This is such a peculiar subject in a way. You can be unsuccessfully successful - like San Jose and Ottawa. Dubas has built, what I think is, the best Leafs team I've ever seen. Keefe is coaching them very well. They are going through a bit of a rough period where not everyone is together and whether it's the Defense, the Goaltending, the second line or all of the above - doesn't matter. Rough patches are good because you learn how to fix them and adapt and adjust. That will be necessary in the playoffs as well.

But I digress from the peculiar subject that popped in my head: One of the Leaf teams that many of us loved was the late 70's Leafs with Palmateer, Sittler, McDonald, Salming, Turnbull, Williams, Ellis and Thompson. That was a very good team that was on the rise - but they ran into the powerhouse dynasty Canadiens (I still think the best team ever assembled) and it prompted the management team to start tearing it apart. Could they, with growth, have interrupted the Canadiens dynasty or stood toe-to-toe with the Islanders dynasty that followed? As they were constructed in 77-78, maybe not, but they had the pieces in place that with proper management, they could have tweaked and changed and gotten better - instead of into the laughingstock they became for over 15 years. It still took them over 30 years to realise that a real rebuild was required.

Sometimes you have to outwait the other powerhouses and build with them until you beat them. Washington didn't give up their core with Ovi - they built and grew. So, too, can the Leafs - I think.

At the end of the day, if this not a successful Leafs team, our post mortem would likely conclude that while overpaying Marner in particular, signing Tavares was the largest misstep in the team's construction.
- Monkeypunk

Personally I think the pandemic was the biggest factor. Everything was projecting out fine, even JT's contract. Marner maybe a little overpaid but the contracts would be paying off right about now with the cap around 10 million higher. Obviously every team had to deal with it, but the Leafs got hit the hardest with their biggest contracts starting right before the pandemic hit. I think that extra cap space would have been plenty to fill in the various holes on the team. We'll see how it all plays out.

The second best team in the league could lose in the first round. Assess performance in both the regular season and playoffs and make adjustments.
- Canada Cup

Yes.

Is that being done effectively is the question. If the Leafs lose, yet again in the 1st round, changes NEED to be made this year. No more excuses IMO.

Agree, he's much better, the cost to acquire him wouldn't be a hair more than Kerfoot either. Leafs biggest needs are on shoring up the D not the offense. Adding a better option at LW on JT's line is possible, but the main focus should remain adding a solid defender or two.
- winsix

fair argument

if it's all or nothing and there's no D options that make sense and JT miller can be had without subtracting significantly from active roster than it would still be a big upgrade to the forward corps, IMO

fair argument

if it's all or nothing and there's no D options that make sense and JT miller can be had without subtracting significantly from active roster than it would still be a big upgrade to the forward corps, IMO
- TheMussel

Seriously doubt Miller will even be available.

probably not, but he's more than a hair better than kerfoot
- TheMussel

Yes, but MP's point is we should look at "where" he makes us better to see if we really get full value relative to other needs.

Over those 3 years:

Miller ESP 100 PPP 67
Kerfoot ESP 76 PPP 6

Miller gets consistent top line minutes at 5v5 and nets out 100 pts.

Kerfoot has gotten 2/3 line minutes at 5v5 and nets out 76 points.

Miller is a very good top line left winger and he can help improve a PP. When I'm thinking of how best to improve the Leafs that's not higher on my list then one or two Defencemen.

If they believe Muzzin can come back and contribute. If not, your top two priorities are 2nd pairing leftie and rightie.
- Canada Cup

Priorities are to make the team better.

The market may not suggest there are any worthwhile d to add, other than some lower quality cheap ones.

fair argument

if it's all or nothing and there's no D options that make sense and JT miller can be had without subtracting significantly from active roster than it would still be a big upgrade to the forward corps, IMO
- TheMussel

They're both UFAs in 23-24, both looking for raises but one already makes almost $2m more per year.

If the difference between the two players is negligible then why make the move to run into a Cap issues yet again for a couple more PP points? Especially when the team will be trying to sort out Matthews, Nylander and Marner all around the same time.

This team needs D. Period. End of sentence. End of story. OUR D SUCKS.

If there is any money to spare on this team it should go directly to D.

If a trade is made it should be to free up money from the forward group and be moved to improved the D group.

We might end up having an issue with the G. Neither are playing well.

Priorities in order should be:
1. D
2. G





8. JT Miller, a more expensive Kerfoot.

*remembers when OV's shot was not better than Jay Beagle's or any other NHLers, he just played more minutes and took more*

Yes, but MP's point is we should look at "where" he makes us better to see if we really get full value relative to other needs.

Over those 3 years:

Miller ESP 100 PPP 67
Kerfoot ESP 76 PPP 6

Miller gets consistent top line minutes at 5v5 and nets out 100 pts.

Kerfoot has gotten 2/3 line minutes at 5v5 and nets out 76 points.

Miller is a very good top line left winger and he can help improve a PP. When I'm thinking of how best to improve the Leafs that's not higher on my list then one or two Defencemen.
- The Law

Yeah but who drives their line? Kerfoot is a passenger on the 2nd line.

Much more should be looked into than ESP...Nylander has 100 ESP too....pretty obvious who is driving the 2nd line and its not Kerfoot.

It's not so much analytics inasmuch as it's this: Miller is better than Kerfoot at most things. This is not really in question. He's got a better shot, he's stronger, and he's more physical. Kerfoot is softer, I question is character at times, but he's still an above average skater and an above average passer.

Let's say you break the bank to go get JT Miller - he'll be on the second line because you're not breaking up the first line's chemistry. So already Miller, who typically gets more ice time than Kerfoot does by about 5.5 minutes / game actually scores less at 5v5 than Kerfoot does. Miller has 177 minutes of PP time to Kerfoot's 5. In other words, Miller enjoys first line ice time, and first PP time. Miller plays with Petterson (or when he's hurt, Pearson) and Boeser. They're not bad players.

You could argue that Miller is more defensively responsible, but most metrics note that Kerfoot is an excellent contributor towards shot suppression, high danger chance generation and expected goals against.

Do I think that Miller is a better player? Yes, I do. Do I think he moves the needle enough for us that he's worth the acquisition price? No, I don't. And to be clear: I am absolutely not a fan of Kerfoot's. I think he's soft and I think he loses too many battles. But he's smart and knows how to use his skills - and he understands and performs his role well.
- Monkeypunk

Miller is currently centering the top line on the Canucks and, as such, plays against a higher level of competition. He's also playing a different role and hasn't been shifted up and down the lineup.

Sure, JT would play about 3 mins less a game but I think the 2nd line would provide more opportunities for success, not less. Especially, considering he'd still be playing with elite linemates in Snake and Willie.

Miller only makes 1.75M more than Kerf and he's got another year which is great.

He can also step into the 2C role with ease if one of our guys goes down (ugh). This is not something Kerfoot can do and, no, I'm not convinced that the very small sample set against the Habs last playoff is particular telling.

Anyway, unless the price for JT Miller is absolutely astronomical (it won't be), I think he'd be about as perfect an upgrade for this team as you could find on the forward front.

To wit: he'd move the needle a lot.

Having said all of that: Muzzin back in zombie mode means this team pretty much has to pivot to bringing in a substantial Top 4 d-man which probably eliminates a JT Miller acquisition.

Yeah but who drives their line? Kerfoot is a passenger on the 2nd line.

Much more should be looked into than ESP...Nylander has 100 ESP too....pretty obvious who is driving the 2nd line and its not Kerfoot.
- Santo_44

I'm not saying JT isn't good or wouldn't make the team better.

I'm not saying your suggestions are bad BUT they're just not the priority at the moment.

Please add a few D suggestions for the next day or so, not only will it break up the monotony of you JT babble, but personally I'm interested in the options you would find because the Fs you suggest are good suggestions...just not the priority. Thanks.

He's playing 21 minutes / game right now and is on his team's first power play unit. Right now 24 of his 53 points are on the Power Play. I have no doubt he'd be on the second unit, but you have to reduce those PP points in half. He'd also get less even strength opportunity where he has 28 points currently in 15:20 / game; Kerfoot has 31 points in 13:30 of even strength time. This, while noting, that again Kerfoot has better xGA numbers.

I am not saying that I'd prefer Kerfoot to Miller; I am saying that I wouldn't pay the price to acquire Miller because he is not going to improve upon the role that Kerfoot is already providing enough to make it worth the acquisition price.
- Monkeypunk

Kerfoot would get eaten alive in Millers mins.

If he was on the 1st line, the driver of a line, a top PP threat, teams would be zeroing in on him and planning to defend around him. Kerfoot is a passenger and is arguably the 6th or 7th best forward on this team.

I understand you analysis, but its way off base. Miller is in a whole other league over Kerfoot. It is not close.

You have to think it's not surprising. I think he is a relationship manager.

As much as Martin was traded for cap space, he was also traded because he wasn't going to get an opportunity to play here.

He also traded guys like Carrick, Leivo, Lehtonen and Barabanov because they weren't going to get the opportunity to play here, but they would elsewhere.

Those assets weren't going to appreciate in value, so at some point doing the right thing for the person becomes more important than the business decision to keep them.

I think those things matter to players and agents. It matters when he's scraping the bottom of the barrel for cheap bottom-6 talent - agents know he'll keep his word about moving them if it doesn't work out.

He also does it quietly, unlike a former GM who was too busy to tie his tie and he would have f'n let you f'n know what a great f'n guy he was.
- Monkeypunk

Quite a few players have articulated that they do not desire playing for a Canadian team in this current climate.

It's this type of management and show of class that makes you wonder if some of those players might have the Leafs as a caveat to their desire to not play up North.

Kerfoot would get eaten alive in Millers mins.

If he was on the 1st line, the driver of a line, a top PP threat, teams would be zeroing in on him and planning to defend around him. Kerfoot is a passenger and is arguably the 6th or 7th best forward on this team.

I understand you analysis, but its way off base. Miller is in a whole other league over Kerfoot. It is not close.
- Santo_44

I wish I had made my reply as concise as yours. Well said!

Miller is currently centering the top line on the Canucks and, as such, plays against a higher level of competition. He's also playing a different role and hasn't been shifted up and down the lineup.

Sure, JT would play about 3 mins less a game but I think the 2nd line would provide more opportunities for success, not less. Especially, considering he'd still be playing with elite linemates in Snake and Willie.

Miller only makes 1.75M more than Kerf and he's got another year which is great.

He can also step into the 2C role with ease if one of our guys goes down (ugh). This is not something Kerfoot can do and, no, I'm not convinced that the very small sample set against the Habs last playoff is particular telling.

Anyway, unless the price for JT Miller is absolutely astronomical (it won't be), I think he'd be about as perfect an upgrade for this team as you could find on the forward front.

To wit: he'd move the needle a lot.

Having said all of that: Muzzin back in zombie mode means this team pretty much has to pivot to bringing in a substantial Top 4 d-man which probably eliminates a JT Miller acquisition.
- mjones242

Why not do both? If they have Muzzin's 5.6M cap hit plus the accumulated cap space?

They're both UFAs in 23-24, both looking for raises but one already makes almost $2m more per year.

If the difference between the two players is negligible then why make the move to run into a Cap issues yet again for a couple more PP points? Especially when the team will be trying to sort out Matthews, Nylander and Marner all around the same time.

This team needs D. Period. End of sentence. End of story. OUR D SUCKS.

If there is any money to spare on this team it should go directly to D.

If a trade is made it should be to free up money from the forward group and be moved to improved the D group.

We might end up having an issue with the G. Neither are playing well.

Priorities in order should be:
1. D
2. G





8. JT Miller, a more expensive Kerfoot.
- underhill14

It's not negligible. And 1.75M is simply not a bridge too far.

I'm not saying JT isn't good or wouldn't make the team better.

I'm not saying your suggestions are bad BUT they're just not the priority at the moment.

Please add a few D suggestions for the next day or so, not only will it break up the monotony of you JT babble, but personally I'm interested in the options you would find because the Fs you suggest are good suggestions...just not the priority. Thanks.
- underhill14

They can add both.

The whole 1 addition thing was because of lack of cap space, IF Muzzin is out for the season cap space is a non issue.

Why not do both? If they have Muzzin's 5.6M cap hit plus the accumulated cap space?
- Santo_44

True. If Muzzin is shutdown for the rest of the regular season (frankly, I think he should be - his decline seems injury-based and not age) it does open up plenty of cap space.

I’m now a huge Amirov fan.

Brain issues? Holy (frank).

I’ll root for him like crazy now. Here’s hoping he’s good to go again next season.

I wish I had made my reply as concise as yours. Well said!
- mjones242

Marner 2.79 ESP/60
Kerfoot 2.76 ESP/60

Basically Marner=Kerfoot

- Garnie

doo-do-do-do-doo doo doo, do-do-do doo doo do-do-do doo doo

True. If Muzzin is shutdown for the rest of the regular season (frankly, I think he should be - his decline seems injury-based and not age) it does open up plenty of cap space.
- mjones242

Cap space and assets are two different things. If you're looking at miller (who I'd continue betting won't even be available), and 1-2 top 4 defenceman, were talking multiple first round picks, probably one of Sandin/Liljegren and numerous prospects on the table (none of which will be Amirov).

Is that really a road people want to go down. 🤔

I prefer spending the assets on one quality defender, try to land a cheaper option as well (like Demelo), and maintain some sense of a future. The focus has to be on the blueline, no one outscores their problems all the way to a cup. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Yes.

Is that being done effectively is the question. If the Leafs lose, yet again in the 1st round, changes NEED to be made this year. No more excuses IMO.
- underhill14

Agreed. If they’re not the best team, they should take steps to become the best team. My only point is that you need a more sophisticated or comprehensive tool than first round to assess the team and it’s needs.

It’s not a question of excuses

True. If Muzzin is shutdown for the rest of the regular season (frankly, I think he should be - his decline seems injury-based and not age) it does open up plenty of cap space.
- mjones242

Trading for Miller would be something that's possible because of Muzzin.

It is separate from what has been discussed pre Muzzin injury.

Recoup assets with Kerfoot in the offseason...but you get Miller, Kerfoot and MAYBE even Muzzin for a playoff run.