Self-containment:  Coming to a city near you.

https://twitter.com/SweeneyABC/status/1237018677360410624

Burns a year of his ELC. Already played in 6.

It's funny, I know conventional wisdom says you should avoid burning off a year of an ELC in these situations. But imagine if the Leafs gave Nylander and Marner 10 games in the first year of their ELCs before sending them back to the OHL/AHL instead of having both of them see their first year slide. Imagine they both negotiated their 2nd contracts a year earlier in their careers. Hindsight is 20/20 and I don't recall anybody suggesting the Leafs do this, but there's a pretty darn good chance our cap situation would look a heck of a lot different than it does today if that happened.

In Marner's case, a year earlier would have made a big difference- BUT- that year where he wouldn't be on his ELC and would be in the first year of his deal would have meant not icing as strong a group.  The fact that we didn't get past the first round anyways probably means in hindsight who cares, but at the time everyone would have been upset we didn't have Marner on his ELC for an additional year.  We may not have been able to sign Tavares.

In Nylander's case, I highly doubt we would have burned two years of his ELC for 10 game and 22 game seasons.  If he had only had one full season, there is very little chance we'd see a long term deal, he would have been bridged because we didn't know what we had, and we'd probably be coming to the end of that bridge deal this season and probably be paying more for him starting next season.

https://twitter.com/koshtorontosun/status/1214613024029528073

For now

Four more games....

???

Burns a year of his ELC. Already played in 6.

I realized after I posted this that my post might be misunderstood. 

I'm not necessarily worried about burning the first year of his ELC- which would also happen in four more GP. 

Four more games was the number of games I'd wait until calling up Sandin.  I'd like to keep his GP under 41 this season.  If he plays less than 41 games this season, he remains an RFA for an additional year.

https://twitter.com/koshtorontosun/status/1214613024029528073

For now

Four more games....

I know you all really like the guy but man, I am really not excited about reshuffling a lineup that really seems to be clicking for Johnsson.

I agree with you when it comes to the top 6.  But there is a Spezza-sized "I'm not sure about this" on the third line right now.  I'd really like to see Johnsson-Engvall-Kapanen to start and leave Kerfoot with JT-Willy.  Those three are really playing well together.

https://twitter.com/SlavaMalamud/status/1214014599080660994

Follow this thread

And then:
https://twitter.com/VeIeno/status/1214216304342814720

For Russians, the Government TROLLS YOU

;D ;D ;D

Fun stat posted by HNIC on their social media channels today:

Phil Kessel played in the most games in the 2010s decade; 787. He didn't miss a single game.

(He also had the second most shots in the decade quite a long way behind Ovechkin)

Kessel gets the advantage of NHL schedulers.  Yandle also didn't miss a single game, and even had an 84 game season the year he was traded.  But, had less games scheduled after Jan 1st in 09-10 and before Jan 1st in 19-20 so he only ended up at 785.

Marleau had 782 and had he not missed the first 4 games of this season without a contract would be right there.  Add his 99 playoff games and he leads in total games though (without missing one)

If Dermott's deal is 3 yrs or less (ie Bridge deal) he likely won't get much more than Holl.  The question is, do you dangle a 5/6 yr deal in front of him at 2.75-3 M per?

I don't think there'd be any harm in making that offer but man, you'd really have to wonder about Dermott's confidence if he accepted something like that.

Well, its always the risk vs reward balance.  What do most 2nd pair d-men get paid on their third contracts (after a bridge deal)?  Somewhere between 4m-5.5m?  If his bridge deal is Holl money....

2 @ 5m + 3 @ 2m = 16m
5 @ 2.75m = 13.75m

Is the risk of career ending injury and/or poor performance on the bridge deal worth giving up 2.25m?

Also, they can front load the longer deal, and the power of money is having as much of it as soon as possible means that 2.25m is not necessarily put in stone as the true difference.

Dermott's going to effectively have no leverage and will almost certainly be looking for a bridge deal. I don't know about less than Holl but he's definitely not going to be getting a lot more.

That bodes well for the Leafs.

He'll be going into negotiations without a 70 game or 20 point season(probably). Could he get 2.5 or something? I suppose. But what's the possible justification for anything higher?

There really isn't one. I don't think he can really go in and demand more then Holl. Still half a year to go though so we'll see.

Took a look at a number of stats (reg. and advanced) and Dermott's only real advantage over Holl is games played.  They have almost identical point rates (0.28 pts/gm) and shot share numbers.  With that said, I think Holl has benefited from playing with possession god Muzzin a fair amount this season while Dermott has carried some carcasses (Polak, Ozhiganov, Ceci) around- but in sheltered minutes.

If Dermott's deal is 3 yrs or less (ie Bridge deal) he likely won't get much more than Holl.  The question is, do you dangle a 5/6 yr deal in front of him at 2.75-3 M per?

I'm still trading Johnsson before Kappy. Kappy is 1 1/2+ years younger, is a cheaper hit and I think a better overall player.

Johnsson can play in the top-6, Kappy can't/won't. A minuscule age difference and cap hit don't make up for that to me.

I have never seen such a skilled, physically gifted player nerf the creativity from top lines so quickly and effortlessly as Kapanen with Tavares/Marner and Matthews/Nylander.

Latest 31 Thoughts

13. Not that they want to, but when things were going poorly for the Maple Leafs, another GM said Toronto learned it could trade Kasperi Kapanen very easily. "But they don't want to," he added.

Do it before others catch on.

I think Kapanen is a fish out of water when he has to play on the Left Side.  Before Willy was back last season Kapanen looked better on Matthews right side- and the biggest frustration was taking long shots off the rush instead of stopping up and creating offense with the second wave of players.  He's seemed to improve that this season, but now Willy and Marner have those RW positions taken.

I appreciate that the issues of racism within the game are going to get a lot of the attention and rightfully so but I think we haven't really come to terms with the fact that with the whole Aliu-Downie thing the whole hockey establishment basically sided with Downie(and that includes the media and fans) and we all sort of went along with that.

The Downie-Aliu incident also happened 14 years ago- are you surprised that's where people sided with things that long ago?  I'm pretty sure hazing at that time was likely more acceptable than it is now- NOT THAT IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN.

Already one coach (DJ Smith) who was there for that incident has come out and said that following that incident he banned hazing practices when he became a head coach in Oshawa and players in that organization say that ban is still in place. 

Clearly its taken hockey culture too long to adjust, especially in some places, but it is changing.  Hopefully all of this coming out now will accelerate it.

[any days and games already missed by the Player as aresult of his being unfit to play (i.e., the injury/illness causing him to missmore than twenty-four (24) calendar days and ten (10) NHL RegularSeason games) prior to the election of the Bona-Fide Long-TermInjury/Illness Exception shall retroactively count]

LTIR is not retroactive.  If they move Moore to LTIR today, he'd still have to miss the entire minimum LTIR period beginning today. 

Getting some serious deja vu here:

3.  Unfortunately LTIR is not retroactive.  So if they wait 2 weeks, find out JT needs a bit more time, he's gotta sit 10 games or 24 days from the day they put him on LTIR.  Only IR is retroactive.

Believe it is: CBA 50.10.d.vi

A Club may elect to replace a Player who is unfit to play under this Bona-
Fide Long-Term Injury Exception at any point during the period that he is
unfit to play, and any days and games already missed by the Player as a
result of his being unfit to play (i.e., the injury/illness causing him to miss
more than twenty-four (24) calendar days and ten (10) NHL Regular
Season games) prior to the election of the Bona-Fide Long-Term
Injury/Illness Exception shall retroactively count toward the missed
twenty-four (24) calendar days and ten (10) NHL Regular Season games
for the Player.

Ah.  Work has been killing me- hence I'm barely on here except once or twice a week.  I had missed your previous reply.  Thanks for the clarification.

If you're looking for one, the one downside to this is it probably means Gauthier won't be seeing waivers this season. I doubt they want to run the risk of losing two depth centres.

You're probably right. I also think Goat stays because he makes less then minimum. We'd have Spezza, Engvall, for centre depth if Goat was gone. They could even go to Brooks from the Marlies. I like his game.

To add to this:  If Babcock were still coach- it be a foregone conclusion that Goat would be the permanent 4th line C.  However, with Keefe (who knows Engvall/Brooks at C well) I don't think its a foregone conclusion Goat will be it for the season.

https://twitter.com/reporterchris/status/1201909466150526976

So if Marner returns tomorrow Shore, Petan, Engvall, and Marincin would all need to get sent down to the Marlies and the Leafs would have a 20-man roster with Moore on the IR.

If the Leafs wanted to keep an additional player for a little bit they could move Moore to LTIR. He would only need to be expected to miss about another week or so to be eligible for that.

LTIR is not retroactive.  If they move Moore to LTIR today, he'd still have to miss the entire minimum LTIR period beginning today. 

It's sad that you'd have to choose either but I'd take young Luke Schenn over Hainsey.

I think the Athletic had not included the 09-10 season (well, IIRC it depended on which beat writer/which team was being done- I know Blake Murphy didn't consider the Raptors 09-10 season).  IN which case you are comparing only Schenn's last two seasons here to Hainsey's two seasons here.  If you include the third season (09-10) then it makes more of a case.