Sign in with your NHL account:
  • Submit
  • Or
  • Sign in with Google
 
MapleLeafs.com proudly sponsored by ROGERS™ Welcome to the Official Site of Leafs Nation - MapleLeafs.com

Jump to content


Photo

Gentlemen's agreements in trades?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
42 replies to this topic

#1 gandlebot

gandlebot

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 08:30 PM

Ever since the trade, I've been wondering why Boston gave up so much for Kaberle. It seemed pretty well known that, less than a year before that trade, the best we could have hoped to have gotten was a single first rounder. As time went on, that should only have diminished, yet it didn't.

Love them or hate them, neither Burke nor Chiarelli are either magicians or imbeciles. How does a trade like that happen? The answer is probably the Kessel deal.

I'm guessing that, when making the Kessel deal, Burke added a little insurance in the form of some sort of "gentleman's agreement," that if the deal swung wildly in either team's favour after the fact… always possible when dealing with draft picks, young kids, etc. …that the lucky team would "owe" the unlucky one… even it out a bit.

I bet that happens all the time. I also know that this isn't some unique, brilliant new discovery I've come up with… I'm pretty sure I've heard it talked about on sports shows and stuff… but I'm not sure I've heard us talk about it on here, when we're analyzing trades or thinking about future trades.

So yeah… Kessel deal turns out to be much more sour for us than Burke expected… Chiarelli sweetens the Kaberle deal. Do you think that's farfetched? Can you think of other examples of that happening? I'll make a prediction based on this… don't be surprised if within the next couple years, we make a deal with Anaheim that seems to make no sense for us whatsoever, as an apology for Gardiner and Lupul working out so well.

#2 Drennan57

Drennan57

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts
  • LocationKingston, Ontario

Posted 07 November 2012 - 10:07 PM

Can't see it fella.

Teams do what they can to improve their own team. Helping a division rival is not on the agenda.

#3 Hapanese

Hapanese

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,757 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 11:06 PM

Yup, I think BB and some old school GMs do work this way. It would have been smart for him to make the pick TOP-TEN or TOP-FIVE protected that's the biggest fault with this trade.

So if it's true, I'm really scared to think what we might owe Anaheim in a future trade.

#4 jockdent

jockdent

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,928 posts
  • LocationThornhill

Posted 07 November 2012 - 11:28 PM

Ever since the trade, I've been wondering why Boston gave up so much for Kaberle. It seemed pretty well known that, less than a year before that trade, the best we could have hoped to have gotten was a single first rounder. As time went on, that should only have diminished, yet it didn't.

Love them or hate them, neither Burke nor Chiarelli are either magicians or imbeciles. How does a trade like that happen? The answer is probably the Kessel deal.

I'm guessing that, when making the Kessel deal, Burke added a little insurance in the form of some sort of "gentleman's agreement," that if the deal swung wildly in either team's favour after the fact… always possible when dealing with draft picks, young kids, etc. …that the lucky team would "owe" the unlucky one… even it out a bit.

I bet that happens all the time. I also know that this isn't some unique, brilliant new discovery I've come up with… I'm pretty sure I've heard it talked about on sports shows and stuff… but I'm not sure I've heard us talk about it on here, when we're analyzing trades or thinking about future trades.

So yeah… Kessel deal turns out to be much more sour for us than Burke expected… Chiarelli sweetens the Kaberle deal. Do you think that's farfetched? Can you think of other examples of that happening? I'll make a prediction based on this… don't be surprised if within the next couple years, we make a deal with Anaheim that seems to make no sense for us whatsoever, as an apology for Gardiner and Lupul working out so well.


I think stuff like that does happen between GM's.

And I couldn't understand why Anaheim would want Beauchemin for a bag of pucks; let alone Gardiner and Lupul. I don't care if Lupul was a salary dump.

But don't worry about Burke owing Anaheim in the future. For one thing, Burke might not be here too long.

And secondly, I would bet that the Beauchemin trade was a payment to Burke, for past good deeds by him to Anaheim.

So everything is square now.

#5 gandlebot

gandlebot

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 11:54 PM

Are there any other teams you could think of with whom we would either owe or be owed a favour? It'd be interesting if we could use this to help predict moves.

#6 H-B-C-Y-G

H-B-C-Y-G

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 16,464 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 11:54 PM

People can't seem to accept that Kaberle was a high priced rental player at the time. That's why he got so much. He happened to bomb in Boston and Carolina afterwards, but 50 pts PP QB's are worth a pretty penny for teams looking for a mobile D man.

Gentleman's agreements are usually more in the form of taking on AHL salary, etc for lower picks. (Remember when we got Peluso from Pittsburgh? Stuff like that.)

Not that it isn't possible, but I don't know if a GM would willingly give up a Gardiner or 1st round pick for "goodwill" alone...

#7 racer88

racer88

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,877 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 11:56 PM

Are there any other teams you could think of with whom we would either owe or be owed a favour? It'd be interesting if we could use this to help predict moves.

I think the hockey gods owe us a favour or 2......they have been crapping on us for years now. LOL

#8 J-BOLD

J-BOLD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,271 posts

Posted 08 November 2012 - 12:56 AM

I don't think so.
"In TO you're either praised or sunk. Masses follow the media even if they're not entirely sure what is going on." -Jonas Gustavsson.

#9 Terry-Silver

Terry-Silver

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,919 posts

Posted 08 November 2012 - 02:43 AM

Ever since the trade, I've been wondering why Boston gave up so much for Kaberle. It seemed pretty well known that, less than a year before that trade, the best we could have hoped to have gotten was a single first rounder. As time went on, that should only have diminished, yet it didn't.

Love them or hate them, neither Burke nor Chiarelli are either magicians or imbeciles. How does a trade like that happen? The answer is probably the Kessel deal.

I'm guessing that, when making the Kessel deal, Burke added a little insurance in the form of some sort of "gentleman's agreement," that if the deal swung wildly in either team's favour after the fact… always possible when dealing with draft picks, young kids, etc. …that the lucky team would "owe" the unlucky one… even it out a bit.

I bet that happens all the time. I also know that this isn't some unique, brilliant new discovery I've come up with… I'm pretty sure I've heard it talked about on sports shows and stuff… but I'm not sure I've heard us talk about it on here, when we're analyzing trades or thinking about future trades.

So yeah… Kessel deal turns out to be much more sour for us than Burke expected… Chiarelli sweetens the Kaberle deal. Do you think that's farfetched? Can you think of other examples of that happening? I'll make a prediction based on this… don't be surprised if within the next couple years, we make a deal with Anaheim that seems to make no sense for us whatsoever, as an apology for Gardiner and Lupul working out so well.


I don't know, I think the common expectation was that the Leafs were in line for a 1st + a prospect.

Perhaps Boston threw in a 2nd for goodwill... but I don't really see it as Boston doing the Leafs a big favour.

Kaberle was still well regarded to that point, and everyone knew those picks were bound to be late, and Colborne was far from being the marquee prospect he might have been considered a few years before.

Cheers to Sonny and Trueleaffan.

 

Heroes are remembered. Legends never die!


#10 gandlebot

gandlebot

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts

Posted 08 November 2012 - 05:54 AM

Fair enough. Thanks for your input, guys.

#11 Someonestolemyname

Someonestolemyname

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,580 posts

Posted 08 November 2012 - 06:37 AM


I don't know, I think the common expectation was that the Leafs were in line for a 1st + a prospect.

Perhaps Boston threw in a 2nd for goodwill... but I don't really see it as Boston doing the Leafs a big favour.

Kaberle was still well regarded to that point, and everyone knew those picks were bound to be late, and Colborne was far from being the marquee prospect he might have been considered a few years before.


I think it's most likely just a matter of real people at work. They are closing in on a new deal, about a 2nd roudner or so away in value and Burke says "Come on Chiarelli, you're really gonna bust my balls over a 2nd round pick after you ****ed me over on the Kessel deal?
  • AKA: MaxPower417
  • AKA: Someonestolemybrain (Courtesy of LeafsNationCitizen)

 


#12 CarlBrewer

CarlBrewer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 207 posts

Posted 08 November 2012 - 12:12 PM

I think the OP is right. Boston overpaid for Kaberle (look at what Liles cost). There was probably a gentleman's agreement.

However it's not like the Leafs made out like bandits in that trade. There are some chances for future returns but Colborne isn't a great prospect despite what some hope, Biggs isn't exactly a spectacular prospect and Liles (2nd round pick) is an overpaid smallish puck mover on the decline.

#13 Poyetas

Poyetas

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,708 posts

Posted 08 November 2012 - 12:21 PM

I think the OP is right. Boston overpaid for Kaberle (look at what Liles cost). There was probably a gentleman's agreement.

However it's not like the Leafs made out like bandits in that trade. There are some chances for future returns but Colborne isn't a great prospect despite what some hope, Biggs isn't exactly a spectacular prospect and Liles (2nd round pick) is an overpaid smallish puck mover on the decline.


Stop depressing me CB!

#14 Seer

Seer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 67,827 posts
  • Location"The Big Smoke" (Toronto)

Posted 08 November 2012 - 02:11 PM

It's a nice way to think about things happening like this.., but I doubt that this is what happened.. GMs' care about their own teams progress.. and that's about it.. (not to say there aren't any possible unknowns, in a trade deal)..

There.. Was that ambiguous enough..? :P

SPEED IS YOUR FRIEND, MAPLE LEAFS..! USE IT IN EVERY GAME..!!


#15 oriephope

oriephope

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • LocationUdon Thani

Posted 08 November 2012 - 03:54 PM

Observant website visitors may realize which the actual Asus Zenbook Great UX31A-R5102F is equivalent in cheap moncler jackets
virtually every single respect on the Asus Zenbook Main UX31A-DB51 ($1, 099 moncler polo
directory, 3. 5)he simply difference appears to be able to be inside the particular model amount. Utilizing the particular parts and also gratifaction the similar together, purchasers decide 1moncler.com
between two primarily upon sales pricing in addition to ease of access..
Paul premiered within the particular hospital 2-3 weeks. Nevertheless regarding a moncler jacket
full week, might consider hardly any kind of else but perish and be location in the specific "box". When you are in the vehicle while by using an clear truck's home windows, cheap moncler jackets
developing a train radio location, and also in a very very bistro cheap moncler
( clear ) a microphone stand probably will passenger moncler usa
a lot more as in comparison to could end up being presentation.

#16 MaximumTaco

MaximumTaco

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,256 posts
  • LocationNew York, NY

Posted 08 November 2012 - 08:15 PM

I could buy it.

Burke had that interview where he mentioned that a lot of GM's used to be wary of trading with Glen Sather (obviously not an issue anymore), because he'd keep destroying GM's in trades and taking them for all they're worth. So if you're a good GM it behooves you not to crush every trade and get a reputation as a shark, so you can stay on good terms with other organizations.

Maybe Chiarelli has a similar outlook and realized that if he won the Kessel trade he might have to lose a later trade that doesn't matter as much to him to keep a good relationship with Burke.
"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "otherwise you wouldn't have come here."
~ An excerpt from Alice's Adventures in Leafland

#17 Euronuck

Euronuck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,483 posts
  • LocationNetherlands

Posted 08 November 2012 - 08:17 PM

If we owed Anaheim anything it wouldn't have been for the Beauchemin trade. It would be the Blake, Toskala trade.

To this day I still have no idea how any sane person would even make that trade. Say what you will about Burke he has had some questionable trades, however trades like that one are what make me wonder how much dirt he has on people in this league hahaha

#18 MaximumTaco

MaximumTaco

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,256 posts
  • LocationNew York, NY

Posted 08 November 2012 - 08:33 PM

If we owed Anaheim anything it wouldn't have been for the Beauchemin trade. It would be the Blake, Toskala trade.

To this day I still have no idea how any sane person would even make that trade. Say what you will about Burke he has had some questionable trades, however trades like that one are what make me wonder how much dirt he has on people in this league hahaha


See I don't know about this.

That trade wasn't all that terrible for the Ducks. They got rid of Toskala without even having to play him once (and even so, he was gonna be a UFA at the end of that season), and while Blake wasn't a great pick up, it really just measured down to a trade of cap hits at that point: we took on Giguere's 6 million for one more season, and they had to take on Blake's 4 million for 2 seasons. But again the cap doesn't matter all that much to Anaheim as they operate closer to the salary floor than the cap, more so it was a raw salary trade for Anaheim. While Giguere would get paid 7 million in his last season, Blake was only going to get paid 6 million for BOTH of his last seasons.

It's not like we pawned off our garbage on them for an all star. We gave them an overpaid winger and a goalie who was headed for Free Agency (and who they managed to trade anyway!) and we got an overpaid goalie and neither of us are all that great afterwards. And Anaheim ended up saving a million in actual money, and Anaheim reduced their cap for the following season, although they did raise it a bit for the season after.

We didn't win this trade as much as people might think we did, it was much closer to a wash.
"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "otherwise you wouldn't have come here."
~ An excerpt from Alice's Adventures in Leafland

#19 Euronuck

Euronuck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,483 posts
  • LocationNetherlands

Posted 08 November 2012 - 09:09 PM


See I don't know about this.

That trade wasn't all that terrible for the Ducks. They got rid of Toskala without even having to play him once (and even so, he was gonna be a UFA at the end of that season), and while Blake wasn't a great pick up, it really just measured down to a trade of cap hits at that point: we took on Giguere's 6 million for one more season, and they had to take on Blake's 4 million for 2 seasons. But again the cap doesn't matter all that much to Anaheim as they operate closer to the salary floor than the cap, more so it was a raw salary trade for Anaheim. While Giguere would get paid 7 million in his last season, Blake was only going to get paid 6 million for BOTH of his last seasons.

It's not like we pawned off our garbage on them for an all star. We gave them an overpaid winger and a goalie who was headed for Free Agency (and who they managed to trade anyway!) and we got an overpaid goalie and neither of us are all that great afterwards. And Anaheim ended up saving a million in actual money, and Anaheim reduced their cap for the following season, although they did raise it a bit for the season after.

We didn't win this trade as much as people might think we did, it was much closer to a wash.

We won that trade simply for the reason that I didn't have to cover my eyes every time someone took a shot on Toskala. Also I didn't have to watch another stat line of Blake having 30 shots and not one of them being in the same universe as the net.

I'll have the same feeling once Komisarek is either traded or his contract is finally up and we don't resign him.

#20 MaximumTaco

MaximumTaco

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,256 posts
  • LocationNew York, NY

Posted 08 November 2012 - 09:31 PM

We won that trade simply for the reason that I didn't have to cover my eyes every time someone took a shot on Toskala. Also I didn't have to watch another stat line of Blake having 30 shots and not one of them being in the same universe as the net.

I'll have the same feeling once Komisarek is either traded or his contract is finally up and we don't resign him.


And Anaheim feels they won the trade because they didn't have to spend 7 million on a backup goaltender with an NTC, who probably would've only gone to one team. And all they had to take back was a goalie who they got rid of anyway, and even if they didn't get rid of him, he only would've been on the team for a few months, and they wouldn't have had to play him. and a $3 million winger who was probably gonna end up on their 3rd line, but who was still a better deal than a $7 million goalie on their bench.

This is pretty much what Burke means when he says the best trades help both teams. We got rid of our dead weight and Anaheim did too. I doubt very much they feel cheated in this deal to the point where they'd need us to make up for it later.
"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "otherwise you wouldn't have come here."
~ An excerpt from Alice's Adventures in Leafland






torontomapleleafs.com is the official Web site of the Toronto Maple Leafs Hockey Club. The Maple Leafs and mapleleafs.com are trademarks of MLSE.  NHL, the NHL Shield, the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup and NHL Conference logos are registered trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P. Copyright © 1999-2013 MLSE and the National Hockey League. All Rights Reserved.


Terms Of Use | Contact Us | Employment Opportunities | Advertise on mapleleafs.com | Privacy Policy | AdChoices | NHL.com Terms of Use | Site Map