Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Search
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
 All Forums
 Hockey Forums
Allow Anonymous Posting forum... General Hockey Chat
 Who won the Phil Kessel Trade? Allow Anonymous Users Reply to This Topic...
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 15

Beans15
Moderator



Canada
8174 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2013 :  14:26:37  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
right now - would you rather have Phil Kessel? Or Tyler Seguinamilknight??


I'll take this one:

I would rather have Tyler Seguin, Dougie Hamilton, Jared Knight, 1 Stanley Cup and 2 finals appearance in the past 3 years over Phil Kessel, his PPG over the past 120 games, and 7 playoff games.



Crock, I will play your game for a second and ask you a question:

If the point of hockey is winning the Stanley Cup, doesn't the team that win the Cup win the trade??

Ottawa, the best coached team in the NHL, with MVP like players such as Chris Neil, will win the Cup in 2013!

Go to Top of Page

CrockOShight
Top Prospect



90 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2013 :  15:03:55  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Welcome to Page 15 Everyone!!

Yeah Beans,

I agree. I'll take the Cup over Phil Kessel. I totally agree with that.*

* - Naturally, that would change if Phil Kessel and the Leafs go on to win the Cup some time in the future.

So, now we get to the crux of the argument (finally, after 15 pages). Is THIS where we are all getting hung up here? Are you guys STILL hung up on the idea that, "well, Boston won the Cup..." Blah Blah Blah??

Gentlemen, this trade had nothing to do with Boston winning the Cup.

The two arguments that we have heard in favour of Boston (and the Cup) are:
1. "Seguin had ONE great game."
2. "Because of the extra Cap Space, they managed to sign Nathan Horton." (kind of a splitting hairs claim really. Horton Cap Hit: 4 million. Phil Kessel: 5.4 million.)


Anyway, these are easily parried:


How do you know the Bruins wouldn't "more" have won the Cup if they had had Phil Kessel? How do you know they wouldn't have won the Cup THIS year - if they had had Phil Kessel?


Or, if we flip it around. Are you actually trying to tell us that the Bruins won the Cup because they didn't have Phil Kessel in the lineup??


Go to Top of Page

andyhack
PickupHockey Pro



Japan
891 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2013 :  16:05:05  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CrockOShight

Welcome to Page 15 Everyone!!

How do you know the Bruins wouldn't "more" have won the Cup if they had had Phil Kessel? How do you know they wouldn't have won the Cup THIS year - if they had had Phil Kessel?



One way to answer this is to think of one of those quiz game shows where the contestant has something in hand already (let's say $1m).

The contestant is then given the choice of either:

A) keeping the $1m (let's say with three little assistants, one of whom, named Tyler, really helped the contestant on one of the questions at a key time in the game, which ultimately helped the contestant achieve the $1m); OR

B) giving back the $1m and taking a gamble that he can do better, perhaps even get $3m, with another assistant (let's call the other
assistant, Phil).

Regardless of how great Phil is, if you're the contestant, do you choose B?

Oh yeah, one more point, the contestant has been playing the game for 39 years and has come up with $0 so far.
Go to Top of Page

Alex116
PickupHockey Legend



5790 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2013 :  16:25:34  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
CrockOShight.....

I will begin this by commending you on one thing. You, after how ever many pages you've been flip flopping your points around to suit your argument, you've finally realized the most important thing in this debate. "IT'S TOO EARLY TO TELL"! Bravo! This was discussed somewhere back on page 1 or 2.

When you claim though, that because Kessel is the best player today that Toronto is winning the trade "HANDS DOWN" right now, it's laughable. One of the best ways to judge a trade that hasn't had the time to pan out is to see the impact the deal has had on the two teams "to this point". Yes, Kessel has prob won a bunch of people some hockey pools. As far as the Leafs go though, he's helped them get to the playoffs a grand total of 1 time where, well, we all know what happened. Now, Boston on the other hand, and i won't refer to it as "Seguin" seeing as he was just a part, has won a cup AND been to another final. Oh, and they broke the Leafs and their fans' hearts along the way.

Here is where you have a serious problem that you have so far failed to realize, and judging by the past 5 or 6 pages, probably never will. You continue to argue like a 12 year old, stomping his feet in anger, cheeks puffed out, fingers in ears and unwilling to listen to anyone else's reason (please FF to 2:15 of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cPrQ-GqpjU for illustration). While you don't agree to value not only Seguin's contribution to the cup win in '11, but the cap space that was gained, allowing the signing of other key pieces, these things are in fact a part of this deal. Bottom line is, the Bruins were in no position to win this deal. Their "hands were tie". It was known they needed to rid themselves of Kessel. Yet, they still came out smelling like roses.

Now, you can go on and on about your poker game and the ace of spades all you want. Heck, i'll even agree that the Bruins got lucky and drew that ace. Here's what you said: In any event, you are claiming "victory" on the strength of a 20% chance from a 15% chance draw - about the equivalent of drawing an Ace out of a full deck of cards.

...Yet you are claiming "victory" on that. Do you feel satisfied with about that?

Now, seeing as you seem to think you're a poker player, lemme ask you this. If i "river" you with an Ace on the river and send you packing while i collect the winners cheque, did i not win??? Are you now trying to flip this around to a new argument and claim that Boston shouldn't be given ANY credit on this trade because they got lucky??? Heck, i think even a die hard B's fan would admit that they got a lot more in the end than they ever expected!!!

OH, btw, my examples, especially the Lafleur one, that you clearly didn't understand, were to show you exactly what you were arguing (at one point before flipping around to some other assinine crap about "bang for buck" and "aces of spades"). You were claiming that "Boston got draft picks, not Seguin, Hamilton and Knight". Or "what if it were Gudbranson, etc....". So, in arguing that it was draft picks, i showed you where Pollock himself did the same. Of course, once you figured that out, you finally conceded that "it's too early to tell".

And what's this crap about none of us agreeing that Kessel is a great player. We pretty much all have! No one is arguing that.

Having said all that, i need a break from this garbage. What was once a fun debate, has turned to garbage. I feel in debating with you (COS), i'm debating with 4 or 5 different people as every time you come up with something new, it makes me shake my head. Roster spots, bang for buck, old wive's tales, etc, etc.......it's getting real old.
Go to Top of Page

JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1877 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2013 :  17:31:18  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Let us rehash the "Seguin is more bang for buck / Boston saved Cap Space on the deal" argument. You have to admit, it is kind of absurd to attempt to argue in factor of Boston here: Seguin's Cap Hit (5.75 million until 2017) is actually higher than Phil Kessel's (5.4 million until 2014). Last year, Phil Kessel was actually a lower Cap Hit than Seguin (and will be again in 2013-2014). (Am I wrong here Joshua?)

So, let's agree on numbers here. Let's compare Cap Hit vs. Goals/Pts. According to nhlnumbers.com:

Phil Kessel
Cap Hit: 5.4 million.
2012: 82GP, 37G, 45A, 82Pts
2013: 48GP, 20G, 32A, 52Pts

Over the past two season, Kessel is:
1 Goal per $189,476
1 Point per $80,597

Tyler Seguin
Cap Hit: 5.75 million.
2012: 81GP, 29G, 38A, 67Pts
2013: 48GP, 16G, 16A, 32Pts

Over the past two seasons, Seguin is:
1 Goal per $255,555
1 Point per $116,161

Joshua, please double-check those numbers that I took off of nhlnumbers.com. If they are wrong, please let me know.

Pending Joshua's approval, this shows us that actually, Kessel is more "bang for buck" than Seguin. Advantage: Toronto.


Again, you were not paying attention. For the last time, Seguins 2012/2013 cap hit was not $5.75, it was $3.55 million. I have throughly worked the numbers back and forth. Next year Seguin is paid $5.75 million, I hope you get it now!

While you added the other players thru the draft picks you are trying to show bang for your buck in a player not yet paid or playing in the NHL and another who was a rookie defenseman with a prorated contract, who in no ways is playing in a stats position. I like how you circled to the other players whom you seem to discount in any other way, as only spare parts in this debate to prove your point, which is only that Kessel scores more points at this point in his career than the other players individually, but avoid any other point against this trade.

"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! "
Go to Top of Page

JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1877 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2013 :  17:50:33  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
* - Naturally, that would change if Phil Kessel and the Leafs go on to win the Cup some time in the future.

And if your dad was a woman he would be your mom too, but he isn't, is he. Can't use if the Leafs win the cup, when they clearly haven't and Boston has, plus who's to say the Kessel trade hasn't caused the Leafs to not compete for the cup since his arrival.

So, now we get to the crux of the argument (finally, after 15 pages). Is THIS where we are all getting hung up here? Are you guys STILL hung up on the idea that, "well, Boston won the Cup..." Blah Blah Blah??

Gentlemen, this trade had nothing to do with Boston winning the Cup


Your right this is the crux of our difference of opinion, as I firmly believe this trade was a hugely important reason why Boston won the cup.

The two arguments that we have heard in favour of Boston (and the Cup) are:
1. "Seguin had ONE great game."


And a great season in 2011/2012 and last year although not as stellar as Kessel was still a great season for a 3rd year player, and so far in his career he is a more complete player.

2. "Because of the extra Cap Space, they managed to sign Nathan Horton." (kind of a splitting hairs claim really. Horton Cap Hit: 4 million. Phil Kessel: 5.4 million.)

Signed an impact player of almost Kessels calibre and a more complete player for less than Kessels salary which also allowed them to retain other depth players.

Anyway, these are easily parried:


How do you know the Bruins wouldn't "more" have won the Cup if they had had Phil Kessel? How do you know they wouldn't have won the Cup THIS year - if they had had Phil Kessel?

Proof is in the pudding, as Kessel hasn't won more cups without the Bruins and they have won more cups without Kessel.

Or, if we flip it around. Are you actually trying to tell us that the Bruins won the Cup because they didn't have Phil Kessel in the lineup??

Good point and I think thats what we have been trying to tell you.
Its not like Kessel was the reason they didn't win the cup with him in the lineup, but the flexibility this trade provided, the players Boston received for his cap space and thru draft picks, in sum total are better than Kessels contributions were for the Bruins.

"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! "

Edited by - JOSHUACANADA on 07/03/2013 17:54:44
Go to Top of Page

Guest4096
( )

Posted - 07/03/2013 :  20:19:51  Reply with Quote
Good name Alex, but maybe we should change the first part to Full of.

Anyways. Yawn.

Alternate universe (I love the fact they he went from the poker analogy right into 'how do you know if' - wow just don't get it. Sorry sir you didn't win the game with a royal flush, you took a gamble that turned out in your favour so you didn't win. You see in another universe the probability of pulling the ace of spades wouldn't happen there so you lost here.), fantasy, old wives tales flippantly dismissing a monster point just by saying that is easily parried by making no relevant point at all and now irrelevant discussions about Rick Nash to fill up pages.

I present you a 15 page script called Comedy by Morons. Written mostly by Crock and Duke. You'll laugh, you'll cry but mostly you'll just be frustrated.

I love it when Crock and Duke post here, the stuff they come up here is comedic gold. Keep them arguments coming. I'll sit back and laugh at you, not with you.
Go to Top of Page

Leafs81
PickupHockey Pro



714 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2013 :  20:50:02  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4096

Good name Alex, but maybe we should change the first part to Full of.

Anyways. Yawn.

Alternate universe (I love the fact they he went from the poker analogy right into 'how do you know if' - wow just don't get it. Sorry sir you didn't win the game with a royal flush, you took a gamble that turned out in your favour so you didn't win. You see in another universe the probability of pulling the ace of spades wouldn't happen there so you lost here.), fantasy, old wives tales flippantly dismissing a monster point just by saying that is easily parried by making no relevant point at all and now irrelevant discussions about Rick Nash to fill up pages.

I present you a 15 page script called Comedy by Morons. Written mostly by Crock and Duke. You'll laugh, you'll cry but mostly you'll just be frustrated.

I love it when Crock and Duke post here, the stuff they come up here is comedic gold. Keep them arguments coming. I'll sit back and laugh at you, not with you.



The arguments are coming from both sides. Don't put down Duke and Crock for defending what they believe in. Obviously not the same opinion on certain points. There was many stupid, ignorant arguments from the Seguin party too, but people doesn't point that out because it suits their opinions.

Edited by - Leafs81 on 07/04/2013 08:15:42
Go to Top of Page

slozo
Moderator



Canada
4579 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  05:29:33  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I think Crock has brought up many excellent points . . . and in terms of ignorant/unseeing opinions, none is greater than that of the Seguin side and "that one game".

I mentioned it before I think, but I'll repeat it:
IF using the "Boston won the deal because of Seguin's big game on their road to the Cup" argument . . . you would have to compare the weight of that one game to what Kessel MIGHT have done had he not been dealt.

Going by his past as a Bruin only at that time, it is easy to predict that he would have played a much bigger role in general . . . certainly, he would have been one of the top front line players the whole time, as opposed to a player inserted into the lineup to inject some energy and give a boost mid-playoffs, as Seguin was. There's no doubt that Seguin gave a great boost for that one game, undeniable . . . but to simply think that Kessel would have had a lower value to that same cup run is a bit silly, I think. Sure, it's postulation, and that's all either side has, but . . . c'mon, Kessel was their top scorer already.

I know someone will mention that what I should actually compare Seguin AND Horton to what Kessel might have done, citing cap space . . . but for that argument, I would say that first, the math doesn't work (amounts not equal); and second, there could have been another less expensive complimentary p[layer other than Horton signed by Boston. IT basically gets into a complicated mess of postulations and guesses.

I think this trade was always about future, and still is. Boston definitely didn't think Kessel was going to turn into a top 10 scorer guy like he has, and Toronto definitely didn't think they were going to finish so badly that year and have the #2 pick overall go to the Bruins.

If going by best player, Toronto won.
If going by overall value, I think at this point it's a win for Toronto.
If going by best fit/situation . . . at the time, it was a great deal for both teams, I think, and still is a good deal for both teams (although certainly, the bloom is off the rose with Seguin).

That's my page 15 2 cents.

Long Live the Leafs.

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Go to Top of Page

Beans15
Moderator



Canada
8174 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  05:41:19  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Putting my moderator hat on for a second, I would like to remind people that everyone is entitle to their opinion no matter how unpopular it may be. Please be aware that comments such about laughing at people or other personal slights are against the rules of the forum. Please keep comments relevant to the argument and not about the people making the argument.

To the most recent point by Slozo: I think you are correct in a few points. I personally think it's arguable between Kessel and Seguin about who is a better hockey player. Your comments (as well as others from the pro-Kessel camp) is that Kessel is the 'best player' in the deal. I think that Kessel is easily and hands down the better offensive player today. I think that very few of the folks in Leafland give much if any credit to the complete game that Seguin brings that, unfortunately, Kessel does not. To the argument that Kessel would have/could have been as impactful to the Bruins as Seguin has been; can that argument not also be used in reverse?? Do you think the Leafs are a worse team with Seguin in their line up rather than Kessel?? I'm not saying they would be better or worse but that is my point. It's arguable at best.

I'm not saying Kessel isn't the best player but I just don't think it's a cut and dry as people are saying. Sure, he's been a top 10 offensive producer in the past 120-130 games. No one can take that away from him and that is something Seguin has not been able to achieve. But Kessel has also perennially been one of the worst defensive players and/or on the worst defensive lines on his team. Seguin, on the other hand, is viewed as one of the better defensive forwards on a team full of quality defensive forwards. He has a great faceoff record and one on one defends very well.


It's the age old debate: offense vs. defense.





Ottawa, the best coached team in the NHL, with MVP like players such as Chris Neil, will win the Cup in 2013!


Edited by - Beans15 on 07/04/2013 06:25:14
Go to Top of Page

andyhack
PickupHockey Pro



Japan
891 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  08:03:16  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
My opinion seems to be drawing the greatest negative response, which is fair game here. On a tennis site I post on now and then I was once called a "monkey," so I'm used to it. No problem.

But the thing is, my stupid ignorant unseeing monkey view here relies on an actual fact. Anything about Kessel on a Bs team in the 2011 playoffs is speculation.

100% fact by the stupid ignorant unseeing monkey vs 100% speculation by the bright knowledgable all-seeing intelligentia. That's what this particular aspect of this debate comes down to.

Just to be clear too, my opinion, which has been very consistent throughout this novella, is and has always been that, as of now Boston is ahead in this trade. I have always left open the possibility that might change. In other words, my opinion is 100% the opposite of Slozo's actually - in fact I think it goes against the grain of a number of people's arguments here, even those on the Boston side of this, and that's okay too. So when Slozo mentions the "Boston won the deal because of Seguin's big game on their road to the Cup" argument, he is not at all properly labelling my argument.

Also, I do not believe the Leafs "lost" in a tremendously bad way here. BUT, if the two GMs had time machines in front of them, my guess is that Burke would be a lot more willing to undo everything since the trade and go back in time to see if he could get Phil without having to give up so much than Chiarelli would be willing to undo everything since the trade (including the "big game") and go back in time to see if he could get more for Phil. In that sense, Boston is ahead, as of now.

Go to Top of Page

slozo
Moderator



Canada
4579 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  09:52:40  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15

Putting my moderator hat on for a second, I would like to remind people that everyone is entitle to their opinion no matter how unpopular it may be. Please be aware that comments such about laughing at people or other personal slights are against the rules of the forum. Please keep comments relevant to the argument and not about the people making the argument.

To the most recent point by Slozo: I think you are correct in a few points. I personally think it's arguable between Kessel and Seguin about who is a better hockey player. Your comments (as well as others from the pro-Kessel camp) is that Kessel is the 'best player' in the deal. I think that Kessel is easily and hands down the better offensive player today. I think that very few of the folks in Leafland give much if any credit to the complete game that Seguin brings that, unfortunately, Kessel does not. To the argument that Kessel would have/could have been as impactful to the Bruins as Seguin has been; can that argument not also be used in reverse?? Do you think the Leafs are a worse team with Seguin in their line up rather than Kessel?? I'm not saying they would be better or worse but that is my point. It's arguable at best.

I'm not saying Kessel isn't the best player but I just don't think it's a cut and dry as people are saying. Sure, he's been a top 10 offensive producer in the past 120-130 games. No one can take that away from him and that is something Seguin has not been able to achieve. But Kessel has also perennially been one of the worst defensive players and/or on the worst defensive lines on his team. Seguin, on the other hand, is viewed as one of the better defensive forwards on a team full of quality defensive forwards. He has a great faceoff record and one on one defends very well.


It's the age old debate: offense vs. defense.





Ottawa, the best coached team in the NHL, with MVP like players such as Chris Neil, will win the Cup in 2013!





Fair enough Beans, and I second your moderator comments on keeping things civil here.

To your point on Seguin's supposedly "more complete game" somehow outshining Phil Kessel and his excellent offence and very middling defensive game . . . I really believed that hype myself as well in the beginning, I have to say.

Until I watched Seguin play.
AND, as of recently, I heard serious Boston commentary on Seguin's game.

To whit:
Example #1:
http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey/bruins/extras/bruins_blog/2013/06/gm_peter_chiarelli_on_tyler_seguin_got_to_become_more_of_a_p.html
From the Bruin's Blog:
Bruins GM Peter Chiarelli issued his most emphatic critique of Tyler Seguin since the forward entered the NHL.
“He’s got to commit his mind and focus to the one task at hand,” Chiarelli said. “He’s got to become more of a professional. You know what? I can say that about a lot of 21-year-olds. I know he got criticized for playing on the periphery and all that stuff. He did. He’s got to commit to being a professional and focusing on the game. Simple as that. He does that, we don’t expect him to be crashing and banging. Just play your game.”
...
Even if Seguin is not traded, Chiarelli hopes the chatter will straighten out the forward.

“I hope it does,” Chiarelli said. “If it doesn’t, I’d be more concerned. We gave Tyler a big contract because he projects and he had good performance. I would expect that going forward.”

Example #2:
http://www.csnne.com/blog/bruins-talk/haggerty-seguin-must-make-strides-offseason

BOSTON – It’s no exaggeration to say this summer will be the biggest, most important offseason in the young NHL career of 21-year-old Tyler Seguin.

The Bruins winger was relatively productive while making his way through the 2013 regular season skating with Brad Marchand and Patrice Bergeron, but also inconsistent enough that he lost his spot during the playoffs.

Then Seguin thoroughly disappeared for long stretches of the postseason and managed just a single goal in 22 Stanley Cup playoff games. He scratched for eight points and a minus-2 in the four playoff rounds for the Black and Gold, and was outscored during the postseason by fourth line winger Daniel Paille (four goals and nine points). He was an absolute ghost in the playoff road games against his hometown Toronto Maple Leafs, but seemed to be skating with more energy and life after that series was over.

Expectations dropped for Seguin as he faded into a third line role for the Bruins, but he does deserve some credit for trying to adapt to the role. Seguin’s action of approaching Claude Julien and the B’s coaching staff for guidance in the latter rounds of the playoffs was a clear sign of maturity.

All that being said, though, it’s an exercise in frustration to think what the Bruins might have done in these playoffs if Seguin was anywhere close to the player Boston envisioned he’d be by the end of his third NHL season. In Steven Stamkos’ third NHL season as a 20-year-old, the Tampa Bay Lightning sniper had 45 goals and 91 points and brandished his toughness while staying in a playoff game against the Bruins after taking a puck to the face.

John Tavares had 31 goals and 81 points as a 21-year-old in his all-important NHL season, and became the de facto leader of a New York Islanders team that’s pointed toward a playoff direction. Pat Kane scored 30 goals along with 88 points, and helped power the Chicago Blackhawks to the first of their Stanley Cup championships in his third year. Even Phil Kessel had 36 goals and 60 points in his third season with the Bruins as a 21-year-old, proving that it was possible to put up those kinds of numbers under Claude Julien.

Some might say it’s unfair to hold Seguin up to the standards of such great players, but those are the Bruins forward’s peers and comparables.


Seguin finished the 48-game shortened season on a pace that would have given him 27 goals and 54 points in his third season, and that’s a step back from his All-Star campaign of 2011-12. That’s the wrong statistical direction to be headed, and the long stretches of invisibility during the playoffs put an unwanted exclamation point on Seguin’s problematic season.

On the ice the highly talented forward is still relying far too much on his natural God-given talent to skate like the wind, shoot with a deadly release and simply expect he’ll overwhelm opponents with his raw skill. For long stretches of the season Seguin simply tried to beat well-positioned defensemen with speed to the outside, and then settled for perimeter shots when he couldn’t get by the blueliner.

He would constantly shoot high and wide on one-timers from the dot during the power play after the Bruins’ coaching staff built the PP around that as one of their main weapons. Seguin might be working on improvement in those areas, but the work isn’t translating into results or production.

There weren’t enough instances of Seguin pulling the puck back out, slowing things down and resetting the offense while looking for a trailer, and not nearly enough use of his hockey smarts to create plays in the offensive end. It’s understandable Seguin never had to make many adjustments as a younger player when he simply overwhelmed his competition with raw hockey talent, but he needs to think the game much more consistently to create offense at the NHL level.

Seguin also needs to consistently enter the battle, and compete for pucks as similarly-sized teammates like Patrice Bergeron and David Krejci do on a regular basis. The occasions when Seguin moved to the front of the net for tips, rebounds and screens were remarkable when they did occur, but notable as well because they very rarely happened.



"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Go to Top of Page

Beans15
Moderator



Canada
8174 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  10:40:41  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Good point, but are we talking about consistency or are we talking about talent. I think that the writers have very valid points about Seguin's play in the shortened season and he was off the mark of where he and the Bruins wanted him. We will see what happens this season.


Just on the point you bolded: Who was Kessel playing with when he scored 36 as a Bruin?? What was that guys's name again who was one of the top three assist guys in the NHL until he was concussed?? Granted, Seguin found himself on the 3rd line because of his own doing but I think it's a little unfair to compare a 21yr old Kessel playing on the top line with Marc Savard compared to a 21 yr old Seguin dragging around the 3rd line in Boston this past year.

Valid points none the less.

Ottawa, the best coached team in the NHL, with MVP like players such as Chris Neil, will win the Cup in 2013!

Go to Top of Page

The Duke
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1039 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  11:30:32  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
God i love this site. Especially this thread...lmao

Guest 4096, im so glad i make you laugh, its a good feeling to make someone laugh. Whats very funny though is whenever i post kessels NHL numbers ( FACTS ) you never comment on them, question them, i guess top ten league stats for scorers only matter or are only relevant when you don`t wear a leaf uniform......in your eyes anyway. I challenge you right now to come out of your alternate universe and post me some numbers here on this thread to prove to me why Seguin is better than kessel

Beans, of course i picked Tor and Edm to do my research, thats who we cheer for isnt it ??..Why would i choose someone else. Why do you and others keep adding Knight yo the equation as for rather having him than kessel ??....he is a part of the trade of course but hasn`t accomplished anything yet...maybe he never will .......do people realize that........
1 ) kessel fills one roster spot in TO........No Seguin
2 ) You could argue Cody Franson.......is using up D . Hamilitons
3 ) You coulg argue Dave Bolland ......is using up J . Knights

Why not use this analogy ? All you guys keep saying you would rather have Bostons 3.....so if the leafs have lost 3 players, than 3 roster spots have to be filled don`t they ??......in reality if the leafs never made the trade than that 3 roster spots they wouldnt have....right ??
So.........instead of having.......
Seguin...........Hamiliton ..........Knight...................thay have
Kessel...........Franson.............Bolland...........

Joshua........whats up with these crazy numbers you are into ??....What are you trying to prove with them ??....Do you realize that you can take any low paid 10 goal league scorer and compare him to a 7 million dollar 30 goal scorer and the lower paid player is better bang for the buck 100 % of the time ???......this doesn`t just work for kessel and Seguin....this works for ALL comparable players....this is meaningless

Every1 keeps saying that a part of Bostons win here is because thay won the stanley cup with Seguin............ok.....so if you think that is true than i guess in the same manner you are also saying that Boston won the Kaberle trade because they won the stanley cup with kaberle......he was there too wasn`t he ??........remember, this is opposing kessel trade mentality , this is your arguement.....not mine.....the arguement is stupid.

So, according to you guys, if your point is true....than Boston won the kaberle trade even though the Leafs got Joe Colbourne and a 1st round pick plus a conditional pick i think.......

Have a nice day every1
Go to Top of Page

The Duke
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1039 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  11:33:25  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The Score just posted........
Boston is in trade talks with Dallas........guess what
Seguin for L. Eriksson..........guess everything is not all rosy in Seguin land
Go to Top of Page

The Duke
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1039 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  12:30:18  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Apparently the deal is done.....7 player combination they say
Go to Top of Page

JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1877 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  13:58:17  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by The Duke
1 ) kessel fills one roster spot in TO........No Seguin
2 ) You could argue Cody Franson.......is using up D . Hamilitons
3 ) You coulg argue Dave Bolland ......is using up J . Knights

Why not use this analogy ? All you guys keep saying you would rather have Bostons 3.....so if the leafs have lost 3 players, than 3 roster spots have to be filled don`t they ??......in reality if the leafs never made the trade than that 3 roster spots they wouldnt have....right ??
So.........instead of having.......
Seguin...........Hamiliton ..........Knight...................thay have
Kessel...........Franson.............Bolland...........


Got to love this arguement. So how when a team gets 3 chances at a player of Seguins calibre in a trade, the team which receives more loses. Is that your arguement?

Do you realize that you can take any low paid 10 goal league scorer and compare him to a 7 million dollar 30 goal scorer and the lower paid player is better bang for the buck 100 % of the time ???......this doesn`t just work for kessel and Seguin....this works for ALL comparable players....this is meaningless

Yes that is exactly what I am saying. Boston won because they got more bang for there buck and Toronto lost because they paid more for less results.

Every1 keeps saying that a part of Bostons win here is because thay won the stanley cup with Seguin............ok.....so if you think that is true than i guess in the same manner you are also saying that Boston won the Kaberle trade because they won the stanley cup with kaberle......he was there too wasn`t he ??........remember, this is opposing kessel trade mentality , this is your arguement.....not mine.....the arguement is stupid.

Kaberle's trade didn't enter my equasion. Just looked at stats, salary and what Boston gained, to what Toronto gained and like many others, I believe Boston got more for less.


"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! "

Edited by - JOSHUACANADA on 07/04/2013 14:00:31
Go to Top of Page

CrockOShight
Top Prospect



90 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  14:33:19  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Thank you Beans! A gentleman as always. I appreciate you standing up for us in the minority here.

Alex, Joshua and MysteryGuest#4096 - isn't there an old adage about debating as well? The side that ends up making personal attacks is the side that has lost the debate? Isn't it something like that?

Bah. Whatever. This has been a blast. Cheers boys.

Alex -

I haven't "flip flopped" once in this entire thread. This is a Forum. We are cycling through the issues. No, I'm not simply "changing" my argument to suit me. I am going through the points one at a time. I'm trying my best to stay on one particular point at a time - but you have to understand that it's quite difficult fending off volleys from a veritable plethora of Armchairs Hockey GMs such as yourself, Joshua, Beans, Guest4096, Fat_Elvis... You have one point to defend. I have to defend 5 every time I write a post.

To discuss your point: The Lafleur example is not a counter-example of anything. Montreal managed to rope-a-dope the California Golden Seals into trading away the 1st overall draft pick in a year where a player of the caliber of Guy Lafleur's ability was available. The Boston-Toronto case has nothing to do with this. First of all, in our day and age, there is a LOTTERY for draft picks. I think you guys haven't quite gotten that point. I'm not stamping my feet on the ground over this point - it's just that you guys really don't seem to have acknowledged it. Today's Draft is a Lottery. It's not like Brian Burke traded the 2nd overall draft pick. He traded a First Round Draft Pick.. They are two very different things.

If you had told me (and Brian Burke for that matter), that the pick was definitely going to be the 2nd overall pick - AND that that pick was going to be Tyler Seguin... well, that changes the discussion slightly. (Personally, I STILL applaud Brian Burke on this deal - nonetheless, it DOES change the discussion. Slightly).

Guest4096 - I've been laughing with you the whole time. This has been fun, hasn't it? Too bad you can't see the humour in it. I've been reading this thread religiously for the past two years.

Joshua - Well, now we will never know. But, let's track it going forward (now that Seguin is going to make "normal" amounts of money).

Everyone - Phil Kessel is an elite player in the NHL. He is definitely better than Tyler Seguin. Sometimes, in order to get Star Players, you have to give up something. Brian Burke pulled the classic "you think you've got me - but actually, I've got you." on this trade. Sure, giving up Seguin sucks. But hey, we got Phil Kessel in return!

I just finished reading a book called "Future Greats and Heartbreaks", and it talks a little bit about Phil Kessel's life pre-draft. You all know that he was originally slated as the 1st overall draft pick... Well, he finished the second half of junior in kind of a slump - but more than that, people didn't like his attitude. He slumps his shoulders, he looks down at the ground as he speaks. He doesn't inspire confidence. He dropped all the way to 5th overall.

Pierre McGuire and the Panel will have you believe that Tyler Seguin is the Next Sidney Crosby while Phil Kessel is just a flash in the pan. Every time they talk about Phil Kessel, they say something like, "he's a hot-and-cold player... I don't think he can keep this up..." etc. etc. Indeed, if I didn't WATCH hockey - and only listened to the commentary - I would feel the same way as all of you about this trade.

Fortunately though, I watch Hockey. I watch every single game in the NHL (I'm not even exaggerating here). I have NHL Centre Ice, and I watch at least the highlights of every single game.

And what I'm saying here is: Phil Kessel isn't getting a fair deal. The Panel rips him because they don't like his "attitude". They love Tyler Seguin, because he's a darling. But Phil Kessel is an elite player. He is the real deal. He is a dynamic, exciting, valuable player. I recommend that you get him in your Pool next year, because he is going to light it up...

----

I believe that this is the end. Seguin just got traded. I think that this is where the discussion ends. Perhaps now, we will never really "know" who won the Kessel Trade. But, you have to admit. It is pretty interesting that Seguin gets cold in the 2nd half of the year, does next to nothing in the Playoffs, and then gets bounced out of town unceremoniously while Kessel's stock just keeps going up everyday...

Duke, we'll get 'em next year.

Beans, I agree. I love the Sens. I can't wait to see them with a healthy lineup next season.

Go to Top of Page

CrockOShight
Top Prospect



90 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  14:34:34  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
PS - Joshua, are you actually a Leafs' Fan??


Man.... I'm not even a Leafs' Fan. But dude. You gotta stand up for your players. Phil Kessel man. Haven't you been happy with Phil Kessel??

"I love your enthusiasm."
- Gary Bettman
Go to Top of Page

JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1877 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  15:07:17  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CrockOShight

PS - Joshua, are you actually a Leafs' Fan??


Man.... I'm not even a Leafs' Fan. But dude. You gotta stand up for your players. Phil Kessel man. Haven't you been happy with Phil Kessel??

"I love your enthusiasm."
- Gary Bettman



Sorry Crock, the 3 players on my profile photo was not a bet lost. Been a Sens fan for 20 years. Last year was the first time I didn't hate the Leafs and actually could cheer for them, in the post season as they did not face my Sens.

I would like to add that at no point did I mean to be taken as a personal attack with regards to my responses. I hope you can see while I was debating you and there were good points made on this trade by you/others on both sides, I would counter your arguement from another prospective.

As I have maintained Kessel is a great player, but from what Burke gave up for his services thru to his contract signing, I believe Burke overpaid. I think a 1 in 10 year talent is a stretch for what Kessel is, I think he is a great player for Toronto. Its more my dislike for Burke, than my dislike for Kessel. I think whomever leads the Leafs in scoring, being that they are more offensive minded, will likely end up being in the top 10-20 in scoring. I also think if you were to ask me for a list of 30 players I would trade for less or sign for less, before Kessel, I could do that list without looking at capgeek or a stats sheet.

"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! "

Edited by - JOSHUACANADA on 07/04/2013 15:09:41
Go to Top of Page

JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1877 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  16:16:37  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I know this thread is about Kessel and Seguin, but I wanted to answer an unanswered question in thes topic. There was a point unanswered by me to Crock, before the trade of Seguin to Dallas. The question was if I believed Nash was a better player than Kessel. I think if you insert Nash to Toronto's lineup right now, he instantly becomes the best offensive player for Toronto. Nash played last year and has always played with a defense 1st team, including last years Rangers. Nash has consistantly put up more goals on average than Kessel has done in his career, including last year. The only time Kessel had outscored Nash in a single season was 2011/2012, where Nash score 32 goals in 77 games to Kessels 37 goals in 82. I think Kessels stats benefit from Toronto's offense 1st play and if on the Rangers or Columbus, with Nash, Nash would outscore him. Nash outscored him in every other year including the year previous. The question has never been "is Nash of Elite offensive ability", its always been, what could he do with elite linemates on an offense 1st team. If you think Kessel is a 1 or 2 in 10 year Elite talent and Nash is not, we disagree on both points again. But again thats ok, because you dont have to agree. This year Gillis might take the Rangers down a different road.

"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! "

Edited by - JOSHUACANADA on 07/04/2013 16:18:22
Go to Top of Page

JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1877 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  18:21:09  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
To your point on Seguin's supposedly "more complete game" somehow outshining Phil Kessel and his excellent offence and very middling defensive game . . . I really believed that hype myself as well in the beginning, I have to say.

Until I watched Seguin play.
AND, as of recently, I heard serious Boston commentary on Seguin's game.


I read those articles and I thought to myself, he was on pace for a 27 goal season and a 54 point season, which are not to far off of Kessel 21 year old/3rd year pace. A regression for sure, but he is being asked to contribute in a more defensive way for Boston and I believe after his sofomore breakout season, which was greater than Kessels 1st 5 seasons, he is being key'd more by other teams.

He disapeared playing on the top 6 in the Toronto series, until the final assist on the goal to send Toronto packing (I am not making a shot at Toronto here), just highlighting where and when his contributions appear. The following 3 series he seems to skate with more energy and contributes more to the score sheet, making close to his career ppg playoff average (albeit, not goal pace) from the 3rd line. Maybe its just my nature to always look at things from a different point of view, but I think Boston was looking to dump salary and this was like shooting a flare up to interested teams. He does have a incoming large cap hit and if what another poster, posted is true, an conjenital hip issue.

The thing i like the most is his trade return was a player with a lessor cap hit, considered a better 2way player and a career 30ishgoal 70 point player, which is also not far off from Kessels stats, with a lessor cap hit. I am constantly amased how Boston seems to always do well in trade scenerios, so if this ends up being another win for Boston, I say it slants this Who won the Kessel debate in a whole new way. If Dallas ends up the winner here of this trade, then maybe not.

"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! "

Edited by - JOSHUACANADA on 07/04/2013 19:07:54
Go to Top of Page

CrockOShight
Top Prospect



90 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  19:34:40  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hey Joshua,

No offense taken! I love this. Wait, did you just say that you lost a bet? And that's why you have a Profile Pic of the "Dany Heatley Line" in Ottawa + a "LOVE THAT DION PHANEUF" tagline on all of your posts... Oh man. Must have been a brutal bet. I'm dying to know. What was it??

--

I want to revisit your "bang for buck argument".

Where are you getting your numbers? According to nhlnumbers.com, Tyler Seguin has an annual Cap Hit of 5.75 million. You are saying that his Cap Hit was 3.55 million. Okay, fine.

We all agree that Kessel was a 5.4 million Cap Hit.

Can we all agree also that Dougie Hamilton was a 1.494 million dollar Cap Hit?

From your numbers:

Tyler Seguin: 3.55 million
Dougie Hamilton: 1.494 million

Total: 5.044 million

Seguin + Hamilton Points combined:
21G, 27A, 48 Pts

That's $240,190.48 per goal. $105,083.33 per point.

From your numbers:

Phil Kessel: 5.4 million
20G, 32A, 52 Pts

That's $270,000 per goal. $103,846.15 per point.

Let us remind our readers that this is from your numbers - they are unverified (according to nhlnumbers.com, Seguin had a Cap Hit of 5.75 million).

In any event, as you can see: In terms of Goals - they are just about even. In terms of Points - Toronto (Kessel) comes out on top.

So, once again. [/b]Your argument, your numbers. Kessel and Toronto come out on top. Does this mean that you are switching over to the Dark Side now?[/b] ;)

--

Re: Rick Nash

I knew it.

You think that Rick Nash is a "better" player than Phil Kessel. It's very often the same people that say that Boston won the Kessel trade who also believe that Rick Nash is a "better" player than Phil Kessel.

Except that... The stats don't agree...

Phil Kessel

2011: 82GP, 32G, 32A, 64Pts
2012: 82GP, 37G, 45A, 82Pts (6th in league scoring)
2013: 48GP, 20G, 32A, 52Pts (7th in league scoring)

Last three years: 212GP, 198Pts

Rick Nash

2011: 75GP, 32G, 34A, 66Pts
2012: 82GP, 30G, 29A, 59Pts (59th in league scoring)
2013: 44GP, 21G, 21A, 42Pts (27th in league scoring)

Last three years: 201GP, 167Pts

Again, the stats would say otherwise. Somehow, this "but Nash played for defensive team" seems veeeeerrrrrrryyyyy unsatisfactory to me. 2012 was especially a beat down - 82 to 59 points? Being on a "defensive minded team" might account for a couple of those points. But, a 23 point difference? 23?? Are you trying to tell us all that a 59-point-getter is more valuable than an 82-point-getter?

It could very easily be argued that: Phil Kessel is BETTER than Rick Nash. The stats back it up. I would say that Kessel is clearly more valuable than Nash. But even if you disagree - you HAVE TO at least agree that Kessel is in the same category as Rick Nash.

...That being the case, would you have accepted the trade: Nash for Segumiltoknight??

So, let's give the kid a break here. I've been watching Pierre McGuire for about 4 years now - and he is dead wrong about 80% of the time. It's gotten to a point where when I hear Pierre McGuire talk about how good (or how bad) a player is, I start to believe the exact opposite.

I've watched Rick Nash and I've watched Phil Kessel for about three straight years now. I LOVE that poolies draft Rick Nash over Phil Kessel in Pools / STILL hold on to the mistaken belief that Nash is better than Kessel.

Because really, when you crunch the numbers: Phil Kessel is better than Rick Nash.

Listen, I "used to" drink the Kool Aid. I "used to" take everything Pierre McGuire said at face value. I "used to" think that Rick Nash was a slam dunk for the Canadian Olympic Team while Phil Kessel was kind of... a "fringe player".

But actually... When you LOOK AT THE NUMBERS... It's a pretty difficult argument to maintain... Clearly, after looking at the numbers - I would rather have Phil Kessel on my team than Rick Nash.

Wouldn't you?

--

What was the bet that you lost? I'm dying to know. Did it have anything to do with Phil Kessel?? Rofl!!







Go to Top of Page

Alex116
PickupHockey Legend



5790 Posts

Posted - 07/04/2013 :  23:07:26  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CrockOShight


Alex -

I haven't "flip flopped" once in this entire thread. This is a Forum. We are cycling through the issues. No, I'm not simply "changing" my argument to suit me. I am going through the points one at a time. I'm trying my best to stay on one particular point at a time - but you have to understand that it's quite difficult fending off volleys from a veritable plethora of Armchairs Hockey GMs such as yourself, Joshua, Beans, Guest4096, Fat_Elvis... You have one point to defend. I have to defend 5 every time I write a post.

To discuss your point: The Lafleur example is not a counter-example of anything. Montreal managed to rope-a-dope the California Golden Seals into trading away the 1st overall draft pick in a year where a player of the caliber of Guy Lafleur's ability was available. The Boston-Toronto case has nothing to do with this. First of all, in our day and age, there is a LOTTERY for draft picks. I think you guys haven't quite gotten that point. I'm not stamping my feet on the ground over this point - it's just that you guys really don't seem to have acknowledged it. Today's Draft is a Lottery. It's not like Brian Burke traded the 2nd overall draft pick. He traded a First Round Draft Pick.. They are two very different things.

If you had told me (and Brian Burke for that matter), that the pick was definitely going to be the 2nd overall pick - AND that that pick was going to be Tyler Seguin... well, that changes the discussion slightly. (Personally, I STILL applaud Brian Burke on this deal - nonetheless, it DOES change the discussion. Slightly).


Maybe "flip flopping" isn't the word. And maybe it's because you're debating vs 5 or 6 others, but you jump around from one point to another while convenient to you and you only. Rather than stick to one thing that's been shot down, you move / change to another. A great example is how you originally didn't wanna include Seguin in the deal, since it was actually for draft picks. NOW, you wanna talk about how it wasn't just a pick, but a LOTTERY PICK! Who cares? It amounts to what the Bruins did with what they got!!!

Tell me, when you say:
quote:
Originally posted by CrockOShight
If you had told me (and Brian Burke for that matter), that the pick was definitely going to be the 2nd overall pick - AND that that pick was going to be Tyler Seguin... well, that changes the discussion slightly.
, how does this work? You're now saying that IF Burke knew the deal was for Seguin, it changes the discussion? WTF? That's part of what you've been arguing against! You're the one looking at things "upside down", not me.


quote:
Originally posted by CrockOShight
Brian Burke pulled the classic "you think you've got me - but actually, I've got you." on this trade.


LOL! This is hilarious! At what point would Burke have thought this? Please enlighten us!!!

quote:
Originally posted by CrockOShight
Fortunately though, I watch Hockey. I watch every single game in the NHL (I'm not even exaggerating here). I have NHL Centre Ice, and I watch at least the highlights of every single game.

HUH? You really want us to take you seriously when you say stuff like this? If you do in fact see at least highlights of EVERY SINGLE GAME, dude, you need to get a life.


Go to Top of Page

CrockOShight
Top Prospect



90 Posts

Posted - 07/05/2013 :  09:31:53  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi Alex,

Yeah, you are totally right about that "I watch every game" comment. That was as ridiculous as it was absurd. At best this could only be considered hearsay. My bad. Please strike this comment from the record.

Dude, give me a break man. When you really think about it, I have stayed on topic - that topic being the Toronto-Boston Kessel-Draft Picks Trade Discussion. Clearly, as this is a rather complicated issue with many varying points. Where I have jumped around, is in trying to discuss all of these. I have done my best to keep everything nicely locked into clear paragraphs ("--This paragraph is about the "bang for buck" argument"). But, I can see that that hasn't satisfied you in the least.

Anyway, just for the record. You are accusing me of jumping around and not staying on the topic. I'm sorry Alex. I disagree. But, since we are talking about that now: By attacking me and clearly avoiding the point about Sam Pollock living in a pre-lottery draft era as opposed to today's lottery draft era... Speaking of changing the subject... isn't that what you *just* did??
Go to Top of Page

JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1877 Posts

Posted - 07/05/2013 :  10:57:40  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
No offense taken! I love this. Wait, did you just say that you lost a bet? And that's why you have a Profile Pic of the "Dany Heatley Line" in Ottawa + a "LOVE THAT DION PHANEUF" tagline on all of your posts... Oh man. Must have been a brutal bet. I'm dying to know. What was it??

Ottawa is my team and when Ottawa was at its best those 3 players were the best line in the game. So I haven't changed it. Course I'm looking into a better Ottawa pic now that 2-3rds are gone and Spezza isn't regularly in the lineup.

Tyler Seguin: 3.55 million
Dougie Hamilton: 1.494 million

Total: 5.044 million

Seguin + Hamilton Points combined:
21G, 27A, 48 Pts

That's $240,190.48 per goal. $105,083.33 per point.

Phil Kessel: 5.4 million
20G, 32A, 52 Pts

That's $270,000 per goal. $103,846.15 per point.


So based on your revised math, looking at stats alone, Boston got the same or similar bang for there puck that Toronto got with the 1-2 in 10 year talent that is Kessel, which I strongly disagree with. Except for Boston also got all the other bonus's both those 2 players contributed to Boston. Again heavily slanted to Boston. I have never maintained stats is the best way to approac this trade, but again, I can show you based on these numbers how Seguin alone is better bang for your bucks stats wise than Kessel.

Let us remind our readers that this is from your numbers - they are unverified (according to nhlnumbers.com, Seguin had a Cap Hit of 5.75 million).

To Verify Seguins salary go to cap geek, select Tyler Seguin, look at 2012/2013 salary including bonus's which he earned. You will verify my numbers.

Your argument, your numbers. Kessel and Toronto come out on top. Does this mean that you are switching over to the Dark Side now?

Again, no, but I am not bashing Kessel here either, its Burke I am hating on.

Phil Kessel

2011: 82GP, 32G, 32A, 64Pts
2012: 82GP, 37G, 45A, 82Pts (6th in league scoring)
2013: 48GP, 20G, 32A, 52Pts (7th in league scoring)

Last three years: 212GP, 198Pts

Rick Nash

2011: 75GP, 32G, 34A, 66Pts
2012: 82GP, 30G, 29A, 59Pts (59th in league scoring)
2013: 44GP, 21G, 21A, 42Pts (27th in league scoring)

Last three years: 201GP, 167Pts


It isn't my opinion only, whereas Burke thought Kessel was worth 3 high draft picks and his $5.4 million dollar contract, look what Columbus received for Nash and he carries a higher cap hit at $7.8 million. Burke was in the running for Nash and Nash choose New York. I don't know why as Toronto would have actually suited his style of play better and I believe he would have eclipsed Kessel as the best Offensive player in TO.

It could very easily be argued that: Phil Kessel is BETTER than Rick Nash. The stats back it up. I would say that Kessel is clearly more valuable than Nash. But even if you disagree - you HAVE TO at least agree that Kessel is in the same category as Rick Nash.

I will give you this point, they are of similar value. Kessel might be the better set up player between the 2, but it is my belief that Nash is the better goal scorer. Career average for both ppg and gpg are advantage Nash

...That being the case, would you have accepted the trade: Nash for Segumiltoknight??

I might, but I dont think Columbus would.

So, let's give the kid a break here. I've been watching Pierre McGuire for about 4 years now - and he is dead wrong about 80% of the time. It's gotten to a point where when I hear Pierre McGuire talk about how good (or how bad) a player is, I start to believe the exact opposite. [/b]


answer----I hate Pierre Mcguire, listening to him makes it a manditory bathroom break. so in this we wholeheartedly agree.


I've watched Rick Nash and I've watched Phil Kessel for about three straight years now. I LOVE that poolies draft Rick Nash over Phil Kessel in Pools / STILL hold on to the mistaken belief that Nash is better than Kessel. Because really, when you crunch the numbers: Phil Kessel is better than Rick Nash.[/b]


answer----Pool drafting Kessel first. Real life game of hockey pickup, Nash. Nash,and (insert any number of quality Canadian forwards he played with) outscore 90% of other countries top lines in generally all world tournaments they played together in.

That the thing about hockey. Numbers tell you part of the story, but you are only looking at offensive stats against the average, not considering defensive stats or considering the team in which they play for. Telling you right now, watching Nash play at the highest level of hockey tournaments and with the highest level of linemates his is the 1-2 in 10 year talent you think Kessel is.

Edited by - JOSHUACANADA on 07/05/2013 11:03:55
Go to Top of Page

Alex116
PickupHockey Legend



5790 Posts

Posted - 07/05/2013 :  11:16:18  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CrockOShight
Anyway, just for the record. You are accusing me of jumping around and not staying on the topic. I'm sorry Alex. I disagree. But, since we are talking about that now: By attacking me and clearly avoiding the point about Sam Pollock living in a pre-lottery draft era as opposed to today's lottery draft era... Speaking of changing the subject... isn't that what you *just* did??



If i've jumped around at all, it's trying to follow you. Everytime you reply to something, you throw another angle at it. What exactly are you asking in regards to Sam Pollock living in a pre-lottery draft era? I don't care when he worked, i showed a trade he made that went against what you claim. He got a draft pick, the other guy got players! In the second deal, he gave up better players than he rec'd in return. Sure, it was all part of his plan, but i showed you this as an example that the team the gets the best player DOESN'T ALWAYS win the trade!!! You were the one, at one point, claiming we can't look at the deal as Kessel for Seguin (and others) because it was for draft picks that "could have turned out to be anything/anyone". NOW THOUGH, to convenience you and your argument, you want me to look at the Sam Pollock trade(s) and compare them using Guy Lafleur and not the freakin' draft pick Montreal rec'd. Please, tell me you understand where i'm going with this.

Apologies for "attacking" you, but that pretty much began when you subtly commented on my hockey knowledge.
Go to Top of Page

JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1877 Posts

Posted - 07/05/2013 :  11:33:02  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CrockOShight
What was the bet that you lost? I'm dying to know. Did it have anything to do with Phil Kessel?? Rofl!!



I lost a bet 2 Slozo, I think, in which standings, goals for Offense and Defense had a bearing. So in a way, Kessels goals added to my loss, yes. Had to praise Toronto and Phaneuf. Best part is with the injuries to Ottawa, I didn't have bonified top3 forwards or defense to compare. All is well. Like I said last year was the first in a long time I didn't have seething hate for the Leafs. Burke was gone!

"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! "
Go to Top of Page

andyhack
PickupHockey Pro



Japan
891 Posts

Posted - 07/06/2013 :  05:54:58  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CrockOShight

What I am suggesting, is that of all the trades that we have seen throughout history - that adage seems to hold true.

At least, I can't think of an example where the adage hasn't- with time - finally been proven true in the end. (The Lindros deal comes very close).

So, by all means. Can you name me a real example in history where this adage was proven wrong?


Here ‘s one example that shows that the “adage” whoever gets the best player in the deal wins the trade sometimes is not entirely true. This, at the very least, proves that the team that gets the "less than best" player(s) doesn’t always “lose” a trade.

In March of 1994 the Rangers traded Tony Amonte to the Blackhawks for Brian Noonan and Stephane Matteau. The trade was done for the specific purpose of adding “grit” to the Rangers team. It worked perfectly. Those two guys made solid contributions to the Ranger's Cup that year. They both added the “grit” that was needed and scored some big goals, and that helped accomplish NY's first Cup in 54 years. Amonte went on to have a very good career and I think it's safe to say that overall he was easily the “best player” of the three (certainly if goals and points are the largest determining factor in what "best player" means).

According to the adage Chicago wins that trade. And it is admittedly very hard to argue that they did not do very well. But if we interpret Chicago “winning” as meaning that NY “lost” that trade, to me that would be, well, to use Duke’s word, “stupid,” to use Leafs 81’s word “ignorant,” and to use Slozo’s word, "silly.”

Crock, do you really believe that Sam Pollock would have assessed that trade by saying “Chicago got the better player, so they won the trade, and that’s all there is to it”. I really doubt it. At the very least, he would likely have qualified it as a trade where, when looking at the overall context, both teams “won.”


Edited by - andyhack on 07/06/2013 06:00:07
Go to Top of Page

Guest9295
( )

Posted - 07/06/2013 :  06:51:22  Reply with Quote
There is the option of both teams winning of which 164 people or 14% seem to think that is exactly what happened.
Go to Top of Page

Alex116
PickupHockey Legend



5790 Posts

Posted - 07/06/2013 :  10:46:32  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9295

There is the option of both teams winning of which 164 people or 14% seem to think that is exactly what happened.



Where the hell are you getting these numbers from??? Oh, wait, you mean there's a poll 15 pages back from 2 years ago that started this mess???

I want to physically harm guest2757 for starting this nonsense!!!
Go to Top of Page

The Duke
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1039 Posts

Posted - 07/06/2013 :  11:38:37  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The kessel vs Seguin saga is over,,,,,,( Tor vs Bos ) it was fun while it lasted ......had some great laughs with this thread.
Go to Top of Page

Guest9295
( )

Posted - 07/06/2013 :  11:49:02  Reply with Quote
It might not be. What if Jared Knight turns out to be the next Zetterberg. Just saying.
Go to Top of Page

Go_Habs_Go
Rookie



157 Posts

Posted - 07/07/2013 :  20:14:22  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
lol

"Bon point Jacques!" - Benoît Brunet
Go to Top of Page

CrockOShight
Top Prospect



90 Posts

Posted - 07/09/2013 :  07:40:33  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Well, I guess that's it then.

That was fun boys. Good times, good times. It only took three years - but I guess that now we can all finally just put this all behind us and agree that Toronto won the Phil Kessel trade. Good discussion there.

(Did you see what I just did there?)

Guest9295 - It wouldn't matter if Jared Knight turns out to be the next Batman. Do you know why? Because Phil Kessel already is...

Go to Top of Page

JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1877 Posts

Posted - 07/09/2013 :  08:46:54  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Crock! For someone who is also an Ottawa fan, like me, why do feel I gotta beat you down on this topic some more! Clearly not gonna let it go, after its absolutely clear to almost all other posters Seguin's trade return, points per dollar value and 2 way play are advantage Boston. And that isn't all Boston gained in this. But go on touting how Kessel is Gretzky, in disguise. The rest of us know the truth

"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! "
Go to Top of Page

fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro



Canada
899 Posts

Posted - 07/09/2013 :  08:48:51  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CrockOShight

Well, I guess that's it then.

That was fun boys. Good times, good times. It only took three years - but I guess that now we can all finally just put this all behind us and agree that Toronto won the Phil Kessel trade. Good discussion there.

(Did you see what I just did there?)

Guest9295 - It wouldn't matter if Jared Knight turns out to be the next Batman. Do you know why? Because Phil Kessel already is...





Yes , yes I did. Nicely done.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 15 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
Jump To:
Snitz Forums 2000 Go To Top Of Page