Toggle sidebar

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

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Dekes For Days said:
Rakell (5m) is on pace for 68 points and Bunting (4.5m) is on pace for 43 points. Matthews (13.25m) is on pace for 87 points. 111 points for 9.5m vs. 87 points for 13.25m? Easy trade! How could anybody be opposed?!?
Click to expand...
The part you’re not including here is nobody would take Matthews at 13.25M if the expectation was he’s only score 46 goals/87 points per season. Likewise - if Rakell was a sure bet to score 36 goals/68 points each year for 5M every team in the league would be trying to acquire him.

The proposed trade off sounds awful because their current point pace is not the expectation.

What you should be asking is: would you trade Nylander - a player who is only expected to score 40G/87P for Verhaeghe (a player expected to score 68-70 points) and Rodrigues (a player expected to score 40 points).

If everyone hits their expectation you get Nylander’s 90 points + replacement player at league min and 20 points (12.3M) or Verhaeghe+Rodrigues (10M) who are expected to also score those same 110 points.

Torontonian said:
Honestly, he was the guy I thought Toronto was going to get because he would have been the "best" of the 2nd tier centerman available.
Click to expand...
Predictably he still cost a 1st. He was realistically in the top tier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rare Jewel
Americanadian said:
The part you’re not including here is nobody would take Matthews at 13.25M if the expectation was he’s only score 46 goals/87 points per season. Likewise - if Rakell was a sure bet to score 36 goals/68 points each year for 5M every team in the league would be trying to acquire him.

The proposed trade off sounds awful because their current point pace is not the expectation.

What you should be asking is: would you trade Nylander - a player who is only expected to score 40G/87P for Verhaeghe (a player expected to score 68-70 points) and Rodrigues (a player expected to score 40 points).

If everyone hits their expectation you get Nylander’s 90 points + replacement player at league min and 20 points (12.3M) or Verhaeghe+Rodrigues (10M) who are expected to also score those same 110 points.


Predictably he still cost a 1st. He was realistically in the top tier.
Click to expand...


So yes, 1st round pick for him. Which is about right for any UFA rental.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SprDaVE
Americanadian said:
The part you’re not including here is nobody would take Matthews at 13.25M if the expectation was he’s only score 46 goals/87 points per season. Likewise - if Rakell was a sure bet to score 36 goals/68 points each year for 5M every team in the league would be trying to acquire him. The proposed trade off sounds awful because their current point pace is not the expectation.
Click to expand...
That's the point... I thought it was obvious that it wasn't a real proposal. It was to demonstrate some of the issues the individual had in his comparison.
 
No way we were going to match that price on Granlund, and it wouldn't have worked without retention (San Jose has no retention slots left).
 
Dekes For Days said:
Rakell (5m) is on pace for 68 points and Bunting (4.5m) is on pace for 43 points. Matthews (13.25m) is on pace for 87 points. 111 points for 9.5m vs. 87 points for 13.25m? Easy trade! How could anybody be opposed?!?

Let's take this a step further! McDavid is pacing for 122 points, and he costs 12.5m.
If we offer them McMann, Domi, Pacioretty, and Holmberg, they get 123 points for just the low, low price of 7.4m. They won't be able to resist!

I'm not sure you should be accusing others of "hilariously bad takes" when you're not only attempting stuff like this, but in a really misleading way. Why did you represent the one side of the equation by their half-season paces this year (22 points higher than their previous 3 year average), and then represent Marner's side as "90 points", when Marner is pacing for 109 points (and has paced for more than 90 points for 7 straight years, and 101 points over that entire timeframe)?

Is it because you realized that even aside from all of the other issues with your comparison, filling that ~30 point pace gap those 2 players have had over 1 player over the past 3 years for the ~4-5m difference that they'll actually cost or less is actually pretty easy?
Click to expand...
Context is important here as well.

The idea of how you build a team has to be factored in. No one is really suggesting that signing Boeser or Ehlers is a straight swap for Marner. It's also about what else you can do with the cap space to create a more balanced team, and really, just not wanting to overpay players because Marner north of $13m is troublesome.

Further to that, the other we should be considering is playoff performance. 6 goals in 36 games is not a pretty stat, even for a playmaker like him, so they should be factoring their performance into the number they get.

Also, representing Marner as 90 points isn't really as disingenuous as your claim because that's where he's finished typically. He may finally hit 100 this season, but 90 is a safer spot to bank on.
 
At the moment, there is no way this team goes anywhere in the playoffs (yet again...) - why are people wanting trades? No minor tweaks are going to make an impact, other than the fact that our cupboard is smaller once more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smif and leafan11
Rare Jewel said:
Context is important here as well.

The idea of how you build a team has to be factored in. No one is really suggesting that signing Boeser or Ehlers is a straight swap for Marner. It's also about what else you can do with the cap space to create a more balanced team, and really, just not wanting to overpay players because Marner north of $13m is troublesome.

Further to that, the other we should be considering is playoff performance. 6 goals in 36 games is not a pretty stat, even for a playmaker like him, so they should be factoring their performance into the number they get.

Also, representing Marner as 90 points isn't really as disingenuous as your claim because that's where he's finished typically. He may finally hit 100 this season, but 90 is a safer spot to bank on.
Click to expand...
Agree. Let’s use production as a metric

If say MM signs at 13mil and he gets 110pts this season. And let’s say he will average that for his new contract.
Let’s say Ehlers sign for 9mil and gets 88pts.
The diff there is 22pts and 3mil.
MM at 13mil and 110pts plus someone like Holmberg at 950k and 16pts.
Or
Ehlers at 9mil with 88 pts plus someone at just under 4mil and will get 38pts or more, which is pretty much Ross Colton.

In short, is MM and Holmberg a better fit for the Leafs or Ehlers and Colton as better fit.

Not going to get into this

But if The comparison is 1W and 4th liner or 1W and 3C. I think everyone will pick 1W and 3C
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rare Jewel
Gabriel426 said:
Agree. Let’s use production as a metric

If say MM signs at 13mil and he gets 110pts this season. And let’s say he will average that for his new contract.
Let’s say Ehlers sign for 9mil and gets 88pts.
The diff there is 22pts and 3mil.
MM at 13mil and 110pts plus someone like Holmberg at 950k and 16pts.
Or
Ehlers at 9mil with 88 pts plus someone at just under 4mil and will get 38pts or more, which is pretty much Ross Colton.

In short, is MM and Holmberg a better fit for the Leafs or Ehlers and Colton as better fit.

Not going to get into this

But if The comparison is 1W and 4th liner or 1W and 3C. I think everyone will pick 1W and 3C
Click to expand...
You’re missing a player.
 
Torontonian said:
Honestly, he was the guy I thought Toronto was going to get because he would have been the "best" of the 2nd tier centerman available.
Click to expand...
Interesting player. 21 minutes a night including 3 minutes of pp so his numbers would shrink considerably with 17:00 usage. Not great on FO but not horrible. He does pk and got what he got with limited OZ starts. Now Dallas has 5 guys that produce points who take regular faceoffs and have a better winning % than him so I am not sure what they think he will make them better at.

He does seem like someone that would fit in if the Leafs wanted to roll 3 lines but I guess we will never know. The cost was about what I expected but the Leafs would have had to involve a 3rd team for retention and I wouldn't take Ceci for free.
 
Rare Jewel said:
No one is really suggesting that signing Boeser or Ehlers is a straight swap for Marner. It's also about what else you can do with the cap space to create a more balanced team, and really, just not wanting to overpay players because Marner north of $13m is troublesome.
Click to expand...
The individual was literally proposing Boeser and Ehlers in a straight swap for Marner. You can do other things with the cap space, but it keeps coming back to the fact that you're very likely to get less impact from that cap space than Marner brings. You don't need to get rid of one of your best players to have a balanced team, and Marner at 13m is not an overpay or troublesome. In fact, with the cap skyrocketing to over 113m by 2027, it would quickly turn into a steal.
Rare Jewel said:
Further to that, the other we should be considering is playoff performance.
Click to expand...
He's been one of our best playoff performers. We shouldn't throw away something so rare and beneficial to us because of this board's impatience and refusal to acknowledge context in playoff production.
Rare Jewel said:
Also, representing Marner as 90 points isn't really as disingenuous as your claim because that's where he's finished typically. He may finally hit 100 this season, but 90 is a safer spot to bank on.
Click to expand...
Representing Marner as 90 points is disingenuous, especially when the other side of the equation is represented in a completely opposite way to inflate their numbers.

Marner has had more than 90 points three times, has paced for more than 90 points for 7 consecutive years, has paced for 101 points since 2018, and is currently pacing for 109 points. Boeser and Ehlers have never actually combined for 151 points, and yet the individual had no issue representing them by their combined inflated half-season paces. Not to mention ignoring everything else Marner brings.
 
Visnovsky said:
At the moment, there is no way this team goes anywhere in the playoffs (yet again...) - why are people wanting trades? No minor tweaks are going to make an impact, other than the fact that our cupboard is smaller once more.
Click to expand...
Leafs have Matthews for this year and 3 more.

There is nothing wrong with making hockey trades that aren't throwing assets away for rentals.

If they can land a 2nd. line center for the duration of Matthews contract then 1st. round picks in the late 20's aren't a great loss.

4 kicks at the can and then bottom out and restart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HomelessPepper and nuck
Visnovsky said:
At the moment, there is no way this team goes anywhere in the playoffs (yet again...) - why are people wanting trades? No minor tweaks are going to make an impact, other than the fact that our cupboard is smaller once more.
Click to expand...
For reference, we're one point out of first in the Atlantic, and currently slated to play Ottawa in round 1. Respectfully, go change your diaper and relax.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Visnovsky
All Mod Cons said:
You know how much you hate Treliving? That's how much I hated Dubas. The big difference I see is that one isn't "creative" enough, and the other made a series of franchise crippling decisions.
Click to expand...
You do realize that the poster you are replying to has as his avatar a picture of Dubus? He has moved on to making imaginary trades in which Treliving gets humiliated in advance. He is trolling Leaf fans for fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom