rumman
Registered User
- Sep 10, 2008
- 14,214
- 14,168
Lose Riley, Kampf and it pretty much us a wash and allows for the trading of some of the following: Jarnkrok, Holmeberg, Laughton, Reeves, McMann, Robertson, Domi……..
Roster Building/Team Building/Future Trade/Drafting thread.
- Thread starter Fogelhund
- Start date
rumman
Registered User
- Sep 10, 2008
- 14,214
- 14,168
Karlsson for marner extended, Crouse for 2nd + Jarnkrok + Robertson, sign Ehlers 7x8 and sign Jeannot 2.5 x 4. Trade kampf for a late pick.
Knies. Matthews. Domi
Ehlers. Karlsson. Nylander
Crouse. Tavares. Mcmann
Jeannot Laughton. Lorentz
That forward group is tough, has skill and solid two way ability.
Knies. Matthews. Domi
Ehlers. Karlsson. Nylander
Crouse. Tavares. Mcmann
Jeannot Laughton. Lorentz
That forward group is tough, has skill and solid two way ability.
- Sep 15, 2007
- 21,390
- 30,924
Sure... but then you are swapping out overpaid, underperforming guys, for massively overpaid, underperforming guys... better off looking elsewhere in that case. Under no circumstances, will Crouse or Anderson provide value for the full contracts. To take them on wouldn't be very bright.
rumman
Registered User
- Sep 10, 2008
- 14,214
- 14,168
Skullz
Registered User
- Jul 5, 2013
- 554
- 1,505
I would Crouse on this team. Brings a lot of what we need, and we are perilously thin at LW.
Not sure what we could offer Utah for him though.
It seems the leafs tried to workout a trade with Marner in season outside of the Rantanen one. I’m curious why they didn’t try last off season.
It sucks Marner didn’t waive in season and I truly get it but boy asking a guy with an 8 month pregnant wife to move is just bad GMing all around
It sucks Marner didn’t waive in season and I truly get it but boy asking a guy with an 8 month pregnant wife to move is just bad GMing all around
- Sep 15, 2007
- 21,390
- 30,924
Rielly put up almost as many points, while playing a more important position, than those two guys combined.
Rielly had a down year, and still put up 41 points, and 7 points in 13 games in the playoffs.
Kampf played C at least, was strong defensively, and played the PK and while he didn't put up many points, 13 points at $2.4 mil, is a hell of a lot better than 27 points at $5.5 mil, or 18 points at $4.3 mil.
If Rielly was a Free Agent today, he'd still get $5-6 mil.
Anderson... $1.5-2 mil, Crouse based on last year alone $1.5 mil... based on reputation, maybe a little more.
If you free up cap space, by moving players you think aren't performing to their cap... you don't then go get players, you know will also underperform... that's a disaster, and just not very bright at all. Sorry, not sorry... there is no argument, or rationalization to go out and obtain these two, at $8.8 mil in cap hits.
Last edited:
Would trading Joseph Woll and signing a guy like Dan Vladar I'd say 2.5 million and gain that extra million in cap space be something to consider?
I would only consider moving Woll if we’re getting a young offensive defenceman (Byram) or a young center in return.
- Sep 15, 2007
- 21,390
- 30,924
It really depends on what you are "trading" Woll for. I highly doubt you get anything of significance back, as goalies don't often get much...
but then you are going from a goalie with a 0.909 SV percentage, to one with a 0.898... Is an extra mil of cap space, worth making your goalie tandem worse? Depends on the return I suppose, but I highly doubt it's worth it.
Americanadian
Registered User
If would be worth it but if he market is limited.
Also - Vladar at over 1.5M is not a good deal.
Not sure Buffalo would give up Byram or Krebs but would be interesting
See I'm not so sure I think ladar is vladar is a decent enough goalie and in front of this defense would put up the same save percentage
I think in front of this team and this defense they will end up having pretty similar save percentages
Rare Jewel
Patience
It could, yes.
To me, if you actually want to both change the culture (moving 16, 91, 44) and also bring in quality replacements, you're going to need to dip into and move off of the two spots that seem "locked in," and that's goaltending and defence.
I don't personally like the D as currently constructed, so that's not a big issue to me. But goalie, if there's an offer for a good young D or a C, you have to look at it.
rumman
Registered User
- Sep 10, 2008
- 14,214
- 14,168
Riley sucked last year too, and it's not the points he puts up that's the problem it's his inability to defend.
Anderson is way overpaid everyone knew that when he signed that contract, this discussion started with adding him if he was bought out and would come cheap I just said if you lose a bad contract you can afford a bad contract. If he is bought out the Leafs wouldn't be the only team interested in signing him so he likely won't come as cheap as we're assuming.
Crouse had a down year and this will make him easier to trade for, I have no doubts he can live up to his contract and/or significantly outperform it..........
I agree with all of this would love to see The addition of one puck moving defenseman the guy I really like be a free agency is Ryan Lindgren or if you can sway a Joseph Woll trade with Buffalo for Byram or Krebs and then sign Lindgren I think it's a huge win
To be honest, the reason that I chose Nashville was because from the outside it's hard to understand the direction of the club. Forsberg, Marchesault, Stamkos, Josi, Skjei and Saros are all signed long term with NMC. (The irony isn't lost on me that I was attempting to trade 2 guys with the same clause, but it was meant to be a goofy thread) Admittedly the need for C wasn't considered. We can throw in a shinny Max Domi.
All jokes aside, how do they plan on tanking when you have the talent listed above? The moves made on TDL didn't look like a team in full tank mode.
People will hate this but:
1. Re-sign Marner & J.T
2. Sign Mikael Granlund so we can run 3 very good lines, instead of a top 6 and no chemistry on the 3rd line.
3. Use Cowan as a winger with Matthews and Knies.
4. Run J.T and Marner on the 3rd line** This is what should have been done years ago. They have never spread out the offense, ever.
5. Sign B.Tanev and Pacioretty so we can have a good shutdown line of Pacioretty-Laughton-Tanev.
Knies-Matthews-Cowan
Robertson-Granlund-Nylander
McMann-Tavares-Marner
Pacioretty-Laughton-Tanev
Essentially we're adding Cowan, Granlund and B.Tanev to the forward group + actually spreading out the talent which they just wouldn't do... and you add those 3 to a series against Florida, who won't have Marchand next time around and I think we take it. But I already know this will get ripped because everyone hates Marner.
1. Re-sign Marner & J.T
2. Sign Mikael Granlund so we can run 3 very good lines, instead of a top 6 and no chemistry on the 3rd line.
3. Use Cowan as a winger with Matthews and Knies.
4. Run J.T and Marner on the 3rd line** This is what should have been done years ago. They have never spread out the offense, ever.
5. Sign B.Tanev and Pacioretty so we can have a good shutdown line of Pacioretty-Laughton-Tanev.
Knies-Matthews-Cowan
Robertson-Granlund-Nylander
McMann-Tavares-Marner
Pacioretty-Laughton-Tanev
Essentially we're adding Cowan, Granlund and B.Tanev to the forward group + actually spreading out the talent which they just wouldn't do... and you add those 3 to a series against Florida, who won't have Marchand next time around and I think we take it. But I already know this will get ripped because everyone hates Marner.
Americanadian
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2007
- 21,390
- 30,924
Why did Crouse have a down year?
Because the young players on Utah got better, pushing Crouse down the lineup. He had previously played with better linemates, and had more playing time. He had a down year from prior years, because he had less opportunity, because better players passed him in the lineup.
How does Crouse not only improve, but "significantly outperform" his contract... well for one, performing to his contract is close to 0.5PPG, while providing other valuable attributes. I'm not sure what exactly you are suggesting is "significant outperformance"... but maybe 55-60 points?
He's only doing that on the first line... which... ya, is never going to happen. He wasn't good enough for top two lines in Utah, he's not going to be good enough here... he's a third line player on a good team at best... so, you are going to get third line minutes, and third line opportunity. His good season, was 45 points... where he had 8 points on the PP, and he's getting zero PP time here. So, his best season, he was 37 points 5v5, playing second line minutes.
I think you are looking at a player, and thinking he's going to rebound from a bad year, without looking at why his numbers went down.
I like Crouse, I've always liked Crouse.. but you have to look at players, on bad teams, who have decent numbers, and then realize they aren't getting that playing time here.
A good comparison is Adam Henrique... he went from first line minutes with Anaheim, to third line with Edmonton.... put up 42 points in 60 games... which was nice, but then only 27 points this year with Edmonton... not because he suddenly sucks, but because when players move down the lineup, you aren't going to get the same points from them.
Crouse would be a third line guy here... 40+ points isn't attainable from that spot, without significant playing time on the Power Play, which he wouldn't get.
Last edited:
Martin Skoula
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 11,837
- 18,143
Well you see Treliving only had a month to move him before his NMC kicked in and we all know it’s impossible to make a trade in only a month in the offseason when there’s maximum cap flexibility.
Disregard the fact that he had a Marner trade + Rantanen extension cooked up in the two weeks the Canes decided to shop Rantanen, while against the cap, and cooking up 3 other trades simultaneously.
It was impossible to trade Marner in only a month.
