Mitch and the Leafs

Mitch doesn't say no. Lower taxes, better city.

Leafs say no. A lot of no. Not gaining any money back and not getting anything of value to themselves.
Take Petruzzelli and Niemela out. They are not needed.
Take Hill out.
Add Hague and Roy.
Thats closer.

I'm not sure how the Leafs dont get any value here? They need Defence and Goaltending. Vegas has a plethora of D-Men and 2 goalies, they need more scoring and playmaking. So this fits both sides. Leafs get a solid Canadian D-Man who can play first or second pair on the right side, and a goalie who can split shifts with Woll. This trade would entice Marner to waive his clause. Vegas is enticed because they get the star player and 2 prospects to replace the outgoing players. IDK but to me this makes sense on both sides as long as the Leafs can get an extensions from these two.

Well his camp is refusing to provide a list of teams so...
Better city is subjective as well.

No way marner blocks a trade to Vegas. That being said, I think it's fair value but Vegas says no

Ya the Leafs need goaltending and D help. But you arent trading a guy like Marner for a 2/3 goalie
and 3/4 D man who hasnt played a full season in his career. lol
The Leafs could trade Marner to DET for Holl and Riemer too. But I dont see that going through either lol
If you move Marner, its going to be for actual top end talent. Not just any random guys. This doesnt make Toronto a better team. And all the cap space you lost from trading Marner is gone. So you cant even improve the team in any way. A VGK and TML trade for Marner doesnt really work because VGK need to SHED cap. Not bring more in. They are way over the cap already. They would need to shed Eichel-Stone-Petro- or Hanifin in the deal just to have a chance of filling out their team under the cap. Either that, or include a bunch of team friendly contracts going back to Leafs so the Leafs have a bunch of cap left over after the deal. Which doesnt work for VGK because they cant afford to take on more than they give out. Leafs want either top end talent, worthy of the money. Or underpaid talent with money left over to spend elsewhere.

Apparently his agent is saying no trade. Could be a bargaining tactic but who knows?

I think at this point, he needs to go for his own good. That being said, I don't think Vegas says no anyway.

I saw someone in another trade idea send the Leafs Theodore and Roy and then dumped Adin Hill and I wondered about all 3 of them for Marner.

I think if the Leafs are going to trade Marner and they can get Theodore+ back, that's an amazing trade. Whether its Theodore and Hill or Theodore and Roy or with both of them, its a great deal for Toronto. Literally every possible Marner trade is going to make the Leafs worse, at least this one fills a couple of huge holes on the roster.

Whos reporting this? None of the big reporters have said this. Friedman said Marner and the leafs are likely going to have a meeting first.

The Steve Dangle podcast brough up the Theodore idea. As the main part of a trade

Lebrun says this 👇. Hopefully it is just a negotiation tactic, but it is Ferris so...

"At this point, the Marner camp led by veteran agent Darren Ferris is not working on a list of teams. They have no intention as of now of producing such a list. As far as the Marner camp is concerned, the star winger has one more year on his contract with the Leafs and intends to honor it."

I dont believe that for one second. If he doesnt play ball the leafs will just screw him. No PP time, reduced mins, healthy scratches. Marner is coming up to UFA and wants a PAY DAY. If he has a bad year he will be losing money. this is also the same agent who said Marner will go play in Sweden during his RFA negotiations. Marner should be looking to move or hes going to get screwed. Plus the hate from the leaf fans if he refuses to move it going to be so toxic

Trading for Theodore makes the Leafs signifcantly worse. And doesnt leave them enough money left to do anything of value. I dont see why anyone thinks this? A UFA D man who would slot in as the Leafs #4, makes too much money, and is lucky to play 50 games a year? We have one of those. His name is Edmundson. And he will only cost 3.5m and we get to keep Marner lol

We are watching different Shea Theodore's. Theodore is immediately the Leafs best offensive dman. Vegas shelters him a big with offensive starts, but his advanced stats are off the charts, he plays 22+ minutes a night almost every year, he's signed for 5.2 this season, he's likely looking at a contract smaller than Rielly's after this year. Injuries are definitely a concern and he'd be another not physical defender on the back end but he's easily the 2nd best dman on the team and would immediately QB the PP. How could he possibly be the 4th?

Possible yep as I did say, but who knows for sure. We have seen it here before.
He is a different cat and his dad will be involved again as well.

Because thats where he slots in. He wont be taking Riellys spot on the top pair, and you cant play him and Reilly together. It would be a defensive nightmare. McCabe sits in the 3 hole as he is the better defensive D man by miles. So there is where he sits. In the 4 hole. And as you said. He is a huge liability from both a physical and health standpoint. And has 1 year left before he needs a big raise. So you trade for him, he plays well but only plays 3/4's of the year. Your team is no better from a defensive standpoint with both him and Rielly on the team. And you have blown your cap space. Anything you had left from the deal goes to him the following year. You now have Rielly and Lyubushkin (or a similar 4m replacement). McCabe and Theo. And Benoit and what I assume will be Edmundson getting resigned. How is that solving the Leafs D problems? Marner is gone. Hasnt been replaced. The goalie problem hasnt been fixed. And the following year you lose JT as well. Who also needs to be replaced. So you now have 11m from JT to replace 180pts from Marner and JT, and pay a starting goalie. And you have burned 1 of the 4 years you have with Matthews. You cant do that. You have to either make the team better with a Marner trade. Or take future back. So you can spend Marner 10m on the right players. You cant take back guys who eat cap and dont give you what you need. Especially guys who will walk in a year or need a huge raise. Its the same issue as trading for Saros. Ya, you solve the goalie problem. But you now have a guy who will want 8-10m a year to stay there. So you are just swapping one big expense for another. The ideal move is something like Dickenson and Murphy from CHI with retention. You get a good power FWD who is cheap. You get a strong D man for 2 or 3 more years at half price. And you still have 5m left to spend. Thats why Im suggesting something like Hague and Roy from Vagas. Maybe with a pick as well. They are cheap. Fill holes. And leave you enough to sign a Montour or Pesce as well. But Vagas cant handle the extra cap space.

If his agent says he wants a trade, or is open to it, the half of the fanbase that still wants him there will be against him. It's a no win situation there

LMAO that will NEVER happen. Players already don't want to go to Toronto because of all the scrutiny. No NHL team is going to treat a star player like that

LMAO? Not sure what you are LMAO' ing about.
My point was we have seen players not waiving before in the past and apparently if they have asked JT and Rielly and got turned down...it happened again.You think that his dad won't be involved in his next contract? Were you living under a rock the last time?

Im LMAO'ing about the suggestion that they will keep him off the PP and reduce his minutes if he doesn't waive. That will NEVER happen. If Marner doesn't waive his NMC, they will be banking on him having a career year to maximize his usage before he bolts in free agency, not wasting 10.5 million in cap space to play him on the 3rd line. It does seem like my quoted post only quoted your reply though

Aaah OK, I was confused there for a minute. 🙂

It sounds like you're proposing some changes for the Leafs, but it seems they're not gaining any financial benefits or receiving any valuable assets in return. Removing Petruzzelli and Niemela might not be necessary, as they could potentially contribute to the team's future. However, taking out Hill and adding Hague and Roy could indeed bring the team closer to your desired outcome. It's essential to consider the overall impact on the team's performance and future prospects before making significant roster adjustments.

The Leafs need only 2 things from Marner trade. Either futures and cap space. Or good players on cheap deals and cap space. Whole point of trading Marner is to get space to spend elsewhere. The Leafs can make the changes they need to make in FA if need be. What they CANNOT do, is take back just as much cap as they are gaining, without fixing their needs. Which this doesn't. And they cannot take back players who will immediately need big raises, again, stopping them from being to address their needs. This is a mediocre goalie, and a good D man who is a UFA and will immediately need a huge raise. Totally defeating the purpose of trading Marner in the first place.