Thread: Proposal: Simmonds for another Leafs D
View Single Post
Old
08-08-2012, 12:25 AM
  #8
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
Firstly, Simmonds is our second worst defensive forward. So, trading him in some hypothetical deal for a defenseman serves a two fold purpose. Secondly, a player like Gardiner who can potentially play the point on a first unit power play fills what is shaping up to be one our biggest voids.

I am not advocating dumping Simmonds or Read for some random defenseman, but rather a parrallel talent on the blue line. I continue to trust this teams ability to find forwards a lot more than it's ability to find young defeneman. While a trade like Simmonds for Gardiner could certainly affect our forward depth this season, in the longterm it would give us 4 top 4 defenseman under 30 to build around. Depending on Mez's progression, we could then target a player like Perry in free agency in 2013.

I believe that thinking entirely about what's best for 2012 is a long term mistake.
I dont necessarily disagree, but losing Simmonds and not replacing his production could be disastrous for the team in 2012.

If you're content to completely write the 2012-13 season as a 'building year', then I suppose you are absolutely correct.

But, personally, I think this team is easily good enough to still contend for the division. Once you get to that point, the rest is all about post season performance.

Losing Simmonds would make our forward group extremely average while making our D 'good' at best. I'd rather continue to have elite depth up front with an average D core than to be mediocre both on the front and on the back.

Since we know injuries are a guarantee (they are for every team), it's entirely likely that we would be forced to roll with a third line of, say, Wellwood-Talbot-Fedotenko at times next season. Our fourth line would then be entirely Phantoms. Not good at all.

Part of what made our team a strong contender for the division was the ability to withstand injuries to our top 6. Without guys like Simmonds, that would simply be impossible. And that is what depth is all about.

Ultimately, I would love to upgrade the D, but at the cost of shooting our greatest strength (depth), it is simply not worth it.


EDIT: Holy crap. I have been forgetting Fedotenko. I knew I was missing someone. Still, my point remains. Anything that forces us to give regular ice to players who cant handle it is bad. Losing a guy like Simmonds would do that, imo.

hockeyfreak7 is offline   Reply With Quote