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

[Hockey 4 Life]

Kerfoot
Ritchie
Holl
Engvall
Dermott
Muzzin

 

[ULF_55]

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.

marner is owed 24.8 million over the next 3.8 seasons.
So around 6 million per season for an all-star winger.
Cap space doesn't change, but there are many teams who can fit him under their cap, especially when you consider they would be returning a player with, likely, a large cap hit.

The option is Matthews, and no I don't see Arizona as Matthews destination of choice.
Living there in the off-season isn't the same as playing there.

Moving Kerfoot and Engvall is going to make an attitude makeover? Yeah, right.

 

[Notsince67]

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 .

Way too difficult of a concept for some

 

[Americanadian]

1. Marner
2. Muzzin
3. Kerfoot
4. Ritchie
5. Mrazek

 

[Gary Nylund]

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 .

We have had several 80+ points players for a while now, funny how that hasn't led to any playoff success whatsoever eh?

Way too difficult of a concept for some

Not sure why you think that adding up points is anything but simple. Now explaining why we have all these points and never win, now that's a bit tougher. Has it ever occurred to you that there is more to building a winning team then adding up points?

 

[ShaneFalco]

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.

He is not worth his contract and most knew that the moment it was signed. He has had poor playoff performances. He's not physical (he actually avoids it), has no shot, and when things tighten up, he's easily shut down. He's also entitled and fragile. He's a very talented regular season performer who has become predictable

 

[ER89]

We have had several 80+ points players for a while now, funny how that hasn't led to any playoff success whatsoever eh?
You're talking to paul


Not sure why you think that adding up points is anything but simple. Now explaining why we have all these points and never win, now that's a bit tougher. Has it ever occurred to you that there is more to building a winning team then adding up points?

 

[Notsince67]

We have had several 80+ points players for a while now, funny how that hasn't led to any playoff success whatsoever eh?



Not sure why you think that adding up points is anything but simple. Now explaining why we have all these points and never win, now that's a bit tougher. Has it ever occurred to you that there is more to building a winning team then adding up points?

Like I said...it is a difficult concept for a few here. The poster was making a valid point regarding the opportunity cost of a position and that simple additive math doesnt work.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Like I said...it is a difficult concept for a few here. The poster was making a valid point regarding the opportunity cost of a position and that simple additive math doesnt work.

Seriously? Try reading his post again. There's literally nothing in there that talks about anything other than points, not sure how you missed this.

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 .

 

[Notsince67]

Seriously? Try reading his post again. There's literally nothing in there that talks about anything other than points, not sure how you missed this.

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 .

I read it property. 2 player to replace Marner might add to his total production but the 2nd players points one of them replaces doesnt get added to the equation. It is an error of yours I've noticed. Like I said...the concept is too difficult for some to understand.

 

[Darcy Tucker]

I read it property. 2 player to replace Marner might add to his total production but the 2nd players points one of them replaces doesnt get added to the equation. It is an error of yours I've noticed. Like I said...the concept is too difficult for some to understand.

Better consult a realtor.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I read it property. 2 player to replace Marner might add to his total production but the 2nd players points one of them replaces doesnt get added to the equation. It is an error of yours I've noticed. Like I said...the concept is too difficult for some to understand.

That's true but you completely missed my point which was that there is more to evaluating teams (and players) than adding up a bunch of points (and whatever else your spreadsheet can do for you).

 

[Notsince67]

Better consult a realtor.

I'll make it simple.
Replacing Marners 100 pts does not equate to 2 players of 50 each. 1 of those player replace Marners spot and another replace someone else...say a 20pt forward. That means you need 2 players who can produce at a 120 point clip.
Is that clear enough or should I keep the point total examples to single digits so you dont have to do the hard rethmatic

 

[Notsince67]

That's true but you completely missed my point which was that there is more to evaluating teams (and players) than adding up a bunch of points (and whatever else your spreadsheet can do for you).

I responded to the poster who made the exact point I was referring to. If you had another point, I clearly didnt see a need to respond to something so unspecific.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I responded to the poster who made the exact point I was referring to. If you had another point, I clearly didnt see a need to respond to something so unspecific.

Yeah if you don't like unspecific things, sticking to your spreadsheet is definitely the way to go.

 

[Notsince67]

Yeah if you don't like unspecific things, sticking to your spreadsheet is definitely the way to go.

No. I can do stuff like this in my sleep with my toes covered

 

[Darcy Tucker]

Let's be frank Lil papi, you're the whiniest ankle biter on this page and I look down at you from my pillows of fortune.

 

[Gary Nylund]

No. I can do stuff like this in my sleep with my toes covered

Again, completely missing the point. The point isn't whether or not you need help doing things like adding 40 and 40 together, the point is that trivial math such as adding up points comes nowhere close to what is required to assess players, teams etc.

That's why the narrative about trading an 80 point guy for two 40 point guys etc. is completely irrelevant as it doesn't even begin to answer the question is trading Marner (or anyone else for that matter) a good idea or not.

You can go back to sleep now.

 

[Gabriel426]

Again, completely missing the point. The point isn't whether or not you need help doing things like adding 40 and 40 together, the point is that trivial math such as adding up points comes nowhere close to what is required to assess players, teams etc.

That's why the narrative about trading an 80 point guy for two 40 point guys etc. is completely irrelevant as it doesn't even begin to answer the question is trading Marner (or anyone else for that matter) a good idea or not.

You can go back to sleep now.

What if the player coming back in the trade is a goalie, lol.

 

[New User Name]

Definitely in the minority here but it would be Austin.
We have him for 2 more years after this year and the second year he has a NMC.

He could have signed for 8 but he wanted more, he's a greedy player. Because he's American and the Canadian/American tax agreement he brings home a hell of a lot more money than McDavid.

He's gone after this contract expires, that is a guarantee.

 

[Notsince67]

Again, completely missing the point. The point isn't whether or not you need help doing things like adding 40 and 40 together, the point is that trivial math such as adding up points comes nowhere close to what is required to assess players, teams etc.

That's why the narrative about trading an 80 point guy for two 40 point guys etc. is completely irrelevant as it doesn't even begin to answer the question is trading Marner (or anyone else for that matter) a good idea or not.

You can go back to sleep now.

Marner is one of the best 2 way forwards in the league. I have no idea what you are insinuating. Throw an irrelevant motherhood statement out there in an attempt to look like you have a point if you like but your smarmy spreadsheet comment just proves you dont have a clue what you are talking about.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Marner is one of the best 2 way forwards in the league. I have no idea what you are insinuating. Throw an irrelevant motherhood statement out there in an attempt to look like you have a point if you like but your smarmy spreadsheet comment just proves you dont have a clue what you are talking about.

Just speaking plainly my friend, no hidden meanings, it's all right there in black and white. I've explained my point at least three different ways and now you're off on some "motherhood" tangent. If you still don't get it, I give up.

 

[Teeder Keon]

I would trade

engfootitchieholl

 

[Notsince67]

Just speaking plainly my friend, no hidden meanings, it's all right there in black and white. I've explained my point at least three different ways and now you're off on some "motherhood" tangent. If you still don't get it, I give up.

You are messaging me with nonsense. I only responded on point to another posters comment that you are still unable to understand after an explanation.

 

[Anthrax442]

I would trade anyone, it all depends on the return.