Jump to content

Photo

Phil Kessel?


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#21 ghdi

ghdi

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,393 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 03:35 PM

82 points was his best season, either as a member of the Bruins or Leafs. Before that he never topped 65 points.

Obviously I meant "soft" on the ice. Don't take my word for it though, other NHLers feel the same way, and by a wide margin at that. My link

Again, he's a good player, but certainly not close to being the best US born player. And if he were that good, it would be harder for people to say how much Burke got butt-raped in that deal. Basically, nobody would be saying the same thing had he made the same deal for Parise, or many of the other players I mentioned above.


15% of 145 think hes easy to intimidate. I don't consider that a big deal. 20 players chose Kessel, but the rest chose someone else.

His stats are almost all on an uptick. He's gotten better when he has players around him and as he's gotten older. He had 60 in 70 games the one time he's been on a good team. He was on bad teams with the Bruins until his last year there and bad teams with the Leafs. There's no reason to believe his production would drop on a good team.

Bull. Any player in that deal bar the true superstars right now would've been considered overpayment especially considering that the Leafs were/are dogsh!t and gave up a huge chunk of their future. Had a good team made that deal, it'd be a lot different. Kessel also wanted out of Boston, which made it easier for the Bruins to deal him. Even Burke admits he overpaid. That was not a good deal.

I dont think Zach or Kane or Brown would've improved the Leafs to the point of that deal ever being considered good.

Based on his age, his current cap hit, and what he does well, Id take Kessel over almost any US born player right now. It also depends on need. We need scoring more than we need a Suter. Kane and Kessel would be a hard decision to make between. Quick would be the only other consideration because of our future goaltender needs and we've seen what goaltenders can do after a good run. Quick is no lock to being worth a 10 year deal. Id bet on it before against it, but he's not shown he can do what he does over a period of time.

Edited by ghdi, 09 July 2012 - 03:39 PM.

  • 0

#22 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,541 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 03:49 PM

15% of 145 think hes easy to intimidate. I don't consider that a big deal. 20 players chose Kessel, but the rest chose someone else.

His stats are almost all on an uptick. He's gotten better when he has players around him and as he's gotten older. He had 60 in 70 games the one time he's been on a good team. He was on bad teams with the Bruins until his last year there and bad teams with the Leafs. There's no reason to believe his production would drop on a good team.

Bull. Any player in that deal bar the true superstars right now would've been considered overpayment especially considering that the Leafs were/are dogsh!t and gave up a huge chunk of their future. Had a good team made that deal, it'd be a lot different. Kessel also wanted out of Boston, which made it easier for the Bruins to deal him. Even Burke admits he overpaid. That was not a good deal.

I dont think Zach or Kane or Brown would've improved the Leafs to the point of that deal ever being considered good.


Zach and Brown were captains on Stanley Cup finalists. That doesn't show up on the stat sheet, but does count. Kane is the best or second best forward on a team that won the Cup. Zach and Kane have both done better on the meat and potatoes stat sheets over the years.

Yeah, Kessel had more points last year, which was his best statistical year. That hardly counts as a trend. I'll also note that tallying a lot of points on a bad team isn't better than a guy who does so on a good team. The scoring even on a bad team has to come from somewhere and will usually be more concentrated in a few players.

Also note that there's a reason he got benched during the Olympics.

Again, good player. But I wouldn't trade that much to get him.

Edited by Daniel, 09 July 2012 - 03:49 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#23 ghdi

ghdi

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,393 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 03:57 PM

Zach and Brown were captains on Stanley Cup finalists. That doesn't show up on the stat sheet, but does count. Kane is the best or second best forward on a team that won the Cup. Zach and Kane have both done better on the meat and potatoes stat sheets over the years.

Yeah, Kessel had more points last year, which was his best statistical year. That hardly counts as a trend. I'll also note that tallying a lot of points on a bad team isn't better than a guy who does so on a good team. The scoring even on a bad team has to come from somewhere and will usually be more concentrated in a few players.

Also note that there's a reason he got benched during the Olympics.

Again, good player. But I wouldn't trade that much to get him.


Hell, I wouldnt give up that much to get him either at least from a Devils perspective. It would take key ingredients to our team that have already been here to acquire Kessel and theres very few guys Id consider putting a Henrique or Larsson into a trade for and almost none of them are American.

Look at his stats overall. He is consistent and since he's been in Toronto, his stats go up as the Leafs acquire more pieces. The better players he has around him, the more he contributes, same thing in Boston. The only years he's been under 50 points were at age 18 and 19 on bad teams. From our perspective, putting Kessel with Kovalchuk or on a line with Elias, is deadly and probably the best talent he will have ever played with from a scoring perspective.

Zach has also had a major knee injury and missed a year. I don't think he lasts 10 of the years that he's signed for, much less 13. Nor do I think Kessel is worth a 13 year deal. This year will tell us a lot about Zach as a hockey player.

I would argue for Toews over Kane, but IMO Kane is probably the only guy I consider over Kessel in this argument from our perspective. They're the youngest and provide the best value for what they do. I dont think we need Suter and I dont think Zach is worth 13 years.

Edited by ghdi, 09 July 2012 - 03:58 PM.

  • 0

#24 CarpathianForest

CarpathianForest

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,086 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 04:06 PM

Kessel may be soft, but he's also considered by the NHLPA poll to be the 4th fastest skater in the NHL. Something we need with all the geriatric cases on our team.
Burke gave up 2 first round picks and a 2nd round pick which is insane. But I think a combination of picks, prospects and players could get Burke thinking. And, no we wouldn't have to include Henrique or Josefson.
  • 0

screenshot-sml-40.jpg
 


#25 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,428 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 04:12 PM

Kessel may be soft, but he's also considered by the NHLPA poll to be the 4th fastest skater in the NHL. Something we need with all the geriatric cases on our team.
Burke gave up 2 first round picks and a 2nd round pick which is insane. But I think a combination of picks, prospects and players could get Burke thinking. And, no we wouldn't have to include Henrique or Josefson.


2 1st round picks and a 2nd round pick isn't insane to give up for a player like that if you knew the 1st round picks would be between 15th and 30th. Since they ended up 2nd and 9th, it didn't really end up working out.

I don't like Kessel, even though he is without a doubt a very good player. He's not a play driver, he's weak defensively, and he's not a creative player. And of course the Leafs would never trade him for anything NJ has, but that's immaterial I suppose.
  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#26 CarpathianForest

CarpathianForest

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,086 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 04:15 PM

2 1st round picks and a 2nd round pick isn't insane to give up for a player like that if you knew the 1st round picks would be between 15th and 30th. Since they ended up 2nd and 9th, it didn't really end up working out.

I don't like Kessel, even though he is without a doubt a very good player. He's not a play driver, he's weak defensively, and he's not a creative player. And of course the Leafs would never trade him for anything NJ has, but that's immaterial I suppose.


It's nothing more than kicking ideas around. Lou's probably going to re-sign Sykora and run with the team as it currently stands.
  • 0

screenshot-sml-40.jpg
 


#27 ghdi

ghdi

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,393 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 04:16 PM

Kessel may be soft, but he's also considered by the NHLPA poll to be the 4th fastest skater in the NHL. Something we need with all the geriatric cases on our team.
Burke gave up 2 first round picks and a 2nd round pick which is insane. But I think a combination of picks, prospects and players could get Burke thinking. And, no we wouldn't have to include Henrique or Josefson.


Here's the problem with this IMO.

Burke needs to get this team to the playoffs ASAP. Right now, they are a bubble team if they can get the goaltending straightened out, which IMO Luongo will do for them, at least to get there. They're not going to trade their leading scorer for futures. I agree that a competitive package could be put together, but none of our current starting D-men, nor is there any forward that he would accept a package around except the younger talent. He's not going to do it for any of our players that are UFA next season, so that eliminates Zubrus, Clarkson, Elias, and Zajac, unless one of them is definitely not coming back. I could see a package built around Zajac, but who wants to trade Zajac? Then we have a problem with faceoffs this season.

Put together a package from the Devils that can get Kessel here that Burke would accept. We have to give up a first rounder in the next two years, so throw one of those out.

I just don't see a viable package unless Burke is willing to wait even longer to get this team to the playoffs or us giving up a really important piece. I don't see Lou doing that.
  • 0

#28 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,399 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 04:40 PM

I don't like Kessel, even though he is without a doubt a very good player. He's not a play driver, he's weak defensively, and he's not a creative player. And of course the Leafs would never trade him for anything NJ has, but that's immaterial I suppose.

I would never think Burke would trade Kessel but if this description is true, he doesn't sound very Lou-ish.



  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#29 Bibby89

Bibby89

    Rookie Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 361 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 05:38 PM

There's always the option to wait until late December-early January when Toronto is far out of it and Burke is fired and the new GM wants Kessel out to help everyone forget the useless tenure of Brian Burke in Toronto
  • 0

#30 robdeselich88

robdeselich88

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,695 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 06:21 PM

Clarkson would be sitting in Lous office to be on this trade.
  • 0
img]http://jerseydatabase.com/sig/temp.png?ran=987145633[/img]

#31 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,399 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 06:34 PM

Clarkson would be sitting in Lous office to be on this trade.


also true.
  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#32 CarpathianForest

CarpathianForest

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,086 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 06:37 PM

After a 30 goal season it may be a good idea to optimize Clarkson's trade potential. If I recall, Burke has a hard on for him.
  • 0

screenshot-sml-40.jpg
 


#33 ghdi

ghdi

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,393 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 06:40 PM

After a 30 goal season it may be a good idea to optimize Clarkson's trade potential. If I recall, Burke has a hard on for him.


So does PDB.

I think its more Clarkson has a hard on for the Leafs than Burke does for him.
  • 0

#34 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,399 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 06:42 PM

So does PDB.

I think its more Clarkson has a hard on for the Leafs than Burke does for him.


completely and utterly disagree with this. I think Clarkson loves NJ and wouldn't mind playing here his whole career. I think he loves Toronto and would enjoy playing there if he was sent there. I think it's been made pretty clear that Burke is a Clarkson fan.
  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#35 CarpathianForest

CarpathianForest

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,086 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 06:44 PM

Lou should have traded out 1st round pick this past draft.
  • 0

screenshot-sml-40.jpg
 


#36 ghdi

ghdi

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,393 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 06:52 PM

completely and utterly disagree with this. I think Clarkson loves NJ and wouldn't mind playing here his whole career. I think he loves Toronto and would enjoy playing there if he was sent there. I think it's been made pretty clear that Burke is a Clarkson fan.


I didnt say Clarkson didnt enjoy NJ. He's also a lifelong Leafs fan. I dont think Clarky would mind, if he was to be traded, to be traded to the Leafs. In fact, I would bet thats where he would choose to go if he had to leave NJ.

Where has that been made pretty clear? Ive never even heard Burke talk about Clarkson. Ive read hockey media types say that Clarkson is the type of guy Burke would like, but Ive not once heard Burke say a word about Clarkson.
  • 0

#37 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,399 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 07:16 PM

I didnt say Clarkson didnt enjoy NJ. He's also a lifelong Leafs fan. I dont think Clarky would mind, if he was to be traded, to be traded to the Leafs. In fact, I would bet thats where he would choose to go if he had to leave NJ.

Where has that been made pretty clear? Ive never even heard Burke talk about Clarkson. Ive read hockey media types say that Clarkson is the type of guy Burke would like, but Ive not once heard Burke say a word about Clarkson.

Ok, but you're backtracking now. I just said Clakson would like playing for the Leafs - but that's alot different than saying that Clarkson, "has a hard on for the leafs." And not that it matters, but I believe the last time I heard mention of it was when I think some announcer was talking about the high regard Burke has for Clarkson during a Leafs game. But it is certainly not an absolute fact.
  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#38 ghdi

ghdi

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,393 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 07:23 PM

Ok, but you're backtracking now. I just said Clakson would like playing for the Leafs - but that's alot different than saying that Clarkson, "has a hard on for the leafs." And not that it matters, but I believe the last time I heard mention of it was when I think some announcer was talking about the high regard Burke has for Clarkson during a Leafs game. But it is certainly not an absolute fact.


"Has a hard on for the Leafs" obviously means he'd like playing for the Leafs. I didnt realize there was a level of interest implied via a figure of speech. He's said numerous times they were his team growing up.

Now you're backtracking, "I think its pretty clear..." is not the same as "It certainly is not an absolute fact". I've read numerous hockey media state that they think Clarky is a "prototypical Burke player", but nothing from Burke himself.

Quit twisting words of an opinion. I would be willing to bet if Clarky wasnt a Devil, his choice of team would be the Leafs. I also said "I think its more Clarkson" which means I was offering an opinion and not stating a fact. I dont know how Burke feels about Clarkson, but I know how Clarkson feels about the Leafs.
  • 0

#39 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,399 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 07:30 PM

"Has a hard on for the Leafs" obviously means he'd like playing for the Leafs. I didnt realize there was a level of interest implied via a figure of speech. He's said numerous times they were his team growing up.

With all due respect that does not "obviously" mean that. It actually more obviously implies that he wants to go play for the Leafs.


Now you're backtracking, "I think its pretty clear..." is not the same as "It certainly is not an absolute fact". I've read numerous hockey media state that they think Clarky is a "prototypical Burke player", but nothing from Burke himself.

Umm...those two quotes are perfectly non-contradictory. "It's pretty clear but not absolute fact." And it seems to be the sentiment in many circles he feels that way. Anyways, the point is that there is no evidence at all to your original implication.

Quit twisting words of an opinion. I would be willing to bet if Clarky wasnt a Devil, his choice of team would be the Leafs. I also said "I think its more Clarkson" which means I was offering an opinion and not stating a fact. I dont know how Burke feels about Clarkson, but I know how Clarkson feels about the Leafs.


I made the most obvious inference. You can call it twisting but it was my sincere inference - i guess you should be more clear and not blame the readers of your posts for "mis-interpreting,".....even though the interpretation is clear...but not absolute fact.

Edited by ben00rs, 09 July 2012 - 07:31 PM.

  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#40 ghdi

ghdi

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,393 posts

Posted 09 July 2012 - 07:52 PM

How damn anal are you? The original comment that set you off was pure opinion and nothing more.

You also stated to the comment "Clarkson would be sitting in Lous office to be on this trade." Your reply: "Also true."

To me reading that comment, Clarkson would be in a hurry to get to Toronto, which you agree with.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users