2024 Offseason Thread: Changes

[Guilt Trip]

The only problem is the obvious choice of the 5 to go, can't go until 2025. So do they 'burn' another year by trying to tinker again with UFAs, or has the patience run out? And if patience has run out, will it lead to a bad decision (trade Marner for nothing).

They can't do anything with those contracts except ask if they'll waive and then if one agrees to go, he has the choice of destination. Chances are they're riding this out for another year until JT comes off the 11M.

 

[Bill_Berg]

The only problem is the obvious choice of the 5 to go, can't go until 2025. So do they 'burn' another year by trying to tinker again with UFAs, or has the patience run out? And if patience has run out, will it lead to a bad decision (trade Marner for nothing).

They can't do anything with those contracts except ask if they'll waive and then if one agrees to go, he has the choice of destination. Chances are they're riding this out for another year until JT comes off the 11M.

Yeah, that seems most likely. But there is going to be a lot of animosity about them running it back again. Even if this time they're kinda forced.

 

[cw]

Watch the f-ing games! The clown scores points when it matters least! Good god!

Games 3 & 4 against Tampa
https://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20222023/ES030123.HTM
https://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20222023/ES030124.HTM
Both won by the Leafs in OT
Marner set up 2 goals in each of those games

If Marner doesn't do that, everything else remaining the same, they lose both games and Tampa wins the series in 5 games. There is no game 6 or 7. And there is no 6 game series with Florida

There would have been no game 5 vs Florida if Marner had not set up and scored the only 2 Leafs goals to win game 4 when facing elimination.

Cherry picking games stats in games 5-7 is Fool's Gold.
All the playoff games matter because there are no games 5-7 unless you score some in games 1-4.

The fact remains. Do you attempt to trade him or do you attempt to resign him? Tavares comes off the books but I don't think Marner deserves to be paid in the realm of Auston Matthews, which is what he is asking for. There's a world in which Marner just walks away from the team without return anyway. You say it's crazy to trade him but he might just go on his own, and then what?

I would not want to keep him if he doesn't want to be here.
If they sit on their hands and let the media devour him, he's not going to want to stay.
They would be letting him be run out of town.
I do not think it is in their interest to let the media devour him.
I also don't think it is warranted - not even close.
If they don't get his back, he can turn around and say "I'll just ride out my NMC contract and go wherever I want next summer. F*ck you."
And they'll get nothing except his cap space in July 2025.
The discord among his teammates wouldn't be very good for next season either or maybe longer term.
They need to take care of this and do it quick.

As for trading him, the GM has to look at it.
However, his negotiating position is already compromised - both in terms of haggling with Marner's agent and with a sign and trade.
My priority would be on damage control of that. If they don't, they're already losing on the deal.

They apparently floated Nylander trying to get a top dman. Allegedly, no takers of something they thought would be worthwhile. A GM not looking at something like that is derelict in his duty.

Treliving did the Tkachuk deal. I thought he did pretty well. The Huberdeau contract was over the top for term. Dollar amount based upon his numbers wasn't that far off. He'd been top 12 in NHL scoring for 7 years. It is unlikely Treliving will make that mistake again.

With the core 5, if they could get a decent, reliable goalie, they can improve the D, sign Domi, grab a winger and they're a top 6 contender with a shot. That might be the path of least resistance and risk.

It's a Rubik's cube problem. They have to get as many of the colors to line up as they can - knowing they'll never get them all lined up but just hopefully, close enough to win.

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/domluszczyszyn/status/1788199783070335148

Over this sample size, the caveat is Matthews and Marner were largely tied together, usually assigned to shut down opposing top lines while largely getting shut down themselves. My theory behind that, after suffering through those games, is the offensive generation engine goes through Marner, and he is targeted to cripple Matthews' subsequent offense. Same game plan against the Leafs' PP every spring.

The article largely goes over the Leafs' choice to grind the pace of play down, which leaves them highly susceptible to variance (goalie/shooting luck), vs asserting a higher pace to give their offense more chances to make a difference and establish a higher differential, e.g. 2-1 vs 6-3.

Let's go, fasstholes.

 

[cw]

The only problem is the obvious choice of the 5 to go, can't go until 2025. So do they 'burn' another year by trying to tinker again with UFAs, or has the patience run out? And if patience has run out, will it lead to a bad decision (trade Marner for nothing).

They can't do anything with those contracts except ask if they'll waive and then if one agrees to go, he has the choice of destination. Chances are they're riding this out for another year until JT comes off the 11M.

Yeah, that seems most likely. But there is going to be a lot of animosity about them running it back again. Even if this time they're kinda forced.

It is most likely.
One of the core members, Tavares, is going at the end of next season whether that is by his physical departure or a serious reduction in his contract.
If Marner gets dumped and Tavares is also gone in July 2025, now you are short one elite talent more than you probably wanted with no one in the NHL willing to give one away.
Patience may be a virtue. Standing up for Marner might be a smart thing to do.

In the interim, they can retool with ~$19M in cap space to return themselves to contender status if they can stabilize the goaltending (maybe a big IF there). But right now, there are a few UFAs who might fill in some voids to make that plausible.

 

[herman]

https://x.com/JhanHky/status/1783848628919861726
Just re-posting this, because it also goes over the percentage advantage vs differential advantage due to pace of play + mechanical reasons why Marner is easier to neutralize in tight games.

 

[Bender]

https://twitter.com/domluszczyszyn/status/1788199783070335148

Over this sample size, the caveat is Matthews and Marner were largely tied together, usually assigned to shut down opposing top lines while largely getting shut down themselves. My theory behind that, after suffering through those games, is the offensive generation engine goes through Marner, and he is targeted to cripple Matthews' subsequent offense. Same game plan against the Leafs' PP every spring.

The article largely goes over the Leafs' choice to grind the pace of play down, which leaves them highly susceptible to variance (goalie/shooting luck), vs asserting a higher pace to give their offense more chances to make a difference and establish a higher differential, e.g. 2-1 vs 6-3.

Let's go, fasstholes.

I didn't mind this article but I think it also kind of buried the lede a bit that he mentions later in the article. The Leafs haven't had a Rask/Swayman/Vasilevskiy goaltender that allowed them to not play a defensive game and they don't have offense down the lineup. I mean, how could adding ROR be the wrong kind of player? I do think they could've added someone like Henrique or something and added more bona fide firepower down the lineup but I think just playing a more offensive game doesn't mean the Leafs offense would've covered for it's defense at all. They aren't the 80s Oilers, and the idea that Matthews/Marner could actually play at the same type of pace as McDavid or Mackinnon who are probably the two best at it is kind of ridiculous.

 

[Bill_Berg]

https://twitter.com/domluszczyszyn/status/1788199783070335148

Over this sample size, the caveat is Matthews and Marner were largely tied together, usually assigned to shut down opposing top lines while largely getting shut down themselves. My theory behind that, after suffering through those games, is the offensive generation engine goes through Marner, and he is targeted to cripple Matthews' subsequent offense. Same game plan against the Leafs' PP every spring.

The article largely goes over the Leafs' choice to grind the pace of play down, which leaves them highly susceptible to variance (goalie/shooting luck), vs asserting a higher pace to give their offense more chances to make a difference and establish a higher differential, e.g. 2-1 vs 6-3.

Let's go, fasstholes.

I didn't mind this article but I think it also kind of buried the lede a bit that he mentions later in the article. The Leafs haven't had a Rask/Swayman/Vasilevskiy goaltender that allowed them to not play a defensive game and they don't have offense down the lineup. I mean, how could adding ROR be the wrong kind of player? I do think they could've added someone like Henrique or something and added more bona fide firepower down the lineup but I think just playing a more offensive game doesn't mean the Leafs offense would've covered for it's defense at all. They aren't the 80s Oilers, and the idea that Matthews/Marner could actually play at the same type of pace as McDavid or Mackinnon who are probably the two best at it is kind of ridiculous.

I didn't like it. It's like the Leafs have tried everything over the last 8 years and none of it has worked. So rather than complain they didn't try this year what didn't work in years past, what should they be doing? And the only thing they do suggest, as you pointed out, is get a better goalie.

 

[Joe S.]

Treliving probably gets more flak for the Tkachuk for Huberdeau/Weeger move than really deserved.  I would have loved to have Weeger on the Leafs.  Huberdeau's previous 5 seasons leading up to the trade were 69/82, 92/82, 78/69, 61/55, 115/80.  His 115 point season was an outlier but the previous 3 seasons he averaged 92 points/82 games.

Tkachuck wanted out.  They got a good player back and a solid defenseman.  Obviously Huberdeau hasn't been good in Calgary but I think that's almost as much of a fit problem as anything.  They acquired a pass guy on a team that really lacks shooters.

The trade was fine - he did his best given the situation Tkachuck forced him into.

The unforced error was the contract. I?d also add that the Kadri contract was a bit nuts as well.

 

[Bill_Berg]

The only problem is the obvious choice of the 5 to go, can't go until 2025. So do they 'burn' another year by trying to tinker again with UFAs, or has the patience run out? And if patience has run out, will it lead to a bad decision (trade Marner for nothing).

They can't do anything with those contracts except ask if they'll waive and then if one agrees to go, he has the choice of destination. Chances are they're riding this out for another year until JT comes off the 11M.

Yeah, that seems most likely. But there is going to be a lot of animosity about them running it back again. Even if this time they're kinda forced.

It is most likely.
One of the core members, Tavares, is going at the end of next season whether that is by his physical departure or a serious reduction in his contract.
If Marner gets dumped and Tavares is also gone in July 2025, now you are short one elite talent more than you probably wanted with no one in the NHL willing to give one away.
Patience may be a virtue. Standing up for Marner might be a smart thing to do.

In the interim, they can retool with ~$19M in cap space to return themselves to contender status if they can stabilize the goaltending (maybe a big IF there). But right now, there are a few UFAs who might fill in some voids to make that plausible.

Cooler heads will probably take this path, but this path probably leads to a repeat of the season we just saw. 

 

[Zee]

I don't like the fact that Pelley AND Shanahan will be at the presser. It sort of indicates that Shanahan isn't fired. Maybe he's finally at a point where he agrees something has to change with the core. Or maybe he's forced to agree with that by Pelley. But after 10 years and only 1 playoff round win, I don't think he should be the guy that gets to see this through anymore. I've heard rumors that the president role itself might be gone. So maybe Shanahan won't have a direct influence on the Leafs anymore. But I don't think he should get off free here.

I wouldn't read anything into who is and who isn't at these pressers. Pelley's only been on the job a few weeks - only officially started April 2. He's almost certainly still putting the final touches on his plans before executing them.

I'm wondering if Shanahan somehow becomes part of the board or moves in some other type of capacity.

As long as he's out on hockey decisions.  It might make it easier to convince players it's time to move on as well.  I assume the players all know that Shanahan was the driving force for keeping the core together, once he's out they know management has a different philosophy and it's time to break up the band. Realistically it's only Marner we're talking about here, and maybe a lesser extent Tavares, so we'll see what happens.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

The article largely goes over the Leafs' choice to grind the pace of play down, which leaves them highly susceptible to variance (goalie/shooting luck), vs asserting a higher pace to give their offense more chances to make a difference and establish a higher differential, e.g. 2-1 vs 6-3.

Let's go, fasstholes.

I agree with that sentiment. I found that in game 5 and 6, when the season was on the line, they seemed to flick a switch and were dominant speed wise. With a team having so much speed, I'm not sure why they would choose not to implement it.

 

[cw]

https://twitter.com/domluszczyszyn/status/1788199783070335148

Over this sample size, the caveat is Matthews and Marner were largely tied together, usually assigned to shut down opposing top lines while largely getting shut down themselves. My theory behind that, after suffering through those games, is the offensive generation engine goes through Marner, and he is targeted to cripple Matthews' subsequent offense. Same game plan against the Leafs' PP every spring.

The article largely goes over the Leafs' choice to grind the pace of play down, which leaves them highly susceptible to variance (goalie/shooting luck), vs asserting a higher pace to give their offense more chances to make a difference and establish a higher differential, e.g. 2-1 vs 6-3.

Let's go, fasstholes.

I can't say I embrace all of the article - the particular way it is expressed.
But I suspect there is some general merit with it.

Keefe talked about Tavares and Marner being used in a checking role against Pastrnak's line and 2/3rds of their starts were apparently in the d-zone. Keefe apparently did that because he didn't trust his other players to check Pastrnak's line.

During the season when Keefe asked Tavares to try centering the checking line. Tavares didn't blink. Zero complaint. He went and did as his coach asked. Unlike a lot of Leafs coaches, the forwards made a better/decent effort of doing as this coach asked when it came to defense. They are one of the most malleable groups of forwards that way I can recall in Leafs jerseys. Burns teams seemed pretty good at it too. Roger Nielson's teams I don't recall as clearly. Maybe I'm forgetting some. But that is something that is a credit to the players Keefe coached and a credit to Keefe being able to convince them to do so.

The other side of the core 5 is if a team is as top heavy like the Leafs are with the core 5, an opponent can focus their checking on them knowing that the others are not going to be able to do nearly as much damage. I was already looking at that. Not done yet.

Some of it may be circumstantial. If Sammy or Woll was going to be my playoff goalie coming off their last 4 weeks of the regular season, I might be coaching on a more defensive shell too.

When they played Colorado during the regular season, there were some moments when Colorado was playing at an exceptional level - like the Leafs had no chance. I asked myself, with some of the elite talent on this team, why don't we see more of that from the Leafs. We don't have Makar but Rielly can get the puck up the ice.

If that article is right, that could be good news: a coaching change may have a significant impact. I think they're due for that anyway.

 

[cw]

The only problem is the obvious choice of the 5 to go, can't go until 2025. So do they 'burn' another year by trying to tinker again with UFAs, or has the patience run out? And if patience has run out, will it lead to a bad decision (trade Marner for nothing).

They can't do anything with those contracts except ask if they'll waive and then if one agrees to go, he has the choice of destination. Chances are they're riding this out for another year until JT comes off the 11M.

Yeah, that seems most likely. But there is going to be a lot of animosity about them running it back again. Even if this time they're kinda forced.

It is most likely.
One of the core members, Tavares, is going at the end of next season whether that is by his physical departure or a serious reduction in his contract.
If Marner gets dumped and Tavares is also gone in July 2025, now you are short one elite talent more than you probably wanted with no one in the NHL willing to give one away.
Patience may be a virtue. Standing up for Marner might be a smart thing to do.

In the interim, they can retool with ~$19M in cap space to return themselves to contender status if they can stabilize the goaltending (maybe a big IF there). But right now, there are a few UFAs who might fill in some voids to make that plausible.

Cooler heads will probably take this path, but this path probably leads to a repeat of the season we just saw. 

I have a little more optimism. I'd guess closer to a repeat of 2022-23. No parade.

 

[herman]

The article largely goes over the Leafs' choice to grind the pace of play down, which leaves them highly susceptible to variance (goalie/shooting luck), vs asserting a higher pace to give their offense more chances to make a difference and establish a higher differential, e.g. 2-1 vs 6-3.

Let's go, fasstholes.

I agree with that sentiment. I found that in game 5 and 6, when the season was on the line, they seemed to flick a switch and were dominant speed wise. With a team having so much speed, I'm not sure why they would choose not to implement it.

Pace in this conversation isn't about footspeed (although that is technically a factor) but referring to number of on-ice events (shot attempts in both directions). I do agree team speed overall will help, and that's skating and decision making and pushing plays rather than circling back to maintain possession. The Leafs went all-in on dump and chase towards the end of the series, relative to previous seasons of tentatively attempting to gain the zone with control but no speed and kept running into set defenses.

 

[Redleaf]

Watch the f-ing games! The clown scores points when it matters least! Good god!

Games 3 & 4 against Tampa
https://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20222023/ES030123.HTM
https://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20222023/ES030124.HTM
Both won by the Leafs in OT
Marner set up 2 goals in each of those games

If Marner doesn't do that, everything else remaining the same, they lose both games and Tampa wins the series in 5 games. There is no game 6 or 7. And there is no 6 game series with Florida

There would have been no game 5 vs Florida if Marner had not set up and scored the only 2 Leafs goals to win game 4 when facing elimination.

Cherry picking games stats in games 5-7 is Fool's Gold.
All the playoff games matter because there are no games 5-7 unless you score some in games 1-4.

The fact remains. Do you attempt to trade him or do you attempt to resign him? Tavares comes off the books but I don't think Marner deserves to be paid in the realm of Auston Matthews, which is what he is asking for. There's a world in which Marner just walks away from the team without return anyway. You say it's crazy to trade him but he might just go on his own, and then what?

You see how he plays out next season. My guess is he?ll go the Nylander route and put up gangbuster points. If he does you sign him to a reasonable contract BUT that contract CANNOT have a no-trade clause . That?s a dealbreaker for the Leafs. Even if the deal has a 10 team list he provides each year, it provides an out for the Leafs if needed.

 

[Joe S.]

You see how he plays out next season. My guess is he?ll go the Nylander route and put up gangbuster points. If he does you sign him to a reasonable contract BUT that contract CANNOT have a no-trade clause . That?s a dealbreaker for the Leafs. Even if the deal has a 10 team list he provides each year, it provides an out for the Leafs if needed.

Absolutely no player of any prominence is going to sign a contract without a no trade clause. That?s a completely unrealistic expectation.

 

[Bullfrog]

He was on pace for his first 100+ point season. So, gangbuster for him would be 110+ points.

 

[cw]

You see how he plays out next season. My guess is he?ll go the Nylander route and put up gangbuster points. If he does you sign him to a reasonable contract BUT that contract CANNOT have a no-trade clause . That?s a dealbreaker for the Leafs. Even if the deal has a 10 team list he provides each year, it provides an out for the Leafs if needed.

Nearly all the players in Marner's salary range who have come to UFA age are getting a NMC or have a NMC. There are exceptions to every rule but I doubt Marner or most other UFAs of his caliber will make that exception. Most contending teams seems to have a few of them.

 

[mr grieves]

You see how he plays out next season. My guess is he?ll go the Nylander route and put up gangbuster points. If he does you sign him to a reasonable contract BUT that contract CANNOT have a no-trade clause . That?s a dealbreaker for the Leafs. Even if the deal has a 10 team list he provides each year, it provides an out for the Leafs if needed.

I'd wait until after next year's playoffs to sign him. If he suddenly emerges as a Showtime player and leads them deep, then something in the ballpark of the Matthews contract is a reasonable expectation, well-earned, and workable under the cap and without Tavares at $11m.

If he remains a perimeter scorer and can't deliver when it's time to end a series, then take him the Stamkos 2016 route. Let him see if he can do better than $11Mx8 on a 7 year UFA contract ($12.6M AAV), and if the endorsement opportunities are as rich in Seattle, Utah, Columbus, Long Island, whatever. Provided everybody behaves like adults, he could certainly come back under those circumstances.

My preferences:
1. A Marner that puts it together and retires a very wealthy career-Leaf legend
2. A chastened, affordable Marner that thrives in a second-tier role on the Leafs
3. A Marner that walks and soaks another team
4. A Marner that the Leafs give a massive The Guy contract that he can't live up to and which hamstrings the team (i.e. Redux of the last 4 years)