With this part i cant agree....you dont let generational player that wants to play for your team to slip away. His 11M were based on 9 Seasons production where he showed multiple times hes 80+ player, tho that shouldnt earn you 11M per year but SJS were there with 13M i think....so you overpay. Some over-simplified full-proof theory about the Salary in Cap era is 10 Points are bringing you 1M with long-term contract ( 7-8y ), you get "few bucks more" if you are generational talent tho.

Same went with Nylander who was Paid for his past production with 600k above it like inflation and cap rise and such.

Completelly different with Matthews where according to what i wrote above how Points / Salary could be seen he jumped on 10 Points is worth 2M with short-term contract. Kick in the head right away. Only guy till now paid for "what he will be or we think he will" ( besides Eichel and we all know what we called out on that contract )



Couldnt agree more

We have him for another 6 years.. We could win a cup in that time.

You're not giving up that easy are you? We haven't won a cup in forever, and yet every year I think it could happen. We're leaf fans. We don't need to be rationale. It's like playing the lottery... someone's gots to win, why not me? I've been losing that game for a long time, too..

We have JT for another six years. Get the right roster around him and the rest of the core and I like our odds in that time frame for a cup win.

Just like the Marleau contract, year 3 was a waste. With J.T. the Leafs will get buyers remorse by year 5 or 6.

J.T.'s contract could turn into C. Perry's contract.

I have been kind of asking this same question for about three weeks now.

Option A: keep Marner at probably a cost higher than he could (should?) be at. Downside being the forwards get shipped out together or separately to not just get under the cap but (cross your fingers here) improve the D.

Option B: trade Marner and get help on D. Let's face it...Leafs probably have to trade 1-2 more forwards even with a Marner trade that brings in a top RHD because this is how weak the Leafs D currently is.

It seems like whether it's fans or media, people are not understanding these choices and the state of the current D.

We need a GM to stop drafting only Euro/Russians, the future will get no help from those players. As the Blues (and many other Cup winning teams prove) North Americans shine in the playoffs.

The Pens won a Cup with half their Top 8 Dman injured and replaced with AHL'ers and journeyman fringe Dmen.

Eh? Didn't we just draft an american kind named roberston?

Regardless, I'd make me a whole team of Lindstroms, and Ovies and Datsyuks and Forsbergs and on and on and on and on......

Sounds like Sundin era.....they failed even with Mogilny, Renberg, Nolan and such. Dubarelli didnt convinced me till now that those Noonis-Burke-Ferguson ghosts arent around still.....

Robertson, 5'8" I'm taller than him.

I think this is all pretty fair. But for me the thing that doesn't get talked about much is how unbalanced the cap structure is with these big salaries invested in 2 C's and potentially a RW. Does that kinda cap configuration even work? Or should there be a greater percentage of cap allocated to other areas? Hockey really is a team sport..

Yeah, that sucked, too. But jeez, man. A little positivity.

All we need to do is trade Paul Marner and the leafs are guaranteed a cup. I swear it.

I am too. But what's that have to do with Russians and Euro's? The kid is american as apple pie. Thought that;s what you wanted??

That's cool.
How often in NHL history has that happened?
One team (let's assume there's a few more) does it and suddenly it's doable by an organization that hasn't won in what? 53 years?

At least the Pens have a winning pedigree. Do the Leafs have that? What was that? No....impossible!

I discussed the fact that so much of the cap has been alotted to the forwards with @Trickster and that it needs to be balanced out more. We disagreed but eventually he saw what I was pointing out.

Hmm...I'd like to see cap distribution of teams that win the cup and see how it compares from year to year. Would be interesting.

Yeah, I don't know but that would be interesting to see. I'm you just gave a blogger an idea for a piece.

I can get behind the idea that you pay your stars and then get creative with the rest of the roster. But what happens when your paying all your stars for a simliar role? I think you end up with a d like the leafs... or trade from an area of strength to address a weakness.

Maybe there is a taker out there for a young star rw in exchange for a young up and coming rhd, or better yet, a young star rhd?

When you take the names out of it that equation would seem to work for the leasfs. But easier said than done.

The team that comes to mind in recent history of a balanced lineup is Chicago with Kane/Teows and Keith/Seabrook.

When I discuss winning with friends I mention the balance those Chicago teams had and then they point to how Chicago is post-winning....all I gotta say about that is they have a couple of cups to show for what they are going through now. I call it the Stanley Cup tax.

Once you have won, ya gotta pay for winning by overpaying the guys that brought you the glory of winning.

Tavares + Marner trade return > just Marner

I am starting to think DeMelo is going to be target of the Leafs