2017/2018 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I think that is a pipe dream. I think we would be lucky to recoup the 3rd and 5th round pick Treliving paid to acquire him. Kapanen would be a huge pickup if Stone was the main piece going the other way.

Treliving paid to acquire a pending UFA defenseman. Michael Stone is now locked in at a pretty good cap-hit for two more years, and could slide in and upgrade Toronto's top-four. He is MUCH more valuable now than he was last Spring.

I suspect that the Maple Leafs will target Chris Tanev, but I do think Stone would be viewed as an okay consolation prize. He is easily more desirable to numerous teams than you suggest.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

And he looked bad as a bottom pairing this season.

No he didn't. He was steady and a sorely needed physical presence with a big shot.

He was fine this year. By no means is he untouchable with our youth if we can garner a return from him, but he's a steady, physical bottom pairing d-man that can step up and play top four if there's injuries.

A few people on this forum beat the drum that he's terrible and that's just out to lunch.

[Saqe]

Stone would definitely help the Leafs. But getting a cost controlled, young asset with upside like Kapanen is a pipe dream.

Maybe Stone is worth a second rounder.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

No he didn't. He was steady and a sorely needed physical presence with a big shot.

He was fine this year. By no means is he untouchable with our youth if we can garner a return from him, but he's a steady, physical bottom pairing d-man that can step up and play top four if there's injuries.

A few people on this forum beat the drum that he's terrible and that's just out to lunch.

If he was a physical presence, it's because the team never had the puck when he was on the ice. And for a guy with a big shot, he had a whopping 3 goals and 7 assists in 82 games.

Stone brought nothing of value to this team. Andersson in the same role would have easily outperformed him.

Then factor in that he makes $3.5MM for the next two seasons. It's ugly.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

If he was a physical presence, it's because the team never had the puck when he was on the ice.

Hyperbole. He's a bottom pairing d-man on this team, and you're completely exaggerating.

His salary is high for his role as he was a UFA signing, and I already said if we can get value for him and open up a spot for a younger player that would be fine, but your suggestion he's terrible is out to lunch.

He's a steady bottom pairing d-man and it's a luxury he can move up to play 2nd pairing if needed.

When he's moved and we receive value for those attributes, it will speak to lack of validity your take holds.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

Hyperbole. He's a bottom pairing d-man on this team, and you're completely exaggerating.

His salary is high for his role as he was a UFA signing, and I already said if we can get value for him and open up a spot for a younger player that would be fine, but your suggestion he's terrible is out to lunch.

He's a steady bottom pairing d-man and it's a luxury he can move up to play 2nd pairing if needed.

When he's moved and we receive value for those attributes, it will speak to lack of validity of your take.

That's not really a sincere critique of my position because I could say the same.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

That's not really a sincere critique of my position because I could say the same.

It very much is, because you're essentially implying he's useless and a net negative, yet if we were to move him, I'm sure there will be suitors who would pay for him because of the things he brings to the table, all which fly in the face of your incorrect and grossly exaggerated evaluation of the player.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Saqe

Stone would definitely help the Leafs. But getting a cost controlled, young asset with upside like Kapanen is a pipe dream.

Maybe Stone is worth a second rounder.

I disagree. Top-four defensemen are worth a premium in this league. Maybe Kapanen is a stretch, but I am reasonably confident that that is exactly the sort of return that a team will demand of the Maple Leafs for them to add player to fix their back end.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Treliving paid to acquire a pending UFA defenseman. Michael Stone is now locked in at a pretty good cap-hit for two more years, and could slide in and upgrade Toronto's top-four. He is MUCH more valuable now than he was last Spring.

I suspect that the Maple Leafs will target Chris Tanev, but I do think Stone would be viewed as an okay consolation prize. He is easily more desirable to numerous teams than you suggest.

I view it differently. I see Stone as an overpaid 3rd pairing Dman so I disagree that he has a pretty good cap hit.

If the Flames can get a 2nd for him take that and run

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

It very much is, because you're essentially implying he's useless and a net negative, yet if we were to move him, I'm sure there will be suitors who would pay for him because of the things he brings to the table, all which fly in the face of your incorrect and grossly exaggerated evaluation of the player.

You said he brings two things to the table: physicality and a big shot. I contradicted them with my own points. I'm not looking to change your mind because obviously I can't do that. I'm looking to express my opinion. You responded by saying he's a good 3nd pairing defender who can play up, and just glossed over my rebuttal.

And yes, for $3.5MM, there is no question Stone is a net negative on this team. There's a reason why this team missed the playoffs, and part of it is because we have a lot of bad players.

If you want to use a hypothetical situation that has not occurred where Stone gets a big return in a trade as an argument against my position, that's fine by me, but it highlights how far from reality you need to reach in order to push your own position.

[Roof-Daddy]

I wonder if BT would have the balls to move out two of the top 5 Dcore in one summer?

I guess it depends on how ready he thinks Andersson/Kylington/Valimaki are.

He may also believe he can snag a decent Dman in free agency too. Like for instance with the whole Hamonic/Tavares thing. Well De Haan and Hickey are both Islander UFA's this summer as well, and Hickey is from Calgary, and I read somewhere (sorry can't remember) that he and Tavares have joked about signing somewhere together.

Trade Stone for picks
Trade Brodie for a top 6 forward, or really good prospect forward, preferably right handed. (someone like Sprong maybe?)
Sign Tavares
Sign Hickey

Gaudreau - Tavares - Sprong
Tkachuk - Monahan - Foo
Ferland - Backlund - Frolik
Bennett - Jankowski - Shore

Lazar - Brouwer

Giordano - Hamilton
Hickey - Hamonic
Valimaki - Andersson

Kulak

Smith
Rittich/Gillies


Maybe you look to upgrade the back up spot by packaging a member of that 4th line (Bennett/Janko) for a Grubauer type young goalie to platoon/back up Smith as an insurance policy and potential long term starter after next season?

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

So the same source that told Rasta Masta that Burke was stepping down, also provided this information about Tavares.

That really is interesting.

Flames would likely have to move out Stone, and buyout Brouwer to make it happen but if they did that and then filled the rest of the roster with guys on an ELC they could probably offer up to a $10M per season contract.

Gaudreau - Tavares - Bennett
Tkachuk - Monahan - Ferland
Jankowski - Backlund - Frolik
Mangiapane - Shore - Foo
Lazar - Hathaway

Giordano - Hamilton
Brodie - Hamonic
Kulak - Andersson
Kylington

Smith
Rittich

That roster would have a cap hit of about $74M for your 23 man roster if you signed Tavares to a $10M per season contract.

I could still see the Flames potentially moving out a Brodie or Frolik and upgrading elsewhere upfront if they can land Tavares.

I had zero hope but with the back to back wins by that source I have upgraded my hopes slightly.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

You said he brings two things to the table: physicality and a big shot.

I said those are two attributes in addition to him being a steady bottom pairing defending that can move up to the 2nd pairing.

As far as bottom pairing d-men go, that's a very advantageous package.

You responded by saying those things aren't valid because we "never" had the puck when he was on the ice, which again, is gross hyperbole.

We paid a premium to beef up our bottom pairing, but in no way was that the detriment you're making it out to be. Especially when it was pretty much universally agreed when he signed it he'll be a place-holder until our youth mature and then turn into a chip that can recoup assets (which I've now said three times I'd be fine with if the return is right).

We're not going to agree here because you're wrong about your assertion he's a bad bottom pairing d-man who was terrible this year.

[Ashasx]

Obviously never is a gross hyperbole. That's the point, and you caught yourself on those few words and ignored the rest of my content.

He is a terrible possession player despite having super easy assignments, and has been for the last three seasons. He does not make up for it offensively, as we have seen as well.

So he's poor defensively, poor offensively... but I guess he racks up 1.29 hits per game?

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Obviously never is a gross hyperbole. That's the point, and you caught yourself on those few words and ignored the rest of my content.

He is a terrible possession player despite having super easy assignments, and has been for the last three seasons. He does not make up for it offensively, as we have seen as well.

The fact you need to resort to that hyperbole in the first place is all anyone needs to know. It completely invalidates your take from the beginning.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

The fact you need to resort to that hyperbole in the first place is all anyone needs to know. It completely invalidates your take from the beginning.

You are so caught up on one statement in my expression of opinion that it's absolutely mind boggling. You understand it was a hyperbole, but choose to be obtuse about it because it's too difficult to address my rebuttal to your arguments.

Do I really need to clarify that the Calgary Flames actually did not have zero puck possession time when Stone was on the ice?

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

You are so caught up on one statement in my expression of opinion that it's absolutely mind boggling. You understand it was a hyperbole, but choose to be obtuse about it because it's too difficult to address my rebuttal to your arguments.

Your entire take is that he's terrible, which is all hyperbole. It's really not worth discussing when your opinion is rooted in nonsense from the get-go.

The team was a tire fire this season and he was playing with a rookie, despite that, I thought he looked solid for the most part, and brought both size and physicality which our d-core sorely lacked. The criticisms you're trying to use and indictments could be said of many bottom pairing d-men, especially on poor teams.

His numbers last year playing 2nd pairing for 20 games were quite good, as was the eye test. That's because he's a serviceable bottom pairing defender who can step up and play 2nd pairing minutes.

[Dan403]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I wonder if BT would have the balls to move out two of the top 5 Dcore in one summer?

I guess it depends on how ready he thinks Andersson/Kylington/Valimaki are.

He may also believe he can snag a decent Dman in free agency too. Like for instance with the whole Hamonic/Tavares thing. Well De Haan and Hickey are both Islander UFA's this summer as well, and Hickey is from Calgary, and I read somewhere (sorry can't remember) that he and Tavares have joked about signing somewhere together.

Trade Stone for picks
Trade Brodie for a top 6 forward, or really good prospect forward, preferably right handed. (someone like Sprong maybe?)
Sign Tavares
Sign Hickey

Gaudreau - Tavares - Sprong
Tkachuk - Monahan - Foo
Ferland - Backlund - Frolik
Bennett - Jankowski - Shore

Lazar - Brouwer

Giordano - Hamilton
Hickey - Hamonic
Valimaki - Andersson

Kulak

Smith
Rittich/Gillies


Maybe you look to upgrade the back up spot by packaging a member of that 4th line (Bennett/Janko) for a Grubauer type young goalie to platoon/back up Smith as an insurance policy and potential long term starter after next season?

Who?

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Dan403

Who?

Thomas Hickey

[Fischy13]

Would a Hamilton for OEL and Domi be close...?