What Roster changes do you make if Marner doesn't waive?

[ToneDog]

I meant that is more if none of the big dogs waive

Agreed, let's keep shuffling the deck chairs around these 5 losers while they line their pockets with money.

 

[WTFMAN99]

Agreed, let's keep shuffling the deck chairs around these 5 losers while they line their pockets with money.

It basically pushes back any big plans another season unfortunately.

 

[rumman]

Jarnkrok
Kampf
Timmins
Liljegren
Robertson

I would think are likely to be moved, they're not bad players but for various reasons, I could see all 5 changing teams.

As much as I have no problem moving on from these pieces, collectively they’re not the real problem, until they deal with the elephant in the room nothing changes imo………

It basically pushes back any big plans another season unfortunately.

If they don’t address the core now what makes anyone think they’ll address it next season?

 

[WTFMAN99]

As much as I have no problem moving on from these pieces, collectively they’re not the real problem, until they deal with the elephant in the room nothing changes imo………


If they don’t address the core now what makes anyone think they’ll address it next season?

If they aren't allowed to change it this year because JT / Marner / Rielly won't waive, JT and Marner at least expire after this year, freeing up money to make changes.

 

[ACC1224]

I meant that is more if none of the big dogs waive

also known as 'staying on topic'.

 

[rumman]

If they aren't allowed to change it this year because JT / Marner / Rielly won't waive, JT and Marner at least expire after this year, freeing up money to make changes.

Agreed, but does anyone really think they’ll let Marner walk for nothing like Tre did with Johnny Hockey? Does anyone think they won’t resign JT? I think addressing the problem now is a better option, and yes, it might take them telling Marner if you don’t waive your in for an unpleasant year of hockey………

 

[Captain Crunch]

As much as I have no problem moving on from these pieces, collectively they’re not the real problem, until they deal with the elephant in the room nothing changes imo………


If they don’t address the core now what makes anyone think they’ll address it next season?

The only reason would be that they can't find a team who doesn't want to send back a bad contract or a top 2 dman. If that's the case, I have a feeling they would rather bring Marner back, make whatever changes to the roster that they can, let him walk after the season, and then with all that extra cap space (JT's contract will also be off the books) start making the major roster changes that need to be made to better balance this team.

 

[rumman]

The only reason would be that they can't find a team who doesn't want to send back a bad contract or a top 2 dman. If that's the case, I have a feeling they would rather bring Marner back, make whatever changes to the roster that they can, let him walk after the season, and then with all that extra cap space (JT's contract will also be off the books) start making the major roster changes that need to be made to better balance this team.

It’s a possibility, I’m more of a fix the problem now kind of guy, like the Fram oil fiter commercial says “you can pay me now or pay me later……”

 

[WTFMAN99]

Agreed, but does anyone really think they’ll let Marner walk for nothing like Tre did with Johnny Hockey? Does anyone think they won’t resign JT? I think addressing the problem now is a better option, and yes, it might take them telling Marner if you don’t waive your in for an unpleasant year of hockey………

In hindsight, Gaudreau walking for nothing for better than re-signing given what they're seeing from him in CBUS.

 

[rumman]

In hindsight, Gaudreau walking for nothing for better than re-signing given what they're seeing from him in CBUS.

Completely agree, maybe letting Marner walk is the right move………..

 

[57 Years No Cup]

also known as 'staying on topic'.

The OP's premise is flawed, thus the discussion about it.

Marner will waive, if asked. Guaranteed.

 

[Captain Crunch]

It’s a possibility, I’m more of a fix the problem now kind of guy, like the Fram oil fiter commercial says “you can pay me now or pay me later……”

I also want it to be now, but I believe that Tre will only trade him if it improves the team now as well as later.

 

[rumman]

I also want it to be now, but I believe that Tre will only trade him if it improves the team now as well as later.

Can’t see how keeping the core together can help unless your for running it back, which would be incredibly stupid, and becomes stupider every year……….

 

[notDatsyuk]

As much as I have no problem moving on from these pieces, collectively they’re not the real problem, until they deal with the elephant in the room nothing changes imo………


If they don’t address the core now what makes anyone think they’ll address it next season?

Three of the core are signed long-term.

The two that are the worst overpaid are only signed for this year, but have NMCs. If they can't be convinced to waive, we're stuck with them until next summer.

There's a good reason it's virtually impossible to address this year, but that reason disappears next year. With the exception of Shanahan the decision makers (Pelley, Tre, and Berube) are all new, and hopefully have it figured out better than the last bunch.

 

[rumman]

Three of the core are signed long-term.

The two that are the worst overpaid are only signed for this year, but have NMCs. If they can't be convinced to waive, we're stuck with them until next summer.

There's a good reason it's virtually impossible to address this year, but that reason disappears next year. With the exception of Shanahan the decision makers (Pelley, Tre, and Berube) are all new, and hopefully have it figured out better than the last bunch.

So come back next summer when things will changed?

 

[Torontonian]

As much as I have no problem moving on from these pieces, collectively they’re not the real problem, until they deal with the elephant in the room nothing changes imo………


If they don’t address the core now what makes anyone think they’ll address it next season?

You need to stop thinking Toronto can do anything to address the core, that ship has sailed. It's more likely they run it back for a year, insulate the team with a better goalie and d-core and see where there at next summer again. If same results like a first round exit, you can change the core by letting two members of it walk in free agency.

 

[Trapper]

Completely agree, maybe letting Marner walk is the right move………..

Marner and his agent would probably bet the Leafs don’t have the stones to let him walk for nothing.
So all they have to do is wait it out, report other teams are looking at giving him 13 + million (just like Tavares) and wait for them to cave.
Pressure = overpay = profit $$$$

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Either Marner waives or I have him drive the third line tanking his value.

10.8 AAV means he drives his own line.

So all they have to do is wait it out, report other teams are looking at giving him 13 + million (just like Tavares) and wait for them to cave.

The team has told him they are moving on.

That's not going to happen.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Agreed, but does anyone really think they’ll let Marner walk for nothing like Tre did with Johnny Hockey? Does anyone think they won’t resign JT? I think addressing the problem now is a better option, and yes, it might take them telling Marner if you don’t waive your in for an unpleasant year of hockey………

The problem with JT is the contract. Signing him for a couple of years at $3-4, while not ideal, frees up most of the cap space.

Marner is not going to take a pay cut to his value. If he doesn't waive the choice is either to badly overpay him, or to not pay him at all. With several years of lessons in the result of overpaying, maybe they'll have learned.

 

[ACC1224]

In hindsight, Gaudreau walking for nothing for better than re-signing given what they're seeing from him in CBUS.

Seems Columbus is where careers go to die.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

The problem with JT is the contract. Signing him for a couple of years at $3-4, while not ideal, frees up most of the cap space.

He's slow and he doesn't play Berube's game. That's the wrong message to send. Something cheap isn't a disaster. Have him on PP2 might be useful.

I'm full mini-rebuild and I'm trading Marner and moving on from JT (when his deal expires, he cant be moved) unless the price is too good to pass up. 3 AAV x 5 years with a Robidas Island backup plan.

 

[notDatsyuk]

It’s a possibility, I’m more of a fix the problem now kind of guy, like the Fram oil fiter commercial says “you can pay me now or pay me later……”

I'm all for "fixing the problem now".

If we could get Marner to waive and trade him for a reasonable return, and get JT to agree to retire and join the team as a faceoff coach, hurrah!

I just don't expect either to happen.

 

[Captain Crunch]

Can’t see how keeping the core together can help unless your for running it back, which would be incredibly stupid, and becomes stupider every year……….

I am not for running it back. I have wanted this core to be broken up for awhile now, especially after the pathetic loss to the Habs. But I believe Tre does not want to bring back a bad contract in any Marner trade, and what Cup contending team will want to give up another player of equal caliber (especially a top 2 dman) for Marner?
But if Tre is willing to get back prospects and draft picks, and/or prefer the cap space, then that certainly opens up more possibilities.
However, I don't expect anything to happen until after July 1st, when Marner gets his signing bonus and then his actual salary is less than $1 million.

 

[socko]

Agreed, but does anyone really think they’ll let Marner walk for nothing like Tre did with Johnny Hockey?

I would absolutely do that if it's between that and signing him to a new deal.

 

[notDatsyuk]

He's slow and he doesn't play Berube's game. That's the wrong message to send. Something cheap isn't a disaster. Have him on PP2 might be useful.

I'm full mini-rebuild and I'm trading Marner and moving on from JT (when his deal expires, he cant be moved) unless the price is too good to pass up. 3 AAV x 5 years with a Robidas Island backup plan.

Wait a minute - two years at 3-4 is "the wrong message to send", but five years at 3 is "too good to pass up"?

Can you clarify please.