HORRIBLE

Well that was a deep thought. Care to explain your opinion?

There's just nothing of value there that would entice the Leafs to give up arguably the most valuable player to their team. It doesn't even address their biggest long-term need in a #1 D-man.

There's just nothing of value there that would entice the Leafs to give up arguably the most valuable player to their team. It doesn't even address their biggest long-term need in a #1 D-man.

I didn't even notice you had them retaining HALF of his cap hit in a year they're supposed to be contending for a Stanley Cup. lol.

I will disagree on the lack of value, but if it doesn't address your needs then I need to except that since I don't really know the Leafs.

I'm sorry bro, but it's not. Rossi looks like he has a solid future ahead of him; he might even become a point-per-game player (despite being a 5'9 centre). I understand Minnesota had their struggles this season, but at this point, Gus has only recorded 1 good season under his very, very short career so far. And the first-round pick you're giving up will likely be in the 20s.

On the other hand, you're pretty much getting a 100-point winger at a 5 million-dollar cap hit (and I'm assuming that you would only make this trade if Marner agreed to an extension). Not to mention he plays in every single situation, at an elite level. The odds Rossi would ever enter the realm of becoming as good as Marner is incredibly slim. Organizations will tank for years just to have a non-zero chance of acquiring a talent like Marner. The Leafs could sign him for the rest of his career on July 1st. From my perspective, this is giving him up for practically nothing in the bigger picture.

No interest in Marner

I am not making the trade under the presumption of a pre signed extension. I have the Wild taking a risk here, so yes it plays into it. Is any one sure what Marner is if he isn't with Matthew's. He is still good no doubt but probably not a 100 point producer in most situations. The rest of your argument I really don't have a rebuttal for other than Friedman saying the Leafs may be willing to lose the Marner trade for the sake of changing the team up.

I guess that's reasonable under the assumption that you're taking a risk. Perhaps this is a bit far-fetched, but I think, hypothetically, any team Marner would waive for would also likely be a team he'd extend with. I can't really speak on the trade rumours. All I can say is it's incredibly sad to see just how many "fans" and people in the media want to see the destruction of a team.

I've watched just about every game of the Matthews/Nylander/Marner era. I can assure you that Marner would be a 100-point player away from Auston Matthews. I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying you could put him with borderline fourth-liners, and he'd still reach that mark. But I'm certain that you could expect at least 90-100 points if you slid him into just about any team's top-6.

Out of curiosity, would it interest you if I made the deal Spurgeon and defensive prospect of the Leafs choice (we are probably talking Hunt, O'Rourke, or Lambos plus Rossi. No picks no retention?

Out of curiosity, would it interest you if I made the deal Spurgeon and defensive prospect of the Leafs choice (we are probably talking Hunt, O'Rourke, or Lambos plus Rossi. No picks no retention?

That would definitely be better. I think I’d prefer Brodin but I can understand why that would be a big no from ur perspective.
If I’m being honest, I’m in the minority of Leafs fans that actually wants to keep Marner. There’s not a whole lot a team could offer that would make me want to give him up in a trade (unless it was a soon-to-be #1 D like Brandt Clarke, Simon Nemec, etc.).

I guess that's reasonable under the assumption that you're taking a risk. Perhaps this is a bit far-fetched, but I think, hypothetically, any team Marner would waive for would also likely be a team he'd extend with. I can't really speak on the trade rumours. All I can say is it's incredibly sad to see just how many "fans" and people in the media want to see the destruction of a team.

I've watched just about every game of the Matthews/Nylander/Marner era. I can assure you that Marner would be a 100-point player away from Auston Matthews. I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying you could put him with borderline fourth-liners, and he'd still reach that mark. But I'm certain that you could expect at least 90-100 points if you slid him into just about any team's top-6.

But just for fun, would you swap Spurge w/ Brodin if we added McCabe? He’s probably our best d-man and only makes 2 million dollars this upcoming season. A fan-favourite, plays with A TON of bite/physicality, too. Strikes me as someone that would be easy to extend at a reasonable cap hit as well.

As a fan of the team that signed Johnny Gaudreau: I'm skeptical. Without support, it's too easy for NHL defenses to swarm one player, especially if they're undersized and primarily a playmaker.

Marner is an incredibly valuable player, and Minnesota probably gives you the best potential package just because they're looking for another elite talent to go alongside Boldy/Kaprizov. But the return really comes down to three things:

1) If the Leafs are going to make changes to the core four, he's the one. Matthews and Nylander aren't going anywhere, and Tavares is a $6M player making $11M; you're likely giving
1) If the Leafs are going to make changes to the core four, he's the one. Matthews and Nylander aren't going anywhere, and Tavares is a $6M player making $11M; you're likely giving him away if you want to get rid of the whole contract. The Leafs wanting to move Marner is the worst kept secret in hockey, so teams are looking to take advantage of that.

2) If you do move Mitch, not many teams can take an $11M cap hit, so you're either retaining or limiting the number of suiters, which would decrease a potential return.

3) Mitch has a full NMC. He's not going to waive that and just say "send me wherever you get the best package", he's going to use that to pick his spot and force Toronto to trade him to one of a select few locations (like when Kaberle was traded, the list was: Boston...and that's it).

If I'm honest, I think Minnesota has to make that pick this year's 1st (13 OA) if they're going to have Toronto retain even ~$3M, but if you get Rossi, Gustavsson, and 13OA...take that and run. A starting-caliber goalie that's only 25 and locked up to a reasonable deal, a potential 2C of the future (which Toronto desperately needs if Tavares regresses), and 13OA? Use the pick, or the extra ~$6.5M in cap space and free agency, to fix the D.

As a fan of the team that signed Johnny Gaudreau: I'm skeptical. Without support, it's too easy for NHL defenses to swarm one player, especially if they're undersized and primarily a playmaker.

Marner is an incredibly valuable player, and Minnesota probably gives you the best potential package just because they're looking for another elite talent to go alongside Boldy/Kaprizov. But the return really comes down to three things:

1) If the Leafs are going to make changes to the core four, he's the one. Matthews and Nylander aren't going anywhere, and Tavares is a $6M player making $11M; you're likely giving him away if you want to get rid of the whole contract. The Leafs wanting to move Marner is the worst kept secret in hockey, so teams are looking to take advantage of that.

2) If you do move Mitch, not many teams can take an $11M cap hit, so you're either retaining or limiting the number of suiters, which would decrease a potential return.

3) Mitch has a full NMC. He's not going to waive that and just say "send me wherever you get the best package", he's going to use that to pick his spot and force Toronto to trade him to one of a select few locations (like when Kaberle was traded, the list was: Boston...and that's it).

If I'm honest, I think Minnesota has to make that pick this year's 1st (13 OA) if they're going to have Toronto retain even ~$3M, but if you get Rossi, Gustavsson, and 13OA...take that and run. A starting-caliber goalie that's only 25 and locked up to a reasonable deal, a potential 2C of the future (which Toronto desperately needs if Tavares regresses), and 13OA? Use the pick, or the extra ~$6.5M in cap space and free agency, to fix the D.

D can be addressed regardless if we decide to keep Marner or not.

I find that all these Marner trades emphasize the idea that just freeing up 11 million is worth getting rid of him or provides some certain value. Any player in the NHL can be overpaid. The same way Marner can , at times, not live up to 11 million dollars. So I’m not sure what I’m supposed to do with this extra “6.5 million” in ur hypothetical.

D can be addressed regardless if we decide to keep Marner or not.

I find that all these Marner trades emphasize the idea that just freeing up 11 million is worth getting rid of him or provides some certain value. Any player in the NHL can be overpaid. The same way Marner can , at times, not live up to 11 million dollars. So I’m not sure what I’m supposed to do with this extra “6.5 million” in ur hypothetical.

HORRIBLE

You aren't getting much for Mitch, lets be honest. He's shown to fade in the playoffs, he is going to want a raise and a team has to extend him before he even plays a game otherwise he could walk. I've listened to the SDPN a ton and they all agree you would be glad to get out of that contract. I'm not saying you get future considerations, but you aren't getting a Faber, Rossi and a 1st for him. And the teams that can afford to acquire him aren't going to give up their futures for him. I don't even want him on the Wild period, let alone giving up Faber, Rossi and 1sts that you are thinking. We have our own players that haven't shown up in the playoffs we don't need to add to the list.