Remember this was the CBJ team who smacked them in the play-in

With Marner there picks would have been low 1sts as he would make them much better

Cant assume those picks would have been as high as they were if he was there.


Would have probs avg 18-30

Basically no Kent Johnson or David Jiriceck

More so meh 1st rounders besides maybe Lambert or Kulich but thats really it

In the end for what he brings it would have not been good unless CBJ really sucked but with him there doubt they would be bad enough to give us top 5/10 picks

Smacked them? It went 5 games out of 5... Add in 10.9 million dollars worth of defensive help and this team beast CBJ, meaning Toronto most likely ends up with Jarvis and dumps Marleau's contract with their own 1st... You're right

Knies-Matthews-Hyman
Bert-JT-Nylander
Johnson-Jarvis-Domi
Pelletier-Kampf-McMann/Gregor/Reaves

Korpisalo shut them out in 2 of those 5 games and CBJ made Toronto blow a 3-0 lead game 3.

Its regarded as their second worst playoffs of the Matthews era which is funny as technically the playin loss = missing

And the following year could be argued as the worst as man that was a bad series in MTL lul


But in the end we cant assume where they would have ended up in the draft without Marner. May have used the picks in a trade maybe not. Jarvis was not a full on guarantee

Marleau would have still been here but thats about it

As we know teams have done better without there stars (NYI when JT left)


As if they had 4 1sts in the 18-32 range at the cost of losing Marner would have not been great unless you really hit or uses 2-3 to make a massive trade

You guys are about to be seeing a sick cowen highlight tonight. Holy moly live from london

You are basing this entire idea off of guys who signed 8 year deals and immediately regretted it. It would be nice to do but circumstances are a big part of this picture. I wish Dubas would have given Willy 8+* 8 years back in the day but oh well. Matthews is worth whatever you pay him. As is Marner.

Knies is a different story. He's good no question but how good is he? It's still hard to say. Maybe all he will ever be is a 40 point grinder. Do you want to give him 8*7 to be that? I don't.

And you aren't going to get a cheap deal for 8 years. He's not a 27 year old Engvall. He's a 22 year old power forward. Why wouldn't he bet on himself to get better and earn more? So 8 years after this season is going to be risky as hell. You would have to pay him more than he's worth hoping he explodes and then you have a bargain. But if he's only scoring 15 goals and 35 points this year, why would he sign for 8 years if all you offer is 4 million or less? Would you?

Now I know you'll puff your chest up here and say something about RFA and how we can make him sit but what's stopping him from just saying, "trade me, I am not signing?". Now we lost Knies because you want to be all tough about it.

With all that in mind, I think a 2-3 year bridge is the only real possibility because he is going to bet on himself and having him for a few years at a cheap rate 2-3.5 million is definitely a valuable thing. Now if he goes off next season and wants 8*7 or something, then maybe you do that. But I doubt it happens. I think a bridge is what will happen.

RFA's can just sit until their contracts are up and then they are FA's. That is definitely leverage. These players are people first. They need to look after themselves. With how you are proposing negotiating, they will very quickly just say, "yeah I don't like how you are treating me, please trade me, I won't sign with you."

The grass is greener. That's your mentality. The grass is always greener

But why would he sign? That's what you keep missing here. What motivation does he have to sign an 8 year deal after this season unless he goes off in the second half scores at close to a point a game and has a good playoff, then he has leverage to command a higher average. But this is his 1st full season. It's likely that he has some drop in play in the 2nd half, it's a long season and he's not used to the grind of the NHL. If he slows down for a bit, he'll be able to command less money. Why would he just accept an 8 year deal at that point? Put yourself in his shoes, betting on himself makes way more sense. An 8 year deal for Knies is a pipe dream. You should play less NHL on Xbox and think about the human aspect more.

Or until he decides, he doesn't like how he's being traded and then just waits to become an FA the summer after. Then all your tough guy approach did was lose you a high quality asset.

It's the lucky move, you really aren't considering him at all in your thinking. Why would he do that? What benefit does he have by just accepting a low ball 8 year offer?

And what would be your big-shot response when Knies says NO to 8 years and signs an offer sheet for 4 x $4.29? Let him walk and take a 2nd rounder?

Stop pretending like one side has all the leverage and can demand whatever they want and simply hold the player hostage until he caves in

I didn't even think about the offer sheet. Yup thats the final nail in the coffin

Here's what I see with Knies

If next year he has a big season and puts up 50-60 points and over 20 goals we see Brad give him a 6 year deal in the 4.25m range like Arvidsson (risky but hey if he becomes the PF we been waiting for its fine)

But at the same time I dont see anything yet to go yea here yah go

Hes on pace rn for 34 points and 17 goals in 80 games

Thats not bad but not over the top

To me a bridge deal is where we should go like Kakko and Lafreniere

2 years 2.5m


And I know there be people who are like lock Liligren up. I just havent seen enough to go 8 years 4.5-5.25m. Rn hes playing third line when clearly this team is begging for a 2nd pair RD. Heck even in playoffs barely used

As u would think

Rielly-Brodie
McCabe-Liligren
Gio-Benoit

Would make sense till the TDL right? But it seems they dont trust him up there and when we look at Sandin in WSH playing top 4 could be one of the reasons as to why

Thats why for him I also think another bridge may not be a bad idea. 2-3 year deal around 2.5-2.75m

I'm not sure Knies would go for that but I'd have no problem if those were the terms. Anything over 4 years is buying up free agent years which, theoretically, should cost more.

It depends on the player to me

We have seen guys take contracts that were like why u could have got more if u waited or thats to much. Cause rn one could argue if its another 17 goal and 30 point season 4.25m will look like a steal for him and bad for us.

I think if he was offered that he would go sure as Brad seems to specialize in these 6 year deals in the 4-5m range for pending RFA's like him

Hanafin, Lindholm, Andersson, etc.

Should be interesting

But realistically I think were gonna see a Laf bridge 2.25-2.5m x 2 years




Liligren's a guessing game as rn it seems there is conflict in terms of how the GM, coach, and fans see him

Hit ‘em with the four like… Ryan Tverberg??

Anyone else feel Bellows is gonna sign a deal soon

His PTO in the AHL is up

14 goals 26 points in 25 AHL games and has seen improvements

775k wouldnt hurt

This game has been crazy. Tverberg looks great (which is no surprise)

Such an awesome late round pick. Seems like a sure-fire bet to be an NHL player at least in some capacity.

People forget that they forced CBJ to blow a 3-0 lead and shut them out too...

And you are forgetting that CBJ would then have 14 mill less to work with as they signed Marner

Look what happened when they signed Gaudreau

Then don't play...

Simple as that... Leafs are telling Knies they want him there for the long haul, Knies will take the deal as it's more money then he would get via bridge and it's guaranteed money...

You and other Leafs fans treat RFA status like UFA

If another team offers that, match it and trade him...

In general at that time CBJ would not have cared PLD and Marner would have been a menace. They would have had Werenski and Jones on the blue line and 2 good goalies

That team would have been good for a couple of years

Sure we had 2 nice victories vs. them but one was entirely based on luck with the goalie pulled thats it. Toronto got beat bad that series. 3 guys in double digits shutout twice in 5 games not good.

Getting 4 1sts for him would not have been as amazing as people think as unless someone over the top became available via trade of Marner's caliber it wasnt worth.

Didn't this happen with Hyman? How'd that turn out? You really would rather pay him 7%+ of the cap/lose him when his deal is up like the Oilers did with Hyman?



No it's not leverage, as long as Toronto has a QO, Knies stays under TC

Other than the fact this would be against the CBA...sure.

First, You know if your RFA gets an offer sheet and you execute your right of first refusal, you can't trade him for a year, right?

Second, your reaction is not to be happy that the player you wanted for 8 years will be under contract for, in this example, 4 years....no...why would you be satisfied? You would be so offended that this player you wanted to force into an 8 year contract had the audacity to exercise one of the few rights he actually has...that you trade his a$$ away.

Sorry bud...it's a blatant lack of maturity and people skills

Thats what a lot of people dont seem as while being rare OS are a thing

Remember 3 years ago with Sandin and Liligren. Yes nothing happened but the threat was always there

If we go fine sit out his agents gonna leak **** to other teams lets be real and we see an OS the next day.

But yea its his choice what he signs for. We have seen guys take cheap 8 year deals (RNH) and we have seen guys go bridge, bridge, big fat deal

I feel Knies = bridge, bridge, big fat deal