Rumor: Leafs trying to trade Nick Ritchie

Cupless44

Registered User
Jun 25, 2014
7,200
3,352
The game is about speed these days, even in the bottom 6. Ritchie doesnt get around very well. Leafs will have done well if they move that signing. Good look trading a guy that cleared waivers.
 

nobody

Registered User
Aug 8, 2017
3,723
3,304
The game is about speed these days, even in the bottom 6. Ritchie doesnt get around very well. Leafs will have done well if they move that signing. Good look trading a guy that cleared waivers.
We've seen worse contracts moved around the league. I think the Leafs will be okay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: teddygmr

HockeyVirus

Woll stan.
Nov 15, 2020
19,440
29,709
???

You called someone out for getting their facts wrong, yet you completely made up that Richie had a 30 goal pace. I see that you've now lowered the bar to just "being productive" so you obviously know that you're wrong.

Teams also had a chance to take a flyer on him when he was on waivers and available to the whole league for free. No one wanted him.

Being in his "prime" is irrelevant when he sucks.

lol people so shook that I won't pretend this is some albatross contract like Savard or Gallagher or Petry and a team might be willing to take him because they see value in them. Seriously the amount of people replying to me upset about this is hilarious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nylanderthal

Nylanderthal

Registered User
Jun 9, 2010
7,901
6,252
He will move, it may cost us though.
I think there’s a better chance he’s a cap ballast in a deadline upgrade. Selling teams still need to ice a roster, and if Nick manages to put anything decent together the rest of this year and next he’ll be ones of next deadlines most desirable players.
The other option is a team who is tight to the contract limit might want to purge a bunch of useless/expensive 1 way deals in the AHL and clear some room to sell rentals where you’re likely to get multiple contracts back.
Either way a shitty 25 game stretch with a fast paced team like Toronto doesn’t completely tank his value. As much as everyone loves crapping on our management they obviously didn’t give out the deal they did in a vacuum and without competing offers.
 
Last edited:

ponder

Registered User
Jul 11, 2007
17,035
6,530
Vancouver
He’s signed for 1 more year at a $2.5 mil cap hit, but if we buy him out, it’s $300K next year, $1.1 mil the year after. So that’s kinda like $1.4 mil total retention, but I think spread out over 2 years is a bit better than all in one.

Based on that, I think we’d do something like Ritchie, $1 mil retained, for nothing (well, filler like a conditional 7th). And maybe there’s someone out there who wants 1 year of Ritchie for $1.5 mil? Probably?
 

horner

Registered User
May 22, 2007
8,557
4,950
He’s signed for 1 more year at a $2.5 mil cap hit, but if we buy him out, it’s $300K next year, $1.1 mil the year after. So that’s kinda like $1.4 mil total retention, but I think spread out over 2 years is a bit better than all in one.

Based on that, I think we’d do something like Ritchie, $1 mil retained, for nothing (well, filler like a conditional 7th). And maybe there’s someone out there who wants 1 year of Ritchie for $1.5 mil? Probably?
Because of the pandemic there are alot of teams that want to get rid of long term injury contract.
Retain .5 mil for LTIR or a contract or two that we can barry in the minors.
 

Holymakinaw

Registered User
May 22, 2007
8,637
4,514
Toronto
The game is about speed these days, even in the bottom 6. Ritchie doesnt get around very well. Leafs will have done well if they move that signing. Good look trading a guy that cleared waivers.

Arizona has already made it known that they're looking to take on salary, just to get picks. I don't think it'll be so hard to move him. Sorry. :)
 

Arthur Morgan

Registered User
Jul 6, 2016
8,915
6,234
Toronto
www.youtube.com
I'm not offended that you are delusional. What team would give an asset for Ritchie and take on that salary next season? Why didnt they take him on waivers. Get real.
GMs make moves for alot of different reasons.
1 year remaining isnt that bad and getting assets back for 1 season is something alot of GMs look for
players get passed on waivers then traded for all the time
seems like the only delusional one is you basically saying Ritchie is impossible to move
 

Macheteops

Registered User
Apr 13, 2005
958
995
lol people so shook that I won't pretend this is some albatross contract like Savard or Gallagher or Petry and a team might be willing to take him because they see value in them. Seriously the amount of people replying to me upset about this is hilarious.

You think people are shook by this? I honestly could never see myself upset at what some random person posted on a hockey board. They might disagree with you
 

johnnybbadd

Registered User
Mar 29, 2011
1,179
1,228
Ritchie might have been a useful player 20 years ago but he is just way too slow for the way the game is played now. If anyone picks him up they will regret it.
 

The Devilish Buffoon

Registered User
Dec 24, 2018
12,708
11,497
Roussel @ 50% (1.5m x 1)
for
Ritchie (2.5m x 2) + their pick of two 4th round or later players from 2019 or 2020, with Toronto being able to take 2-4 guys off the table. Or something like that.
 

4thline

Registered User
Jul 18, 2014
14,610
9,997
Waterloo
My bet is he'll be a coyote. They need to add both salary and roster players for next season, and I can't see the state of the org/using college facilities making them a huge draw. Being an everyday player likely lets him rehab his value and they can get something at next years deadline
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nylanderthal

notbias

Registered User
Feb 16, 2017
11,904
9,936
With Toronto supposedly interested in Chiarot, I'm wondering if Leaf fans would be willing to swallow the asking price if we take back Ritchie at full cap.

I hope not, I don't think he fits on the Leafs unless he can play the right side. I also think the supposed return is insane.

And how much of an upgrade on Holl/Liljegren is he?
 

Guttersniped

Satan’s Wallpaper
Sponsor
Dec 20, 2018
22,766
50,916
lol people so shook that I won't pretend this is some albatross contract like Savard or Gallagher or Petry and a team might be willing to take him because they see value in them. Seriously the amount of people replying to me upset about this is hilarious.
It’s way shorter and cheaper (particularly in terms of a cap hit) than those, so much so that I don’t really understand the comparison.

He has the opposite of the typical recent Leaf contracts because of escrow though, they’re usually more attractive because the deals are front-loaded.

Both Kapanen and Johnsson made less then their cap hits by the time they were traded. Their 2020-21 signing bonuses were already paid before the trades happened and their salaries really drop in their two last seasons.

The 3.3m salary next season makes it a tougher sell, and cap space might get pricey if the salary cap doesn’t go up 1m next season because of this season’s lost revenue. I’m curious what it will cost. (Not a 1st IMO, but something. He’s 26, so potential as a selling point has faded quite a bit.)
 

Nothingbutglass

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
4,693
4,148
GMs make moves for alot of different reasons.
1 year remaining isnt that bad and getting assets back for 1 season is something alot of GMs look for
players get passed on waivers then traded for all the time
seems like the only delusional one is you basically saying Ritchie is impossible to move
I didnt say he was impossible to move so not sure why you are quoting me. I said he sucks and has no value. Dubas basically flushed $5 million dollars. You could staple him to assets to move him
 

LEAFANFORLIFE23

Registered User
Jun 17, 2010
47,417
16,046
The game is about speed these days, even in the bottom 6. Ritchie doesnt get around very well. Leafs will have done well if they move that signing. Good look trading a guy that cleared waivers.

That happens all the time most recently Kyle Clifford
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad