Should have let Nylander sit or traded him for defense.

Status
Not open for further replies.

genk

Registered User
Nov 15, 2015
556
883
I hate this fan base. We have an amazing young player? Yeah, let's trade him!

Unbelievable.

Since January 20th, Nylander's been playing at a 61 point pace, and this is with the majority of his time spent playing with anchors Brown and Marleau. Most would also agree that he isn't even 100% up to speed. This fan base deserves to rot in the standings cellar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saffronleaf

LeafsOHLRangers98

Registered User
Jun 13, 2017
6,572
6,718
And I am still willing to bet they trade Nylander for a minute-eating defenceman in the offseason, to balance their offence back out. It makes more logical sense; although Nylander is a great player, and normally one you want to keep around, the Leafs CANNOT afford to lose Marner on an offer sheet or due to not being able to squeeze him in simply to keep Nylander. It's become VERY obvious at this point that Marner is the better player.

Personally, I'd rather trade Marleau, but they have to be willing to look at a Nylander trade if it comes down to it.
Why would a team screw up their own cap situation AND give up 4 1st round picks to get Marner? He's a great player but overpaying a guy by $4-5M (which is what I think it would take for him to leave because of endorsement deals) and giving up all your future players that you could potentially add to him makes no sense. It's why offer sheets simply don't happen.

Even if a team did you could trade Kapanen, Johnsson, Brown, heck even Kadri before you had to move Nylander.

Marner will end up around Kucherovs contract because really nobody should be making more than him or Rantanen on the wing, and everything will be fine with the cap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saffronleaf

Trapper

Registered User
Nov 21, 2013
23,736
11,002
reason: to make your team better. shock, that.
there is this big thing that the value would have been lowered because he was holding out. really? like. would it have been? or is it an assumption?
coulda traded him before he held out, then you don't even have to worry about the holding out issue.

like i said. when it comes to like 80 percent of this roster, people will twist themselves into knots saying why it shouldn't be so.
it wouldn't have been a disaster had Dubas traded him. people want to believe because he was holding out, it would have lowered the return. we don't know. it's not like there is a long list of examples showing "yah these are the people who got traded holding out and look it all sucked."

trading Nylander (or anyone on the roster) to improve this team, isn't stupid.
"wanting the team to be better." is a significant reason enough for me.
I’m with you if it makes the team better,

However, Nylander appears to be a moot point at this time due to comments by Dubas and Nylander.

The logical choice IMO now is to move Kadri for a RHD to pair with Rielly.
 

Daisy Jane

everything is gonna be okay!
Jul 2, 2009
70,212
9,189
I’m with you if it makes the team better,

However, Nylander appears to be a moot point at this time due to comments by Dubas and Nylander.

The logical choice IMO now is to move Kadri for a RHD to pair with Rielly.

and see, the best time to trade Kadri (and this is no shade on Kadri) would have been when we signed Tavares. I think his value was at an all time high then. then we could have made moves to get a really solid #3 (who fit more in that role, i just think really better for kadri if he was #2 (or #1 on a team without a lot of centre depth and can really generate chances for himself).
 

Trapper

Registered User
Nov 21, 2013
23,736
11,002
and see, the best time to trade Kadri (and this is no shade on Kadri) would have been when we signed Tavares. I think his value was at an all time high then. then we could have made moves to get a really solid #3 (who fit more in that role, i just think really better for kadri if he was #2 (or #1 on a team without a lot of centre depth and can really generate chances for himself).
He still holds value as a legit 2.
Teams right now know he’s buried behind Matthews/JT. But it’s now time.
At 4.5 he has the value. He would slide in behind Aho in Carolina as no. 2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToneDog

Notsince67

Papi and the Lamplighters
Apr 27, 2018
15,854
11,052
This is the pertinent point

We are agreed.

When faced with the choice of xx dollars for 6 seasons starting on time in the 1st season, or xx dollars for 6 seasons starting after a two month holdout 99% of players choose to start on time. They don't see added value in the time off. It's not a positive. It doesn't materially impact the value prop for either side in the scale of a 6 year deal.

Connect the dots, what is the significance of it being 5.6 year contract when the player would have preferred to play the whole season for the same sum?

Go further to the supposed "benchmark setting"

Hypothetically, Kapanen and Dubas agree that on a 6 year deal Kappy should get 70% of Nylander.
Dubas offers 6.96x0.7 = 4.87, (29.22 over 6 years) Kapanen says wait, Nylander's Officially Listed Full Season contract is for 7.5m, I want 5.25 cause I'm not missing any games. Dubas presents him with the choice 29.22 over 6 seasons, or 29.22 over 5.6 seasons. As we've discussed Kapanen (being a professional hockey player not a petulant child) acts in his best interest and chooses to report on time.
Contrary to your belief, willy only sets the standards of contract negotiation based on his comparable points and his relative pay which requires normalizing to a full year to make it an apples to apples comparison. Not sure why you are complicating the issue at all. Players wont sit out and if they have comparable points to willy, the equitable comparable salary will be 7.5MM over 6 years. You are jumping through hoops denying this but it is the truth. I'm not going to argue with you over this because the truth is obvious. You just choose not to see it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLF

CantLoseWithMatthews

Registered User
Sep 28, 2015
49,550
59,135
and see, the best time to trade Kadri (and this is no shade on Kadri) would have been when we signed Tavares. I think his value was at an all time high then. then we could have made moves to get a really solid #3 (who fit more in that role, i just think really better for kadri if he was #2 (or #1 on a team without a lot of centre depth and can really generate chances for himself).
Then the leafs would have gotten to play with 1 good NHL center for the 15 games Matthews missed. Sometimes you can't just get rid of players. Having a strength is worth keeping
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tmart335

Daisy Jane

everything is gonna be okay!
Jul 2, 2009
70,212
9,189
Hahaha

Sure, trading kids that good that age makes you better

The Oilers did Hall for Larsson, now it's the Leafs turn because "balance"

Worked like a charm

it drives me nuts that people want to compare a dumb has never been good GM's decisions, to anything the Leafs should do.
I also never said I would trade Nylander for "balance" I never even said that in the several posts mentioned. that was you.
I said. I'd trade Nylander to help make our team better. if not Nylander. Kadri, the two players who had great value in the summer and could have netted a really great return i think.

There is a butt load of really good players out there
I am a firm believer that if you want really good quality you need to trade quality back. period.

but again. case in point. "we can't trade our good players because oh my god. the Oilers did and they suck- let's ignore the 99 million other reasons why they suck let's just focus on Hall for freaking Larsson, so we must keep our precious beans, until you know they aren't good and then maybe, just maybe we can get a really good player back. maybe. Maybe they'll take the crap that we have on the team because god forbid we trade anything good, to get something good back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rumman and Al14

Kiwi

Registered User
Mar 5, 2016
20,979
15,855
The Naki
it drives me nuts that people want to compare a dumb has never been good GM's decisions, to anything the Leafs should do.
I also never said I would trade Nylander for "balance" I never even said that in the several posts mentioned. that was you.
I said. I'd trade Nylander to help make our team better. if not Nylander. Kadri, the two players who had great value in the summer and could have netted a really great return i think.

There is a butt load of really good players out there
I am a firm believer that if you want really good quality you need to trade quality back. period.

but again. case in point. "we can't trade our good players because oh my god. the Oilers did and they suck- let's ignore the 99 million other reasons why they suck let's just focus on Hall for freaking Larsson, so we must keep our precious beans, until you know they aren't good and then maybe, just maybe we can get a really good player back. maybe. Maybe they'll take the crap that we have on the team because god forbid we trade anything good, to get something good back.

There's a butt load of good players available is there?

The fact hall for Larsson even happened should tell you exactly what young defenseman are worth on the trade market

The last quality young defensive player that was traded was Jones, who went for a #1C in Johansson before Jones broke out

Or Drouin for Sergachev who was still in junior ffs

But sure, the deals just waiting to be made despite the evidence to the contrary
 
  • Like
Reactions: saffronleaf and IPS

Daisy Jane

everything is gonna be okay!
Jul 2, 2009
70,212
9,189
I hate this fan base. We have an amazing young player? Yeah, let's trade him!

Unbelievable.

Since January 20th, Nylander's been playing at a 61 point pace, and this is with the majority of his time spent playing with anchors Brown and Marleau. Most would also agree that he isn't even 100% up to speed. This fan base deserves to rot in the standings cellar.

because they have a different opinion than you?

There's a butt load of good players available is there?

The fact hall for Larsson even happened should tell you exactly what young defenseman are worth on the trade market

The last quality young defensive player that was traded was Jones, who went for a #1C in Johansson before Jones broke out

Or Drouin for Sergachev who was still in junior ffs

But sure, the deals just waiting to be made despite the evidence to the contrary

Chiarelli is dumb. that's what that trade tells me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rumman and ToneDog

Al14

Registered User
Jul 13, 2007
24,093
5,452
I hate this fan base. We have an amazing young player? Yeah, let's trade him!

Unbelievable.

Since January 20th, Nylander's been playing at a 61 point pace, and this is with the majority of his time spent playing with anchors Brown and Marleau. Most would also agree that he isn't even 100% up to speed. This fan base deserves to rot in the standings cellar.
If Nylander can only generate any points playing with other star players, then, maybe he's not worth his contract. At his salary, he needs to be able to drive a line, especially because he thinks he's a bonafide centre too, which is why he held out for more money.

It's a real shame that anyone has to hate fellow fans because they have different opinions than oneself. We should all cheer one another, and, our Leafs, no matter what.

JMHO.
 

IPS

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
15,461
24,487
There's a butt load of good players available is there?

The fact hall for Larsson even happened should tell you exactly what young defenseman are worth on the trade market

The last quality young defensive player that was traded was Jones, who went for a #1C in Johansson before Jones broke out

Or Drouin for Sergachev who was still in junior ffs

But sure, the deals just waiting to be made despite the evidence to the contrary

Well said. Supply and demand, extremely small supply of RHD, and thus a massive demand. Everyone knows Chiarelli can't make a trade to save his life, but the example still shows that you gotta pay out the ass to get even a 2nd pairing guy, let alone a 1st pairing guy. Like you referenced, Johansson for Jones was the last real example of this, very rare that a team is willing to part with the piece to acquire such a player.
 

4thline

Registered User
Jul 18, 2014
14,371
9,674
Waterloo
Contrary to your belief, willy only sets the standards of contract negotiation based on his comparable points and his relative pay which requires normalizing to a full year to make it an apples to apples comparison. Not sure why you are complicating the issue at all. Players wont sit out and if they have comparable points to willy, the equitable comparable salary will be 7.5MM over 6 years. You are jumping through hoops denying this but it is the truth. I'm not going to argue with you over this because the truth is obvious. You just choose not to see it.

It's not jumping through hoops. Its pretty basic negotiation. Unless in arbitration Comps don't set standards, they provide guidelines. There are no requirements, no rules, no formula. Team is going to argue the comp is 6.96 because that's what he's paid. Agent is going to argue 7.5 because that's the Official Listed Contract, he would have been paid 7.5 for a full year and our guy isn't going to miss games. Team will argue we don't care if he missed games we have 6.96 to spend and that's what we're offering. You can have it now or wait and have the moral victory of saying you're worth 7.5 a year while still only getting paid what we're prepared to offer. Which does the player choose? Given the answer, why does the team cave?
 

Daisy Jane

everything is gonna be okay!
Jul 2, 2009
70,212
9,189
If Nylander can only generate any points playing with other star players, then, maybe he's not worth his contract. At his salary, he needs to be able to drive a line, especially because he thinks he's a bonafide centre too, which is why he held out for more money.

It's a real shame that anyone has to hate fellow fans because they have different opinions than oneself. We should all cheer one another, and, our Leafs, no matter what.

JMHO.

honestly for me.
it's crest first. name second. so if trading whomever = getting a player that helps the team win a cup, that's what i'm hoping for.
for a lot of other people it's name first.
 

Al14

Registered User
Jul 13, 2007
24,093
5,452
honestly for me.
it's crest first. name second. so if trading whomever = getting a player that helps the team win a cup, that's what i'm hoping for.
for a lot of other people it's name first.
Exactly! Team before individual players! What's best for the team should always come first IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rumman

Lightsol

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
4,824
2,691
it drives me nuts that people want to compare a dumb has never been good GM's decisions, to anything the Leafs should do.
I also never said I would trade Nylander for "balance" I never even said that in the several posts mentioned. that was you.
I said. I'd trade Nylander to help make our team better. if not Nylander. Kadri, the two players who had great value in the summer and could have netted a really great return i think.

There is a butt load of really good players out there
I am a firm believer that if you want really good quality you need to trade quality back. period.

but again. case in point. "we can't trade our good players because oh my god. the Oilers did and they suck- let's ignore the 99 million other reasons why they suck let's just focus on Hall for freaking Larsson, so we must keep our precious beans, until you know they aren't good and then maybe, just maybe we can get a really good player back. maybe. Maybe they'll take the crap that we have on the team because god forbid we trade anything good, to get something good back.
I said they should trade Nylander for balance, but f*** the "Hall for Larsson" bullshit. The Leafs are going to have to make some hard decisions this offseason, so people who keep going "We can't trade Nylander; he's too good! We can't trade Kadri; he's too good! We can't trade Kapanen; he's too good!, etc." better WAKE THE f*** UP.

Because you can say "No team will be stupid enough to offersheet Marner for $12 million and 4 firsts", but I'm willing to bet there are a few teams that would. And if you don't find a way to fit this in, it's Marner we're going to lose... To keep Nylander and Kadri. So we're giving up arguably our second-best forward, who is scoring at a point-a-game pace this year... For what?

Nylander is a nice luxury to have. But if it comes down to trading Nylander or losing Marner, consider where they both are at this point.
 

Daisy Jane

everything is gonna be okay!
Jul 2, 2009
70,212
9,189
I said they should trade Nylander for balance, but **** the "Hall for Larsson" bull****. The Leafs are going to have to make some hard decisions this offseason, so people who keep going "We can't trade Nylander; he's too good! We can't trade Kadri; he's too good! We can't trade Kapanen; he's too good!, etc." better WAKE THE **** UP.

Because you can say "No team will be stupid enough to offersheet Marner for $12 million and 4 firsts", but I'm willing to bet there are a few teams that would. And if you don't find a way to fit this in, it's Marner we're going to lose... To keep Nylander and Kadri. So we're giving up arguably our second-best forward, who is scoring at a point-a-game pace this year... For what?

Nylander is a nice luxury to have. But if it comes down to trading Nylander or losing Marner, consider where they both are at this point.

like i said -there's always a reason why we can't trade our precious bean.
to be fair. i've always argued i'd personally like the team be balanced on both forward/defense (and capable of smacking you hard on either end) vs. being top heavy. i've been saying this since Quinn was the coach. but everyone here wants to be all about offense, and then cite but Pittsburgh, though. so. like. whatever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Al14

Kiwi

Registered User
Mar 5, 2016
20,979
15,855
The Naki
because they have a different opinion than you?



Chiarelli is dumb. that's what that trade tells me.

It tells you the market sucks if your buying

If it was as easy as your implying we would have traded for one already

Well said. Supply and demand, extremely small supply of RHD, and thus a massive demand. Everyone knows Chiarelli can't make a trade to save his life, but the example still shows that you gotta pay out the ass to get even a 2nd pairing guy, let alone a 1st pairing guy. Like you referenced, Johansson for Jones was the last real example of this, very rare that a team is willing to part with the piece to acquire such a player.

How much would a genuine top pairing, young defenseman on a decent contract return?

What would you trade Rielly for?

It's like people don't actually take the market or quality RD scarcity into account during any of these debates

Nylander sure as hell isn't returning that and trading him for less is a mugs game

Why does this always need repeating?
 

CelticDruid

Registered User
Oct 23, 2013
6,931
5,799
Penticton , BC
If Nylander can only generate any points playing with other star players, then, maybe he's not worth his contract. At his salary, he needs to be able to drive a line, especially because he thinks he's a bonafide centre too, which is why he held out for more money.

It's a real shame that anyone has to hate fellow fans because they have different opinions than oneself. We should all cheer one another, and, our Leafs, no matter what.

JMHO.


Nylander drove the Kadri & Brown line-they just couldn't finish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saffronleaf

Notsince67

Papi and the Lamplighters
Apr 27, 2018
15,854
11,052
It's not jumping through hoops. Its pretty basic negotiation. Unless in arbitration Comps don't set standards, they provide guidelines. There are no requirements, no rules, no formula. Team is going to argue the comp is 6.96 because that's what he's paid. Agent is going to argue 7.5 because that's the Official Listed Contract, he would have been paid 7.5 for a full year and our guy isn't going to miss games. Team will argue we don't care if he missed games we have 6.96 to spend and that's what we're offering. You can have it now or wait and have the moral victory of saying you're worth 7.5 a year while still only getting paid what we're prepared to offer. Which does the player choose? Given the answer, why does the team cave?
The team can choose to not offer market but it doesnt begin a negotiation on the right track. You can come up with any useless excuse but it wont advance a very legitimate point. The a proper 6 year comparable to Nylander is 7.5mm over 6 years. The fact he lost time due to holding out is irrelevant. The fact that there is cap savings due to Nylander not actually being on the roster is irrelevant. In short, the leafs aren't forced to offer Marner anything other than a qualifying offer. Marner doesnt have to sign and we can all sit and wait. Seems kind of silly to have sit a player who will put up 56% more in points this year over another players career high just because you want to pay him less than 33% more. It will never happen if Marner holds tough. Nylander will be traded long before that happens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->