If you were trading one player on this team, who would it be?

[The Iceman]

KERFOOT

$3.5 when he should be $1.5.
I would overpay Tavares and Marner by $2 million before a guy without a role.

 

[Leaf4Life79]

For me, it's a toss up between Marner And Tavares... but as of late.. Tavares has shown more heart... so my decision is MOREner

 

[Leaf4Life79]

KERFOOT

$3.5 when he should be $1.5.
I would overpay Tavares and Marner by $2 million before a guy without a role.

I disagree... Kerfoot has done more so far than Marner has!

 

[Blowfish]

I disagree... Kerfoot has done more so far than Marner has!

The only 2 realistic players Leafs can trade are Matthews and Nylander. Thinking they package a Nylander and Marner or a Matthews and Ritchie. Something like that...

 

[The Iceman]

The only 2 realistic players Leafs can trade are Matthews and Nylander. Thinking they package a Nylander and Marner or a Matthews and Ritchie. Something like that...

Never seen a $18 million trade

 

[Blowfish]

Never seen a $18 million trade

LOL seriously. Crazy stuff. Dubas is a beauty.

 

[Tak7]

Great idea: trade away the only player (other than the kids) who is actually worth his contract.

You at least come out even in that deal, at worst.

You lose a Marner deal every day of the week.

And before you lay out that "cap space" crap, that space is only good if you have players ready to allocate that money to. The Leafs don't.

 

[notDatsyuk]

You at least come out even in that deal, at worst.

You lose a Marner deal every day of the week.

And before you lay out that "cap space" crap, that space is only good if you have players ready to allocate that money to. The Leafs don't.

I'm not sure I agree. Just because a contract is good or bad, it doesn't necessarily mean you can't make a bad or good trade.

Just as an example, what if Dubas traded Nylander for Komarov, and Marner for Fox?

I know neither is likely.

Generally, if you trade someone who's overpaid, you get back someone who's overpaid, or you have to add.

Not necessarily better or worse, depending on relative needs, trading skills, and situations.

And I say nothing about cap.

 

[Tak7]

I'm not sure I agree. Just because a contract is good or bad, it doesn't necessarily mean you can't make a bad or good trade.

Just as an example, what if Dubas traded Nylander for Komarov, and Marner for Fox?

I know neither is likely.

Generally, if you trade someone who's overpaid, you get back someone who's overpaid, or you have to add.

Not necessarily better or worse, depending on relative needs, trading skills, and situations.

And I say nothing about cap.

Well, it depends entirely on what your purpose for the trade is.

If it's for cap space, go ahead and trade (and lose) Marner.

if you want to improve the team, then you trade Nylander for a potential package.

My point is, Nylander nets you a larger return

 

[Menzinger]

Well, it depends entirely on what your purpose for the trade is.

If it's for cap space, go ahead and trade (and lose) Marner.

if you want to improve the team, then you trade Nylander for a potential package.

My point is, Nylander nets you a larger return

Eh, I personally prefer Nylander but I'd say Marner is viewed league wide as the better player and would net the higher return despite carrying the higher caphit.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Well, it depends entirely on what your purpose for the trade is.

If it's for cap space, go ahead and trade (and lose) Marner.

if you want to improve the team, then you trade Nylander for a potential package.

My point is, Nylander nets you a larger return

The problem with Marner is you likely have to take back an overpaid player, or retain cap, or lose a lot of quality.

The problem with Nylander is you either get the same back (possibly worthwhile for a good D), or you get a package back, and the old adage of "whoever got the better player won" usually applies.

In either case, other teams know we're in a bad spot, and that Dubas can probably be taken advantage of.

I agree with your last point, although I might rephrase it as "a better return (since it's a better contract)"

 

[kb]

The problem with Marner is you likely have to take back an overpaid player, or retain cap, or lose a lot of quality.

The problem with Nylander is you either get the same back (possibly worthwhile for a good D), or you get a package back, and the old adage of "whoever got the better player won" usually applies.

In either case, other teams know we're in a bad spot, and that Dubas can probably be taken advantage of.

I agree with your last point, although I might rephrase it as "a better return (since it's a better contract)"

No you don't have to take back anything you don't want to. Especially an overpaid player. Marner is young and still improving. Absolutely ridiculous.

 

[wingman75]

Marner for sure, but mainly because of the cap space it would create to enhance the supporting cast. It's unfortunate timing his contract... flat cap and all. If the cap had continued its upward trend I wonder what things would look like? Hyman would still be here I bet...

I mean we are getting good Mitch tonight... but 10.9 mil is a lot.

 

[Tak7]

Eh, I personally prefer Nylander but I'd say Marner is viewed league wide as the better player and would net the higher return despite carrying the higher caphit.

The caphit basically prohibits the better return.

 

[Tak7]

The problem with Marner is you likely have to take back an overpaid player, or retain cap, or lose a lot of quality.

The problem with Nylander is you either get the same back (possibly worthwhile for a good D), or you get a package back, and the old adage of "whoever got the better player won" usually applies.

In either case, other teams know we're in a bad spot, and that Dubas can probably be taken advantage of.

Absolutely - I totally agree with this.

Which is why I really feel like they are stuck between a rock & a hard place - they either stick with this core and hope they figure it out (and if they don't, likely lose their jobs), or they try and make a series of sideways moves and hope that the changed complexion of the dressing room is enough to let you progress.

If they fail again this year, I start looking for a Seth Jones / Ryan Johansson type trade - 2 players viewed at the time very highly, with plenty of upside.

 

[notDatsyuk]

No you don't have to take back anything you don't want to. Especially an overpaid player. Marner is young and still improving. Absolutely ridiculous.

You are assuming that the GMs around the league agree with you that he isn't overpaid, and that we don't have a need to get rid of one of our very expensive players.

I'm not so sure.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Marner for sure, but mainly because of the cap space it would create to enhance the supporting cast. It's unfortunate timing his contract... flat cap and all. If the cap had continued its upward trend I wonder what things would look like? Hyman would still be here I bet...

I mean we are getting good Mitch tonight... but 10.9 mil is a lot.

How do you work that?

Marner is making about 11M. Say you want to free up 3M cap space.

Is there a team somewhere that will trade us a comparable player who is only making 8M, without our retaining 3M, or including a prospect or a pick?

 

[Havoc]

The caphit basically prohibits the better return.

I'm not advocating trading Marner but if the discussion is solely about trade value, Marners cap hit wont matter to a lot of teams. His real money is 8 mil a season soon. Marner will bring in a huge haul.

Minnesota had no problem shelling out cash for Kaprizov even though they carry so much dead cap for a couple years. Majority of the league is full of teams that aren't contenders, they'd gladly slash their cap by 1.5 mil (Marners theoretical overpay amount) to take on Marner for 8 mil.

 

[wingman75]

How do you work that?

Marner is making about 11M. Say you want to free up 3M cap space.

Is there a team somewhere that will trade us a comparable player who is only making 8M, without our retaining 3M, or including a prospect or a pick?

31 other teams would love to get their hands on Marner.

I don't know what a trade would look like... but he is the one I would move as much as it would suck to see him on another team.

 

[Tak7]

I'm not advocating trading Marner but if the discussion is solely about trade value, Marners cap hit wont matter to a lot of teams. His real money is 8 mil a season soon. Marner will bring in a huge haul.

Minnesota had no problem shelling out cash for Kaprizov even though they carry so much dead cap for a couple years. Majority of the league is full of teams that aren't contenders, they'd gladly slash their cap by 1.5 mil (Marners theoretical overpay amount) to take on Marner for 8 mil.

The Wild bought themselves out of a lot of bad money just to fit Kaprizov (one of their own guys) in, and they aren't giving away a high value core piece in order to do so.

How many of the potential suitors for Marner that have the sort of return the Leafs would look for, can even fit $11M into their cap? There's almost none..

The real money is irrelevant in the Marner discussion - you need to find a team that has $11M in cap space, and a high value term controlled asset or two going the other way.

That's an almost impossible deal to make.

 

[Acesup]

The Wild bought themselves out of a lot of bad money just to fit Kaprizov (one of their own guys) in, and they aren't giving away a high value core piece in order to do so.

How many of the potential suitors for Marner that have the sort of return the Leafs would look for, can even fit $11M into their cap? There's almost none..

The real money is irrelevant in the Marner discussion - you need to find a team that has $11M in cap space, and a high value term controlled asset or two going the other way.

That's an almost impossible deal to make.

You can retain a bit, bring back a higher paid player on the other team with shorter term. Theres realistically alot you can do if you are hellbent on trading him which we should.

I'm thinking multiple first, a top prospect or two and a contract they want to get rid of. Pretty much any team can make that.

 

[Havoc]

The Wild bought themselves out of a lot of bad money just to fit Kaprizov (one of their own guys) in, and they aren't giving away a high value core piece in order to do so.

How many of the potential suitors for Marner that have the sort of return the Leafs would look for, can even fit $11M into their cap? There's almost none..

The real money is irrelevant in the Marner discussion - you need to find a team that has $11M in cap space, and a high value term controlled asset or two going the other way.

That's an almost impossible deal to make.

That's true I guess I simplified it a bit too much. Willing to take him is not the same as able. However retentions, buyouts, overpaying depth guys, these things all add up such that overpaying Marner 1.5 mil isn't really a big deal for teams that need him. (This should be slashing their cap by 1.5 mil, not overpaying)

The Kaprizov example was just to show the worth of elite players to teams regardless of cap situations or what needs to get done. There are many teams that need a Marner and my belief is some will make the cap room if the memo is sent out that Marner is available. We saw Vegas trying to clear cap room for an aging Pietrangelo just a year ago. Why won't teams do it for Marner if they're starving for elite young talent?

edit- So I messed up my first paragraph. The context is that Marners real money is 8 mil therefore slashing their cap hit by 1.5 mil is equivalent to teams that have retention, buyouts, instead of overpaying a third liner why not just take on Marner instead etc. It's not that big of a deal @ 8 mil for teams that actually need a Marner.

 

[DraftSchmaft]

That's true I guess I simplified it a bit too much. Willing to take him is not the same as able. However retentions, buyouts, overpaying depth guys, these things all add up such that overpaying Marner 1.5 mil isn't really a big deal for teams that need him. (This should be slashing their cap by 1.5 mil, not overpaying)

The Kaprizov example was just to show the worth of elite players to teams regardless of cap situations or what needs to get done. There are many teams that need a Marner and my belief is some will make the cap room if the memo is sent out that Marner is available. We saw Vegas trying to clear cap room for an aging Pietrangelo just a year ago. Why won't teams do it for Marner if they're starving for elite young talent?

edit- So I messed up my first paragraph. The context is that Marners real money is 8 mil therefore slashing their cap hit by 1.5 mil is equivalent to teams that have retention, buyouts, instead of overpaying a third liner why not just take on Marner instead etc. It's not that big of a deal @ 8 mil for teams that actually need a Marner.

It's too late for logic like this, let people get some sleep first.

Marner at 8 mil is an easy sell.

 

[notDatsyuk]

31 other teams would love to get their hands on Marner.

I don't know what a trade would look like... but he is the one I would move as much as it would suck to see him on another team.

Would 31 other teams love to get their hands on Marner at 11M?

How many could fit him without giving us 11M back, or our retaining?

If they give us back a player making only 8M, do you expect him to be as good? If so, why would they make the trade?

It's easy to say that we can make a trade, but without considering the real situation, it's as pointless as saying we should trade Kerfoot for McDavid.

I don't want to see him on another team either, and I'm just looking at the practical "if we trade him, don't expect it to magically solve all our problems".

Probably the best we could hope for is trading him, plus a pick, for two guys making a combined 8 or 9M.

If we have to trade one of the five big salaries, my personal preference would be Tavares, but that ain't happening.

I don't think we should trade either Nylander or Rielly, whose cap hits are smaller and better value, and I don't see us trading Matthews, which leaves Marner.

I just don't expect a spectacular return.

 

[Havoc]

It's too late for logic like this, let people get some sleep first.

Marner at 8 mil is an easy sell.

It's straight forward I just didn't explain myself properly.

Marner makes 8 mil soon. His theoretical overpayment is 1.5 mil. 8 <= his AAV - 1.5 so you can treat the overpayment similar to teams that have less to spend on players compared to the real cap. Marner situation is even better. For example our cap is slashed 1.2 mil because of Kessel. We have to actually pay the 1.2 though. For Marner you reduce the $$ you can start but you don't have to actually pay what you slashed.

Teams will line up. It's really not a big deal in the grand scheme of things. This is also inferior to the fact over half the teams need a Marner and even Vegas made room for a 30 year old....so I think it's an open shut case Marner will be easy to trade.