Brodie. Weegar would slot into his current role very well. I'd be willing to bet any free agent signing to replace Brodie's current role will cost at least 6M, if not over 7M.

 

[Fogelhund]

I just think it's funny that people are tripping over each other around here to get a Peeke, who isn't even playing, or even Zadorov when they aren't even close to the level of Weegar can bring in terms of minutes, efficiency and quality. He's not perfect or top tier or anything but that team he's on now really is struggling. The price of acquisition would obviously vary and all that but... I'd much rather aim higher and target a player like Weegar, if available. They are hard to acquire and would fit this team very well over the next few years.

To me, obtaining Weegar, is a bit like obtaining Muzzin, or Brodie at this stage. We pay a premier cost in futures, for a premier 30ish year old player, on a sizable but mostly manageable contract, and we get 3 good years out of that player. Is that a move we can continuously make?

The goal here, is to find a guy, who makes a very good partner for Rielly. I think we've been searching for a long time. The best guys so far, have been Hainsey and Schenn. Is there a need to aim really high, or just find a piece that fits the puzzle? You can debate either way.

If I were going for a 30ish yo guy.. .I'd think about Larrson, or Brodin first. Or maybe I wait on Tanev being a UFA, instead of spending premier assets again.

My thoughts have always been, find the next guy, who can become that type of player. A younger player, who you get more years out of, and might cost less to obtain... but in any case, you have for longer. Someone who might not be the premier player, but just who can really compliment what Rielly does.

To me, Peeke was trending in that direction a couple of years ago. I've openly stated, that I'm not sure he still is heading in that direction now. I've stated, that I'm not sure it's worth the risk. But, the cost to obtain him won't be particularly high... and he is 25 and did appear to be trending in the right direction.

Zadorov... I mean, that's purely a bottom pairing guy, and best as a UFA.

So the question to me... is who are the next few names, who will be recognized in the next few years..? On teams that might make trades? The Leafs really could use that guy, who has physical pushback, mobility, RD... who could partner with Rielly.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Not sure what we expect out of a 6M cap hit player, but it ain't a superstar. Nothing about the cap hit is ugly, the term is as expected with most players of his ilk. He's capable of playing a lot of hard minutes and do well. He's a great skater and capable offensively.

If we can find a 6M defenseman that can do all that and be younger, better and/or not signed long-term, then sign me up. What are the alternatives here?

Going into next season, we have an expiring Brodie. Weegar would slot into his current role very well and funny enough, a lot of the same comments were said at the time the Leafs signed him.

Brodie didn't cost anything to acquire, and was cheaper, and wasn't signed for 8 years. Brodie has been a top tier acquisition for us, but even then, how would we feel if we were locked in to another half-decade of Brodie?

Quite frankly, I don't really like the idea of acquiring anybody with 8 years of term, much less an almost-30 decently paid defensive defenseman. It's a risky amount of term for somebody you've never seen on your team and in your system. I don't expect a superstar out of a 6.25m player, but that could still easily be a crippling contract.

I don't see how we fit that in right now, and I don't think he'd be as cheap to acquire as he should be, given the position Calgary's ownership has taken.
And I don't think he'll live up to that contract.
And he has a NTC.

 

[SprDaVE]

To me, obtaining Weegar, is a bit like obtaining Muzzin, or Brodie at this stage. We pay a premier cost in futures, for a premier 30ish year old player, on a sizable but mostly manageable contract, and we get 3 good years out of that player. Is that a move we can continuously make?

The goal here, is to find a guy, who makes a very good partner for Rielly. I think we've been searching for a long time. The best guys so far, have been Hainsey and Schenn. Is there a need to aim really high, or just find a piece that fits the puzzle? You can debate either way.

If I were going for a 30ish yo guy.. .I'd think about Larrson, or Brodin first. Or maybe I wait on Tanev being a UFA, instead of spending premier assets again.

My thoughts have always been, find the next guy, who can become that type of player. A younger player, who you get more years out of, and might cost less to obtain... but in any case, you have for longer. Someone who might not be the premier player, but just who can really compliment what Rielly does.

To me, Peeke was trending in that direction a couple of years ago. I've openly stated, that I'm not sure he still is heading in that direction now. I've stated, that I'm not sure it's worth the risk. But, the cost to obtain him won't be particularly high... and he is 25 and did appear to be trending in the right direction.

Zadorov... I mean, that's purely a bottom pairing guy, and best as a UFA.

So the question to me... is who are the next few names, who will be recognized in the next few years..? On teams that might make trades? The Leafs really could use that guy, who has physical pushback, mobility, RD... who could partner with Rielly.

You acquire a Muzzin or a Brodie anytime you can or that you have to... That seems really weird to position as a negative. They were great in their time here and the kind of player that elevated the team.

So if Weegar can give you similar efficiency and quality... Uh... yeah, I do that way over taking a shot in the dark on a 25 year old that's not playing. If there's a young defenseman available and actually playing... I'm all ears.

Brodie didn't cost anything to acquire, and was cheaper, and wasn't signed for 8 years. Brodie has been a top tier acquisition for us, but even then, how would we feel if we were locked in to another half-decade of Brodie?

Quite frankly, I don't really like the idea of acquiring anybody with 8 years of term, much less an almost-30 decently paid defensive defenseman. It's a risky amount of term for somebody you've never seen on your team and in your system. I don't expect a superstar out of a 6.25m player, but that could still easily be a crippling contract.

I don't see how we fit that in right now, and I don't think he'd be as cheap to acquire as he should be, given the position Calgary's ownership has taken.
And I don't think he'll live up to that contract.
And he has a NTC.

If we could turn back the clock on Brodie to give him an 7-8 year deal instead of 5, I would easily do it. He'd be around for the next couple years and he's still very much a good defenseman. He has far exceed the cap hit of that contract.

The term on his contract sucks for sure. But I'd take a shot at acquiring him if there's any possibility of that happening and if of course the price makes sense. I'm not sweating the term on the contract since I know he'll be really good for most of that term... and it's also likely he outplays the contract. He's from Toronto and likely very much willing to come to Toronto, so the NTC is really not a concern either.

At the end of the day, we can go in circles. But I do think looking at the Flames and their position to load up would be wise.

 

[Americanadian]

To me, obtaining Weegar, is a bit like obtaining Muzzin, or Brodie at this stage. We pay a premier cost in futures, for a premier 30ish year old player, on a sizable but mostly manageable contract, and we get 3 good years out of that player. Is that a move we can continuously make?

No.

The Leafs need a refresh of players between 21-24. Look at the acquisition cost when Calgary got Hamilton compared to the Leafs grabbing Muzzin - basically the same trade. If the Leafs spend future assets they should be trying to make Hamilton-esque trades, not Muzzin.

 

[Fogelhund]

You acquire a Muzzin or a Brodie anytime you can or that you have to... That seems really weird to position as a negative. They were great in their time here and the kind of player that elevated the team.

So if Weegar can give you similar efficiency and quality... Uh... yeah, I do that way over taking a shot in the dark on a 25 year old that's not playing. If there's a young defenseman available and actually playing... I'm all ears.

There seems to be a communication break down. I've never suggested not getting a Weegar and getting a 25 year old that's currently not playing. That's kind of the opposite of what I've suggested.

 

[Dekes For Days]

If we could turn back the clock on Brodie to give him an 7-8 year deal instead of 5, I would easily do it. He'd be around for the next couple years and he's still very much a good defenseman. He has far exceed the cap hit of that contract.

Brodie was 4 years, not 5. He's starting year 4. if he was signed for 8 years like Weegar is, we'd have another half decade with him.
I love Brodie, and he's been massive for our team, and the comments around here about how he's already broken down are wildly exaggerated, but I don't think he holds up another 5 years either. And that's somebody who had a much more established history at that level and doesn't play as physically demanding a style.

 

[jaric1862]

Peeke is exactly what we need it’s unfortunate that the money won’t work with our current cap structure.

 

[IPS]

You acquire a Muzzin or a Brodie anytime you can or that you have to... That seems really weird to position as a negative. They were great in their time here and the kind of player that elevated the team.

So if Weegar can give you similar efficiency and quality... Uh... yeah, I do that way over taking a shot in the dark on a 25 year old that's not playing. If there's a young defenseman available and actually playing... I'm all ears.



If we could turn back the clock on Brodie to give him an 7-8 year deal instead of 5, I would easily do it. He'd be around for the next couple years and he's still very much a good defenseman. He has far exceed the cap hit of that contract.

The term on his contract sucks for sure. But I'd take a shot at acquiring him if there's any possibility of that happening and if of course the price makes sense. I'm not sweating the term on the contract since I know he'll be really good for most of that term... and it's also likely he outplays the contract. He's from Toronto and likely very much willing to come to Toronto, so the NTC is really not a concern either.

At the end of the day, we can go in circles. But I do think looking at the Flames and their position to load up would be wise.

TJ Brodie exceeds his cap hit?

I have to disagree, on his best years he's providing about exactly what we're paying for. You get a good solid reliable defensive D with a good first pass but doesn't provide much offense at all. TJ Brodie types historically have gotten that kind of cap hit on the free market.

And we all know, if it's on twitter, it's true...
Funny how every time this comes up on here, it's because (just like this time) people remember it the other way around. I guess a bunch of people just all independently had the same dream. Much more likely than a later minor correction being drowned out by an original publicized claim on twitter.

Maybe we should just stick to things that actually happen, or at least actual reports, instead of 3 year old "I think"s from media personalities in the first place.

There's about as much credibility to that then there was with Marner and the offer sheets - which you believed was very real.

Your bias literally decides want you want to believe from the media. Truth is - you don't have any clue whatsoever if what was reported was true.

 

[rumman]

Peeke is exactly what we need it’s unfortunate that the money won’t work with our current cap structure.

Too many shiny toys, can’t expect success surrounding said toys with plugs, it’s a lesson yet still to be learned in Leaf Nation……..

 

[showtime8]

Peeke is exactly what we need it’s unfortunate that the money won’t work with our current cap structure.

Where do you put him in the current lineup?

 

[rumman]

Where do you put him in the current lineup?

Anywhere, I think most of the D is all out bad. Gio’s too old, Brodie/McCabe are big questions, Rielly is the only quality and he isn’t winning a Norris trophy anytime soon. Woll better be able to stand on his head this year because he won’t get much help……..

 

[ToneDog]

Anywhere, I think most of the D is all out bad. Gio’s too old, Brodie/McCabe are big questions, Rielly is the only quality and he isn’t winning a Norris trophy anytime soon. Woll better be able to stand on his head this year because he won’t get much help……..

Jury is still out on our D and G. IMO we have not beaten any significant teams (Tampa without Vasi and on the decline and Florida missing 3 huge pieces). I want to see how we defend against Vegas, Colorado, NJ, Boston, Detroit, Dallas, NYR, Carolina and McDraisaitl..