Brad Treliving is new Leafs GM

[bustaheims]

What does everyone think Treliving's first move as GM will be?

Changing the goal song.

[Bill33]

I think he'll do everything possible as a first move to sign Matthews to an extension,because that'll stabilize everything else.

[herman]

https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2023/06/07/on-brad-trelivings-first-week-and-the-possibility-of-running-it-back-with-the-core-and-coach/
I'll echo some of the positive Treliving-observations mentioned in the article so far:

• This is a good/great regular season team: needs an identity as a whole
• Leafs need to impose their will on the game, rather than passively reacting

This is the main pickle:

Elliotte Friedman* noted that the organization believes too much of the conversation has centered around the core four and they want to have more focus on the overall team and finding identities for players throughout their lineup. Brad Treliving even publicly addressed this already, emphatically noting, "Quite frankly, it is not about four. I don't want to hear that term. This is the Toronto Maple Leafs. It is not about one, two, four, or five guys. It is about 23-24-25 guys on our team."

Is the main change supposed to be that the Leafs are de-emphasizing that core – externally and internally – while also changing the mix around/alongside them? And can Sheldon Keefe be the leader of this evolution? The head coach has routinely loaded the stars with ice time no matter how they're playing and has been trigger shy when it comes to criticizing them (and quick to walk it back when he has).

* https://twitter.com/tavmarnythews/status/1666497720922562565

[L K]

The frustrating thing for me is that the majority of the Core 4 stuff is the media.  It's the media that can't go 5 seconds without talking about the Core 4 (including Friedman).  I find that one of the most frustrating things about the Leafs is that the media creates stories and then uses those stories to indicate that there is a problem.

[CarltonTheBear]

The frustrating thing for me is that the majority of the Core 4 stuff is the media.  It's the media that can't go 5 seconds without talking about the Core 4 (including Friedman).  I find that one of the most frustrating things about the Leafs is that the media creates stories and then uses those stories to indicate that there is a problem.

I don't think that's entirely it. It's obvious that over the past 5 years season after season we've seen a lot of roster turnover, especially at forward. Even in-season the line-up see's a lot of changes through trades or waivers or promotions/demotions or just moving guys around. But the one constant for the most part has been: the "core 4" have to play together and everyone else is kind of just seen as window dressing and don't really have a permanent spot on the team.

I don't think that's necessarily an easy problem to fix, especially over the past few seasons where we've had the flat cap, but I could understand people seeing it as a legitimate issue.

[Bender]

The frustrating thing for me is that the majority of the Core 4 stuff is the media.  It's the media that can't go 5 seconds without talking about the Core 4 (including Friedman).  I find that one of the most frustrating things about the Leafs is that the media creates stories and then uses those stories to indicate that there is a problem.

I don't think that's entirely it. It's obvious that over the past 5 years season after season we've seen a lot of roster turnover, especially at forward. Even in-season the line-up see's a lot of changes through trades or waivers or promotions/demotions or just moving guys around. But the one constant for the most part has been: the "core 4" have to play together and everyone else is kind of just seen as window dressing and don't really have a permanent spot on the team.

I don't think that's necessarily an easy problem to fix, especially over the past few seasons where we've had the flat cap, but I could understand people seeing it as a legitimate issue.

I find it so bizarre that the team wants the focus to be less on the core 4. I get it, but it's pretty obvious to me that 4 players taking up almost half your salary would be the primary focus of the team. It's illogical to think otherwise when the remainder of the team is made up of role players who basically can't have as big an impact on the team by virtue of cap hit. Yes, it's a team, but it's always going to be skewed with this much salary tied up in so few players.

[CarltonTheBear]

I find it so bizarre that the team wants the focus to be less on the core 4. I get it, but it's pretty obvious to me that 4 players taking up almost half your salary would be the primary focus of the team. It's illogical to think otherwise when the remainder of the team is made up of role players who basically can't have as big an impact on the team by virtue of cap hit. Yes, it's a team, but it's always going to be skewed with this much salary tied up in so few players.

They come in a little bit lower yes but Florida was in a pretty similar spot cap wise with how much their top 4-5 highest paid players made. Despite that you never hear anyone say anything about the "big/core-4/5" in Florida, they still had remaining cap space to have impact scoring forwards like Verhaeghe, Bennett, and Duclair, and their top-3 forwards (especially in the playoffs) generally carried their own line and had success without needing to play with another "star".

For me that 3rd part could be the biggest key. When I hear these complaints about too much focusing being on the "core-4" I think about how for years the teams largely been built to have just 2 lines that can actually make an impact and then just a rotating cast of role players to fill out the other 2 lines who's sole duty is to just kill time while the "core-4" rests up for their next shift. Hopefully somehow the team can get away from that mentality. 

[Frank E]

This is the main pickle:

Elliotte Friedman* noted that the organization believes too much of the conversation has centered around the core four and they want to have more focus on the overall team and finding identities for players throughout their lineup. Brad Treliving even publicly addressed this already, emphatically noting, "Quite frankly, it is not about four. I don't want to hear that term. This is the Toronto Maple Leafs. It is not about one, two, four, or five guys. It is about 23-24-25 guys on our team."

Is the main change supposed to be that the Leafs are de-emphasizing that core – externally and internally – while also changing the mix around/alongside them? And can Sheldon Keefe be the leader of this evolution? The head coach has routinely loaded the stars with ice time no matter how they're playing and has been trigger shy when it comes to criticizing them (and quick to walk it back when he has).

Evolution?  Like who is he supposed to play when they need to score goals...the third line?  The fourth?

Elliotte is engaging in bull#$#% talk there like Keefe had a real alternative for goal scoring on his roster that he just didn't go to because core-4.

[Nik]

I find it so bizarre that the team wants the focus to be less on the core 4. I get it, but it's pretty obvious to me that 4 players taking up almost half your salary would be the primary focus of the team. It's illogical to think otherwise when the remainder of the team is made up of role players who basically can't have as big an impact on the team by virtue of cap hit. Yes, it's a team, but it's always going to be skewed with this much salary tied up in so few players.

But the only reason they are the "core 4" is because the team has done a largely bad job of filling out their ranks with guys who are also major contributors. If the Leafs had developed another forward who was up there in scoring the emphasis would be on them less. The point the team is making when they say they want the emphasis to be less on those guys isn't that those guys aren't important, it's that attributing the team's failures to them as opposed to their inability to flesh out the roster behind them is A) misdiagnosing the problem and B) scapegoating guys who they badly want to re-sign at a good rate.

[Joe]

The frustrating thing for me is that the majority of the Core 4 stuff is the media.  It's the media that can't go 5 seconds without talking about the Core 4 (including Friedman).  I find that one of the most frustrating things about the Leafs is that the media creates stories and then uses those stories to indicate that there is a problem.

This is why I've completely cut off the fan and tsn 1050. Other than listening to jays games I never tune into those stations or the podcasts.

I won't go to Twitter anymore and I don't go to sportsnet. And I'd over all I'm much happier that way.

It's like the whole "rounds won" narrative. Did anyone ever say that before the leafs had their streak? And to tie it back to all the years they didn't even make the playoffs? Canadian hockey media is mostly just leafs trolling garbage

[Joe]

I find it so bizarre that the team wants the focus to be less on the core 4. I get it, but it's pretty obvious to me that 4 players taking up almost half your salary would be the primary focus of the team. It's illogical to think otherwise when the remainder of the team is made up of role players who basically can't have as big an impact on the team by virtue of cap hit. Yes, it's a team, but it's always going to be skewed with this much salary tied up in so few players.

They come in a little bit lower yes but Florida was in a pretty similar spot cap wise with how much their top 4-5 highest paid players made. Despite that you never hear anyone say anything about the "big/core-4/5" in Florida, they still had remaining cap space to have impact scoring forwards like Verhaeghe, Bennett, and Duclair, and their top-3 forwards (especially in the playoffs) generally carried their own line and had success without needing to play with another "star".

For me that 3rd part could be the biggest key. When I hear these complaints about too much focusing being on the "core-4" I think about how for years the teams largely been built to have just 2 lines that can actually make an impact and then just a rotating cast of role players to fill out the other 2 lines who's sole duty is to just kill time while the "core-4" rests up for their next shift. Hopefully somehow the team can get away from that mentality. 

Don't forget they have Bobrovsky at 10mil.

[Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate]

Treliving agreed with Dubas's characterization of the team as "elite" and if you look at regular season results, they have been the last 2 or 3 seasons.  If you accept that characterization — and of course it can be debated — then no matter what you think of the roster composition the results have been good.

Except in the playoffs.  Frankly, I am beginning to move to the position that the key problem there has been the guy behind the bench.

[CarltonTheBear]

Don't forget they have Bobrovsky at 10mil.

The cap breakdowns are surprisingly close.

Both have 2 elite forwards: Matthews $11.64mil + Marner $10.9mil vs Barkov $10mil + Tkachuk $9.5mil
Both have an aging UFA signing that is certainly overpaid now but can still be an impact player at times: Tavares $11mil vs Bobrovsky $10mil
Both have a $7.5mil defenceman: Rielly vs. Ekblad
Both have a 3rd high end forward: Nylander $6.9mil vs. Reinhart $6.5mil

The Leafs 5 come in at about $4.5mil more in total at the moment, or one Sam Bennet/Carter Verhaeghe

[Bender]

I find it so bizarre that the team wants the focus to be less on the core 4. I get it, but it's pretty obvious to me that 4 players taking up almost half your salary would be the primary focus of the team. It's illogical to think otherwise when the remainder of the team is made up of role players who basically can't have as big an impact on the team by virtue of cap hit. Yes, it's a team, but it's always going to be skewed with this much salary tied up in so few players.

They come in a little bit lower yes but Florida was in a pretty similar spot cap wise with how much their top 4-5 highest paid players made. Despite that you never hear anyone say anything about the "big/core-4/5" in Florida, they still had remaining cap space to have impact scoring forwards like Verhaeghe, Bennett, and Duclair, and their top-3 forwards (especially in the playoffs) generally carried their own line and had success without needing to play with another "star".

For me that 3rd part could be the biggest key. When I hear these complaints about too much focusing being on the "core-4" I think about how for years the teams largely been built to have just 2 lines that can actually make an impact and then just a rotating cast of role players to fill out the other 2 lines who's sole duty is to just kill time while the "core-4" rests up for their next shift. Hopefully somehow the team can get away from that mentality. 

Don't forget they have Bobrovsky at 10mil.

And Bob has rightly been talked about as a boat anchor.

[herman]

The cap breakdowns are surprisingly close.

Both have 2 elite forwards: Matthews $11.64mil + Marner $10.9mil vs Barkov $10mil + Tkachuk $9.5mil
Both have an aging UFA signing that is certainly overpaid now but can still be an impact player at times: Tavares $11mil vs Bobrovsky $10mil
Both have a $7.5mil defenceman: Rielly vs. Ekblad
Both have a 3rd high end forward: Nylander $6.9mil vs. Reinhart $6.5mil

The Leafs 5 come in at about $4.5mil more in total at the moment, or one Sam Bennet/Carter Verhaeghe

I think we should throw in our next two (long term) top-6 forwards into the equation: Bunting, Kerfoot and it kind of evens out; they're both gone next year while Bennet/Verhaeghe are locked in at 8.5 combined. Bunting's value will be replaced by Knies and I think you'd want someone more productive than Jarnkrok to replace the Kerfoot slot.