Rumor: Toronto One Of The Teams Erik Karlsson Has Spoken To

[TheDoldrums]

How would we even afford him? One or two of the C4 would need to go. Not sure he's worth it.

Don't sign Klingberg and Domi and you're already there with like $4M retained. Or sign Domi and don't do Reaves and Kampf.

All those players are relatively useless compared to the most recent Norris winner. The difference between them and Holmberg/McCann is tiny compared to the difference between Klingberg and Karlsson.

 

[RobBrown4PM]

Don't sign Klingberg and Domi and you're already there with like $4M retained. Or sign Domi and don't do Reaves and Kampf.

All those players are relatively useless compared to the most recent Norris winner.

Honestly, I'd rather have the depth than a D-man who's a 1-trick pony. Albeit, a really good 1 trick pony.

 

[Menzinger]

The problem with Karlsson, aside from his age +cap hit, is he's really just a one man show.

Needs to be given free reign with the puck every time he's on the ice. He doesn't seem like he would be a good fit with possession monsters like Matthews/Marner/Nylander who all eat up the top six icetime. And the Leafs already got guys like Rielly who can play set up man offensively.

 

[socko]

I'm pulling for Pittsburgh. Time for Dubas to work his magic and destroy the dreams of an entirely new city.

 

[6ix]

I mean if you send Brodie + Klingberg back the other way that clears close to 9.5 mill in cap space. Karlsson at 30% retained comes in at 8 mill

 

[Gabriel426]

Imagine it is MM going the other way in a 1 for 1 deal.

Jokes aside, I can see why the Leafs are being linked by medias as it creates buzz, like the Kane trade a months ago and then Kane just came out and said his camp only spoke with Rangers.

Realistically, I don’t see the Leafs getting EK unless MM or JT or Willie plus TJ moving the other way. Even if Sharks willing to retain 3mil, just trading Willie still won’t be enough in terms of Cap.

 

[Menzinger]

EK is likely going to have to play at least the next three years for the Sharks because of that contract.

If he's still good in three years, the Sharks likely will be more willing to retain a couple mil during his final year for maybe a 2nd round pick (maybe he gets traded at the tdl of 2026)

 

[Buds17]

The current situation is we're clear favourites in the Atlantic, Matthews and Nylander have one more year on their deals.

If there was ever an "all in" time, this is it.

I just don't think people appreciate the difference between Klingberg and the reigning Norris trophy winner. Klingberg is scraps, Karlsson is the current best defenseman in the world. I am more than willing to take the future risk for that kind of talent.

I think Klingberg is being sold short here ("scraps"). Furthermore, Karlsson is also coming off of a career year by quite a fair margin. The deletions from the roster required to fit in Karlsson would also consist of more than just a Klingberg. I certainly respect your ambition regarding this matter though.

 

[IPS]

Talk to the voters. Or consider that "well Makar is better" is not a serious argument against acquiring a defenseman.

No but a serious argument is is that Karlsson does not fit this team whatsoever.

He's a defensemen who demands the puck every shift to make his impact. The more he has the puck - the less Matthews, Marner and Nylander have the puck.


And regarding the 1st half of your post - Matthews winning the Hart over McDavid did not make him a better player than McDavid.

 

[Lightsol]

Easy to get players to waive NMC, especially when that player lives to drive offence. Find a way to put him in every pain in the ass defensive position, 1st unit PK, pair him with Klingberg and tell him he is the guy who stays back and defends while Klingberg leads the rush, reduce his minutes.

Harold Ballard, is that you?

 

[authentic]

Neither advocating for or against the idea if adding him, but Karlsson is NOT a bad defensive player contrary to popular belief

IIRC he basically broke even at ES not including empty net goals against (that's the only reason he was a minus player this past season) on a team that was like -50 or so with him off the ice. Surely he is no defensive stalwart (but easily better than Klingberg there) but his offense and transition game alone make him the best defenseman along with Makar, although I'm not sure he replicates the season he had last year, but he would still be really good assuming he doesn't run into injury trouble again.

That said, I'd be shocked if he ended up in Toronto anyway, and I also don't think he would be the greatest fit ever. But who knows, I can't say I would be disappointed if it somehow happened. It would be a really exciting team to watch and he has carried a much lesser team to the conference finals before.

 

[AcerComputer]

Imagine it is MM going the other way in a 1 for 1 deal.

Jokes aside, I can see why the Leafs are being linked by medias as it creates buzz, like the Kane trade a months ago and then Kane just came out and said his camp only spoke with Rangers.

Realistically, I don’t see the Leafs getting EK unless MM or JT or Willie plus TJ moving the other way. Even if Sharks willing to retain 3mil, just trading Willie still won’t be enough in terms of Cap.

Erik Karlsson personally said he spoke to the Leafs, so it's not just media buzz. In other circumstances I would agree that the Leafs are often used as a ploy by Agents and GMs to generate media interest and stoke the trade market. The only other possibility is that the Leafs kicked the tires before they signed Klingberg on July 1st, but now that ship has sailed since they have spent their cap space, but it's being put out there now in order to generate the impression of a larger field of suitors and trade market interest.

 

[TheMadHatTrick]

Ballsy move that would completely transform our team. Would have to send Nylander or Marner the other way to make the money work though unless there's retention.

 

[ANDI P IS CUTE]

Kinda think Rielly is on the move.

1) We know Tre likes big, tough , defensive defence men. Rielly is not that.

2) He signed a one way, train wreck of a defensive defenceman in Klingberg to basically play 1st unit PP. Rielly while better defensively, is not a defensive defenceman, his job is to QB the PP and drive offence from the 1st pairing. This is what Klingberg does. How do you have two defenders with suspect defensive ability play big minutes and not suffer defensivly? Kinda looks like Klingberg is stealing Riellys easy minutes on PP1. If Rielly is not playing 1st unit , how does he get enough minutes to drive offence, we pay him to produce points not play a shutdown role?

3) If the Karlsson rumor is true, how could any sane person have Rielly, Klingberg and Karlsson on the back end and think that is a defence that will play big rough playoff hockey and defend enough to shut down the other teams stars? F-ing nightmare if those guys are our top 3. the scores are going to be 9-8 every night.

4) Rielly is a Jekyll/Hyde player, not sure you want that inconsistency on the back end when you got Klingberg who is a nightmare in his own end, think Sandin but better point producer. Two poor defenders in your top 3 is not a good recipe + the guy we depended on in Brodie, to be that stabilizing defender, has clearly been affected by father time and has lost a step..

yes trade our best playoff performer.

 

[Hellcat]

yes trade our best playoff performer.

If it makes our team better, yes. Just because he had a good playoffs once, does not mean he will repeat. He's shit in his own end, its been 7 years of trying to find a guy that can play with him, ergo, he makes so many mistakes our end, an elite defender is necessary to make up for his defensive liabilities. Hell trade Matthews if it makes our team better. There have been much better playoff performers that were traded, that's hockey.

Harold Ballard, is that you?

No its your Mom and if you keep doing that you'll go blind.

 

[Hellcat]

Definitely but you wouldn’t need both of them.


Yes he was traded but it’s a completely different situation. Rielly = NMC

He was traded to a team that was on his no trade list. Clearly even though a contract says something, it does not mean you can't find a way around it. I've been in enough boardrooms to know contracts are not worth the paper they are printed on. In the real world contracts are broken ALL the time.

 

[ACC1224]

He was traded to a team that was on his no trade list. Clearly even though a contract says something, it does not mean you can't find a way around it. I've been in enough boardrooms to know contracts are not worth the paper they are printed on. In the real world contracts are broken ALL the time.

I doubt it.

 

[ULF_55]

He was traded to a team that was on his no trade list. Clearly even though a contract says something, it does not mean you can't find a way around it. I've been in enough boardrooms to know contracts are not worth the paper they are printed on. In the real world contracts are broken ALL the time.

Pretty simple in the NHL contracts are public and agreed publicly by team and player.

Now, can a player agree to move, certainly but he can't be traded without his consent.

Happened this year and last year, a player refused and the trade was off.

 

[Hellcat]

They were going to put him on waivers, and had a deal in place with Columbus to claim him.

This cannot happen with Rielly. NMC means he can't be waived.

And do you think that TB isn't paying the price for what they did? They lost to the worst team in NHL history in round 1 according to some.

The point is being missed by some of you. Contracts are broken all the time. You create conditions that the person ho is leveraging the contract is then willing to break to get out of those conditions. Just like they did with McDonnaugh, they threatened to send him to Hockey hell if he didn't waive is NTC to a specific team. That is called leverage. Tre has leverage in that he can simply put Rielly in tough minutes until Rielly choose's to go to a team that will allow him to play the soft minutes get currently gets in Toronto.

Equivocating is not rational. Just because TB lost to Toronto, it does not mean it was because McDonnaugh was traded. Just because TB had a down year to their standards last year, it does not mean it was because McDonnaugh was traded.

I doubt it.

You doubt the truth, super, good talking with you.

 

[Arzak]

He was traded to a team that was on his no trade list. Clearly even though a contract says something, it does not mean you can't find a way around it. I've been in enough boardrooms to know contracts are not worth the paper they are printed on. In the real world contracts are broken ALL the time.

The matrix I live in, got courts and judges and law. It's rarely smart to break a contract. Not to mention the PR disaster such a move could bring. JT was da best UFA ever according to some here.

When it's time to lure McDavid here, I want you to talk about the sh*t Leafs can offer to someone, you know via contract, on paper...

 

[TheGreenTBer]

Kinda think Rielly is on the move.

1) We know Tre likes big, tough , defensive defence men. Rielly is not that.

2) He signed a one way, train wreck of a defensive defenceman in Klingberg to basically play 1st unit PP. Rielly while better defensively, is not a defensive defenceman, his job is to QB the PP and drive offence from the 1st pairing. This is what Klingberg does. How do you have two defenders with suspect defensive ability play big minutes and not suffer defensivly? Kinda looks like Klingberg is stealing Riellys easy minutes on PP1. If Rielly is not playing 1st unit , how does he get enough minutes to drive offence, we pay him to produce points not play a shutdown role?

3) If the Karlsson rumor is true, how could any sane person have Rielly, Klingberg and Karlsson on the back end and think that is a defence that will play big rough playoff hockey and defend enough to shut down the other teams stars? F-ing nightmare if those guys are our top 3. the scores are going to be 9-8 every night.

4) Rielly is a Jekyll/Hyde player, not sure you want that inconsistency on the back end when you got Klingberg who is a nightmare in his own end, think Sandin but better point producer. Two poor defenders in your top 3 is not a good recipe + the guy we depended on in Brodie, to be that stabilizing defender, has clearly been affected by father time and has lost a step..

Why do the Leafs move out the one guy that, despite having his warts, actually cares about the playoffs?

 

[ACC1224]

The point is being missed by some of you. Contracts are broken all the time. You create conditions that the person ho is leveraging the contract is then willing to break to get out of those conditions. Just like they did with McDonnaugh, they threatened to send him to Hockey hell if he didn't waive is NTC to a specific team. That is called leverage. Tre has leverage in that he can simply put Rielly in tough minutes until Rielly choose's to go to a team that will allow him to play the soft minutes get currently gets in Toronto.

Equivocating is not rational. Just because TB lost to Toronto, it does not mean it was because McDonnaugh was traded. Just because TB had a down year to their standards last year, it does not mean it was because McDonnaugh was traded.



You doubt the truth, super, good talking with you.

I have no doubt you believe your delusions are the truth. In the real world where the rest of us live the Leafs have zero ability to ‘break’ his contract. Wishing it to be different is just wishing.

 

[Buds17]

The point is being missed by some of you. Contracts are broken all the time. You create conditions that the person ho is leveraging the contract is then willing to break to get out of those conditions. Just like they did with McDonnaugh, they threatened to send him to Hockey hell if he didn't waive is NTC to a specific team. That is called leverage. Tre has leverage in that he can simply put Rielly in tough minutes until Rielly choose's to go to a team that will allow him to play the soft minutes get currently gets in Toronto.

Equivocating is not rational. Just because TB lost to Toronto, it does not mean it was because McDonnaugh was traded. Just because TB had a down year to their standards last year, it does not mean it was because McDonnaugh was traded.



You doubt the truth, super, good talking with you.

There's an argument to be made for Rielly already playing tough minutes as a Leaf considering he averages the most ice time on the team. He'd be an *interesting* one for coaching/management to play hardball with.

 

[hullsy47]

i

The pigeons on youtube will run with tjis

 

[FerrisRox]

He was traded to a team that was on his no trade list. Clearly even though a contract says something, it does not mean you can't find a way around it. I've been in enough boardrooms to know contracts are not worth the paper they are printed on. In the real world contracts are broken ALL the time.

This is all nonsense. He agreed to the trade to Nashville, so his no trade list is completely irrelevant if he agrees to the trade.

McDonagh traded to Predators by Lightning | NHL.com

Tampa Bay receives defenseman Myers, forward Mismash for 33-year-old defenseman

www.nhl.com

It's frankly bizarre that you are in here repeatedly pretending that No Trade Clauses and NMC's don't need to be honoured.