The Core

[hobarth]

TO might not be better right away or even next year but TO might have the assets to improve the team enough by the 3rd year to expect better playoff results than we are currently seeing. Since Chytil makes $4.5 mil. per TO would possibly have an extra $5.5 mil. per to spend on a FA since I expect Nylander can expect to be signed for around $10 mil. per. The rebuild while keeping Mitch and Austin would be enhanced by the 3rd year because JT's contract will have expired.

Having Nylander's talent level would be nice going into the future but I think St.L. won a Cup with only 2 significant players surrounded by outstanding depth. 

So the plan is to make a trade that probably makes the team worse for a few years but, by the end of it, they might be able to emulate the flukiest post-cap Cup winner?

Yeah, try selling Matthews and Marner on that.

Not sure about Marner but I'm pretty sure Matthews wants his paydays, what Matthews demands in his next contract will speak volumes about his desire to win the Cup rather than the salary battle. Where Matthews goes so goes Marner because he feels he's as valuable.

If they can't be sold on pay restraint then at least one of the M and Ms need to go, probably both.

TO can't be competitive with 4 making around or over $10 mil., it doesn't matter what the M & Ms think.

[4EVRLEAFAN]

If TO traded say Nylander, they could get a roster player, 2nd line capable, a top prospect, and a significant draft choice, that's not an unrealistic haul for him.

So what could we be talking about:

 From the NYR-Chytil, a decent prospect and their 1st rounder from this draft.

TO might not be better right away or even next year but TO might have the assets to improve the team enough by the 3rd year to expect better playoff results than we are currently seeing. Since Chytil makes $4.5 mil. per TO would possibly have an extra $5.5 mil. per to spend on a FA since I expect Nylander can expect to be signed for around $10 mil. per. The rebuild while keeping Mitch and Austin would be enhanced by the 3rd year because JT's contract will have expired.

Having Nylander's talent level would be nice going into the future but I think St.L. won a Cup with only 2 significant players surrounded by outstanding depth.

What I see now is TO getting older/slower without true progress, looking to the future without an entire overhaul might be the best option. 

You're assuming Matthews and Marner sign, what if they don't? I don't envy the new GM he has his work cut out.

[Frank E]

The Leafs also don't have that guy knocking at the door to become a top line player...nobody to promote, unless Knies turns into something very very quickly. 

So would you rather have Mitch Marner, or 2 guys at $5.5m a piece contributing 50 points a each?

[Nik]

Not sure about Marner but I'm pretty sure Matthews wants his paydays, what Matthews demands in his next contract will speak volumes about his desire to win the Cup rather than the salary battle. Where Matthews goes so goes Marner because he feels he's as valuable.

If they can't be sold on pay restraint then at least one of the M and Ms need to go, probably both.

TO can't be competitive with 4 making around or over $10 mil., it doesn't matter what the M & Ms think.

I didn't say anything about what they might sign for. I said that making a trade that makes the team worse in the hope that a few years down the road you can put together a team without much of a chance to win is a bad plan that most guys won't want to be around for.

But, you know, thanks for the dime store long distance interpretation of their personalities.

[Nik]

Fair and valid point. I don't think there is any way of outright winning a Marner trade (unless McDavid?). Best case would be getting a more diverse mix to pad the upper middle depth chart and filling a dire hole with a prime or rising star centre (Larkin, Barzal, Petersson, Hintz tier). No one will hit Marner's ceiling individually, but on the aggregate could exceed his value.

Oh. So all we have to do is trade Marner for a bunch of really good players and somehow figure out how to add a young all-star C while staying under the cap. My mistake I thought this was going to be hard.

[Rob]

Fair and valid point. I don't think there is any way of outright winning a Marner trade (unless McDavid?). Best case would be getting a more diverse mix to pad the upper middle depth chart and filling a dire hole with a prime or rising star centre (Larkin, Barzal, Petersson, Hintz tier). No one will hit Marner's ceiling individually, but on the aggregate could exceed his value.

Oh. So all we have to do is trade Marner for a bunch of really good players and somehow figure out how to add a young all-star C while staying under the cap. My mistake I thought this was going to be hard.

Yes, we are smarter than all NHL general managers. 

While it's harmless fun to play armchair GM and propose ridiculous trades, I'm often reminded of what George Mcphee said, "truth of the matter is if that they knew anything about the game, they'd be in it". 

[herman]

I'm not saying it'll be easy or that it has to be completed in one transaction. At some point, it's not a tenable solution to keep watching Marner rack up regular season points off an inflated TOI, and see him continue playing those minutes in the playoffs but a mere shadow of himself (playstyle, energy level, hometown pressure or what have you) while continually putting the salary structure and discourse over a barrel.

There are a handful of teams flush with centres but don't have Mitch, who might want to change their mixes as well, so that centre target would be the centrepiece of any trade return. Secondary deals will have more flexibility with the 10.9M moved out, to round out the net roster changes.

[L K]

The Leafs also don't have that guy knocking at the door to become a top line player...nobody to promote, unless Knies turns into something very very quickly. 

So would you rather have Mitch Marner, or 2 guys at $5.5m a piece contributing 50 points a each?

The problem is who are those 5.5 million guys.  Are they players who step up in the postseason and end up being .8-.9 PPG players in the playoffs or are they guys who are .5 PPG players during the regular season AND playoffs.  Two lesser players who are truly just lesser players probably aren't better than one Mitch Marner.

It's important to keep in mind that over the last 3 seasons Marner is 4th in NHL scoring.
McDavid (381), Draisaitl (322), MacKinnon (264), Marner (263).  From a PPG perspective Marner drops to 6th (Kucherov jumps to 4th and Matthews is 5th).  Not to mention that Marner got a Selke nod this year while putting up that level of offence.

I don't think you can really find a scenario where the Leafs are a better team trading Marner unless you win the lottery on a prospect or two getting good really fast and becoming unexpected PPG players right away.  That's highly unlikely to happen.

[Nik]

I'm not saying it'll be easy or that it has to be completed in one transaction. At some point, it's not a tenable solution to keep watching Marner rack up regular season points off an inflated TOI, and see him continue playing those minutes in the playoffs but a mere shadow of himself (playstyle, energy level, hometown pressure or what have you) while continually putting the salary structure and discourse over a barrel.

There are a handful of teams flush with centres but don't have Mitch, who might want to change their mixes as well, so that centre target would be the centrepiece of any trade return. Secondary deals will have more flexibility with the 10.9M moved out, to round out the net roster changes.

Again, this is where we come back to the idea that we're somehow clever enough to see that Marner is a liability in the playoffs but NHL GM's aren't and will offer the Leafs very valuable pieces who step up their game in the playoffs with all the required gritty grititude.

I've never said that the idea of making some significant changes is necessarily off the table, we just have to be realistic about what we're working with after making a trade based around the idea of "This guy is overpriced and can't help us win". Almost certainly we're going to be left with a situation where the Leafs have neither impressive top end talent or good young depth.

[Bender]

The Leafs also don't have that guy knocking at the door to become a top line player...nobody to promote, unless Knies turns into something very very quickly. 

So would you rather have Mitch Marner, or 2 guys at $5.5m a piece contributing 50 points a each?

The problem is who are those 5.5 million guys.  Are they players who step up in the postseason and end up being .8-.9 PPG players in the playoffs or are they guys who are .5 PPG players during the regular season AND playoffs.  Two lesser players who are truly just lesser players probably aren't better than one Mitch Marner.

It's important to keep in mind that over the last 3 seasons Marner is 4th in NHL scoring.
McDavid (381), Draisaitl (322), MacKinnon (264), Marner (263).  From a PPG perspective Marner drops to 6th (Kucherov jumps to 4th and Matthews is 5th).  Not to mention that Marner got a Selke nod this year while putting up that level of offence.

I don't think you can really find a scenario where the Leafs are a better team trading Marner unless you win the lottery on a prospect or two getting good really fast and becoming unexpected PPG players right away.  That's highly unlikely to happen.

The problem is everything is not ideal. Bringing the 4 back isn't ideal, dealing any of them isn't ideal, letting them walk isn't ideal, and paying them to inflated contracts isn't ideal. It's hard to see any way forward that doesn't come with a decent amount of risk that this team is either functionally the same or risk of taking a step back.

[hobarth]

Nik, you're slinging at all the other team building concepts we have put forward, you steadfastly remain in the preCap era even tho teams like Edmonton and Detroit could spend to whatever total they wished.

Today's NHL is totally different, Detroit had stars and then bought the best FAs which enabled them to not graduate homegrown talent for about 20 years, few other teams we willing to spend to their internal Cap, TO could win it all today with the big 4 and Karlsson and a host of other FAs, TO would've been able to keep Hymen and probably have the #1 d-man it hasn't had since, who, Salming.

Detroit signed far more significant players than they traded for, off the top of my head Shanahan, Rafalski, Murphy and others so I fail to see the logic of any mention of the Wings or any team pre Cap or pre lowering of the age of Free Agency.

Dubie failed to realize that a pandemic was just around the corner when he signed M & M plus JT, stupid Dubie but since it did happen a team's chance of success in the playoffs relies on depth with some stars, like we're seeing from Vegas, oh, another fluke Cup team, I guess?

Vegas, a team built around Eichel, Pietrangelo and quality depth, TO has the hardest players to accumulate, stars, Knies represents a great start to gathering quality depth, Rielly does not, a trade to move the overpaid Rielly and Brodie would be a great start, using Nylander, Rielly and Brodie to reshape TO's depth makes sense and is very doable, I'm hearing Nylander for Byram, unlikely because I think Colorado would be crazy to do it, but if possible I think TO should do it.

I don't think M & M or Nylander are overpaid but I do think to continue to pay all of them what they're worth isn't a winning formula, as we've seen/see, unless fans are happy with an awesome regular season team only which we aren't.

As for the Marner wanting Matthews money, we've already been down that road and I doubt very much that Marner is any less aware or comparable to Matthews, in his mind.

So Nik what are you saying, build the Leafs after the pre Cap Detroit model or what, I think we're all confused by you, it's far easier to put posters down than to venture an opinion, as you show by every post you make.   

[azzurri63]

There's a lot of opinions on the core and rightfully so. As Bender eluded no matter the path it's a tough road to take whether we trade some of the core, stay with them etc etc. My personal opinion and this is for all on here. Do you honestly think you can win with the current formula? This is my biggest beef with this core. I don't think we can thus we need change. I honestly feel throwing Tavares aside the other 3 are not players built for playoff hockey. I understand the way sports works and contracts increasing but do we honestly feel M & M are deserving of any raises? Both got lucrative contracts from Dubas years ago. I think if we cave in again we are doomed. Hayes as I posted the other day on Overdrive was bang on. Time these guys look at the whole picture other than f'ing the team over again. If not then ship them out and retool. The huge cap we spend on the 4 aint working. You can argue they need more time, maybe figure it out but personally I don't see it happening so for me make some deals.

[Significantly Insignificant]

Nik, you're slinging at all the other team building concepts we have put forward, you steadfastly remain in the preCap era even tho teams like Edmonton and Detroit could spend to whatever total they wished.

Or, and hear me out on this, he is preaching patience as the team builds around a superstar base that has been created rather than burning it to the ground because a cup hasn't been won within the first 7 years of this team being put together. 

Today's NHL is totally different, Detroit had stars and then bought the best FAs which enabled them to not graduate homegrown talent for about 20 years, few other teams we willing to spend to their internal Cap, TO could win it all today with the big 4 and Karlsson and a host of other FAs, TO would've been able to keep Hymen and probably have the #1 d-man it hasn't had since, who, Salming.

You missed the point on Detroit.  The comparison was not Detroit to Toronto.  It was more Matthews to Yzerman, in which, in Detroit they said similar things about Yzerman's inability to win big games early in his career, and he didn't actually win a cup till he was 31.  So maybe we should give Matthews a couple of more years.   

Detroit signed far more significant players than they traded for, off the top of my head Shanahan, Rafalski, Murphy and others so I fail to see the logic of any mention of the Wings or any team pre Cap or pre lowering of the age of Free Agency.

The top of your head is wrong.  Shanahan was acquired in a trade with Hartford, and Murphy was acquired in a trade with Toronto.  Again, the comparison to Detroit was about how the failures of a team in the playoffs shouldn't rest on one players shoulders.

Dubie failed to realize that a pandemic was just around the corner when he signed M & M plus JT, stupid Dubie but since it did happen a team's chance of success in the playoffs relies on depth with some stars, like we're seeing from Vegas, oh, another fluke Cup team, I guess?

Vegas missed the playoffs entirely last year.  Most people didn't have them getting past Edmonton.  I'm not saying they are a fluke, but they weren't the front runners to win.  Also, go back one year.  Think of how different the Colorado Tampa series was to this years series.  The point is there are no guarantees.  There is no way to predict who will make it next year.  So you build the best team that you can and you give yourself the best chance to win, and having a lineup that includes three superstars in their prime gives you some pretty good odds.

As an aside, are you really saying that Dubas should have planned for a global pandemic two years before it even happened?  Is that what you really believe?

Vegas, a team built around Eichel, Pietrangelo and quality depth, TO has the hardest players to accumulate, stars, Knies represents a great start to gathering quality depth, Rielly does not, a trade to move the overpaid Rielly and Brodie would be a great start, using Nylander, Rielly and Brodie to reshape TO's depth makes sense and is very doable, I'm hearing Nylander for Byram, unlikely because I think Colorado would be crazy to do it, but if possible I think TO should do it.

Vegas has been aggressive for sure, but they are also in cap hell.  If they don't win it this year, they are going to have a lot of heavy lifting over the next couple of years because they don't have a lot of flexibility in their lineup.

I don't think M & M or Nylander are overpaid but I do think to continue to pay all of them what they're worth isn't a winning formula, as we've seen/see, unless fans are happy with an awesome regular season team only which we aren't.

Worked for Pittsburgh.  I think it can work for the Leafs.  This year presents an awesome opportunity.  The roster can be overturned because of so many free agents.  You can fill in some of those spots with younger players, or you can try and fill out the roster with some shrewd signings.  I sure hope melba toast can deliver.

As for the Marner wanting Matthews money, we've already been down that road and I doubt very much that Marner is any less aware or comparable to Matthews, in his mind.

I'm not sure what this means.  I don't know what point you are trying to make. 

So Nik what are you saying, build the Leafs after the pre Cap Detroit model or what, I think we're all confused by you, it's far easier to put posters down than to venture an opinion, as you show by every post you make.   

I am not confused by what Nik is saying.  He is saying that continuing to take runs at the cup with the current team has a higher chance of yielding a cup than moving one of the three and weakening the team overall.

[Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate]

The trouble with this entire conversation is that the Core 4 player who makes the most sense to trade because of his salary is the one who seemingly can't be.

Or can he?

As the saying goes, if Gretzky can be traded, anyone can.

[Bender]

The trouble with this entire conversation is that the Core 4 player who makes the most sense to trade because of his salary is the one who seemingly can't be.

Or can he?

As the saying goes, if Gretzky can be traded, anyone can.

Anyone definitely can be, but it's definitely harder with a NMC. It could be a Sundin situation where he just didn't want to to waive it no matter the circumstance.