Why is it that so many think other teams Dmen are so much better than the Leafs. Hainsey and Gardiner are the Leafs 2nd and 3rd best Dmen. How is trading them fo the Canes 6th best Dmen helping the Leafs? Now I admit both Gardiner and Hainsey likely won't be Leafs in 2019/20, but trade really weakens the Leafs this year. A players "handiness" is no indication of "good"
No sure if Honda better than Zaitsev, but at least it would provide long term cap relief for the Leafs. Holl has shown he is nice 26 year old career AHLer. I'd be surprised if was long term NHL competent. Hope he his ,but the logistics of career says he isn't. Moulsen couldn't make the Sabres last year, why would the Leafs want him an his cap hit?

Im not saying other teams d menare better but im just looking at it that if we arent going to Sign Gardiner then move him when his value is high and get some assets back vs lose him for nothing. He is good but i would argue Hainsey is our 4-5 best d man after Rielly, Gardiner, Dermott and Zaitsev maybe. Player handiness is no indication of how good they are but if you have a coach that has shown to be very in favour of a lefty/righty ballance then it becomes important. Honka may not be better now but i think given time he will be for sure. Its also a cap issue like i said and you also agree that it would help in that way long term. Holl doesnt have to become a top pairing guy but if you never give him a chance then you wont know what he is. If he doesnt work out on the third pair then you send him back down and call up someone else or play carrick. Just saying that he is good AHL player only after two NHL games at 26 doesnt mean he cant develope late. Brian Rafalski played his first season on the NHL at 26 and he was ptetty good. Not saying Holl will be him but just need to give players a chance to prove you right or wrong andf then go from there.

As for Moulson thats just using the leafs financial power to take on his deal for an assest(the 2nd) and then see if he can play, which i agree he cant. So you burry him and its no big deal. The leafs have the cap room to make that happen and not blink an eye

Moulsen has proven he can't play in the NHL anymore, just better ways to spend 5m.
It is lunacy to think upcoming UFAs "get traded to get assets back". Teams are trying there best to make the playoffs and do well in the playoffs then this succumbing to this crazy notion that UFAs get traded. Just look at the TDL and how few upcoming UFA get traded. Good teams trade for UFAs to get stronger for a playoff run, they aren't traded for inferior players.
Love to see Holl be an NHLer, but hoping probably increase his chances. Regardless there is much creditability in calling Dmen third pairing guys so their ability doesn't matter much. (which so many folks think) Almost all "bottom end" Dmen play 14 minutes a night usually at full strength. "Good" Dmen play 23 minutes a night on PP and PK. That leaves the worse Dmen still playing a quarter of the game. They better be NHL good.

Like what though? Give me an example of what you would do as Dubas that is analytically inclined and backed up? St. Louis traded Shattenkirk to get assets back whenn they werent going to resing him. Ottawa is going to trade Karlsson to get assets back because they cant resign him. McDonagh was traded. Evander Kane. Paul Stastny. It keeps going. I know TVR might be considered an inferior player but he drives posession and chances in his teams favour and for a fraction of the price Gardiner does. Obviously id like to keep Gardiner but if hes not goiung to resing then deal him when his value is high.

You still need to give players a chance to show they can be NHLers and keeping them in the AHL because they are older or you dont think they can do it proves nothing. Let him play and see what he can do.

Thanks for confirming my thoughts about upcoming UFAs. Karlsson hasn't been traded yet, but will be. As I said, "contending teams" don't trade upcoming UFAs, Ottawa is hardly contending. McDonagh still has a year to go and Rangers traded him because they look like they were out of the playoffs. There are about 90 upcoming UFAs, they all don't get traded because GMs are shaking about losing them for nothing. I can think of only three trades last TDL, for upcoming UFASs on any consequence. Nash, Kane and Stastny. Of course the Rangers and Sabres were well out of the playoff hunt so it makes sense of them to unload for assets, just like it kinda of make sense of for contending teams to load for the playoffs.

You never said contending team so i dont know why you are quoting yourself saying that.

You also havent answered my question about what move you would make if you were Dubas.

I completely see your side of the argument on this one...I just respectfuly disagree....and it's simply opinion so not claiming to be 'right'...

however...I would much rather my team keep assets and lose them for nothing than to trade them away for something less valuable, just for the sake of salvaging some value.

Even with the 1st round exit, I'm glad the Leafs didn't move JVR, Bozak or Komarov at the TDL. I think there's something to be said about letting the guys in the dressing room know you're putting your best foot forward in trying to win. It's an intangible so impossible to measure against the opposite scenario of trading a pending UFA for something....but I agree with @palhal and his modified comment about contending teams not trading away their pending UFAs. It sends the wrong message to the guys you're asking to go to battle for you day in and day out.

I'm fine with the Moulson trade if the leafs feel they won't need the cap space at any point this season...and getting the 2nd round pick for it....but again...I'd rather keep that cap space in hand for the TDL in case there's an improvement that's available to help bolster a playoff run.

Psycologically is tough to turn off the 'acquire assets' mode the leafs had been in for so long....it was the right strategy then...when we weren't making the playoffs, had financial power...and could be more businesslike in the moving around of assets....but this is a cup contending team now that needs to be focussed on putting the best possible team on the ice each night. For me, trading Gardiner/Hainsey/Zaitsev and replacing them with inferior players is a step in the wrong direction.

But that's just my opinion

Get out from under that Zaitsev contract while you can!

I can appreciate that. Its all up to peoples views and what they think should happen or how they would do things. Im not saying m y idea is right either, i just wanted to see what people think of rht trade ideas. I do agree that the message being sent to the players if you dead every pending UFA is not the best one for sure but you cant always lose players for nothing. St. Louis has shown you can do both letting Brower and Backes walk while also dealing Shattenkirk. I will admit my mindset of asset management and my aversion to lose something for nothing weights big in my decisions and probably with other leafs fans as well but i dont think its a poor mindset either.And obviously you werent saying that either just to clarify.

I just wanted to talk about the deals and if they would be possible value wise.

Thanks for the well though out response and i look forward to talking about the leafs more with you

The STL reference is an interesting one. They actually got better after trading Shattenkirk but it is an example of a team that was playoff bound deciding to trade a top pending UFA. But if you look at this past year and then trading away Stastny...a lot of guys in the room were unhappy and felt like the team had bailed on them.

I try and look at it from the opposite scenario. If the leafs are willing to give up assets at the TDL to bolster their lineup (they gave up 2nd rounders at the last two deadlines for the rentals of Boyle and Plekanec), then they should also be willing to forego receiving assets for their own pending UFAs, and to simply view them as rentals too.

I know from an asset management perspective, it’s very short sighted...but windows of opportunity are so small and short in the NHL that I think it’s wise to seize any potential opportunity to win.

St. Louis was definitely a unique one because they got better as you said but then the players were also very vocal in their anger at the tem dealing rather then adding or standing pat. Which i totally understand.

I Definitely agree that when you have a chance to go for it you should. But last year i see a situation where they had a playoff position locked up so early they could have tried out the kids to see what they had. It will sound strange probably but i was of the opinion that they should have dealt JVR, Bozak, Leo and Polak at last years deadline because they had a position locked down already. One last year of selling to recoup assets. They would still have made the playoffs and might still have pushed it to game 7, not guaranteed obviously, but they could have given the time that those guysbhad to kids that could produce now. Obviously thats a very tough call to make and one the players would have not liked but for one last year of selling i think it wouyld have made sense.

Now obviously that last part i said goes against selling Gardiner now but i see Dermott as someone that can fill his roll right now and then we could use the asset that is Gardiner to find that d help we are looking for.

Ya, I hear ya. I just think if the leafs traded those guys and lost in the first round it would have caused more harm than keeping them and losing in the first round. Building a winning culture within that locker room is critical to long term success IMO

Actually my quote was,
"Good teams trade for UFAs to get stronger for a playoff run, they aren't traded for inferior players." Trading two starting Dman for TVR seems like the Leafs have given up.
With the Leafs cap situation.....and that includes have no Performance Bonus carryover, the Leafs aren't in a great position to make any big money moves.....without moving money out.
I suspect will have to go with their defence as last year at least to start the season. Left side. Reilly, Gardiner, Dermot maybe Borgman, Rosen Right side. Zaitsev, Hainsey and then it's crossing your fingers like last year, Carrick, Ozhignilov. Holl or maybe Dermot goes to the right side.
Would't mind to see Gardiner traded if a similar type of Dmen was returned. Myers makes sense. A bigger move would be trading Kadri and more for Pesce and then you hope Nylander can be play centre competently . There might be some cap flexibility at TDL, and non contenders might want to unload assets, maybe that is the time the Leafs could trade futures for short term gain.
But maybe the Leafs are really looking at 2019/20 for UFA help, though it might be at cap expense of Nylander.

Ecxactly so dont " " contending if you didnt say it. TVR may not be the same kind on player that Gardiner is but his posession stats are just as good and thats what you want. It may noy be perfect valiue coming back but then tlets modify the deal so it is. That was just an idea like all the posts anyone makes on this site are.

The leafs have loads of cap space this year so i dont know where you think they dont. The roster i made has $10M in cap space and thats even with taking on Moulson so there is tons of space. Revert all the deals and youd have $8.2 roughly in cap space after signing Nylander. That number includes Hortons deal not on LTIR and includes the bonus overage from last year. This years bonus money is projects to be about $3.7M so subtract that from the cap space and you still have $4.5M in cap space tp play with. Lots of space to make a deal. Also the Leafs deadline cap space is $68M if you revert all the deals so as long as you have some space it gets bigger by the deadline.

Hoping Nylander can play C over Kadri who is very good at it just to add Pesce seems like a bad idea when you just became the deepest team at C with Tavares joining. Keep your C depth and fill around the edges with undervalued players that raise the floor.

Id love Myers back but i dont think WPG makes that deal so thats why i didnt propose it.

Well the Leafs don't have plenty of cap space this year, if they want no Performance Bonus carryover next year, when it a very expensive year. It's the rule of the cap and it's how Horton affects when Performane Bonuses are paid. You're right about the Blues and Shattenkirk two seasons and even Stastny last year. But that is the rare exception. Most contending teams do not upcoming UFAs, they acquire them for a player run. There are about 90 upcoming UFAs in a season, they all don't get traded because teams want to get assets back. And how can they be traded, since your logic would say all teams don't want upcoming UFAs cause they would lose them for nothing Trade players for inferior players is probably never a good idea for a contending team or for team morale. Do it if you want, but certainly the Leafs aren't doing with this team who is battling to win a playoff round.

Last years bonus overage is included in their cap hit already, that’s what the “Other” section says if you click on that little (?). There is space for this years as well even with Horton not on LTIR so they have space.

I’m just very confused why you think they have no space when they do for this year. Next year is different I know but this year they have the space to do a lot if they choose to