Re-tooling For One More Run With This Core

[killer1980]

If only he showed up in the playoffs, he was absolutely horrendous and provided nothing of value other than a few empty net goals. It’s great that he made strides to improve his regular season performances, but he was awful when the games actually mattered.

I totally agree. I believe in a better environment (coach) he could flourish regular & post season.

 

[Dreakmur]

Do you know what does it mean being soft??? Not sure

If they was so soft like you said NEVER they would be 12 minutes and a ghost call away of beating the best team of last 3 season and being the team who challenging tampa the most since 2020 .

Yes, I’m well aware of what it means to be soft. They were less soft than previous years, but still below average. They pushed Tampa to 7 because they were more skilled, and lost because they were less tough.

 

[bossram]

1)
Trade: Mrazek + 2024 1st + Nick Robertson to Arizona for basically nothing

2)
Campbell
Kallgren

1 - You need to put down the pipe. Getting rid of Mrazek won't cost anywhere near that.
2 - If come back without improving in net, we're screwed and nothing else we do will matter.

I repeat - put ... down ... the ... pipe.

I hope he costs less to get rid of than that. But he's coming off perhaps the absolute worse-case scenario that could've happened with Toronto: He was terrible and had major injury issues. He'll also be harder to pawn off on cap floor/cash poor teams because his actual salary is higher than his cap hit. No signing bonus that the Leafs can eat on July 1st either.

Marleau cost a 1st to get rid of. It was 1 year at $6.25M, but the actual cash was only $4.25 million. Mrazek's actual cash owed is about double that amount. The cash-conscious teams (Arizona) with cap space will be more reluctant to eat that. Plus the first I added was further in the future, so teams will discount the value as they typically do with future picks. So I figure another additional asset will be needed to pay them off.

Maybe don't tell people to "put down the pipe" until you've actually considered all the factors in play, which you clearly have not. This scenario really isn't that unreasonable.

I don't think anyone really want to come back with Campbell/Kallgren, but I legitimately don't see any realistic means of improving the goaltending without taking on even larger cap investments, that they frankly can't afford. If Campbell is just average next season, and Kallgren (or Woll) can pitch in .900 goaltending for 20-25 games, that'll be enough for the Leafs to finish top-five again.

 

[ToneDog]

I hope he costs less to get rid of than that. But he's coming off perhaps the absolute worse-case scenario that could've happened with Toronto: He was terrible and had major injury issues. He'll also be harder to pawn off on cap floor/cash poor teams because his actual salary is higher than his cap hit. No signing bonus that the Leafs can eat on July 1st either.

Marleau cost a 1st to get rid of. It was 1 year at $6.25M, but the actual cash was only $4.25 million. With the Leafs eating his July 1st signing bonus, the actual cash was only $1.25 million. Mrazek's actual cash owed is almost 7x that amount. The cash-conscious teams (Arizona) with cap space will be much more reluctant to eat that. Plus the first I added was further in the future, so teams will discount the value as they typically do with future picks. So I figure another additional asset will be needed to pay them off.

Maybe don't tell people to "put down the pipe" until you've actually considered all the factors in play, which you clearly have not. This scenario really isn't that unreasonable.

I don't think anyone really want to come back with Campbell/Kallgren, but I legitimately don't see any realistic means of improving the goaltending without taking on even larger cap investments, that they frankly can't afford. If Campbell is just average next season, and Kallgren (or Woll) can pitch in .900 goaltending for 20-25 games, that'll be enough for the Leafs to finish top-five again.

Trade was made before bonus was due.

Jun 22, 2019 — The club shipped veteran forward Patrick Marleau, a conditional first-round pick and a seventh-round selection in 2020 to the Carolina. The move helps clear cap space for Toronto by removing Marleau’s US$6.25-million salary and increases the likelihood star winger Mitch Marner, who is set to become a restricted free agent on July 1, will remain with the club.

 

[bossram]

Trade was made before bonus was due.

Jun 22, 2019 — The club shipped veteran forward Patrick Marleau, a conditional first-round pick and a seventh-round selection in 2020 to the Carolina. The move helps clear cap space for Toronto by removing Marleau’s US$6.25-million salary and increases the likelihood star winger Mitch Marner, who is set to become a restricted free agent on July 1, will remain with the club.

Good correction. So Mrazek is only double the total cash, which I think makes my proposed payment of a 2024 1st + Robertson basically about right.

 

[ULF_55]

Good correction. So Mrazek is only double the total cash, which I think makes my proposed payment of a 2024 1st + Robertson basically about right.

Way to rich, 1st. or Robertson, and a prospect.

If Kerfoot didn't have a NTC he would be ideal.

I'd rather buyout Mrazek than overpay to dump him.

 

[ACC1224]

Good correction. So Mrazek is only double the total cash, which I think makes my proposed payment of a 2024 1st + Robertson basically about right.

That's too much to pay to clean up a mistake. Better off buying him out.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I hope he costs less to get rid of than that. But he's coming off perhaps the absolute worse-case scenario that could've happened with Toronto: He was terrible and had major injury issues. He'll also be harder to pawn off on cap floor/cash poor teams because his actual salary is higher than his cap hit. No signing bonus that the Leafs can eat on July 1st either.

Marleau cost a 1st to get rid of. It was 1 year at $6.25M, but the actual cash was only $4.25 million. With the Leafs eating his July 1st signing bonus, the actual cash was only $1.25 million. Mrazek's actual cash owed is almost 7x that amount. The cash-conscious teams (Arizona) with cap space will be much more reluctant to eat that. Plus the first I added was further in the future, so teams will discount the value as they typically do with future picks. So I figure another additional asset will be needed to pay them off.

Maybe don't tell people to "put down the pipe" until you've actually considered all the factors in play, which you clearly have not. This scenario really isn't that unreasonable.

I don't think anyone really want to come back with Campbell/Kallgren, but I legitimately don't see any realistic means of improving the goaltending without taking on even larger cap investments, that they frankly can't afford. If Campbell is just average next season, and Kallgren (or Woll) can pitch in .900 goaltending for 20-25 games, that'll be enough for the Leafs to finish top-five again.

Not a chance it costs that much to unload him. You are completely missing the fact that he's a goalie with a proven track record and those kind of players actually have value. Andersen was garbage last year and look what he signed for. The guy was good for two years here, then he had the worst season of his career and then the next one was far worse than even that and guess what, Carolina gave him money and term despite him playing poorly for two whole years. Thinking it would cost a 1st round pick to ditch Mrazek is bad enough but you think we need to add Robertson to the package? LMAO this is just so far off the deep end it's beyond ridiculous. I'm trying to think of when I last saw a trade proposal that was this bad and I'm coming up empty.

Do you really think anyone cares about finishing top-five again? It's all about the playoffs and no matter what the "cap investments are", we have to make them. Saying that we can't afford to do so is frankly madness. Can't afford not to is more like it..

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

Offseason moves:

Trade: Justin Holl for Jessi Puljujarvi (sign at ~$2.75 million)

Don't think Edmonton goes for this, they are set on right D. Like Puljujarvi as a target.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Way to rich, 1st. or Robertson, and a prospect.

If Kerfoot didn't have a NTC he would be ideal.

I'd rather buyout Mrazek than overpay to dump him.

Way too rich is right and even a 1st is too much, never mind adding to that. Mrazek's been pretty solid for 9 years, not sure why people think his value plummets to that far below zero after one bad year. I will again mention Andersen who had the two worst years of his career, the last one was by far the worst and almost as bad as Mrazek's bad season and he got money and term from Carolina.

 

[bossram]

Way to rich, 1st. or Robertson, and a prospect.

If Kerfoot didn't have a NTC he would be ideal.

I'd rather buyout Mrazek than overpay to dump him.

Obviously no one wants to pay that, but extrapolating the cash costs, that seems about the price. Personally I'm not that high on Robertson either. I don't think he has the speed (or even edgework) or hockey IQ to be an impact player as a smaller guy.

A Mrazek buyout would leave $1M, $830k, $1.4M, $1.4M on the cap over the next 4 seasons. Given how tight the Leafs will need to run their cap situation just to be compliant, I honestly don't think they can afford to have that dead money on the books.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Obviously no one wants to pay that, but extrapolating the cash costs, that seems about the price. Personally I'm not that high on Robertson either. I don't think he has the speed (or even edgework) or hockey IQ to be an impact player as a smaller guy.

A Mrazek buyout would leave $1M, $830k, $1.4M, $1.4M on the cap over the next 4 seasons. Given how tight the Leafs will need to run their cap situation just to be compliant, I honestly don't think they can afford to have that dead money on the books.

Agree to disagree, not much else to say except that I would bet it doesn't cost us a 1st to unload Mrazek and I would bet a TON that even if it does cost a 1st round pick, we won't have to add to it, there's just no way.

 

[thusk]

Yes, I’m well aware of what it means to be soft. They were less soft than previous years, but still below average. They pushed Tampa to 7 because they were more skilled, and lost because they were less tough.

They were more skilled??? Where???

Campbell more skilled than vasilevskiy? No

Rielly brodie muzzin gio more skilled than hedman mcdonaugh cernak and sergachev? No

Matthews marner more skilled than point/ kucherov: this one yes probably

Jt nylander kerfoot bunting, kampf mikheyev engval spezza blackwell more skilled than stamkos palat, killorn, colton, hagel, paul, perry? No

So no toronto was not more skilled team, they was faster than tampa its different.

 

[bossram]

Not a chance it costs that much to unload him. You are completely missing the fact that he's a goalie with a proven track record and those kind of players actually have value. Andersen was garbage last year and look what he signed for. The guy was good for two years here, then he had the worst season of his career and then the next one was far worse than even that and guess what, Carolina gave him money and term despite him playing poorly for two whole years. Thinking it would cost a 1st round pick to ditch Mrazek is bad enough but you think we need to add Robertson to the package? LMAO this is just so far off the deep end it's beyond ridiculous. I'm trying to think of when I last saw a trade proposal that was this bad and I'm coming up empty.

Do you really think anyone cares about finishing top-five again? It's all about the playoffs and no matter what the "cap investments are", we have to make them. Saying that we can't afford to do so is frankly madness. Can't afford not to is more like it..

It would be great to not pay that much to disappear Mrazek, yes. But he's coming off such a disastrous season, that he will be hard to find a taker for. He's got a combination of cumbersome cap hit + high cash value that I think would deter a lot of would-be salary dumpees. I'll be very surprised if it doesn't cost a 1st to move him.

The most frequent name being thrown around to solve the goaltending problem is Gibson, which would be a massive risk for not that much reward. Sure, I'd make the cap investment necessary if you're actually getting a top-tier goaltender. $5M on Demko? Yes. Saros at $5M? Absolutely. Shesterkin at $5.7M? 100%. Gibson at $6.4M? God no.

Goaltenders are such voodoo and volatile year-to-year, that unless you have an elite one, you might as well go with the carousel (like Carolina did). If Mrazek isn't so bad and has a proven track record as you say, why not run him back then?

 

[bossram]

Don't think Edmonton goes for this, they are set on right D. Like Puljujarvi as a target.

Their D-core is pretty weak overall. I expect they'll move Barrie (as he's redundant) and try add a more defensively responsible 4/5 RD. Barrie in and Holl out saves Edmonton $2.5M on the cap and gives them a more defensive tilt on their blueline.

EDM MSM has been manifesting Pulju out of there for months, so I think there is a good chance he can be acquired.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Goaltenders are such voodoo and volatile year-to-year, that unless you have an elite one, you might as well go with the carousel (like Carolina did). If Mrazek isn't so bad and has a proven track record as you say, why not run him back then?

Because Mrazek isn't a solid #1 which is what we need, he's more of a 1B tandem guy. If it ends up that we can't do better than resigning Campbell then we'll probably keep Mrazek but no matter what happens, we're not going to run with the plan of him being our #1 goalie.

 

[bossram]

Because Mrazek isn't a solid #1 which is what we need, he's more of a 1B tandem guy. If it ends up that we can't do better than resigning Campbell then we'll probably keep Mrazek but no matter what happens, we're not going to run with the plan of him being our #1 goalie.

I would agree with that. But it's hard for him to even be a tandem guy because of his injury issues. Which reduces his usefulness to any team.

But I don't see any realistic, actually good #1 goalie available for a price the Leafs can pay.

 

[ULF_55]

Obviously no one wants to pay that, but extrapolating the cash costs, that seems about the price. Personally I'm not that high on Robertson either. I don't think he has the speed (or even edgework) or hockey IQ to be an impact player as a smaller guy.

A Mrazek buyout would leave $1M, $830k, $1.4M, $1.4M on the cap over the next 4 seasons. Given how tight the Leafs will need to run their cap situation just to be compliant, I honestly don't think they can afford to have that dead money on the books.

They can afford that more than they can afford to give away the few assets they have.

They paid 5.5 on goalies this year, if they landed a backup around $1mm, and then a starter around 3.8, the buy-out cost is only around $.7mm. Move Holl replace his cap with Sandin and you probably recoup that .7.

 

[bossram]

They can afford that more than they can afford to give away the few assets they have.

They paid 5.5 on goalies this year, if they landed a backup around $1mm, and then a starter around 3.8, the buy-out cost is only around $.7mm. Move Holl replace his cap with Sandin and you probably recoup that .7.

The cap is going to be very tight, an extra million in dead space will be important. They're going into the offseason with $74 million on the cap, needing to re-sign Engvall, Sandin, Liljegren, and probably Giordano, and then fill out the 4th line and 7th D with league minimum types, at minimum.

Buying out Mrazek gives you $2.8M in extra space next season, but they would still need to sign two goalies (or find a legit starter + Kallgren).

Moving Holl gives you another $2 million, but you need to replace him with at least a warm body to sit in the press box, so that'll only save you around a million.

And again, I'm just not super high on Robertson anymore (I used to be). If the price to move Mrazek only ends up being Robertson + mid-round pick, that is a big win.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I would agree with that. But it's hard for him to even be a tandem guy because of his injury issues. Which reduces his usefulness to any team.

But I don't see any realistic, actually good #1 goalie available for a price the Leafs can pay.

I'm curious - what is this arbitrary limit you've set on what the Leafs can pay?

 

[Menzinger]

Good correction. So Mrazek is only double the total cash, which I think makes my proposed payment of a 2024 1st + Robertson basically about right.

Difference is the team trading for Mrazek will do so with the intention of having him as a regular in the lineup.

Marleau was trading with the knowledge he would be immediately bought out - rendering it essentially dead money.

Will adjust the valuation of the trade fairly significantly imo

 

[Gary Nylund]

The cap is going to be very tight, an extra million in dead space will be important. They're going into the offseason with $74 million on the cap, needing to re-sign Engvall, Sandin, Liljegren, and probably Giordano, and then fill out the 4th line and 7th D with league minimum types, at minimum.

Buying out Mrazek gives you $2.8M in extra space next season, but they would still need to sign two goalies (or find a legit starter + Kallgren).

Moving Holl gives you another $2 million, but you need to replace him with at least a warm body to sit in the press box, so that'll only save you around a million.

And again, I'm just not super high on Robertson anymore (I used to be). If the price to move Mrazek only ends up being Robertson + mid-round pick, that is a big win.

We've heard this same story for a few years now - cap hell, we're screwed. Then Dubas goes to work and we somehow manage to have a pretty good season.

 

[Nylanderthal]

Shief for willy and putting JT on the wing does make some sense



Campbell gone for sure imo anyways

If you can do Willy + futures for schief + Helle you’d have to look at that. Breaking down Willy into spare parts doesn’t appeal to me at all

 

[bossram]

I'm curious - what is this arbitrary limit you've set on what the Leafs can pay?

I don't really think they can (or should, barring an exceptional goalie being available) allocate more than $5M to the goaltending position.

Difference is the team trading for Mrazek will do so with the intention of having him as a regular in the lineup.

Marleau was trading with the knowledge he would be immediately bought out - rendering it essentially dead money.

Will adjust the valuation of the trade fairly significantly imo

Yes, that's definitely a consideration. How many teams want Mrazek in the lineup though? Arizona? They could throw anyone in goal for $750k. They don't really need (or want) Mrazek at all.

 

[Nylanderthal]

I totally agree. I believe in a better environment (coach) he could flourish regular & post season.

The coach isn’t out there on the ice with them making or not making plays. They were mostly deployed how they should have been, and didn’t capitalize.
Dude scored a bunch this year and went Casper the ghost vs Tampa