2023/2024 Trade Rumors and Speculation Thread

[Spurs]

I like the sound of that as we can hopefully get more for retaining on Tanev as you would think the Leafs would be willing to part with more to get him onto their team versus Zadorov.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

on HNIC:

Leafs and Flames couldn't agree on price for Flames to retain on both Zadorov and Tanev
Friedman believes Leafs will still go after Tanev

Predators allow Barrie to speak to teams

Sharks are willing to move defence
Most interest in Mario Ferraro

What's great about that is I think it shows Conroy being willing to call another GM's bluff, especially his old mentor Treliving. When Tanev eventually gets traded to Toronto, I'm sure that Treliving will be much more likely to play ball. If anyone loves to pay for aging veteran rentals, it's Treliving. Looking forward to Conroy taking a bunch of young assets in return.

[topfiverecords]

Leafs need to add for more than just retention. They can’t even fit Tanev in at 50% so they need to send salary back and they better be paying extra for that too.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by saillias

If we make contract decisions because of Gio we are doomed. Giordano's age curve and career path one of the most glaring outliers in pro sports I've ever seen. Far more likely to have the next OEL or Vlasic who is suddenly unplayable way before you hoped.

You should make decisions based on the player, and not what Gio has done or what someone has done with an age curve.

If the Flames think he has 8 years of high level play left Jen they sign him, it's that simple.

My point with Gio was that the age curve is not an absolute. Lots of dmen are great well into their 30's.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

What's great about that is I think it shows Conroy being willing to call another GM's bluff, especially his old mentor Treliving. When Tanev eventually gets traded to Toronto, I'm sure that Treliving will be much more likely to play ball. If anyone loves to pay for aging veteran rentals, it's Treliving. Looking forward to Conroy taking a bunch of young assets in return.

There was also this quote from Friedman on 32 thoughts:

Originally Posted by Elliotte Friedman

He’s a Toronto guy, Treliving signed him, I bet he’ll have a good idea of what it will take to keep him. That’s the one guy I think Toronto goes hard to get, because even if he’s acquired as a rental, I think they’re going to be pretty confident they can keep him. But we’ll see.

So Tre would like to extend Tanev as well if he manages to trade for him.

[dammage79]

Tanev get you Nick Robertson?

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

You should make decisions based on the player, and not what Gio has done or what someone has done with an age curve.

If the Flames think he has 8 years of high level play left Jen they sign him, it's that simple.

My point with Gio was that the age curve is not an absolute. Lots of dmen are great well into their 30's.

Lots more aren't. Your point is valid that there are variations in the age curve, but I would bet that it is quite difficult to predict who will be one in advance.

[Infinit47]

Double post.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Lots more aren't. Your point is valid that there are variations in the age curve, but I would bet that it is quite difficult to predict who will be one in advance.

One thing that does help is observing the player's curve to date. A player who is still improving at age 26 is more likely to beat the curve than one whose production peaked at 23 or 24.

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Tanev get you Nick Robertson?

If the Flames are retaining 50%, eating one of their bad deals, and allowing a sign-and-trade all at the same time, you'd have to hope they're getting something serious in return.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

If the Flames are retaining 50%, eating one of their bad deals, and allowing a sign-and-trade all at the same time, you'd have to hope they're getting something serious in return.

I think Tre loves his conditional picks. I bet we get a conditional pick in there somewhere based on Tanev re-signing in TOR, on how far they go in the playoffs, and so on.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

One thing that does help is observing the player's curve to date. A player who is still improving at age 26 is more likely to beat the curve than one whose production peaked at 23 or 24.

Have you looked at it before? I am about to go out but I want to backtest it to see how predictive it might be. The problem I keep facing is that easily available offensive performance numbers are a very poor measure of the skill of a D.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

on HNIC:
Sharks are willing to move defence
Most interest in Mario Ferraro

How bad are the Sharks trying to be? Without Ferraro, their D is:


Okhotyuk
Benning
Burroughs
Vlasic
Emberson
Addison
MacDonald
Rutta



I believe Knyzhov was just waived.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Have you looked at it before? I am about to go out but I want to backtest it to see how predictive it might be. The problem I keep facing is that easily available offensive performance numbers are a very poor measure of the skill of a D.

I wish I had a link to the article, but somebody did some analytical work on it a few years back. They did find quantitative evidence for these points:

1. Players' defensive performance, in general, continues to improve after offensive production begins to fall off.

2. Players with higher peaks tend to fall off with age more slowly than players close to replacement level.

3. Players who peaked later in their careers tended to fall off more slowly than those who peaked early. (This may be because they depend on hockey sense, which takes time to mature, more than raw athleticism, which manifests early and then declines.)

As I say, I wish I had a link, but I don't. I'm pretty sure I linked the article when I read it, but I think the URL went dead and I deleted it. Link rot is the great plague of the World Wide Web.

It may have been one of Iain Fyffe's articles. He did a lot of pioneering work when statistical analysis of hockey was still in its infancy. Sufficiently clever Google-fu, coupled with the Wayback Machine, might be sufficient to unearth it; I don't know.

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Leafs need to add for more than just retention. They can’t even fit Tanev in at 50% so they need to send salary back and they better be paying extra for that too.

Hopefully the wizard goes all in like he did with the Flames

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

You need to learn the difference between a fact and an opinion.

Your opinions are not facts.

Other people's opinions are not lies.

Get over yourself.

Almost makes you think there's a psychosis going on there.

Or a troll.

[Stillman16]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

I wish I had a link to the article, but somebody did some analytical work on it a few years back. They did find quantitative evidence for these points:

1. Players' defensive performance, in general, continues to improve after offensive production begins to fall off.

2. Players with higher peaks tend to fall off with age more slowly than players close to replacement level.

3. Players who peaked later in their careers tended to fall off more slowly than those who peaked early. (This may be because they depend on hockey sense, which takes time to mature, more than raw athleticism, which manifests early and then declines.)

As I say, I wish I had a link, but I don't. I'm pretty sure I linked the article when I read it, but I think the URL went dead and I deleted it. Link rot is the great plague of the World Wide Web.

It may have been one of Iain Fyffe's articles. He did a lot of pioneering work when statistical analysis of hockey was still in its infancy. Sufficiently clever Google-fu, coupled with the Wayback Machine, might be sufficient to unearth it; I don't know.

http://https://hockey-graphs.com/201...katers-part-1/

This article has some of the analysis you may be referring too, I've only perused it, and I admit I don't really know much about advanced analytics, so hopefully it's relevant, if not I apologise in advance

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Stillman16

http://https://hockey-graphs.com/201...katers-part-1/

This article has some of the analysis you may be referring too, I've only perused it, and I admit I don't really know much about advanced analytics, so hopefully it's relevant, if not I apologise in advance

It looks like that is one of the articles I've read, but it isn't the one I had in mind. It contains good stuff, but does not go into the differences between replacement players, average players, and stars, which (if memory serves) were covered in the article I have in mind.

[Sofa GM]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Tanev get you Nick Robertson?

If the Flames retain 50% better get a much better return than Nick Robertson.

[Sandman]

Just my opinion, but Nick Robertson might just be another Czarnik/Phillips type, and we don’t need any Smurfs.