Bunting’s Next Contract

[francis246]

60 point rat who has chemistry with our stars? 5m is a bit rich for him, but if that's what he's coming in at I'd have no problem with a 4m x 5y deal.

I think the idea that we let him walk and easily find a replacement is completely nonsensical. Finding guys who can bang in the odd puck while tagging along with Matthews and Marner is one thing, finding a top6'er who can score 60 points with them is entirely another. I find myself very perplexed by this fanbase's complete disinterest in any sort of investment in our depth. Bunting (and Kampf) should be re-signed.

If we have to choose between the two I think you keep Bunting.

 

[ULF_55]

60 point rat who has chemistry with our stars? 5m is a bit rich for him, but if that's what he's coming in at I'd have no problem with a 4m x 5y deal.

I think the idea that we let him walk and easily find a replacement is completely nonsensical. Finding guys who can bang in the odd puck while tagging along with Matthews and Marner is one thing, finding a top6'er who can score 60 points with them is entirely another. I find myself very perplexed by this fanbase's complete disinterest in any sort of investment in our depth. Bunting (and Kampf) should be re-signed.

Without out a cap sure.

How much is left after Matthews, Nylander, Holl, Kampf, Acciari and Liljegren re-sign?

 

[Confucius]

2-3 million per year for 3 more years. Solid player but I think his offence is a little inflated because of the guys he most often plays with. If he scored 20 away from Marner,Mathews, Nylander I’d think he would be worth 4 max for 3 more years.

 

[AvroArrow]

I like Bunting but let him go at that price. Max he should be asking is $4M. He's been good for us but most of his production is coming playing with Marner/Matthews.

 

[Niagara Bill]

4 million x 5 years is my max for Bunting. At 5 I think I would rather give someone else a try.

For me Kerfoot at 3.5 is grossly overpaid so I would not go past $3m fir Bunting. His mouth with no backbone is very troublesome.

 

[LeafGrief]

Without out a cap sure.

How much is left after Matthews, Nylander, Holl, Kampf, Acciari and Liljegren re-sign?

Holl likely isn't back, Acciari isn't getting any sort of raise and is getting paid scarcely more than replacement player money. Liljegren isn't due for another season.

My answer, which nobody will like, is that we trade Nylander this offseason while his value is the highest. Gutting the team's depth every summer is getting old, and I'd much rather reap the haul of assets and cap space that a Nylander trade would bring. If we commit to him long term, we're going to have to completely gut the team next summer to bridge the gap until JT's on a smaller contract, and that's just not it. Why are we so hellbent on continuing the big4 experiment that has brought us nothing? Make the hard choice now, retain the quality depth that we have built, and get a massive haul for a player who's next contract we simply cannot afford.

We could trade Marner instead.

 

[Sypher04]

Couple things:

1) Kypreos has no credibility as an insider but this is believable imo. I think bunting could get 5M on the open market

2) This may be the singular opportunity in his entire career that Bunting has to get truly paid and I’d expect and not blame him for exploring it. I’d expect no more than a 500k discount and that’s IF we go 8 years.

I do not expect Bunting here next year. And like his predecessor leaving before him, we will be just fine

 

[notbias]

60 point rat who has chemistry with our stars? 5m is a bit rich for him, but if that's what he's coming in at I'd have no problem with a 4m x 5y deal.

I think the idea that we let him walk and easily find a replacement is completely nonsensical. Finding guys who can bang in the odd puck while tagging along with Matthews and Marner is one thing, finding a top6'er who can score 60 points with them is entirely another. I find myself very perplexed by this fanbase's complete disinterest in any sort of investment in our depth. Bunting (and Kampf) should be re-signed.

You could replace "Bunting" with "Hyman" and this post probably already happened.

I think guys like Bunting and Kampf are pretty replaceable.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

Bunting won't be a Leaf due to CAP

 

[SeaOfBlue]

Playoffs are going to determine it for him.

Was fairly underwhelming last year, but came off of injury.

At the end of the day, we have LW prospects coming up and playing with Matthews/Marner is not overly difficult. Jarnkrok has looked good up there. Knies is coming up. Robertson still deserves a lot of attention. Abruzzese and Steeves in the AHL. Plus any guys we bring in through UFA.

 

[CabanaBoy5]

Holl likely isn't back, Acciari isn't getting any sort of raise and is getting paid scarcely more than replacement player money. Liljegren isn't due for another season.

My answer, which nobody will like, is that we trade Nylander this offseason while his value is the highest. Gutting the team's depth every summer is getting old, and I'd much rather reap the haul of assets and cap space that a Nylander trade would bring. If we commit to him long term, we're going to have to completely gut the team next summer to bridge the gap until JT's on a smaller contract, and that's just not it. Why are we so hellbent on continuing the big4 experiment that has brought us nothing? Make the hard choice now, retain the quality depth that we have built, and get a massive haul for a player who's next contract we simply cannot afford.

We could trade Marner instead.

I'd rather continue with the big 4 experiment than throw 3-5 million on Bunting. Teams get into trouble in a cap world when they give out hefty contracts to average players. Continue to work around the 4 till at least the end of the '24-'25 season even if it means a new coach or GM at the end of this season. If we trade Marner, it better be a massive haul or we should have our heads examined (and that's coming from a guy who would have gladly driven Marner to the airport after the Montreal series ). Young star players in their prime are difficult to get a hold of, and that's where Nylander and Marner are now. Tavares is the only one from the big 4 we should consider trading but we know that's not going to happen with his NMC.

 

[ACC1224]

Hyman was the one to keep, Bunting isn't comparable.

 

[ULF_55]

Holl likely isn't back, Acciari isn't getting any sort of raise and is getting paid scarcely more than replacement player money. Liljegren isn't due for another season.

My answer, which nobody will like, is that we trade Nylander this offseason while his value is the highest. Gutting the team's depth every summer is getting old, and I'd much rather reap the haul of assets and cap space that a Nylander trade would bring. If we commit to him long term, we're going to have to completely gut the team next summer to bridge the gap until JT's on a smaller contract, and that's just not it. Why are we so hellbent on continuing the big4 experiment that has brought us nothing? Make the hard choice now, retain the quality depth that we have built, and get a massive haul for a player who's next contract we simply cannot afford.

We could trade Marner instead.

So you think Keefe and Dubas would chose Bunting over Holl?

I'm not saying Holl is retained, I'm saying for the same money Holl would likely get the nod.

Played as a top 4 defender, compared to a complementary player being carried by two star players.

 

[PROUD PAPA]

I'd rather a form of power forward if 5 million is up for grabs.

 

[horner]

I wouldn't assume he can be easily replaced. Robertson, Jarnkrok, Kerfoot, etc have been tried in the top 6, and none have been nearly as effective as Bunting. Just because you're playing with 2 of Matthews, Marner, Tavares, and Nylander doesn't at all make it a given that you'll be able to put up ~60 points.

I agree we can't just write a blank cheque here, but we got VERY lucky when we replaced Hyman with Bunting. I wouldn't assume we can easily do it again, especially as we've obviously been trying to fill the second top 6 LW spot for years, without success.

Kerfoot can't do anything with thosec4 players

 

[Magic Man]

4.5M per for 4 years.

 

[Gilmour1996]

3.5M for 3 years.

 

[Kiwi]

I'd let him walk unless he's going to take something extremely team friendly (like 3.5 over 2 or 3 years)

No giving depth guys big money or term because there on a line feeding off high end talent

Find somebody else on the cheap and put them into that situation instead

 

[Machinae]

Doesn't make any sense for the Leafs to spend money on the 3rd man. Knies, Robertson, McMann, Steeves, all going to get looks. Or the Leafs will find the next guy looking for an opportunity to sign two years 1 mil.

 

[LeafGrief]

I'd rather continue with the big 4 experiment than throw 3-5 million on Bunting. Teams get into trouble in a cap world when they give out hefty contracts to average players. Continue to work around the 4 till at least the end of the '24-'25 season even if it means a new coach or GM at the end of this season. If we trade Marner, it better be a massive haul or we should have our heads examined (and that's coming from a guy who would have gladly driven Marner to the airport after the Montreal series ). Young star players in their prime are difficult to get a hold of, and that's where Nylander and Marner are now. Tavares is the only one from the big 4 we should consider trading but we know that's not going to happen with his NMC.

The theory that maximizing young star players yields success has not served us well the last six years. That they’re hard to acquire does not mean they are worth prioritizing over a deep team, which we have found equally difficult to maintain over the years. Giving out hefty contracts to average players is bad, but giving 2nd line winger money to a 60 point rat is not how you sink a franchise. Committing 35m to three players for the next decade is several levels of magnitude more of a commitment.

 

[LeafGrief]

So you think Keefe and Dubas would chose Bunting over Holl?

I'm not saying Holl is retained, I'm saying for the same money Holl would likely get the nod.

Played as a top 4 defender, compared to a complementary player being carried by two star players.

Bunting is a damn good player, he scored 60 points last year and our 2nd line LW for the last five years has demonstrated how hard it is to produce that, even with two star players. Bunting is a complementary player, but it’s alright to invest in complementary players who fit and have chemistry with the stars. He is not going to carry a line, but saying he is carried is a massive disservice. He’s got top6 IQ, can play a give and go, can shoot well enough to score from the slot, and takes the punishment to go to the scoring areas. He’s a legit top6 winger for a contender.

Holl is a good player, but we have enough top4 defensemen to do the job. Liljegren stole the 2nd pairing job, while Bunting is our best LW followed by Jarnkrok. I’ve been a very vocal supporter of Holl over the years and I’d take Bunting 10/10 times.

Bunting has been a psycho the last little while, but with how hard he plays, how much the team clearly means to him, and how often he finds the scoresheet you think he’d be a fan favourite.

 

[Holls Blackmail]

$3.69 x 3

Nice.

Hyman was the one to keep, Bunting isn't comparable.

Not for 7 years, friend-o.

 

[ACC1224]

$3.69 x 3

Nice.


Not for 7 years, friend-o.

Easily moved

 

[Mentat]

At 5M AAV, thanks but no thanks.
If he settles for a figure around 3M, i´d consider keeping him, depending on how the other UFA negotiations are going. He´s probably going to want to have a payday and we just can´t afford it.

 

[Blaylock38]

I think he settles in anywhere between 2.9-3.5 a year if we do retain him. I have no idea what I would guestimate the term, but i feel like if the aav is lower the term would be longer.