Mats Sundin, According to the Three Stooges

So I was doing my morning reading today, and found that all of Damien Cox, Steve Simmons, and David Shoalts wrote basically the same article. Each wrote of the possibility of trading Mats Sundin, and the hurdles and potential gains associated with such a deal. Of the three, Simmons was the only one to do his job and offer some biting opinion - that the Leafs should get rid of whatever assets they can in hopes of receiving a lottery pick this year or next...or both. Kudos to Simmons for that. Cox and Shoalts were on the fence - giving facts but not much else. These men, I will remind you, are paid largely for their opinions on all things hockey. Anyone will opposable thumbs can sputter out fact. Even I do that, most of the time.

Cox did print an interesting quotation from JFJ and that quotation inspired this here post.

Part I

"(Trading Sundin is) not something we're looking for,"

I doubt that, Johnny. The decision to trade Sundin is a very simple one to make. He must be traded. There are only two scenarios in which trading Mats should not happen: [1] The Leafs make the playoffs, and [2] Mats vetoes any trade. I've already given up on [1], and you should have, too. I'll talk about the reasons why a little later, but I really have to question the mental health of anyone that is still clinging to the Leafs' playoff dreams this season.

Absolutely anyone in charge of managing assets would trade an asset with a limited shelf life - his most valuable asset or not - to secure larger gains in the future. The fact that the more valuable asset is not currently adding value (ie. leading the team to a Stanley Cup) only furthers the argument. Mats has been the Leafs for over a decade, but Mats must go. His departure will surely breathe desperately needed new life into the stale organization.

As for [2], I really can't see Mats barring the Leafs from trading him. Every athlete wants to win the ultimate prize; Mats has his Olympic gold medal, and a Stanley Cup is the only thing left for him to accomplish in his probable Hall-of-Fame career.

He will never win a Cup in Toronto, and he is smart enough to know it. He has a couple of seasons left in him, and being a rental player for a good hockey club is his best bet to accomplish the NHL's ultimate goal. Mats is sticking to his guns about not wanting to go anywhere but Toronto, and says that he wants to win a Cup with (for) the Leafs. This may be true - Mats' desire to win in Toronto isn't being contested - but at some point he must realize it won't happen during his tenure in Toronto. His will to win will inevitably supercede his desire to win in Toronto.

Mats is the captain of the Leafs and as such, would never, ever publicly discuss his desire to join a contender. But let us all use some common sense here - that desire is there. Moreover, his no-trade clause means he will be able to hand-pick the team he will join.

Part II

[2] "We've got 40 games left, and let's face it, we've got to win 25 (to make the playoffs)."

This quotation came directly after the above. So, this was meant to reinforce his stance that trading Mats Sundin isn't on his radar. I think that realistically, the Leafs need 53 points in the remaining 40 games to take 8th spot and make the playoffs. The 8th place team as of today is Philadelphia, on pace for 92.51 points. As such, I've used 93 points as the benchmark for entrance in the playoffs. JFJ's 25 win prediction might be a little high, especially considering that 20% of the Leafs points thusfar have come from overtime or shootout losses. They need 53 points, however earned, not necessarily 25 wins.

I will concede that the Leafs can not gain 53 points in their remaining 40 games if Mats is traded. But I'm not convinced they'll hit that target - or even be within a reasonable margin - if Mats stays with the team. It is really not worth the risk of keeping him past the February 26 trade deadline on the outside chance the team makes the playoffs? Because even if they take 8th place (and I think it's foolish to think they'll land any higher) they match up against a superior Ottawa team, and will quickly make a first round exit. Is one round of playoffs (2-3 home gates) worth losing the most valuable asset the team has had in a decade? Fuck no!

The stats back my no playoff claim up. The team has 40 points in 42 games (0.95 PPG) and must increase that to 53 in 40 (1.33 PPG). Not easy to do. Moreover, the Leafs are 13th in the Eastern conference. They must climb over 5 teams in order to take a playoff spot. Gaining points in the standings is one thing, but jumping over teams is a whole 'nother animal. If you're still not convinced, try this: the Leafs are 4-6-4 (4-10) against their own division. They play an additional 18 games against divisional opponents and would need a huge turnaround in fortune in order to take the number of points necessary. Incidentally, they are the currently worst team in the division, so expecting them to regularly better their division is a tall order.

Really, the team is counting on die-hard Leafs fans that don't know when to say uncle. MLSE banks that their followers will always believe there is a decent chance at success, when that chance is actually about as realistic as the Bible being true.

Let's trade Mats, stockpile assets, and make a go of it. Keeping him flat-out makes no sense.

Powered by ScribeFire.