Do You Believe We should Go All In Over the Next 2 Years?

[NVious]

Imo to retain Matthews we should do it.

I'm talking scortched earth all in, keep Knies, but everyone else is on the table including all of our draft picks 1-7 rounds next 2 years. The possibility of losing Matthews is too much for me, I would personally shoot for a 1st+2nd+2nd+prospect for Tarasenko and ROR.

What do you guys think? And if you want to go all in, who do you want to go after?

Click to read more...

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Yes for that very reason, Matthews needs an extension this isn't the time to f*** around

 

[ACC1224]

They have been going all in, they just aren't very good at it.

 

[Gary Nylund]

They have been going all in, they just aren't very good at it.

Last season we hung on to all our top picks and prospects. Is that your definition of going all in?

I'll jut copy/paste what I said in another thread:

Everyone's always clamoring for "a couple of pieces" but good pieces always cost a lot so it's always a question of what pieces do you want, and more importantly, are you willing to pay the price to acquire those pieces? Are you willing to give up Knies, Niemela and a 1st round pick for those "couple of pieces"? Do you understand that even if we do that, we still probably have no more then maybe a 15% chance to win the cup (no team ever has more than that in this parity/cap era). And if we fall short, are you OK with the fact that the cupboards are empty making it that much harder to win going forward, making it harder to attract free agents and perhaps making it harder to sign Matthews?

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

They have been going all in, they just aren't very good at it.

No they haven't, they haven't truly gone all in since 2003 and 2004.

All in means exactly that, ALL IN.

You can't go all in when you haven't traded a single prospect in 3 years.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Last season we hung on to all our top picks and prospects. Is that your definition of going all in?

I'll jut copy/paste what I said in another thread:

Everyone's always clamoring for "a couple of pieces" but good pieces always cost a lot so it's always a question of what pieces do you want, and more importantly, are you willing to pay the price to acquire those pieces? Are you willing to give up Knies, Niemela and a 1st round pick for those "couple of pieces"? Do you understand that even if we do that, we still probably have no more then maybe a 15% chance to win the cup (no team ever has more than that in this parity/cap era). And if we fall short, are you OK with the fact that the cupboards are empty making it that much harder to win going forward, making it harder to attract free agents and perhaps making it harder to sign Matthews?

I don't think trading Niemela and 1st would make it harder to sign Matthews because I don't think Matthews cares about a 1st round pick that he doesn't know the name of yet and won't until June.

Even when he does learn it he will forget it 15 minutes later because the reality is that 1st isn't helping them for 3 years minimum and maybe never help them

 

[ACC1224]

No they haven't, they haven't truly gone all in since 2003 and 2004.

All in means exactly that, ALL IN.

You can't go all in when you haven't traded a single prospect in 3 years.

There was no cap in 2003/2004. Going all in is much more restrictive now and they have traded picks for players.

 

[ToneDog]

They won't. If they win the division, I'd spend more at the TDL but "all-in", I doubt it.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I don't think trading Niemela and 1st would make it harder to sign Matthews because I don't think Matthews cares about a 1st round pick that he doesn't know the name of yet and won't until June.

Even when he does learn it he will forget it 15 minutes later because the reality is that 1st isn't helping them for 3 years minimum and maybe never help them

First of all, if Matthews signs a long term deal, he will absolutely care what the teams prospects will be 3 years from now. Secondly, picks and prospects can always be traded for more immediate help (Muzzin trade is a good example) so those assets could "help" whenever the GM decides it's time.

There was no cap in 2003/2004. Going all in is much more restrictive now and they have traded picks for players.

Every team trades picks for players every now and then. You think that every team that trades a pick for a player is going all in?

 

[NVious]

First of all, if Matthews signs a long term deal, he will absolutely care what the teams prospects will be 3 years from now. Secondly, picks and prospects can always be traded for more immediate help (Muzzin trade is a good example) so those assets could "help" whenever the GM decides it's time.


Every team trades picks for players every now and then. You think that every team that trades a pick for a player is going all in?

This assumes Matthews signs, why would he if we fail yet again? And especially if we don't swing for the fences and show him we're extremely serious about winning?

 

[ACC1224]

This assumes Matthews signs, why would he if we fail yet again? And especially if we don't swing for the fences and show him we're extremely serious about winning?

I doubt very much the players think they need to go 'all in'.
A LW for the top 6 is a must, is obtaining that going 'all in'?

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

There was no cap in 2003/2004. Going all in is much more restrictive now and they have traded picks for players.

By that definition any team that ever trades a pick for a player is going all in every time they do it.

That's not how that works.

The 2021 bucs

The 2022 Rams

The 2019 Raptors

The 2021 Lakers

The 2015-2017 Jays.

Pittsburgh from 2008-Present

Tampa 2015-present.

1994 Rangers

These are all in teams the Leafs haven't done that in nearly 20 years

The Leafs haven't truly gone all in in nearly 20 years

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

I doubt very much the players think they need to go 'all in'.
A LW for the top 6 is a must, is obtaining that going 'all in'?

Depends on who it is.

ROR, Timo Meier? That's a BIG price

Tyler Bertuzzi? Still fits the bill as a top 6 LW but he won't cost as much

 

[Gary Nylund]

This assumes Matthews signs, why would he if we fail yet again? And especially if we don't swing for the fences and show him we're extremely serious about winning?

Read my post again, note my use of the word "if".

 

[ACC1224]

By that definition any team that ever trades a pick for a player is going all in every time they do it.

That's not how that works.

The 2021 bucs

The 2022 Rams

The 2019 Raptors

The 2021 Lakers

The 2015-2017 Jays.

Pittsburgh from 2008-Present

Tampa 2015-present.

1994 Rangers

These are all in teams the Leafs haven't done that in nearly 20 years

The Leafs haven't truly gone all

You can arbitrarily set whatever definition of 'all in' you like. Other sports are completely irrelevant to what happens in the NHL with the cap.
None of those teams traded 'all' of their picks and prospects.( Tampa Bay Lightning Draft History at hockeydb.com Tampa kept lots of picks)

The Team may feel they are going all in even if it doesn't meet your criteria.
For teams with little cap space it's pretty much impossible to go 'all in'.

 

[NewZealandMike]

Depends on who it is.

ROR, Timo Meier? That's a BIG price

Tyler Bertuzzi? Still fits the bill as a top 6 LW but he won't cost as much

55 Years waiting to get this close, I think this year they need to add 3 more players to fill voids. Knies internally comes in at no cost leaving 2 positions to fill top 6 winger with bite and a big D with snarl to add that layer to the D. Maybe the D can be added without significant cost beyond picks, but the winger will cost 1st ++.
In the end the team will be much bigger, better rounded, and with continued goal tending we should be able to go deep or more

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

You can arbitrarily set whatever definition of 'all in' you like. Other sports are completely irrelevant to what happens in the NHL with the cap.
None of those teams traded 'all' of their picks and prospects.( Tampa Bay Lightning Draft History at hockeydb.com Tampa kept lots of picks)

The Team may feel they are going all in even if it doesn't meet your criteria.
For teams with little cap space it's pretty much impossible to go 'all in'.

It's not an arbitrary definition when teams go all in they mortgage their entire future that's what they do it's always the same.

And you don't get to use the cap as an excuse because the NBA And NFL also have a salary cap

 

[egd27]

Imo to retain Matthews we should do it.

I'm talking scortched earth all in, keep Knies, but everyone else is on the table including all of our draft picks 1-7 rounds next 2 years. The possibility of losing Matthews is too much for me, I would personally shoot for a 1st+2nd+2nd+prospect for Tarasenko and ROR.

What do you guys think? And if you want to go all in, who do you want to go after?

If you want to hang onto Knies, what are you including in "scorched earth" that is desirable for other teams to give up their quality assets? (Keep in mind there will be other bidders for these players)

Does "everyone else" include roster players other than the usual Kerfoot and Engvall offers? You know, the players that other teams may covet.

 

[ACC1224]

It's not an arbitrary definition when teams go all in they mortgage their entire future that's what they do it's always the same.

And you don't get to use the cap as an excuse because the NBA And NFL also have a salary cap

No team gives up their 'entire future', you're just being silly now.

I expect them to bring in an impact LW. I expect that to come with a substantial cost. I don't expect it to cost all the top picks and top prospects.

You may want to check out the differences between the NHL cap and other leagues.

 

[Larcos_Unal]

If we're gonna make that commitment to Matthews he needs to make the same commitment guys like Bergeron, Marchand, Point, Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman have made over the years. That means putting the team first and taking a hometown deal in order to free up cap and make the team better.

Based on Matthews' track record, he's gonna want a league max deal and then wonder why the 2nd line has no LW and why the bottom 6 can't contribute any goals at key times.

 

[Fogelhund]

Imo to retain Matthews we should do it.

I'm talking scortched earth all in, keep Knies, but everyone else is on the table including all of our draft picks 1-7 rounds next 2 years. The possibility of losing Matthews is too much for me, I would personally shoot for a 1st+2nd+2nd+prospect for Tarasenko and ROR.

What do you guys think? And if you want to go all in, who do you want to go after?

No. This group has the capacity to be contenders for years. Part of winning the cup is having the right group, but luck also plays into it... injuries, calls, and sometimes just puck luck. You go all in for one year, it doesn't work, and you end up like Florida, where after your one year, you are done. No thanks.

 

[DarkKnight]

We were all in when we traded for Foligno.

 

[Larcos_Unal]

We were all in when we traded for Foligno.

Hall would have been nice on JT's wing

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

No team gives up their 'entire future', you're just being silly now.

I expect them to bring in an impact LW. I expect that to come with a substantial cost. I don't expect it to cost all the top picks and top prospects.

You may want to check out the differences between the NHL cap and other leagues.

Yes, they do the Rams did it last year And they won, they haven't been good this yearbut they won last year.

The Cavs did it this past summer for Donavan Mitchell that result is pending.

The Lakers did it for Anthony Davis and they won, then for some reason they gutted their team and now they suck but that's their fault they made stupid decsions after winning a championship.

Have you looked at who the 94 Rangers traded? They gutted their future and they won.

Pittsburgh has been doing it for 15 years they have 3 championships and 4 finals appearances.

Yes when a team goes all in they go ALL in there are countless examples of it in sports.

We were all in when we traded for Foligno.

Not even close

 

[ACC1224]

Yes, they do the Rams did it last year And they won, they haven't been good this yearbut they won last year.

The Cavs did it this past summer for Donavan Mitchell that result is pending.

The Lakers did it for Anthony Davis and they won, then for some reason they gutted their team and now they suck but that's their fault they made stupid decsions after winning a championship.

Have you looked at who the 94 Rangers traded? They gutted their future and they won.

Pittsburgh has been doing it for 15 years they have 3 championships and 4 finals appearances.

Yes when a team goes all in they go ALL in there are countless examples of it in sports.

You don't understand the cap differences in the other leagues. Once you do, you'll understand why they are meaningless to compare to. Stick to hockey.

94 Rangers