Yes but only in the annoying McEichel crap everyone was going on about in order to make the draft more entertaining. I don't think any serious person ever thought the two were interchangeable.
- James_Tanner

Not really, people knew about Eichel two years before 2015. Again, he's not as good as CM, but many scouts analysts etc stated that Eichel would have went 1st just about every year besides possibly 2008 when Stamkos came out.

He's considered a better prospect than Hall, Tavares, RNH, Ekblad, etc.

First off leafs never trade the #1 pick. Secondly, strome will never be as good as Tavares.....as in never. Teams don't trade players like mcdavid or Matthews unless they have empty cupboards, and even then they don't....it's extremely rare, and only the largest of overpayment gets a deal done.

[quote=James_Tanner]1) I highly doubt Hunwick returns to the Leafs. If he does, he'll play in the 6/7 spot where he belongs.

2) I don't know that the Coyotes would want anything to do with Bozak. He's garbage. Percy and Corrado don't have too much trade value, as one was claimed on waivers and the other is perilously close to being a bust. I personally would not trade a first rounder for all three.

That being said, I think both Percy and Corrado are upgrades over what the Coyotes have and they could do worse in getting those players, I just don't know you really want to burn a first to do

Tanner, do you watch hockey? Matt hunwick is the type of dman that helps you win games and stay under the cap. He works hard, doesn't take many chances, block shots, hits....all for 1 million or so. He literally would be the 2nd best dman in the yotes. He's not going anywhere, the leafs love him and e fact that he will be. 3rd pairing guy makes him even better. He's played great hockey from the owl throughout the NHL....you might want to start watching actual games and stop reading the "stats"

I don't think there are so many of them all of a sudden.

When it comes to guys who are a step above even the best players of their time, there is always a few:


Mike Bossy 1977
Wayne Gretzky 1978
Mario Lemieux 1984
Eric Lindros 1992
Sidney Crosby 2005
Alexander Ovechkin 2005
Conner McDavid 2015
Auston Matthews 2016

I don't think there's an over abundance of 'generational' talents lately, just that people overuse the word.
- James_Tanner

Matthews does not belong on that list.

He is a tier 2 guy, like Tavares, not a bad thing, but he is not a generational talent.

1) I highly doubt Hunwick returns to the Leafs. If he does, he'll play in the 6/7 spot where he belongs.

2) I don't know that the Coyotes would want anything to do with Bozak. He's garbage. Percy and Corrado don't have too much trade value, as one was claimed on waivers and the other is perilously close to being a bust. I personally would not trade a first rounder for all three.

That being said, I think both Percy and Corrado are upgrades over what the Coyotes have and they could do worse in getting those players, I just don't know you really want to burn a first to do so.

3) As for the seventh overall, hahahahahah.
- James_Tanner

1) Listening to Babcock last year he loves Hunwick and what he brings to the team so thought he would be brought back for veteran leadership on the back end.

2) If you looks at Bozaks stats (including advanced, CORSI) he was just as good or better than your slotted number 1 center Hanzal, so to call him garbage and to say the Coyotes would want nothing to do with him, doesn;t make a whole lot of sense.

3) if you read the way I phrased it I knew it was not enough but was more wondering what else would be needed to get to those things, since both center and D are large needs for the coyotes.

Undervalued in Buffalo? Or over valued by Buffalo fans?
- Jeropotato

A lot of people on this board in Buffalo and its fans don't like him for some reason.

I'm pretty ambivalent towards him at the moment. He just really hasn't played enough. He makes some nice plays and some bone headed ones, much like Bogosian, and even Ristolainen to a point. Ristolainen really needs to work on his D-zone positioning. Especially on the rush.

Despite the fact that I think tanner may have been right about coopers misuse of drouin earlier, dude is a really effin good coach

You totally misunderstand. All I am saying is that your second tier non-generational players are not that difficult to aquire in terms of getting an Ovechkin or whoever else. I mean there are about 5 "generational" players to come into the NHL since 1978, and if Matthews is possibly one of those, you wouldn't trade him for anything.

I mean, if it was 2005 and you could somehow get Thornton, Hossa, Bergeron and Lecavelier for Crosby, you'd say no every time. That's my point. You don't ever want to be the team that moves an all-time great, which makes the price ridiculous.

The Leafs could look at an offer of Domi, Strome, 7th pick and say "wow that is pretty amazing for one guy," but when you factor the risk/reward of the situation it's not worth it because, sure, AM could end up being Daigle 2.0, but what if he turns out to be the Mario to Connor's Wayne? What if Strome is a dud and the Seventh pick is wasted?

There is just no situation when you have a player with that kind of upside where it makes sense to pass on him. This doesn't mean I am saying the Coyotes should guy their team to get him, because that is stupid too. It just means there is no trade to do.
- James_Tanner

There is not a single scout, single team, single blog, or single scout that has raised Mathews to the level you are portraying him here. Placing him with Gretzky and Crosby...do you have an ounce of data to back that claim up?the only reason he was rated ahead of Eichel was because of character and personality, not play on the ice. Second, if someone offers Thornton, Hosea, Bergeron, and lecavalier for Crosby, 100% of teams accept that offer. 100%, guaranteed. Also, by the way, lecavalier, was labeled as a generational player when he was coming in to the league.

Actually, your guess is not as good as mine.


That's been proven with you're ridiculous predictions year after year.


And that " year behind " you speak of occurred when they were 5 and 6 years old.
- Jeropotato

This has actually proven to be a MAJOR factor in how good athletes are, depending on the age group they fell into. Gladwell has some awesome stuff on it, check out Outliers. Not taking sides here, I just think it's an interesting theory.

Essentially it focuses on the fact that kids who are "old for their age" vs. kids who are "young for their age" get a competitive advantage from a young age. They get more attention and praise, and coach's often spend more time with them. The added attention allows them to improve more while keeping them motivated because they are so much better. While I don't think this had as much effect in this situation, these situations definitely can matter at a young age.

Matthews does not belong on that list.

He is a tier 2 guy, like Tavares, not a bad thing, but he is not a generational talent.
- Mashadar

He's never played an NHL game. Eichel doesn't really have enough of a body of work for us to make decisions about him yet, either. Not just a comment to you Mash, but to this whole conversation... what are we talking about here? How the heck are we supposed to know if someone will be a generational talent before they've even established themselves in the league? Both Eichel and Matthews could be spoken of in the same way Crosby and Ovie are someday, or more likely, neither of them will. Maybe one is, one isn't. Nobody knows where the ceiling is for either yet.

Putting Matthews in the generational category with Mario is just utter foolish tanner clickbait ridiculousness.

Stating that sitting Tarasenko instead of Elliot is also total poope

Bozak is too crappy to play for Arizona?

Consistent, but not surprising tannerism BS

[quote=James_Tanner]1) I highly doubt Hunwick returns to the Leafs. If he does, he'll play in the 6/7 spot where he belongs.

2) I don't know that the Coyotes would want anything to do with Bozak. He's garbage. Percy and Corrado don't have too much trade value, as one was claimed on waivers and the other is perilously close to being a bust. I personally would not trade a first rounder for all three.

That being said, I think both Percy and Corrado are upgrades over what the Coyotes have and they could do worse in getting those players, I just don't know you really want to burn a first to do

Tanner, do you watch hockey? Matt hunwick is the type of dman that helps you win games and stay under the cap. He works hard, doesn't take many chances, block shots, hits....all for 1 million or so. He literally would be the 2nd best dman in the yotes. He's not going anywhere, the leafs love him and e fact that he will be. 3rd pairing guy makes him even better. He's played great hockey from the owl throughout the NHL....you might want to start watching actual games and stop reading the "stats"
- Kinggilmour

If there is one thing I am truly sick of, it's whenever you disagree with someone and they question how much hockey you watch. The ironic thing is that it's always the people with the worst opinions who do this.


Matt Hunwick is terrible. Like, possibly out of the NHL terrible. Your review of his game is bizarre.

One of the worst posts in the history of this site.

Matthews does not belong on that list.

He is a tier 2 guy, like Tavares, not a bad thing, but he is not a generational talent.
- Mashadar

You don't know that. Indications are that he is.

1) Listening to Babcock last year he loves Hunwick and what he brings to the team so thought he would be brought back for veteran leadership on the back end.

2) If you looks at Bozaks stats (including advanced, CORSI) he was just as good or better than your slotted number 1 center Hanzal, so to call him garbage and to say the Coyotes would want nothing to do with him, doesn;t make a whole lot of sense.

3) if you read the way I phrased it I knew it was not enough but was more wondering what else would be needed to get to those things, since both center and D are large needs for the coyotes.
- MastaLG

1) Why do you ever listen to a coach? He's a politician and nothing he says to the media is true. The Leafs have Rielly, Gardiner, Percy, Marincin, Zaitsev, Harrington, Loov, Carrick, Corrado, Valiev, Dermott + whoever they acquire in trade or free agency.

It's really easy to see them moving on from Hunwick. If you look up Hunwick's stats, he rates as a bottom pairing in everything but shot suppression, which he doesn't even rate as a bottom pairing in. He also makes everyone he skates with worse.

2) That is false. I just compared them by HERO chart and Hanzal is way, way better. As previously stated, Bozak sucks.

3) Good centres and D are what the Coyotes need, not the players who can' t make the team that finished below them in the standings.

You don't know that. Indications are that he is.
- James_Tanner

Where are you getting the idea that Mathews might be, say Lemieux good?

I haven’t seen anything to say that.

Proman has recently dropped Mathews to #2 on his board. I still think the leafs unquestionably take Mathews, and they will be getting a very good player. I just don’t know why you seem higher on him than everyone else.

thats a joke right? just becasue he "WAS" a 1st rounder doesnt mean thats what he"ll get in a deal. the Yotes 2nd rounder is probably the very best offer you'd get for him (and thats if the Yotes actually offer that for him)
- Kinggilmour

it sure does if we don't "NEED" to trade him, and can demand over-payment.

Why would we trade a D guy whom we've developed internally, is very solid, very young (for D), and has way more upside than down?

IF he also lead the team in steak dinners eaten on Wednesdays, that would be about the same level of relevancy as leading in plus minus. Just look at the wowys - Pysyk makes everyone he plays with better while people tend to get worse when McCabe plays.

Also, why would the Leafs include Gardiner, probably their best current player? Why would they take a bunch of average players in exchange for a guy who's career will be seen as a failure if he doesn't make the Hall of Fame?

If you take Gardiner out of that package and put OEL in , it's still doubtful Toronto would do that trade.
- James_Tanner

So you're discrediting the Plus/Minus stat, yet going all-in, for a stat that attempts to gauge which player most makes the players around them better?!

Now that's what I call a, Wowsy.

No, but in my world, which is the real world, where everything I say can be empirically validated, it is next to impossible to get long-term edges in terms of playing against weak opponents, and more often than not, when you do play weaker opponents, you also have weaker teammates.

This is why when you measure the strength of opponents, it's almost always the same. The Corsi of Gardiner's and Rielly's respective opponents all season long is basically the same. This means that they faced the exact same competition.

As you've pointed out, I believe Rielly had a ton of mins against Ovechkin vs Gardiner barely any. This is why anecdotal evidence is meaningless. Clearly the Leafs wanted to intentionally have Rielly face the league's best player and so made sure it happened. However, considering that over 82 games they faced the same competition, there were obviously times when they played a team and the opposite occurred.

The best minds in the NHL have crunched the numbers and determined that over-time, it is so difficult to get a favorable matchup that in most cases zone starts and matchups don't really matter.

People who do good at the bottom of the lineup tend to do the same when given more ice time. The game is not as delineated as you think, much more fluid, so all players tend to get out against all players. Sure, there is sheltering and there are examples when this isn't true. But essentially, qoc doesn't matter.
- James_Tanner

IMO they still need to crunch some #s, nothing is ever perfect.....and this is a good example.

Lots of brilliant people have opposite thoughts and conclusions on all kinds of subjects.

Tend to? Is that a 100% guarantee? I would guess no.

Ovechkin and most #1 guys/lines on every team kill the other teams shutdown line when it comes to Corsi etc. ( especially the weaker teams ) So to use 2015-2016 stats as " Gardiner could do that against every line" is just wrong. It makes zero sense.

Quality of teammate, you told me to throw that out the window...long ago.

Anyways, enjoy your holiday.

The only one here entertaining this subject realistically is me.

The Leafs are not trading the pick - 100% chance they select Matthews.

But, if a trade were to go down - which it wouldn't - it would be like the Lindros trade. A trade that may well have actually worked out for Quebec more than the team that got Lindros.

If the Coyotes paid what it would actually cost to get Toronto to pass on a guy who has a chance to be an all-time player, they would ruin their team.

But, just hypothetically speaking, if a trade were to occur, Toronto isn't taking dime-a-dozen- good players like Domi and Strome. They are taking the Hall of fame D man and a hell of a lot more. (to balance out for the fact they already missed out on 7 years of OEL's career).

Which is why there can not be a trade - what it would cost to get the Leafs to pass on Matthews would be way more than any team would ever pay.

The idea they'd pass up a generational player in exchange for a couple really good players is preposterous.
- James_Tanner

What makes you think that Matthews is a generational player? Wasn't another generational players just drafted last year? How can two generational players be so close together?

I don't think there are so many of them all of a sudden.

When it comes to guys who are a step above even the best players of their time, there is always a few:


Mike Bossy 1977
Wayne Gretzky 1978
Mario Lemieux 1984
Eric Lindros 1992
Sidney Crosby 2005
Alexander Ovechkin 2005
Conner McDavid 2015
Auston Matthews 2016

I don't think there's an over abundance of 'generational' talents lately, just that people overuse the word.
- James_Tanner

so only forwards can be generational talents? Guys like Orr Lidstrom and Howe don't make it? I seem to remember many people saying that Tavares was going to be generational but it hasn't exactly turned out that way. We should really wait at least a decade after they are drafted before any players are labeled as generational.

You totally misunderstand. All I am saying is that your second tier non-generational players are not that difficult to aquire in terms of getting an Ovechkin or whoever else. I mean there are about 5 "generational" players to come into the NHL since 1978, and if Matthews is possibly one of those, you wouldn't trade him for anything.

I mean, if it was 2005 and you could somehow get Thornton, Hossa, Bergeron and Lecavelier for Crosby, you'd say no every time. That's my point. You don't ever want to be the team that moves an all-time great, which makes the price ridiculous.

The Leafs could look at an offer of Domi, Strome, 7th pick and say "wow that is pretty amazing for one guy," but when you factor the risk/reward of the situation it's not worth it because, sure, AM could end up being Daigle 2.0, but what if he turns out to be the Mario to Connor's Wayne? What if Strome is a dud and the Seventh pick is wasted?

There is just no situation when you have a player with that kind of upside where it makes sense to pass on him. This doesn't mean I am saying the Coyotes should guy their team to get him, because that is stupid too. It just means there is no trade to do.
- James_Tanner

That would have been more than a fair return for Crosby. I don't think any team would want to give up all those players for one guy. To be fair Crosby is a great example of a player who didn't live up to his pre draft hype.

You totally misunderstand. All I am saying is that your second tier non-generational players are not that difficult to aquire in terms of getting an Ovechkin or whoever else. I mean there are about 5 "generational" players to come into the NHL since 1978, and if Matthews is possibly one of those, you wouldn't trade him for anything.

I mean, if it was 2005 and you could somehow get Thornton, Hossa, Bergeron and Lecavelier for Crosby, you'd say no every time. That's my point. You don't ever want to be the team that moves an all-time great, which makes the price ridiculous.

The Leafs could look at an offer of Domi, Strome, 7th pick and say "wow that is pretty amazing for one guy," but when you factor the risk/reward of the situation it's not worth it because, sure, AM could end up being Daigle 2.0, but what if he turns out to be the Mario to Connor's Wayne? What if Strome is a dud and the Seventh pick is wasted?

There is just no situation when you have a player with that kind of upside where it makes sense to pass on him. This doesn't mean I am saying the Coyotes should guy their team to get him, because that is stupid too. It just means there is no trade to do.
- James_Tanner

That would have been more than a fair return for Crosby. I don't think any team would want to give up all those players for one guy. To be fair Crosby is a great example of a player who didn't live up to his pre draft hype.

If there is one thing I am truly sick of, it's whenever you disagree with someone and they question how much hockey you watch. The ironic thing is that it's always the people with the worst opinions who do this.


Matt Hunwick is terrible. Like, possibly out of the NHL terrible. Your review of his game is bizarre.

One of the worst posts in the history of this site.
- James_Tanner

Yeah...I wouldn't take Kinggilmoures brand of malarkey too seriously. You're actually smarter and suprisingly have more integrity than he does.