Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded
No Avatar image uploaded
Leafs Rumours Member Posts
Torontobuds's Profile
Torontobuds's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To Torontobuds's Posts
To Torontobuds's last 5 rumours posts
To Torontobuds's last 5 banter posts
To Torontobuds's last 5 rumour replies
Torontobuds's rumours posts with other poster's replies to Torontobuds's rumours posts
16 May 2026 14:04:14
A flip of RFAs who need a change of scenery
To Utah: F - N. Robertson
To Tor: C - B. Hayton
Both players are roughly the same age.
Hayton - 67 GP - 10G 15A
Robertson - 78 GP - 16G 16A
Both are RFAs and need new deals.
1.) 16 May 2026 15:38:55
I like this trade for Toronto. I think Hayton would be a solid 3C, great on draws and is defensively responsible (can also PK).
Utah can use a LW middle 6 goal scorer as well, but I think Leafs need to add a lower draft pick to get this over the finish line (maybe a 2026 5th or possibly a 4th).
Good target.
2.) 16 May 2026 19:30:23
I'd be good with it.
3.) 17 May 2026 00:44:34
Leafs would need to add a 3rd rd pick.
16 May 2026 13:59:33
First off, rumors on the Leafs trading or not selecting McKennna are ridiculous, when a generational talent comes along and you're picking 1st, you pick them!
Remember the debate of Matthews and Laine, now look at that?
As well, McKenna is the only player in this draft that the Leafs take that likely can play this year!
Leafs will go into the season to win with McKenna and Matthews, if they are on the outside looking in at trade deadline, look for the Leafs to move Matthews.
For now
To SJS: D - M. Rielly + 2026 2nd
To TOR: 2026 1st (20th pick)
This gives the Sharks a veteran blue liner while only dropping back 1 round.
1.) 16 May 2026 15:31:48
Hey I’m not saying McKenna isn’t really good, but I have a problem with you saying Generational... He’s not that, bud. Also, what do the Leafs need more than anything??? Right, and true 1# Defender. So, the package we could get additionally by trading our first Ova could yield a lot more. Just saying getting a guy like Chase Reid or Keaton Verheoff could be exactly what we need.
Plus say a NHL ready centre or another good young power forward. Idk there’s options out there for this pick. I believe the Leafs are exploring bc the guys are not generational. Looking at adding quantity might be the play.
2.) 16 May 2026 15:48:39
I agree with you Henry77. Bedard is also a very very good player, but 3 years in he is still not hitting the Generational type numbers people had him pegged for. I am not saying he won't eventually. But say it takes him 5 years to hit that stage and possibly the same for say McKenna.
I would rather have Robertson and Harley during their prime during that same timeframe. Just my own personal preference and not everyone else's.
3.) 16 May 2026 15:52:23
My way of addressing the Generational thing from this post and the one below that also said Generational and had Robertson and Groulx going for Harley and Robertson and TorontoBuds calling McKenna Generational in it as well.
4.) 16 May 2026 19:34:06
I think generational gets thrown out a bit too much. That said, McKenna's vision, hockey IQ and ability to hold onto pucks until the last possible moment and then make a slick little pass to a teammate, probably is generational. But I don't think he as a whole is. Still no doubt he would be my pick.
5.) 16 May 2026 19:43:27
McKenna's point totals in the WHL a year ago were greater than both Bedard and McDavid in the same year for both of them.
When elite talent comes along, you draft it! Figure D out through trades.
6.) 17 May 2026 23:57:53
The term “Generational Talent” is used far too loosely.
MacKinnon was a generational talent talent.
McDavid was a generational talent talent.
Matthews was a generational talent talent.
McKenna might become a point person game player but he isn’t a generational talent.
There is every reason to believe that Ivar Stenberg will be ready for the NHL this year as well.
He has been playing against men in the SHL.
7.) 18 May 2026 01:36:34
Everyone always talks (Myself inclluded) about the 32 players up for grabs in the 1st round. Let's just hope that our scouting staff can find those hidden gems in the lower rounds. 2nr 3rd and 4th rounders. That's sometimes where the actual Stanley Cup runs through is those guys that everyone missed.
Case in point. 1988 Draft. Modano went 1st overall scored 1374 points in 22 seasons. 1 Stanley Cup. Jeremy Roanick went 8th overall scored 1216 points in 20 seasons 0 Stanley Cups. Rod Brindamour went #9 overall scored 1184 points in 21 seasons 1 Stanley Cup.
Teemu Selanni went 10th overall scored 1457 points in 21 seasons 1 Stanley Cup.
Drafted in the 4th round that year #67th overall was Mark Recchi (One of my fave players to watch.) He merely outscored each of those 1st round guys 1533 points in 22 years and..... He won 3 Stanley Cups. The most impressive part was he won those cups with 3 separate teams. That is the kind of player we need to look for. We need to turn over every stone.
12 May 2026 16:07:59
As McTavish is no longer even playing in the playoffs and is signed for $7MAAV, could he be picked up for cheap?
To TOR: C - M. McTavish
To ANA: 2027 2nd +B prospect
Thoughts?
1.) 12 May 2026 16:21:08
They have a need for RHD. I would think Carlo could be a good price to send the other way. Ideally I'd like to do it without using any draft picks.
2.) 12 May 2026 17:33:42
It has been talked about on here. They have moved him mostly to the wing.
As I said before, I think Carlo and Stolarz would peak their interest. Goaltending has been a bit of an issue for the Ducks and they lack signed NHL veteran D-men for next season.
This would help solidify two spots for them. The money would be about even, but the Leafs may have to take Husso and his $2.2M contract as well to make it work.
3.) 12 May 2026 17:47:04
Elf, their starter isn't an issue, but I agree they could use a back up. I'm not sure which goalie they would want.
4.) 12 May 2026 21:54:45
I’ve posted many trades on here for McTavish
But I do wonder what happened to him this year…
But I would do Carlo and Stolarz for McTavish and Husso in a heartbeat.
5.) 12 May 2026 22:08:29
It is a tough one. His knock and has been for a while is he seems do have lost his defensive game and for a Centre who is not a speed demon to be a Low #1 or a Top #2 you have to be very, very good defensively. That is why he has been getting sat or limited on minutes and even switched to the wing. He is having trouble with the pace and is not hitting like he can.
I guess the question is, is he a Third line Centre or can he be a 2nd or 3rd line winger? It is a hefty contract to take on to find out.
If he was banging and grinding hard I would think on it. I just am not sure if he is fast enough for what I hope the Leafs are going to aim for, with more speed up front. Maybe if Anaheim retained a couple million it might be worth exploring. But $7 is steep for what could be a 3rd line Centre.
6.) 12 May 2026 22:50:27
Then absolutely not if we’re taking back north of 9 million back. I’m not sold on him. How is he not is the perfect place all that young talent finally becoming competitive the atmosphere should be giving you all compete and confidence to perform better than he has over a long period of time.
7.) 12 May 2026 23:05:34
Where did see north of $9 m coming back?
8.) 12 May 2026 23:13:12
Husso 2.2 M
9.) 12 May 2026 23:31:53
I am not promiting the trade but if that happened it would only be $2m coming back. As Golftown was trading Stolarz and Carlo out.
10.) 12 May 2026 23:48:40
Ya?! But can we agree it’s two players we’d be paying 9.2 million dollars to play? I’m not filling my 3rd line centre with 7 million dollars and for a guy that might be Domi 2.0 plus the fact if he continues to under perform and we what trade him again for the second time. We can fill those spots for a lot less.
11.) 13 May 2026 00:01:50
Hey, I said I wasn't promoting the trade. I was just saying after the numbers were crunched it was $2.2 coming back and actually it would be less because we would probably put Husso on waivers. He would be safer one to put on waivers over Hildeby because Husso cleared waivers a few times this past season. Anyway. On to the next trade.
12.) 13 May 2026 00:10:43
Ok so we can’t agree it’s two players making 9.2 million dollars.
13.) 13 May 2026 00:35:40
OK iff it makes you feel better, there are two players that would arrive making $9.2 and we can also agree there are two players leaving that were making $7.2 leaving. So in sport terms, we would be taking back $2 million.
If it was opposite we would say the other team is taking back $2 million and we are saving $2 in cap space. So I will agree it is 4 players making $16.4 million that will not be traded in this deal lol :o)
14.) 13 May 2026 00:36:17
That is way too much for McTavish. ANH got some talent now that pushed McTavish down the lineup and not living up to his 7M contract. We gonna trade Stolarz and Carlo for this guy? I think someone said a 2nd and a B prospect I think is fair without retaining any money.
Everyone knows ANH is gonna have to pay Carlsson, Gauthier, Sennecke, Lacomb so I’m sure the Ducks would be happy to move him out for a 2nd and a prospect.
15.) 13 May 2026 00:48:06
@Clarky17 He was never fast, but seems to have slowed even more since he bulked up a bit. But is not playing physical. I can't see him as a #2 Centre here but maybe a 3rd line winger on J. T's Line. We still need to either trade for a #2 or give one of the Marlies a chance to catch lightning in a bottle.
16.) 13 May 2026 00:58:10
So yeah, if we got him for that 2nd and a B prospect it might be worth seeing if he can bounce back enough to possibly be a 3rd line winger and maybe a power play specialist playing in that trigger spot Ovechkin would sit in. I would still see if Anaheim would retain $1.5 though.
17.) 13 May 2026 20:25:14
MacTavish is only 23. 4 seasons, all of over 40 points with one over 50. Similar to Bennett.
Let me get his straight. He bulked up and has gotten slower. He isn't playing physical, his defensive game has diminished, maybe he is a PP specialist now. They aren't even playing him. Did he have a down season by expectations? Sure. He had the most hits he has ever had in a season this year at 95. 25 more than his previous best.
In the playoffs he has been on this ice for 14 goals for and only 4 against. Even strength he is a +2, which is the best amongst all forwards. He has 22 hits in only 9 games which is 7th on the team even though he has played 2 less games than some. He has played 9 of 11 playoff games including the last one, where he had 2 assists. 6 points in 9 playoff games. Although he is not playing centre as much, 2nd on the team in FO% at 54.8%.
Seems like at only 23, people writing him off as a possible 2nd line player would be a bit pre-mature. He can work on his foot speed and defensive coverage as most young centres struggle with defensive coverage. Dylan Strome struggled as a young player with foot speed and defensive coverage. He wasn't as physical as MacTavish, yet I am told he is now a true #1 centre. At 23, he had only 17 points in 40 games for Chicago and 8 hits. Have people forgot how Calgary ruined Bennett trying to make him play as defensive player with little minutes. Look what happened with him in Florida. MacT still has a heavy shot, big physical frame that wins puck battles. He will go to the front of the net. He has room to grow.
Seems right to pass on him if it would cost Stolarz(often injured) and Carlo(Same) because the Leafs couldn't use a 23 year old, 6'1". 215 lb centre(winger) who will use his body, put up 6 points in 9 games in the playoffs and a + player at even strength in the playoffs. 3 assists came on the PP. Have we forgotten how bad the Leafs PP in the playoffs has been.
18.) 13 May 2026 21:48:19
I said if they eat part of his contract he might be worth taking a chance but sorry not at his full pop.
19.) 13 May 2026 22:05:12
In fairness Suffering, you said a 2nd and a B prospect he might be worth it, but also want to see if Anaheim would retain $1.5M. Even Bennett, when he was struggling worse than MacTavish, went for a 2nd and Heineman. Basically, 2 2nds and Bennett was stapled to the 4th line, getting scratched and putting up 12 points a year at the same age.
Not getting a former 3rd overall pick (who only 4 years ago dominated at the World Juniors while having 17 points in 7 games.
Then 3 seasons of over 40 points and 1 over 50 points) for a 2nd and a B prospect. Nevermind wanting retained salary.
If Cowan is putting up 40 points by the time he is 23 and his defence lacks at times, I can't imagine this site suggesting the Leafs trade him for a 2nd and a B prospect.
20.) 13 May 2026 22:16:45
Bennett wasn't earning $7 million.
21.) 13 May 2026 22:18:17
Hey it's only my thought. You can love him as much as you want. Free world.
22.) 13 May 2026 22:46:48
It's not about loving a player. It was about an opportunity. Seems like you don't particularly like when someone disagrees with you and has valid counterpoints.
23.) 13 May 2026 23:51:30
To be honest I don't care if someone disagrees with me. I really don't see many posts on here where anyone really agrees with anyone fully. I was merely stating my own opinion. Your conterpoints might be valid to you but perhaps to someone else they aren't and vice versa with me as someone else doesn't agree with some points I have that are valid.
I did kind of chuckly though at your about face on your opinion of the Leafs players you were saying could be a good deal to get McTavish. I believe you said initially.
"As I said before, I think Carlo and Stolarz would peak their interest.
Goaltending has been a bit of an issue for the Ducks and they lack signed NHL veteran D-men for next season."
Then you followed up a bit later with... "Seems right to pass on him if it would cost Stolarz (often injured) and Carlo (Same)".
So on one hand we are giving them valuable assets for him and then you say the assets are not really worth anything.
Anyway we will disagree on this one and I am sure other transactions. One day we might agree on one and I would not be upset at that.
24.) 14 May 2026 11:17:51
There is no about face. How does saying "may peak their interest because goaltending has been an issue and they could use veteran RD's" and then following up saying they wouldn't be too much to give up for the Leafs in order to acquire MacT because they are often injured make you chuckle? Two things can't be true at the same time? Anaheim says yes because they want to improve and these two vets can help do this. They would know the injury risk, but as I also said, they may want to move MacT contract and go with a cheaper option where they would play him. If they stay healthy, they can help without adding to their cap because they moved MacT and Husso. Toronto makes the deal because they want to get younger and need help at C.
Although both assets given up have value, their injury concerns and age don't fit Toronto's direction. I didn't think it needed deep explanation. How is that an about face? That is the second time you have said my comments make you chuckle in the sense you find my thoughts kind of laughable. If you notice, I don't do that to you. I try to engage in honest debates, not insults or insinuate a lack of hockey knowledge or intelligence. You honestly don't think you contradict yourself at times or have far reaching arguments that you would normally laugh at yourself (apparently) if someone else said it.
25.) 14 May 2026 13:11:58
You need to develop thicker skin if you think Because I chuckled I was insulting you. I just found it humorous is all.
26.) 14 May 2026 16:28:54
You say I did an about face on my reasoning behind a trade and values on players, find that humourous, but don't see that as insulting? ok. Interesting take on it.
Out of this, you conclude that how you chose to engage in a debate is my fault for not having a thick enough skin. I'm not hurt by it. It's an insecure debate tactic. I mentioned it to say there is no need for it in an honest debate.
People with thicker skin don't constantly engage in insulting others props or put multiple lol's as a response to a prop or thoughts on a player etc. It's the thin skinned (who are typically highly egotistical) that do that. And yes, I do know what I am talking about. Thanks for your concern, but my skin is fine.
07 Mar 2026 16:28:19
If the Leafs fine themselves out of the playoffs next year, gotta blow it up. Further to my Rielly trade this draft, next trade deadline they would need to trade both Matthews and Nylander.
To SEA: F - W. Nylander
To TOR: F - S. Wright + 2027 1st
Then
To SJ: C - A. Matthews
To TOR: F - M. Misa + 2027 1st + 2028 2nd + F - A. Gaudette
1.) 07 Mar 2026 15:37:00
We need to buyout Reilly. If he’s not willing to be traded that’s it, that’s all. Kyle and Keefer were great. The Shannaplan was fine. The team was awesome except that one piece we had a 2nd pair d-man as our star defence men for a decade and made all these changes for no reason.
Now are worse off with the same problem: crappy defensive players, a useless GM and a couch who’s style doesn’t compute with the superstars around him. This team is F***ed for years now. Go Oilers Go lol
2.) 07 Mar 2026 16:14:10
Out of the playoffs next year? Fans don't want to wait through another year of this. Change needs to be swift and yes at times it will be painful but the fans would rather see a younger team that shows promise than waiting another year of this.
3.) 07 Mar 2026 16:36:52
LeafsGM78 comment is the best explanation I’ve heard for the Leafs. This team was good over the past several years (pre Berube) but had no top notch offensive defenders. In fact, by playing Reilly, looking for offensive you made the defense weaker and except for one year didn’t really get much offense.
4.) 07 Mar 2026 20:23:29
Totally agree that we can’t wait another year.
If we have any chance to win with Matthews, Nylander, etc we have to be bold once free agency happens and opening of trades.
I’m going to, if I remember lol, to post either one trade or one UFA signing each day for a week or so.
This will no doubt be the only hockey fum I will have.
Let’s start slowly.
First trade is Robertson to LAK who need scoring, especially when their captain retires and Doughty fades into the dust.
Robertson is totally redundant now with Cowan and Maccelli; no need for this talent overlap. Cowan is too young and unproven to trade and he has totally been mismanaged by our so-called brain trust. Maccelli has certainly proven his skill lately and perhaps is the best puck transporter on PP or 5on5.
The Kings have a 6.3 190 winger who is 19yo. Let’s target him and also ask for a R4 in 2026.
5.) 07 Mar 2026 20:37:27
Not near enough for Mathews!
6.) 07 Mar 2026 20:52:31
Hey RandySears. Look forward to seeing your Trade and UFA suggestions. Sounds fun. I'll look for your posts and match you on them. You and I have kind of a same outlook. Was just pondering that maybe McMann likes it in Seattle, signs with them and tells Matthews how awesome it is and maybe we pry some of those prospects off of that loaded crew if Matthews says yeah that's a team I could go to.
lol.
7.) 08 Mar 2026 02:59:50
I hope everyone contributes.
It will be interesting to read what everyone says and how they support their position versus saying a “GM will laugh and hang up”.
I’m sure we’ll agree on some moves and disagree on some but can probably come to a final plan that we would be willing to implement.
There are several others whose views are quite similar and am looking forward to reading those.
Matthews, I think, is having problems shooting and seems to be quite willing to pass the puck more than he previously did.
And you may be right about filling the cupboards through a Matthews trade.
I’ve read that others on this site are suggesting the same.
It will be the summer of course before that happens so we have lots of time to ponder.
07 Mar 2026 16:18:09
While the Leafs did pick up some assets, a bit underwhelming overall. Thought they got higher value on Roy, but slightly lower value on McMann.
That being said, off-season and draft day is what to look forward to.
Draft day trade
To SEA: D - M. Rielly
To TOR: 2026 1st + 2027 3rd
Looked at both the Carlson and Faulk trades, both went for a 1st and 3rd. So comparable.
Re-sign Stecker
Leafs D for next year
OEL Carlo
McCabe Tanev
Benoit Stecker
Myers
With the 1st draft best available Defenseman, preferably LHD.
1.) 07 Mar 2026 16:15:40
Don't ever put Reilly and Carlson in the same conversation. Carlson is in a different league.
2.) 07 Mar 2026 16:31:30
Reilly is the worst defenseman on a non playoff team. I would be happy for a 5th round pick and save his cap space. The Leafs cannot win with Reilly playing more than 00.0 minutes.
3.) 07 Mar 2026 23:47:49
Rielly comparable to Carlson and Faulk?
Are you sure you’re following the same Leaf team as the rest of us?
Rielly is more comparable to Benoit and Myers than Carlson or Faulk.
4.) 08 Mar 2026 03:29:30
I’m not sure we will ever see Tanev again; if true it’s too bad. A true warrior.
We need to make big changes to our D corps; it’s bad, so we will need to change it up significantly.
I see zero need to resign Stecher. He’s been fine, but remember we are not making the playoffs, so why on earth would we keep a 32 yo 5.10 184lb defenceman who has played for 6 different teams!
Yes, he’s paid only $787k, but I’d rather use that amount as part of the increase in salary that behemoth Logan Stanley will demand as a UFA.
And that’s if the Sabres don’t resign him!
Torontobuds's banter posts with other poster's replies to Torontobuds's banter posts
09 Mar 2024 12:55:59
Trade deadline past, nothing crazy happened, not surprising. Not much to work with.
Off season, while nearly $7M is added from the Matthews and Nylander extensions, a lot of money falls off the books. Cap is rising $4.2M, so need to find $3M.
All the LTIR contracts are gone. Plus Bertuzzi $5.5M, Domi $3M, Brodie $5M, Samsonov $3.5M.
All other contracts are either close or near league minimum, so no need to list.
Re-sign Samsonov, but at a lower value than $3.5M, likely $2M to see it he can bring it together for a full year.
Bertuzzi, let walk, as that $5.5 unless he wants to come back for $4M.
Re-sign Domi, give him a 3 year at $2.5M
See if Brodie wants to come back at a significant discount or re-sign Edmundson, see who is better in the playoffs
Trade
To TOR: D - C. Parayko (14% retained) cap hit is $5.6M
To STL: 2024 1st + F - D. Kampf + F - A. Steeves
See how the team does in the playoffs and possibly look at this in the off-season.
1.) 09 Mar 2024 13:33:58
Interesting ideas, deserving much discussion.
First the in/ out has rounding errors so it’s only $2m that’s needed.
Not sure that Samsonov would resign in Toronto when other teams who are in need of a goalie could easily offer more.
LAK need two goalies next year; both Talbot and Rittich are UFAs. Let’s trade rights to Samsonov AND Jones to LAK for right to Matt Roy! LAK also have cap issues so this advance their cause getting 2 goalies whose combined salaries might be less than Roy’s new salary.
LAK have Brandt Clarke waiting to take Roy’s place and we get a solid 2-way RD to play with Reilly (if we resign him using Brodie’s money) .
I might have interest in resigning Domi at $2.5 and Bertuzzi at $3.75 but they rarely tilt the ice in our favour. And only on the 3rd line for both; their tenacity together might be effective. Bottom line is they are NOT 2L players.
I have zero interest in Brodie, even at minimum salary. There are simply better choices.
And yes Lyubushkin and Edmundson will get their audition in the playoffs when it counts. Neither are worth their current salaries but if they help the PK, clearing the net and are able to slow the rush with body checks we may have something.
Same for Dewar.
As for Parayko while I might like to have him I would continue to oppose any 1st in a package.
Just my opinion.
2.) 09 Mar 2024 14:29:58
St. Louis would owe 2 3rds to leafs as per hertl trade. A but differant but retaining low% for many season doesn’t seem like a huge ask compared to 50% retained with or without 3rd party gets a bigger return even though you’ve retained more than the few month retain. So weird because although a team retain me less % it’s not only moult leaving till the term of thd contract expires or player retires. In fact it takes up a retain slot and only allowed 3 at a time per year you might wanna do something big but that tiny % comes back to bite you
Maybe league will catch on to reversing the values since you end up retaining more cap and salary on the long term low%retain than high % retain on a less than half a year annoyance. It might seem to put u behind covering such a high retain but by the new offseason unlike other scenario you don’t need to think about it or worry if player goes to LTIR causing you to have to get your accounted involved over a non human entity
Just saying.
3.) 10 Mar 2024 01:01:49
@Rsears to say Brodie would be bad at league min is a bit much. I'd take a lot of guys at league min I wouldn't take any higher.
10 Jun 2019 12:43:48
Does the Skinner deal impact Marner's contract?
Skinner just scored 40 goals on a very poor team, and has scored 30+ goals 4 times in his career. He also was a pending UFA
My thoughts are no team is dumb enough to sign Marner to an offer sheet paying him north of $10.5M as no one will pay 4 1st's for a winger, I like Marner but he's not McDavid, sorry
So when looking at a contract, $10.5 is the max I would go with him on an 8 year deal. Ideally the Leafs want $9M on an 8 year deal, but that is not going to happen.
Can a 7 year 9.75M deal work? Slice off 1 year of UFA and meet half way?
1.) 14 Jun 2019 20:59:33
The Skinner deal impacts every contract. I would assume it gives Marner a lot more leverage. Marner is arguably the better player. Scores less goals, but has been instrumental in leading the play for the Leafs. Both are top line wingers and among the top offensive points leaders on their teams. The comparison is apt, and though it doesn’t give Marner any leverage to ask for more money, it does strengthen his case for what he has been asking.
20 Oct 2018 14:31:23
Does Tuch's new deal out of his ELC at $4,75MM for 7 years improve the contract offer talks for the Leafs with Nylander.
I understand he's not as good as Nylander, but also lower than what the Leafs are offering
last year
Nylander 20G, 41A, 61 Pts
Tuch 15G, 22A, 37 Pts
Leafs offer is around $6M - $6.5M on a LT deal
Also hearing a 4 year offer around $4.75M AAV
I would say the Leafs are bang on with their offers using this as a gauge!
1.) 21 Oct 2018 02:07:14
I think Tuch is going to be for Vegas what Lucic was for Edmonton.
09 Jun 2018 16:01:24
Looking towards the draft, the Leafs need to start to upgrade the depth at the C position. After looking at some mocks, here are two quality C to draft 1st and 2nd
1st - C - R. McLeod
2nd - C - J. McBain
Two young big bodied Centres who the Leafs can develop
The other need is at RHD, but I feel with Lilijegren in the pipe and they should be looking for a NHL ready RHD so the draft is not ideal unless they trade up for D - E. Bouchard
27 Feb 2018 02:48:51
Looking towards the off-season,what do contracts look like for the big 3
Using Eichel and McDavid and sandwich for Matthews I come to the following:
A. Matthews 8 years $88M, ($11M AAV)
For both Marner and Nylander who I say are valued the same, I use Ehlers and Pastrnak to sandwich their deals.
M. Marner 7 years 45.5M ($6.5M AAV)
W. Nylander 7 years $45.5M ($6.5M AAV)
Thoughts?
1.) 28 Feb 2018 01:31:57
the amount of years for marner should be 8 years and nylander should take 5.5M at 7 years.
16 May 2026 19:43:27
McKenna's point totals in the WHL a year ago were greater than both Bedard and McDavid in the same year for both of them.
When elite talent comes along, you draft it! Figure D out through trades.
16 May 2026 13:00:17
Makes no sense for the Leafs to not take the generational talent.
28 Feb 2026 14:20:30
Have the Oilers add a 2nd in 2026 and then it's a reasonable deal.
27 May 2025 15:36:20
No need to buyout Reaves, he has 1 year left and is basically a wash if sent to the Marlies.
27 May 2025 15:35:31
I like the idea of a sign and trade. Marner at his age likely wants a max 8 year deal, so it would make sense and a team can get out in front of the other teams.
Torontobuds has no Banter Replies