Toggle sidebar

Trades and Free Agency - 2022/2023 Trade Deadline Edition

Status
Not open for further replies.
LeafSteel said:
Honestly, I'm just astounded at the blind arguing in his favor, to the point you would think that their favorite team is the Toronto Patrick Kane's.......

I want any player that makes us better, but I'm not blindly throwing everything at a player who brings a lot of question marks and I'm not convinced will merit the price paid to get him, and what the opportunity cost of bringing him is. By that I don't just mean the assets we trade to get him (which may indeed by minimal due to the garbage below average season he's having), but also another player we might have traded for but didn't because we brought in Kane instead...

Bottom line for me: he's 34 years old, I've always questioned his character and that hasn't changed, he may or may not be hurt and the physicality ratchets up in the playoffs, can he thrive or even survive with whatever is/isn't ailing him?

Too many question marks with the stakes too high for Dubas to make any mistakes here. I say the money is even that he doesn't even change Teams this TDL, but if he does, I'm seriously hoping it's to go somewhere else. Worst case, he comes at the price of a song, and is one of several Forwards we bring in so if he craps the bed, he's out of the lineup faster than you can say "Aki Berg"........

We've already seen one serious Stanley Cup contender in the NYR look at him and decide to go in a different direction, who I'm sure could have gotten him at a discount too. We need to be that smart as well.
Click to expand...

Not a single person in this thread has advocated "blindly throwing everything" at Kane. You're thinking Meier/Chych.

The whole point of a potential Kane trade is that we'd be buying low on him - he likely would not even cost us a 1st.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stickty111, acrobaticgoalie, NHL WAR and 4 others
ACC1224 said:
He could choose to be a professional. I'm sure he has no issue cashing this crappy teams cheques.

Is this the player you'll get if things don't go his way on his new team?
Click to expand...
I think that depends on whether or not do you want to see him on your team.

He could just be tanking and doesn't care or if he is traded to a new team, he just started playing to his level again and we sit here wondering how come the Leafs didnt trade for him.
 
Gabriel426 said:
I think that depends on whether or not do you want to see him on your team.

He could just be tanking and doesn't care or if he is traded to a new team, he just started playing to his level again and we sit here wondering how come the Leafs didnt trade for him.
Click to expand...
I've said all along that if the cost was minimal and it didn't prevent any other additions, go ahead and add him.
I don't think anyone wants to see the pouty version on this team.
Now we hear the brain dead, "if you don't want Kane, you must love Engvall" garbage.

This place use to be so much better, now it's just mostly dumb.
 
Tony Romo said:
they need forwards that can score. unless adding a huge forward makes us score more goals in an elimination game, we will have the same issue we always do. Not scoring when it matters most.

Don't care if they are 4'2 or 6'1. Get me a guy who can score in game 6 or 7.
Click to expand...

Thats my point, size is only a tool like speed or anything else
LeafSteel said:
Honestly, I'm just astounded at the blind arguing in his favor, to the point you would think that their favorite team is the Toronto Patrick Kane's.......

I want any player that makes us better, but I'm not blindly throwing everything at a player who brings a lot of question marks and I'm not convinced will merit the price paid to get him, and what the opportunity cost of bringing him is. By that I don't just mean the assets we trade to get him (which may indeed by minimal due to the garbage below average season he's having), but also another player we might have traded for but didn't because we brought in Kane instead...

Bottom line for me: he's 34 years old, I've always questioned his character and that hasn't changed, he may or may not be hurt and the physicality ratchets up in the playoffs, can he thrive or even survive with whatever is/isn't ailing him?

Too many question marks with the stakes too high for Dubas to make any mistakes here. I say the money is even that he doesn't even change Teams this TDL, but if he does, I'm seriously hoping it's to go somewhere else. Worst case, he comes at the price of a song, and is one of several Forwards we bring in so if he craps the bed, he's out of the lineup faster than you can say "Aki Berg"........

We've already seen one serious Stanley Cup contender in the NYR look at him and decide to go in a different direction, who I'm sure could have gotten him at a discount too. We need to be that smart as well.
Click to expand...

Wich player available didn't have question mark just for fun... its the case with every player you can trade for

Ror, meier, henrique, bertuzzi, chychrun, barbashev, gavrikov, mccabe, comtois... choose who you want they all coming with question mark

Ps NYR moved probably because they didn't want to wait at the deadline...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kurtz
ACC1224 said:
I've said all along that if the cost was minimal and it didn't prevent any other additions, go ahead and add him.
I don't think anyone wants to see the pouty version on this team.
Now we hear the brain dead, "if you don't want Kane, you must love Engvall" garbage.

This place use to be so much better, now it's just mostly dumb.
Click to expand...

I hope the irony's not lost on you, because you just pulled a Kane.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leafs4Life77
ACC1224 said:
I've said all along that if the cost was minimal and it didn't prevent any other additions, go ahead and add him.
I don't think anyone wants to see the pouty version on this team.
Now we hear the brain dead, "if you don't want Kane, you must love Engvall" garbage.

This place use to be so much better, now it's just mostly dumb.
Click to expand...
To me it is all about cost. If the cost makes sense, need to make the trade.

I really didn't know about the Kane Vs Engvall thing, I must had missed reading it here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ACC1224
Gabriel426 said:
To me it is all about cost. If the cost makes sense, need to make the trade.

I really didn't know about the Kane Vs Engvall thing, I must had missed reading it here.
Click to expand...
Back a page or two, strawman central.
 
The Podium said:
You can tell who watches other teams and who doesn’t based on how many perceived holes people believe this team has.

Realistically we are 0 adds away from a cup, rather they are a mentality change away. We have the top end talent to compete with the best of them and a system that covers for any potential depth issues up front. An add or 2 or 3 is just bonus, but the team as is still is among the top contenders in the league.
Click to expand...
Sure - if it was regular season rules and officiating.
If you don’t get that, then I question if YOU actually watch other teams and their holes.
 
Last edited:
Kurtz said:
Not a single person in this thread has advocated "blindly throwing everything" at Kane. You're thinking Meier/Chych.

The whole point of a potential Kane trade is that we'd be buying low on him - he likely would not even cost us a 1st.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the "throwing everything" part is over the top, as no one advocating for Kane is really saying how much they are prepared to pay to get him, but my point remains the same. The lack of objectivity being shown here to bring in Kane like he's some kind of saviour is hilarious and hard to take.

I'm open to him, but at a minimum, with more significant pieces brought in as well, and if he doesn't deliver, he sits his ass down pronto. Unfortunately we've seen that Keefe can't be trusted to do that part, so it just further makes me uneasy to bring him in.

Some here make him sound like the 2nd Coming, and I can't take them seriously anymore....

COMMON TRADES!!! (The Let's Get Them Over With Edition)
 
Last edited:
Probably a few players there that would say the same.

Hagel.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kurtz
Kurtz said:
Not a single person in this thread has advocated "blindly throwing everything" at Kane. You're thinking Meier/Chych.

The whole point of a potential Kane trade is that we'd be buying low on him - he likely would not even cost us a 1st.
Click to expand...

His cap hit is enormous, even at 50% retention it's going to seriously effect other potential moves, that's also a cost

We should be trying to make our bottom 6 deeper so we shouldn't be throwing forwards overboard for cap reasons, we should be trying to add and keep the guys we already have

Engvall can play on a shutdown line and Kerfoot can score a bit, that's still useful when the teams being put together
 
LeafSteel said:
Perhaps the "throwing everything" part is over the top, as no one advocating for Kane is really saying how much they are prepared to pay to get him, but my point remains the same. The lack of objectivity being shown here to bring in Kane like he's some kind of saviour is hilarious and hard to take.

I'm open to him, but at a minimum, with more significant pieces brought in as well, and if he doesn't deliver, he sits his ass down pronto. Unfortunately we've seen that Keefe can't be trusted to do that part, so it just further makes me uneasy to bring him in.

Some here make him sound like the 2nd Coming, and I can't take them seriously anymore....

COMMON TRADES!!! (The Let's Get Them Over With Edition)
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Personally, I'd easily pay the Giordano price (a pair of 2nds) for him, but not the Giroux price (1st+Tippet equivalent...let's just say Topi). Everything that I've read/heard leads me to believe the return will be closer to the former rather than the latter.
 
How much cap room do the Leafs have at this moment without moving out salary?
And how much cap would it needs to get Kane at 50% at this moment? Bc I think 50% of Kane is 5.25mil but since the season is already 54 game or so, the current cap hit for Kane is around 1.8mil if he is traded to the Leafs or any teams today at 50% retention, am I correct?
 
Kiwi said:
His cap hit is enormous, even at 50% retention it's going to seriously effect other potential moves, that's also a cost

We should be trying to make our bottom 6 deeper so we shouldn't be throwing forwards overboard for cap reasons, we should be trying to add and keep the guys we already have

Engvall can play on a shutdown line and Kerfoot can score a bit, that's still useful when the teams being put together
Click to expand...

That's a fair point, but Kane's cap hit would fit into Muzzin's LTIR and if we're bringing in another expensive forward, then we can ship out Engvall/Kerfoot. But to your point about depth, what if we try:

Bunts-Matthews-Kane
Jarn-JT-Marner
Knies-Nylander-Kerfoot
Holm/Zar-Kampf-Engvall

Wouldn't that give us 3 dangerous two-way lines and a 4th line that is excellent defensively and can give us 5-10 minutes of time in a defensive deployment?
 
Kurtz said:
Fair enough. Personally, I'd easily pay the Giordano price (a pair of 2nds) for him, but not the Giroux price (1st+Tippet equivalent...let's just say Topi). Everything that I've read/heard leads me to believe the return will be closer to the former rather than the latter.
Click to expand...
Honestly, Topi alone would be a gross and stupid over-pay.

I know that's not what you are saying at all, but even with a minimal cost to bring in, how much retention is Chicago going to make? Our cap space is tight and bringing in Kane takes away from our pool to bring in someone else as well.

Sorry, I'm just not on it at all, unless Dubas can do some serious wheeling and dealing to bring in other pieces that can be counted on more and fit our long-term, which is what his priority appears to be as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kb
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom