Forums/Armchair-GM

Based on latest rumor Leafs

Created by: ChiHawk
Initial Creation Date: Mar. 8, 2022
Published: Mar. 8, 2022
Team: 2021-22 Chicago Blackhawks
Team Explanation
Due to Campbell not playing well since Jan 1st, apparently the Leafs are rumored to be talking to Chicago about Flowers and Hagel. It's going to take a haul to get them both, but I'd imagine this proposal can get Chicago to listen.
Trades
1.
CHI
  1. Mrázek, Petr
  2. Robertson, Nicholas
  3. 2022 1st round pick (TOR)
  4. 2023 1st round pick (TOR)
TOR
  1. Fleury, Marc-André ($3,500,000 retained)
  2. Hagel, Brandon
2.
CHI
  1. 2023 3rd round pick (EDM)
EDM
  1. Mrázek, Petr ($1,000,000 retained)
Additional Details:
If the Leafs trade were to happen, hopefully Chicago can flip Mrazek at the TDL or in the offseason
3.
CHI
  1. 2022 2nd round pick (STL)
NYR
  1. De Haan, Calvin
4.
CHI
  1. 2022 2nd round pick (CAR)
Doesn't have to be Carolina but Hawks looking for a 2nd for Kubs
CAR
  1. Kubalik, Dominik
Retained Salary Transactions
  • Marc-André Fleury: $3,500,000 (100%)
  • Petr Mrázek: $1,000,000 (26.32%)
  • Olli Määttä: $750,108 (18%)
  • Marc-André Fleury: $3,500,000 (50%)
DRAFT YEARROUND 1ROUND 2ROUND 3ROUND 4ROUND 5ROUND 6ROUND 7
2022
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the STL
Logo of the CAR
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the VGK
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CBJ
Logo of the CHI
2023
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the TBL
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
2024
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
Logo of the CHI
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
19$81,500,000$67,778,381$452,439$2,565,000$13,721,619
Left WingCenterRight Wing
Logo of the CHI
DeBrincat, Alex
$6,400,000
LW, RW
RFA - 2
Logo of the CHI
Toews, Jonathan
$10,500,000
C
NMC
UFA - 2
Logo of the CHI
Kane, Patrick
$10,500,000
RW
NMC
UFA - 2
Logo of the CHI
Kurashev, Philipp
$842,500
LW, C
RFA - 1
Logo of the CHI
Strome, Dylan
$3,000,000
C, LW
RFA - 1
Logo of the CHI
Johnson, Tyler
$5,000,000
RW, C
NTC
UFA - 3
Logo of the TOR
Robertson, Nicholas
$796,667
LW
RFA - 3
Logo of the CHI
Borgström, Henrik
$1,000,000
C
RFA - 2
Logo of the CHI
Carpenter, Ryan
$1,000,000
RW, C
UFA - 1
Logo of the CHI
Dach, Kirby
$925,000
C, RW
RFA - 1
Logo of the CHI
Entwistle, Mackenzie
$811,667
RW, C
RFA - 1
Logo of the CHI
Lafferty, Sam
$750,000
C, LW
UFA - 1
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the CHI
McCabe, Jake
$4,000,000
LD/RD
NTC
UFA - 4
Logo of the CHI
Jones, Seth
$5,400,000
RD
NTC
UFA - 1
Logo of the CHI
Lankinen, Kevin
$800,000
G
UFA - 1
Logo of the CHI
Stillman, Riley
$1,350,000
LD
RFA - 3
Logo of the CHI
Murphy, Connor
$3,850,000
RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the CHI
Jones, Caleb
$850,000
LD
RFA - 1
Logo of the CHI
Gustafsson, Erik
$800,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
Logo of the CHI
Shaw, Andrew
$3,900,000
C, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the CHI
Khaira, Jujhar
$975,000
C, LW
UFA - 2
Logo of the CHI
Johnson, Reese
$880,833
RW, C
RFA - 1

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
Mar. 8 at 10:48 a.m.
#1
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2018
Posts: 6,349
Likes: 2,925
Wasn't it reported that MAF won't accept any trade at this point?
Mar. 8 at 10:49 a.m.
#2
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 12,650
Likes: 5,713
I'd personally rather have Knies. Even if Robertson has a ton of grit/fight in him...we have Kane and Debrincat. Knies is at least a powerful forward...which we don't have many of...
ChiHawk and Garak liked this.
Mar. 8 at 10:50 a.m.
#3
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 12,650
Likes: 5,713
Quoting: Mr_Gardoki
Wasn't it reported that MAF won't accept any trade at this point?


That's been officially debunked. Allen Walsh (his agent) has come out publicly and said all options are still on the table.
Mr_Gardoki and ChiHawk liked this.
Mar. 8 at 10:51 a.m.
#4
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2018
Posts: 6,349
Likes: 2,925
Quoting: exo2769
That's been officially debunked. Allen Walsh (his agent) has come out publicly and said all options are still on the table.


Interesting.
Mar. 8 at 10:51 a.m.
#5
Yzerman would never
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2019
Posts: 10,629
Likes: 11,662
I would not accept that as toronto
Lenny7 liked this.
Mar. 8 at 10:52 a.m.
#6
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 16,102
Likes: 6,158
Quoting: Mr_Gardoki
Wasn't it reported that MAF won't accept any trade at this point?


It was reported he doesn't want to move, but there are conflicting reports on this both from Chicago outlets
Mr_Gardoki liked this.
Mar. 8 at 10:52 a.m.
#7
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 16,102
Likes: 6,158
Quoting: exo2769
I'd personally rather have Knies. Even if Robertson has a ton of grit/fight in him...we have Kane and Debrincat. Knies is at least a powerful forward...which we don't have many of...


Great point
Mar. 8 at 10:54 a.m.
#8
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2018
Posts: 6,349
Likes: 2,925
Quoting: AndrewLadd
I would not accept that as toronto


Yeah, I think it's just a bit too much, but not by a lot. IMO if one of those firsts becomes a second or maybe a conditional 3rd (becoming a 2nd or 1st if they reach the finals) it would be a little closer.
Lenny7 liked this.
Mar. 8 at 10:55 a.m.
#9
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2019
Posts: 5,003
Likes: 2,329
The ask is way too high for Toronto. Fleury is a rental goalie, he's not going to get the moon. Hagel is just a young player who's running an unsustainable shooting %, there's going to be some heavy regression there going forward. At that kind of cost, he can regress in Chicago next season.
Mar. 8 at 10:55 a.m.
#10
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 16,102
Likes: 6,158
Quoting: AndrewLadd
I would not accept that as toronto


Well the Leafs goaltending has fallen off a steep cliff. Campbell, since january 1st, is posting a .897 sv % which obviously isn't going to get them anywhere in the playoffs so a change is needed there first and foremost. Widely reported the Hawks aren't shopping Hagel and have declined at least 3 if not 4 offers of a 1st and good prospect (Toronto was one of those teams) so it's fair to assume a top prospect and 1st would be needed. It was rumored that a package of multiple top picks and a top prospect is on the table now for Hagel and Flowers with likely Mrazek going the other way. This is probably close to what is on the table to get Chicago to listen.
Mar. 8 at 10:56 a.m.
#11
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 12,650
Likes: 5,713
Quoting: AndrewLadd
I would not accept that as toronto


Quoting: Mr_Gardoki
Yeah, I think it's just a bit too much, but not by a lot. IMO if one of those firsts becomes a second or maybe a conditional 3rd (becoming a 2nd or 1st if they reach the finals) it would be a little closer.


The hardest part is Mrazek. The Hawks have reportedly turned down (4) different teams that offered a 1st and top prospect for Hagel...so that's the bench mark at the minimum the hawks are looking for Hagel. So a 1st for taking on Mrazek and giving MAF 50% retained...I'd argue that I'd want more to be perfectly honest. The Hawks don't WANT Mrazek. Mrazek is likely being forced upon them.
Kyle_Davidson and Garak liked this.
Mar. 8 at 10:58 a.m.
#12
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 12,650
Likes: 5,713
Quoting: Byrr
The ask is way too high for Toronto. Fleury is a rental goalie, he's not going to get the moon. Hagel is just a young player who's running an unsustainable shooting %, there's going to be some heavy regression there going forward. At that kind of cost, he can regress in Chicago next season.


MAF would likely NOT be a rental. Of course he can change his mind at any moment, but he himself has come out and said that he wants to extend wherever he ends up because he doesn't want to move his family around. He wants to win and he wants to stay in one place. I think he extends on a 2 year $4M deal.
ChiHawk liked this.
Mar. 8 at 10:58 a.m.
#13
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2019
Posts: 5,003
Likes: 2,329
Quoting: exo2769
MAF would likely NOT be a rental. Of course he can change his mind at any moment, but he himself has come out and said that he wants to extend wherever he ends up because he doesn't want to move his family around. He wants to win and he wants to stay in one place. I think he extends on a 2 year $4M deal.


And that would still be a rental when it comes to what Chicago is trading. Chicago doesn't get value for a decision Fleury is making in the offseason.
Mar. 8 at 10:59 a.m.
#14
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 12,650
Likes: 5,713
Quoting: Byrr
And that would still be a rental. Chicago doesn't get value for a decision Fleury is making in the offseason.


How is 3 playoff runs a rental? Is Matthews a rental in your mind? Are we all just rentals on this planet? You're deep man!
Mar. 8 at 11:00 a.m.
#15
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 16,102
Likes: 6,158
Quoting: Mr_Gardoki
Yeah, I think it's just a bit too much, but not by a lot. IMO if one of those firsts becomes a second or maybe a conditional 3rd (becoming a 2nd or 1st if they reach the finals) it would be a little closer.


Quoting: Byrr
The ask is way too high for Toronto. Fleury is a rental goalie, he's not going to get the moon. Hagel is just a young player who's running an unsustainable shooting %, there's going to be some heavy regression there going forward.


We know the Hawks have passed on multiple offers of a 1st and good prospect for Hagel, so it's going to take more then that to pry Hagel out. Not saying it's fair, but that's the reality and luxury the Hawks have.

Flowers is going to take a 2nd retained, but throw in a an overpaid backup on a multi-year deal with Mrazek and it's going to easily bump that to a 1st for Flowers and IMO it's not worth it for the Hawks...Mrazek sucks and only was good behind the best defense in the league in Carolina historically which would have made a lot of goalies look good. Mrazek was clearly a acquisition that was overpaid for by the Leafs. Just can't see anyone wanting to take on that cap hit for a backup for multiple years which is why I hope Chicago can flip him for something if this trade went through.

Latest rumor is that a package of multiple top picks and a top prospect is on the table now for Hagel and Flowers with likely Mrazek going the other way.
exo2769 and Mr_Gardoki liked this.
Mar. 8 at 11:00 a.m.
#16
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2019
Posts: 5,003
Likes: 2,329
Quoting: exo2769
How is 3 playoff runs a rental? Is Matthews a rental in your mind? Are we all just rentals on this planet? You're deep man!


Chicago isn't trading 3 playoff runs, they are trading 1. MAF might sign with his new team in the offseason but that isn't what Chicago is trading.
Mar. 8 at 11:01 a.m.
#17
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 12,650
Likes: 5,713
Quoting: Byrr
Chicago isn't trading 3 playoff runs, they are trading 1.


MAF won't accept the trade. He has the right. He's going to INSIST on an extension...OR NO TRADE
Mar. 8 at 11:02 a.m.
#18
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2018
Posts: 6,349
Likes: 2,925
Quoting: exo2769
The hardest part is Mrazek. The Hawks have reportedly turned down (4) different teams that offered a 1st and top prospect for Hagel...so that's the bench mark at the minimum the hawks are looking for Hagel. So a 1st for taking on Mrazek and giving MAF 50% retained...I'd argue that I'd want more to be perfectly honest. The Hawks don't WANT Mrazek. Mrazek is likely being forced upon them.


Yeah, I get that. Personally I think a 1st + top prospect is a fine return for Hagel, but as I've said in other threads, the only thing you up to get in moving Hagel is another Hagel, so does it even make sense to move him?. CHI is going to rebuild, so unless they feel this is going to be a very long rebuild like DET, then yeah, you move Hagel, but if they're only looking at maybe a four-ish year rebuild then you keep him.
ChiHawk and exo2769 liked this.
Mar. 8 at 11:02 a.m.
#19
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2019
Posts: 5,003
Likes: 2,329
Quoting: exo2769
MAF won't accept the trade. He has the right. He's going to INSIST on an extension...OR NO TRADE


At that price, there's no trade anyway so that won't be a problem.
Mar. 8 at 11:03 a.m.
#20
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 12,650
Likes: 5,713
Quoting: Mr_Gardoki
Yeah, I get that. Personally I think a 1st + top prospect is a fine return for Hagel, but as I've said in other threads, the only thing you up to get in moving Hagel is another Hagel. CHI is going to rebuild, so unless they feel this is going to be a very long rebuild like DET, then yeah, you move Hagel, but if they're only looking at maybe a four-ish year rebuild then you keep him.


I 100% agree with you. I wouldn't trade Hagel at all. This is just the Frank Seravalli rumor mill churning.
Mr_Gardoki liked this.
Mar. 8 at 11:04 a.m.
#21
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 16,102
Likes: 6,158
Quoting: Mr_Gardoki
Yeah, I get that. Personally I think a 1st + top prospect is a fine return for Hagel, but as I've said in other threads, the only thing you up to get in moving Hagel is another Hagel. CHI is going to rebuild, so unless they feel this is going to be a very long rebuild like DET, then yeah, you move Hagel, but if they're only looking at maybe a four-ish year rebuild then you keep him.


Couldn't agree more. A late first is nothing but a bag of magic beans with less then a 30% chance of getting a full-time NHL player based on historical stats. You'd hope with Robertson, despite being a bit fragile, you get production close to Hagel thus making the 1st another remote chance if it fails. But yes, to your point, trading Hagel would be foolish for a team rebuilding in a 2 to 3 (maybe 4) year window.
exo2769 and Mr_Gardoki liked this.
Mar. 8 at 11:06 a.m.
#22
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2017
Posts: 16,102
Likes: 6,158
Quoting: Byrr
At that price, there's no trade anyway so that won't be a problem.


It's been already rumored this is the type of deal on the table as of now. Whether you or I like it, doesn't mean it's not on the table or won't happen and certainly neither of us can speak for the respective teams. For the record, to me Mrazek is a cap dump and for that reason I don't like the trade. Leafs should have to pay to move mrazek...he's nothing more then an overpaid backup goalie which there are plenty of much cheaper backup goalie options in the NHL.
exo2769 liked this.
Mar. 8 at 11:08 a.m.
#23
exo2769
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 12,650
Likes: 5,713
Quoting: ChiHawk
It been already rumored this is the type of deal on the table as of now. Whether you or I like it, doesn't mean it's not on the table or won't happen. For the record, to me Mrazek is a cap dump and for that reason I don't like the trade. Leafs should have to pay to move mrazek...he's nothing more then an overpaid backup goalie which there are plenty of much cheaper backup goalie options in the NHL.


He's awful. I've been stating for months now that he's consistently inconsistent. What that truly means though... at some point ... who knows when ... He'll get hot. Maybe the Hawks could move him then? Otherwise taking on cap dumps is what rebuilding teams need to do unfortunately.
ChiHawk liked this.
Mar. 8 at 11:10 a.m.
#24
Lets Get Kraken
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2021
Posts: 3,951
Likes: 1,718
If the Canes can get some retention on Kubalik, Canes accept. Mind you, they probably accept regardless. For the Toronto trade, I am pretty sure Flower would block a trade to Toronto with his NTC, and Mrazek might block a trade to Chicago, and absolutely block a trade to Edmonton. Plus, I’m pretty sure Toronto would have to pay a bit more for this trade to go down, and hope like he’ll that neither goalie blocks the trade with their NTC’s.
Mar. 8 at 11:10 a.m.
#25
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2019
Posts: 5,003
Likes: 2,329
Quoting: ChiHawk
It's been already rumored this is the type of deal on the table as of now. Whether you or I like it, doesn't mean it's not on the table or won't happen and certainly neither of us can speak for the respective teams. For the record, to me Mrazek is a cap dump and for that reason I don't like the trade. Leafs should have to pay to move mrazek...he's nothing more then an overpaid backup goalie which there are plenty of much cheaper backup goalie options in the NHL.


Where are these rumors coming from? This should be funny.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll