2024 Offseason Thread: Changes

[cw]

If Colorado offered MacKinnon, Makar & Georgiev for Matthews straight up (& they were all willing to go along with it with their NTC/NMC clauses), who in Leafs Nation (aside from crazy Matthews fans) wouldn't do that deal? It obviously would never happen but it is another way of saying everybody is tradeable. Gretzky was traded.

It is the duty of a GM to look at all the credible options and do whatever he can to put the best teams together he can. In that way, no one is untouchable but their NMCs may be an insurmountable obstacle/complication that limits their options severely. NTC/NMC clauses were formalized in the 2005 CBA but have been around for decades before that. We didn't have sites like CapFriendly to keep track of them. It seemed more confidential back then. I do not recall hearing nearly as much about them. A number of deals probably never got done because of them but we never heard about it. Today, it seems about 20% of the league has a NTC or NMC clause which has to be substantially more than decades ago. Add in the cap/CBA and it is more difficult to haggle a trade.

Although I liked Samsonov, I never thought Samsonov was a likely Cup winner. With him & the Leafs 2023-4 dmen, they weren't likely to win much of anything. They had $18.8 mil to spend on UFAs last summer and were a worse roster of talent than the spring of last year. So it wasn't a shock as they played like it down the stretch with special teams problems that carried on into the playoffs.

Playoffs arrive. Matthews & Nylander are injured for a number of playoff games. The coach puts Tavares & Marner on a checking line against Pastrnak with a lot of d-zone starts. The PP & PK problems down the stretch are not corrected and brutal in the playoffs. Up against Boston, one of the better defensive teams in the NHL, with the above circumstances, is it any wonder why they had trouble scoring? Seemed kind of obvious.

To me, maybe the most surprising thing was they made it a 7 game series. They were never a true contender. They needed a bunch of luck.

Marner becomes the media pi?ata in part because as the team's leading playoff scorer and top playoff powerplay scorer over the past 8 seasons, he apparently hasn't done enough in the playoffs. And the apparent hope is, they'll take his cap money if they can get him to leave and spend it more wisely than they did last summer. Few seem to remember that management never successfully addressed the shortfalls of last summer. It wasn't all their fault - it was a pretty barren UFA, market for their dman needs.

This is a dangerous game to play because a hometown player who is a top 10 scorer in the league since he arrived may leave for nothing. If he does, they'll have all kinds of cap space next year to spend in a UFA market which is arguably the worst place to shop for price performance needed to build a Cup contender. They're already going to get a bunch of cap space from Tavares deal ending in summer 2025 too. Yet in 2023 summer, they couldn't find $18 mil cap in decent players they needed on the UFA market. So how much will $51.8 mil to spend in 2025 help them? They do not have a lot of prospect/picks to throw at trades either as those are needed to help keep them under the cap in subsequent seasons.

The one view that did it for me was working out how things will look in 2025-26 when Tavares comes off the books. Give Marner Nylander money. Add Cowan & Minten at entry level salaries. They have oodles of cap space to re-sign Knies, Woll & Holdberg, re-sign McCabe and add 2 other top 4 dmen, etc.

Matthews is around for 4 more seasons. Not one. The roster decisions should look at taking multiple kicks to win a Cup during those 4 years- not get some cap space in year one that could hurt the following three years.

It is not as simple a decision as the media seems to be making it out to be.

The one person who might benefit nuking Marner would be Shanahan as it might help them do more next season than they otherwise would as his contract expires. But if Treliving waits until after July 1 for a sign and trade, a bunch of the UFA market for next season will have signed.

Anything is possible but I'm pessimistic dumping Marner is good for the next four Cup runs with Matthews. We'll see soon enough what Treliving comes up with.

 

[Arn]

The press is grim. Pumping out tens of stories a day assassinating the likes of Marner. And I know they pump out the content cos the demand to read it is there.

I really don?t see why you don?t want to see how Marner fits into the new systems that will likely follow with Berube. He?s a massively talented player. He?s obviously smart. If Berube can get his buy in who knows what can happen.

I do feel like there?s an argument that the org need to start to try and control the narrative to protect their player, too. Not their asset, their player, the person.

 

[Palmateer29]

But his defense! uh huh, yes we should spend 11+M on the equivalent of Alex Kerfoot but with baggage.

We are spending $92 million on Sergei Berezin 2.0 so why not.
1.2 points per game AND plays defence
or
1.15 points per game and doesn't....seems right to me.

 

[IJustLurkHere]

Humans look for simple single explanations to complex phenomena and sometimes there just aren?t single simple explanations.  The media and the fans are being far too hard on a single guy.

Media sells on entertainment, and the drama of running a big star out of town is more entertaining that a nuanced reflection. People are uncomfortable with relative probability, even if we don't "believe in fate", we tend to become fatalistic after the fact... "thing x was never going to happen".

While I'm not particularly attached to NOT trading Marner... it's easy to get worse. It reminds me of the Kadri trade. Wouldn't mind a mulligan on that edition of "it's time to move on".

 

[Bender]

If Colorado offered MacKinnon, Makar & Georgiev for Matthews straight up (& they were all willing to go along with it with their NTC/NMC clauses), who in Leafs Nation (aside from crazy Matthews fans) wouldn't do that deal? It obviously would never happen but it is another way of saying everybody is tradeable. Gretzky was traded.

It is the duty of a GM to look at all the credible options and do whatever he can to put the best teams together he can. In that way, no one is untouchable but their NMCs may be an insurmountable obstacle/complication that limits their options severely. NTC/NMC clauses were formalized in the 2005 CBA but have been around for decades before that. We didn't have sites like CapFriendly to keep track of them. It seemed more confidential back then. I do not recall hearing nearly as much about them. A number of deals probably never got done because of them but we never heard about it. Today, it seems about 20% of the league has a NTC or NMC clause which has to be substantially more than decades ago. Add in the cap/CBA and it is more difficult to haggle a trade.

Although I liked Samsonov, I never thought Samsonov was a likely Cup winner. With him & the Leafs 2023-4 dmen, they weren't likely to win much of anything. They had $18.8 mil to spend on UFAs last summer and were a worse roster of talent than the spring of last year. So it wasn't a shock as they played like it down the stretch with special teams problems that carried on into the playoffs.

Playoffs arrive. Matthews & Nylander are injured for a number of playoff games. The coach puts Tavares & Marner on a checking line against Pastrnak with a lot of d-zone starts. The PP & PK problems down the stretch are not corrected and brutal in the playoffs. Up against Boston, one of the better defensive teams in the NHL, with the above circumstances, is it any wonder why they had trouble scoring? Seemed kind of obvious.

To me, maybe the most surprising thing was they made it a 7 game series. They were never a true contender. They needed a bunch of luck.

Marner becomes the media pi?ata in part because as the team's leading playoff scorer and top playoff powerplay scorer over the past 8 seasons, he apparently hasn't done enough in the playoffs. And the apparent hope is, they'll take his cap money if they can get him to leave and spend it more wisely than they did last summer. Few seem to remember that management never successfully addressed the shortfalls of last summer. It wasn't all their fault - it was a pretty barren UFA, market for their dman needs.

This is a dangerous game to play because a hometown player who is a top 10 scorer in the league since he arrived may leave for nothing. If he does, they'll have all kinds of cap space next year to spend in a UFA market which is arguably the worst place to shop for price performance needed to build a Cup contender. They're already going to get a bunch of cap space from Tavares deal ending in summer 2025 too. Yet in 2023 summer, they couldn't find $18 mil cap in decent players they needed on the UFA market. So how much will $51.8 mil to spend in 2025 help them? They do not have a lot of prospect/picks to throw at trades either as those are needed to help keep them under the cap in subsequent seasons.

The one view that did it for me was working out how things will look in 2025-26 when Tavares comes off the books. Give Marner Nylander money. Add Cowan & Minten at entry level salaries. They have oodles of cap space to re-sign Knies, Woll & Holdberg, re-sign McCabe and add 2 other top 4 dmen, etc.

Matthews is around for 4 more seasons. Not one. The roster decisions should look at taking multiple kicks to win a Cup during those 4 years- not get some cap space in year one that could hurt the following three years.

It is not as simple a decision as the media seems to be making it out to be.

The one person would might benefit nuking Marner would be Shanahan as it might help them do more next season than they otherwise would as his contract expires. But if Treliving waits until after July 1 for a sign and trade, a bunch of the UFA market for next season will have signed.

Anything is possible but I'm pessimistic dumping Marner is good for the next four Cup runs with Matthews. We'll see soon enough what Treliving comes up with.

We all know you can't build a contender through free agency. This is why people are talking about trades.

I'm also pessimistic more or less running it back will lead to anything either.

 

[cw]

The press is grim. Pumping out tens of stories a day assassinating the likes of Marner. And I know they pump out the content cos the demand to read it is there.

I really don?t see why you don?t want to see how Marner fits into the new systems that will likely follow with Berube. He?s a massively talented player. He?s obviously smart. If Berube can get his buy in who knows what can happen.

I do feel like there?s an argument that the org need to start to try and control the narrative to protect their player, too. Not their asset, their player, the person.

Looks like Berube agrees with you ...

 

[cw]

We all know you can't build a contender through free agency. This is why people are talking about trades.

I'm also pessimistic more or less running it back will lead to anything either.

The thing about "running it back" is they really never ran it.
Which one of the rosters they put together looked like a Cup winner?
2022-23 was probably the closest.

Massive media and fans claim Marner isn't any good in the playoffs (I don't agree with them). If there is a Marner trade going down, Leafs must concur that to some significant extent because they're dumping Marner. I think it is more than wishful thinking to expect to get very much for him under those circumstances given his $10.9M cap hit. Who wants a very pricey player who can't play or produce in the playoffs (even though he leads his team in playoff scoring over 8 years ...)? The fact that they're dumping him via trade devalues him.

If he relinquishes his NMC, it will be to a handful of teams. Many will have cap problems trying to add him. There will be very few bidders from his short list. So the return - IF Marner grants it, wouldn't be great for his final year. Sign & trade - we know his agent wants him to become a UFA. And who wants to pay a lot for a $100 mil player that the Leafs don't think can help them in the playoffs when they have $52 mil in cap space coming in 2025-26? If he was that good, Leafs would keep him (which I think they will). Again, very few bidders = not a great return.

Anything is possible but I'm pessimistic of a big trade return for Marner. I'm also pessimistic he will grant it.

Trades are just that. A team gives up assets to get assets. They win some and lose some. So it is iffy that a team gets way "better". They hopefully give up something they don't need as much for something they need more. Sometimes, these things don't work out. When there is a fire-sale - like the Marner situation, they tend to not get full talent value in return. The talent on the roster is usually weaker after such a trade.

With Matthews 4 year window, you can almost forget about drafting a developing players that would help those Cup runs. They have 1 pick in the top 3 rounds in the next two years that might help. They have Cowan & Minten and maybe Hildeby or Grebyonkin who could help but part of their value is their entry level or low contracts which the Leafs need to help them stay under the cap. Benoit & McMann are in a similar low contract boat - great price performance.

Reaves & Kampf contracts are boat anchors. Jarnkrok trade probably requires retained salary.
I don't see Knies as likely to be traded but even then, it is value for value. You are not getting leaps and bounds better. Holmberg, Robertson & Liljegren? No gigantic return there. And if any of the return are draft picks/young prospects, they have to flip them into something with a heartbeat to help Matthews Cup window.

So their NHL player trade options are quite limited. The NMCs, cap and existing contracts made it so.

They can trade most of the remaining draft picks and probably will during the Matthews 4 year window but they only have four top 4 picks in the next three years = 2 good rentals at the trade deadline. They can trade more beyond the Matthews 4 year window in subsequent years and probably will. But there are limits there.

Aside from Cowan and Minten (probably #3 C), and maybe Grebyonkin, I do not see a lot of top 4 dmen/top 6 forward prospects in their system for trade.

July 1 free agency is one path to improve the roster. They can flip Klingberg's $4 mil into a $5 mil top 4 dman. The next 2 years, they could have a lot of cap space to do that. And they'll have a bunch even if they keep Marner.
The other free agency avenue is to use their deep resources to beat the bushes for found wallets - younger UFAs that flew under the radar (might be their best shot at a decent goalie ...)

The window is close to closed for drafting and developing a player that will appear on a Matthews roster in the next 4 years in a significant way. Maybe the 1st round pick this year could help them. They have already mortgaged a bunch of their picks for prior playoff runs. Their trade options to substantially improve the NHL roster - which are value for value - are fairly limited. I think the $40-$50 mil cap space of the next two seasons could provide the biggest jolt to improving the roster if other NHL teams don't lock up most of their UFAs before July 1 like they did last year.

 

[herman]

But his defense! uh huh, yes we should spend 11+M on the equivalent of Alex Kerfoot but with baggage.

We are spending $92 million on Sergei Berezin 2.0 so why not.
1.2 points per game AND plays defence
or
1.15 points per game and doesn't....seems right to me.

hm, we should see what their points rates look like with and without Matthews.

The point isn't about pitting the two RWs against each other, it's allocation of resources to support a successful playstyle when the games matter. The roster has holes to fill on defense and centre and depth scoring in general. My preference is to devote heavier cap hits to those that can generate and score within themselves. Defense is more team structure-dependent.

Defensive wingers who can PK are relatively cheap, so if that's essentially the value we're getting from someone during the playoffs, there will be an appetite to redistribute that cap hit accordingly.

We're unlikely to get anything remotely Marner-level in a trade return, but an aggregate of above-adequate pieces filling roster slots that need to be addressed, be it directly through the trade components or an indirect combination of returning pieces + open cap space, will raise the tide of the team's overall performance in the playoffs.

June is an important month for the front office and coaching staff to
a) determine what they want the roster to look like
b) assess their asset values on the market for basically everybody who isn't nailed down (Matthews, Knies, Cowan, and Nylander)
c) spin up the required moves accordingly

Marner controls his destination, be it Toronto, or elsewhere. There is still significant trade value given his final year is only 775k in actual dollars as of July 1. Honestly, in my opinion, the best way to protect Marner, the person -- and for the roster to achieve a balance where accountability and playoff success is possible, is to let him flourish elsewhere.

 

[Bullfrog]

I don't think the Leafs should be looking to offload Marner, regardless of the return or other factors. That's just silly talk. He's too good a player for that, and some posters are being too glib about that.

That being said, with basically everyone who saw significant time with the Leafs this past season other than Matthews, Nylander, and Knies, the Leafs need to be willing to move on if doing so improves the team as a whole. While you're never going to get a Marner-level talent in return, it's quite possible that the sum of the parts returning could be more helpful in the team reaching their ultimate goal than Marner alone. The team as it is right now is flawed. There's only so much tinkering that can be done around the margins before you have to start looking at swapping out core pieces, and, I think that's where the Leafs are right now. Just about every option needs to be on the table.

Agreed. I'm OKish with trading Marner, but it'd likely be a mistake. He's an incredible player.

They lost in OT in game 7. This team isn't exactly a spectacular failure.

I also admit that it's possible several lesser players could be good, but I think it's a tenuous argument and a better conversation for when Tavares's deal is over. The team gains $11M after next year when his contract is over. That's a better way of gaining space then trading one of the most skilled players in the league in his prime.

For some reason they can't get a deal made: they'll have freed up $22M while only losing two roster players. Assuming Tavares comes back at a reasonable deal (~$6-7M??), that's a lot of open space.

 

[Bullfrog]

...

We're unlikely to get anything remotely Marner-level in a trade return, but an aggregate of above-adequate pieces filling roster slots that need to be addressed, be it directly through the trade components or an indirect combination of returning pieces + open cap space, will raise the tide of the team's overall performance in the playoffs.
...

I find it curious how you can state this so confidently.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I'm a little numb to whatever happens with Marner at this point tbh. The options are basically:

1) Trade him now for a somewhat similarly high-end player in the league
2) Trade him now in more of a 4 quarters for a dollar type trade to boost the teams depth, futures, and cap space
3) Let him play out 24/25 under Berube and re-sign him to as fair a contract as possible depending on how well he performs
4) Let him play out 24/25 under Berube and let him walk either due to his performance (or lack of) or simply because the two sides can't come to reasonable terms

I don't think any of them would be catastrophically bad for the Leafs. They all have their pro's and con's, some surely a little more or less than others, but a good team/organization/GM should still be able to make the most out of any of them.

 

[herman]

...

We're unlikely to get anything remotely Marner-level in a trade return, but an aggregate of above-adequate pieces filling roster slots that need to be addressed, be it directly through the trade components or an indirect combination of returning pieces + open cap space, will raise the tide of the team's overall performance in the playoffs.
...

I find it curious how you can state this so confidently.

I have maaaany posts about how the way Marner naturally plays (and Keefe's coaching leaned hard into it) nerfs the offense in the playoffs. Based on the cap allocation and deployment, the depth players were basically told from the get-go you're just here to kill clock for Matthews/Marner so don't do anything.

Marner's a really good player, but he's trying to play a different game and he has the puck a lot. If different players have the puck instead, we get a different result and I'm fairly confident the shooting abilities of Matthews, Nylander, Tavares, BOBBY MCMANN will carry the mail if the puck is moving more directly.

 

[cw]

I'm a little numb to whatever happens with Marner at this point tbh. The options are basically:

1) Trade him now for a somewhat similarly high-end player in the league

I suppose never say never but I'm pessimistic that is a likely option with his NMC limiting destinations, his cap hit and the team walking away from him in an ugly media storm.

He could help a financially struggling team to save money to get to the cap floor but why would he want to go there? Hard to win anything there.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I'm a little numb to whatever happens with Marner at this point tbh. The options are basically:

1) Trade him now for a somewhat similarly high-end player in the league

I suppose never say never but I'm pessimistic that is a likely option with his NMC limiting destinations, his cap hit and the team walking away from him in an ugly media storm.

He could help a financially struggling team to save money to get to the cap floor but why would he want to go there? Hard to win anything there.

It probably wouldn't be a one for one elite star yeah, but yeah something close-ish. If option 2 is 4 quarters for a dollar then option 1 would likely better be described as a 75 cent coin and quarter for a dollar.

 

[herman]

I'm a little numb to whatever happens with Marner at this point tbh. The options are basically:

1) Trade him now for a somewhat similarly high-end player in the league

I suppose never say never but I'm pessimistic that is a likely option with his NMC limiting destinations, his cap hit and the team walking away from him in an ugly media storm.

He could help a financially struggling team to save money to get to the cap floor but why would he want to go there? Hard to win anything there.

It probably wouldn't be a one for one elite star yeah, but yeah something close-ish. If option 2 is 4 quarters for a dollar then option 1 would likely better be described as a 75 cent coin and quarter for a dollar.

UNLESS IT'S MITCH MARNER FOR ELIAS PETTERSSON

 

[Bender]

We all know you can't build a contender through free agency. This is why people are talking about trades.

I'm also pessimistic more or less running it back will lead to anything either.

The thing about "running it back" is they really never ran it.
Which one of the rosters they put together looked like a Cup winner?
2022-23 was probably the closest.

Massive media and fans claim Marner isn't any good in the playoffs (I don't agree with them). If there is a Marner trade going down, Leafs must concur that to some significant extent because they're dumping Marner. I think it is more than wishful thinking to expect to get very much for him under those circumstances given his $10.9M cap hit. Who wants a very pricey player who can't play or produce in the playoffs (even though he leads his team in playoff scoring over 8 years ...)? The fact that they're dumping him via trade devalues him.

1. Generally teams don't trade players who are at the peak of their perceived value, especially if the players wants to be there and the team is contending otherwise why trade them? The alternative is a team thinks a player needs a change of scenery in which case the argument is it devalues him. I get the rationale but it's circular logic. I get it in the abstract, and we'll never know what we get back in potential Marner deals or if one goes down, but I don't think just because a team thinks a player can have success elsewhere or needs to address their needs down the lineup automatically makes a potential trade a bad one and an automatic loss, nor do I think discussing it devalues the  player. I think teams would line up for a shot at Marner knowing he may just need out of Toronto, plain and simple. I don't think the team will make a deal that can't be popularly viewed as relatively fair value.

2. I don't understand your "did they run it back?" comment. They signed/extended the core 4 and there's too much cap space tied up at forward for the team to be a true contender, but they've ran the same basic core lineup year in year out with basically the same result for over half a decade. So yes, they ran a flawed team back many times, and quite frankly I don't understand why we're so worried about considering what we've seen since 2016, which is basically routine failure.

To be honest, barring a major shakeup, I think the die has already been cast on Matthews' (and this group's) time here. And call me crazy but I'd rather the Leafs have a bottom 5 season and get a top 5 draft choice than lose in the first round again.

 

[Bender]

I'm a little numb to whatever happens with Marner at this point tbh. The options are basically:

1) Trade him now for a somewhat similarly high-end player in the league
2) Trade him now in more of a 4 quarters for a dollar type trade to boost the teams depth, futures, and cap space
3) Let him play out 24/25 under Berube and re-sign him to as fair a contract as possible depending on how well he performs
4) Let him play out 24/25 under Berube and let him walk either due to his performance (or lack of) or simply because the two sides can't come to reasonable terms

I don't think any of them would be catastrophically bad for the Leafs. They all have their pro's and con's, some surely a little more or less than others, but a good team/organization/GM should still be able to make the most out of any of them.

I don't see how letting him walk for nothing wouldn't be somewhat catastrophic from an asset management standpoint.

 

[Frank E]

I'm a little numb to whatever happens with Marner at this point tbh. The options are basically:

1) Trade him now for a somewhat similarly high-end player in the league
2) Trade him now in more of a 4 quarters for a dollar type trade to boost the teams depth, futures, and cap space
3) Let him play out 24/25 under Berube and re-sign him to as fair a contract as possible depending on how well he performs
4) Let him play out 24/25 under Berube and let him walk either due to his performance (or lack of) or simply because the two sides can't come to reasonable terms

I don't think any of them would be catastrophically bad for the Leafs. They all have their pro's and con's, some surely a little more or less than others, but a good team/organization/GM should still be able to make the most out of any of them.

I don't see how letting him walk for nothing wouldn't be somewhat catastrophic from an asset management standpoint.

I think an argument could be made that the cap space freed up by Marner walking could be a valuable asset as well.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I don't see how letting him walk for nothing wouldn't be somewhat catastrophic from an asset management standpoint.

Sometimes letting a star player walk for nothing (which is actually oodles and oodles of cap space) is just the right play. Treliving actually personally knows that all too well. You can bet the Flames are thankful every day that Johnny Gaudreau walked instead of taking their 8-year, $10.5mil AAV contract offer. And at the same time they probably wished they let Huberdeau walk instead of signing him to that same deal instead.

Letting Marner walk would be my least favourable option. But there are circumstances where the Leafs need to be ready to just let that happen. If they don't trade him now and he has a similar year with Berube with all the normal ups and downs and both him individually and the Leafs face playoff failures for all the same reasons they have in this era and Marner says he won't sign long-term for a penny less than $12.5mil AAV I'm not convinced you put ink to that deal just because you're afraid of letting him walk.

You don't get immediate assets from letting him walk but the cap space you get from him leaving, Tavares leaving or signing a drastically lower deal, and a likely large increase in the ceiling would give Treliving the opportunity to make the kinds of drastic changes to the roster a team potentially facing 9 straight playoff failures would need. A good GM, which we better hope Treliving is regardless, should be able to do insane things with this group even without Marner and likely over $25mil in cap space.

 

[cw]

I'm a little numb to whatever happens with Marner at this point tbh. The options are basically:

1) Trade him now for a somewhat similarly high-end player in the league

I suppose never say never but I'm pessimistic that is a likely option with his NMC limiting destinations, his cap hit and the team walking away from him in an ugly media storm.

He could help a financially struggling team to save money to get to the cap floor but why would he want to go there? Hard to win anything there.

It probably wouldn't be a one for one elite star yeah, but yeah something close-ish. If option 2 is 4 quarters for a dollar then option 1 would likely better be described as a 75 cent coin and quarter for a dollar.

Maybe they line up on the dollars for cap purposes but I really doubt they will on talent.
The Leafs are not in a great negotiating position. They're likely to get significantly less talent value in return.

For example (and this is not a great/perfect example - far from it):
for the purposes of discussion: Marner is very roughly close to 100pts/season playing 20 mins/game
If they get 2 guys back each earning half of Marner's $ putting up half his points, Marner still delivers twice the points/min played. Now, someone else is filling that 2nd roster spot with Marner so that is where is is not perfect comparison. But is it part of the reason why teams are interested in elite talent like Marner.
There are only 9 guys in the league who have scored more than Marner has in the past 8 years and less than 30 with a better playoff ppg.
He's not an easy hockey talent to replace.

I was not a big fan of him being drafted but I have to concede, he has some special talent.
There are things like his 1.11 ppg that make you sit up. That is tied for 27th in NHL history (300+ GP). Think about that.
Or his .88 ppg in the playoffs is tied for 68th in history among NHL forwards (50+ GP)
Stats like that give me a little pause. There are not many Leafs who did that.
Particularly when the player who put them up did so with a defensive conscience. His defensive play goes beyond his PKing. Others noticed when they nominated him as a Selke finalist ...
As he ages, he'll come back to earth some so I have no illusions that he is right up there with the greatest. But he's flying pretty darn high. Way higher than I ever thought he would.
Some of this relates to the way the game has changed since 2005. He wouldn't have done this in the clutch and grab era.

I'd be careful before throwing talent like that away - particularly when the claim is he can't score in the playoffs while possessing the best playoff ppg on the team and 68th in NHL history.