TML? More like FML, amirite? Yet Another Off Season Thread

[Preston]

counterpoint - his analysis relies heavily upon the most important stretch of hockey played by the Leafs last season.

Against the toughest competition anyone could ever face. I mean sure, maybe it was a fluke? Seems pretty unlikely though. Regardless, if you take away the player he was in that series it's a huge loss. Whether it's because he falls off a cliff next year or because they trade him for nothing, that's beside the point. In both scenarios they lose him.

 

[MindzEye]

If he's not reliably able to provide roughly a equivalent level of play over an 82 game season, it's not making your team worse to replace him. We were fortunate to get healthy and in form Muzzin for the playoffs after he was kind of meh and/or hurt for most of the season. 50 games of half broken Muzzin and then praying for him not being a mess in time for the playoffs is bad team building, and bad cap spend.

We just watched Tampa do similar math with McDonagh. We're in the position though where we would be able to put that cap spend towards a direct replacement rather than feeling forced to disperse it elsewhere in the lineup to keep the band together.

So yeah, moving Muzzin only makes your team worse if 1) He doesn't continue to decline 2) He actually provides more value in subsequence seasons than he provided this season 3) You don't replace him

That he's capable of still being a shut down defender over short periods of time is great, but with our roster construction, we kind of need that money to show up during the regular season too. Playoff seeding matters.

 

[Wayward DP]

Against the toughest competition anyone could ever face. I mean sure, maybe it was a fluke? Seems pretty unlikely though. Regardless, if you take away the player he was in that series it's a huge loss. Whether it's because he falls off a cliff next year or because they trade him for nothing, that's beside the point. In both scenarios they lose him.

also, you have to decide if the outlier last year was the regular season, where he performed well below his career norms for a stretch of time, OR, if the outlier was the playoffs, where he returned to the form he had shown for much of the previous years.

I choose to optimistically believe the latter. For folks believing the former, I get why you want to jettison him. Risk either way.

 

[Wayward DP]

If he's not reliably able to provide roughly a equivalent level of play over an 82 game season, it's not making your team worse to replace him.

there are so many assumptions baked into this I don't even no where to start other than to say I cannot agree.

We were fortunate to get healthy and in form Muzzin for the playoffs after he was kind of meh and/or hurt for most of the season. 50 games of half broken Muzzin and then praying for him not being a mess in time for the playoffs is bad team building, and bad cap spend.

I wonder what Muzz' health looks like with proper load management though? something the Leafs have never really shown any indication of trying.

We just watched Tampa do similar math with McDonagh.

not really, no. McD is older with more term left and they had to choose between him and Palat.

We're in the position though where we would be able to put that cap spend towards a direct replacement rather than feeling forced to disperse it elsewhere in the lineup to keep the band together.

sure, can't argue this

So yeah, moving Muzzin only makes your team worse if 1) He doesn't continue to decline 2) He actually provides more value in subsequence seasons than he provided this season 3) You don't replace him

1) I'm not sure that we can conclude yet Muzz is in decline rather than just had a bad/injured year;
2) given your condemnation of his performance last season, not a high bar for him to surpass this year, no?
3) who is available as a UFA or allegedly via trade that you think could replace him? or do you think we have someone in house who can?

 

[Preston]

If you want to be aggressive and ballsy you keep him and hope he is that top pair d we saw in the playoffs for one more year; that would be a fucking massive jolt to this team. Trading him is refusing to take the risk that he has another year in him. I get it! I get both sides of it. For me, I think the Leafs are in a spot where aggression matters. Tampa didn't get rid of McDonagh a year ago. They decided to try to win another cup with him, because they could afford him. Why trade a potentially very good player if they can afford it? Hang on for as long as you can unless you're in rebuild/retool mode.

 

[Volcanologist]

it's not only about aging with Muzzin. a large part is the health factor. yes he has to not decline, but at that cap hit he also has to be in the lineup and healthy enough to contribute at playoff time. At this point we're down to hoping the injuries don't happen late in the year for him. he needs to be 100% with the current group or we're in trouble.

 

[LeafOfFaith]

Muzzin has to go. If your best or second best dman is an old injury prone guy who plays 50 games a year, and pretty badly in most of them, and then has a fine but unspectacular performance in a 7 game playoff sample in a losing effort...you need better dmen.

 

[LeafOfFaith]

If you want to be aggressive and ballsy you keep him and hope he is that top pair d we saw in the playoffs for one more year; that would be a fucking massive jolt to this team. Trading him is refusing to take the risk that he has another year in him. I get it! I get both sides of it. For me, I think the Leafs are in a spot where aggression matters. Tampa didn't get rid of McDonagh a year ago. They decided to try to win another cup with him, because they could afford him. Why trade a potentially very good player if they can afford it? Hang on for as long as you can unless you're in rebuild/retool mode.

You keep acting like losing Muzz means we have no D or that $6M can't be spent elsewhere.

Muzz + Kerf = a $9M forward like Forsberg on the open market. Better to add that and deploy Sandin, or have a rickety old dman maybe patrolling your blue line in the playoffs if he's healthy enough to play?

 

[MindzEye]

there are so many assumptions baked into this I don't even no where to start other than to say I cannot agree.

What assumptions? We just watched it happen this past season. He wasn't exactly injury free the previous 2 seasons either. The only assumption baked in here are that recent history will inform future events.

I wonder what Muzz' health looks like with proper load management though?

If my aunt had a cock....

not really, no. McD is older with more term left and they had to choose between him and Palat.

McD is a few months younger than Muzzin. And yes, they chose the support winger over the core defender with recent injury and decline issues signed into the future. Did those extra years absolutely help shift the math, absolutely. But they are absolutely similar decisions at their core.

1) I'm not sure that we can conclude yet Muzz is in decline rather than just had a bad/injured year

I mean, sure. But there's the whole father time bit involved here too. Not a whole ton of bounce back seasons happen to injury prone 33 yr old defenders. It would be weirder if he wasn't mid decline. The list of active defenders who slid past 33 without seeing a decline in their game is pretty short.



There's the list of 33 and older defenders, how many of those would you be comfortable with paying 5.6 and trusting to be your shutdown guy? Even the good ones on that list (Petry, Vlasic, Suter,Keith, etc) all saw pretty steep declines between 31-34.

3) who is available as a UFA or allegedly via trade that you think could replace him? or do you think we have someone in house who can?

I have no way of knowing who is available via trade, just like we had no way of knowing Muzzin was available back when the conversation was "can we really trust Jake Gardiner?".

 

[Wayward DP]

it's not only about aging with Muzzin. a large part is the health factor. yes he has to not decline, but at that cap hit he also has to be in the lineup and healthy enough to contribute at playoff time. At this point we're down to hoping the injuries don't happen late in the year for him. he needs to be 100% with the current group or we're in trouble.

honestly I'm of the view that we have enough NHL calibre d-men as it is that we would want to be rotating them in and out of the lineup regularly anyways.

so load manage, and if he does get hurt, then it's a golden opportunity for Raz to face some tougher usage.

but it is undeniably a major risk with Muzz - I'd say risk of injury is the biggest, then decline second, but I wouldn't object to someone who wanted to flip flop them.

 

[Wayward DP]

Muzzin has to go. If your best or second best dman is an old injury prone guy who plays 50 games a year, and pretty badly in most of them, and then has a fine but unspectacular performance in a 7 game playoff sample in a losing effort...you need better dmen.

so, you want to trade Muzz for a forward, and also upgrade the D?

 

[Preston]

I mean sure, if you can find another shutdown d to replace him then go for it. Something tells me that won't be easy to find tho.

 

[Wayward DP]

I mean sure, if you can find another shutdown d to replace him then go for it. Something tells me that won't be easy to find tho.

this is the point that in my view cannot adequately be refuted.

either decision carries a lot of risk. ultimately I assume it will come down to doobie's assessment of how much Muzz has left in the tank and how likely further decline is. he could also go Matt Niskanen on us. if he'd been shit in the playoffs, I don't think we'd be having any of these conversations.

 

[LeafOfFaith]

so, you want to trade Muzz for a forward, and also upgrade the D?

I'd trade Muzz for a package of a 1st and a prospect, trade off Kerf and some other fluff, chase a Forsberg, and give Sandin the opportunity on D which I believe upgrades it, yes.

 

[Wayward DP]

I'd trade Muzz for a package of a 1st and a prospect, trade off Kerf and some other fluff, chase a Forsberg, and give Sandin the opportunity on D which I believe upgrades it, yes.

so your position is that Sandin > Muzzin?

 

[LeafOfFaith]

this is the point that in my view cannot adequately be refuted.

either decision carries a lot of risk. ultimately I assume it will come down to doobie's assessment of how much Muzz has left in the tank and how likely further decline is. he could also go Matt Niskanen on us. if he'd been shit in the playoffs, I don't think we'd be having any of these conversations.

He had a decent 7 game stretch in the regular season too, but it didn't stop him from being terrible or unavailable due to injury for significant chunks of the season.

 

[LeafOfFaith]

so your position is that Sandin > Muzzin?

In a lot of ways, yes.

Faster, more mobile, more durable and less injury prone, improving and not declining, and will be cheap enough to let us use significant savings on getting another really good player.

 

[Wayward DP]

In a lot of ways, yes.

Faster, more mobile, more durable and less injury prone, improving and not declining, and will be cheap enough to let us use significant savings on getting another really good player.

Sandin played fewer games than Muzz last season.

They had nearly identical rates of assists/60 mins.

And Raz is faster than very few players.

But overall, you seem to think Sandin is superior to Muzzin? I do not agree.

 

[Artnes]

 

[LeafOfFaith]

Sandin played fewer games than Muzz last season.

They had nearly identical rates of assists/60 mins.

And Raz is faster than very few players.

But overall, you seem to think Sandin is superior to Muzzin? I do not agree.

You don't need to. But say Sandin and Forsberg were on a team together.

Would you trade Muzzin and Kerf for Sandin and Forsberg?

That's what it comes down to.