Trades & Free Agency Thread: Off-season Edition

[mydnyte]

How could we not beat Washington with for Roy?

Liljergren,Hakanpaa,OEL --> $8M

Even if we gave Roy $6M, we'd have $2M extra for two more depth D. (Timmins + Boqvist)

Liljergren,Hakanpaa,OEL = 3 players, and 2 RHD and 1 that can play both sides

Roy got overpaid and his career high in points is 26 in 82 games played.
Lil had 23 points in 55 games last season, with lower toi.

and Haka isnt official yet, so we still have 2.5 available

 

[ULF_55]

How could we not beat Washington with for Roy?

Liljergren,Hakanpaa,OEL --> $8M

Even if we gave Roy $6M, we'd have $2M extra for two more depth D. (Timmins + Boqvist)

Free agent frenzy is over, but it is still off-season.

Still waiting for the Liljegren and Robertson for Rasmus Andersson to go down.

 

[Sypher04]

Free agent frenzy is over, but it is still off-season.

Still waiting for the Liljegren and Robertson for Rasmus Andersson to go down.

That would be quite a deal.

 

[notDatsyuk]

It's functionally the same. Just stated in a common, easier to understand way.

"A common, easier to understand way"? With no context, using projections (without saying so) instead of real numbers, and with no indication of where they came from or what they were supposed to mean?

Obfuscation at its best - about what we expect from you.

 

[Dekes For Days]

"A common, easier to understand way"? With no context, using projections (without saying so) instead of real numbers, and with no indication of where they came from or what they were supposed to mean?

An "X point player" is widely understood to be somebody who produces X per 82 game season. There were no projections. Just the level that they had produced at in the years leading up to their signing. It's very straightforward, but if you didn't understand what the discussion was about, then you could have asked.

 

[Dreakmur]

An "X point player" is widely understood to be somebody who produces X per 82 game season. There were no projections. Just the level that they had produced at in the years leading up to their signing. It's very straightforward, but if you didn't understand what the discussion was about, then you could have asked.

The whole idea of a "per 82 games" is projecting their scoring pace onto a larger sample size.....

 

[ULF_55]

As long as Marner is on the team he will be used in whatever role he’s deemed most effective and can help the team most.

The idea of chopping down his usage is fine in theory (unless it’s retaliation for not waiving his NMC, that would 100% get a grievance) but at the end of the day you’re just hurting the team and it’d he pretty stupid on several levels.

I do think we could see a correction of some or even all of Marner’s PK time towards keeping him fresher for 5v5 play.

Almost any player can be taught to penalty kill (though obviously some players have better tools for it than others). I think Berube will value putting others on the team in positions of owning those roles to increase their sense of worth to the team. We probably still need to add another 1 or 2 PKers

I also expect us to return to 2 PP units for similar reasons.

You've peeked my curiosity, let's jump over to NHL stats and see PK time for Blues Seasons ...

 

[Dekes For Days]

The whole idea of a "per 82 games" is projecting their scoring pace onto a larger sample size.....

The whole idea of per 82 games is to show their production levels in an easily comparable way. There is no projection, and both samples were bigger than 82 games.
If you want raw points in the 3 years prior, Barzal had 164, and Marner has 281.

 

[Dreakmur]

The whole idea of per 82 games is to show their production levels in an easily comparable way. There is no projection, and both samples were bigger than 82 games.

As soon as you take a scoring pace and apply it to a larger number of games, that's the literal definition of a projection.

 

[Dekes For Days]

As soon as you take a scoring pace and apply it to a larger number of games, that's the literal definition of a projection.

Projection is "an estimate or forecast of a future situation", not a description of past results. And again, 82 games is a smaller number of games than the samples used.

 

[Dreakmur]

Projection is "an estimate or forecast of a future situation", not a description of past results.

When they didn't play 82 games.... the unplayed games are a future situation (that didn't happen).....

And again, 82 games is a smaller number of games than the samples used.

The reason you're saying 82 games is because that's a full season. You're then taking guys who didn't play every game and projecting their paces as if they did.

Just take the L and start calling it 1.22 points per game.. That's the pace it would take to score 100 points in 82 games and you're not projecting to any specific sample size.

 

[Dekes For Days]

When they didn't play 82 games.... the unplayed games are a future situation (that didn't happen).....

They did play 82 games. The samples were 196 and 221 games. No projections were used. No future situations were estimated or forecast.
How they produced over those ~200 games was just described in an easily comparable format. I even provided the P/GP as well.
If you'd like to represent it a different way, you can do that in your own posts.

 

[WTFMAN99]

What are the draft pick returns on Robertson/Liljegren/Timmins?

Just thinking about the liquidation of them to try to A) Have ammo for TDL and B) Have ammo for Leach

I guess the Hakanpaa thing needs to resolve first but need picks for our scouts.

 

[nuck]

As long as Marner is on the team he will be used in whatever role he’s deemed most effective and can help the team most.

The idea of chopping down his usage is fine in theory (unless it’s retaliation for not waiving his NMC, that would 100% get a grievance) but at the end of the day you’re just hurting the team and it’d he pretty stupid on several levels.

I do think we could see a correction of some or even all of Marner’s PK time towards keeping him fresher for 5v5 play.

Almost any player can be taught to penalty kill (though obviously some players have better tools for it than others). I think Berube will value putting others on the team in positions of owning those roles to increase their sense of worth to the team. We probably still need to add another 1 or 2 PKers

I also expect us to return to 2 PP units for similar reasons.

What would be the basis for a grievance other than he wasn't getting what he wanted? The club would need to be contravening either the terms of the CBA or employment legislation which don't speak to whether a player receives any ice time at all, his just salary and benefits. I agree it would seem stupid to sit him but the clubs roster is the clubs choice so its theoretically possible.

I have said before its at least possible to role back his usage a little bit, in favor of their commitment to Nylander. They will still get 100pts if Mitch plays 18:00 a night during the regular season.

I never understood using him on the pk. I know he was capable but the Leafs were not a top pk club because of it. A low minute guy will run his ass off and block shots which you don't want your stars to do and probably get you a similar result. Maybe if you are behind and pushing for a possible SH goal late but I want my stars fresh so I can run them ragged in the 3rd if I need to. They do have other options.

Really looking forward to Berube and the pp. Basically we have watched the big 4 evolve with Keefe and kind of settle in to be good but seldom great. I don't see any reason why it should look like past years at all. Will it automatically be better? Who knows?

 

[Dreakmur]

They did play 82 games.

The reason 82 is the number is because that’s a full season.

The samples were 196 and 221 games.

Out of how many ?

No projections were used.

You projected them to an 82 game season average.

No future situations were estimated or forecast.
How they produced over those ~200 games was just described in an easily comparable format. I even provided the P/GP as well.

The points per 82 games is a projection stat. The entire point of it is to say “if he played every game, he would have scored X”

If you'd like to represent it a different way, you can do that in your own posts.

I’ll do it in a way that isn’t disingenuous…

 

[LeafEgo]

What would be the basis for a grievance other than he wasn't getting what he wanted? The club would need to be contravening either the terms of the CBA or employment legislation which don't speak to whether a player receives any ice time at all, his just salary and benefits. I agree it would seem stupid to sit him but the clubs roster is the clubs choice so its theoretically possible.

I have said before its at least possible to role back his usage a little bit, in favor of their commitment to Nylander. They will still get 100pts if Mitch plays 18:00 a night during the regular season.

I never understood using him on the pk. I know he was capable but the Leafs were not a top pk club because of it. A low minute guy will run his ass off and block shots which you don't want your stars to do and probably get you a similar result. Maybe if you are behind and pushing for a possible SH goal late but I want my stars fresh so I can run them ragged in the 3rd if I need to. They do have other options.

Really looking forward to Berube and the pp. Basically we have watched the big 4 evolve with Keefe and kind of settle in to be good but seldom great. I don't see any reason why it should look like past years at all. Will it automatically be better? Who knows?

NHLPA and the league would be all over the Leafs for acting in bad faith: coercion to waive a contract right. There probably exists a path to victory going down that road, but risky, and probably not with this mgmt group.

There won't be much wiggle room when it comes to deployment either. Berube isn't going to veer away much from what he would consider perfect deployment of his players, or introduce an impediment to team cohesion. Managing who is on the roster is not part of his already challenging objective.

 

[arso40]

Yeah, so would I, I think.... honestly just to be able to avoid the contract negotiation with Marner.

even without that hes a center with speed and is dynamic similar to willy maybe to a lesser extend but it works for me

 

[arso40]

How could we not beat Washington with for Roy?

Liljergren,Hakanpaa,OEL --> $8M

Even if we gave Roy $6M, we'd have $2M extra for two more depth D. (Timmins + Boqvist)

then what happens to the powerplay

 

[jaric1862]

then what happens to the powerplay

You bring in a powerplay specialist as the #6. Guys like Adam Boqvuist/Justin Schultz/Shattenkirk/Addison come to mind.

 

[-DeMo-]

When they didn't play 82 games.... the unplayed games are a future situation (that didn't happen).....



The reason you're saying 82 games is because that's a full season. You're then taking guys who didn't play every game and projecting their paces as if they did.

Just take the L and start calling it 1.22 points per game.. That's the pace it would take to score 100 points in 82 games and you're not projecting to any specific sample size.

don't generally like jumping into the middle of a convo but this is kind of strange the way you 2 are arguing over essentially the same thing.

one could easily say the PPG is also a projection because if two players have the exact same PPG your basically trying to show if two players played the same number of games there points would be identical but your still projecting unplayed games for which ever player played less games. it's really no different then taking there PPG and then multiplying it by any number of games to show who would come out ahead in the same games played. it's basically exact same stat.

 

[Stephen]

Name me the #1 overall draft pick center Barzal got to play with the last 3 years the way Marner is gifted Matthews and to a lesser extent, Tavares, as his centers.

I'll save you some time, you can't.

Name me a guy on the Islanders with nearly identical skill/production to Barzal that play the same position as he does, to take some of the focus away from defending him, the way Marner has Nylander to soften his defensive assignments.

I'll save you some time, you can't.

When Barzal was a rookie he had Tavares to both play with and to take some of the pressure of playing against the opponents #1 shutdown D pairing and shutdown line. Now you're insinuating his production suffers because he's no longer as good as he was as a rookie?

The fact is Barzal doesn't have the same supporting cast as Marner, nowhere even close, nor did he have a coach that plays him in every possible position to put up points, and a team offense -focused play style with which to let him put up points. All this taken into consideration his numbers are very comparable to your beloved overpaid "god in this city"

Barzal also returned to an 80 point level this past season because the Islanders also had Bo Horvat for a full season... so it stands to reason that if he hadn't played a number of years under the Trotz system and had some combination of the Big 4 to play with his numbers would be a lot closer to Mitch than how their careers have unfolded to date.

Is this to say I'm proposing a Marner for Barzal trade? Not really. But really is to say over and over again that Marner is at a level with a lot of different forwards in the game, whether that's Aho, Rantanen, Point and even guys like Barzal who have been dragging a bit over the years.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Barzal also returned to an 80 point level this past season because the Islanders also had Bo Horvat for a full season... so it stands to reason that if he hadn't played a number of years under the Trotz system and had some combination of the Big 4 to play with his numbers would be a lot closer to Mitch than how their careers have unfolded to date.

Is this to say I'm proposing a Marner for Barzal trade? Not really. But really is to say over and over again that Marner is at a level with a lot of different forwards in the game, whether that's Aho, Rantanen, Point and even guys like Barzal who have been dragging a bit over the years.

As much as I don’t like Marner, the Barzal numbers under Trotz are an exaggeration on how much they sagged due to system. If Kuznetsov can put up PPG+ under Trotz, there’s no excuse for Barzal to be putting up 2nd line numbers. He returned to 80 points this year because league scoring is up significantly since 2018, even without Trotz and with Horvat on the team he’d still be putting up low 70s at best if we still had 2018 scoring levels. Rantanen and Point are fair comparisons but Barzal is objectively worse defensively and offensively no matter how flashy he looks.

 

[LeafEgo]

As much as I don’t like Marner, the Barzal numbers under Trotz are an exaggeration on how much they sagged due to system. If Kuznetsov can put up PPG+ under Trotz, there’s no excuse for Barzal to be putting up 2nd line numbers. He returned to 80 points this year because league scoring is up significantly since 2018, even without Trotz and with Horvat on the team he’d still be putting up low 70s at best if we still had 2018 scoring levels. Rantanen and Point are fair comparisons but Barzal is objectively worse defensively and offensively no matter how flashy he looks.

What would he be putting up if he moved to the Leafs and played with Matty on L1?

 

[Stephen]

As much as I don’t like Marner, the Barzal numbers under Trotz are an exaggeration on how much they sagged due to system. If Kuznetsov can put up PPG+ under Trotz, there’s no excuse for Barzal to be putting up 2nd line numbers. He returned to 80 points this year because league scoring is up significantly since 2018, even without Trotz and with Horvat on the team he’d still be putting up low 70s at best if we still had 2018 scoring levels. Rantanen and Point are fair comparisons but Barzal is objectively worse defensively and offensively no matter how flashy he looks.

You also have to consider Barzal has led or was tied for 1st in Islanders scoring for every season he's been in the league except 2022-23 when he missed significant time... so he is giving them first line production for whatever they're doing over there.

 

[Dekes For Days]

The points per 82 games is a projection stat.

No, it's not. Nothing has been projected. You're literally advocating for P/GP (which I've already provided as well anyway), while calling P/GP*82 evil. I'm not sure how you don't realize it's the same thing. One is just 82x the other, to put it in a common form that is easier to visualize for fans.