Sam Girard is not one of the ten or twelve players in the NHL I would trade both Trevor Moore and Matt Roy for.

We're only trading Girard if we're getting a middle-6 forward with term back.

I'd do the Walker trade. I wouldn't do either of the other trades.

Yeah, leafs dont do that

COL at least listens.

There are only 10-12 players in the NHL you would trade 2 middle of the lineup players for? Are you serious?

Why would Toronto ever even consider this?

Yep. Because I'm assuming that the other teams wouldn't be making silly offers like McDavid or Hedman, but realistic ones for players we might want and need and would be rational value.

So if you were offered Mitch Marner for Trevor Moore (noted middle 6 forward) and Matt Roy (#3/4 d man), you would say no? Are you confusing Roy with prime Doughty or something?

Relax, Sparky, nobody thinks that the Maple Leafs would offer any one of Toronto's Big Four to us for Moore and Roy. Did you even bother to read my response to your original effort to create a controversy? I specifically said that "I'm assuming that the other teams wouldn't be making silly offers like McDavid or Hedman." Don't you think that class of player includes Mitch Marner?

You're pretty quick off the mark to pick a fight, aren't you?

When you first sent the message all it said was yep, you can see it from when I quoted you lol

I'm a big fan of his game, plus 5x5 is a great contract. I think he's a good match stylistically for Durzi and Clarke. Reminds me of Voynov but better on D.




Moore is a middle-6 forward on a contender, top 6 on a normal playoff team, and Roy is a top 4 RHD (which have a premium in the league). But I believe what he means is that there are only a handful of players who fit the team's needs while also being a match value-wise. Nobody would take a trade of them for Marner seriously (hence why that trade was of 2 really high-quality players), but Girard isn't of that caliber so it's a more reasonable offer.

Yeah, I could see term being a deciding factor, but Moore would be a perfect middle-6 player in COL (problem is, if you want to give him term, then his price might go beyond what the Avs are willing to spend on a middle-6 scoring winger).

Mitch Marner is essentially untradeable without heavy salary retention. The same is true for guys like Drew Doughty and Erik Karlsson.

Unless you're swapping large contracts (e,g, Marner for Doughty), there's no way most teams (exceptions for teams like Buffalo and Arizona) can fit a huge contract like that and remain competitive. Just look at Vegas since they acquired Eichel.

So no, I probably wouldn't trade Roy and Moore for Marner. I would probably trade Roy and Moore for Nylander though.

Honestly, that's why it's hard to trade him. If we're going to get, like, Buchnevich back, then sign me up because he's playing well and will be signed until he turns 30 on a cheap deal. If Moore came with an extension then I could see it, but that's a big if.

You do realise you can add several smaller salaries of good players together to add up to a larger contract right?
And Toronto doesn't do that nylander trade either

You still need to have 23 players on the roster. If you trade 5 smaller contracts totalling $11M for Marner, you have to add 4 replacement players to fill out your roster. Sure you can add a bunch of league minimum guys and get away with $14.5M or so, but are your really better off with one Marner and four replacement level players? I'd argue that you're better off with the 5 good players adding up to $11M, hence why I would say no to any such deal.

I agree that Toronto shouldn't do that Nylander deal. That wasn't the question. The original statement was "So if you were offered Mitch Marner for Trevor Moore (noted middle 6 forward) and Matt Roy (#3/4 d man), you would say no?", Yes, I would say no to that deal. I threw In the Nylander example of a deal I would accept to show that there are other factors to consider than just how good an individual player might be.

Name 5 good players not on elcs or steal contracts you can get for marners salary.
You cant. You can rarely get two players that impact the game in a good way for his price

That wasn't my point. My point is that without returning one of Kopitar or Doughty in the deal, adding Marner's contract would only hurt the Kings. Having three 8-figure contracts hasn't been working out very well for the Leafs, why would the Kings want to try it?

I know what your point is, my point is that the kings salary cap issues have nothing to do with marner, they have to do with their bad contracts. If they had 4x terrible 5 million dollar deals then they'd still be hurting. And you didnt just specify the kings, you used marners contract as some sort of blanket no no that only buffalo or arizona could take without moving 8 figure contract, which is bunk

I'm not sure what your point is with "terrible 5 million dollar deals" . The Kings don't have salary cap issues or bad contracts. The last of the contracts they wish they could be rid of is Brown's, which ends this summer. If given a free compliance buyout with no cap ramifications this summer, the Kings wouldn't use it on anyone. However, if they traded for Marner without sending back Doughty or Kopitar, they would immediately be in cap hell again.

I said "teams like Buffalo or Arizona" meaning teams that have plenty of cap space and not many big money players. Most teams already have an established core player or two making big money. For them, bringing in another big-money guy like Marner without moving out a big money guy is just going to give them the same problems that Toronto currently has. Vegas recently tried to do it with Eichel, and we all see how well its working out for them.

Of course there arnt that many terrible contracts, it was an example of how you dont need to have a big money player to mess up your cap, look at the islanders.
And you are the one implying cap issues would prevent teams from getting marner, not me.

Oh and your exact words "there is no way most teams" and then excluded arizona and Buffalo specifically . So either it's most teams or it's like 2 or 3 teams that cant

Most = more than 16. I would venture that the actual number is around 25. I didn't feel like going through every single NHL roster to determine which teams could potentially squeeze him in and which ones couldn't, so I threw out a couple examples.

I agree that teams can "mess up their cap" without having big money players. However teams with three big money guys are guaranteed to be in cap hell, while teams that don't are not.

Lol, yeah 25 teams cant trade for marner. Good one

Not without being in cap hell or sending back big money contracts of their own, unless Toronto wants to retain salary.