Trades and Free Agency - 2022 Off-season

[andora]

Throw in Topi and another 1st from Toronto while you are at it..,,

Just brutal.

Why is it terrible? Sandin and 1st ?

 

[ACC1224]

Throw in Topi and another 1st from Toronto while you are at it..,,

Just brutal.

Doesn’t seem that bad. Certainly seen much worse

 

[Dekes For Days]

Cleaning the carpet with a flame-thrower wasn't a good idea.

No flamethrower was used. Just a normal cleaner, which unfortunately, can be expensive when there's a big mess to clean up.

 

[Dreakmur]

No flamethrower was used. Just a normal cleaner, which unfortunately, can be expensive when there's a big mess to clean up.

I guess you're the expert. Worshipping Dubas has led to a lot of messes for you to clean up.

One more play-off loss, and maybe we'll see the flame-thrower after all.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

Why is it terrible? Sandin and 1st ?

Kerfoot and Holl have value too, especially to us.

 

[andora]

Kerfoot and Holl have value too, especially to us.

To us yes but personally if i get a long term 2/3 dmanthat has the potential to be more kerfoot and holl kind of lose their shine as their contracts head out the door

I like chychrun / liljegren pairing

 

[Dekes For Days]

I guess you're the expert. Worshipping Dubas has led to a lot of messes for you to clean up.
One more play-off loss, and maybe we'll see the flame-thrower after all.

I don't worship Dubas. I just don't blame people for other people's mistakes. It's an idea that has led me well in life.
We have one of the best chances at a cup next year, so fingers crossed, but if not, I trust that the business knows that flamethrowers aren't effective carpet cleaners.

 

[Kiwi]

Nope but all good if that’s what you believe.
You can either make the most out of a bad situation or compound it. I believe he compounded it.

Dubas has shown an ability to wriggle out of some pretty tough contracts (some of which he signed mind-due)

That just shows everybody here how bad that Marleau contract was, Dubas isn't God which he would have needed to be to make that pig look attractive

 

[SeaOfBlue]

To us yes but personally if i get a long term 2/3 dmanthat has the potential to be more kerfoot and holl kind of lose their shine as their contracts head out the door

I like chychrun / liljegren pairing

Chychrun really is not worth jumping a crap ton of hoops to get. He is very overrated from one season and having a big shot.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Dubas has shown an ability to wriggle out of some pretty tough contracts (some of which he signed mind-due)
That just shows everybody here how bad that Marleau contract was, Dubas isn't God which he would have needed to be to make that pig look attractive

It's amazing that there's still debate about the cost when the Monahan trade literally just happened.

 

[Dreakmur]

I don't worship Dubas.

LOL, ok....

I just don't blame people for other people's mistakes.

Yes you absolutely do. That's your primary defence of Dubas. It's always somebody else's fault.

We have one of the best chances at a cup next year, so fingers crossed, but if not,

We've been one of the favourites for a few years now, and still never seen the second round.

I trust that the business knows that flamethrowers aren't effective carpet cleaners.

It's almost time to remove the carpet.

 

[andora]

Chychrun really is not worth jumping a crap ton of hoops to get. He is very overrated from one season and having a big shot.

Fair enough...

Personally i dont see that as much of a price

 

[TheGreatOne11]

In all honesty I don't see us as a better team than last year, and we didn't get it done there either.

These two question marks in goal is what will make the difference, if one can become that legit #1 we could do some damage. If the goaltending is mediocre this team ain't going anywhere deep, and its just a gamble, a massive gamble, one has upside that they haven't hit yet and the other we are banking on former glory.

Scary time to be a Leaf fan given the most important position in the sport is a massive question mark for us.

 

[Dreakmur]

It's amazing that there's still debate about the cost when the Monahan trade literally just happened.

Marleau was significantly better than Monahan is now, and we gave up an unconditional 1st

 

[Knies iT]

In all honesty I don't see us as a better team than last year, and we didn't get it done there either.

These two question marks in goal is what will make the difference, if one can become that legit #1 we could do some damage. If the goaltending is mediocre this team ain't going anywhere deep, and its just a gamble, a massive gamble, one has upside that they haven't hit yet and the other we are banking on former glory.

Scary time to be a Leaf fan given the most important position in the sport is a massive question mark for us.

We're a softer team with the same question marks in goal and an even older blueline that struggled to stay healthy a year ago.

We're basically treading water and desperately hoping our internal prospects can take massive strides.

 

[Americanadian]

It's amazing that there's still debate about the cost when the Monahan trade literally just happened.

Just because two bad trades happened doesn't make them good. Dubas set the precedent. Treliving followed suit 3 years later because the price was set.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Yes you absolutely do. That's your primary defence of Dubas. It's always somebody else's fault.

No, I don't. If something is Dubas' fault, then it's Dubas' fault. If something is somebody else's fault, then it's their fault. Most things are attributable to Dubas, but the horrible Marleau contract that Lou knowingly signed and knew would have to be moved by the 3rd year is one of a few things attributable to Lou. He is responsible for the consequences of it, just like Dubas is responsible for the consequences of his contracts.

The 13 draft slots to get rid of Mrazek? That's attributable to Dubas, the person who signed it. The difference between a 2nd/3rd and the individual cost of Lyubushkin that it cost to get rid of Ritchie? That's attribute to Dubas, the person who signed it. In a similar vein, the consequences of the Marleau contract are attribute to Lou, the person who signed it.

We've been one of the favourites for a few years now, and still never seen the second round.

It often takes years for favourites to win the cup, but that's not a reason to stop trying. Everybody's path is different.

It's almost time to remove the carpet.

I think you've lost the analogy.

Marleau was significantly better than Monahan is now, and we gave up an unconditional 1st

40 year old Marleau that's being traded as completely dead cap is worse than 28 year old Monahan as a player expected to play. The only condition on the 1st is how good the 1st is, not whether it's a 1st. We had similar protection, and Calgary's has some limiting stipulations, and ways it could be more. And while small, we actually traded up a round at the end of the draft in the Marleau trade. The Monahan trade should have ended the debate that wasn't really a debate - that's just the cost.

Just because two bad trades happened doesn't make them good. Dubas set the precedent.

Dubas did not set the precedent for a 1st (funny enough, I believe Lou did), and cap dumps have been happening for years. There's nothing abnormal about the price that we paid, considering how bad what we were trading was. Most cap dumps involve players that can be LTIRed, or players that are overpaid but still bring value. Marleau was just dead cap.

 

[ACC1224]

Dubas has shown an ability to wriggle out of some pretty tough contracts (some of which he signed mind-due)

That just shows everybody here how bad that Marleau contract was, Dubas isn't God which he would have needed to be to make that pig look attractive

Yep he’s certainly had practice getting out of bad deals and the Marleau contract was horrible. Feeling a GM has no responsibility for his actions will never make sense to me. Pretty sure most feel the same way.

 

[Dreakmur]

No, I don't. If something is Dubas' fault, then it's Dubas' fault. If something is somebody else's fault, then it's their fault. Most things are attributable to Dubas, but the horrible Marleau contract that Lou knowingly signed and knew would have to be moved by the 3rd year is one of a few things attributable to Lou. He is responsible for the consequences of it, just like Dubas is responsible for the consequences of his contracts.

Both GMs are partially responsible. Dubas create a situation were he forces himself to pay a ransom.

The 13 draft slots to get rid of Mrazek? That's attributable to Dubas, the person who signed it. The difference between a 2nd/3rd and the individual cost of Lyubushkin that it cost to get rid of Ritchie? That's attribute to Dubas, the person who signed it. In a similar vein, the consequences of the Marleau contract are attribute to Lou, the person who signed it.

I'm glad you could come up with some safe contritions.

It often takes years for favourites to win the cup, but that's not a reason to stop trying. Everybody's path is different.

We're not even talking about the cup. We're talking about a round. It shouldn't take those favourites years to win a single round.

I think you've lost the analogy.

We're not really talking about carpets?

40 year old Marleau that's being traded as completely dead cap is worse than 28 year old Monahan as a player expected to play. The only condition on the 1st is how good the 1st is, not whether it's a 1st. We had similar protection, and Calgary's has some limiting stipulations, and ways it could be more. And while small, we actually traded up a round at the end of the draft in the Marleau trade. The Monahan trade should have ended the debate that wasn't really a debate - that's just the cost.

If we didn't create our own cap crunch, he was worth keeping. And we did that for a team that couldn't even beat Columbus in the playoffs qualifiers.

Dubas did not set the precedent for a 1st (funny enough, I believe Lou did), and cap dumps have been happening for years. There's nothing abnormal about the price that we paid, considering how bad what we were trading was. Most cap dumps involve players that can be LTIRed, or players that are overpaid but still bring value. Marleau was just dead cap.

It wasn't just the price that was the mistake. The smart move was to keep Marleau.

 

[Americanadian]

Dubas did not set the precedent for a 1st (funny enough, I believe Lou did), and cap dumps have been happening for years. There's nothing abnormal about the price that we paid, considering how bad what we were trading was. Most cap dumps involve players that can be LTIRed, or players that are overpaid but still bring value. Marleau was just dead cap.

Lou traded a 1st to dump Malakhov in 2006. 13 years of cap dumps between them and a 1st was never used. Last off season you had Eriksson and Ladd dumped for less than a 1st and they both continued to play.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Lou traded a 1st to dump Malakhov in 2006. 13 years of cap dumps between them and a 1st was never used. Last off season you had Eriksson and Ladd dumped for less than a 1st and they both continued to play.

How many of those were 35+ contracts with full NMCs that needed to be bought out at full value? Carolina had to set 6.25 mil in cap on fire + pay Marleau's bonuses for a player that would never contribute anything to their team.

Imagine explaining to your boss that your team is playing with a 6 mil cap handicap for the year and you paid 4 million USD of his money to do so in exchange for a whole 3rd round pick lol.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Both GMs are partially responsible. Dubas create a situation were he forces himself to pay a ransom.

Lou is the one responsible. He created the situation, and he knew that this would be the endpoint when he did it. The price was the result of the horrible contract.

I'm glad you could come up with some safe contritions.

It's not my fault that Dubas hasn't had contracts anywhere close to as bad as Marleau.

We're not even talking about the cup. We're talking about a round.

We are talking about a cup. That's the objective. Every team takes a different path. We don't throw in the towel or make counterproductive moves because our path has been different.

If we didn't create our own cap crunch, he was worth keeping.
It wasn't just the price that was the mistake. The smart move was to keep Marleau.

We didn't create our own cap crunch. Your can't just leave your team to die in order to accommodate a horrible contract. Keeping Marleau would have been a horrible move.

 

[Americanadian]

How many of those were 35+ contracts with full NMCs that needed to be bought out at full value? Carolina had to set 6.25 mil in cap on fire + pay Marleau's bonuses for a player that would never contribute anything to their team.

Imagine explaining to your boss that your team is playing with a 6 mil cap handicap for the year and you paid 4 million USD of his money to do so in exchange for a whole 3rd round pick lol.

Neither Ladd nor Eriksson had a NMC at the time of the trade. I'm not claiming a 3rd round pick would have been the price. A Ladd-esque price is what I would have expected. Arizona ate 8M for two 2nd and a 3rd - sure they get a warm body but Ladd isn't even worth league minimum. A deal like the Backes deal would have been the best case scenario. Anaheim ate 6M in real money for a 1st but also gave up Kase who was a good asset at the time.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Lou traded a 1st to dump Malakhov in 2006.

Yes, precedents tend to be a longer time ago. Lou set the precedent, on a better contract.

13 years of cap dumps between them and a 1st was never used.

That's not true. A 1st has been involved in multiple cap dumps throughout the cap era. And Marleau was also one of the worst things to ever be dumped.

Last off season you had Eriksson and Ladd dumped for less than a 1st and they both continued to play.

We don't know what Eriksson's actual cost was on it's own, because he was involved in a much bigger trade (which actually did include a 1st).
Ladd was dumped for two 2nds and a 3rd, so not really better than a 1st.

Neither were as bad, neither had NMCs, and the fact that they continued to play is kind of the point. They were overpaid, and potentially LTIR, but they weren't just dead cap and money, much less for a competitive team.

 

[TheKrebsCycle]

Just because two bad trades happened doesn't make them good. Dubas set the precedent. Treliving followed suit 3 years later because the price was set.

Lou signed the Marleau contract, not Dubas . He was cleaning up his mess . The fact be would only waive for San Jose was also a factor.