No it doesn't.
Getting depth pieces to allow for calle to play in the top 6 which hes done well at, shows he has confidence in the team.
Dubas has altered his way a bit of how he builds a team, again showing the team hes committed to winning, no matter whats required.
Moves will be made for sure, but if they arent emptying the prospect and picks pool on some high end player, thats fine (not fun but fine)....that wont prove dubas isnt committed to wnning. Dubas will make a trade(s) that makes sense for the team short and long term.
Im sure matthews knows dubas is committed.
With more cap flexibility, dubas could shoot for stars for sure, but not doing so wont prove to matthews anything negative about dubas
- Fakepartofme

Yeah I just do not agree he will go small at the TDL.

Usually doesnt anyways and this year is even more of a reason to do something.

Yeah I just do not agree he will go small at the TDL.

Usually doesnt anyways and this year is even more of a reason to do something.
- Santo_44

It was just a feeling.

I hope whoever he spends a lot on (if he does) either has term or gets an extension.

I'm not sure about Garland - both in terms of whether I actually believe in him and in terms of what Vancouver would be willing to do (like, he's a great worker and skilled, but he's very small). I mean there is talk that Vancouver wants to buy him out in the off-season.

Since he's 27, he gets bought out at 2/3rds his remaining salary, and the cost to Vancouver would be deferred over 6 years @ $1m for the first 2, and then $2m for the final 4 years. He has 3 years remaining as it is. If Vancouver ate $2m, as you suggest, they save money in the long-run, but technically they are short $1m in cap room over the next 2 seasons, but at least in years 4-6 they are clear.

The hard part in the Garland consideration is determining if cap room NOW is more important than cap room later - since the cap will likely make a big jump in 2 years, the room now might be more important to them since they are still tight to the cap.

I mean if he gets bought out, you can go after him as a free agent for nothing, but you're competing with everyone then.
- Monkeypunk

Well Connor Garland has been pretty legitimate the last 3 years prior to this one. Drives offence, plays D. The drawback for him is he isnt great on the PP which doesnt matter to the leafs.

This year he has been a bit snakebitten and used horribly by the Canucks. Dubas has been in on him every year and now he has a chance to get him retained and for a low price? Just seems like something Dubas is going to do if Canucks are willing to look a little silly which they have been.

I don't look at trading for Garland as being THE move for the Leafs, but I do believe its something Dubas wants to do. He is potentially a great fit at 2LW for the next 3 years and if its 3-3.5M it could be a steal. They do not need a guy that can play PP.

Lets say you get Garland, a rental that can drive the 3rd line and Bjugstad for 4C...are you happy? I am.

It was just a feeling.

I hope whoever he spends a lot on (if he does) either has term or gets an extension.
- Fakepartofme

I agree.

I don't mind sending 2nds and Hirvonens for rentals though.

Hey, they are coming out with another comic book movie!

This comes as a bit of a surprise.
- Atomic Wedgie

Ugh, marvel apparently have the next 5 years set for more superheroes.

All i want to see is Deadpool 3.

Off topic, i started watching the british series the inbetweeners (ive seen bits of the show and movie over the years)....its pretty darn funny. Imo

Mark J. Burns

@markjburns88
·
14h
NHL U.S. TV national viewership is down 22% this season, per findings from @AustinKarp.

NHL regular games to date have averaged 373,000 viewers on ESPN/TNT, 2nd season of the league's 7-year pact with Disney & Turner.

NHL averaged 478,000 viewers at this point last season.



This is pretty bad
- Santo_44

not sure what it means.

I pretty much only watch games on streams..dont subscribe to anything to watch hockey.

if I had an option to subscribe somewhere and was able to watch every Leafs game (only care about the leafs)...for a reasonable monthly price, I would do that.

not sure what it means.

I pretty much only watch games on streams..dont subscribe to anything to watch hockey.

if I had an option to subscribe somewhere and was able to watch every Leafs game (only care about the leafs)...for a reasonable monthly price, I would do that.
- senstroll

I think thats coming, just might be a while.

I think thats coming, just might be a while.
- Santo_44

via GIPHY

One of their 8 current D would have to be waived if they add a D. Considering that and the acquisition cost any blueline addition has to be significantly better than Benn.

Henrique at something around $4 - $4.5M is probably worth a 2nd and B prospect, I think. I don't mind the sounds of that at all ...if the price for Kane/Tarasenko/RoR is unappealing.
- The Law

Mikkola is a lot better than Benn or Mete to be fair, but the question is - do we feel that we need some serious muscle on the back-end? I think we could use that in the playoffs, but who would he replace in the lineup? You don't acquire a guy to not play him, and since he's a left side player, he probably doesn't get a lot of opportunity. Also noting that this is a guy who, outside of bottom pairing situations, is generally a negative xGF% player - like most of these stay-at-home types. He's not driving the play, he's reacting to it. So he's that nice-to-have guy for the size and muscle, but may not be useful.

I don't mind the sound of Henrique. Part of my thing is that Meier/Kane/Tarasenko are all guys I'd be gunshy about the acquisition cost or their actual contribution in the Leafs system - I think Meier would fit in very well, but his acquisition cost would be crazy; Kane I'm honestly not sold on because we already have Marner - we don't need two Marners; Tarasenko has always driven me nuts because he seems to play when he wants to but not all the time.

ROR, as I said, personally I am so against getting him, it's not funny.

Well Connor Garland has been pretty legitimate the last 3 years prior to this one. Drives offence, plays D. The drawback for him is he isnt great on the PP which doesnt matter to the leafs.

This year he has been a bit snakebitten and used horribly by the Canucks. Dubas has been in on him every year and now he has a chance to get him retained and for a low price? Just seems like something Dubas is going to do if Canucks are willing to look a little silly which they have been.

I don't look at trading for Garland as being THE move for the Leafs, but I do believe its something Dubas wants to do. He is potentially a great fit at 2LW for the next 3 years and if its 3-3.5M it could be a steal. They do not need a guy that can play PP.

Lets say you get Garland, a rental that can drive the 3rd line and Bjugstad for 4C...are you happy? I am.
- Santo_44

I feel like it'll be a top 6 piece and a guy like Bjugstad for the bottom 6 ...and maybe a contract moved out to make room.

On Garland if I take the Nucks perspective on this they are probably happy to move him and eat $1M or less ...things get tougher for them if it's over $1M. And they probably want some modest assets if they're eating salary for 3 yrs.

If I'm the Leafs and I like him ( I don't but I agree they've sniffed around on him before) then does Garland at 3.75'ish for the next 3+ yrs sound good? Probably not bad for a guy capable of baggin' 20+ and especially true if they know Bunting and Kerfoot are not going to be re-signed.

I think thats coming, just might be a while.
- Santo_44

I highly doubt it, while Rogers and Bell own them.

It was just a feeling.

I hope whoever he spends a lot on (if he does) either has term or gets an extension.
- Fakepartofme

I’d say Matthews might not be happy if Dubas plays it safe and the Leafs get blown out by a team that loads up and goes on to win the Cup.

I highly doubt it, while Rogers and Bell own them.
- Atomic Wedgie

It’s alive!

It’s alive!
- Canada Cup

Gonna hit the slopes. See how it goes.

I feel like it'll be a top 6 piece and a guy like Bjugstad for the bottom 6 ...and maybe a contract moved out to make room.

On Garland if I take the Nucks perspective on this they are probably happy to move him and eat $1M or less ...things get tougher for them if it's over $1M. And they probably want some modest assets if they're eating salary for 3 yrs.

If I'm the Leafs and I like him ( I don't but I agree they've sniffed around on him before) then does Garland at 3.75'ish for the next 3+ yrs sound good? Probably not bad for a guy capable of baggin' 20+ and especially true if they know Bunting and Kerfoot are not going to be re-signed.
- The Law

They are rumoured to be buying him out if they cant reach a deal which is 1M for 1 season and 1.8M for 4 seasons...If they trade him its fair to suggest that they would be willing to eat up to 2M. Maybe more if the leafs give up a valuable asset.

I'd be happy with a Garland add, as long as its not the only one. The fit on 2LW could be really good and I am sure the Leafs have done their homework on him for that potential fit.

Maybe they sneak Schenn in there too which is a luxury not a need. Who btw his wife is about to have a baby in 3 weeks and wants to be traded well before that to get settled in a new city...also sounds like a Dubas move

Mikkola is a lot better than Benn or Mete to be fair, but the question is - do we feel that we need some serious muscle on the back-end? I think we could use that in the playoffs, but who would he replace in the lineup? You don't acquire a guy to not play him, and since he's a left side player, he probably doesn't get a lot of opportunity. Also noting that this is a guy who, outside of bottom pairing situations, is generally a negative xGF% player - like most of these stay-at-home types. He's not driving the play, he's reacting to it. So he's that nice-to-have guy for the size and muscle, but may not be useful.

I don't mind the sound of Henrique. Part of my thing is that Meier/Kane/Tarasenko are all guys I'd be gunshy about the acquisition cost or their actual contribution in the Leafs system - I think Meier would fit in very well, but his acquisition cost would be crazy; Kane I'm honestly not sold on because we already have Marner - we don't need two Marners; Tarasenko has always driven me nuts because he seems to play when he wants to but not all the time.

ROR, as I said, personally I am so against getting him, it's not funny.
- Monkeypunk

I love Tarasenko and have been a staunch supporter going back to when he fell in the draft like crazy due to stupid idiots thinking he would stay in the KHL forever, but I don't think he has enough speed to play the type of game the Leafs are trying to go for.

I think thats coming, just might be a while.
- Santo_44

Not while the leafs are owned by both bell and rogers.

Mikkola is a lot better than Benn or Mete to be fair, but the question is - do we feel that we need some serious muscle on the back-end? I think we could use that in the playoffs, but who would he replace in the lineup? You don't acquire a guy to not play him, and since he's a left side player, he probably doesn't get a lot of opportunity. Also noting that this is a guy who, outside of bottom pairing situations, is generally a negative xGF% player - like most of these stay-at-home types. He's not driving the play, he's reacting to it. So he's that nice-to-have guy for the size and muscle, but may not be useful.

I don't mind the sound of Henrique. Part of my thing is that Meier/Kane/Tarasenko are all guys I'd be gunshy about the acquisition cost or their actual contribution in the Leafs system - I think Meier would fit in very well, but his acquisition cost would be crazy; Kane I'm honestly not sold on because we already have Marner - we don't need two Marners; Tarasenko has always driven me nuts because he seems to play when he wants to but not all the time.

ROR, as I said, personally I am so against getting him, it's not funny.
- Monkeypunk

On D - I think Keefe likes his current parts: Rie-Bro, Gio-Hol, San-Lil with Timmins and Benn backing up. Can't see him sitting any of those guys. The only wild card for me would be a massive addition like a Chychrun into the mix.

Up top - I agree, Meier will go somewhere where he's able to extend and the price will be high. I still think Jersey.

Haven't watched the other rentals but I presume some heavy scouting is going on to see if any of those guys are just playing down this year as opposed to really slowing down.

I love Tarasenko and have been a staunch supporter going back to when he fell in the draft like crazy due to stupid idiots thinking he would stay in the KHL forever, but I don't think he has enough speed to play the type of game the Leafs are trying to go for.
- AdamFrench

I am skeptical Dubas sends a 1st and a Hirvonen for him though

Gonna hit the slopes. See how it goes.
- Atomic Wedgie

Good luck man ....take fluids ...and pop some ibuprofen.

I’d say Matthews might not be happy if Dubas plays it safe and the Leafs get blown out by a team that loads up and goes on to win the Cup.
- Canada Cup

Thats a lot "ifs"
The leafs getting blown out will illustrate bigger issues for dubas outside of not blowing his load on one big name player.
Also his unhappiness probably will be because the team got blown out and not specifically directed at dubas.
But we'll see, no need to worry about it now

Good luck man ....take fluids ...and pop some ibuprofen.
- The Law

Let’s just say…ahem…My body just let me know I took in too many fluids yesterday.

Don’t use the upper bathroom in the chalet for a few hours.

I’d say Matthews might not be happy if Dubas plays it safe and the Leafs get blown out by a team that loads up and goes on to win the Cup.
- Canada Cup

The TDL is not a time to correct what's wrong on your roster, but rather a time to tweak what you need. Swinging for fences at the TDL rarely works. Look at last year. There were three of the major deals made that were probably helpful - Copp, Manson and to a lesser extent Giroux:


Hagel to the Lightning (23gp, 2g / 4a)
Chiarot to Florida (10gp, 1pt, -1)
Giroux to Florida (10gp, 3g / 5a)
Jarnkrok to Calgary (12gp, 1g / 3a)
Manson to the Avs (20gp, 3g / 5a +6)
Fleury to Minnesota (5gp, 2w-3l, .906%, 3.04)
Rakell to the Penguins (2gp, 0pts)
Copp to the Rangers (20gp, 6g / 8a)


If the Leafs find a top-6 LW, and some depth in the bottom-6, it's probably all they need. They need to learn to win in the playoffs with this core, not some guys you add at the TDL.

The TDL is not a time to correct what's wrong on your roster, but rather a time to tweak what you need. Swinging for fences at the TDL rarely works. Look at last year. There were three of the major deals made that were probably helpful - Copp, Manson and to a lesser extent Giroux:


Hagel to the Lightning (23gp, 2g / 4a)
Chiarot to Florida (10gp, 1pt, -1)
Giroux to Florida (10gp, 3g / 5a)
Jarnkrok to Calgary (12gp, 1g / 3a)
Manson to the Avs (20gp, 3g / 5a +6)
Fleury to Minnesota (5gp, 2w-3l, .906%, 3.04)
Rakell to the Penguins (2gp, 0pts)
Copp to the Rangers (20gp, 6g / 8a)


If the Leafs find a top-6 LW, and some depth in the bottom-6, it's probably all they need. They need to learn to win in the playoffs with this core, not some guys you add at the TDL.
- Monkeypunk

Top 6 with term

Rent all the top 9 or bottom 6 Fs you want. Leafs have a bunch of B prospects.

Let’s just say…ahem…My body just let me know I took in too many fluids yesterday.

Don’t use the upper bathroom in the chalet for a few hours.
- Atomic Wedgie

Maybe its a stomach issue and not just altitude.
Good luck and be careful landing those fakie blunt grabs on groomed hills