The value for Matthews is BRUTALLY BAD

I suggest you look at anything relating to Dougie Hamilton

The best d-man in hockey... is he even the best d-man on his team?

best dman in hockey.....LOL

Matthews was a top 3 goal scorer in the League. He was headed for a ~100 point season. They are right, Brutally bad value for Matthews.

hahaha and I thought Leafs fans were bad

Brutal trade value for Matthews and horrendous contract to Dougie. You can't be serious with a 10M/yr valuation.
If Matthews were to be traded to the Canes Sebastian Aho would definitely have to be coming back the other way + another piece.

It would be Aho and Pesce. Nothing less.

And Hamilton isn't the best Dman in hockey, stop valuing defenceman on how many points they score. Isn't that the rationale Canes fans used for months when arguing that Marner for Pesce wasn't a fair trade?

Okay, ignoring points. No D man has a better xGF or an xGA. He's the best D man in the NHL offensively by a large margin, and defensively, he's 2nd in the league to Nik Hjalmerssen analytically. Want more?

His xGAR is top of the league, his gAR is top of the league, his WAR is top of the league. You want base stats?

His net impact on the Hurricanes team (so this is what difference he made being on the ice as opposed to being on the bench) was a league best +30% offensively and a -10% threat defensively. He's the ONLY OFD in the NHL that does not need a defensive babysitter.

"oH jOsI" Yeah, Josi is the definition of a defensive turnstile before you get there. The ONLY D man in the league that comes close to Dougie right now is Hedman, and I still think that's a large margin because of the fact Hedman just isn't as good in either end.

Now you're gonna say something like "1 year doesn't make him the best D man in hockey" whcih is fair enough, but he's been this good analytically since he was a Bruin. There's not a shadow of a doubt that he is the best D man in hockey. End. Of. Argument.

I get what you're saying man and you're right when it comes to the analytics and stats sure, but only a few people would agree with your "analytical"-only approach. Right now more people believe NOT in building their team around analytics. It hasn't worked for Arizona, Toronto, or even Florida yet. It's not all about points, corsi, and possession. I'm a huge habs fan and I just saw them lose to the flyers because they couldn't get to the front of the next for games 3 and 4 and they couldn't clear the front of their own net game 7. Not one analytical stat will tell me that.

You got to have balance, and looking at stats only or just one stat is not good enough.

People act like St Louis weren't built on analytics. Or Vegas, or San Jose, or Carolina, or, you know, a lot of great teams. You pick 3 failures, sure, but the old fashioned approach hasn't worked for Anaheim, Montreal, Dallas, the Rangers, Islanders, etc etc. When you look at the league as a whole, the better the analytics of a team, usually the better the team is. It's why I put more stock in analytics than base stas. Especially for D men, where the most reliable stat isn't what they're paid for (points)