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

[Teeder Keon]

47
25
15
3
24
20

 

[GardinerTheForward]

Lots of opinions in here but i think we all can agree we need to catch lighting in a bottle or either dump salary and retool.

I say we all protest the salary cap angry mob style outside bettmans house

\s Oh how i can dream

 

[dubplatepressure]

Lots of opinions in here but i think we all can agree we need to catch lighting in a bottle or either dump salary and retool.

I say we all protest the salary cap angry mob style outside bettmans house

\s Oh how i can dream

I still think it's inevitable that Marner gets traded, and thus this is his final year. Our depth is just stretched far too thin with the top-heavy cap allocation this way. The exception? If we win the cup this year. That's about it.

 

[wingman75]

Would 31 other teams would 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.

I don't think we get full value back in that trade for a few years... hard pill to swallow. The immediate impact is as you describe... a complicated mess with other players coming back at probably a high cost and low impact... but that is the position the team has put themselves in. In this case you do what you think is best. It might not be Marner, I am just saying that is who it would be for me... and look, I think he is, or can be, a great player... look at his game tonight for example. But I also think, over a period of 2-3 years you could do a lot of good with 11 million in cap space... you might take a hit in year 1, I agree with your comments on that.

 

[Larcos_Unal]

Kerfoot does zilch for $3.5M a year, cannot keep him around with the cap at such a crunch...he goes as soon as Robertson/Soup are healthy.

 

[Havoc]

I don't think we get full value back in that trade for a few years... hard pill to swallow. The immediate impact is as you describe... a complicated mess with other players coming back at probably a high cost and low impact... but that is the position the team has put themselves in. In this case you do what you think is best. It might not be Marner, I am just saying that is who it would be for me... and look, I think he is, or can be, a great player... look at his game tonight for example. But I also think, over a period of 2-3 years you could do a lot of good with 11 million in cap space... you might take a hit in year 1, I agree with your comments on that.

My computer was freezing . Post got messed up. Delete

 

[Havoc]

I don't think we get full value back in that trade for a few years... hard pill to swallow. The immediate impact is as you describe... a complicated mess with other players coming back at probably a high cost and low impact... but that is the position the team has put themselves in. In this case you do what you think is best. It might not be Marner, I am just saying that is who it would be for me... and look, I think he is, or can be, a great player... look at his game tonight for example. But I also think, over a period of 2-3 years you could do a lot of good with 11 million in cap space... you might take a hit in year 1, I agree with your comments on that.

"you could do a lot of good over 2-3 years with 11 mil in cap space".

That's not even a plan though. Do you plan to do this via free agency? If so, when teams were allowed to spend to infinity they still couldn't build a team. There is no chance they're going to "addition by subtraction" Marner.

So then, the players might come from trading Marner himself? Can't be because you don't believe we are getting full value back, otherwise your whole post is a contradiction. Clearly Marner has sky high trade value then.

So you want us to lose Marner because of a hunch you MIGHT be able to do something with the cap space over 2-3 years......yeah all this does is support why Marner would be easy to trade and get value back. Teams need a Marner especially at 8 mil.

you need to remind yourself how difficult it is to obtain a Marner. There are many teams out there who have more problems than first round flops. Vegas gave us top 5 odds for a reason. We have some elite guys on this team who many teams would want.

If Marner is traded we will love the return. Don't fret over this.

 

[notDatsyuk]

I don't think we get full value back in that trade for a few years... hard pill to swallow. The immediate impact is as you describe... a complicated mess with other players coming back at probably a high cost and low impact... but that is the position the team has put themselves in. In this case you do what you think is best. It might not be Marner, I am just saying that is who it would be for me... and look, I think he is, or can be, a great player... look at his game tonight for example. But I also think, over a period of 2-3 years you could do a lot of good with 11 million in cap space... you might take a hit in year 1, I agree with your comments on that.

Agreed. But unless you can trade him to a team that has 11M cap space, and get back only minor leaguers and/or draft picks, you don't have 11M of cap space to "do a lot of good with".

 

[34]

Nick Richie. Worst player on the team.

 

[cipher]

I love him, but if possible I'm trading Tavares. Ideally, we get back a younger star player with an equivalent contract (hello Jack Eichel!) or we use that 11M on two 5-6M players for added depth.

 

[kb]

Kerfoot does zilch for $3.5M a year, cannot keep him around with the cap at such a crunch...he goes as soon as Robertson/Soup are healthy.

 

[cannucky]

Nylander gets you more in a return than Marner, purely because of the AAV.

Not many teams have a $11M in cap space, and those that do probably don't have the sort of ready-now pieces that the Leafs would want in a trade.

Nylander at $6.9M makes that much easier to do. William also doesn't have the "disappearing act" perception that Marner currently has in the playoffs.

My exact argument for trading Reilly , the reality is interchangeable between the two but Reily has clearly peaked and is in the decline of his career , this time next year we'll be saying the same thing about reilly we are saying about JT today .

 

[Throw More Waffles]

I still maintain that a team can't succeed with three forwards making 11 mil (40% of total cap). Tavares has an ntc, and Matthews is Matthews.

So yeah, it's still Marner.

Anything else is a band-aid solution.

 

[Tak7]

My exact argument for trading Reilly , the reality is interchangeable between the two but Reily has clearly peaked and is in the decline of his career , this time next year we'll be saying the same thing about reilly we are saying about JT today .

Not sure how he's "clearly" peaked / on the decline.

The "concern" about a physical decline is pretty unwarranted - he's still a guy who is getting stronger & faster every year, and his skating hasn't looked at any risk. He also stays pretty healthy, and doesn't play a physical, hard brand of hockey like, perhaps, Muzzin does. That to me is the sort of guy that probably isn't at risk for a massive physical decline anytime soon.

 

[Sniper99]

if you trade Tavares you will never get a high profile UFA ever again

bye Marner.

Thats not true at all.

 

[Sniper99]

For those saying "I'd trade Marner for 2-3 good quality players"

My question would be to where then cause I just cant see anyone offering "2-3 good quality players" Cant see who is taking that 10.8-11 million dollar contract

For me its Rielly. We need a #1 dman and IMO Rielly just isnt that.

 

[cannucky]

So 80 points. He has past that every year since his 2nd season.
He is worth his contract. He is a super star. He was a first team all star and people like you want to trade him. His cutesy plays have worked. The man is among the most gifted players in the league. He is untouchable as far as I can see.

I finally got my LIKE button back and my only regret is I can only click it once for this post .

 

[cannucky]

Not sure how he's "clearly" peaked / on the decline.

The "concern" about a physical decline is pretty unwarranted - he's still a guy who is getting stronger & faster every year, and his skating hasn't looked at any risk. He also stays pretty healthy, and doesn't play a physical, hard brand of hockey like, perhaps, Muzzin does. That to me is the sort of guy that probably isn't at risk for a massive physical decline anytime soon.

Passed by as our #1 two years ago , only had 1 good season in his career the rest he is a pretty big Dash , gets walked like an incontinent dog on a nightly basis , need I continue ? like I said past his peak and even that was brief , he's on a decent enough contract that he could easily bring in a much younger faster , bigger kid to serve on our second pair in return for pennies on the dollar from a team that isn't looking to wait on youth development .

 

[Tak7]

Passed by as our #1 two years ago , only had 1 good season in his career the rest he is a pretty big Dash , gets walked like an incontinent dog on a nightly basis , need I continue ? like I said past his peak and even that was brief , he's on a decent enough contract that he could easily bring in a much younger faster , bigger kid to serve on our second pair in return for pennies on the dollar from a team that isn't looking to wait on youth development .

Passed by. Lol.
If that were the case, they wouldn't have extended him.
If you're going to be a hater, that's fine. Qualify your comments. To say he's only had 1 good season in his career is absurd and hilarious.

 

[cannucky]

I don't think we get full value back in that trade for a few years... hard pill to swallow. The immediate impact is as you describe... a complicated mess with other players coming back at probably a high cost and low impact... but that is the position the team has put themselves in. In this case you do what you think is best. It might not be Marner, I am just saying that is who it would be for me... and look, I think he is, or can be, a great player... look at his game tonight for example. But I also think, over a period of 2-3 years you could do a lot of good with 11 million in cap space... you might take a hit in year 1, I agree with your comments on that.

yes but does 11 million get you 2 40 plus points wingers in todays NHL ? And thats not including the points they have to replace from the second roster player getting bumped out of the line up for them to both play . 1 80+ points player in the hand is always worth more than two 40's in the bush .

 

[cannucky]

Passed by. Lol.
If that were the case, they wouldn't have extended him.
If you're going to be a hater, that's fine. Qualify your comments. To say he's only had 1 good season in his career is absurd and hilarious.

Let me fix that for you . He's Dash 25 and his only big year he had 30 plus secondary assists on the PP If your going to be a FanBoy thats fine just Quantify your comments eh . You extend name players to lock them in so teams know what they are getting in a trade , he still has name value and thats the best time to move on from him because defensively he has always been not good .His career has been playing as a fourth winger attacking from the back end which is fine if you have 5 other strong defensive Dmen because thats not defense and this team needs defense .

 

[Tak7]

Let me fix that for you . He's Dash 25 and his only big year he had 30 plus secondary assists on the PP If your going to be a FanBoy thats fine just Quantify your comments eh . You extend name players to lock them in so teams know what they are getting in a trade , he still has name value and thats the best time to move on from him because defensively he has always been not good .His career has been playing as a fourth winger attacking from the back end which is fine if you have 5 other strong defensive Dmen because thats not defense and this team needs defense .

It's not being a fanboy, calling him what he is.

A good, dynamic skating Dman who can move the puck, contribute offensively, while being a liability in his own end. He's signed a contract that reflects that - he's not in that elite tier, of the guys who got paid ahead of him. He is in that tier just behind though, which is reflected in the dollar he's making next season.

 

[therealkoho]

Matthews more than a few reasons for it, one of which is the return would be really great for the team and could set the team up for the next 10 years.

 

[Sweetpotato]

Marner for a blue chip forward prospect, a 1st and a dump with a short contract.

 

[Darcy Tucker]

In order of preference

Sandin
Ritchie
Kerfoot
Engvall
Dermott