Aren't conditional picks dependent on re-signing illegal now? I remember reading that somewhere.

Why are the Leafs adding picks here??

Lots of respect for P. Kane, but he's 8 years older than Marner.

is it? I haven't seen anything about that

Kane is the better player currently tho, and his salary is being retained. Also, I tried to make it similar to the one for Demar and Kawhi

Here are a few articles i found on it.

Pittsburgh Hockey Now, with a source from Elliotte Friedman

SportsNet,WRITTEN by Elliotte Friedman

a paragraph from Pro Hockey Rumors

Trade conditions: A team can no longer include a condition in a trade that would send further compensation if a player is re-signed. This is only applicable if the traded player has an NHL contract at the time of the trade. Before this rule, teams were almost always including an additional condition in trades that would net them an extra piece of compensation if the acquiring team re-signed the player. A notable recent example was when the San Jose Sharks re-signed Evander Kane after acquiring him from the Buffalo Sabres. The decision to re-sign Kane came with an increased cost to the Sharks, as a conditional fourth-round selection was upgraded to a first-round pick.

yep they addressed that in the latest cba.

Since other posters ahead of me already mentioned the resign conditions, I think (could be wrong) you could instead replace it with Kane playing a small amount of games the year after his contract in order to circumvent this.

Interesting. Okay, I guess the condition would be how far can the leafs go in the playoffs. But that condition should be on the first rather then the 3rd

Plenty of other conditions to put on like you said Games played, scoring, how far they get into playoffs, and stuff. Wasn't the main focal point as much as it is the trade itself

Yep, I had no issue with the trade itself, just thought I'd mention a condition alternative since I really didn't have much other constructive input

What does better player currently have to do with trade value though? Also prior to this slump, and taking defence into account Marner>Kane. Jake Muzzin is a better player currently than Owen Power, would that mean Buffalo would have to add if they were traded for each other?

Leonard is 2 years younger than Derozan, so Leafs trading Marner for Kane (8 yrs older) is not a good comparable at all.

Yes.... BUF would lol. You're trading potential for actuality in that trade proposition.

As for the Kane trade, you are again trading for someone who is at the top of their game and is a proven winner, and on an expiring contract vs a fan favourite. Like I said, I wanted to make this trade as close as possible to the NBA one.

If you don't know enough that Owen Power has more trade value than Muzzin and Marner has more trade value than Kane (both cases it's significant) than there really is no reason to continue this discussion.

You're right there isn't a reason to continue lmfao. You haven't looked at a single trade that has happened in the NHL if you believe that potential has more value than actual. Want to use Muzzin as the example? Sure.

Sean Durzi (2nd rd pick, high ceiling), Carl Gundstrom (2nd rd pick moderate ceiling), and low 1st rd pick. ALL actuals vs the potential of a top 4/2 dman. Do you understand now? or shall we look up other trades that have potential vs actuals in them (Mantha, Kuemper, Kessel to PIT, and so on)

Why didn't you list 1st overall picks in their D+1 year?

Of yeah, because they never get traded.

No one you listed comes anywhere close to having the value of a top 5 (and especially No. 1) pick.

Give your head a shake here bud.

Mark Stone for Erik Brannstrom. Nick Pac for Nick Suzuki. Nick Schmaltz for Dylan Strome. Does that float your boat better? or shall I find you more?

Reading comprehension high.

1st overall picks in their D+1 years.

None of these actually apply to my question, so not really sure why you took the time to list them.

Strome is the closest example, but that of course was in his D+4 season, which wouldn't apply to my question.

Suzuki was drafted in 17, traded in 18. Branstrom was drafted in 17 traded in 19. They were still blue chips at this time. Not sure how you're completely missing that point

13th/15th overall picks do not equal 1st overall picks, not sure how you are completely missing this point???

You do know Power was picked 1st right?

Asking the Hawks to pay $14.5M for the next two years for Marner since Hawks are being asked to retain on Kane is one reason.

I don't think Marner is better then Kane hands down; that's a falsehood even if taking defense into account. Look at Marner's stats away from Matthews or JT, both worldclass centers, and while still decent are Kane level. Kane on the other hand plays with a constantly revolving door of average centers and often not top end wingers. Contrary to popular belief, Kane doesn't play with Toews that much, and has spent more time away from Cat on the other wing then with Cat on the other wing. Then consider the two teams as a whole and who over the last few years is much better...that matters as well.

You can make an argument last season Marner was better i get that, but outside of last season no way. Kane slumped for the last 20 games last season, it's not excuse and it's real and needs to be taken into account, just like Marner is in a slump not...not an excuse and it's real and needs to be taken into account.

It's certainly debatable, and considering what Marner looks like to start this season, it makes it easier to take the Kane side of the debate.

The Athletic just came out with their Top 100 "tiers" ranking.

They had Marner near the top of the 2A franchise player ranking, considering TOI playmaking, defence, PK ability "Marner is an elite playmaker with solid two-way play".

Kane was middle of 3A all-star player tier - playmaking and offence among best in the league, but he gets knocked down for his defence "but his defensive limitations do hamper his overall play. The Hawks allowed three expected and actual goals against per 60, something Kane’s offense wasn’t able to cover up."

End of the day, Leafs trading Marner for Kane wouldn't make sense based on the age difference alone.

Yes I saw the article. That said, it's very hard to analyze objectively given that marner mainly plays next to Matthews who's a top 3 center in the league (JT as well is still top 10 IMO) versus Kane and in addition the team system and players around them. It's a team sport first and foremost.

I agree, age difference is the big factor here and wouldn't do it if I'm the Leafs. As the Hawks, I also wouldn't want Marner's contract for $11M per year cap hit with him ultimately becoming a free agent at the peak of his career at age 28.

Can see that another quality Marner-for-Kane trade has gone well in discussion.

Marner's value has dropped a lot recently but I wouldn't want to trade him away for Patrick Kane. He's 32, going to be declining and will 100% leave in free agency. His defensive liabilities are going to show even more when on Toronto too.