Leafs block your number

Not only that if marner would take 9.2 over 6 years that would of been signed long time ago

Leafs have no interest in this trade as Marner is a franchise player and the proposed players in return are not in his league.

Every team in the league wants Marner but few have a player of equal value at his same age.

The issue is Marner wants Matthews money based on the Leafs internal cap structure. If the Leafs make the difficult decision to move on from Marner he may sign for less based on a different teams cap structure. It would then fall on Marner to explain why we was willing to take less with another team vs signing with his home town team at the same #. I also think Dubas will make the decision to trade Marner if he is dead set on getting Matthews money.

Dubas counters with Rakell, Manson, Kase, Steel, Comtios, Jones, and Gibson, for Marner, Ceci, and Andersen, see I can be ridiculous too.

This is just an insane line of thinking. If he won't sign for 9.25x6 in Toronto he won't suddenly lower his asking price by 2 million just because of what the Ducks have some of their guys making.

Trading Manson would leave our D completely decimated on the right side. While the value of the OP is certainly in our favour, it's just not a trade I would entertain. We'd end up like NJ after the Hall-Larsson trade. They got the better player, but have drafted 1st OA twice since then. I think that is evidence enough that the trade didn't really pan out as they hoped it would.



I mean, if you're giving him away, "sure", we'll take Marner. Otherwise, we don't want or need Marner. We need scorers, not playmakers. Moreover, he is getting over-hyped at this point. The kid is good, but he's no Ovechkin.



I know you are just trying to make some O-T-T point, but why are we taking back Ceci and Andersen? The OP only wants Marner. FWIW, I think a deal around Rakell + Steel/Comtois + 1st is a strong offer for Marner. However, I am sure some deluded TOR fans wouldn't even entertain it, what with Marner being a generational talent and equivalent to McDavid (which he isn't).

First off not nearly enough for Marner, I wouldn't even move Larkin for that offer. And secondly you're at least $2.4 million under his asking price. He'll stay in Toronto if that's only what he gets.

Actually, what you proposed isn't a terrible trade idea (Rakell,Comtois/Steel,+1 for Marner) just doesn't do enough for the leafs, if we where to trade Mitch we would need a top pairing defenceman back otherwise it wouldn't be worth it for us and at that point it wouldn't be worth it for you as well. P.s. I don't think nore have I ever said Mitch Marner is a generational player, he is very good but not close to generational, just because one fan says something does not mean that all of us share the same opinion.

Fine, but I don't think Marner returns a top pairing D-man. Top pairing D-men, at least good ones, are really hard to come by. Meanwhile, top pairing W are found at the top of every draft.

You may not think it, but you certainly respond to proposals for Marner as if he is a generational player. Hence the O-T-T response you gave in this thread. I mean, Marner for Silf + Manson isn't a good return or even a fair one, but it's certainly not "ridiculous" either.

Which is why he won't be traded. No i dont as I clearly stated. that is a ridiculous trade proposal which is why I went the other way, you think that my proposal is over the top, but that trade proposal is laughable, hence why I went the other way so you or original poster can understand how the leafs would view this proposal.

It is not that insane at all really. Marner is holding out because on the Leafs roster he believes he is worth every much as Matthews. He is using the Leafs internal cap and teammates as his comparable. This would all change if he were traded. He can ask for the Matthews deal but wouldnt get it. The new team isnt going to care about the Leafs and their cap situation. They would use there own and the league for comparables to determine his value. Making it much more likely Marner signs for less. 5x9.5-10.5 likely.

So you don't think Marner is generational, but you think a 2nd line W + top 4 RD is a "ridiculous" offer for a 1st line W. Again, it's not a good return or even fair value, but it's certainly not "ridiculous". I don't know, Marner for Sprong + MDZ is a "ridiculous" offer. I think we can all agree that a 1st line W would return a lot more than a bottom pairing D-man and a W prospect that is yet to find a home in the NHL. I mean, where do you start with such an offer? Hence, it is "ridiculous". Meanwhile, Marner for Silf + Manson would be a poor return and probably doesn't meet TOR needs now they have Barrie and Ceci. However, in terms of pure value, it's certainly workable (I think I can tell the type of fan you are and so I'm sure the fact both players aren't <25 years old = no deal, but I'll follow through on my point). That doesn't mean TOR would consider it, but it's certainly not a "ridiculous" offer. I mean, Lindholm for Nylander + Liljegren + 1st isn't an offer I would even consider, but it's certainly not "ridiculous" and, in terms of pure value, is certainly a respectable offer for a top pairing D. However, I don't think Lindholm is generational or, at least, I don't respond to bad trade offers (unless they are completely devoid of value) as if he is.

What do you think about Andersen and Johnsson + a 3rd for Gibson and Jones?

An honest question.

I think it's fair value. In terms of value:

Gibson >> Andersen
Jones << Johnsson

The 3rd makes up for the differences in age.

I wouldn't do that deal, as I think Gibson is a more consistent netminder and I think middle-6 W are pretty streaky and easy to come by, but it's a very fair and reasonable offer.

That's what I thought thanks