Trades & Free Agency Thread: Off-season Edition

[notDatsyuk]

Barzal put up a 69 point pace over the 3 years prior to signing, and Marner has put up a 104 point pace over the past 3 years.

Not only wildly misleading, as Barzal paced for 19 points less, but also completely irrelevant to Barzal's contract signed 2 years ago.

Gee - my providing facts without context is "wildly misleading" but your providing numbers that aren't even facts but 'projections', and with even less context, somehow isn't?

Never change, dekes - these boards do need a good laugh now and then.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Gee - my providing facts without context is "wildly misleading" but your providing numbers that aren't even facts but 'projections', and with even less context, somehow isn't?

The facts are that Marner produced at 1.27 points per game, and Barzal produced at 0.84 points per game. That information was conveyed in a common, easily understandable way that provides way more context than what you wrote, and unlike your statement, is actually relevant to the contract.

...and has never reached that point total again and will be entering his 9th season in the NHL.

Yeah, but if we look only at a season 7 years ago, but not too closely to learn where those points actually came from, and ignore the 65 point player he was over the next half-decade, we can pretend that he has massive untapped offense because reasons and then arbitrarily claim that he's worth the same as one of the best offensive and defensive forwards in the league.

The funny thing is, pretty much everything that people incorrectly claim about Marner applies way more to Barzal. People here would despise him.

 

[notDatsyuk]

It's been a thing in some form forever ... tabloid newspaper headlines were print form.

The concept has been around since the Roman Empire at least, but I was thinking about the actual phrase "click bait".

 

[nuck]

Based on reports, this is basically what Tre’s plan sounded like. Struck out on both Roy and Montour.

Really curious to know how close it was with Roy. I would have gone higher on dollars. But I get the feeling he prioritized staying in the US. Roy and Tanev would have been achievable cap wise.

I can’t get excited about this team’s contending chances until they add at least one more high quality blueliner that can give them impact beyond 1-3yrs like Tanev. Having zero plan for the departures/decline of Muzzin/Brodie is going to lead to desperate overpays (the term on Tanev being one).

What I read (FWIW as it was only one report) is that Washington paid over market for Roy and that this is generally considered an overpay. I did want him more than Tanev tho strictly because of the age thing.

Montour I am fine without at that contract, as he is getting a bump from a 73 point year he may never approach again. But now with that the Kraken have 3 solid RD. That would seem to relegate Borgen to the 3rd pair. Are they preparing to deal Larsson or let him walk at year end?

 

[supermann_98]

They are average size, and a 69 point player and 104 point player are not "very very similar" just because they are both primarily playmakers. They are in completely different tiers as players.

104 points? Is that how many points you scored with him on NHL23? I love how you invent stats to support your arguments

 

[Dekes For Days]

104 points? Is that how many points you scored with him on NHL23?

No, it's his pace over the past 3 years, like I said. 1.27 P/GP if you'd prefer.

 

[nuck]

No player in the history of the league, was sat out to force a trade. None. It's never happened, and it never will. You absolutely could file a grievance for behaviour that would devalue a players future contract and career, including being healthy scratched for the season, for harassment, and equality of opportunity, for fair conditions of work.

I suppose you've never read the CBA, or the NHLPA Universal Declaration of Players rights.

Here is just the beginning of those Declaration of Players Rights.

Every player has the right to a sporting environment that is well governed, free of corruption, manipulation and cheating and protects, respects and guarantees the fundamental human rights of everyone involved in or affected by sport, including the player.

ACCESS TO SPORT.​

Every player has the right to access and pursue sport as a career and profession based solely on merit.

EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY.​

1. Every player is entitled to equality of opportunity in the pursuit of sport without distinction of any kind and free of discrimination, harassment and violence.

1. Every player has the right to just and favourable remuneration and conditions of work

Honestly, anybody who has ever had any dealings, or even basic learnings in Employment Law, Human Resources would understand that healthy scratching a player until they agree to move, just isn't happening. It's land of make belief type of stuff.

Beside, the Leafs don't want to trade Marner... so none of this matters. And if Marner didn't want to be traded, he wouldn't be traded, even if the Leafs wanted to move him, and there is no actions they could do to make him go.

I would somewhat disagree, and I do have an understanding of employment law. Their obligation is to pay him, not to play him. I can't imagine an environment where the NLPA could influence usage or ice time and that's really what this would boil down to. How many minutes he plays and with who is not going to be written anywhere in his contract so there really isn't a basis to grieve. If there is a section in the NLPA that specifically relates to allowing the player in games I am not aware (if you have it please provide the link but I am too lazy to hunt). Unless he had a game related bonus that was going to cost money of course but those are almost non existent.

IMO flat out sitting him would create a toxic environment and morale issues with the team and thats why benching him for no reason until he submitted to being dealt wouldn't be considered.

 

[aingefan]

The leverage the team does have if it in fact wants to move marner is their financial control.
By that I mean, the 8th year.
They could use that as leverage to prompt acceptance of waiving his NMC.
We’re willing to pay you x over 8. Only offer. Without NMC (whatever the terms the team is comfortable with)
Or
You accept a trade to y where you can negotiate for 8 years and whatever terms
You decide by day z. After this, we will commit to you betting on yourself as you are and honour the last year of your deal. But after day z, we will not entertain trades that enable the 8th year.
Hardball in the players court. The risk is then on him and him alone.
Team doesn’t seem inclined to force the issue either way and/or make any big sweeping changes, of course, but that’s the only real leverage they have.

 

[supermann_98]

Barzal put up a 69 point pace over the 3 years prior to signing, and Marner has put up a 104 point pace over the past 3 years.

Not only wildly misleading, as Barzal paced for 19 points less, but also completely irrelevant to Barzal's contract signed 2 years ago.

Name me the #1 overall draft pick center Barzal got to play with the last 3 years the way Marner is gifted Matthews and to a lesser extent, Tavares, as his centers.

I'll save you some time, you can't.

Name me a guy on the Islanders with nearly identical skill/production to Barzal that play the same position as he does, to take some of the focus away from defending him, the way Marner has Nylander to soften his defensive assignments.

I'll save you some time, you can't.

When Barzal was a rookie he had Tavares to both play with and to take some of the pressure of playing against the opponents #1 shutdown D pairing and shutdown line. Now you're insinuating his production suffers because he's no longer as good as he was as a rookie?

The fact is Barzal doesn't have the same supporting cast as Marner, nowhere even close, nor did he have a coach that plays him in every possible position to put up points, and a team offense -focused play style with which to let him put up points. All this taken into consideration his numbers are very comparable to your beloved overpaid "god in this city"

 

[ULF_55]

The concept has been around since the Roman Empire at least, but I was thinking about the actual phrase "click bait".

The term ... wonder if Oxford has the timeline for it?

The Rise & Fall of Clickbait

The phrase ‘clickbait’ was first coined in 2006 by blogger, Jay Beiger. But, now this term has become outdated and is being replaced by something else.

www.linkedin.com

2006 ...

 

[Al14]

leafs had a chance to lure stamkos to his hometown.
treliving and shanahan are idiots.

The idiots are the ones that just paid Stamkos $8M for 4 more years.

He's washed up now, and TB walked away knowing that.

If he does well there this season, and for the entire 4 years, I'll admit that I'm an idiot along with our Leafs management.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Now you're insinuating his production suffers because he's no longer as good as he was as a rookie?

No, he was just never as good as a rookie as some perceived him to be.

All this taken into consideration his numbers are very comparable to your beloved overpaid "god in this city"

None of the excuses being made make their numbers or their worth remotely comparable.

 

[ULF_55]

I would somewhat disagree, and I do have an understanding of employment law. Their obligation is to pay him, not to play him. I can't imagine an environment where the NLPA could influent usage or ice time and that's really what this would boil down to. How many minutes he plays and with who is not going to be written anywhere in his contract so there really isn't a basis to grieve. If there is a section in the NLPA that specifically relates to allowing the player in games I am not aware (if you have it please provide the link but I am too lazy to hunt). Unless he had a game related bonus that was going to cost money of course but those are almost non existent.

IMO flat out sitting him would create a toxic environment and morale issues with the team and thats why benching him for no reason until he submitted to being dealt wouldn't be considered.

Everything below is
IMO / pure speculation ... I'm not legally trained but I have watched L&O since the beginning of time.

Not playing him would result in a grievance, and given the evidence the Leafs would lose.

There would be no justification for a complete benching.
On and off ice performance could not be used, as his record places him near the top of the NHL.
Unless there is some dirt no one knows about the only reason Leafs could provide was they want him to waive his NMC.
That would not be, IMO, as valid reason since both the team and the player agreed to the NMC.
Taking it further, you could argue that is an attempt to breach the contract by the Leafs.
I suppose the judgement could be voiding the contract and making him a free agent.
Maybe that outcome would suit a group of fans?

What they could do however is limit his usage.
Easily justify they are trying to improve a weak PK.
PP is near the top in regular season, but brutally bad playoffs.
Playing on the 3rd. or 4th. line is to spread out the offence.

Again my opinion:

I don't think either scenario is going to happen, or would make any sense.
The goal is to win, not force players to abandon their contractual rights.
marner in the line-up being deployed to get the most out of him is the only logical scenario.

 

[TMLBlueandWhite]

Leafs trade Tavares, Liljegren, Robertson, 1st (2026)
NJ trade Meier, Hamilton, Holtz

Leafs trade Marner, Stolarz, Minten, 1st (2027)
Anaheim trades Zegras, Fowler*, Gibson*
*Anaheim retains 50%

Nylander(11.5)/Matthews(13.5)/Meier(8.8)
Holtz(1)/Zegras(5.75)/Cowan(1)
Knies(2)/Domi(3.75)/Karnkrok(2)
Reaves(1.35)/Kampf(2.5)/Holmberg

Fowler(3.25)/Hamilton(9)
Rielly(7.5)/Tanev(4.5)
OEL(3.5)/McCabe(2)
*Benoit(1)

Gibson(3.2)
Woll (1)

Total = 87.98

 

[Sypher04]

Not playing him would result in a grievance, and given the evidence the Leafs would lose.

Without question
It would also ruin our reputation amongst players and agents. We’d be effectively blacklisted.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Everything below is
IMO / pure speculation ... I'm not legally trained but I have watched L&O since the beginning of time.

Not playing him would result in a grievance, and given the evidence the Leafs would lose.

There would be no justification for a complete benching.
On and off ice performance could not be used, as his record places him near the top of the NHL.
Unless there is some dirt no one knows about the only reason Leafs could provide was they want him to waive his NMC.
That would not be, IMO, as valid reason since both the team and the player agreed to the NMC.
Taking it further, you could argue that is an attempt to breach the contract by the Leafs.
I suppose the judgement could be voiding the contract and making him a free agent.
Maybe that outcome would suit a group of fans?

What they could do however is limit his usage.
Easily justify they are trying to improve a weak PK.
PP is near the top in regular season, but brutally bad playoffs.
Playing on the 3rd. or 4th. line is to spread out the offence.

Again my opinion:

I don't think either scenario is going to happen, or would make any sense.
The goal is to win, not force players to abandon their contractual rights.
marner in the line-up being deployed to get the most out of him is the only logical scenario.

Has playing him in top line minutes and quarterbacking the PP led to a lot of post season winning? Perhaps it’s time to try something new? I’m personally bored of watching an impotent powerplay fail to have an impact while the other team abuses us on their power plays.

Nylander got PP2 time and 3rd line demotions plenty of times, I don’t think any grievances were filed about how we’re being super mean to him or whatever case someone thinks Marner would have.

 

[notDatsyuk]

The facts are that Marner produced at 1.27 points per game, and Barzal produced at 0.84 points per game. That information was conveyed in a common, easily understandable way that provides way more context than what you wrote, and unlike your statement, is actually relevant to the contract.

But of course that wasn't what you actually said.

Try again. (Or bet yet, don't.)

 

[ULF_55]

Has playing him in top line minutes and quarterbacking the PP led to a lot of post season winning? Perhaps it’s time to try something new? I’m personally bored of watching an impotent powerplay fail to have an impact while the other team abuses us on their power plays.

Nylander got PP2 time and 3rd line demotions plenty of times, I don’t think any grievances were filed about how we’re being super mean to him or whatever case someone thinks Marner would have.

Nylander was not benched for a season.

That is the scenario that would result in a grievance, not having deployment changed.

 

[Sypher04]

As long as Marner is on the team he will be used in whatever role he’s deemed most effective and can help the team most.

The idea of chopping down his usage is fine in theory (unless it’s retaliation for not waiving his NMC, that would 100% get a grievance) but at the end of the day you’re just hurting the team and it’d he pretty stupid on several levels.

I do think we could see a correction of some or even all of Marner’s PK time towards keeping him fresher for 5v5 play.

Almost any player can be taught to penalty kill (though obviously some players have better tools for it than others). I think Berube will value putting others on the team in positions of owning those roles to increase their sense of worth to the team. We probably still need to add another 1 or 2 PKers

I also expect us to return to 2 PP units for similar reasons.

 

[conFABulator]

What I read (FWIW as it was only one report) is that Washington paid over market for Roy and that this is generally considered an overpay. I did want him more than Tanev tho strictly because of the age thing.

Montour I am fine without at that contract, as he is getting a bump from a 73 point year he may never approach again. But now with that the Kraken have 3 solid RD. That would seem to relegate Borgen to the 3rd pair. Are they preparing to deal Larsson or let him walk at year end?

Hard to know what happened with Roy. At least we weren't caught flat footed and we got two decent dmen. We needed that.

Yeah, we didn't need Montour and I wouldn't have been happy paying that for him. It seems that Seattle has to overpay to get guys. Stephenson was an overpay too, IMO

 

[notDatsyuk]

Name me the #1 overall draft pick center Barzal got to play with the last 3 years the way Marner is gifted Matthews and to a lesser extent, Tavares, as his centers.

I'll save you some time, you can't.

Name me a guy on the Islanders with nearly identical skill/production to Barzal that play the same position as he does, to take some of the focus away from defending him, the way Marner has Nylander to soften his defensive assignments.

I'll save you some time, you can't.

When Barzal was a rookie he had Tavares to both play with and to take some of the pressure of playing against the opponents #1 shutdown D pairing and shutdown line. Now you're insinuating his production suffers because he's no longer as good as he was as a rookie?

The fact is Barzal doesn't have the same supporting cast as Marner, nowhere even close, nor did he have a coach that plays him in every possible position to put up points, and a team offense -focused play style with which to let him put up points. All this taken into consideration his numbers are very comparable to your beloved overpaid "god in this city"

In the 20-21 playoffs, he managed 14 points in 19 games, playing with Leo Komarov on the top line.

The term ... wonder if Oxford has the timeline for it?

The Rise & Fall of Clickbait

The phrase ‘clickbait’ was first coined in 2006 by blogger, Jay Beiger. But, now this term has become outdated and is being replaced by something else.

www.linkedin.com

2006 ...

So around but fairly new in 2008. Thanks.

 

[Dekes For Days]

But of course that wasn't what you actually said.

It's functionally the same. Just stated in a common, easier to understand way.

 

[Peasy]

Leafs trade Tavares, Liljegren, Robertson, 1st (2026)
NJ trade Meier, Hamilton, Holtz

Leafs trade Marner, Stolarz, Minten, 1st (2027)
Anaheim trades Zegras, Fowler*, Gibson*
*Anaheim retains 50%

Nylander(11.5)/Matthews(13.5)/Meier(8.8)
Holtz(1)/Zegras(5.75)/Cowan(1)
Knies(2)/Domi(3.75)/Karnkrok(2)
Reaves(1.35)/Kampf(2.5)/Holmberg

Fowler(3.25)/Hamilton(9)
Rielly(7.5)/Tanev(4.5)
OEL(3.5)/McCabe(2)
*Benoit(1)

Gibson(3.2)
Woll (1)

Total = 87.98

NJ doesnt even have holtz anymore lmao...

 

[Sypher04]

I was just talking about this another thread and I wanted to give it more space for discussion and detail my thoughts a bit more.

I think one of the big things Berube needs to do behind the scenes this year is ensure the players beyond the core 4-5 players don’t feel like second class citizens on this team. Carving out well defined roles for every player to take ownership of and help everyone feel like they are integral to the team’s success.

I see 3 primary opportunities to change this culture in the direction we want:
1) go back to split powerplay units to get more people involved.
2) take the star players off the penalty kill
3) split the star talent across 3 forward lines, ensuring 3/4s of forwards play on legit scoring lines and can contribute. 4th line should be primarily defensive/checking

Most every D and F should have a primary special teams role. For example:

Defense:
PP - Rielly, OEL, Liljegren
PK - Tanev, McCabe, Benoit, Hakanpaa

Forward:
PP - Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Tavares, Domi, Knies, Robertson
PK - Kampf, Holmberg, McMann, plus I think we need 2 others to be added.

Edit: lmao nevermind it was this thread

Edit2: don’t get too hung on names and configurations here as I didn’t put a ton of thought into them, but we could something like:

Matthews, Robertson, Knies, Domi & OEL
Tavares, Marner, Nylander, Rielly & Liljegren

 

[jaric1862]

How could we not beat Washington with for Roy?

Liljergren,Hakanpaa,OEL --> $8M

Even if we gave Roy $6M, we'd have $2M extra for two more depth D. (Timmins + Boqvist)