Trades & Free Agency Thread - Still Too Soon Off-Season Edition

[Jozay]

Would Warren Foegele be of interest?

 

[Dreakmur]

so just out of curiosity. now knowing that the world changing event has happened, what do you do with those big 4? especially with a flat lined cap. do you trade them and take pennies on the dollar or keep them until the market corrects itself? if im the gm and im not getting proper value, i keep them.

Overpay the players and have less cap space to build a team or move the player for less value. Sometimes pennies on the dollar is the best deal.

 

[4thline]

I don't mind Galchenyuk on a cheap contract, but we still need to make substantial changes. If we bring back Galch, then ALL of Engvall, Kerfoot, and Mikheyev have to go. Swapping 1 or 2 players doesn't do the trick.

Chemistry with Tavares/Nylander shouldn't matter, since those two should be split next year. Keefe would be insane to keep Matthews and Marner together next season.

I don't think they all have to go, but only one can play in the top 9. I think its very unlikely that we come through expansion with both of Kerfoot/Engvall, but on the off chance we do (and bring back AG)

xxx-Matthews-Nylander
Galchenyuk-Tavares-Marner
xxx-Kerfoot-xxx
Soup- Engvall-Spezza

can be a very different group with the right xxx's. The 4thline is vanilla as anything and I'd like someone other than Engvall at C but competent at both ends. Give Kerf some traditional north south 3rd line two way guys, and we're well set up. That 2nd line plays sheltered and gives Marner two targets, who are both shooting threats and good net front guys.

 

[Dreakmur]

I don't think they all have to go, but only one can play in the top 9. I think its very unlikely that we come through expansion with both of Kerfoot/Engvall, but on the off chance we do (and bring back AG)

xxx-Matthews-Nylander
Galchenyuk-Tavares-Marner
xxx-Kerfoot-xxx
Soup- Engvall-Spezza

can be a very different group with the right xxx's. The 4thline is vanilla as anything and I'd like someone other than Engvall at C but competent at both ends. Give Kerf some traditional north south 3rd line two way guys, and we're well set up. That 2nd line plays sheltered and gives Marner two targets, who are both shooting threats and good net front guys.

So we'd have less than 8 million in cap space to sign 3 top-9 forwards and a backup goalie. Guess the plan is more dumpster diving?

Kerfoot has proven over and over again that he's not a centre. I actually wouldn't mind him on the wing, but we don't have the cap space to keep him.

Engvall is soft and I just don't want him at all, especially at centre.

Mikheyev is the one I'd be most open to keeping, but I'd still rather move him with somebody who's less passive.

 

[Brobust]

I don't think they all have to go, but only one can play in the top 9. I think its very unlikely that we come through expansion with both of Kerfoot/Engvall, but on the off chance we do (and bring back AG)

xxx-Matthews-Nylander
Galchenyuk-Tavares-Marner
xxx-Kerfoot-xxx
Soup- Engvall-Spezza

can be a very different group with the right xxx's. The 4thline is vanilla as anything and I'd like someone other than Engvall at C but competent at both ends. Give Kerf some traditional north south 3rd line two way guys, and we're well set up. That 2nd line plays sheltered and gives Marner two targets, who are both shooting threats and good net front guys.

Keefe does not trust Nylander in matchup minutes. So I would not expect 34-88 to be a thing as long as he is the coach.

TBH, I think he has a point.

 

[ShaneFalco]

So we'd have less than 8 million in cap space to sign 3 top-9 forwards and a backup goalie. Guess the plan is more dumpster diving?

Kerfoot has proven over and over again that he's not a centre. I actually wouldn't mind him on the wing, but we don't have the cap space to keep him.

Engvall is soft and I just don't want him at all, especially at centre.

Mikheyev is the one I'd be most open to keeping, but I'd still rather move him with somebody who's less passive.

That's our reality - cheap contracts with fill-ins that hopefully can provide what the core lack. You know things like heart, compete level, "killer instinct" etc

 

[Dreakmur]

Keefe does not trust Nylander in matchup minutes. So I would not expect 34-88 to be a thing as long as he is the coach.

TBH, I think he has a point.

Bad coaches make bad decisions.

 

[4thline]

Kerfoot has proven over and over again that he's not a centre. I actually wouldn't mind him on the wing, but we don't have the cap space to keep him.

Engvall is soft and I just don't want him at all, especially at centre.

Mikheyev is the one I'd be most open to keeping, but I'd still rather move him with somebody who's less passive.

Except for by consistently winning his minutes, most recently as a 2C against a team likely headed to the Stanley cup finals.
It's moot though, he's almost certainly Seattle bound unless we do some sort of shenanigans with the defense.

My happiness level with Mikheyev went up exponentially when I accepted him as a stong PK/defensive depth piece rather than an underpaid 3rd wheel on an offensive unit.

I'm trying not to think about things until the ED, so much hinges on that

 

[Brobust]

Bad coaches make bad decisions.

So Nylander is good defensively, that you would put him on the ice against Marchand and Kucherov?

 

[Brobust]

Except for by consistently winning his minutes, most recently as a 2C against a team likely headed to the Stanley cup finals.
It's moot though, he's almost certainly Seattle bound unless we do some sort of shenanigans with the defense.

My happiness level with Mikheyev went up exponentially when I accepted him as a stong PK/defensive depth piece rather than an underpaid 3rd wheel on an offensive unit.

I'm trying not to think about things until the ED, so much hinges on that

If Dubas protects Holl over Kerfoot, I'll lose faith in him as a GM.

 

[4thline]

If Dubas protects Holl over Kerfoot, I'll lose faith in him as a GM.

I was thinking bigger, something around Muzzin (trade, not exposing him). It's unlikely but he's the only high leverage piece not explicitly ruled out by direct comments and rumour.

 

[Dreakmur]

So Nylander is good defensively, that you would put him on the ice against Marchand and Kucherov?

Why would you use Matthews as a shut-down centre?

 

[WTFMAN99]

If I’m Kyle Dubas I do my f’ing job and call 31 teams and take a detailed inventory on what I could get for any of the Big 4 excluding Matthews on the premise of making either a) a hockey deal for another star or b) pure futures to free up cap.

Then I talk to pro scouting and rank the scenarios and team fit against what we could do with the cap space in free agency with evolving intel on players who might have interest coming here.

Then I make a decision with all the prep work on whether to move one of them and who I would move with all the likely next steps roughed out.

But what do I know, I’m a just a 30 something year old with prescription glasses.

It's honestly all I would ask, do the due diligence.

Other teams beat writers saying they're hearing from other GMs that the Leafs are seriously not considering any of the big 4 is stupid. At least have discussions so you know if there is actually a trade out there that could make the team better.

 

[Dreakmur]

Except for by consistently winning his minutes, most recently as a 2C against a team likely headed to the Stanley cup finals.
It's moot though, he's almost certainly Seattle bound unless we do some sort of shenanigans with the defense.

You did notice that Nylander took a portion of the centre duties when Kerfoot moved into that slot, right?

My happiness level with Mikheyev went up exponentially when I accepted him as a stong PK/defensive depth piece rather than an underpaid 3rd wheel on an offensive unit.

I like Mikheyev too, but he costs too much to do what he does.

If we had unlimited cap space, I'd be ok keeping Kerfoot and Mikheyev, but we don't, so we can't.

Engvall is brutal.

 

[Stigma]

From Seravalli's article:

"Sources indicate significant friction built up between Kane and a number of his teammates last season, frustration that was expressed clearly to management in exit interviews."

I was pumped about Kane, but it looks like he's still the same guy he always was. I don't want this guy on the team.

I'm wondering about Debrusk. He had 27 goals just 2 years ago. His cap hit is 3.6 for one more year. He's LW and a nice little rat. I wouldn't mind us going after him.

Fabbro is also available. Could be a good pick-up if we lose Rielly and need some high ceiling types. Of course, at the right price.

 

[4thline]

You did notice that Nylander took a portion of the centre duties when Kerfoot moved into that slot, right?

Yup, his inability to improve on faceoffs is by far his biggest flaw. But like I said, point is likely moot. Barring major surprises he's one of the best 6 (if not 3) forwards likely to be eligible.

Engvall is the anti- Chad Kilger. Both were effective down the lineup, both frustrating as shit and thus scapegoats because of their inability to live up to their tools (both have/had the tools to be impact players.) Kilger had no brain, Engvall no heart.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

It's honestly all I would ask, do the due diligence.

Other teams beat writers saying they're hearing from other GMs that the Leafs are seriously not considering any of the big 4 is stupid. At least have discussions so you know if there is actually a trade out there that could make the team better.

I can somewhat understand the point... Or at least trying to keep it hush hush. It would cause a media crapstorm in a quiet market... If it comes out that the Leafs are doing 'due-diligence' on their hometown 24 year old star winger, then it would be a huge thing.

The Leafs would have to be really serious for them to go to that kind of trouble. They may consider it, but they need to temper things A LOT... Especially since they need a very specific offer that they likely do not receive to even consider moving Marner at all.

As soon as anyone thinks their organization turns on them, then it is really hard to come back from that.

 

[WTFMAN99]

- Lebrun via the Athletic.

Oh yay, I love keeping a bunch of losers together.

 

[Dreakmur]

From Seravalli's article:

"Sources indicate significant friction built up between Kane and a number of his teammates last season, frustration that was expressed clearly to management in exit interviews."

I was pumped about Kane, but it looks like he's still the same guy he always was. I don't want this guy on the team.

Some friction in the Leafs dressing room would be pretty sweet. Those guys are way too happy losing every year.

 

[Stigma]

Some friction in the Leafs dressing room would be pretty sweet. Those guys are way too happy losing every year.

I hear you, but I think it would have to depend on the type of friction. If Kane is angry at teammates for not playing hard, I'm good with that friction. If he's angry at them for some dumb other reason then I'm not. I dunno, he just seems like a very douchey individual.

 

[Brobust]

Why would you use Matthews as a shut-down centre?

Because he's had good defensive numbers in hard minutes over the last two seasons?

 

[McSnypsky]

Why would you use Matthews as a shut-down centre?

Exactly, Keefe thought he should play Matthews head to head with a guy whose sole purpose was to shut down and not score. We could've used a shutdown center and try to get Matthews better matchups.

 

[Dreakmur]

I hear you, but I think it would have to depend on the type of friction. If Kane is angry at teammates for not playing hard, I'm good with that friction. If he's angry at them for some dumb other reason then I'm not. I dunno, he just seems like a very douchey individual.

In the past, I was worried about brining in bad apples that could corrupt the core... but they're already corrupted. They need a shakeup.

 

[Superstar]

Some friction in the Leafs dressing room would be pretty sweet. Those guys are way too happy losing every year.

Only friction in the Leafs dressing room is due to some guys rubbing their hands together in glee from how much money they're getting paid...

 

[Dreakmur]

Because he's had good defensive numbers in hard minutes over the last two seasons?

This is the same thinking that led to a lot of Keefe's bad decisions. You can't play the top guys to much or they get tired, so you have to spread the ice time around.

Do you want Matthews playing in mostly offensive situations or mostly defensive situations?