• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

The ****ing Offseason Thread 2018

if we do sign him then I sure as hell don't want anyone arguing against trading prospects for more win-now players, at least.
 
Yup. you are all in if you sign JT. But the Leafs should be all-in regardless of it they can sign him or not. 105 points with a great young core.
 
zeke said:
if we do sign him then I sure as hell don't want anyone arguing against trading prospects for more win-now players, at least.
Click to expand...
Well, if you continue to push bad ideas, like trading boat-loads of future assets for Shea Weber or Ryan McDonagh, expect to continue to receive push-back, no matter what ends up happening with Tavares.
 
i feel like that was a swipe at people not wanting McDonough for his package which he thinks was equal to the Tampa package cuz, Zeke numbers.
 
zeke said:
Because the time to win with a $12m dollar 28 year old Tavares is RIGHT NOW.
Click to expand...

It's just money if they do it. Fills a short-term hole. There's no reason it should affect what you do with your futures. This is a Toronto Sun quality thinking. Sign Tavares, throw plan out window.
 
We're already in win now mode. like Dubas said, we're at a totally different time as a franchise now than we were even 3 years ago.

and let's not exaggerate what was given up for McDonagh and JT Miller. Yzerman pimped us at the deadline.
 
Glad he did. He wasnt going to be the different maker we needed to get over that hurdle

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
 
LeafGm said:
Well, if you continue to push bad ideas, like trading boat-loads of future assets for Shea Weber or Ryan McDonagh, expect to continue to receive push-back, no matter what ends up happening with Tavares.
Click to expand...

no boat loads of futures were proposed for either Weber or McDonagh, and no boat loads of futures were given up for them.

a boat load of capsapce is definitely being proposed for Tavares, though.
 
GMs undervalue their assets all the time and I suspect he will look to expose one of them.

My gut feeling is that he grabs a guy like Pysyk. Lesser name but still has a solid impact


Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
 
I don't pretend to know what the answer is for this team on defense.

But one thing we know is that any package for McDonagh from the Leafs probably would have started with one of Dermott or Liljegren. And even ignoring all the other assets we would have had to add to a potential deal, I'd rather roll the dice on those guys going forward than get a two-playoff-run shot with McDonagh on this team.

And I certainly wouldn't want the Leafs to be the team re-signing a 30 year-old McDonagh long-term when his current contract expires.
 
But is the reason the Hawks aren't good anymore really because Kane and Toews are getting paid? I don't think so. I think the bigger problem is they got old and aren't as good of a team anymore. Toews and Keith have taken steps back. Crawford may be done. Hossa and Sharp are done. They just aren't as talented of a team. Its not cap related either. They kept the whole gang together. The only cap related move they made was Panarin for Saad, but they were not forced to do that by the Toews contract, it was just a gross miscalculation by the Hawks. And with the cap going up they would have had no problems resigning Panarin.

I'm not sure that a big contract to a great player has prevented a team from winning. Actually, most of the highest paid players in the league have been on teams that won. What prevents a team from winning is not having enough good players. Thats why its always the best move to target the best players that are available and you can afford.

Adding Tavares makes the Leafs a significantly better team, and they would be hard pressed to find a move that would make them even better. It may happen, there will be more opportunities. But they aren't always out there.
 
LeafGm said:
I don't pretend to know what the answer is for this team on defense.

But one thing we know is that any package for McDonagh from the Leafs probably would have started with one of Dermott or Liljegren. And even ignoring all the other assets we would have had to add to a potential deal, I'd rather roll the dice on those guys going forward than get a two-playoff-run shot with McDonagh on this team.

And I certainly wouldn't want the Leafs to be the team re-signing a 30 year-old McDonagh long-term when his current contract expires.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. Moving cheap controllable assets for a guy that will need to be resigned to big bucks past 30 doesn't make a lot of sense. Tavares is a different animal imo. Dude is an elite center available for just money. We're not losing any young pieces. When it does come down to a cap crunch we have other guys that can be moved in Brown, Hyman, Martin, Gardiner, Zaitsev. Hell i'd move Kadri if it came to it.

Sign the elite talent. Last time we decided to spread the money we ended up with Komisarek and Hagman instead of Chara. Not sure we would've been able to sign him but in hindsight we would've been way better off.
 
leafman101 said:
But is the reason the Hawks aren't good anymore really because Kane and Toews are getting paid? I don't think so. I think the bigger problem is they got old and aren't as good of a team anymore. Toews and Keith have taken steps back. Crawford may be done. Hossa and Sharp are done. They just aren't as talented of a team. Its not cap related either. They kept the whole gang together. The only cap related move they made was Panarin for Saad, but they were not forced to do that by the Toews contract, it was just a gross miscalculation by the Hawks. And with the cap going up they would have had no problems resigning Panarin.

I'm not sure that a big contract to a great player has prevented a team from winning. Actually, most of the highest paid players in the league have been on teams that won. What prevents a team from winning is not having enough good players. Thats why its always the best move to target the best players that are available and you can afford.

Adding Tavares makes the Leafs a significantly better team, and they would be hard pressed to find a move that would make them even better. It may happen, there will be more opportunities. But they aren't always out there.
Click to expand...

part of the reason the Hawks are not as good is because Toews is getting paid 10.5 m but is no longer (if he ever was) worth that amount.

also, I don't think they won a single cup with Kane/Toews getting paid $21 m cumulatively.

the Pens won with Geno, Sid, and Phil all getting paid. but their performances justified their salaries.
 
Wayward DP said:
part of the reason the Hawks are not as good is because Toews is getting paid 10.5 m but is no longer (if he ever was) worth that amount.

also, I don't think they won a single cup with Kane/Toews getting paid $21 m cumulatively.

the Pens won with Geno, Sid, and Phil all getting paid. but their performances justified their salaries.
Click to expand...

But Toews getting paid 10.5 million isn't what stopped them from winning. It was losing all of their good players. If they still had 32 year old Hossa, prime Toews and Keith, Panarin, and a healthy Crawford they would be a much different team this year. And an easily cap compliant one.

Good players get paid. I'd rather pay good players than worse players.
 
LeafGm said:
I don't pretend to know what the answer is for this team on defense.

But one thing we know is that any package for McDonagh from the Leafs probably would have started with one of Dermott or Liljegren. And even ignoring all the other assets we would have had to add to a potential deal, I'd rather roll the dice on those guys going forward than get a two-playoff-run shot with McDonagh on this team.

And I certainly wouldn't want the Leafs to be the team re-signing a 30 year-old McDonagh long-term when his current contract expires.
Click to expand...

the rangers got nothing comparable to dermott or liljegren.
 
The story that the Hawks aren't as good because of those 2 contracts is a lazy myth. They have no depth and have some valuable pieces that have regressed or left. They are not as strong at finding those supporting pieces as they previously were.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top