SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Massive deal

Created by: PJosephM13
Team: 2019-20 Toronto Maple Leafs
Initial Creation Date: Dec. 17, 2019
Published: Dec. 17, 2019
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Trades
TOR
  1. Campbell, Jack
  2. Martinez, Alec ($1,250,000 retained)
LAK
  1. Åberg, Pontus
  2. Ceci, Cody ($750,000 retained)
  3. Kapanen, Kasperi
  4. 2020 6th round pick (COL)
  5. 2022 4th round pick (TOR)
Additional Details:
Turns to 2nd if the leafs win the cup
Retained Salary Transactions
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2020
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the CBJ
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the VGK
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the CAR
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the STL
Logo of the WPG
2021
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
2022
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
22$81,500,000$78,697,143$0$70,000$2,802,857
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$3,400,000$3,400,000
LW, RW
UFA - 4
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$11,634,000$11,634,000
C
UFA - 5
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$6,962,366$6,962,366
RW
UFA - 5
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$2,250,000$2,250,000
RW, LW
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$11,000,000$11,000,000
C, LW
NMC
UFA - 6
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$10,893,000$10,893,000
RW
UFA - 6
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$925,000$925,000
LW, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$3,500,000$3,500,000
LW, C, RW
UFA - 4
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$775,000$775,000
LW, RW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$675,000$675,000
C
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$700,000$700,000
C, RW
NTC
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$925,000$925,000
RW, LW
UFA - 1
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$5,000,000$5,000,000
LD
UFA - 3
Logo of the Los Angeles Kings
$2,750,000$2,750,000
LD
UFA - 2
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$5,000,000$5,000,000
G
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$4,000,000$4,000,000
LD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$2,750,000$2,750,000
RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$863,333$863,333
LD/RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$675,000$675,000
RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Los Angeles Kings
$675,000$675,000
G
UFA - 1
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$700,000$700,000
LD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$5,300,000$5,300,000
RW
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$694,444$694,444 (Performance Bonus$70,000$70K)
LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$5,250,000$5,250,000
RW
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 1

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Dec. 17, 2019 at 7:07 p.m.
#1
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,193
Likes: 5,554
You know Martinez and Campbell both suck right?
Dec. 17, 2019 at 7:12 p.m.
#2
Bcarlo25
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 20,833
Likes: 6,911
Quoting: Random2152
You know Martinez and Campbell both suck right?


He was better than Andersen last season, albeit with far fewer starts.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 7:20 p.m.
#3
i hope ur hungry now
Avatar of the user
Joined: Oct. 2017
Posts: 2,411
Likes: 978
Nah fam
Dec. 17, 2019 at 7:21 p.m.
#4
i hope ur hungry now
Avatar of the user
Joined: Oct. 2017
Posts: 2,411
Likes: 978
Quoting: Bcarlo25
He was better than Andersen last season, albeit with far fewer starts.


And that season was a huge outlier.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 7:22 p.m.
#5
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,193
Likes: 5,554
Quoting: Bcarlo25
He was better than Andersen last season, albeit with far fewer starts.


Yeah, not even close. Either use your eye test you hail so much, use real stats, or at least some common sense.
ELOr7-UXkAMWSpL?format=png&name=900x900
ELOr7-VWkAAX7nZ?format=png&name=900x900
Trickster liked this.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 7:38 p.m.
#6
What in tarnation
Avatar of the user
Joined: Oct. 2017
Posts: 32,708
Likes: 31,448
Quoting: Random2152
Yeah, not even close. Either use your eye test you hail so much, use real stats, or at least some common sense.
ELOr7-UXkAMWSpL?format=png&name=900x900
ELOr7-VWkAAX7nZ?format=png&name=900x900


Not gonna lie, your status of "the evil stats guy" fits perfectly for you.
Random2152 and Trickster liked this.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 7:47 p.m.
#7
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,193
Likes: 5,554
Quoting: BurgerBoss
Not gonna lie, your status of "the evil stats guy" fits perfectly for you.


Am I the baddie? Well I do have a silver skull on my hat, but at least the uni's are fly as ****
Trickster and justaBoss liked this.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 7:57 p.m.
#8
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 280
I expected more.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 8:04 p.m.
#9
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 9,379
Likes: 3,695
Campbell has been a borderline NHLer at best for his entire professional career except for one partial season last year... Think about that
Dec. 17, 2019 at 8:27 p.m.
#10
Bcarlo25
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 20,833
Likes: 6,911
Quoting: Random2152
Yeah, not even close. Either use your eye test you hail so much, use real stats, or at least some common sense.
ELOr7-UXkAMWSpL?format=png&name=900x900
ELOr7-VWkAAX7nZ?format=png&name=900x900


No one cares! He played on a horrible team, and had a lower GAA and a higher save percentage than the goalie on a good team. Keep your spin zone away from me.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 8:40 p.m.
#11
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,193
Likes: 5,554
Edited Dec. 17, 2019 at 8:46 p.m.
Quoting: Bcarlo25
No one cares! He played on a horrible team, and had a lower GAA and a higher save percentage than the goalie on a good team. Keep your spin zone away from me.


Bud you are the one spinning things. These stats account for that. Sv% and GAA don't.
Actually know what you are talking about before you spew nonsense.


I also just find it funny that your definition of a spin is irrefutable evidence contrary to your **** opinion.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 9:07 p.m.
#12
Bcarlo25
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 20,833
Likes: 6,911
Quoting: Random2152
Bud you are the one spinning things. These stats account for that. Sv% and GAA don't.
Actually know what you are talking about before you spew nonsense.


I also just find it funny that your definition of a spin is irrefutable evidence contrary to your **** opinion.


If you think advanced stats are irrefutable evidence, hockey is not the sport for you. I recommend baseball or basketball.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 9:10 p.m.
#13
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,193
Likes: 5,554
Quoting: Bcarlo25
If you think advanced stats are irrefutable evidence, hockey is not the sport for you. I recommend baseball or basketball.


ok boomer
Dec. 17, 2019 at 9:20 p.m.
#14
Bcarlo25
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 20,833
Likes: 6,911
Quoting: Random2152
ok boomer


I’m a millennial, but i actually played the game, and know how dumb these stats are in the context of, “evidence,” or, “proof.”

I literally do not understand why people that like hockey like these stats. The best thing about hockey is how subjective everything is.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 9:23 p.m.
#15
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,193
Likes: 5,554
Quoting: Bcarlo25
I’m a millennial, but i actually played the game, and know how dumb these stats are in the context of, “evidence,” or, “proof.”

I literally do not understand why people that like hockey like these stats. The best thing about hockey is how subjective everything is.


If something happens in the game, you write it down, then tabulate it. That is advanced analytics. It is literally a record of what happened.
Why would someone want to use stats? Because we want to understand what is actually happening on the ice. We are human, our eyes are lyin' SoB's.
I have also played the game, you playing has no bearing on what you understand - especially since you clearly lack all understanding.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 9:56 p.m.
#16
Bcarlo25
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 20,833
Likes: 6,911
Quoting: Random2152
If something happens in the game, you write it down, then tabulate it. That is advanced analytics. It is literally a record of what happened.
Why would someone want to use stats? Because we want to understand what is actually happening on the ice. We are human, our eyes are lyin' SoB's.
I have also played the game, you playing has no bearing on what you understand - especially since you clearly lack all understanding.


Okay, tell me, this fancy stat you posted. How is it calculated. Does it take into account on a 2 on 1 when the puck carrier shoots if the other guy was open, and the goalie had to play both the shot in the pass? Or is it just, “player x scored from position y?” Does it take into account the shooter? Does it take into account the other guy? The defender? The screen, or lack of a screen? How about something like zone exits? Does it take into account if the pass is perfect, or if the guy receiving the pass has to slow down just ever so slightly because the pass was a little behind. Does it take into account who the forecheckers are? The d partner? The three forwards moving up ice? The time on the clock? The point in the shift? Does it tell you if the d man moves some of the opposition in the neutral zone by looking them off?

Every play in hockey has thousands of variables. Most advanced stats track two of them. Advanced stats are binary. Analog. It’s like if you need to know the temperature to within a thousandth of a degree, and you have a sensor that will tell you if it over or under 30 degrees. Ya, I guess it will help you for some things, but it gives you such a small piece of the puzzle, that it’s kind of useless.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 10:13 p.m.
#17
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,193
Likes: 5,554
Quoting: Bcarlo25
Okay, tell me, this fancy stat you posted.

1)How is it calculated.

2)Does it take into account on a 2 on 1 when the puck carrier shoots if the other guy was open, and the goalie had to play both the shot in the pass?

3)Or is it just, “player x scored from position y?”

4)Does it take into account the shooter?

5)Does it take into account the other guy?

6)The defender?

7)The screen, or lack of a screen?

8) How about something like zone exits?

9)Does it take into account if the pass is perfect, or if the guy receiving the pass has to slow down just ever so slightly because the pass was a little behind.

10)Does it take into account who the forecheckers are? The d partner? The three forwards moving up ice?

11) The time on the clock? The point in the shift?

12) Does it tell you if the d man moves some of the opposition in the neutral zone by looking them off?

13)Every play in hockey has thousands of variables.

14) Most advanced stats track two of them. Advanced stats are binary. Analog. It’s like if you need to know the temperature to within a thousandth of a degree, and you have a sensor that will tell you if it over or under 30 degrees.

15)Ya, I guess it will help you for some things, but it gives you such a small piece of the puzzle, that it’s kind of useless.


1) It takes the expected goals against and compares it to how many goals a goalie has actually let in
2) yes
3) no
4) no. You cannot account in any known way. The best you can do is figure out how dangerous the situations they shoot from are which is 90% of the way there since good skilled goalscorers tend to shoot from dangerous situations.
5) who is this other guy?
6)yes, it takes into account the situation the defender allowed to happen. A good defender will not allow a player into a dangerous situation more often than a bad defender.
7)yes
8)yes these are tracked, although not related to expected goals. You are asking about microstats. Here is an easy to use comparison tool that tracks that stuff.
9)Not explicitly, but it is accounted for by other tracked factors
10)see the skill answer from above.
11)they even account for score effects and venue, the things you mentioned are accounted through other factors and tracked separately
12)accounted for by other factors
13)you should see the inner workings of this stuff. You think there are thousands of factors - they use tens of thousands. Anything you can think of they've thought of.
14)not particularly true. What I have posted accounts for thousands of things all wrapped up in a nice package
15) exactly the opposite. compiled stats run through a regression model or put in context using other stats gives you the bigger picture. The part you might be missing from an eye test.


I am going to answer all of these here for you, but you know you can just read the faq's on the sites or google it right? The stats guys literally answer all of these questions. Hell you can just ask them yourself on social media. They are often very good about answering questions as long as you are genuinely interested and not just saying they suck and you don't like them. I'll link here some resources for you:
https://hockey-graphs.com/tag/expected-goals/
http://www.corsica.hockey/blog/2016/03/03/shot-quality-and-expected-goals-part-i/
https://evolving-hockey.com
Dec. 17, 2019 at 10:54 p.m.
#18
Bcarlo25
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 20,833
Likes: 6,911
Quoting: Random2152
1) It takes the expected goals against and compares it to how many goals a goalie has actually let in
2) yes
3) no
4) no. You cannot account in any known way. The best you can do is figure out how dangerous the situations they shoot from are which is 90% of the way there since good skilled goalscorers tend to shoot from dangerous situations.
5) who is this other guy?
6)yes, it takes into account the situation the defender allowed to happen. A good defender will not allow a player into a dangerous situation more often than a bad defender.
7)yes
8)yes these are tracked, although not related to expected goals. You are asking about microstats. Here is an easy to use comparison tool that tracks that stuff.
9)Not explicitly, but it is accounted for by other tracked factors
10)see the skill answer from above.
11)they even account for score effects and venue, the things you mentioned are accounted through other factors and tracked separately
12)accounted for by other factors
13)you should see the inner workings of this stuff. You think there are thousands of factors - they use tens of thousands. Anything you can think of they've thought of.
14)not particularly true. What I have posted accounts for thousands of things all wrapped up in a nice package
15) exactly the opposite. compiled stats run through a regression model or put in context using other stats gives you the bigger picture. The part you might be missing from an eye test.


I am going to answer all of these here for you, but you know you can just read the faq's on the sites or google it right? The stats guys literally answer all of these questions. Hell you can just ask them yourself on social media. They are often very good about answering questions as long as you are genuinely interested and not just saying they suck and you don't like them. I'll link here some resources for you:
https://hockey-graphs.com/tag/expected-goals/
http://www.corsica.hockey/blog/2016/03/03/shot-quality-and-expected-goals-part-i/
https://evolving-hockey.com


Your answer to 4 contradicts a lot of your other answers.

You entirely missed the point.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 11:45 p.m.
#19
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,193
Likes: 5,554
Quoting: Bcarlo25
Your answer to 4 contradicts a lot of your other answers.

You entirely missed the point.


No it doesn't. Amazing you cant see that. It not only doesn't contradict the other points, but it sums up advanced stats really well. Good players do good things, so measure those good things and you can figure out who the good players are.

You are so far in your opinion that stats are bad that even when shown that every single scenario that is relevant and possible to be accounted for is accounted for you still ignore it. That says a lot about you as a person.
I would not want to work with you is all I'll say. Good night.
Dec. 17, 2019 at 11:56 p.m.
#20
Avatar of the user
Joined: Dec. 2019
Posts: 209
Likes: 134
All I can say is Campbell is light years better then Hutchinson and Martinez is much better then ceci. Martinez is not a first pair D though! Campbell was a 1 st round pick that struggled to start his pro career but has taken off. He would be an excellent backup for Toronto. And he’s gonna get better. His work ethic is insane and he’s a great team guy. If I was with Toronto I’d want Campbell and Clifford. Cliffy is a beast and exactly the kinda guy the leafs need. As a kings fan though I’d hate to lose him!
Dec. 18, 2019 at 12:04 a.m.
#21
Bcarlo25
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 20,833
Likes: 6,911
Quoting: Random2152
No it doesn't. Amazing you cant see that. It not only doesn't contradict the other points, but it sums up advanced stats really well. Good players do good things, so measure those good things and you can figure out who the good players are.

You are so far in your opinion that stats are bad that even when shown that every single scenario that is relevant and possible to be accounted for is accounted for you still ignore it. That says a lot about you as a person.
I would not want to work with you is all I'll say. Good night.


Sure, buuuuut I’m gonna go ahead and say one more thing. I don’t think you understood one of my questions. It’s a 2 on 1. Player x shoots from a high scoring area. That’s what the stat tracks. It’s my understanding that if he shoots from there, he shoots from there, and that’s what the stat tracks. But, it’s a 2 on 1. That’s different than a 1 on 1 or a breakaway. And not all 2 on 1s are created equal. Is it a short handed chance where it’s a winger playing defense on the 2 on 1? Who’s the guy taht doesn’t have the puck? Is he a scorer? Is he on his off side for a one timer? How close is he? Has he beaten the defender? Is the passing lane blocked? Does the goalie have to cheat pass? Can he come out and play the angle? Are all three at the end of a long shift? The stat tracks who the guy is and where he’s shooting from. There’s about a thousand other things to consider. It’s analog. It’s simple. Hockey isn’t simple. It’s a game full of variables, and variables within the variables. The stats make a poor attempt to simplify the game, and work for simple people.

John Moore leads Bruins defensemen in Corsi and Fenwick. Morgan Reilly is 17th on the leafs in corsi and 21st in fenwick.

Advanced stats are hot garbage.
Dec. 18, 2019 at 12:35 a.m.
#22
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,193
Likes: 5,554
Quoting: Bcarlo25
Sure, buuuuut I’m gonna go ahead and say one more thing. I don’t think you understood one of my questions. It’s a 2 on 1. Player x shoots from a high scoring area. That’s what the stat tracks. It’s my understanding that if he shoots from there, he shoots from there, and that’s what the stat tracks. But, it’s a 2 on 1. That’s different than a 1 on 1 or a breakaway. And not all 2 on 1s are created equal. Is it a short handed chance where it’s a winger playing defense on the 2 on 1? Who’s the guy taht doesn’t have the puck? Is he a scorer? Is he on his off side for a one timer? How close is he? Has he beaten the defender? Is the passing lane blocked? Does the goalie have to cheat pass? Can he come out and play the angle? Are all three at the end of a long shift? The stat tracks who the guy is and where he’s shooting from. There’s about a thousand other things to consider. It’s analog. It’s simple. Hockey isn’t simple. It’s a game full of variables, and variables within the variables. The stats make a poor attempt to simplify the game, and work for simple people.

John Moore leads Bruins defensemen in Corsi and Fenwick. Morgan Reilly is 17th on the leafs in corsi and 21st in fenwick.

Advanced stats are hot garbage.


And you said I missed the point. You are honestly hopeless
Dec. 18, 2019 at 12:41 a.m.
#23
Bcarlo25
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 20,833
Likes: 6,911
Quoting: Random2152
And you said I missed the point. You are honestly hopeless


And you are flat out unintelligent. Peace out.
Dec. 18, 2019 at 12:53 a.m.
#24
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,193
Likes: 5,554
Quoting: Bcarlo25
And you are flat out unintelligent. Peace out.


The fact this comes from you is just
*Chef kisses fingers*
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll