Its someone that hasnt showned up in big playoff games. MacKinnon has a cup, hes earned his big payday.
None of AMs reg season awards mean anything if he doesnt dominate in the playoffs...and in big games, he hasnt.
- Fakepartofme

I differ on my approach. I think Matthews is a top end talent you wouldn't see in other places and he deserves his money.

I also think everyone should prepare for a 3 - 5 year contract again. As I've said before, he is and should be showing the way of new generation of stars. Taking shorter term deals to re-up and re-up again AND forcing the organizations to actually make good on their word of building a winner.

Also ...

We heard from the Tree man 4 days ago. He didn't sound committed to anything with Keefe other than meeting with him (and the players to discuss him). And he said his M.O. was to keep everything out of the media.

So Friedmans piece reads like this ...

While there is no confirmation of which direction the Leafs are leaning, it is believed that if Keefe is back, he will be given an extension and not go into the final year of his contract.

But it should be read like this ...

While I have no (frank)ing information at all about what Treeliving and the Leafs are going to do, the thought I just pulled out of my ass is that if Keefe is back, he will be given an extension and not go into the final year of his contract.

And I probably agree with Friedman's ass-thought - if they decide to keep Keefe on for a show-me year then they have to give him an extension to ensure he's got leverage in the room. Makes sense.

None of that is to say they won't can his ass tomorrow if they have a better option.
- The Law

Treliving mentioned on Overdrive that if they were objectively looking at coaches and Keefe was on the market, he'd likely be a top candidate or even "THE" top guy. So why would he fire a guy to get a lesser guy if they believe Keefe is the best man available at this time?

Keefe is a queef. He should have never been hired but he was part of the Soo Greyhounds organization 15 years ago so of course, he got a free job.

Kick him to the curb and get a Stanley Cup winning coach behind the bench like Joel Quenneville.

A common comment from last blog regarding Hellebuyck is his next contract - and I'd agree. I wouldn't be approaching any deal unless an extension could be discussed.

He will be 31 and 4 years removed from his last Vezina when this contract expires. He's an excellent goalie, but I can't see how he can command more than $8m at this point in his career. That said, Bobrovsky was 30; Price was coming up on 30 and Vasilevskiy was 25.

It's those waning years that should worry someone.

If I could get a #1 Dman instead, I would take that over Helly, but having a guy who can cover up your mistakes more than most is an asset.
- Monkeypunk

Hellebuyck is worth the 1 year gamble and if he gets them far in the playoffs, he's worth an extension too.

I'd love for the Leafs to improve the blueline and have a defensive minded coach but unfortunately, those are more difficult, more expensive options. If you can get high quality goaltending like Hellebuyck, he solves a lot of problems with one singular transaction.

And also, for those thinking and saying that the Leafs wouldn't have beat Florida if they had Hellebuyck instead of Samsonsov, that's untrue.

Samsonov gave up 7 goals on 57 shots for a combined SV% of .877 in the first two games before he got hurt. They lost 4-2 and 3-2. Hellebuyck has a career playoff SV% of .916. If he played just his average, the Leafs give up between 4-5 goals on 57 shots. Seems like a small difference but that could be the difference between being tied 1-1 and down 2-0. Or maybe even up 2-0.

I think a big reason the Leafs had such trouble scoring against the Panthers were two fold. One, they refused to screen Bob. And two, they collapsed so hard in front of their net (to compensate for Samsonsov and a rookie being in net) that their ability to play offensively was severely hampered. With a reliable veteran like Hellebuyck, the Leafs could have afforded to take more risks and get more offense.

Then came in Woll. Again, 3 goals against on 21 shots for .857 SV%. If Hellebuyck is in net and plays his playoff average of .916, maybe that's a 2-1 win instead of a 3-2 OT loss.

I think he's a solid prospect who has earned a chance at being the back-up but the Leafs need a guaranteed proven, top 5 starter and Hellebuyck is a great pick-up.

I differ on my approach. I think Matthews is a top end talent you wouldn't see in other places and he deserves his money.

I also think everyone should prepare for a 3 - 5 year contract again. As I've said before, he is and should be showing the way of new generation of stars. Taking shorter term deals to re-up and re-up again AND forcing the organizations to actually make good on their word of building a winner.
- Aaron_85

Everyone should prepare for a 7 or 8 year deal.

Nobody takes a 3-5 year deal unless it gets them to UFA status faster which is why he signed 5 years last time. It won't happen again.

Almost nobody takes less than the max term because it's guaranteed, secured money with as much as possible upfront.

In a sport like hockey, he could take a 3 year deal, get one bad injury and never get another contract again.

Anyone read the article about Nylander for Byram straight up?
- Tee-Dot

I wouldn't be against trading Nylander to balance out the team, although I would much prefer to find a compromise with Tavares so he waives his NMC.

That being said, if you trade Nylander for a defender, you'd hope you'd get somebody who can compliment Rielly instead of getting another version of Rielly AKA scores points but can't defend.

Treliving mentioned on Overdrive that if they were objectively looking at coaches and Keefe was on the market, he'd likely be a top candidate or even "THE" top guy. So why would he fire a guy to get a lesser guy if they believe Keefe is the best man available at this time?
- Aaron_85

I listened to that ...he's right - Keefe would be a 'top guy' because he racked up 115 and 111 pt seasons. But that doesn't mean that Treeman thinks he's the top guy for this job.

He might ....but he might not.

Everyone should prepare for a 7 or 8 year deal.

Nobody takes a 3-5 year deal unless it gets them to UFA status faster which is why he signed 5 years last time. It won't happen again.

Almost nobody takes less than the max term because it's guaranteed, secured money with as much as possible upfront.

In a sport like hockey, he could take a 3 year deal, get one bad injury and never get another contract again.
- Rare_Jewel

IMO with a flat ish cap for a few years coming, it would make sense to sign a 3~4 deal and sign for more once the cap goes up.
there's a risk of injury and his (frank)ed a little but there would be a bigger pay day coming up.

I wouldn't be against trading Nylander to balance out the team, although I would much prefer to find a compromise with Tavares so he waives his NMC.

That being said, if you trade Nylander for a defender, you'd hope you'd get somebody who can compliment Rielly instead of getting another version of Rielly AKA scores points but can't defend.
- Rare_Jewel

I'd be looking at the draft to do so

I differ on my approach. I think Matthews is a top end talent you wouldn't see in other places and he deserves his money.

I also think everyone should prepare for a 3 - 5 year contract again. As I've said before, he is and should be showing the way of new generation of stars. Taking shorter term deals to re-up and re-up again AND forcing the organizations to actually make good on their word of building a winner.
- Aaron_85

It only took us 50 plus years to get a superstar. Let’s get rid of him to free up some space. He’s 25 and doesn’t have a cup yet, nothing but a bum.

IMO with a flat ish cap for a few years coming, it would make sense to sign a 3~4 deal and sign for more once the cap goes up.
there's a risk of injury and his (frank)ed a little but there would be a bigger pay day coming up.
- dmnted

It makes no sense for him to take that risk when he can become a UFA and get paid the max by whoever competes for his signature. Be it 7 years at 14-15 a year from the open market or 8 years at 13-14 a year from the Leafs. It's going to be a 100 million dollar contract, one way or the other.

McDavid, Crosby, Stamkos, Kucherov, Tavares, Ovechkin, Draisaitl, Eichel; everybody gets the max length they can get as a UFA or pending UFA.

When it was allowed, they took 12 year deals. They go for the biggest possible guarantee. If the player doesn't think it, his agent sure as hell does.

I'd be looking at the draft to do so
- dmnted

5 years ago, I would agree.

But today, with their window of opportunity closing, I doubt they can afford to move Nylander and get any kind of benefit from it on the ice for at least 3 or 4 years. If not longer or at all.

Unless it's something ridiculous like Bedard, I don't think that helps the team win more playoff games right now.

Laviolette
Boudreau
Love

Having a good laugh at the headlines on SN and TSN regarding the Caulfield signing...
When they say what a team friendly deal it is, you can almost hear the silent "unlike some teams stars..."

- oldstyle

Dubas was crucified for the Nylander deal which ended up being a good contract. Mathews/Marner contracts was ok, Shaving $1-2 mil of each probably would have helped with the Covid stuff but based on the fact that they thought the cap was not going to be flat..Hindsight is 20-20

It makes no sense for him to take that risk when he can become a UFA and get paid the max by whoever competes for his signature. Be it 7 years at 14-15 a year from the open market or 8 years at 13-14 a year from the Leafs. It's going to be a 100 million dollar contract, one way or the other.

McDavid, Crosby, Stamkos, Kucherov, Tavares, Ovechkin, Draisaitl, Eichel; everybody gets the max length they can get as a UFA or pending UFA.

When it was allowed, they took 12 year deals. They go for the biggest possible guarantee. If the player doesn't think it, his agent sure as hell does.
- Rare_Jewel

Yes, he can do that if he becomes a UFA. We are talking about extending him and you gotta think about what the max cap ceiling is and what percent of said cap is paid to Matthews
It's a gamble on a short contract. Sure it is.
3yrs/40.5M then followed up with 8 yr/120M.

That some good coin.

Keefe is a queef. He should have never been hired but he was part of the Soo Greyhounds organization 15 years ago so of course, he got a free job.

Kick him to the curb and get a Stanley Cup winning coach behind the bench like Joel Quenneville.
- Rare_Jewel

No.

I had no problem poop canning Keefe when there was a guy I thought was an automatic upgrade in Brunette, but getting rid of Keefe to bring in a sack of poop that should never be allowed in the league again, ain't it.

5 years ago, I would agree.

But today, with their window of opportunity closing, I doubt they can afford to move Nylander and get any kind of benefit from it on the ice for at least 3 or 4 years. If not longer or at all.

Unless it's something ridiculous like Bedard, I don't think that helps the team win more playoff games right now.
- Rare_Jewel

it the cycle of life in hockey.

if he ain't signing a 6yr/51 front loaded contract then time to move him for something than having their own rental

It makes no sense for him to take that risk when he can become a UFA and get paid the max by whoever competes for his signature. Be it 7 years at 14-15 a year from the open market or 8 years at 13-14 a year from the Leafs. It's going to be a 100 million dollar contract, one way or the other.

McDavid, Crosby, Stamkos, Kucherov, Tavares, Ovechkin, Draisaitl, Eichel; everybody gets the max length they can get as a UFA or pending UFA.

When it was allowed, they took 12 year deals. They go for the biggest possible guarantee. If the player doesn't think it, his agent sure as hell does.
- Rare_Jewel

He and Malkin both got 5 year deals out of their entry level deal.

Some go full length out of ELC and others don't.

Yes, he can do that if he becomes a UFA. We are talking about extending him and you gotta think about what the max cap ceiling is and what percent of said cap is paid to Matthews
It's a gamble on a short contract. Sure it is.
3yrs/40.5M then followed up with 8 yr/120M.

That some good coin.
- dmnted

If Mathews wants max dollars then the Leafs will never win with the current structure.

If he goes max $ then Marner and Nylander need to go so that you can better distribute $$$

Plus he has had wrist issues 3 years in a row now that hampered his production.. Even the year he had 60 I believe he had problems for the first 20 games

No.

I had no problem poop canning Keefe when there was a guy I thought was an automatic upgrade in Brunette, but getting rid of Keefe to bring in a sack of poop that should never be allowed in the league again, ain't it.
- GreatGigInTheSky

He should be given a 2nd chance and it should be here. He's the best qualified coach available and there's no way he makes the same mistake twice because there will be every provision to guarantee it can't happen again.

These people who mentally live in a world where people can't be redeemed and earn a second chance is just asinine.

He and Malkin both got 5 year deals out of their entry level deal.

Some go full length out of ELC and others don't.
- GreatGigInTheSky

To get to UFA faster. Then signed the biggest 7 or 8 year deal they could get.

Matthews is 99% likely to do the same. 5 years to become a UFA, then either become a UFA and get 7 years or stay here for 8.

14+ as a UFA. Maybe 12-13 as a Leaf. It's going to be 100-110 million either way.

it the cycle of life in hockey.

if he ain't signing a 6yr/51 front loaded contract then time to move him for something than having their own rental
- dmnted

I'd rather do everything possible to trade Tavares and keep Nylander.

Again, 5 years ago, sign Tavares and trade Nylander.

But as of today, we're looking at 33 year old Tavares and 25 year old Nylander.

Keep the 25 year old, trade the 33 year old. Use the 11 AAV to extend your best, young players and whatever is left over to balance the team on D and in net.

He should be given a 2nd chance and it should be here. He's the best qualified coach available and there's no way he makes the same mistake twice because there will be every provision to guarantee it can't happen again.

These people who mentally live in a world where people can't be redeemed and earn a second chance is just asinine.
- Rare_Jewel

Can debate on whether or not he deserves a second chance, but it absolutely should not be here.

Keeping Keefe? The one real move they can make to improve the team asap and they arent going to change a thing? Really think that is a mistake
- Roadrunner75

Yeah it’s ridiculous. So what they have over 100pts in regular season! A trained monkey could get this team 100pts reg season! What’s he done in playoffs!!?? Time to move on!!

Keefe is a queef. He should have never been hired but he was part of the Soo Greyhounds organization 15 years ago so of course, he got a free job.

Kick him to the curb and get a Stanley Cup winning coach behind the bench like Joel Quenneville.
- Rare_Jewel

Amen!!!