All Activity

Oil totally dominating the third

Canucks, Oilers has been fun to watch. There is this feeling that either team might score every time they get the puck. 👍

VERY different draft in 1964 ... most players were obtained through the old junior sponsorship/affiliation system ... only the dregs (😉 😜 😄) were left for the draft.

Marner is 100% the whipping boy and the one they should trade in the toronto media, amongst the majority leaf fans on twitter, reddit, and hfboards, and with most insiders.

Let’s go Canucks 🎉

Well, there was this guy named Ken Dryden. Traded at the end of the 1964 draft in a four-player deal (all newly-drafted players) from Boston to Montreal. The players involved didn't even know at first that they had been drafted by a different team!

Sergechev

Again, (1) didn't say WOULD be ... just that he COULD be ... and ... (2) I totally agree, he was a "ballsy"* pick by the current management team and unlikely to go anywhere ... unless McDavid is involved 😉. * - "ballsy" in the context of fans expectations that one of the forwards would be selected rather than DR.

Thx ... didn't want to assume ... guess it is one of the few things (maybe the only thing?) that can be modified in an existing contract.

I hope that is the case and I think it's much more likely that is the case. Just saying that in some markets you are under the microscope a little more and you have to be a little tougher mentally to survive.

Nylander was producing in the playoffs, not sure why they want to move him. Having said that, I think they can move him if they wanted too - doesn’t is NMC come into effect July 1? Marner’s issue has been playoff production. So I can see them wanting to change the mix, given the repeated failure with this core. Leafs have zero leverage though. He can refuse any move, or pick where he is willing to go.

Are there any comparables, a promising top 5 or 10 pick dealt before his 1st NHL game? And more just saying any proposal involving him seems 'silly' to consider.

It actually is enforceable if it was written into the deal. If an extension contains stronger trade protection and the player is of UFA age, the extension can overwrite the existing clause if both sides agree to it. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't and when they do, we rarely hear about it.

When Mailloux smashes his opponent into the boards and takes that puck up ice over the blue line and scores…the Bell Centre will erupt in cheers

Yes, exactly this. I don’t actually want that trade just trying to establish value

Until July 1st when his extension takes effect, then a full NMC ... we can't know whether there was perhaps a "handshake" agreement that the full NMC was immediate ... while legally unenforceable, it would be bad for the Leafs reputation in future negotiations with other players to "break" the agreement *** if *** it does exist.

I expect that *** if *** he is ever traded it will be for purely hockey reasons

I think Hughes has certainly handled this situation the right way. When Hughes came on board I believe Mailloux was already working with Rob Ramage to get him pointed in the right direction. Hughes wisely continued working with Mailloux on this path and it looks like things are working out. It's true Hughes didn't draft Mailloux and I strongly believe that if Hughes had been the GM at that time he would NOT have drafted Mailloux. However he did inherit him and he could have dumped Mailloux as soon as he took over but he took time to assess the situation and probably realized that if he dumped him right away then he would have been: 1)selling off a talented player at a low price 2) plus Hughes might have looked bad from a PR point of view for giving up on a guy who was working hard to become a better/more mature person Also Hughes didn't have to put up with the grief Bergevin did for drafting him. I also think Hughes spent a lot of time with Mailloux to get a better sense of whether his efforts to improve off the ice are sincere. I have every confidence in Hughes handling this situation and others the right way. I think he is a tremendously smart and astute person/GM. I didn't know anything about him when he was hired but I am very glad he was hired. There may come a time where if Hughes thinks that Mailloux can't escape his past in Montreal then he may look for an opportunity to move him. I hope that doesn't turn out to be the case.

Just want to be the first respond to offer my belief/understanding that you are in no way suggesting that trade but only offering it as an example familiar to Habs fans of what sort of return that *** might *** be possible for the Leafs.

(1) EVERYBODY can be traded in the right deal (2) Wasn't even close to suggesting he would be, precisely for the reason I stated ... I was addressing a hypothetical choice between trading Mailloux and Reinbacher.

I want every damned leaf with a no trade clause to refuse all trades. Tavares is the one they probably want to move but I hope he says no. I’m not saying the leafs should trade Mathews but I would do my homework. The return could be transformative to the leafs. Definitely not suggesting this but the kind of return would be like Suzuki, Slafkovsky, Caufield, first.

... or that he would necessarily agree to waive his NMC unless it was to the perfect situation ... but what team that would so qualify would have the cap room to afford his contract next season? Moving out significant AAV to do so would likely mean "losing" a player that would make the team less appealing to Tavares. Leafs screwed themselves by not addressing the roster/cap issues last June before the Marner/Nylander NMCs kicked in.

As I said above, "I suspect it was all tongue-in-cheek ... I took it, and responded, in that sense." Unless the Leafs have decided they are fully committed to re-signing Marner and confident they can do so, ***if*** he is willing to waive his NMC (it is 100% his choice) I expect the Leafs will recoup what they can by trading the pending UFA ... if, as you speculated, someone is willing to up the ante and can reach a sign&trade contract deal with Marner they might just get something closer to his market value. Nylander is also on a NMC, so entirely his choice ... does he want to leave Toronto? It also would not send a good message for future contract negotiations if the he is willing to re-sign to a max-term contract and then 4-5 months later the team asks him to leave.

Sure, there is no guarantee, almost any prospect can bust. Just making the point that so far, Lindstrom has shown far more offensive upside than Anderson ever did.