Trade makes no sense for the leafs but “gRiT mAn”

Oilers decline. Koskinen is better than Andersen for the 2nd year in a row and the oilers D sucks.

So Hedman and Parayko are no good and Manson is? Good Dmen can only play for non playoff teams? I disagree. Then you blame your offence for the problem and say those players should also be traded at a premium.

Good teams are good because of good players.

Holl is suffering from the capfriendly effect. You made your judgement on him 40 games into his career. You’ll also be late to the “Holl is actually really good” party. Because you won’t admit he is good till you’re forced by everyone else.

GrIt!!!!

*spits out coffee...

Not trading Wood for scraps

Oh, I see, your player gets an inflated return due to a market fluke but we get a lesser return for a better player who, with the retention, costs less? C'mon.



Kapanen for a first and Hallander = Rakell with retention for a first and Niemela. Your first is likely to be well further down the chart from Pittsburgh's. We can do a side deal for a low 2021 pick for Engvall. (We got Nic Des Lauriers for a fourth and as I recall we have an extra 2021 fifth.)

Niemela is just coming off defender of the tournament at the world juniors, I doubt Dubas considers trading him with a first for a boost in the mid 6 position. If Rackell is that important to the ducks he might just be more valuable to keep. Leafs have Robertson and Thornton on ltir. When they return it will be hard to justify that type of payment for Rackell.

Did I mention either of them? Are you mad because you cant refute my point so you pull something ridiculous out of no where?

I dont blame Rakell, who is our best offensive player. Where was I demanding a premium for any one other than Rakell? Please inform me.

I never said Holl wasnt good, I said he wasnt AS good as Manson, it is possible for both to be good. I will never be "forced by everyone else" I'm not a sheep I have a brain and I evaluate players myself. Holl has not shown me anything that suggests he is better than Manson.

Theres a reason he only has 90 games played 2 days before he turns 29

Rakell and Hyman would be your top-6 LWs and there's always the chance that you might not have Hyman next year. Moreover, when Robertson and Thornton come back, there's no assurance that they'll have significant positive impact. Since Toronto is in more of a "win-now" mode than Anaheim, I would think that this is the sort of deal you'd like.

Lmao

ahahahahahahahaha

Refute your point? That is the roundest edge on an argument I have ever heard. Make a point and I will refute it. Holl leads Manson in every possible stat, he is more skilled, has better vision and shuts down top offensive players in the league. Leafs offence has been sputtering and Holl is a big reason we are winning games. If we swapped Holl for Manson leafs would win less and ducks would win more, simple as that.

No, our player didn't get an inflated return because of a market fluke. He got an inflated return because the GM we dealt with got ripped off. And I'm not saying you have to get a lesser return for Rakell, I'm saying that using a trade where one team got bent over a table to justify a higher ask for another player isn't likely to pan out. The way the market has gone just doesn't help, either.

Ah, yes, ignoring the stats because the players play on different quality teams. Very good way to judge players.

My point being comparing stats of players on a playoff team compared to a lottery team is idiotic. which youve gone back to. Manson also shuts down top offensive players.

All thats being accomplished here is us getting more entrenched in our opinions, I respect yours and I always have, you're one of the few Leaf fans I enjoy reading opinions from on here but I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here

Never said to ignore them but ok. I said it isnt a good way of saying player A is better than player B

There is about a 1% chance that Hyman isn’t back after the expansion draft. (Career ending injury). When Thornton and Robertson return, they should both be inserted directly into the line up.

Agreed, I respect your opinion as well... but this could have been an 8 page contest that changed no one’s opinion.

"Getting ripped off" is the very DEFINITION of "market fluke," and it's exactly what you're arguing: that the market isn't the same for any similar player. There's something fishy about contending that a trade you guys made shouldn't be used against you as a comparable because your player wasn't worth what you got for him. And what trades since the Kapanen trade do you believe indicate that the market has gone against trading top-6 forwards?

Well, let's look at the stats: over his career, Rakell is a 0.6-points-per-game player on a historically offensive-challenged team; Kapanen, 0.4 on a racehorse overly-productive team.

Do you know how outraged the Colorado cognoscenti get when I suggest that Hyman and Landeskog are both guaranteed to return to their respective teams, and thus don't have to be protected in the expansion draft?

Rakell and Kapanen weren't the topic players here, and I didn't contend that Kapanen is better or equal, but if you really want to get into that, we can later on, I suppose...



By market fluke, it appears we had a miscommunication, my bad. I had thought you were referring to the timing of the deal and the shift in the landscape of the NHL that has since come. Getting out in front of that certainly helped the Leafs maximize the return they got for Kapanen, but even so, I think they recouped more than even the most optimistic Leafs fans hoped for. What I'm arguing is that the trade was likely an outlier based on the reactions of Leafs fans, Pens fans, and others, the vast majority of whom agreed that the Leafs fleeced the Penguins, and an outlier isn't likely to be strong support in a separate trade negotiation. There's nothing really fishy about that; regardless of what teams are involved, my stance on that would be the same. There haven't really been any top 6 trades since then except for player for player swaps, and I'm not saying that the market's gone against trading top 6 forwards - high end players are the least impacted by all this, as far as trade value goes, imo. I don't, however, think it's unfair to say that circumstances have changed and a flat cap, quarantine period, and loss of revenue have likely had an influence on mentality among GM's which may (but may not), impact a potential Rakell deal, whether directly or indirectly.

I really love vigorously debating heartfelt opinions with you and @Jamiepo without anyone taking offense or injuring pride.

As do I.