Brad Treliving is doing a great job.

[Havoc]

Very convenient jumping to penguins. Get to use soon time rebuilding as excuse for Dubas soon. Mediocre gm riding excuse after excuse to remain elite. Hands are always tied, boo hoo.

Don't worry. I watched a few pens games and it made me feel grateful for having the Leafs. The Scooblanders will be back soon. Pens hockey <<<<<< Leafs hockey.

 

[thusk]

Our defensive play was never an issue until we brought in 4 FAs who can't defend...

I have no clue why everyone thinks we had a terrible D before this season.

D always been the issue last 8 years...come playoff time

the fact leafs allowing less goal doesn't mean it was not a issu

your D dont only affecting game against for also goal for. when your D are unable to make quick transition, you will have less breakaway 2v1 or whatever, that will affect your offensive scoring chance so at the end less goal for. Against good team, you will struggle to move the puck out of your zone so more time to defend and less to attack, so come playoff thats can affect both side ... scoring less goal and allowing more goam... your depht player whatever who they are will struggle because contrairly to leafs core 4, dont have skill to create thing with absolutly nothing... si you will struggle to have secondary scoring outside of core 4...

Muzzin health and lack of option to replace him had been the biggest issu

 

[ULF_55]

No... Lou is a terrible GM too.

GM is only as good as his HOF players.

 

[IPS]

No... Lou is a terrible GM too.

Man every GM except Dubas is terrible. What a world.

There is less emotion when the team wins.

Being peeved off > being satisfied.

The Leafs are one of the best teams in the league the past several years so expectations are pretty high that they win most games, which they do.

Leafs won.
"As they should!"

Leafs lost.
"GM really mucked this team up!!!"
"Coach outcoached yet again!"
"x-GM left nothing for the current GM to work with!"
"x-GM left everything for the current GM to work with and he messed it up!"

A loss is usually better for creative writing.

Yeah but it wasn't always like that.

In the early days of the big 3 era there was a lot of buzz around wins. As the playoff losses piled up you've seen less and less interest in the GDT's and the team in general (for the regular season anyway). The losses only serve to reinforce what people believe caused them to fail in the playoffs.

The buzz only really comes back at playoff time.

 

[Dekes For Days]

How about signing UFA Petr Mrazek to a 3 year deal at $3.8 mil AAV per and then getting 20 games out of him and then dealing away Leafs 1st round pick to unload his contract?
How about signing UFA Nick Ritchie to a 2 year deal at $2.5 mil AAV and then after not even completing the 1st year deal him as salary dump to Arizona? .. The Toronto Maple Leafs will send a 2025 second-round pick to the Arizona Coyotes to complete last February's trade that sent forward Nick Ritchie to Arizona.
What about protecting Justin Holl in the expansion draft after just trading pick and prospect to Pittsburgh for Jared McCann and then losing him to Seattle in expansion draft. McCann going on to score 40 goals last year and lead Settle in scoring and then on to the playoffs in their 2nd year in existence?
What about trading for smurf Denis Malgin who is now playing in the Swiss league for Mason Marchment who over the past 2 1/2 seasons put up 33 goals 52 assists 85 points & 163 pims?
How about trading away 1st round pick + 2 X 4th for Nick Foligno at the TD and getting 7 regular season games and 4 playoff games recording 1 assist in 1st round loss?
How bout trading Kadri for Kerfoot, dealing away 2 X future 2nd round pick + 3rd for 38 pending UFA Giordano the oldest skater in the game now, How about 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks for Ryan O'Reilly and Noel Acciari to get 11 playoff games?

How about actually representing the things that happened accurately, instead of leaving out important context and our returns in trades?

Mrazek was removed for 13 draft slots that didn't change our draft selection, not a 1st. Ritchie was removed for basically the difference between a 2nd and a 3rd, as we got back Lyubushkin in that trade. Not every acquisition is going to mesh on your team, no matter who your GM is, but the sign of a good GM is their ability to not do things that can't be fixed, and then recognize when things aren't clicking, and fix it quickly and cheaply.

Everybody loses somebody in the expansion draft, and protecting your top tier team at the cost of a mid-low tier prospect and a 7th is good work.
A mid-20s AHLer that couldn't hold an NHL job being traded for early-20s 4th line depth is an insignificant move, and the only lasting impact from that is Dallas having a cap dump.
Kadri wasn't traded for Kerfoot. Kadri was traded for Kerfoot and Barrie 50% retained, after multiple consecutive playoff suspensions, a history of issues, and Kadri blocking the initial trade. He's now a cap dump in Calgary - the same place he blocked the trade to.

The rest are just normal deadline deals, that teams in our position make, with costs that are pretty normal. Outside of Foligno getting a debilitating injury after the trade, they all played well for us.

The funny thing is, most of these deals were fully supported by this board at the time they happened. There's a big difference between playing captain hindsight when everything doesn't go as perfect as you dreamed, and making decisions that are objectively bad at the time they are made, like signing one of the worst players in the league to a 3 year deal in their late 30s that can't be fully buried.

 

[Apex Predator]

How about actually representing the things that happened accurately, instead of leaving out important context and our returns in trades?

Mrazek was removed for 13 draft slots that didn't change our draft selection, not a 1st. Ritchie was removed for basically the difference between a 2nd and a 3rd, as we got back Lyubushkin in that trade. Not every acquisition is going to mesh on your team, no matter who your GM is, but the sign of a good GM is their ability to not put the team in situations that can't be fixed, and then recognize when things aren't clicking, and fix it quickly and cheaply.

Everybody loses somebody in the expansion draft, and protecting your top tier team at the cost of a mid-low tier prospect and a 7th is good work.
A mid-20s AHLer that couldn't hold an NHL job being traded for early-20s 4th line depth is an insignificant move, and the only lasting impact from that is Dallas having a cap dump.
Kadri wasn't traded for Kerfoot. Kadri was traded for Kerfoot and Barrie 50% retained, after multiple consecutive playoff suspensions, a history of issues, and Kadri blocking the initial trade. He's now a cap dump in Calgary - the same place he blocked the trade to.

The rest are just normal deadline deals, that teams in our position make, with costs that are pretty normal. Outside of Foligno getting a debilitating injury after the trade, they all played well for us.

The funny thing is, most of these deals were fully supported by this board at the time they happened. There's a big difference between playing captain hindsight when everything doesn't go as perfect as you dreamed, and making decisions that are objectively bad at the time they are made, like signing one of the worst players in the league to a 3 year deal in their late 30s that can't be fully buried.

That’s a fair statement and with that said let’s give Treliving the time to see if he fixes it and what the cost is.

 

[Dekes For Days]

That’s a fair statement and with that said let’s give Treliving the time to see if he fixes it and what the cost is.

That's fair. I'm hoping he is able to acknowledge his mistakes, and he fixes things at minimal cost. I don't have a lot to draw confidence from for that, but maybe he will, and he deserves credit if he does.

 

[HandshakeLineRespect]

Question is will the devastation caused by the Reaves contract have a greater impact than the devastation caused by the Marleau contract?

The Leafs can burry 90% of Reaves contract any time they see fit and the cap implications are a rounding error. Trying to frame it as some kind of devastation is ridiculously hyperbolic.

 

[ACC1224]

The Leafs can burry 90% of Reaves contract any time they see fit and the cap implications are a rounding error. Trying to frame it as some kind of devastation is ridiculously hyperbolic.

Thanks

 

[GoonieFace]

How about actually representing the things that happened accurately, instead of leaving out important context and our returns in trades?

Mrazek was removed for 13 draft slots that didn't change our draft selection, not a 1st. Ritchie was removed for basically the difference between a 2nd and a 3rd, as we got back Lyubushkin in that trade. Not every acquisition is going to mesh on your team, no matter who your GM is, but the sign of a good GM is their ability to not do things that can't be fixed, and then recognize when things aren't clicking, and fix it quickly and cheaply.

Everybody loses somebody in the expansion draft, and protecting your top tier team at the cost of a mid-low tier prospect and a 7th is good work.
A mid-20s AHLer that couldn't hold an NHL job being traded for early-20s 4th line depth is an insignificant move, and the only lasting impact from that is Dallas having a cap dump.
Kadri wasn't traded for Kerfoot. Kadri was traded for Kerfoot and Barrie 50% retained, after multiple consecutive playoff suspensions, a history of issues, and Kadri blocking the initial trade. He's now a cap dump in Calgary - the same place he blocked the trade to.

The rest are just normal deadline deals, that teams in our position make, with costs that are pretty normal. Outside of Foligno getting a debilitating injury after the trade, they all played well for us.

The funny thing is, most of these deals were fully supported by this board at the time they happened. There's a big difference between playing captain hindsight when everything doesn't go as perfect as you dreamed, and making decisions that are objectively bad at the time they are made, like signing one of the worst players in the league to a 3 year deal in their late 30s that can't be fully buried.

The fact is they dropped 13 spots to get rid of Mrazek. You can’t pretend that’s nothing, but lose your mind that they overpaid Reaves by $200k and they can basically bury him for nothing.

 

[Guided by Veseys]

The fact is they dropped 13 spots to get rid of Mrazek. You can’t pretend that’s nothing, but lose your mind that they overpaid Reaves by $200k and they can basically bury him for nothing.

He can and he will.

 

[Dekes For Days]

The fact is they dropped 13 spots to get rid of Mrazek. You can’t pretend that’s nothing, but lose your mind that they overpaid Reaves by $200k and they can basically bury him for nothing.

Yes, they dropped 13 spots to remove Mrazek. That's what I said. It's not nothing, but the impact on us was essentially nothing, since there was no meaningful quality difference between those two slots in the draft, and we reportedly took the exact same prospect we would have taken earlier. A prospect who has trended well and has already played some NHL games after making the team out of camp.

As for Reaves, they overpaid him by 1.35m, and he can't be buried for nothing. We're currently paying 1.35m for him to hurt the team, and if we bury him, we have 200k in dead cap for the next 3 years. He also caused us to lose a better depth player. Overall, not the end of the world, but it's concerning, because it was an easily predictable and avoidable error, and yet Treliving not only didn't comprehend something so obvious, but he made the Reaves signing his top priority. And we're likely stuck with him, because I don't think we're getting rid of this one with a few draft spots.

 

[Leaf Fans]

Yes, they dropped 13 spots to remove Mrazek. That's what I said. It's not nothing, but the impact on us was essentially nothing, since there was no meaningful quality difference between those two slots in the draft, and we reportedly took the exact same prospect we would have taken earlier. A prospect who has trended well and has already played some NHL games after making the team out of camp.

As for Reaves, they overpaid him by 1.35m, and he can't be buried for nothing. We're currently paying 1.35m for him to hurt the team, and if we bury him, we have 200k in dead cap for the next 3 years. He also caused us to lose a better depth player. Overall, not the end of the world, but it's concerning, because it was an easily predictable and avoidable error, and yet Treliving not only didn't comprehend something so obvious, but he made the Reaves signing his top priority. And we're likely stuck with him, because I don't think we're getting rid of this one with a few draft spots.

You got the 200k right. That would be the cap hit if he is waived and unclaimed. Though Reeves did cost anyone their job.

 

[Dekes For Days]

You got the 200k right. That would be the cap hit if he is waived and unclaimed. Though Reeves did cost anyone their job.

He caused us to lose Lafferty - a better, cheaper, and younger depth player than him. I'm not sure why you're trying to start this endless back and forth again.

 

[Leaf Fans]

He caused us to lose Lafferty - a better, cheaper, and younger depth player than him. I'm not sure why you're trying to start this endless back and forth again.

Gregor beat out Lafferty. It is not an endless back and forth. It just is.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Gregor beat out Lafferty.

Reaves was handed the 4th line RW spot over Lafferty, despite being worse, and his cost created cap complications for keeping Lafferty.

 

[Leaf Fans]

Reaves was handed the 4th line RW spot over Lafferty, despite being worse.

No, Gregor won job by being better in camp. Reeves has an entirely different role one for which Lafferty was not in competition for.

 

[Dekes For Days]

No, Gregor won job by being better in camp. Reeves has an entirely different role one for which Lafferty was not in competition for.

Lafferty was a 4th line RW. Reaves was handed our 4th line RW spot. They were competing for the same roster spot.
Reaves was also the one handed Lafferty's money (and then some), resulting in us not being able to afford Lafferty anywhere else.
Reaves is the one that caused us to lose Lafferty, not the league minimum guy we signed to replace the cap casualty.
We've been over this enough. If you don't want to acknowledge what happened, that's your choice I guess.

 

[Leaf Fans]

Lafferty was a 4th line RW. Reaves was handed our 4th line RW spot. They were competing for the same roster spot.
Reaves was also the one handed Lafferty's money (and then some), resulting in us not being able to afford Lafferty.
Reaves is the one that caused us to lose Lafferty, not the league minimum guy we signed to replace the cap casualty.
We've been over this enough. If you don't want to acknowledge what happened, that's your choice I guess.

Reeves signed his own contract. Lafferty was already signed. Lafferty is the one that caused us to lose Lafferty. I do acknowledge what happened. Gregor won the job over Lafferty. The Leafs signed Gregor. I accept the facts. I am not making a choice.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Reeves signed his own contract. Lafferty was already signed. Lafferty is the one that caused us to lose Lafferty.

Lafferty was already signed for our 4th line RW. Then, we signed Reaves to take his spot on the roster, and he was overpaid and given Lafferty's money, which prevented us from having the space to have Lafferty in another spot on the roster. Despite being the best player in competition for a 4th line winger spot, Lafferty was traded for cap reasons, and we signed the best camp tryout to a league minimum contract to replace him. Those are the facts.

 

[Leaf Fans]

Lafferty was already signed for our 4th line RW. Then, we signed Reaves to take his spot on the roster, and he was overpaid and given Lafferty's money, which prevented us from having the space to have Lafferty in another spot on the roster. Despite being the best player in competition for a 4th line winger spot, Lafferty was traded for cap reasons, and we signed the best camp tryout to a league minimum contract to replace him. Those are the facts.

Like I said Rafferty was already signed then the Leafs signed Reeves and even later than that the Leafs signed Gregor to a PTO to compete with Lafferty, Gregor won the job and Lafferty was traded, and the Leafs signed Gregor - got him for league minimum too.

 

[Guided by Veseys]

I think we can all agree at least that Reaves almost took Gregor’s job but then Gregor outplayed Lafferty so Minten took Lafferty’s job. And then a 5th round pick replaced Minten shortly before McMann took Reaves job but only after Klingberg took Holls job.

 

[Hellcat]

No... Lou is a terrible GM too.

The guy who built a team that defined a decade and won multiple Cups is a terrible GM?

 

[Dekes For Days]

Like I said Rafferty was already signed then the Leafs signed Reeves and even later than that the Leafs signed Gregor to a PTO to compete with Lafferty, Gregor won the job and Lafferty was traded, and the Leafs signed Gregor - got him for league minimum too.

Gregor got the job because signing Reaves for what we did and handing him Lafferty's spot on the roster meant we didn't have the cap to keep Lafferty on the roster as well.
Lafferty was our best 4th line RW option, and no matter what you want to believe about Gregor, a top-2 winger for the 4th line.
We would have been able to keep him like the team wanted, if not for Reaves. Reaves cost us Lafferty.

 

[Leaf Fans]

Gregor got the job because signing Reaves for what we did and handing him Lafferty's spot on the roster meant we didn't have the cap to keep Lafferty on the roster as well. Lafferty was our best 4th line RW option, and no matter what you want to believe about Gregor, a top-2 winger for the 4th line. Reaves cost us Lafferty.

No, Gregor got the job by earning a contract off a strong PTO. He won the job over Lafferty.