Forums/Toronto Maple Leafs

Kawhi-Type Trade

17 mai à 18 h 34
#1
Zach
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 907
Mentions "j'aime": 106
There has been a lot of talk about Kawhi-Type Trades. I don't like this idea, but here are the options (Players going to be UFAs in 2023)

Nate Mack - He is the obvious number one choice, but there is no chance he is available and will be re-signing with Colorado soon. But if he were to become available it would cost Marner plus a first plus Sandin plus Knies. This would be closest to a "Kawhi-type" deal. Trading for a top 5 player in the league and giving up a star who never was able to get over the hump plus a young player plus a pick
Huberdeau - He would cost a package surrounding Marner, I do not do this. Marner is both younger and better defensively. They are very similar players, elite playmakers who can put the puck in the net. Good at driving the play, huberdeau is obviously a better version of Maner but he is also 4 years older and Mitch is continuously improving each year
Pastrnak - He is part of the Bruins long term plans, but if he demanded a trade and refused to play for them, it would probably cost either Marner or Willy a first and Knies/Sandin. Neither team would want to trade within the division and Pasta is part of the Bruins long-term plan
Pacioretty: Max Pacioretty would probably cost Willy, and Vegas would have to give up something else as well. Max is a great player but has played over 70 games once over the past 5 seasons. He is turning 34 and, despite being a good fit, is not really what you want as the centrepiece in return of a young star
Patty Kane: No thank you. A player making over 10 mill, on the wrong side of 30, is a worse version of Marner, and is coming off one of the largest scandals in the NHL. I do not want that on my team. It would cost too much in both money and personnel for a player who truthfully is not worth it

Any other player you think might make a deal like this? What do you think of these options?
18 mai à 15 h 39
#2
Twitter improved
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2020
Messages: 11,988
Mentions "j'aime": 8,267
Quoting: ZachArmel
There has been a lot of talk about Kawhi-Type Trades. I don't like this idea, but here are the options (Players going to be UFAs in 2023)

Nate Mack - He is the obvious number one choice, but there is no chance he is available and will be re-signing with Colorado soon. But if he were to become available it would cost Marner plus a first plus Sandin plus Knies. This would be closest to a "Kawhi-type" deal. Trading for a top 5 player in the league and giving up a star who never was able to get over the hump plus a young player plus a pick
Huberdeau - He would cost a package surrounding Marner, I do not do this. Marner is both younger and better defensively. They are very similar players, elite playmakers who can put the puck in the net. Good at driving the play, huberdeau is obviously a better version of Maner but he is also 4 years older and Mitch is continuously improving each year
Pastrnak - He is part of the Bruins long term plans, but if he demanded a trade and refused to play for them, it would probably cost either Marner or Willy a first and Knies/Sandin. Neither team would want to trade within the division and Pasta is part of the Bruins long-term plan
Pacioretty: Max Pacioretty would probably cost Willy, and Vegas would have to give up something else as well. Max is a great player but has played over 70 games once over the past 5 seasons. He is turning 34 and, despite being a good fit, is not really what you want as the centrepiece in return of a young star
Patty Kane: No thank you. A player making over 10 mill, on the wrong side of 30, is a worse version of Marner, and is coming off one of the largest scandals in the NHL. I do not want that on my team. It would cost too much in both money and personnel for a player who truthfully is not worth it

Any other player you think might make a deal like this? What do you think of these options?


JT Miller is the most likely I would think.

Nylander for Miller straight up. Done. Obviously Miller isn't Kahwi, but he's the closest thing you'll find.
1 juill. à 17 h 10
#3
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 410
Mentions "j'aime": 199
MacKinnon and Huberdeau are intriguing, not just because they’d be an upgrade over Marner but also because of the cap hit they’d free up. However, that’s one reason I don’t think their current teams would do it. It would already put Florida over the cap. (It’s harder to judge the impact it would have on Colorado because they have so many unsigned players.) You could argue that that they’d have to deal with that next year anyway if they want to extend these guys, but a lot can change in a year so there are benefits to not dealing with cap issues before you have to.

Another issue is that like the Leafs, these teams are in win-now mode. If the trade makes sense for Toronto because it makes them better now, it makes sense for Florida and Colorado not to do it for the same reason. The Leafs would need to deal with somebody who’s not a contender, like Chicago, but you don’t trade Marner for a year of Patrick Kane. I don’t know if I’d trade Nylander for him either, but if I did, I’d want Chicago to retain half of his salary, so it’s more like a Kadri deal than a Kawhi deal.

The other consideration in these trades is what’s going to happen to these players when their contracts run out. I think Marner could be a Leaf for life, not just for the three years left on his contract, so I don’t think I’d give that up for just one year of anybody. Keeping him probably increases the chances of Matthews wanting to stick around too.

Going all in for one year doesn’t work as well in today’s NHL anyway. Even if you have the best team, the odds of winning the cup in any given year are still against you, so once you develop into a contender, you want to keep the core together because it might take several years to get over the top. So I’m keeping Marner and Nylander, and aiming a little lower than MVP-level players if I’m going after a 1-year rental.
2 juill. à 15 h 15
#4
Lets Go Leafs
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2022
Messages: 1,680
Mentions "j'aime": 1,256
Quoting: jr400
MacKinnon and Huberdeau are intriguing, not just because they’d be an upgrade over Marner but also because of the cap hit they’d free up. However, that’s one reason I don’t think their current teams would do it. It would already put Florida over the cap. (It’s harder to judge the impact it would have on Colorado because they have so many unsigned players.) You could argue that that they’d have to deal with that next year anyway if they want to extend these guys, but a lot can change in a year so there are benefits to not dealing with cap issues before you have to.

Another issue is that like the Leafs, these teams are in win-now mode. If the trade makes sense for Toronto because it makes them better now, it makes sense for Florida and Colorado not to do it for the same reason. The Leafs would need to deal with somebody who’s not a contender, like Chicago, but you don’t trade Marner for a year of Patrick Kane. I don’t know if I’d trade Nylander for him either, but if I did, I’d want Chicago to retain half of his salary, so it’s more like a Kadri deal than a Kawhi deal.

The other consideration in these trades is what’s going to happen to these players when their contracts run out. I think Marner could be a Leaf for life, not just for the three years left on his contract, so I don’t think I’d give that up for just one year of anybody. Keeping him probably increases the chances of Matthews wanting to stick around too.

Going all in for one year doesn’t work as well in today’s NHL anyway. Even if you have the best team, the odds of winning the cup in any given year are still against you, so once you develop into a contender, you want to keep the core together because it might take several years to get over the top. So I’m keeping Marner and Nylander, and aiming a little lower than MVP-level players if I’m going after a 1-year rental.


Huberdeau is not an upgrade over Marner. He is slightly better offensively but miles worse defensively. Marner is our premier penalty killer, PP1 bumper, and our 2nd best player by a large margin. He is not the issue
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage