Trades & Free Agency Thread: 2024-2025 - Trade Deadline Approaches

[ToneDog]

Maple Leafs and Sharks emerging as potential trade partners

The Toronto Maple Leafs will be buyers before the trade deadline, and...

theleafsnation.com

Kunin and Walman? I don't hate this. Also, Walman is my buddy's 2nd cousin. This may result in some sort of perk for me.

I believe Kunin is Matty's buddy.

 

[SprDaVE]

I guess what I'm trying to say is both GMS of the Leafs have made smaller moves such as depth pieces, but no one has actually made a bigger move that has moved the needle for the team both in the short and long term, IE acquiring a player with more then 1 or 2 years on their contract. and actually trading top prospects or 1st round picks. I think that's because of Shanahan, but we can agree to disagree on that. Maybe we just have different views on additions, but Toronto has always acquired players @ the deadline to bolster the lineup, but again, nothing that has moved the needle. Just like this year is probably going to be the same thing. To me, the common denominator is the guy running the organization.

You talk about Vegas, Tampa, Flordia, Carolina... and even Vancouver.. All of them have made monster moves within the past 3 years while giving up high end players or prospects to make themselves better..

Vegas trading for Eichel and giving up: Tuch, Krebs, 1st, 2nd.

Vancouver trading for Lindholm and giving up: 1st, Kuzmenko (coming off solid year)
,
Florida trading for Tkchuck and Reinhart and giving up: Huberdeau, Weager, 1st & for Reinhart it was Levi + 1st round pick.

Carolina just recently trading for Rantenten and giving up: Necas + Drury.

Tampa trading for Hagel for 2 first round picks, + Trading for Jeannot for 1st,2nd,3rd,4th.. and then trading Sergachev.

I think we're in line with the same idea. Making moves that move a needle. The rentals from last season did not really move much of anything. They weren't bad, but they were just meh. And my issues with Treliving is not making any sort of roster changing moves through his tenure in the most important time to make them -- the off-season. The common denominator is still there at the helm, but the previous GM had no issues making moves at any point... but the new guy does? The veteran? Makes no sense to me. I think we can keep the blame entirely on Treliving for being very shy about making roster changes and getting busy in the off-season. But his free agencies have been solid for the most part.

All those moves were on the higher end for sure. But they were all teams with extensive salary caps and cores, just like us, and they were given a boost or change in their core. The kind of risk and creativity we're missing. They've made plenty of moves and changes through their org in more than just trading a top pick and/or top prospects.

 

[WTFMAN99]

Agreed, not every move is a winner, some end up being bad, and you end up with a egg on your face, such as the Kadri deal, or a potential Cowan/Minten trade. But at some point, you need to try to swing for the fences and hit a home run.

Bigger problem is I think the President is afraid to have a egg on his face. Just my opinion.

He's not a $13M player. If he wants that for 28 goals he can walk. Sign Ekblad and one of Boeser or Ehlers. The world doesn't end if Mitch doesn't get his overpayment except in Shanny's nightmares.

What are Boeser and Ehlers expected to pull? Could you sign them for 7 years around 7.5-8M each?

Does 2 of them around 16M beat Marner at 12-13M? Certainly 14M is a non-starter.

 

[Fogelhund]

He's not a $13M player. If he wants that for 28 goals he can walk. Sign Ekblad and one of Boeser or Ehlers. The world doesn't end if Mitch doesn't get his overpayment except in Shanny's nightmares.

Easy to say now, but will any of them reach UFA? Maybe Boeser does.... and then what?

 

[WTFMAN99]

Easy to say now, but will any of them reach UFA? Maybe Boeser does.... and then what?

Ehlers is basically 100% hitting UFA

They were open to a move in the off-season, I don't think Ehlers will re-up there.

 

[Rare Jewel]

May be 12-14m but it will be a max of 7 years. Little guy like him slowing down already. I would want the full 8 if I were him and not to mention those endorsements, which are some of the most lucrative in the entire league, are not following him. They are GTA centric so he has to think again. I would play chicken with him, I think he will sign at around WN money once they do the math. 11.75 - 12m if signed. That's my guess

I would only go 5 actually. Can't have all these in their mid 30's making $40m combined. The likelihood of them being worth is quite slim.

 

[Skullz]

We need to go big game hunting. Look at our depth scoring, it is utterly nonexistent. We desperately need another moderate-high end piece.

Center or RHD? I don’t think the defence is nearly good enough as it stands.

Treliving needs to make a trade. It’s been long enough. He never does anything.

 

[nuck]

Easy to say now, but will any of them reach UFA? Maybe Boeser does.... and then what?

And then you sign him. My point is there seems to be a narrative with some that if Marner walked, the club would be stuck with empty roster spots and unused cap space. Like there needs to be a formula for immediately improving the club where you plug other reliable assets to create a winner as soon as he is gone. So its either Mitch and a NM for 8 or the end of the window. As though the success of this group has been so great you can't risk breaking it up.

I'm saying there are players to be had for under $10M per and losing Mitch doesn't close the window. How Colorado will fare I don't know but my guess is they weighed the chances off success with a monster top heavy club and didn't like it, and they are a team that will have one of those big salaries invested in a Norris caliber #1D. If the Leafs can't get the right UFAs they can make trades without retention which for some deals can be a requirement. Or maybe the big UFA add is in 2 years

Marner for the right price makes sense but not at any cost. They couldn't compete for the Cup with him so losing him (or any one player) isn't going to drop them to the middle of the pack. If Ranta isn't a $12M player for the Avs how on earth is Mitch a $13M player?

Sign him to a deal that works for the team and not just the player. They can use a top D a lot more than a third high end forward. Shouldn't that be their focus if this year doesn't pan out?

 

[Fogelhund]

And then you sign him. My point is there seems to be a narrative with some that if Marner walked, the club would be stuck with empty roster spots and unused cap space. Like there needs to be a formula for immediately improving the club where you plug other reliable assets to create a winner as soon as he is gone. So its either Mitch and a NM for 8 or the end of the window. As though the success of this group has been so great you can't risk breaking it up.

I'm saying there are players to be had for under $10M per and losing Mitch doesn't close the window. How Colorado will fare I don't know but my guess is they weighed the chances off success with a monster top heavy club and didn't like it, and they are a team that will have one of those big salaries invested in a Norris caliber #1D. If the Leafs can't get the right UFAs they can make trades without retention which for some deals can be a requirement. Or maybe the big UFA add is in 2 years

Marner for the right price makes sense but not at any cost. They couldn't compete for the Cup with him so losing him (or any one player) isn't going to drop them to the middle of the pack. If Ranta isn't a $12M player for the Avs how on earth is Mitch a $13M player?

Sign him to a deal that works for the team and not just the player. They can use a top D a lot more than a third high end forward. Shouldn't that be their focus if this year doesn't pan out?

I'm not worried about price. I'm worried about compete. If they compete well into the playoffs, win at least two rounds, you find a way to bring them back. If they don't, you make changes. If they lose in the first round, I'm not sure it matters if Mitch asks for $13, or $11mil... it's just time to make changes.

 

[ULF_55]

If we're dead set against playing Domi beside Matthews a 1 for 1 change of scenery would work for me too- though would be nice if they retained to cap neutral.

History with Berube and a better fit for the bottom 6- + more goal scoring

So Blues waive Saad and Leafs waive Domi ... and so much for the NTC's.

If someone else picks them up ... fine.

 

[WTFMAN99]

And then you sign him. My point is there seems to be a narrative with some that if Marner walked, the club would be stuck with empty roster spots and unused cap space. Like there needs to be a formula for immediately improving the club where you plug other reliable assets to create a winner as soon as he is gone. So its either Mitch and a NM for 8 or the end of the window. As though the success of this group has been so great you can't risk breaking it up.

I'm saying there are players to be had for under $10M per and losing Mitch doesn't close the window. How Colorado will fare I don't know but my guess is they weighed the chances off success with a monster top heavy club and didn't like it, and they are a team that will have one of those big salaries invested in a Norris caliber #1D. If the Leafs can't get the right UFAs they can make trades without retention which for some deals can be a requirement. Or maybe the big UFA add is in 2 years

Marner for the right price makes sense but not at any cost. They couldn't compete for the Cup with him so losing him (or any one player) isn't going to drop them to the middle of the pack. If Ranta isn't a $12M player for the Avs how on earth is Mitch a $13M player?

Sign him to a deal that works for the team and not just the player. They can use a top D a lot more than a third high end forward. Shouldn't that be their focus if this year doesn't pan out?

You'd need JT to play ball by deferring

6M x 2 years but defer 1.5M per year

I don't know if the bottom 6 is that much more potent, also has a few RFAs like Holmberg, Timmins, Dewar etc to potentially do something with.

This has Rielly bought out but would be much more ideal if he'd waive for CGY/VAN/LAK/SEA

 

[Fogelhund]

I realize this is close to smoking the crack pipe and all... but for S&G... I thought I'd see if the cap fit. It did.

Reality... nowhere near me at the moment... but hey..

Rielly, Marner, Minten (also from Vancouver) for Miller, Hughes and Boeser (50%).

Honestly, I don't really even want Miller on this team, it more started around the thought of... what if Hughes gets moved, and they just blow it all up and retool. This has been mentioned by some people on Twitter... not anyone with inside knowledge though.

 

[nuck]

I'm not worried about price. I'm worried about compete. If they compete well into the playoffs, win at least two rounds, you find a way to bring them back. If they don't, you make changes. If they lose in the first round, I'm not sure it matters if Mitch asks for $13, or $11mil... it's just time to make changes.

I would be stunned if they don't win a round. I think with JT back they can even handle Ottawa With two series wins it would seem illogical to make major changes.

 

[Gabriel426]

I think we're in line with the same idea. Making moves that move a needle. The rentals from last season did not really move much of anything. They weren't bad, but they were just meh. And my issues with Treliving is not making any sort of roster changing moves through his tenure in the most important time to make them -- the off-season. The common denominator is still there at the helm, but the previous GM had no issues making moves at any point... but the new guy does? The veteran? Makes no sense to me. I think we can keep the blame entirely on Treliving for being very shy about making roster changes and getting busy in the off-season. But his free agencies have been solid for the most part.

All those moves were on the higher end for sure. But they were all teams with extensive salary caps and cores, just like us, and they were given a boost or change in their core. The kind of risk and creativity we're missing. They've made plenty of moves and changes through their org in more than just trading a top pick and/or top prospects.

Or the fact that there is just no deals that could improve the team.

Cap aside, of all the deals that happened sofar this season in the league. There is really the Rantanen and Necas deal that would improve or make sense for the Leafs.

All the other deals that happened really won't affect the Leafs one way or another unless that player breaks out.

The other thing is currency. Even with Cowan and Minten, Leafs really don't have any top prospects or young players that is attractive to other teams. Unless Knies is on the table.

Lastly, I mentioned it in other threads, contenders and Cup winners use trades and TDL to round out their team, the Leafs been trying to get a piece or two to go over a hump which shows the team is not ready.

 

[Fogelhund]

I would be stunned if they don't win a round. I think with JT back they can even handle Ottawa With two series wins it would seem illogical to make major changes.

I can't tell you how many times I've said the same thing... I'd be stunned if they don't win a round or two this year... and then... they don't. They've found more ways to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

 

[jaric1862]

I know we won't be in the Nelson/Gourde/Granlund tier, I just hope we end up in the Bjugstad/Evans tier, rather than the Kunin/McCarron tier.

 

[Gabriel426]

I realize this is close to smoking the crack pipe and all... but for S&G... I thought I'd see if the cap fit. It did.

Reality... nowhere near me at the moment... but hey..

Rielly, Marner, Minten (also from Vancouver) for Miller, Hughes and Boeser (50%).

Honestly, I don't really even want Miller on this team, it more started around the thought of... what if Hughes gets moved, and they just blow it all up and retool. This has been mentioned by some people on Twitter... not anyone with inside knowledge though.

Nucks will never do it.

Leafs should do it though.

I can't tell you how many times I've said the same thing... I'd be stunned if they don't win a round or two this year... and then... they don't. They've found more ways to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

We can always count on them to find new ways to lose in the FIRST round.

Then we would be debating all summer about how CLOSE they are in winning ONE round.

 

[Namikaze Minato]

I realize this is close to smoking the crack pipe and all... but for S&G... I thought I'd see if the cap fit. It did.

Reality... nowhere near me at the moment... but hey..

Rielly, Marner, Minten (also from Vancouver) for Miller, Hughes and Boeser (50%).

Honestly, I don't really even want Miller on this team, it more started around the thought of... what if Hughes gets moved, and they just blow it all up and retool. This has been mentioned by some people on Twitter... not anyone with inside knowledge though.

They would hesitate to trade Quinn Hughes for Matthews and likely at the end of the day would not do that trade.

They would laugh at your proposal even if you didnt include Miller and Boeser.

 

[ToneDog]

Nucks will never do it.

Leafs should do it though.


We can always count on them to find new ways to lose in the FIRST round.

Then we would be debating all summer about how CLOSE they are in winning ONE round.

I'd fire them all if they did not do it. No way Canucks entertain trading Hughes unless they are on crack x10. That Leaf package won't even get you Hughes IMO. Kid is probably more untouchable than Matthews.

 

[Kiwi]

They're always 2 side.

1 - The player you target as a fit in your team is he available? Exemple McCabe type of player available are not available very often, especially at 50% for 2 year and half

2- If team are open, the price it is fair or completly trash?

If the anawer is No to any of this questions, hes not an option anymore

It's a large league with a lot of players

I'm sure our pro scouts can identify undervalued players on poor teams we could do mutually beneficial deals with

It's about being proactive and willing to think outside the box to find deals that make sense for both teams involved

 

[SprDaVE]

Or the fact that there is just no deals that could improve the team.

Cap aside, of all the deals that happened sofar this season in the league. There is really the Rantanen and Necas deal that would improve or make sense for the Leafs.

All the other deals that happened really won't affect the Leafs one way or another unless that player breaks out.

The other thing is currency. Even with Cowan and Minten, Leafs really don't have any top prospects or young players that is attractive to other teams. Unless Knies is on the table.

Lastly, I mentioned it in other threads, contenders and Cup winners use trades and TDL to round out their team, the Leafs been trying to get a piece or two to go over a hump which shows the team is not ready.

There's always a deal that could improve the team. It doesn't have to be a blockbuster or nothing. The Leafs added some solid players through free agency but inexplicably did nothing via the trade market whether it was to add players or even just picks, or anything. As for right now, plenty of smoke around quite a few players...

The Leafs don't have an infinite wealth of assets but to say they have nothing is a little much. A good GM can be creative and find ways around that. And part of the reason why we're in the position we're in right now is because of the lackluster off-season they just had.

Teams that contend for the cup make moves in the off-season and the deadline all the time, short and long-term, sometimes big time players, sometimes just depth. I'm not sure what you mean at all.

It's crazy how many excuses Treliving gets right now, but we'll see what he does in the next few weeks and we'll go from there.

 

[Americanadian]

I realize this is close to smoking the crack pipe and all... but for S&G... I thought I'd see if the cap fit. It did.

Reality... nowhere near me at the moment... but hey..

Rielly, Marner, Minten (also from Vancouver) for Miller, Hughes and Boeser (50%).

Honestly, I don't really even want Miller on this team, it more started around the thought of... what if Hughes gets moved, and they just blow it all up and retool. This has been mentioned by some people on Twitter... not anyone with inside knowledge though.

If you take out Hughes Vancouver probably does it.

 

[Menzinger]

Here’s something I don’t understand about these guys. When your career earnings are already close to 70 million and you’re about to sign another $80+ million contract, does 1.5-2mill per year matter in the grand scheme of things? Sure it’s $16 million over the course of a contract, but when your career earnings are projected to be $150 mill + investments + sponsorship and commercial deals it really isn’t a life changing sum anymore.

11.5x8 would be celebrated by the fan base and there would be less pressure. 13.5x8 and you’re public enemy number 1.

Eh, I'd say it matters. I think you can make a stronger case for like 500-750k. But once you start going north of 1 mil over 8 years, too much real money.

I've always been interested in Crouse, but he's having a really bad year. He's playing mostly with Cooley and Guenther and they have 42 and 34 points. Sure, some of that is on the PP, but Crouse has 11 points. But, they also love him there, and I doubt he's available, even if his value is down... plus, what is it we have, that they need? His form this year, is of no help to us... and playing with Tavares and Nylander isn't suddenly going to wake him up, if he can't put up points with Cooley and Guenther.

If we are swinging a deal with Utah, I'd be targeting McBain, whom can also play C, and would be more of a need. I doubt they move him either though.

I don't mind him, But every asset needs to be used for centre or defence, plus the cap . Knies is also need of a raise, can't be paying other wingers beyond this season anyways

 

[hamzarocks]

Haha tell that to Marner, I’m not advocating for him to get paid the sun and the moon. I just think we should keep him.

Internal cao structure wise marner should be 1-2% higher of the cap than Nylander

External cap structure he should be 1-2% lower than rantanen and pastranak

We haven't traded nylander, so marner will use that as his main comparable

MLSE/Shanny/Treliving all seem content with the core so likely 14% of the cap for marner which is ~13M x 8.

I would not sign him to that but that is what I expect he gets assuming nothing changes from now to July 1st from MLSE/Shanny/Treliving POV

View attachment 968577

View attachment 968578

You'd need JT to play ball by deferring

6M x 2 years but defer 1.5M per year

I don't know if the bottom 6 is that much more potent, also has a few RFAs like Holmberg, Timmins, Dewar etc to potentially do something with.

This has Rielly bought out but would be much more ideal if he'd waive for CGY/VAN/LAK/SEA

Major risks are Ehlers and Boesors are two glass man players

Injury concerns would be high for those two

 

[ULF_55]

I realize this is close to smoking the crack pipe and all... but for S&G... I thought I'd see if the cap fit. It did.

Reality... nowhere near me at the moment... but hey..

Rielly, Marner, Minten (also from Vancouver) for Miller, Hughes and Boeser (50%).

Honestly, I don't really even want Miller on this team, it more started around the thought of... what if Hughes gets moved, and they just blow it all up and retool. This has been mentioned by some people on Twitter... not anyone with inside knowledge though.

Pretty sure everyone is telling you the same thing. Hughes and Makar are not moving.

I'd take a flier and go for 26 year old center ... Pettersson.

I think you could buy low on him, but it is a gamble.

? - Matthews - ?
? - Pettersson - ?
? - Tavares - ?

Again, it is a gamble.