HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Canucks - Leafs

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-31-2012, 01:44 PM
  #101
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWiseguy View Post
Toronto absolutely does have the cap flexibility. There's not a lot of teams that would have the ability and willingness to clear the requisite cap space for a $7-8m player.

$3-4m guys are relatively easy to move, and Toronto's got enough of them to sacrifice if it means getting the top tier guy they need.

seanlinden is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2012, 01:48 PM
  #102
medhatcanuck
Registered User
 
medhatcanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Inside JayZ's Belly
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mansfield View Post
We barely even use traditional pairings. Everyone is all over the place. For example, Liles has spent most of the season on our "third pairing", yet he's never been a third pairing d-man throughout his career and he's on pace for similar numbers as the rest of his career.

Because of our depth on D, a lot of D-men end up playing less minutes than they might otherwise. The only d-men we have who actually play like third pairing D-men are Komisarek and Aulie - yet everyone except Phaneuf has seen time on the "third pairing".

Anyway, on franson in particular - he was scratched at the beginning of the season because RW insisted on playing Komi (which I understand, he's the veteran, and he was playing better than he had been before). Once Komi got injured, Franson got to play and really impressed - hence him keeping his spot in the line-up despite Komi now being healthy.

The buzz out of Nashville when we got him was that he had a great shot, and decent offensive instincts, but that he was fairly soft for his size and not all that great defensively. I wasn't expecting much, but he's really been a pleasant surprise for the leafs. He's no Luke Schenn from a physical standpoint, but he certainly uses his size and is definitely not soft. He's also been quite reliable defensively (admittedly not being used in a top pairing role, though he has played significant minutes in many games).

Offensively, he is as advertised. A decent passer, and a very deceptive shot (very quick release, and quite accurate). Definitely a great guy to have on your second PP unit.

On the canucks, he'd occupy a similar role as he does on the leafs. I don't see him making your top four (he's definitely not as good as edler, bieksa, salo, and hamhuis), but he can play twenty minutes a night and be defensively reliable. I think the fit with vancouver would actually be quite good given that they play a very similar style to toronto, with a fast, offense based game involving aggressive d-men.

However, I agree with those saying that it doesn't make sense to give up more than Raymond and some decent picks. Problem is, neither Raymond nor the picks are particularly helpful to Toronto at the moment. So I think the player fits quite well, but the trade value doesn't.

TL;DR - decent proposal, ultimately probably not all that realistic though.
Like. Good analysis!

medhatcanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2012, 01:50 PM
  #103
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
lol i love how leaf fans are trying to compare their defence to van. And on top of that they think they are better!

Leafs 147 GA

Canucks 122 Ga

i know 147 > 122 but i gotta remind u in this case u want it to be smaller! hahaha

Numbers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2012, 01:52 PM
  #104
Mansfield
possession obsession
 
Mansfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by medhatcanuck View Post
Like. Good analysis!
Thanks! It really is a pity that this trade would probably never go down - I really think Franson is a guy who would fit really well with the Nucks and really help you guys in the playoffs. Ahh well, I guess that's the real world eh

Mansfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2012, 01:53 PM
  #105
TYayo
Registered User
 
TYayo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 727
vCash: 500
Value isn't bad but Leafs don't have a need for him at all...
We don't have a place in our top 9 for him that justifies giving up Franson.

We will get rid of a D but hopefully it brings a BIG body in the top 9 that can bang on the boards and go hard to the net..score some garbage goals and hurt some ppl.

TYayo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2012, 01:55 PM
  #106
TYayo
Registered User
 
TYayo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
lol i love how leaf fans are trying to compare their defence to van. And on top of that they think they are better!

Leafs 147 GA

Canucks 122 Ga

i know 147 > 122 but i gotta remind u in this case u want it to be smaller! hahaha
I'd have a feeling that lies a lot on Luongo & Schneider >>>>>>> Reimer & Monster & Scrivens for the year

TYayo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2012, 01:59 PM
  #107
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 17,846
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mansfield View Post
We barely even use traditional pairings. Everyone is all over the place. For example, Liles has spent most of the season on our "third pairing", yet he's never been a third pairing d-man throughout his career and he's on pace for similar numbers as the rest of his career.

Because of our depth on D, a lot of D-men end up playing less minutes than they might otherwise. The only d-men we have who actually play like third pairing D-men are Komisarek and Aulie - yet everyone except Phaneuf has seen time on the "third pairing".

Anyway, on franson in particular - he was scratched at the beginning of the season because RW insisted on playing Komi (which I understand, he's the veteran, and he was playing better than he had been before). Once Komi got injured, Franson got to play and really impressed - hence him keeping his spot in the line-up despite Komi now being healthy.

The buzz out of Nashville when we got him was that he had a great shot, and decent offensive instincts, but that he was fairly soft for his size and not all that great defensively. I wasn't expecting much, but he's really been a pleasant surprise for the leafs. He's no Luke Schenn from a physical standpoint, but he certainly uses his size and is definitely not soft. He's also been quite reliable defensively (admittedly not being used in a top pairing role, though he has played significant minutes in many games).

Offensively, he is as advertised. A decent passer, and a very deceptive shot (very quick release, and quite accurate). Definitely a great guy to have on your second PP unit.

On the canucks, he'd occupy a similar role as he does on the leafs. I don't see him making your top four (he's definitely not as good as edler, bieksa, salo, and hamhuis), but he can play twenty minutes a night and be defensively reliable. I think the fit with vancouver would actually be quite good given that they play a very similar style to toronto, with a fast, offense based game involving aggressive d-men.

However, I agree with those saying that it doesn't make sense to give up more than Raymond and some decent picks. Problem is, neither Raymond nor the picks are particularly helpful to Toronto at the moment. So I think the player fits quite well, but the trade value doesn't.

TL;DR - decent proposal, ultimately probably not all that realistic though.
Yeah I'll agree with medhatcanuck, best rebuttal from a Leaf fan yet.

The one part I cannot agree on is the 20 minute thing. Franson has ONE GAME this year over 19 minutes, let alone playing 20 minutes a game.

The other thing, when you are 8th in average TOI for defensman on YOUR OWN TEAM, I dont think you can be considered any more than a 5/6/7/8th defensman ie. "third pairing".

Leafs dont want Raymond. I'm entirely fine with that.

I wouldn't move him for an upgrade to the "third pairing" in Vancouver.

I like Franson as a 6-7th in Vancouver, but not at the cost of proven players, as IMO Franson would be a 6 or 7 in Vancouver with games spent in the press box.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2012, 02:00 PM
  #108
BLAME CANADA*
The Canucks did it
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYayo View Post
I'd have a feeling that lies a lot on Luongo & Schneider >>>>>>> Reimer & Monster & Scrivens for the year
Toronto D is not better than the one on a cup contender, sorry. Only a complete homer could believe that, I bet those same fans think they have a better forward group too.

BLAME CANADA* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2012, 02:10 PM
  #109
Fearless Leaf*
Playiffs 2013!!!!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Markham and Lawrence
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by medhatcanuck View Post
K I'm done with these leafs shennangins.

Last night with the Kadri, Komisarek and 2nd for Kesler
and today with the Franson > Salo and Hamhuis.

The portion of Leafs nation that only watch leafs, do some homework, and get smart.
I wish that was the case, but unfortunately some of the fellow Leafs fans just don't seem to get it.

Like I said in my previous post, this is a highway robbery by Leafs if the trade indeed happened, Franson does bring a unique element of size, offensive flair and little bit of physically on the blue-line,but when u are in a position of abundance of top 4 d-man land good depth of D in the system like the Leafs, u absolutely cannot say no this trade. Raymond would bring great speed and PK ability to our group and I think he will gel perfectly in our top 6, add to that the solid pick in the deep draft that can possibly give us gem, this deal simply becomes too lopsided in Leafs favor.

Unfortunately, fellow Leafs just won't think about other teams requirement and constantly overrate almost every player on our current roster.

Fearless Leaf* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2012, 02:13 PM
  #110
Mansfield
possession obsession
 
Mansfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Yeah I'll agree with medhatcanuck, best rebuttal from a Leaf fan yet.

The one part I cannot agree on is the 20 minute thing. Franson has ONE GAME this year over 19 minutes, let alone playing 20 minutes a game.

The other thing, when you are 8th in average TOI for defensman on YOUR OWN TEAM, I dont think you can be considered any more than a 5/6/7/8th defensman ie. "third pairing".

Leafs dont want Raymond. I'm entirely fine with that.

I wouldn't move him for an upgrade to the "third pairing" in Vancouver.

I like Franson as a 6-7th in Vancouver, but not at the cost of proven players, as IMO Franson would be a 6 or 7 in Vancouver with games spent in the press box.
I'm not sure of the exact stats (i'll take your word for it) - my general point was that he's not playing typical third pairing minutes on a team with standard D - (anywhere from 10-15).

At any rate, we seem to have come to an agreement.

Mansfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2012, 02:15 PM
  #111
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYayo View Post
I'd have a feeling that lies a lot on Luongo & Schneider >>>>>>> Reimer & Monster & Scrivens for the year
ya i would have to say that goaltending has made a difference as well.

but van d production 116 points, tor d production 110 points

Van has cap hit of 21.225

Tor has cap hit of 22.775

in pretty much every category canucks d wins and is paid less. therefore better value.

Numbers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 12:38 AM
  #112
Bgav
We Stylin'
 
Bgav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SundinOurOnlyChance View Post
Bieksa and Edler are the only two above average defensemen on your team, everyone else is under Franson, so if Franson is below average, my point still stands, the other defensemen are below average according to your standards.

Bgav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 12:50 AM
  #113
Ricky Bobby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,700
vCash: 500
So Burke acquire Raymond who doesn't fill any need for them.

Franson is worth at least a Vancouver 1st at this point with his contract status and playing ability.

Look at what Kubina and Grossman have returned.

Ricky Bobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 12:55 AM
  #114
Ricky Bobby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,700
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
ya i would have to say that goaltending has made a difference as well.

but van d production 116 points, tor d production 110 points

Van has cap hit of 21.225

Tor has cap hit of 22.775

in pretty much every category canucks d wins and is paid less. therefore better value.
I'd take the Leafs D.

The big difference is your goaltending is far superior. Plus your forwards know how to cycle and are very good defensively.

Your big 3 forwards in the Sedins and Kesler are all very good defensively. Our big 3 in Kessel, Lupul and Grabo are all very good offensively but have holes defensively and don't cycle.

Ricky Bobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 04:53 PM
  #115
Al Swearengen
Smug Nation National
 
Al Swearengen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricky Bobby View Post
I'd take the Leafs D.

The big difference is your goaltending is far superior. Plus your forwards know how to cycle and are very good defensively.

Your big 3 forwards in the Sedins and Kesler are all very good defensively. Our big 3 in Kessel, Lupul and Grabo are all very good offensively but have holes defensively and don't cycle.
The Sedins are sub-par defenders. Vancouver has a ton of defensively responsible forwards (see Lappy, Manny, Kes, Burr, Hansen, Raymond, etc), but the Sedin brothers are not among them.

You'd take the Leafs D? Have fun with that. Maybe in 3-4 years.

Al Swearengen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 05:00 PM
  #116
IBLeaf*
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oakville, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,378
vCash: 500
Mason Raymond sucks.

Rather keep Franson.

IBLeaf* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 05:20 PM
  #117
Ricky Bobby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,700
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Swearengen View Post
The Sedins are sub-par defenders. Vancouver has a ton of defensively responsible forwards (see Lappy, Manny, Kes, Burr, Hansen, Raymond, etc), but the Sedin brothers are not among them.

You'd take the Leafs D? Have fun with that. Maybe in 3-4 years.
The Sedins are actually very good defensively. How many times do you see them lose a board battle? How many years now have they been amongst the best plus/minus players?

Just because they aren't use in a shutdown role doesn't mean they aren't good in that area. In addition to being prolific scorers it's how effectively they cycle and kill time in the other teams zone which mean less time in their own zone.

Kessel and Lupul are darn good offensive players but all of their offence is almost exclusively off the rush. They trade chances all game every game. They don't eat up time in the other teams zone like the Sedins do. Which mean more quality chances for the other team.

Take the Leafs D group and have them backstopped by far superior goaltending and a superior forward group and they'd look pretty amazing.

D is a team game. Everybody picks on the Leafs D but it is actually one of the best groups in the NHL. It's our forwards and goaltending that needs to be upgraded.

Ricky Bobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 05:25 PM
  #118
Horvat2Virtanen
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Horvat2Virtanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,551
vCash: 855
Quote:
Originally Posted by SundinOurOnlyChance View Post
Bieksa and Edler are the only two above average defensemen on your team, everyone else is under Franson, so if Franson is below average, my point still stands, the other defensemen are below average according to your standards.
POST OF THE YEAR. Hamhuis, Salo, Ballard and heck even Tanev>Franson

Horvat2Virtanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 05:30 PM
  #119
IBLeaf*
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oakville, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno Mars View Post
POST OF THE YEAR. Hamhuis, Salo, Ballard and heck even Tanev>Franson
lol..

IBLeaf* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 05:35 PM
  #120
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,776
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricky Bobby View Post
I'd take the Leafs D.

The big difference is your goaltending is far superior. Plus your forwards know how to cycle and are very good defensively.

Your big 3 forwards in the Sedins and Kesler are all very good defensively. Our big 3 in Kessel, Lupul and Grabo are all very good offensively but have holes defensively and don't cycle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpallday View Post
Mason Raymond sucks.

Rather keep Franson.
Put these two things together and you realize why the Leafs never win. You need more Mason Raymonds and less Grabovskis.

Also, I'm thinking you should have traded a 1st and Kulemin for Schneider rather than relying on Craptimus Reim and "the Monster".

DJOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 05:43 PM
  #121
Horvat2Virtanen
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Horvat2Virtanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,551
vCash: 855
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpallday View Post
lol..
I know it sounds stupid. But I wouldn't give up Tanev for Franson, Tanev will be a part of Vancouver's D for a long long time.

Horvat2Virtanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 05:44 PM
  #122
IBLeaf*
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oakville, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno Mars View Post
I know it sounds stupid. But I wouldn't give up Tanev for Franson, Tanev will be a part of Vancouver's D for a long long time.
At least you're right about that.

IBLeaf* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 05:45 PM
  #123
Horvat2Virtanen
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Horvat2Virtanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,551
vCash: 855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricky Bobby View Post
I'd take the Leafs D.

The big difference is your goaltending is far superior. Plus your forwards know how to cycle and are very good defensively.

Your big 3 forwards in the Sedins and Kesler are all very good defensively. Our big 3 in Kessel, Lupul and Grabo are all very good offensively but have holes defensively and don't cycle.
Make a poll on the main board, I bet you anything Vancouver will win it my a mile. Vancouver's D is much much much better, yesterday was a prime example of how much better Vancouver's D is.

Horvat2Virtanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 05:46 PM
  #124
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,198
vCash: 500
The only Leaf I would want would be Schenn, and even then he'd be a 4th defenceman at best (probably fight it out with Ballard and Rome for icetime).

The rest of that team licks ass - honestly I wouldn't even want the vast majority of players on that team for free, and that includes Kessel.

None would fit on the Canucks, where one has to play with accountability and pride.

Diamonddog01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2012, 05:46 PM
  #125
Horvat2Virtanen
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Horvat2Virtanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,551
vCash: 855
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpallday View Post
At least you're right about that.
If you actually watched a Canucks/Wolves game where Tanev has been in, you'd see what I mean. Tanev was playing for the Canucks in the finals last year, thats how much confidence the team has in him.

Horvat2Virtanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:18 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.