2019-2020 Toronto Maple Leafs General Discussion

[Guilt Trip]

As for dealing from strength. That's our forwards, not LD. I'd rather have Dermott as our 7th guy then Marincin.
As for this being his third year, he only played 37 his first and around 140 total. He's just starting out. Let's also not forget he played a lot with CC when he came back. Trading Dermott has Stralman written all over it for me.

If Muzzin re-signs that's when Dermott becomes expandable in the same way and for the same reasons that a guy like Kapanen might be. That doesn't automatically mean either of them should just be given away at the first offer or that they even absolutely need to be traded, but they definitely become in play. They wouldn't be "giving up" on either player, they'd be trading valuable pieces to help shore up other parts of the team.

Totally disagree. Dermott is not expendable the way Kappy is. We have Marlies like Engvall, who have stepped up this year and proven they can play in the league. Without Dermott the Leafs are 1 injury away from having Marincin in the lineup fulltime. We simply don't have the depth on the Marlies yet. Any deal with Dermott has to include a D man of equal value coming back.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Totally disagree. Dermott is not expendable the way Kappy is. We have Marlies like Engvall, who have stepped up this year and proven they can play in the league. Without Dermott the Leafs are 1 injury away from having Marincin in the lineup fulltime. We simply don't have the depth on the Marlies yet. Any deal with Dermott has to include a D man of equal value coming back.

Like I said, nobody has said that we should just sell him for a draft pick. In a perfect world we trade the expandable parts of our team to fix the team's weaknesses, one of which is the lack of RHDs.

Also the team is clearly comfortable with Marincin being the teams 7D. That won't have any effect in whether they move Dermott or not.

 

[herman]

I think Rielly is the better trade bait. Extremely good cap hit and counting stats.

Muzzin - Rielly/Kapanen trade-return
Dermott - Holl
Sandin - Liljegren

In terms of team dynamic, that?s a very difficult trade to pull off, so the return has to be a slam dunk for us the way it has to be a slam dunk for the trade partner.

 

[Hobbes]

I think Rielly is the better trade bait. Extremely good cap hit and counting stats.

Muzzin - Rielly/Kapanen trade-return
Dermott - Holl
Sandin - Liljegren

In terms of team dynamic, that?s a very difficult trade to pull off, so the return has to be a slam dunk for us the way it has to be a slam dunk for the trade partner.

This might be the best course of action as long as the return for that trade is a really big slam dunk, as you say. Ideally that slam dunk would include whoever that is being on a reasonable contract for several years into the future. Rielly will probably be looking at a $7-8M x 6+ year payday when he re-ups for 2022-23 so if we could get a decent RD with a little more term at a lower cost, that would be perfect.

I'm in no way suggesting dumping Dermott (or Sandin) for a bag of pucks. I'm just looking forward a bit and wondering how our current group of D is going to work if Muzzin is re-signed (which according to reports is something the Leafs are actively pursuing with him).

 

[Guilt Trip]

Totally disagree. Dermott is not expendable the way Kappy is. We have Marlies like Engvall, who have stepped up this year and proven they can play in the league. Without Dermott the Leafs are 1 injury away from having Marincin in the lineup fulltime. We simply don't have the depth on the Marlies yet. Any deal with Dermott has to include a D man of equal value coming back.

Like I said, nobody has said that we should just sell him for a draft pick. In a perfect world we trade the expandable parts of our team to fix the team's weaknesses, one of which is the lack of RHDs.

Also the team is clearly comfortable with Marincin being the teams 7D. That won't have any effect in whether they move Dermott or not.

It's expendable not expandable and you agree with me. He has to be traded for a D man and in Leafland preferably a righty.

 

[Guilt Trip]

I think Rielly is the better trade bait. Extremely good cap hit and counting stats.

Muzzin - Rielly/Kapanen trade-return
Dermott - Holl
Sandin - Liljegren

In terms of team dynamic, that?s a very difficult trade to pull off, so the return has to be a slam dunk for us the way it has to be a slam dunk for the trade partner.

This might be the best course of action as long as the return for that trade is a really big slam dunk, as you say. Ideally that slam dunk would include whoever that is being on a reasonable contract for several years into the future. Rielly will probably be looking at a $7-8M x 6+ year payday when he re-ups for 2022-23 so if we could get a decent RD with a little more term at a lower cost, that would be perfect.

I'm in no way suggesting dumping Dermott (or Sandin) for a bag of pucks. I'm just looking forward a bit and wondering how our current group of D is going to work if Muzzin is re-signed (which according to reports is something the Leafs are actively pursuing with him).

It's def going to be interesting. If everyone is healthy I think Sandin is with the Marlies. As for next year, who knows? Safe to think Barrie and CC are gone? What if they can get CC for cheap? Do they do it?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

It's expendable not expandable and you agree with me.

Ok but your post right before that said this so I was kinda confused:

Totally disagree. Dermott is not expendable the way Kappy is.

Both Kappy and Dermott are expendable, but that doesn't mean they HAVE to be traded or that they should be dealt for picks and prospects. But in an attempt to improve our right side defence they're names are on the table. So Dermott is expendable the way Kappy is.

 

[Kin]

Expendable seems to feed into the idea that by trading one of these guys, or by being open to trading them, you're somehow "giving up" on them which is a mentality that probably isn't portraying things fairly.

Like, I know we all tend to just remember the bad trades the Leafs made but they traded a 24 year old Ed Olcyzk who was coming off a 32 goal, 88 point season not because they were "giving up" on him but because they thought they could turn him into something they needed more on the back end. And they did.

Neither Kapanen nor Dermott should be given away for nothing but it's precisely because they are good young players that they have real value. Not looking to turn that value into pieces that fit the needs of the club more would just be bad practice.

 

[ZBBM]

For what we have up for him Muzzin has been more meh than marvelous IMO.  We do need a couple of guys who plays the way he does but maybe Sandin can be that guy on the left side.  But the immediate problem is that Dubas needs to get rid of his two RHD mistakes before the deadline. 

 

[Guilt Trip]

For what we have up for him Muzzin has been more meh than marvelous IMO.  We do need a couple of guys who plays the way he does but maybe Sandin can be that guy on the left side.  But the immediate problem is that Dubas needs to get rid of his two RHD mistakes before the deadline. 

I thought Muzz was really good last year in the playoffs even though he was paired with Zaitsev. Now you're opening up a big can of worms here with the RD mistakes. So if CC and Barrie go, who can they realistically target? I'm thinking Liljegren will be the 3rd pairing RD and Dermott will continue to fill in for Rielly so we'll need 1 RD.

 

[Hobbes]

For what we have up for him Muzzin has been more meh than marvelous IMO.  We do need a couple of guys who plays the way he does but maybe Sandin can be that guy on the left side.  But the immediate problem is that Dubas needs to get rid of his two RHD mistakes before the deadline. 

I thought Muzz was really good last year in the playoffs even though he was paired with Zaitsev. Now you're opening up a big can of worms here with the RD mistakes. So if CC and Barrie go, who can they realistically target? I'm thinking Liljegren will be the 3rd pairing RD and Dermott will continue to fill in for Rielly so we'll need 1 RD.

Since Keefe took over Barrie is playing a LOT more like the Barrie we thought we were getting and at a cap hit of only $2.75 he's someone I wouldn't be upset to have remain on the roster for the rest of the year. Obviously if someone makes an offer that blows our socks off at the deadline, by all means go for it. Realistically, though, who is going to do that? We think we're a contending team and as good as Lily might be in the future, he's not ready to come in with 1 NHL game of experience and be a viable and reliable first or second pairing RD for the playoffs. Anyone we take in trade for Barrie would at minimum need to fit that need, and at an equally low cap hit. No contending team will make that deal with us since they'd be keeping that inexpensive good RD themselves (particularly if he has any more term left). I can't think of anyone who plays on a "seller" team who would (1) be available, (2) be better than Barrie right now for the upcoming playoffs, and (3) be as cheep as Barrie.

Getting rid of CC is about dumping his salary and we have replacement level players for him already in the system so trading him is more about trying to minimize what we have to give up rather than any particular return he'd net us. Again, no contender is going to have the slightest interest in him, and no "seller" is going to take him on unless there's something in it for them...like one of our younger "stud" prospects. We're certainly not going to get a decent RD for him...I doubt we could even get a decent backup goalie in a straight trade for him. Maybe Dubas will find a way to move him but I wouldn't hold my breath. It's much more likely that he simply walks at the end of the season (most likely into an AHL job or a min-salary 7th D future like Marincin's). And as much as perhaps Dubas' hope that CC would be able to pick up his game in a new environment has been a bust, it's still not all that much of a mistake to have 1 year of CC instead of yet another 4 years of Zaitsev. It's not a home run, but it's not a complete strike out either.

 

[Bender]

So the Leafs are actually in a playoff spot as.of this writing. I thought it was based on ROW but apparently a points tie breaker now goes to the team with more regulation wins so we're in the final WC spot.

 

[Guilt Trip]

For what we have up for him Muzzin has been more meh than marvelous IMO.  We do need a couple of guys who plays the way he does but maybe Sandin can be that guy on the left side.  But the immediate problem is that Dubas needs to get rid of his two RHD mistakes before the deadline. 

I thought Muzz was really good last year in the playoffs even though he was paired with Zaitsev. Now you're opening up a big can of worms here with the RD mistakes. So if CC and Barrie go, who can they realistically target? I'm thinking Liljegren will be the 3rd pairing RD and Dermott will continue to fill in for Rielly so we'll need 1 RD.

Since Keefe took over Barrie is playing a LOT more like the Barrie we thought we were getting and at a cap hit of only $2.75 he's someone I wouldn't be upset to have remain on the roster for the rest of the year. Obviously if someone makes an offer that blows our socks off at the deadline, by all means go for it. Realistically, though, who is going to do that? We think we're a contending team and as good as Lily might be in the future, he's not ready to come in with 1 NHL game of experience and be a viable and reliable first or second pairing RD for the playoffs. Anyone we take in trade for Barrie would at minimum need to fit that need, and at an equally low cap hit. No contending team will make that deal with us since they'd be keeping that inexpensive good RD themselves (particularly if he has any more term left). I can't think of anyone who plays on a "seller" team who would (1) be available, (2) be better than Barrie right now for the upcoming playoffs, and (3) be as cheep as Barrie.

Getting rid of CC is about dumping his salary and we have replacement level players for him already in the system so trading him is more about trying to minimize what we have to give up rather than any particular return he'd net us. Again, no contender is going to have the slightest interest in him, and no "seller" is going to take him on unless there's something in it for them...like one of our younger "stud" prospects. We're certainly not going to get a decent RD for him...I doubt we could even get a decent backup goalie in a straight trade for him. Maybe Dubas will find a way to move him but I wouldn't hold my breath. It's much more likely that he simply walks at the end of the season (most likely into an AHL job or a min-salary 7th D future like Marincin's). And as much as perhaps Dubas' hope that CC would be able to pick up his game in a new environment has been a bust, it's still not all that much of a mistake to have 1 year of CC instead of yet another 4 years of Zaitsev. It's not a home run, but it's not a complete strike out either.

I agree with you Hobbes. I wouldnt be getting rid of Barrie unless we're out if it. I also don't see CC going anywhere. I'm wondering what ZBBM has in mind if Dubas removes the 2 mistakes in RHD

 

[Hobbes]

I agree with you Hobbes. I wouldnt be getting rid of Barrie unless we're out if it. I also don't see CC going anywhere. I'm wondering what ZBBM has in mind if Dubas removes the 2 mistakes in RHD

I'm equally as curious as to how ZBBM thinks CC could be "removed" that wouldn't be even more damaging to the team than keeping him. Maybe Dubas is friends with Tonya Harding? Or the Gambino family? Otherwise I'm not seeing a way of shedding his contract that doesn't involve also giving something of value away, which we really can't afford to do.

 

[princedpw]

https://twitter.com/theoakleafs/status/1223393265694707713

Matts is lighting it up  8)

oops, it was 100% completely accidental that you posted an image praising Matthews but where Nylander is caught in the frame slightly ahead, eh?

 

[herman]

http://faceoffcircle.ca/2020/01/18/on-crediting-the-nylander-critics-and-our-biased-attention-spans/

This is a bit dated because Nylander is now leading the league in high danger goals, not merely in second.

 

[Hobbes]

http://faceoffcircle.ca/2020/01/18/on-crediting-the-nylander-critics-and-our-biased-attention-spans/

This is a bit dated because Nylander is now leading the league in high danger goals, not merely in second.

Having been critical of him in the past, an article like the one you linked only goes to show me that the argument I was making isn't one that his proponents wanted to listen to. I've never once said he was bad or lacking in the offensive zone. He's also always been great at driving play through the neutral zone...one of the team's very best at it. What I found very frustrating about his play in the past and for the first ~20 games of this season was what seemed to be a lack of effort when backchecking against opposition movement through the neutral zone and also his efforts when defending in his own zone.

Showing year over year heat maps of what he's doing in the O-zone is like me showing you how fantastically your car's engine is performing. It's great that the engine is purring like never before, but the problem I was complaining about was the brakes.

What seems to me to have changed drastically since the half-game he was benched for in December is a MAJOR uptick in his defensive effort in his own zone and against the opposition rush in the neutral zone. He's doing far fewer half-hearted fly-bys in his own zone. He's always been a pretty tenacious guy against the boards in the o-zone, but now he's also doing that in the neutral zone and even on occasion in the D-zone too.

Maybe I'm delusional and imagining it all. I have no idea where to go and find the fancy charts that would show what the opposition heat maps look like when he was on the ice in previous seasons, for the first 20-ish games this season, and for the last 20-25 games. I don't know where to get numbers about how many checks or take-aways he made in his own zone or when defending through the neutral zone...how many plays he might have broken up in those situations. If that data exists, I'd be happy to look at it. In the meantime it's those plays that my eyes were seeing and objecting to in the past and which he has drastically improved on since that December benching.


[Note: the "benching" game I'm referring to was Dec 21 vs the Wings. The first period or two of that game has multiple examples of the lack of defensive effort I'm talking about. It's pretty commonplace for him for games prior to that too. Since then, he's been vastly better.]

 

[Guilt Trip]

Won't quote you Hobbes but that's exactly how I feel/felt about him. His defensive game was non existent and it was frustrating watching the lack of effort in the backcheck. He's def playing a more 200 ft game now. Nice to see because we all know he has the tools.

 

[Kin]

http://faceoffcircle.ca/2020/01/18/on-crediting-the-nylander-critics-and-our-biased-attention-spans/

This is a bit dated because Nylander is now leading the league in high danger goals, not merely in second.

Having been critical of him in the past, an article like the one you linked only goes to show me that the argument I was making isn't one that his proponents wanted to listen to. I've never once said he was bad or lacking in the offensive zone. He's also always been great at driving play through the neutral zone...one of the team's very best at it. What I found very frustrating about his play in the past and for the first ~20 games of this season was what seemed to be a lack of effort when backchecking against opposition movement through the neutral zone and also his efforts when defending in his own zone.

That seems like kind of a weird thing to take away from an article about the criticism of Nylander in general and not the criticisms you personally were making about Nylander. I mean, I think we can agree that the contingent of Leafs fans that were critical of Nylander generally included some problems with his offensive game last year and earlier this year even if you yourself had none.

 

[Hobbes]

http://faceoffcircle.ca/2020/01/18/on-crediting-the-nylander-critics-and-our-biased-attention-spans/

This is a bit dated because Nylander is now leading the league in high danger goals, not merely in second.

Having been critical of him in the past, an article like the one you linked only goes to show me that the argument I was making isn't one that his proponents wanted to listen to. I've never once said he was bad or lacking in the offensive zone. He's also always been great at driving play through the neutral zone...one of the team's very best at it. What I found very frustrating about his play in the past and for the first ~20 games of this season was what seemed to be a lack of effort when backchecking against opposition movement through the neutral zone and also his efforts when defending in his own zone.

That seems like kind of a weird thing to take away from an article about the criticism of Nylander in general and not the criticisms you personally were making about Nylander. I mean, I think we can agree that the contingent of Leafs fans that were critical of Nylander generally included some problems with his offensive game last year and earlier this year even if you yourself had none.

The article seemed to be saying that the criticism of Nylander was unwarranted because he's been a very effective offensive player for his whole career. It speaks about some recent changes he's made to make him even more effective this year, but like so many of the "you ought to have loved Willy all this time like I did, shame on you!" articles it doesn't address the area that was his greatest shortcoming in the past and of which a considerable number of people (including Justin Bourne) were critical of.

Instead, the author sets up his argument as "everyone was criticizing him for not going to the net and he wasn't scoring so the rabid hordes wanted to dump him" (yes, I'm pouring on the hyperbolae to over-emphasize the point) and then proceeds to largely disprove that. Trouble is, that's only valid if that initial premise is accurate and I have some trouble believing it is.

Granted, I don't get to hang out in Toronto sports bars to hear what John Doe is saying to his buddies over their beers so maybe it's me who is off base. In this day and age, when someone bases their argument on "people are saying" my immediate response new tends to be "Really? Who exactly are these people? Is there any reason to believe they exist?" It struck me as being at least in part a strawman argument; perhaps because around here he was criticized for his defensive effort, not for his lack of offensive production.