Player Discussion Mitch Marner, Continued

[Stephen]

Florida’s D was mostly 6’-6’2 with only Ekblad and Mikkola above that, the Avs only had Manson and Johnson as big guys, 4 of their D were below 200 pounds and they had a pair of 5’10 guys playing big minutes. Rielly at 6’1 225 would be considered one of the bigger guys on most cup winning blue lines outside of Vegas, Washington, and St Louis.

I’m not saying you need 6 Torrey Krugs but most teams have the majority of their D as 6-6’2 guys at 200 pounds +/- 15lbs, and there’s a lot of bigger defenses in the basement.

I didn't really state a size requirement for length defenders, but I think you want a good core of guys at 6'2" and up and the construction of the Leafs blueline now is a good proof of concept that size helps.

I don't really care to draw lessons from Colorado with Makar and Toews and Girard or Florida with Montour and Forsling or other specific cases because we don't have access to a lot of those higher end skill defensemen. More likely you can fill gaps with available, larger defensemen who can cover more ice and be a challenge to play against.

I also don't think it's productive to have a simplistic referendum on size vs skill on defense, and fall into the intellectually impoverished Dubas-think that I just want guys who can think the game, so let's go after market inefficiencies and sign a bunch of smaller D. No thanks. Hard no to 6x Torey Krug's.

Yes all day to high end elite defensemen of any size. No to average smaller defensemen when a bigger guy at the same skill level can be had. And pay attention to the group dynamic so you don't run small to average and wonder why you get torn apart by a heavy forecheck.

 

[Martin Skoula]

I didn't really state a size requirement for length defenders, but I think you want a good core of guys at 6'2" and up and the construction of the Leafs blueline now is a good proof of concept that size helps.

I don't really care to draw lessons from Colorado with Makar and Toews and Girard or Florida with Montour and Forsling or other specific cases because we don't have access to a lot of those higher end skill defensemen. More likely you can fill gaps with available, larger defensemen who can cover more ice and be a challenge to play against.

I also don't think it's productive to have a simplistic referendum on size vs skill on defense, and fall into the intellectually impoverished Dubas-think that I just want guys who can think the game, so let's go after market inefficiencies and sign a bunch of smaller D. No thanks. Hard no to 6x Torey Krug's.

Yes all day to high end elite defensemen of any size. No to average smaller defensemen when a bigger guy at the same skill level can be had. And pay attention to the group dynamic so you don't run small to average and wonder why you get torn apart by a heavy forecheck.

Yeah again I’m not saying 6 Krugs, but in a scenario where Edmundson gets more money than OEL and Lyub gets 250k less that should be a no-brainer.

 

[Evilhomer]

And how is that working out? Mitch wants to be a Leaf and Leafs can pay him the most money. What is the rush to resign him?

I don't disagree with you. I just have a hard time seeing this management group, with as risk adverse as they are, doing it.

 

[Gabriel426]

The leafs aren’t scared to resign Marner because of his playoff performances. They are only scared of the public backlash if they sign him before the playoffs. That’s literally it. I think as an organization they’ve concluded they want to keep the player. But they know that it would be a media frenzy if they sign him before the playoffs. So if they do hold off, it’s probably more so to appease the fans than do the wait and see approach for playoff success.

I don’t think the organization really looks at Marner’s performances and say, “yup it’s his fault”. I think it’s pretty clear what Treliving thinks is the issue. Not big enough / tough defense, not good enough goaltending. Those have been the key things he’s focused on since arriving. It’s pretty clear whether they are wrong or right on this, the management group believes this group can find it offensively. It’s the other parts they want to strengthen

Yes and no.

Having 12mil or so to spend on UFA or trade for players is better than having 12mil or so less to spend.

The team should be about winning Cup and not having so and so to lead them to win a Cup.
Fans will be happy when the team wins regardless whose name is on the back of the jersey.

Let’s say MM and Leafs agree to sign for 11.5mil today. What’s the rush? How much can MM’s value go up after the playoffs? It won’t be higher than AM, which means 1.5-1.8mil more than 11.5mil. Trading away Kampf and use Lorentz or Dewar at 4C will do the trick.
If Leafs win the Cup while MM wins the Conn Symthe, sign MM at 15mil and nobody will say anything bc Leafs won the Cup.

The problem is that the track records in the playoffs for our Beta Chokers are horrible. Not only had they collectively won ONE round but they collectively underperformed.

That’s why I don’t see the rush in signing MM and JT. Let’s see their performance in playoffs first.
For all we know both of them can be their subpar playoffs self as usual. Like if they both combined for 7 goals in the playoffs while Leafs win the Cup? The power will be with the Leafs to resign them or not. And if one of them, applies to all our top guys, got injured for most of the playoffs and Leafs wins the Cup, the question will be do the Leafs really need them to win in playoffs?

 

[DarkKnight]

The cap is expected to go to $92m next year.

"Unless something really goes off the rails, I think we're going to see a $95 to $97 (million) cap this year, as long as the CBA gets done as part of it". Friedman

As I've said my numbers assume it's higher, as being floated now.

 

[thusk]

I consider taking one of the worst defensive teams in the league and turning them into one of the best defensive teams in the league "making it good". I'm not sure what other definition there could be, but your incorrect comments about drafting/deadlines aside, if you think late 30s Hainsey to Brodie was a downgrade, we most certainly do have different definitions of good. That is a wild take.

Except we had our worst defensive results in half a decade in the playoffs last year, and we were great defensively in the playoffs prior to that.

Before Dubas

leafs goal against 2,83
Dubas era 2,93

1st year after dubas era resulting of Dubas work in D,

Second year where tre really been able to put his color to leafs D 2,50

It's the 1st year leafs really like a top defensive team...

Dubas had all salary cap space of the world to make something with his D but unstead to upgrade his D, he gave up a huge contract to tavares when they was already pretty strong down the middle in the top 6 with matthews and Kadri.

Treliving took a team with no D and no cap space at all and build something better than what Dubas ever did in 2 years...

 

[arso40]

Before Dubas

leafs goal against 2,83
Dubas era 2,93

1st year after dubas era resulting of Dubas work in D,

Second year where tre really been able to put his color to leafs D 2,50

It's the 1st year leafs really like a top defensive team...

Dubas had all salary cap space of the world to make something with his D but unstead to upgrade his D, he gave up a huge contract to tavares when they was already pretty strong down the middle in the top 6 with matthews and Kadri.

Treliving took a team with no D and no cap space at all and build something better than what Dubas ever did in 2 years...

That’s the difference right there dubas went video game mode and tried to make an all star forward group and negated the bacc end tree fixed the bacc end and goalie position and let the high paid forwards do what they’re supposed to

 

[DarkKnight]

...

 

[francis246]

...

lol today will be complaining about how he was on the ice when Utah’s PP scored. I bet my mortgage

 

[Bomber0104]

Mitchy is absolutely dialed in