SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

call me Dubas

Created by: leafsFan1996
Team: 2020-21 Toronto Maple Leafs
Initial Creation Date: Sep. 29, 2020
Published: Sep. 30, 2020
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Description
added a cheap partner for Rielly and a re-vamped defensive 3rd line. ALso 4/6 in the bottom 6 can play centre. So if Kerfoot is hurt or is a put in the top 6 Larson can play 3 C
Free Agent Signings
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
2$1,300,000
2$1,700,000
UFAYEARSCAP HIT
4$2,750,000
3$1,900,000
1$700,000
3$2,250,000
Trades
TOR
  1. 2021 3rd round pick (PIT)
  2. 2022 4th round pick (SJS)
Retained Salary Transactions
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2020
Logo of the PIT
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the VGK
Logo of the VGK
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the CAR
Logo of the COL
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the STL
Logo of the WPG
2021
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the PIT
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
2022
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the TOR
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
21$81,500,000$81,221,450$0$0$278,550
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$2,250,000$2,250,000
RW, LW
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$11,640,250$11,640,250
C
UFA - 4
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$10,903,000$10,903,000
RW
UFA - 5
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$1,700,000$1,700,000
LW, RW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$11,000,000$11,000,000
C, LW
NMC
UFA - 5
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$6,962,366$6,962,366
RW
UFA - 4
$1,900,000$1,900,000
C, LW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$3,500,000$3,500,000
LW, C, RW
UFA - 3
$2,250,000$2,250,000
RW
UFA - 3
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$821,667$821,667
LW, RW
RFA - 4
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$700,000$700,000
C, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$1,250,000$1,250,000
RW, LW
UFA - 2
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$5,625,000$5,625,000
LD
NMC
UFA - 4
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$2,000,000$2,000,000
RD
M-NTC
UFA - 3
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$5,000,000$5,000,000
G
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$5,000,000$5,000,000
LD
M-NTC
UFA - 2
$2,750,000$2,750,000
RD
UFA - 4
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$1,650,000$1,650,000
G
UFA - 2
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$1,300,000$1,300,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$925,000$925,000
LD
UFA - 1
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$894,167$894,167
LD
UFA - 2

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Sep. 30, 2020 at 9:02 a.m.
#1
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2018
Posts: 2,449
Likes: 1,275
To me, this looks largely like the team that lost to CBJ in the play in round this year.

I like the idea of adding DeMelo but, I think that dollar value is low.

There simply isn't enough change here to make me believe that it is change for the better.

NO thanks.
Sep. 30, 2020 at 9:14 a.m.
#2
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 4,892
Likes: 3,372
This is far too realistic for ACGM.
Sep. 30, 2020 at 9:41 a.m.
#3
Formerly Jamiepo
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2018
Posts: 21,155
Likes: 10,700
Quoting: Trevorchef
To me, this looks largely like the team that lost to CBJ in the play in round this year.

I like the idea of adding DeMelo but, I think that dollar value is low.

There simply isn't enough change here to make me believe that it is change for the better.

NO thanks.


With some time to think about it now, it was a ****ty play in. Not necessarily a ****ty team. I think the addition by subtraction of Barrie and ceci May help as well.

I think a healthy Johnsson and muzzin would have been a boost too. Adding Demelo with Rielly seems like a good fit. If there is a way to cut costs a bit and keep Johnsson I think it would improve our depth scoring by pushing other players down.

See where the team goes and accrue space for a TDL move.
Sep. 30, 2020 at 9:59 a.m.
#4
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2018
Posts: 2,449
Likes: 1,275
Quoting: Jamiepo
With some time to think about it now, it was a ****ty play in. Not necessarily a ****ty team. I think the addition by subtraction of Barrie and ceci May help as well.

I think a healthy Johnsson and muzzin would have been a boost too. Adding Demelo with Rielly seems like a good fit. If there is a way to cut costs a bit and keep Johnsson I think it would improve our depth scoring by pushing other players down.

See where the team goes and accrue space for a TDL move.


It is just a soft group and far too easy to shut down. Columbus proved that.

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion. I just look at this team here and find it hard to believe that anything would be different.

For me, this doesn't cut it. That is all that I am saying.
GenXHockey liked this.
Sep. 30, 2020 at 10:08 a.m.
#5
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 564
I made a similar ACGM yesterday, but I added Matt Roy from LA as well. https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1962509
I think another d-man helps with the depth. If not Roy, I'd look at a Justin Braun who should be cheap as UFA depth. Create competiton and depth on defence. I also like this type of bottom-6 because it's really 3 lines.

3offensive- Robertson, Kerfoot, Spezza/Fast
3defensive-Engvall, Larsson, Fast
4th- Whoever's not on the 3rd obviously.

It lets Keefe use the lineup blender like he enjoys. I'd also love to look at adding somebody like Jordan Greenway (maybe even instead of Fast) because he could play higher up in the lineup but also does a good job of suppressing shots and playing physical should the need arise. I think he's a more athletic and defensive-minded JVR.

It's a lot of improvement by bringing up the floor rather than raising the ceiling. The only other move I might make is to try and add a veteran with some playoff experience (if they could be had for cheap) who could help take some leadership burden off of Tavares.
leafsFan1996 liked this.
Sep. 30, 2020 at 12:31 p.m.
#6
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Oct. 2017
Posts: 416
Likes: 160
Quoting: newballcoach
I made a similar ACGM yesterday, but I added Matt Roy from LA as well. https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1962509
I think another d-man helps with the depth. If not Roy, I'd look at a Justin Braun who should be cheap as UFA depth. Create competiton and depth on defence. I also like this type of bottom-6 because it's really 3 lines.

3offensive- Robertson, Kerfoot, Spezza/Fast
3defensive-Engvall, Larsson, Fast
4th- Whoever's not on the 3rd obviously.

It lets Keefe use the lineup blender like he enjoys. I'd also love to look at adding somebody like Jordan Greenway (maybe even instead of Fast) because he could play higher up in the lineup but also does a good job of suppressing shots and playing physical should the need arise. I think he's a more athletic and defensive-minded JVR.

It's a lot of improvement by bringing up the floor rather than raising the ceiling. The only other move I might make is to try and add a veteran with some playoff experience (if they could be had for cheap) who could help take some leadership burden off of Tavares.


Quoting: newballcoach
I made a similar ACGM yesterday, but I added Matt Roy from LA as well. https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1962509
I think another d-man helps with the depth. If not Roy, I'd look at a Justin Braun who should be cheap as UFA depth. Create competiton and depth on defence. I also like this type of bottom-6 because it's really 3 lines.

3offensive- Robertson, Kerfoot, Spezza/Fast
3defensive-Engvall, Larsson, Fast
4th- Whoever's not on the 3rd obviously.

It lets Keefe use the lineup blender like he enjoys. I'd also love to look at adding somebody like Jordan Greenway (maybe even instead of Fast) because he could play higher up in the lineup but also does a good job of suppressing shots and playing physical should the need arise. I think he's a more athletic and defensive-minded JVR.

It's a lot of improvement by bringing up the floor rather than raising the ceiling. The only other move I might make is to try and add a veteran with some playoff experience (if they could be had for cheap) who could help take some leadership burden off of Tavares.


I like Roy but i'd rather keep the 1st tbh. I'm also still pretty high on Holl as a decent 2nd pairing guy.

I wonder how much Greenway would cost, he would be such a great fit and is not only is he big but he's actually good.

I agree, with the high floor thing, Stars are important but not to the extent of a sport like basketball, so I'm willing to hear out that more undervalued depth contracts could benefit the team more than swinging on a guy like Petro. Also in a hard cap providing more value than your contract is needed to be a good team. Defense is not what gets you paid and can be undervalued. Hence cheaper guys like Larson, Fast and Demelo can replace Mango, Kappy and Barrie at a cheaper price without losing any overall value.
Sep. 30, 2020 at 12:49 p.m.
#7
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Oct. 2017
Posts: 416
Likes: 160
Quoting: Trevorchef
To me, this looks largely like the team that lost to CBJ in the play in round this year.

I like the idea of adding DeMelo but, I think that dollar value is low.

There simply isn't enough change here to make me believe that it is change for the better.

NO thanks.


agree to disagree. Larsson plays hard competition in Buffalo with meh linemates and treds water, Fast is a hard forechecking player who can move up the lineup and compliment talent and is great on the pk. this replaces Kappy (bad defensively and allegedly bad off the ice, didn't mesh in the top 6) and Mango (I liked in the top 6, but 3.4 is hard to swallow in Toronto's situation, injury prone) with cheaper options who are better defensively and harder to play against.

I was real low on Barrie, he killed offence by taking too many low % shots, couldn't beat F1 on the breakout and was bad in his own end. Demelo is a great compliment to Reilly and rounds out the top 4. Also no more Ceci but Lehtonen is a wild card, could be better, but most likely a negligible difference

I think some growth will come internally (young stars, growth of Dermott and Sandin, Robertson lighting it up against other teams 4th lines) and better luck (better year from Freddy, shoot more the 2% 5v5 in round 1, less injuries, full year of Campbell and Keefe)

but the new additions will improve us defensively and as far as the 3rd line, there is more versatility and hard forecheckers. this makes us harder to target specific parts of our game in the playoffs and we still keep the top 6 that can matchup with any top 6 in the league.

I'd argue all 3 new additions make us harder to shutdown, and there is more room with goaltending, luck and internal growth to improve than decline. I'd like to know what you'd do differently
Trevorchef and newballcoach liked this.
Sep. 30, 2020 at 1:23 p.m.
#8
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2018
Posts: 2,449
Likes: 1,275
Quoting: leafsFan1996
agree to disagree. Larsson plays hard competition in Buffalo with meh linemates and treds water, Fast is a hard forechecking player who can move up the lineup and compliment talent and is great on the pk. this replaces Kappy (bad defensively and allegedly bad off the ice, didn't mesh in the top 6) and Mango (I liked in the top 6, but 3.4 is hard to swallow in Toronto's situation, injury prone) with cheaper options who are better defensively and harder to play against.

I was real low on Barrie, he killed offence by taking too many low % shots, couldn't beat F1 on the breakout and was bad in his own end. Demelo is a great compliment to Reilly and rounds out the top 4. Also no more Ceci but Lehtonen is a wild card, could be better, but most likely a negligible difference

I think some growth will come internally (young stars, growth of Dermott and Sandin, Robertson lighting it up against other teams 4th lines) and better luck (better year from Freddy, shoot more the 2% 5v5 in round 1, less injuries, full year of Campbell and Keefe)

but the new additions will improve us defensively and as far as the 3rd line, there is more versatility and hard forecheckers. this makes us harder to target specific parts of our game in the playoffs and we still keep the top 6 that can matchup with any top 6 in the league.

I'd argue all 3 new additions make us harder to shutdown, and there is more room with goaltending, luck and internal growth to improve than decline. I'd like to know what you'd do differently


Well... for starters, let me say this. It isn't so much that I don't like the additions that you've made here. The contrary is actually true. I like the players that you have added.

I just don't see it as enough change to make a difference.

There is a larger problem that keeps getting pushed under the rug in most of these posts. The Leafs are spending 40 million dollars on four forwards. As much as I like the players, I believe that is a poor dispersal of financial resources.

I think that all of their salaries are for the most part reasonable dollar values. (Perhaps Marner is slightly overpaid but, that is another story for a day long since past IMO).

I think it would be in the team's best interest to trade one of those salaries to properly allocate finances better. (I know that is not a popular opinion and so be it).

Tavares has a no move. Matthews isn't going anywhere and after Dubas' comments about Marner, neither is he. Who does that leave?

I really, really like Nylander. So much so that, were it up to me, I'd rather trade Marner and use his 11 million dollars of cap space to shore up in other areas. We all know that isn't happening. So there does that leave us. Basically right here with what you have produced, or something similar, which to me, just isn't good enough. (Again, that is my opinion and I know it isn't a shared one for the most part).

I could go a lot deeper but, I'm not going to. Lets just say, that there isn't anything that terrible about what you have produced here, and agree to disagree as you have already said. YOu've gotta give something of quality to get something of quality and for the most part, what you have here just doesn't move the needle enough for me to believe that things will be any different.

Fair enough?

I wish you good fortune in the wars to come.
leafsFan1996 and newballcoach liked this.
Sep. 30, 2020 at 2:01 p.m.
#9
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Oct. 2017
Posts: 416
Likes: 160
Quoting: Trevorchef
Well... for starters, let me say this. It isn't so much that I don't like the additions that you've made here. The contrary is actually true. I like the players that you have added.

I just don't see it as enough change to make a difference.

There is a larger problem that keeps getting pushed under the rug in most of these posts. The Leafs are spending 40 million dollars on four forwards. As much as I like the players, I believe that is a poor dispersal of financial resources.

I think that all of their salaries are for the most part reasonable dollar values. (Perhaps Marner is slightly overpaid but, that is another story for a day long since past IMO).

I think it would be in the team's best interest to trade one of those salaries to properly allocate finances better. (I know that is not a popular opinion and so be it).

Tavares has a no move. Matthews isn't going anywhere and after Dubas' comments about Marner, neither is he. Who does that leave?

I really, really like Nylander. So much so that, were it up to me, I'd rather trade Marner and use his 11 million dollars of cap space to shore up in other areas. We all know that isn't happening. So there does that leave us. Basically right here with what you have produced, or something similar, which to me, just isn't good enough. (Again, that is my opinion and I know it isn't a shared one for the most part).

I could go a lot deeper but, I'm not going to. Lets just say, that there isn't anything that terrible about what you have produced here, and agree to disagree as you have already said. YOu've gotta give something of quality to get something of quality and for the most part, what you have here just doesn't move the needle enough for me to believe that things will be any different.

Fair enough?

I wish you good fortune in the wars to come.


fair enough, I can see where you're coming from. Pre-covid it looked like the cap was on a steady incline making the big 4s contracts look not so bad in years 3-5/6.

I'd love to see them do it with the big 4 but if they can't Marner should be the first to go. hopefully the return is close to fair and nothing like the AGM's on here where the leafs retain 1.5 mill and get a second liner and a 1st rounder in 2022.
Trevorchef liked this.
Sep. 30, 2020 at 2:23 p.m.
#10
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 564
Quoting: Trevorchef
Well... for starters, let me say this. It isn't so much that I don't like the additions that you've made here. The contrary is actually true. I like the players that you have added.

I just don't see it as enough change to make a difference.

There is a larger problem that keeps getting pushed under the rug in most of these posts. The Leafs are spending 40 million dollars on four forwards. As much as I like the players, I believe that is a poor dispersal of financial resources.

I think that all of their salaries are for the most part reasonable dollar values. (Perhaps Marner is slightly overpaid but, that is another story for a day long since past IMO).

I think it would be in the team's best interest to trade one of those salaries to properly allocate finances better. (I know that is not a popular opinion and so be it).

Tavares has a no move. Matthews isn't going anywhere and after Dubas' comments about Marner, neither is he. Who does that leave?

I really, really like Nylander. So much so that, were it up to me, I'd rather trade Marner and use his 11 million dollars of cap space to shore up in other areas. We all know that isn't happening. So there does that leave us. Basically right here with what you have produced, or something similar, which to me, just isn't good enough. (Again, that is my opinion and I know it isn't a shared one for the most part).

I could go a lot deeper but, I'm not going to. Lets just say, that there isn't anything that terrible about what you have produced here, and agree to disagree as you have already said. YOu've gotta give something of quality to get something of quality and for the most part, what you have here just doesn't move the needle enough for me to believe that things will be any different.

Fair enough?

I wish you good fortune in the wars to come.


I get the 40 million thing. I get it. I don't think it's easy to change. You aren't going to trade Nylander without a great return. And you shouldn't, because he's a great player.

So even if you move him for lets say, Colton Parayko in this case. You haven't saved much on the cap and now you need to pay Parayko and Rielly in two years. What the Leafs have right now is a lot of cost certainty. They know how long this core is setup to be together for, they only have a few negotiations between now and when Matthews/Nylander are up again. They know what their core is going to look like. That helps plan for the future (and if the cap had kept rising I think these deals would look better, can't predict COVID). The Islanders made the eastern conference final with almost 30 million in 4th line forwards and 3rd pair defencemen. At least the Leafs no longer have bad contracts to move. The players making lots of good money are good players. It's a better problem to have than desperately needing to commit buyouts or move salary right now.

The bigger issue I think we need to find it is, are they good enough? Even if they move Nylander to add Parayko or Ekblad, they are still a top heavy team. Is that top good enough to win? That remains to be seen. If they're not, you blow it all up and start again. That's a crazy idea. You need to give this core more time and add to it to try and help them be successful. And if it ends up that they're not good enough, then they aren't. But I think you have what you have and you do your best from there.
Trevorchef liked this.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll