Edmonton will want at least a young 1st line C in return and not another rebuild. Mathews + Johnsson or Kappy.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.Show posts Menu
Quote from: Nik the Trik on October 01, 2019, 10:20:46 PM
Something to maybe consider with regards to the Captaincy is that while things like the fairly nebulous quality of "leadership" is important, it is also very much about being the public face of the organization and representing the team at various events and things.
As a result, there is a chance that Tavares may not be the best fit because he just started a family and may not want to spend a bunch of nights out at charity dinners and general gladhanding. Sundin, who was as public a face as the franchise had, was able to be as good at that side of the job as he was because he didn't have a family until he stopped playing.
Quote from: Nik the Trik on July 30, 2019, 07:17:01 AM
Something else to consider is that Gardiner may not be over the moon with the role the Leafs would be offering him. I think we've all generally accepted that the Leafs will be going with 4 forwards and a D on the PP and the PP will be handled by Rielly and Barrie. If some other team is offering Gardiner more of a PP focused role with maybe a defensive partner that would allow him to roam a bit more he may be better situated than he would be here.
Quote from: Nik the Trik on July 23, 2019, 03:12:21 PMQuote from: Average Joes on July 23, 2019, 02:49:23 PM
Kane was also more interesting than Marner due to those criminal charges he had with the cab driver.
I actually think there are some pretty interesting parallels between Kane and Marner. Kane was negotiating his extension the year after his team had signed a big deal free agent and negotiating it alongside the team's other top young player, a C who was arguably more valuable and who, while not producing as many points, had scored significantly more goals in fewer games.
Thing is, Kane's deal had a higher AAV than Hossa's(admittedly due to those dodgy backdiving deals) and was exactly equal to the deal they gave Toews. So from strictly an ego stroking point of view, as opposed to just dollars and cents or cap %, Chicago's offer maybe had more appeal.
Quote from: Nik the Trik on July 23, 2019, 02:38:49 PMQuote from: Average Joes on July 23, 2019, 02:29:34 PM
Kane had 28 points in 22 games in the playoffs the year he was signed to the extension. He was a big part of that cup win. Does that not have significant value compared to regular season points?
Well, no. He signed the deal in December of 2009. The Blackhawks won the cup, and Kane got those 28 points in 22 games, in the spring of 2010.
Which, again, speaks to what I'm saying. If Kane had waited to sign his second contract until after his third year, he probably would have been able to ask for and get more armed with a better regular season and a cup. This is true with a lot of guys who sign extensions after their second years(not so much the cup part as the growth in the third year part. A lot of guys we think of as having signed really good value 2nd contracts signed them after their 2nd seasons instead of their 3rd. Tavares is a good example).
Quote from: Joe S. on October 18, 2018, 12:13:49 PM
Let's say nylander doesn't sign by the end of November. How does that affect his rfa status? So he'll lose this ability to play in the nhl this year, and next season he's still and rfa and leafs property?
Quote from: IJustLurkHere on October 05, 2018, 09:18:14 AM
So, I'm not sure how people believe contract negotiations work, but No negotiation I've ever heard works by a TV like scripted process where 6 turns to 8 turns to 6.5 turns to 7.5 turns to 7 and everyone shakes hands...
Quote from: Nik the Trik on July 09, 2018, 01:19:34 PMQuote from: Significantly Insignificant on July 09, 2018, 01:05:33 PM
So how does the probability change if the Leafs face the Lightning in the first round versus the second or the third? If you are going to have to play a tough team, you are going to have to play a tough team.
You can argue that by facing them in the second round, they may have injuries, but you can't plan for that. Also the Leafs may get injuries as well. In order to be the best team in the league, you are going to have to beat the best teams in the league.
My argument isn't that playing a lower ranked team wouldn't be better. My argument is that you can't outrun playing good opponents by changing the playoff format.
I think the argument is that if you're in a tough division, the likelihood of getting sort of a flukey run to the cup where by luck you manage to miss out on heavyweights from your own conference is lower.
I agree with you that the Leafs should be focused on building a team where they are the heavyweights but I think there's something to be said for maybe putting off the biggest battles until it's absolutely necessary. If a particularly tough series takes more out of a team than an easier one than you'd prefer for your toughest series to be your last one.