Armchair GM 2018-2019

[Kin]

As for your third option, I don't see any real scenario where Matthews signs a short-term deal like that. He's getting at least 6 years, and he's not going $16M from anyone.

I could see the possibility that the sort of mid-term deal Marner's supposedly interested in becoming attractive to someone like Matthews but I find it very hard to believe that Matthews, or Marner, would sign any deal that would leave them negotiating a 3rd contract while still an RFA.

 

[Coco-puffs]

As for your third option, I don't see any real scenario where Matthews signs a short-term deal like that. He's getting at least 6 years, and he's not going $16M from anyone.

I could see the possibility that the sort of mid-term deal Marner's supposedly interested in becoming attractive to someone like Matthews but I find it very hard to believe that Matthews, or Marner, would sign any deal that would leave them negotiating a 3rd contract while still an RFA.

So instead of an 8 year deal, they may be more interested in a 5 year deal (which gets them 1 year of UFA... same as Willy got).  Will the Leafs want all 3 of them up at the same point though?

 

[Kin]

So instead of an 8 year deal, they may be more interested in a 5 year deal (which gets them 1 year of UFA... same as Willy got).  Will the Leafs want all 3 of them up at the same point though?

I'm sure they don't. As we just saw with Nylander though, the Leafs have a pretty limited ability to impose what they want on anyone.

 

[Coco-puffs]

So instead of an 8 year deal, they may be more interested in a 5 year deal (which gets them 1 year of UFA... same as Willy got).  Will the Leafs want all 3 of them up at the same point though?

I'm sure they don't. As we just saw with Nylander though, the Leafs have a pretty limited ability to impose what they want on anyone.

Agreed, to some extent.  I think there is a reason why very few players get contracts that end right when they turn UFA.  Both sides have to agree, and no matter how much leverage the player has the team can still impose to a degree beyond "limited" I'd say

 

[Kin]

Agreed, to some extent.  I think there is a reason why very few players get contracts that end right when they turn UFA.  Both sides have to agree, and no matter how much leverage the player has the team can still impose to a degree beyond "limited" I'd say

What we just saw with Nylander was the Leafs and the guy with probably the least pull of their three. Are the Leafs going to let Matthews sit because of a disagreement about term?

 

[Coco-puffs]

Agreed, to some extent.  I think there is a reason why very few players get contracts that end right when they turn UFA.  Both sides have to agree, and no matter how much leverage the player has the team can still impose to a degree beyond "limited" I'd say

What we just saw with Nylander was the Leafs and the guy with probably the least pull of their three. Are the Leafs going to let Matthews sit because of a disagreement about term?

Mostly no.  But if Matthews camp says 4 years, the Leafs aren't going to kiel over and just give it to him.  They will fight hard, including sitting a few games (not until December 1st), to try and move him off that term.

 

[Kin]

Mostly no.  But if Matthews camp says 4 years, the Leafs aren't going to kiel over and just give it to him.  They will fight hard, including sitting a few games (not until December 1st), to try and move him off that term.

Respectfully, I don't agree. I think the notion that they will fight Matthews hard on anything strikes me as extremely unlikely, especially not to the point where he sits even through training camp. The idea that they would risk souring their relationship with Matthews over a term they think isn't ideal, well, despite what we just saw with Nylander I still have faith that Dubas wouldn't go down that road.

 

[bustaheims]

Respectfully, I don't agree. I think the notion that they will fight Matthews hard on anything strikes me as extremely unlikely, especially not to the point where he sits even through training camp. The idea that they would risk souring their relationship with Matthews over a term they think isn't ideal, well, despite what we just saw with Nylander I still have faith that Dubas wouldn't go down that road.

Agreed. I think, at most, they try to push as much as they can until early September, and then settle on where they've gotten at that point. Probably similar with Marner.

 

[AvroArrow]

Need to find a way to get Pesce.  Problem is, I don't think we have (available) what I think Carolina needs.

 

[herman]

Thanks to St. Louis' goaltending issues, they sound like they're ready to just throw all their stars out the door. The prices will likely be young prospects and picks, which we have (not oodles of, mind you).

Obviously the Pietrangelo rumour from Kypreos drew the headlines. Parayko is the younger, defensively better option that will cost more (longer term, smaller hit). Tarasenko's name is now also being floated in media speculation as everyone thinks he looks super unhappy with how things are going.

Those would all be fun, but other than Parayko, I think the biggest impact get might actually be Ryan O'Reilly as a one year rental (even though he has 4 more years at 7.5M to go).

We can easily absorb the cap hit this year at the deadline (thanks, Nylander!). Babcock loves having spare centres and faceoff takers and penalty killers. O'Reilly is a legitimate shutdown centre. Our left shots wings are weak, and he can line up in all three positions.

For all the griping about our defense corps issues, the real problem is structural and it stems from a lot of the forwards doing diddly squat in the d-box or providing poop support (hey, Marner).

So similar to my Taylor Hall rental proposal, let's rent him for a year and recoup the costs in other areas -- i.e. a young defenseman -- after July 1st when MLSE easily pays off his signing bonus up front for a better return from a team desperate for a 1st line quality centre (so much resale value).

Kadri - Tavares - Marner
Marleau - Matthews - Nylander
Johnsson - O'Rielly - Kapanen/Hyman
Ennis - Lindholm - Hyman/Brown

I assume one of Johnsson, Kapanen, Hyman, or Brown will be part of the deal, and one of the higher end Marlies (Bracco, Timashov), and probably a 1st rder.

 

[Kin]

I think it'd be tough because after the run the Leafs would be in a good spot on one hand(O'Reilly is a good player and teams probably want him) but a tough one on the other(they'd still be trying to trade a player they couldn't conceivably keep).

I like the idea of a rental they flip in the off-season but I really think that if they have assets like that to spend at the deadline a defenseman just makes so much more sense.

 

[Bates]

For all the talk about ROR and how good he is there seems to be a growing list of teams who suck with him and improve without him??? Might be a coincidence but I'm not sure I really want to find out??

 

[Kin]

For all the talk about ROR and how good he is there seems to be a growing list of teams who suck with him and improve without him???

O'Reilly's last year with the Avalanche was in 2014-2015 and the team had 90 points. They traded him and then had two seasons of 82 and then 48 points.

So really the list is just at 1. Although it does have to be said that going from 0-1 is technically growth, I'm not sure it qualifies as a list.

 

[Bates]

For all the talk about ROR and how good he is there seems to be a growing list of teams who suck with him and improve without him???

O'Reilly's last year with the Avalanche was in 2014-2015 and the team had 90 points. They traded him and then had two seasons of 82 and then 48 points.

So really the list is just at 1. Although it does have to be said that going from 0-1 is technically growth, I'm not sure it qualifies as a list.

Oh you read that I wrote in one year?? The Avs made the playoffs once during ROR's time there and are about to make it twice since his departure. Buffalo sucked each year and now St Louis. I don't assume he is the issue but I also don't assume he isn't part of it.

 

[Kin]

Oh you read that I wrote in one year??

So your contention is that the Avalanche weren't very good, they traded him, and then three years later they were in the playoffs so there's something indicating he was holding them back.

Sure thing. 

 

[Bates]

Oh you read that I wrote in one year??

So your contention is that the Avalanche weren't very good, they traded him, and then three years later they were in the playoffs so there's something indicating he was holding them back.

Sure thing.

How about Buffalo and St Louis?

 

[Kin]

How about Buffalo and St Louis?

St. Louis. The team where he's got almost 150% the points of any of his teammates and where they're receiving the worst goaltending in the league?

Yeah, that's probably his fault.

 

[Bates]

How about Buffalo and St Louis?

St. Louis. The team where he's got almost 150% the points of any of his teammates and where they're receiving the worst goaltending in the league?

Yeah, that's probably his fault.

Would you mind pointing out where I said it was his fault?? He is part of the problem though unless you believe he comes out Scot free??

 

[Bullfrog]

I think the cost for O'Reilly would be huge and not worth the gamble.

 

[Kin]

I suppose I generally tend to think players should "come out Scot free" if they score a point per game, yes.