You are comparing completely different trades.

There is a crystal clear example that you are conveniently leaving out.

They retained around 8.5M over 3 years for basically free for Brent Burns. This is not a Marleau trade scenario.
- Santo_44

I very much doubt they want to go to $10m in dead cap this year, around $7 or $8m next year and then carry forward. They don't seem to have any huge impending expenditures, but I'm not moving my best asset for mediocre assets at this point if I'm SJ. They don't have a cap need - they have like $15m in capspace. They suck. They're rebuilding. They have an asset need. If they shop Karlsson around and someone makes them an asset rich offer, then yeah - sure - eat some cap to get it done. And I'll even grant you that Grier has made some weak deals so far, considering his needs coupled with the talent he's moved.

I just don't think we can compete in that space compared to their needs. In other words if SJ is willing to come down to $7.5m on Karlsson, we'll get outbid by at least 5 other teams with better options than we have.

If he brings Lindholm I’m ok
- Canada Cup

that would be incredible

Sounds like ROR is gone and Kampf likely gets overpaid.

I think there are better options through trade for 3C.

They can have Acciari and Holmberg for 4C.
- Santo_44

I think RoR is going to go where the $$ and term is offered. Not sure Leafs can't compete with that.

And yah ..if Kampf wants north of 1.5M then they can find another guy for less. Love for them to get Dowd out of Washington ...and sign Hathaway.

I very much doubt they want to go to $10m in dead cap this year, around $7 or $8m next year and then carry forward. They don't seem to have any huge impending expenditures, but I'm not moving my best asset for mediocre assets at this point if I'm SJ. They don't have a cap need - they have like $15m in capspace. They suck. They're rebuilding. They have an asset need. If they shop Karlsson around and someone makes them an asset rich offer, then yeah - sure - eat some cap to get it done. And I'll even grant you that Grier has made some weak deals so far, considering his needs coupled with the talent he's moved.

I just don't think we can compete in that space compared to their needs. In other words if SJ is willing to come down to $7.5m on Karlsson, we'll get outbid by at least 5 other teams with better options than we have.
- Monkeypunk

Their coach literally said the other day it is up to him if he wants to be traded, and they have had plenty of those conversations.

This not only about getting assets.

Their GM also said last offseason they asked Couture, Karlsson and Hertl if they would like them to retain their cap and trade them to a contender like they did for Burns and they declined.

We won't agree here, coach, GM and Karlsson all have the appetite to move him to a contender. It is up to Karlsson now.

I think RoR is going to go where the $$ and term is offered. Not sure Leafs can't compete with that.

And yah ..if Kampf wants north of 1.5M then they can find another guy for less. Love for them to get Dowd out of Washington ...and sign Hathaway.
- The Law

I hope the Leafs wouldn't...I like ROR but he has overpaid written all over him.

A team will pay him for what he has done before this year and at this point its silly.

well im sure they put in a call to Cliff Fletcher
- drexel

they sent a text to his rotary phone

Their coach literally said the other day it is up to him if he wants to be traded, and they have had plenty of those conversations.

This not only about getting assets.

Their GM also said last offseason they asked Couture, Karlsson and Hertl if they would like them to retain their cap and trade them to a contender like they did for Burns and they declined.

We won't agree here, coach, GM and Karlsson all have the appetite to move him to a contender. It is up to Karlsson now.
- Santo_44

Well. We can't agree necessarily. They've offered to retain salary on 3 players and trade them, but they only have 2 slots for it.

And get real - it's 100% about getting assets. A team that's in the business of giving away their best stuff for free is in the business of being in a dispersal draft not being an NHL team.

But yeah. We're not going to agree if that's what you're thinking here.

they sent a text to his rotary phone
- senstroll

He'll never get that. He's still trying to press '1' for English on the Best Buy IVR. H heard they have a TV Remote with big buttons that you can read.

A stupid long post? Because I did some research and was curious? OF COURSE!
Ultimately it's this: Treliving has maybe more misses than hits. He spent too long trying to find a goalie, has drafted alright, has kept his firsts for the most part, but is tragically bad at signing Free Agents. Some trades were better than others (I'd call the Toffoli trade awful - and that includes knowing he just had a career year). I'd struggle to evaluate the Tkachuk deal, but ultimately his youth and overall ability make him the best player in the deal, no matter whether Huberdeau had an off year or not. I really like Huberdeau, but he's on the wrong side of his prime.

TRADES

Good

- Got a 2nd and 3rd for Glencross

- Got a 2nd (Rasmus Andersson) for Baertschi

- Acquired Hamilton for the #15, 45 and 52 picks

- Traded up to #60 to get Kylington for #76 & #83

- Traded Hamilton (with Ferland and Fox's contract) for Lindholm and Hanifin.

- acquired Lucic and a 3rd for James Neal (hate him or not, Lucic had 35 goals and 83 points and played 283 games for Calgary while Neal played just 84 games, did score 24, but only 11 were at 5v5 and he was a bad liability for his time there).

- Getting a 3rd for David Rittich

- Acquiring Zadorov for a 3rd

- Acquiring Huberdeau, Weegar, Schwindt (3rd rounder), and a 1st for Tkachuk and a 4th.

Bad

- Acquiring Brian Elliott for a 2nd (used for Kyrou) & 3rd - basically falling into the trap that he was way better than he was because of St. Louis' excellent defense .

- trading a 2nd (Formenton) for Lazar and Kostka

- acquiring Hamonic & 4th for 1st (Dobson), 2nd (Ishakov) and a 2nd (Bolduc)

- struggling to identify a goaltender from the onset and bouncing around on one to two deals - starting with Hiller and Ramo and moving through a sea of inadequate to adequate in Chad Johnson, Brian Elliot, Mike Smith, David Rittich, Cam Talbot (who was actually pretty decent for them) - before finally getting Markstrom.

- Acquiring Toffoli for Pitlick, Heineman (a former 2nd, acquired in the Bennet trade), a 1st, a 5th and a 4th.

- Acquiring Jarnkrok for a 2nd, 3rd and 7th

- Trading Sean Monahan to Montreal with a 1st that gives Montreal the better of Calgary or Florida's 2025 1st round pick.


DRAFT

- in 9 drafts, he had 6 1st round picks (Bennett, Tkachuk, Valimaki, Pelletier, Zary and Coronato. The first two were traded and the third was claimed on waivers; the last three are all still prospects, with Pelletier being the weakest of the three)

- they have a lower ranked propsect pool in terms of depth and skill; in their system it's fronted by Coronato by a fair bit, followed by Wolf and to me, Connor Zary - who still could be a decent middle-6 option.

- that said, the Flames under Treliving still built some of their better players through deeper parts of the draft: Mangiapane (166), Kylington (60), Andersson (53), Dube (56), Fox (66) - never played, but was used in the Hamilton deal).

FREE AGENCY / CONTRACTS

Good

- Signed Cam Talbot to 1 x $2.75m

- Signed Markstrom to 6 x $6m – and I know this is debatable, but he is a good goalie – I think last year had more to do with the team quitting and Markstrom eating it from his coach than regression or age

- Signed Coleman to 6 x $4.9m – also debatable, but @ $4.9 and the fact that I think at least 4 of the 6 years will be good, I give it a pass.

BAD

- Signed Hiller to 2 x $4.5m

- Signed Mason Raymond to 3 x $3.2m

- Signed Ramo to 1 x $3.8m

- Signed Troy Brouwer to 4 x $4.5m -> You can read the buyout when you see it

- Signed Michael Stone to 3 x $3.5m -> Also bought out; crazy enough Stone stayed in Calgary for 4 more years, including this one, on 1 year league minimum deals.

- Signed Derek Ryan to 3 x $3.2m -> Didn’t buy him out, but sure didn’t get value

- Signed James Neal to a 5 x $5.8m deal

Unknown

- Signed Weegar to 8 x $6.25m; I’m a huge fan of Weegar. On the surface, this is a great deal. The last couple of years might be touchy – with Weegar being 37 at the deal’s conclusion.

- Signed Huberdeau to 8 x $10.5m; a crappy first year notwithstanding, Huberdeau is an elite puck mover and should rebound from that year. Still a risky deal @ $10.5m until he’s 38. You sort of think you’re getting 3-4 good years and then it’s a boat anchor.
- Monkeypunk

Based on this I have a couple quick thoughts.

1. I expect a goalie trade early in his tenure. I don't think he wants to struggle to find one.

2. He seems to have FOMO and signs middling guys to bad deals so he doesn't lose out. Or he simply falls in love with players and does what he can to trade for them/sign them.

if its tree livings job to lose, thats quite a process to find a new GM

leave every stone unturned
- senstroll

Like, I'm pretty sure he's the only guy they've actually interviewed so far, and that just happened.

Like walking into a pawn shop with the plan to not sell your guitar for anything less than $1K, but immediately accept their first offer of $100.

Well. We can't agree necessarily. They've offered to retain salary on 3 players and trade them, but they only have 2 slots for it.

And get real - it's 100% about getting assets. A team that's in the business of giving away their best stuff for free is in the business of being in a dispersal draft not being an NHL team.

But yeah. We're not going to agree if that's what you're thinking here.
- Monkeypunk

Did it with Burns less than a year ago. The cap retention was a non issue.

Nobody is saying for free.

And getting assets for him now is a hell a lot better than not and having an 11.5M Karlsson in 4 years when they finally may just be starting to get competitive again.

You are comparing completely different trades.

There is a crystal clear example that you are conveniently leaving out.

They retained around 8.5M over 3 years for basically free for Brent Burns. This is not a Marleau trade scenario.
- Santo_44

And you are inconveniently leaving out the following

You are suggesting SJ retain 16 million over 4 years
Burns was 37 coming off a 54 point year.
Karlson is 32 coming off a 101 point year.

I cant wait for him to sign Loooooch
- drexel

at 800K

And you are inconveniently leaving out the following

You are suggesting SJ retain 16 million over 4 years
Burns was 37 coming off a 54 point year.
Karlson is 32 coming off a 101 point year.
- jribout

Yes and Burns was practically given away for free.

Karlsson will not.

The point was that this is not a Marleau trade scenario at all, where you have to pay SJ to retain money.

Simply not the case, it would be so SJ can even trade him in the first place like they had to do with Burns.

And you are inconveniently leaving out the following

You are suggesting SJ retain 16 million over 4 years
Burns was 37 coming off a 54 point year.
Karlson is 32 coming off a 101 point year.
- jribout

and amazingly was -26

My vision is RoR at 2C (or a new/big acquisition if they go that route) and Kampf at 4C if he's at the right number. A new 3C needs to be Kampf-like defensively but with a bit more offensive chops and ideally costs less than $3M per. I thought Haula might fit that script.
- The Law

you need to think of Holmberg as 3C or 4C also is in the mix

Timo Meier and Willie should be pretty comparable on new deals, yah?

Curious to see what Timo gets.

RoR 2C and Haula 3C?

Severson RD?

You look at B'Hawks roster and gotta think Jones and Murphy would want to get the hell out of there. Hmmm...
- The Law

Although, maybe not so much now....if playing with the great Bedard appeals to them.....

Did it with Burns less than a year ago. The cap retention was a non issue.

Nobody is saying for free.

And getting assets for him now is a hell a lot better than not and having an 11.5M Karlsson in 4 years when they finally may just be starting to get competitive again.
- Santo_44

Things change in a year. Karlsson had a fantastic year. I think any team trading for him is going to be disappointed. Regardless if you're paying him 7 million or 8.

Yes and Burns was practically given away for free.

Karlsson will not.

The point was that this is not a Marleau trade scenario at all, where you have to pay SJ to retain money.

Simply not the case, it would be so SJ can even trade him in the first place like they had to do with Burns.
- Santo_44

So the trade is possible, but not likely?

and amazingly was -26
- drexel

Yes because that is a major stat that most GMs likely look at when making a deal. At least one idiot will overpay for him.

So the trade is possible, but not likely?
- jribout

Coach said a month ago its up to Karlsson if he wants to be traded

So ya

We'll see his decision

Its true though. He isnt physical at all. Acciari and Schenn should both be back though.
- Archaic

Ehh... he's a big boy at 6'3, 221, blocks shots, averages about a hit a game, kills penalties, and has been used heavily in 5v5 dZone starts.

I'm not suggesting he's a top pairing guy but he's a solid, steady d-man who would look pretty damn good in our Top 6.

Rielly-Schenn
Gavrikov-Brodie
McCabe-Liljegren

If the Leafs can do better than Gav, I'm all for it.

Coach said a month ago its up to Karlsson if he wants to be traded

So ya

We'll see his decision
- Santo_44

So the Leafs trading for him like you suggest is possible but highly unlikely?

So the Leafs trading for him like you suggest is possible but highly unlikely?
- jribout

you aren't worth responding to right now.

Things change in a year. Karlsson had a fantastic year. I think any team trading for him is going to be disappointed. Regardless if you're paying him 7 million or 8.
- Aaron_85

I'd like to see him on a better team with better players.