Your words were literally they can’t trade nylander without, “a top skilled playmaker.”

I repeatedly told you I was talking about a top 6 skilled playmaker.

You can edit your first post if you made an error. Maybe it would clear things up. Have a good day sport.

7m doesn't get you a top league skilled playmaker, 11m does. That's why my response to needing to free up cap is that if that's the position one is taking it's Marner that has to go.

You should proof read your posts.

I edited the comment. To be fair a few replied about that and you are the only one who didn't get what I meant.

I look forward to the excuses next off-season.

I like them both. They are both great players. Marner has more AAV, but likely far fewer teams that would agree to taking his contract without retention. I don't think that either will be traded, and managing to get a good enough return would be difficult. Regardless, this team will not win the cup with 4 forwards taking up half the cap.

The problem was the forwards not playing the hockey basics. The forwards weren't making sure their zone was covered, covering their man, pressuring the other team to the outside and maintaining puck control. Ceci making defensive lapses and Barrie being the wrong kind of D for the team didn't help obviously but a lot of it was on the play of the forward lines not playing well defensively.

They had three more $3m fwds last year, so they've spent on fwd depth. They've added three top 4 dmen in last 2 years (Barrie obviously didnt work) so they've been able to add to their D. Aside from starting last year with Hutch, what exactly have they went cheap on?

Marner is more tradable than you think. Say they trade him when his 2021-22 bonus is paid this coming offseason. His salary for that year is only $750,000. He's only 8m a year after that so teams who's owners want to save real dollars but have a star playmaker would be scrambling to make an offer. From what's been said both Nylander and Marner had inquiries made on them. (Andersen had the most but that makes sense)

Somehow you think you do? Contracts and goods are two different things. When was the last time you went to haggle at a store and someone came in with an offer sheet? He very well might have asked for more in the beginning. From what I have heard his agent would not drop from that percentage. Why would he? Could have got more from the market.

I wouldn’t tote yourself as better than the mlse staff because you haggled somebody on a used car. Makes you look foolish.

Marner on the other hand.. they should have stuck to their guns a bit more. Clearly there was no offersheet coming, they seemingly had all the leverage.

I was talking about you. I know how contract negotiations work I've been part of a few. Each side asks for a sweetheart deal for them, usually a bit obcene. Both sides negotiate and they usually land somewhere in the middle.

Say a player tells his agent he wants 7.5-7.8. His agent talks to the GM and says were thinking 10.5.
GM says "your out of your mind. We're at 5.6. Your player loses the puck too much and isn't throwing the body enough (or something like that.")
Agent says, "he's the best in the league at blocking shots and zone entries with possession. His assists are some of the best in the league and the guy can score. 8.9m"
GM says, maybe so but his scoring could be a lot better and he's a defensive liability"
Then at some point they end up somewhere in the middle for whatever number of years they negotiate. Neither side goes in expecting to get their initial asking. Chances are Marner told his agent he wanted that term so his agent put an unreasonable asking he refused to budge at for the full 8 years.

Sure that was part of it, but having 4 forwards who cost so much means that they can't get the right group of players together to succeed.

Barilko complained in the post I was responding to that "Babcock decided dump and chase, and point shots was the most effective ways to win games."

And I don't disagree with that, but Leafs' fans on here in general have adopted the mistaken belief that they lost in the playoffs because they came up against amazing goaltending, whereas in reality they came up against a team that forced them to play the way Babcock was trying to train them to play. In the first game 43% of the Leafs' shots on net came from the D, with another several shots coming from forwards who were at the point or even farther out. They dumped and chased. They carried the puck in and then immediately shot the puck as they had no one open to pass to (the chances of scoring on a controlled entry with no pass in the opposing zone are near zero). And things changed minimally throughout the series.

I hate that kind of hockey. It sucks to watch and I wish the league would find a way to get rid of it, but it exists and Babcock knew that in the playoffs - and even down the stretch - teams are going to force the Leafs' to play that way and they have so far shown that they are incapable of fighting through it. I don't think that the changes that have been made this offseason will impact that. I don't think that they have the cap space to make those changes while they have 4 forwards making half the cap.

I highly doubt they trade one of the big four over the next 4 years, they bring tons of money into the Leafs' organization, but it is extremely unlikely that they have any playoff success over the next 4 years keeping them all. Maybe they will get to the second round once.





I have made the same argument before, but I have serious doubts about it now. We have no way of knowing right now, but I think that the problem many teams will have with taking on Marner's contract is that it causes major problems with their internal cap and the contracts that their upcoming stars are going to demand.

Babcock wanted a Babcock team that played a Babcock way where Babcock was king and nobody was better. He was an egomaniac and an asshole. He made decisions that hurt the Leafs intentionally harming their play in order to prove that this was a Babcock team. He put himself above the team, the cup, and most of all winning.

We shall see I guess. I think the $40m on 4 fwds is overblown.

I think Dubas and co. have to be aware by now, that playoff hockey and regular season hockey are two different animals. It would be nice to have better options than reclamation projects to bring that different dynamic to the team (Vesey and Simmonds) but I think odds are good at least one guy can find success.

I think consistency will be the biggest factor this season. If the young core can mature, and get rid of most of those no-show nights, that will prep them for the playoffs more than anything else.

They've always had different gears in the regular season. Bring the A game against TB, Bos, McDavid, etc. Once they learn how to bring consistent effort, and be a bit tougher to play against night in night out, then the playoffs won't be such a step up.

I think they have the personnel to get there.

But like I said, we shall see.

I don't disagree with that, and I was on the fire Babcock train back when it was pretty much empty. But, he is still a smart hockey mind and the things that Babcock said the team needed are the things that Dubas has been acquiring.

Yes, we shall see. I hope I am wrong, but there is no evidence to support a team this top-heavy winning the cup. Being this top-heavy was not the plan as Dubas assumed the cap would go up a lot during Matthews' contract, but this is the reality.

I agree. They have taken huge steps and I think that Keefe and the new guys like Simmonds and Thorton can help the guys be more defensively responsible and watch the zones and cover each other's positions better. Adding Brodie will be a big boost regardless of playing with Reilly or Muzzin and if they end up having to put Holl with Reilly I think he's going to be much more capable of being the defensive D they need him to be. He took huge strides against Columbus and their coach even eluded to as much.

I would never doubt Babcock's knowledge of hockey and personally, I hope he's learned from the situation in Toronto and is more willing to adapt and work with players better. If he's the new coach for the new team I think it could go really really well for them. It would definitely be something I would listen for when interviewing him if it was me but I'm just some guy.

Doubt you have negotiated many 60m contracts. Think we all know how they work. The facts are the facts. I’m sure they negotiated back and forth but in the end they got the contracts we see.

I want to start off by saying that I don't think Marner is getting traded. That said, if there were ever a time Marner could be traded, between now and the next 3 years is a very good time.

Why? Because as with 90% of the Leafs roster, most of Marner's contract is paid via signing bonuses and that's very important right now and probably for the next few years thanks to what COVID has done not just to the NHL but the world at large.

Too often here and perhaps other places people get caught up on salary cap numbers and how it affects any given team's situation. Owners don't care about cap hits or any cap numbers, that's something they leave GMs and capologists to figure out.
If an owner can save money (especially right now) they will because money talks and right now NHL owners are not making very much of it.

The original comment was about Nylander's agent's initial asking price and acting like he expected that to be what the signing price would be. Acting like Nylander was holding out for 10m or something. That's nowhere close to how contract negotiation works. None of the guys wanted 8-year contracts because that's **** for the player and in the long run **** for the team. 6-year contracts work out better for everyone and if agents aren't willing to budge on the price of an 8-year contract it's not because the player expects to get paid that unreasonable sum, it's that they don't want to sign for that kind of term because it hurts the player and the team. The team and the player have no wiggle room to make changes and that gets players traded and teams often worse off as a result.
players are 18-19 at the draft. Three-year entry takes them to 21-22. a 5-6 year contract takes them to 26-27. That means when they sign the second contract most of another 5-6 year contract will be all prime years. That's financially better for the player but it's also better for the team as they are not taking a massive cap hit for a player past his prime. 32-33 at the end of that contract then they have the flexibility to pursue whatever their goal is after that.

he needs to be traded for an agresive player l

That makes no sense at all but at least it ends the stupid pretence that there are barrels of money to be saved by trading him and there are endless numbers of top 6 forwards waiting to be paid half Nylander's salary.