Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
To be quite honest, I think Komisarek will play better this season. He should benefit from Carlyles style of play compared to Ron Wilsons nonexistent d.
Exactly.
I think it's probably too far gone for Komisarek to completely rebound, and even at his best, he's not worth that contract...but he should be a much better fit under Carlyle. Might as well just keep him and hope he provides some sort of value on the ice, as his value is essentially negative at this point.
I think it's probably too far gone for Komisarek to completely rebound, and even at his best, he's not worth that contract...but he should be a much better fit under Carlyle. Might as well just keep him and hope he provides some sort of value on the ice, as his value is essentially negative at this point.
Here's my question -- when Matt Carle is paid $5.5m and Dennis Wideman is worth $5.25m on long term deals, how is Komisarek incapable of being worth $4.5m?
I guess that's why he went from a Norris candidate to voted most overrated by his peers? He has come nowhere near what he was projected to be when he broke into the league. He is still a good defenseman just never lived up to the promise he showed early on.
Hasn't lived up to the promise he once showed yet, but still better than he ever was.
Points are important for the Norris, but they are not the determining factor for a defenseman.
As for that so-called player poll, it is the most ridiculous and bias thing I've ever heard in my life.
Here's my question -- when Matt Carle is paid $5.5m and Dennis Wideman is worth $5.25m on long term deals, how is Komisarek incapable of being worth $4.5m?
Because Komisarek is much worse than both of those. And just because other bad contracts exist doesn't make Komisareks better.
30 year old 3rd pairing defensive defenseman who has been -9, -8, and -15 the last three years and has a $4.5 cap hit.. What do you think his value is? Maybe you can get Lebda back if you add a 2nd.
Here's my question -- when Matt Carle is paid $5.5m and Dennis Wideman is worth $5.25m on long term deals, how is Komisarek incapable of being worth $4.5m?
Two of those three know what hockey is. I'll let you figure out which ones.
Carle and Wideman are offensive defensemen known to be suspect defensively, yet even on their worst defensive nights they're better at defense than Komisarek, who also brings no offense game or upside to his team's transition.
If Wideman or Carle were paid 7 million a year and played for the Leafs you'd understand.
Here's my question -- when Matt Carle is paid $5.5m and Dennis Wideman is worth $5.25m on long term deals, how is Komisarek incapable of being worth $4.5m?
That's cute, use examples of other bad contracts to support your argument. Maybe one day we could compare Toronto's good contracts with other good contracts and a good team with other good teams instead of this petty nit-picking of stats and numbers of crap players to compare to our own crap players.
Because Komisarek is much worse than both of those. And just because other bad contracts exist doesn't make Komisareks better.
30 year old 3rd pairing defensive defenseman who has been -9, -8, and -15 the last three years and has a $4.5 cap hit.. What do you think his value is? Maybe you can get Lebda back if you add a 2nd.
Right now he is -- but the guy is still well capable of rebounding to be a #4 shutdown dman if the Leafs change to a more defensive philosophy like it seems they will do. Wideman/Carle have never been much more than #3 defencemen, and with a long term deal of course comes a risk discount.
Calgary and Tampa Bay certainly don't think they're bad contracts -- which in turn makes them not bad contracts -- just fair market value in today's market.
As for trade value, i'm not suggesting that Komisarek has much, I'm simply saying that it's ludicrous to suggest that Komisarek is incapable of earning his $4.5m cap hit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordieHoweHatTrick
That's cute, use examples of other bad contracts to support your argument. Maybe one day we could compare Toronto's good contracts with other good contracts and a good team with other good teams instead of this petty nit-picking of stats and numbers of crap players to compare to our own crap players.
These contracts aren't bad -- they are fair market value today. They are the cost of acquiring players with no assets moving the other direction.
Last edited by seanlinden: 08-12-2012 at 03:17 PM.
Right now he is -- but the guy is still well capable of rebounding to be a #4 shutdown dman if the Leafs change to a more defensive philosophy like it seems they will do. Wideman/Carle have never been much more than #3 defencemen, and with a long term deal of course comes a risk discount.
Calgary and Tampa Bay certainly don't think they're bad contracts -- which in turn makes them not bad contracts -- just fair market value in today's market.
As for trade value, i'm not suggesting that Komisarek has much, I'm simply saying that it's ludicrous to suggest that Komisarek is incapable of earning his $4.5m cap hit.
What's ludicrous is suggesting he may be worth the $4.5mill cap-hit. The guy flat out sucks, I don't understand why you feel the need to defend him. Playing under Carlyle's system may be more to his liking but he'll still handle the pick like a grenade (that's not an exaggeration for those who don't watch him), he'll still get caught standing around on the PK, he'll still take unnecessary penalties (after the whistle no less), and may even provide some humour/frustration if he manages to score on his own team. Just an absolute detriment to icing a competitive roster.
These contracts aren't bad -- they are fair market value today. They are the cost of acquiring players with no assets moving the other direction.
UFA contracts aren't generally overpayed?
On a side note,
Team's shouldn't be looking to shore up depth with UFAs (imo). 9/10 UFAs are overpayed so I'd rather have an overpayed star than an overpayed depth player.
What's ludicrous is suggesting he may be worth the $4.5mill cap-hit. The guy flat out sucks, I don't understand why you feel the need to defend him. Playing under Carlyle's system may be more to his liking but he'll still handle the pick like a grenade (that's not an exaggeration for those who don't watch him), he'll still get caught standing around on the PK, he'll still take unnecessary penalties (after the whistle no less), and may even provide some humour/frustration if he manages to score on his own team. Just an absolute detriment to icing a competitive roster.
I'm not suggesting he is at this point -- simply that he's capable of earning it. He's been in one of the worst situations for his skillset since coming to Toronto, and that's probably going to change with a new coach and bigger group of forwards.
You don't need to handle the puck to earn $4.5m in this league.... that's not physical dmen earn their keep... and on a team that will have one Gardiner/Liles paired with him, it really doesn't matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordieHoweHatTrick
UFA contracts aren't generally overpayed?
On a side note,
Team's shouldn't be looking to shore up depth with UFAs (imo). 9/10 UFAs are overpayed so I'd rather have an overpayed star than an overpayed depth player.
No. They're open market fair value. They're only considered overpaid in relation to players who sign as RFAs or give discounts to be in a certain place, reflective of course of the fact that it requires assets to get underpaid players.
I'm not suggesting he is at this point -- simply that he's capable of earning it. He's been in one of the worst situations for his skillset since coming to Toronto, and that's probably going to change with a new coach and bigger group of forwards.
You don't need to handle the puck to earn $4.5m in this league.... that's not physical dmen earn their keep... and on a team that will have one Gardiner/Liles paired with him, it really doesn't matter.
It wouldn't matter if he never had to handle the puck. He'll **** up every little opportunity he gets, just watch. He'll be out of this league as quickly as Mike Commodore (a year after the contract he cashed in on is over).
Ps, physical d-men don't earn their keep putting their team a man down as a result of taking dumb penalties when the game isn't even being played (post whistle), and for 4.5M you'd think your physical d-man had more than just one attribute. Just being physical doesn't make you an NHL caliber player. If that were true every dumbass with size would have an NHL job.
Here's my question -- when Matt Carle is paid $5.5m and Dennis Wideman is worth $5.25m on long term deals, how is Komisarek incapable of being worth $4.5m?
See, in order to be worth that type of money you must not only be slightly decent, but also be capable of offensive output.
Komisarek is a "stay at home" defenseman, who is barely average for his role! He is completely incapable of being worth $4.5 even at his best.
It wouldn't matter if he never had to handle the puck. He'll **** up every little opportunity he gets, just watch. He'll be out of this league as quickly as Mike Commodore (a year after the contract he cashed in on is over).
Ps, physical d-men don't earn their keep putting their team a man down as a result of taking dumb penalties when the game isn't even being played (post whistle), and for 4.5M you'd think your physical d-man had more than just one attribute. Just being physical doesn't make you an NHL caliber player. If that were true every dumbass with size would have an NHL job.
Not really. He's screwed up under Wilson, that's not necessarily going to hold true under Carlyle.
Phaneuf takes just as many dumb penalties, and as for only having one aspect, what do you think makes Volchenkov worth his money?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanHortonFan
See, in order to be worth that type of money you must not only be slightly decent, but also be capable of offensive output.
Komisarek is a "stay at home" defenseman, who is barely average for his role! He is completely incapable of being worth $4.5 even at his best.
What Komisarek lacks in offensive output he has in physicality. He's also $1m less than those guys. The guy has proven capable of being a top pair defenceman in Montreal, and found a terrible situation under Ron Wilson in Toronto. No reason he can't regain form to a top 4 guy, and $4.5m is certainly within the going rate these days.
See, in order to be worth that type of money you must not only be slightly decent, but also be capable of offensive output.
Komisarek is a "stay at home" defenseman, who is barely average for his role! He is completely incapable of being worth $4.5 even at his best.
Komisarek is worth 4.5 from his montreal days. Back then the offer was 4 and I would've been happy with it. The cap went up during that time and 4.5 isn't unreasonable. Is he worth it now? Nah, but 'at his best' he was clearly a top 4 d-man.
So you're willing to give Komisarek, whose proven bad for past 3 straight seasons, a chance to rebound. But you won't give the chance to Holzer because the kid hasn't earned it. And you're still preaching putting the best avaliable players on the ice lol.
What Komisarek lacks in offensive output he has in physicality. He's also $1m less than those guys. The guy has proven capable of being a top pair defenceman in Montreal, and found a terrible situation under Ron Wilson in Toronto. No reason he can't regain form to a top 4 guy, and $4.5m is certainly within the going rate these days.
He is barely a #6-7 defenseman... and "physical" stay at home defenseman are not even close to $4.5 even on their best days typically.
He tried to get "physical" with Lucic again this season and got beaten down once again. He is never going to be a top 4 defenseman again. Even if he is he will be lucky to reach 15 points ever again....
Komisarek is worth 4.5 from his montreal days. Back then the offer was 4 and I would've been happy with it. The cap went up during that time and 4.5 isn't unreasonable. Is he worth it now? Nah, but 'at his best' he was clearly a top 4 d-man.
Komisarek is worth 4.5 from his montreal days. Back then the offer was 4 and I would've been happy with it. The cap went up during that time and 4.5 isn't unreasonable. Is he worth it now? Nah, but 'at his best' he was clearly a top 4 d-man.
Thanks in very large part to Markov who was his partner during his best years as a Hab.
He is barely a #6-7 defenseman... and "physical" stay at home defenseman are not even close to $4.5 even on their best days typically.
He tried to get "physical" with Lucic again this season and got beaten down once again. He is never going to be a top 4 defenseman again. Even if he is he will be lucky to reach 15 points ever again....
I actually found it was the first fight of the 3 where he didn't look terrible. I actually considered that the first real fight too.
In the 1st Komisarek dislocates his shoulder midway through fight and just keeps getting a beating till it's over.
In the 2nd Komisarek just falls and loses balance.
In the 3rd Komisarek fights lucic and manages to still lose but lose with some dignity. He stayed up and really had no excuse for the loss besides being the inferior fighter.
Thanks in very large part to Markov who was his partner during his best years as a Hab.
Call it what you want but he blocked shots just like gorges. He cleared the net better than gorges too. Komisarek had the size and willingness to be physical and clear the net any team would love. If we compare to gorges who is far less physical and intimidating but a better passer and better hockey IQ we'd see that if Gorges is worth 3.9 per for 6 years now, Komisarek of the past likely worth 4.5. Markov or no markov is irrelevant. Made him look better but didn't do the work for him either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanHortonFan
Sorry, meant at his best now.
Fair enough. At best he could be a #4 but I doubt he can maintain it anymore. Playing a shotblocking style and physical game wears you down. Komisarek doesn't have a high enough hockey IQ or skillset to compensate for wearing down and not being 25 anymore.
No. I think Komi will play better under Carlyle's defensive system which suits Komi much better.
Komisarek > Prout. Komi can still be a bottom pairing D man for us, while Prout is at most a depth D man at this point, he does have some upside though but his ceiling is likely a bottom pairing defenseman at best, which is what Komi is right now. Plus we are giving up a higher pick...no thanks.
Komi gives us depth and can step in as a bottom pairing D man for us if Holzer isn't ready for full time duty just yet.
I am open to trading Komisarek, but not if the return is not worth our while.
So you're willing to give Komisarek, whose proven bad for past 3 straight seasons, a chance to rebound. But you won't give the chance to Holzer because the kid hasn't earned it. And you're still preaching putting the best avaliable players on the ice lol.
Komisarek gets the chance because he's a better defenceman right now. That's what matters in a results driven business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanHortonFan
He is barely a #6-7 defenseman... and "physical" stay at home defenseman are not even close to $4.5 even on their best days typically.
He tried to get "physical" with Lucic again this season and got beaten down once again. He is never going to be a top 4 defenseman again. Even if he is he will be lucky to reach 15 points ever again....
That's quite the exaggeration for Komisarek, and physical top 4 stay at home defencemen are worth about $4.5m on the open market. Just ask Anton Volchenkov, and the cap has gone up substantially since then.
