News Article: Scott Mayfield Future (NY Post article)

[Mike C]

I'm not sure - maybe he does. My main point was that there's really not a great reason to deal him. He's one half of one of the best D pairs in the league signed to a fair contract. We could get a haul for Mayfield based not only because of his past play in the playoffs but because of his contract, and there's a solid chance we lose him for nothing in the offseason anyway... and we already have 2 top 4 RHD under team control. IMO unless we're firmly in a playoff spot he should be dealt

I understand what you're saying. I think as the game speeds up year after year, he has his issues. The pairings/rankings seem diluted due to injuries every year anyway. I'm not as impressed with Pulock as others are but I see the point.

I get what your saying about Mayfield. I don't see us entrenched in a spot. I see us hovering on the edge

My hope is they can figure a way to keep him but letting him go for nothing is not desirable

 

[saintunspecified]

I'm not sure - maybe he does. My main point was that there's really not a great reason to deal him. He's one half of one of the best D pairs in the league signed to a fair contract. We could get a haul for Mayfield based not only because of his past play in the playoffs but because of his contract, and there's a solid chance we lose him for nothing in the offseason anyway... and we already have 2 top 4 RHD under team control. IMO unless we're firmly in a playoff spot he should be dealt

I will say "it depends" only because we don't have any firm information about the state of play over his contract negotiations, and any provisions that may be involved. But it seems to me that NYI desperately need to retool the forward unit. 4 solid D is enough to do that around. NYI really could use additional assets, although it remains to be seen what Mayfield would garner. His cap hit would be manageable by any buyer who had the need, so that has to help.

If Mayfield wasn't such an likeable player, true warrior type, the decision wouldn't be so hard.

 

[The Real JT]

Pulock has a full NTC for the first 5 years, this being year #1. The remaining years it changes to a modified NTC.

I’ve never been a big fan though his contract is fair value. Unfortunately, he’ll never be that star offensive Dman we were hoping for using his “legendary “ slap shot to pot 15-20 goals a year.

Given the NTC he’s not going anywhere unless he pulls a Hamonic on us.

 

[MJF]

He's been a good soldier and admittedly underpaid currently but, still flawed and a 4th or 5th defenseman, if the number is anything more than $3.5-$4M x 5 years I would try rather get an asset for him at the trade deadline. Maybe give him a 6th year if you need to. Pulock is at 6.15 AAV and Pelech 5.75M as our top pairing both 2 years younger than Mayfield. He is still in his prime but not young at 30 years old. I don't think he moves the needle enough for a contract >$4M AAV currently. If he gets it elsewhere I would wish him good luck and thank him for his service here.

And of course it is easy to say we would keep or not keep a player for $xxx but always have to factor in who we can replace him with if we didnt keep him. Also assuming we are not a cup contender this year, so unless a miracle happens and they find another gear and add a major scorer at the TDL, I dont mind trading assets.

I disagree. Mayfield is better than the way you and @YearlyLottery are portraying him to be.

 

[Throttle]

Pulock is a 1RD on a 6M a year contract. He's a great value for us, and because of that we could move him at any time. There's just not a great reason to do that unless someone was going to severely overpay.

Mayfield taking a hometown discount will probably look something like 4 x 6 for what will essentially be our 3RD. If you can pick up a replacement level 3RD for 2.5M less, PLUS pick up a 1st at the deadline that should be too much value to pass up.

Pulock is not a 1RD, stop. The Isles paid Pulock to have an offensive component to his game, which he’s become wholly ineffective at the past two seasons.

I just don't know if hitching the wagon to Mayfield as a bottom pairing defenseman making close to $5 million is good cap wise.

They only thing here is both Trotz and Lambert have put him out there in critical game situations over and over again for the past 3 seasons. That’s not the sign of a bottom pairing defenseman.

 

[MJF]

Pulock is not a 1RD, stop. The Isles paid Pulock to have an offensive component to his game, which he’s become wholly ineffective at the past two seasons.


They only thing here is both Trotz and Lambert have put him out there in critical game situations over and over again for the past 3 seasons. That’s not the sign of a bottom pairing defenseman.

100% on both statements.

 

[JKP]

If you mean trading salary for term, that's kind of what I expect to see. He'll sign for something in the 6-8 year range at a lower number than he could get on the open market for 4-5 years.

I'd do this. f*** the future, the cap will go up again and guys like him have a longer shelf life, imo. Simple crease-clearer and PKer

 

[YearlyLottery]

I disagree. Mayfield is better than the way you and @YearlyLottery are portraying him to be.

Do you view Mayfield as a top four defenseman? My issue with paying him $5 million is he will be on the third pairing. I love him come playoff time and think he has developed quite a bit. I also think that this team will miss him sorely if he leaves. That being said I am worried about locking Mayfield up as a third pairing guy at this point.

 

[MJF]

Do you view Mayfield as a top four defenseman? My issue with paying him $5 million is he will be on the third pairing. I love him come playoff time and think he has developed quite a bit. I also think that this team will miss him sorely if he leaves. That being said I am worried about locking Mayfield up as a third pairing guy at this point.

I do. If you set Dobson aside as a true offensive specialist, I would put only Pelech ahead of Mayfield, and Mayfield ahead of Pulock as he is no longer looked towards to provide any meaningful offense. Mayfield is miles ahead of Romanov at this point.

So what difference does Mayfield’s pairing number make when at the end of the game he’s likely to log between 20-24 minutes and play in the last minute of a close game?

 

[YearlyLottery]

I do. If you set Dobson aside as a true offensive specialist, I would put only Pelech ahead of Mayfield, and Mayfield ahead of Pulock as he is no longer looked towards to provide any meaningful offense. Mayfield is miles ahead of Romanov at this point.

So what difference does Mayfield’s pairing number make when at the end of the game he’s likely to log between 20-24 minutes and play in the last minute of a close game?

So here is what I will say.... If Pulock is starting to be seen as the odd man out I would trade him and keep Mayfield. I'm just not totally sure cap wise the Isles will ever have an average offense if they sign Mayfield to a large contract and keep everyone else.

Keep in mind if they can keep him for anything less than $4.5 I am in. I don't see a long term contract aging great for him at all though. Think it will be another bad contract.

To think Mayfield might make more than Toews... I have never faulted Lou for trading Toews but man this team could sure use his skating ability right about now.

 

[The Real JT]

I can’t be the only one here shaking their head regarding suggestions that we trade Pulock.

I would’ve done that one or two years ago but that ship has sailed. He’s in the first year of an 8 year deal with a full NTC for the first 5 years. It’s not happening.

 

[YearlyLottery]

I can’t be the only one here shaking their head regarding suggestions that we trade Pulock.

I would’ve done that one or two years ago but that ship has sailed. He’s in the first year of an 8 year deal with a full NTC for the first 5 years. It’s not happening.

It's a hockey forum where we are talking about roster trades for a GM that has not shown he has wanted to trade roster players. All of this talk is most likely a waste of time. It is fun to debate potential roster moves though.

For the record I'd keep Pulock and let Mayfield walk for anything over $4.5

 

[Throttle]

I can’t be the only one here shaking their head regarding suggestions that we trade Pulock.

I would’ve done that one or two years ago but that ship has sailed. He’s in the first year of an 8 year deal with a full NTC for the first 5 years. It’s not happening.

The Isles signed Pulock to a deal that included his offense. His windup is slow, his accuracy is terrible, and he’s not even on the PP1, if at all at times.

If you want to ‘fix’ this team, the a RH ‘top’ 4 dman gets you offense. Reup Mayfield, backfill with any of the random spare parts on Ana or Was as examples.

Maybe trading a guy with a NTC kinda wakes up this clown car of a team that can’t get their crap together.

The Isles are not a team that can retool through UFA or don’t suck enough to net a top 3 pick in the draft. So, trading a premium player (or one thought to be) is a smart move.

Fans want to believe all the issues with this team are the fringe guys, 4th line, and Bailey. They are part of the issue, however, a core problem is with some of the performance of the core players.

 

[JTToilinginToronto]

I would still trade him.

If Mayfield wants to come back, he can talk to the team in the offseason.

 

[MJF]

The Isles signed Pulock to a deal that included his offense. His windup is slow, his accuracy is terrible, and he’s not even on the PP1, if at all at times.

If you want to ‘fix’ this team, the a RH ‘top’ 4 dman gets you offense. Reup Mayfield, backfill with any of the random spare parts on Ana or Was as examples.

Maybe trading a guy with a NTC kinda wakes up this clown car of a team that can’t get their crap together.

The Isles are not a team that can retool through UFA or don’t suck enough to net a top 3 pick in the draft. So, trading a premium player (or one thought to be) is a smart move.

Fans want to believe all the issues with this team are the fringe guys, 4th line, and Bailey. They are part of the issue, however, a core problem is with some of the performance of the core players.

How do you trade a guy with a NTC? Ask him nicely?

After you telegraph to him that you don’t want him anymore he still has veto power over any trade.

 

[seabass45]

Easy decision IMO.

 

[Throttle]

How do you trade a guy with a NTC? Ask him nicely?

After you telegraph to him that you don’t want him anymore he still has veto power over any trade.

NTC just gives him an element of control.

 

[Mike C]

How do you trade a guy with a NTC? Ask him nicely?

After you telegraph to him that you don’t want him anymore he still has veto power over any trade.

In theory, there is probably a way to professionally pay him for his cooperation no?

 

[MJF]

In theory, there is probably a way to professionally pay him for his cooperation no?

I’m not sure if that’s in the CBA.

 

[Mike C]

I’m not sure if that’s in the CBA.

Ah, but guys like me and you would be able to find a way to play Let's Make a Deal within legal boundaries!!

 

[seabass45]

I see we’re playing the “let’s ignore NTCs” game again.

 

[PK Cronin]

I see we’re playing the “let’s ignore NTCs” game again.

The only reason to contemplate some trade ideas with players who have NTCs is that sometimes players are fine with moving on if the team doesn't want them anymore. It's happened before. The issue that then presents itself is that the player dictates where they're going so there's not as much leverage to get a good return.

Still, to your point, very rare to see it happen.

 

[Richie Daggers Crime]

Easy decision IMO.

 

[seabass45]

The only reason to contemplate some trade ideas with players who have NTCs is that sometimes players are fine with moving on if the team doesn't want them anymore. It's happened before. The issue that then presents itself is that the player dictates where they're going so there's not as much leverage to get a good return.

Still, to your point, very rare to see it happen.

The other issue is that when it comes time to sign other players they might be suspicious that the same trick will be played on them. Why sign with a team long term if they decide less than a year later that you need to go? It creates a toxic environment.

It happened with McDonagh because Tampa was over the cap and someone had to go, he had value, there weren’t many other options (he may have been the only player who teams were willing to pick up). Still, it was VERY scummy and I’m baffled that people keep floating it with Pulock when we don’t have the same cap issues. Some of us just have regrets.

 

[MJF]

The only reason to contemplate some trade ideas with players who have NTCs is that sometimes players are fine with moving on if the team doesn't want them anymore. It's happened before. The issue that then presents itself is that the player dictates where they're going so there's not as much leverage to get a good return.

Still, to your point, very rare to see it happen.

Lou signs Pulock to an NTC two years ago, then asks him to waive it so he can trade him to a particular team? Not good business, imho.

If there’s been one constant in Lou’s career, it’s that he’s a players’ GM.