Proposal: What would you be willing to give up for...

[SoupNazi]

If the leafs cant win with "a top 5 player" with better depth and skill than the current DRW, how in the world would Detroit win with him especially after you gut the team of all but 1 of its BEST young players ?

IF mathews is moved he will go to LA for Byfield, some decent but nothing special former top 10 draftee propsect (Turcotte level), salary dump, a 1st and either a 2nd or another conditional 1st.

Well put.

 

[RabidBadger]

So, this proposal isn't as much a earth shaker as the others in this thread, but I think we should try to pluck Jake Debrusk from Bahstin. They have no cap space, no draft capital and a horrid prospect pool.

Debrusk has always seemed like the odd man out on that team. He did have a career year under a new coach which may keep him in the fold. If Bergeron and Krejci leave, I'd say everyone except Pasta and McAvoy are for sale.

 

[Pavels Dog]

The holy-grail situation where a guy like this comes available and Red Wings have asset's ability to try and no one wants him. It's like people saying they don't want a young steve yzerman cause he couldn't get over the top... Kids 25.

It was different times but not even Gretzky was traded for the equivalent of the package you suggest for Matthews.

 

[mikerooooose]

I would take Nylander on a good deal. He seems to be undervalued by Toronto even though he's the only top guy that always shows up.

 

[Snuggs]

It was different times but not even Gretzky was traded for the equivalent of the package you suggest for Matthews.

Yeah, I don't see the relevance of that, then, and now. Lindros was traded for more than Gretzky too. So have a lot of players since.

Honestly, it's ok to hate my trade package, I don't even care. I'm not a professinal, lol. It's more alarming guys around here don't even want Matthews to me. Or want to even try for it.
*

Like, what trim a 1st rdp, and Edvinsson. People will still freak out. Detroit fans I'm learning don't like players making money.( on this forum ) It upsets them for some reason. Like example:

I would take Nylander on a good deal. He seems to be undervalued by Toronto even though he's the only top guy that always shows up.

That comment isn't even true but because Nylander isn't paid near what Matthews is expected and will be paid significantly less this is somehow Nylanders narrative... vs Matthews even though Matthews has always had more points, and has more goals/points in the same amount of playoff games. Had more goals/points this year, better plus minus too and still things are said like this about Nylander vs Matthews who apparently is going to turn into Stephen Wiess as soon as he's not playing with Mitch Marner. It's Matthews fault in TOR instead of things like Tavarse move/trade/money and some swiss cheese defensemen defensively.

If my trades crazy, cool, fix it so it's not in your own opinion... The Best come back literally... was that he'll want to go to LA and they've got the stuff to get a deal done too. That's a problem if he literally says he wants to be in LA. (Because I think we both assumed a trade involves an extension. ) Idk who posted that.

Anyways... Red Wings literally have to spend 11 million this year, and outside of tanking and taking someone's junk for picks, Fans will freak out about who's signed around here. I guess I'm more highlighting how many fans around here don't like spending money no matter who it's spent on.

 

[Axel Sandy Pelikan]

Yeah, I don't see the relevance of that, then, and now. Lindros was traded for more than Gretzky too. So have a lot of players since.

Honestly, it's ok to hate my trade package, I don't even care. I'm not a professinal, lol. It's more alarming guys around here don't even want Matthews to me. Or want to even try for it.
*

Like, what trim a 1st rdp, and Edvinsson. People will still freak out. Detroit fans I'm learning don't like players making money.( on this forum ) It upsets them for some reason. Like example:


That comment isn't even true but because Nylander isn't paid near what Matthews is expected and will be paid significantly less this is somehow Nylanders narrative... vs Matthews even though Matthews has always had more points, and has more goals/points in the same amount of playoff games. Had more goals/points this year, better plus minus too and still things are said like this about Nylander vs Matthews who apparently is going to turn into Stephen Wiess as soon as he's not playing with Mitch Marner. It's Matthews fault in TOR instead of things like Tavarse move/trade/money and some swiss cheese defensemen defensively.

If my trades crazy, cool, fix it so it's not in your own opinion... The Best come back literally... was that he'll want to go to LA and they've got the stuff to get a deal done too. That's a problem if he literally says he wants to be in LA. (Because I think we both assumed a trade involves an extension. ) Idk who posted that.

Anyways... Red Wings literally have to spend 11 million this year, and outside of tanking and taking someone's junk for picks, Fans will freak out about who's signed around here. I guess I'm more highlighting how many fans around here don't like spending money no matter who it's spent on.

To land Matthews would require, no joke, like 3x the assets it would take to get Nylander. To get Matthews, we would certainly have to surrender a package that at least includes Larkin or Seider. No way a trade gets made with Toronto for anything less than one of those two as the centerpiece.

Regardless of the contract value... I don't see how Toronto with remotely competent management deals away Matthews for anything but a freaking blockbuster. And while he's wonderful... are the Wings really better off if they're swapping Seider/Larkin + multiple firsts + something else?

Like sure, call Toronto for Matthews. Call them about Marner. Call about Nylander. I'm partial to Nylander because you might be able to get him for something that keeps the rest of your roster more intact. If I can get Matthews without detonating a bomb on my roster? Of course I want him. But if I'm moving out Larkin++, I'm left with the same problem I had before of being a one-line team just with higher scoring C... who is still probably gonna want to go to the desert in a year.

Adding Nylander, you might be able to do with futures and/or okay NHL roster players and picks, you get to have two good lines and he's locked up for several more years.

E: Also... if you want to look at it a different way... you're giving Toronto a get out of cap hell free card.... for damn near no discount. Toronto in this case adds 7 cost-controlled assets to completely restock their NHL roster and their system, can absorb the loss of Auston Matthews because they still have Tavares, Marner, and Nylander and even get around losing guys like Giordano who played for peanuts at an average level and can even avoid getting sucked in to keeping Ryan O'Reilly for too much money or Noel Accari for too much money.

At some point, Toronto is going to have to buckle and trade one of their four high priced forwards for a massive discount... this ain't it.

 

[DoMakc]

To land Matthews would require, no joke, like 3x the assets it would take to get Nylander. To get Matthews, we would certainly have to surrender a package that at least includes Larkin or Seider. No way a trade gets made with Toronto for anything less than one of those two as the centerpiece.

Regardless of the contract value... I don't see how Toronto with remotely competent management deals away Matthews for anything but a freaking blockbuster. And while he's wonderful... are the Wings really better off if they're swapping Seider/Larkin + multiple firsts + something else?

Like sure, call Toronto for Matthews. Call them about Marner. Call about Nylander. I'm partial to Nylander because you might be able to get him for something that keeps the rest of your roster more intact. If I can get Matthews without detonating a bomb on my roster? Of course I want him. But if I'm moving out Larkin++, I'm left with the same problem I had before of being a one-line team just with higher scoring C... who is still probably gonna want to go to the desert in a year.

Adding Nylander, you might be able to do with futures and/or okay NHL roster players and picks, you get to have two good lines and he's locked up for several more years.

E: Also... if you want to look at it a different way... you're giving Toronto a get out of cap hell free card.... for damn near no discount. Toronto in this case adds 7 cost-controlled assets to completely restock their NHL roster and their system, can absorb the loss of Auston Matthews because they still have Tavares, Marner, and Nylander and even get around losing guys like Giordano who played for peanuts at an average level and can even avoid getting sucked in to keeping Ryan O'Reilly for too much money or Noel Accari for too much money.

At some point, Toronto is going to have to buckle and trade one of their four high priced forwards for a massive discount... this ain't it.

The acquisition costs for an asset with 1 year of control are not comparable or superior (in case of Seider) with 8 years resp. 6 years of control. They can ask whatever they want, but nobody in this league is going to trade Seider or Larkin equivalent for Nylander. As for Matthews, I also doubt it, because of same issue - 1 year of control. The best they can hope in case of Matthews trade is to replicate the Tkachuk trade.

 

[Snuggs]

To land Matthews would require, no joke, like 3x the assets it would take to get Nylander. To get Matthews, we would certainly have to surrender a package that at least includes Larkin or Seider. No way a trade gets made with Toronto for anything less than one of those two as the centerpiece.

Regardless of the contract value... I don't see how Toronto with remotely competent management deals away Matthews for anything but a freaking blockbuster. And while he's wonderful... are the Wings really better off if they're swapping Seider/Larkin + multiple firsts + something else?

Like sure, call Toronto for Matthews. Call them about Marner. Call about Nylander. I'm partial to Nylander because you might be able to get him for something that keeps the rest of your roster more intact. If I can get Matthews without detonating a bomb on my roster? Of course I want him. But if I'm moving out Larkin++, I'm left with the same problem I had before of being a one-line team just with higher scoring C... who is still probably gonna want to go to the desert in a year.

Adding Nylander, you might be able to do with futures and/or okay NHL roster players and picks, you get to have two good lines and he's locked up for several more years.

E: Also... if you want to look at it a different way... you're giving Toronto a get out of cap hell free card.... for damn near no discount. Toronto in this case adds 7 cost-controlled assets to completely restock their NHL roster and their system, can absorb the loss of Auston Matthews because they still have Tavares, Marner, and Nylander and even get around losing guys like Giordano who played for peanuts at an average level and can even avoid getting sucked in to keeping Ryan O'Reilly for too much money or Noel Accari for too much money.

At some point, Toronto is going to have to buckle and trade one of their four high priced forwards for a massive discount... this ain't it.

I'm not gonna go over everything cause a lot is just reharshing other posters concerns... and i don't wanna discuss that x5 times with each seperate poster but.... What the cost is/will be in a trade is literally just made up so say anything and you can run with it either way(high value/low value).

Nylander isn't a bad way to go, and the bolded is definitely, 100% true. It's a good point. It's just I don't like it really when someone trys to say Nylander is as good as Matthews... He's not... but he's still extremely good and would be our best player immediately. (*Nylander*)

Toronto cap to resign these guys isn't as bad as people wanna make it out to be. (Maybe just this year only.) Nylander/Matthews are UFA's at the same time and Brodie/Muzzin/Murray all come off the books too... adding like something like 16 million to their cap for extensions on both players. Matthews gets a little over 11.5, so his raise actually wont be as hard felt on their cap as lets say Nylander's who's only signed for 7 and should get a 2-3 million dollar raise per year. Still, extending both guys should only added about 5-6 million more dollars to their cap if management/players decide Toronto is still fine to play at. (Likely will be)

 

[Pavels Dog]

Yeah, I don't see the relevance of that, then, and now. Lindros was traded for more than Gretzky too. So have a lot of players since.

Honestly, it's ok to hate my trade package, I don't even care. I'm not a professinal, lol. It's more alarming guys around here don't even want Matthews to me. Or want to even try for it.
*

Like, what trim a 1st rdp, and Edvinsson. People will still freak out. Detroit fans I'm learning don't like players making money.( on this forum ) It upsets them for some reason. Like example:

It's not being against player making money. Pretty sure everyone would be all over the idea of throwing money at Matthews in FA.

If Matthews is available via trade it's because Toronto can't re-sign him. That should lower his value - not increase it.
The number of teams that have the assets to trade for Matthews is low. The number of teams that can fit him under the salary cap is also low. The number of teams he'll re-sign with is also likely low.
All of that should also lower the trade cost.

He'd be expensive as hell, but you don't give up the equivalent of 4 top 10 picks along with multiple additional assets for anyone. We're not a cup contender with Matthews if we don't have anything else on the roster.

 

[Snuggs]

It's not being against player making money. Pretty sure everyone would be all over the idea of throwing money at Matthews in FA.

If Matthews is available via trade it's because Toronto can't re-sign him. That should lower his value - not increase it.
The number of teams that have the assets to trade for Matthews is low. The number of teams that can fit him under the salary cap is also low. The number of teams he'll re-sign with is also likely low.
All of that should also lower the trade cost.

He'd be expensive as hell, but you don't give up the equivalent of 4 top 10 picks along with multiple additional assets for anyone. We're not a cup contender with Matthews if we don't have anything else on the roster.

I mean literally there was a poster or two that said they'd rather spend the money elsewhere even if he FA, etc.

Like I said about my offer; It's totally fine to ignore/make fun of it but the basic point was to get a convo started and I more quickly realized no one's even interested in trying for it because it's very much assumed it'll cost too much. It's interesting to me. I also must just have a lot of faith in Yzerman going forward with that core of Matthews/Larkin/Seider. I just felt like with tons of money available(which there would be.) He'd be able to surround them with talent.

I mean both teams in the Stanley cup right now have gone out and made major moves to adjust their rosters. Done them in multiple years too, (can't do it all in one year). Both teams have done the whole spectrum of drafting well, trading for really good players when opportunity rises, sign quality players. They're not nickel/dimming UFA's, buying low on trade assets, or worried about drafting guys every year to save their franchise.

 

[Pavels Dog]

I also must just have a lot of faith in Yzerman going forward with that core of Matthews/Larkin/Seider. I just felt like with tons of money available(which there would be.) He'd be able to surround them with talent.

We have tons of money available. I don't think that's the problem - the problem is availability of talent. Trade route is almost the only way - but using massive amounts of assets on one player makes it difficult to make additional trades.

 

[Axel Sandy Pelikan]

The acquisition costs for an asset with 1 year of control are not comparable or superior (in case of Seider) with 8 years resp. 6 years of control. They can ask whatever they want, but nobody in this league is going to trade Seider or Larkin equivalent for Nylander. As for Matthews, I also doubt it, because of same issue - 1 year of control. The best they can hope in case of Matthews trade is to replicate the Tkachuk trade.

That’s why I’m in favor of Nylander. Because he won’t cost either of Larkin or Seider. And Matthews will almost certainly cost one and a whole lot more.

So I’m not disagreeing with you.

 

[jkutswings]

That’s why I’m in favor of Nylander. Because he won’t cost either of Larkin or Seider. And Matthews will almost certainly cost one and a whole lot more.

So I’m not disagreeing with you.

Matthews could be had by adding a third team. Send a Schiefele or a Lindholm caliber center to Toronto, picks to a team wanting to blow it up, and Auston here. (As a framework. More would be needed to balance it out, but it absolutely COULD be done without involving Larkin or Seider. The real problem is whether the Leafs would even consider a team in their division as a trade partner.)

 

[RedHawkDown]

I mean literally there was a poster or two that said they'd rather spend the money elsewhere even if he FA, etc.

Like I said about my offer; It's totally fine to ignore/make fun of it but the basic point was to get a convo started and I more quickly realized no one's even interested in trying for it because it's very much assumed it'll cost too much. It's interesting to me. I also must just have a lot of faith in Yzerman going forward with that core of Matthews/Larkin/Seider. I just felt like with tons of money available(which there would be.) He'd be able to surround them with talent.

I mean both teams in the Stanley cup right now have gone out and made major moves to adjust their rosters. Done them in multiple years too, (can't do it all in one year). Both teams have done the whole spectrum of drafting well, trading for really good players when opportunity rises, sign quality players. They're not nickel/dimming UFA's, buying low on trade assets, or worried about drafting guys every year to save their franchise.

I watch almost all Leafs games as I’m in the Ontario area and I’ll say it again. Matthews is not worth the price of admission. More often than not, it’s Marner and Nylander who drive the bus on that team.

 

[13to40]

I watch almost all Leafs games as I’m in the Ontario area and I’ll say it again. Matthews is not worth the price of admission. More often than not, it’s Marner and Nylander who drive the bus on that team.

Matthews is not the player you build a championship team around. Can he turn into one? Possibly. But his previous playoff displays showed how he’s not willing to go to the dirty areas and compete for a cup.

Amazing regular season player. One of the best by far. He’s a top player in this league; so don’t get me wrong, I’m not ignoring that, I just don’t think he has it in him to play playoff hockey the way it’s supposed to be played.

 

[jkutswings]

I watch almost all Leafs games as I’m in the Ontario area and I’ll say it again. Matthews is not worth the price of admission. More often than not, it’s Marner and Nylander who drive the bus on that team.

I'd be AOK with working out a trade for Marner.

 

[The Zermanator]

Matthews could be had by adding a third team. Send a Schiefele or a Lindholm caliber center to Toronto, picks to a team wanting to blow it up, and Auston here. (As a framework. More would be needed to balance it out, but it absolutely COULD be done without involving Larkin or Seider. The real problem is whether the Leafs would even consider a team in their division as a trade partner.)

Any trade that involves Matthews coming in is also going to involve roughly the same amount of assets going out. The only difference is those assets are being spread to 2 teams instead of just one. No other team would agree to be the 3rd if it just meant subsidizing Detroit’s acquisition of Matthews.

If we’re wanting to avoid including Larkin and Seider, our two most valuable assets by far, then that will essentially mean having to gut the rest of the team.

The only time trading for a player of that calibre makes sense is when: a) the team trading them is desperate for some reason (but then you’re still competing with all the other teams who want to take advantage); and b) when you’re trading a player of similar value, for example if team A has 2 1Cs and no 1D and team B has 2 1Ds and no 1Cs. Then you work the fine details on what is more or less a 1-1 swap. But if you’re wanting to get an elite player with a package of quality but not elite assets, it’s going to cost you so much it’s not worth it.

 

[jkutswings]

Any trade that involves Matthews coming in is also going to involve roughly the same amount of assets going out. The only difference is those assets are being spread to 2 teams instead of just one. No other team would agree to be the 3rd if it just meant subsidizing Detroit’s acquisition of Matthews.

If we’re wanting to avoid including Larkin and Seider, our two most valuable assets by far, then that will essentially mean having to gut the rest of the team.

The only time trading for a player of that calibre makes sense is when: a) the team trading them is desperate for some reason (but then you’re still competing with all the other teams who want to take advantage); and b) when you’re trading a player of similar value, for example if team A has 2 1Cs and no 1D and team B has 2 1Ds and no 1Cs. Then you work the fine details on what is more or less a 1-1 swap. But if you’re wanting to get an elite player with a package of quality but not elite assets, it’s going to cost you so much it’s not worth it.

If I'm adding an established high end 1C, then any draft picks going forward after 9 overall this year have very little value to me, because I'm pushing to open my window of contention right now.

If it guts the players and prospects already drafted, then yeah I'm saying no. But if it's something like one decent player (maybe a Rasmussen), 17 this year and both firsts next year? I do that all day if I'm confident that a guy like Matthews is who I need and I get him extended.

Adding somebody of that caliber improves half a dozen roster spots by slotting guys where they belong. That's an absolutely massive boost to the team.

 

[Pavels Dog]

If I'm adding an established high end 1C, then any draft picks going forward after 9 overall this year have very little value to me, because I'm pushing to open my window of contention right now.

If it guts the players and prospects already drafted, then yeah I'm saying no. But if it's something like one decent player (maybe a Rasmussen), 17 this year and both firsts next year? I do that all day if I'm confident that a guy like Matthews is who I need and I get him extended.

Adding somebody of that caliber improves half a dozen roster spots by slotting guys where they belong. That's an absolutely massive boost to the team.

Even if we add Matthews can we really be considered a contender? It would kind of feel like trying to use a crowbar to open a window that's just not ready to open yet.

 

[The Zermanator]

If I'm adding an established high end 1C, then any draft picks going forward after 9 overall this year have very little value to me, because I'm pushing to open my window of contention right now.

If it guts the players and prospects already drafted, then yeah I'm saying no. But if it's something like one decent player (maybe a Rasmussen), 17 this year and both firsts next year? I do that all day if I'm confident that a guy like Matthews is who I need and I get him extended.

Adding somebody of that caliber improves half a dozen roster spots by slotting guys where they belong. That's an absolutely massive boost to the team.

I mean, if you think you’re getting Matthews for Rasmussen, a later first this year, and two picks that would likely be between 10-20 next year, then good luck with that.

You’ve got 3 mid-firsts and a player who has not proven himself in the top 6 and may never. And you’re spreading those assets across Toronto and the 3rd team, so Toronto doesn’t even get all of that. So why is the 3rd team subsidizing our acquisition of Matthews?

Edit: And apparently this 3rd team is the one sending the better player (Scheifele/Lindholm as you suggested) so it’s even worse for them.

 

[jkutswings]

Even if we add Matthews can we really be considered a contender? It would kind of feel like trying to use a crowbar to open a window that's just not ready to open yet.

Fair question. But I would not stop there. I'd add one more top six winger (ideally first line) and a fourth line grinder to really fix the offense, a depth defenseman, and another goalie (maybe Swayman if Boston came keep him?). Then you'd have:

<added wing> - Matthews - Raymond
Berggren - Larkin - Perron
Kasper - Copp - Kubalik
Fabbri - Suter - <added grinder>
(kids and spare parts as extras)

Seider - Walman
Maatta - Edvinsson (once healthy)
Chiarot - <depth defenseman>

Husso/Swayman


Now it's fair to still ask if Detroit is ready to hit the gas pedal. But between all the assets and being FORCED to spend just to hit the cap floor, they're definitely going to need to do something tangible, and a repeat summer of guys like Copp and Maatta doesn't seem to make sense unless it also includes at least one high end player, because that's their biggest need.

 

[saska sault]

Fair question. But I would not stop there. I'd add one more top six winger (ideally first line) and a fourth line grinder to really fix the offense, a depth defenseman, and another goalie (maybe Swayman if Boston came keep him?). Then you'd have:

<added wing> - Matthews - Raymond
Berggren - Larkin - Perron
Kasper - Copp - Kubalik
Fabbri - Suter - <added grinder>
(kids and spare parts as extras)

Seider - Walman
Maatta - Edvinsson (once healthy)
Chiarot - <depth defenseman>

Husso/Swayman


Now it's fair to still ask if Detroit is ready to hit the gas pedal. But between all the assets and being FORCED to spend just to hit the cap floor, they're definitely going to need to do something tangible, and a repeat summer of guys like Copp and Maatta doesn't seem to make sense unless it also includes at least one high end player, because that's their biggest need.

What are we giving up to get Mathews? I think the problem with the trade route is depth. We still need more quality depth players , and our prospect pool is not all ready to contribute and should continue to grow. Think we stick to free agency another year unless there is some very shockingly low ask prices or someone values some of our depth youth that has not broke through yet or made a statement.

 

[The Zermanator]

Fair question. But I would not stop there. I'd add one more top six winger (ideally first line) and a fourth line grinder to really fix the offense, a depth defenseman, and another goalie (maybe Swayman if Boston came keep him?). Then you'd have:

<added wing> - Matthews - Raymond
Berggren - Larkin - Perron
Kasper - Copp - Kubalik
Fabbri - Suter - <added grinder>
(kids and spare parts as extras)

Seider - Walman
Maatta - Edvinsson (once healthy)
Chiarot - <depth defenseman>

Husso/Swayman


Now it's fair to still ask if Detroit is ready to hit the gas pedal. But between all the assets and being FORCED to spend just to hit the cap floor, they're definitely going to need to do something tangible, and a repeat summer of guys like Copp and Maatta doesn't seem to make sense unless it also includes at least one high end player, because that's their biggest need.

I see Larkin, Raymond, Seider, Edvinsson, and Kasper all still on the roster.

How are Swayman and Matthews and your added top 6 wing being acquired?

 

[Snuggs]

Matthews is going to cost more than some picks/rasmussen, gonna have to throw Edvinsson or Raymond most likely in that too to even get a sniff. (imo).

 

[Snuggs]

I see Larkin, Raymond, Seider, Edvinsson, and Kasper all still on the roster.

How are Swayman and Matthews and your added top 6 wing being acquired?

You can literally go sign someone. (Anyone)

There's lots of money to spend even after a (assumed) trade/extension for Matthews.(or even Nylander) People aren't grasping that part of this thing. Idk if people realize how much cash just needs to be spent to hit the cap floor in the next two seasons/years.