LA isn't interested in any Marner trade involving Clarke. Marner has publically said he wants to stay in Toronto and has a NMC. I get that fans want him out and brass wants the cap space, but they signed him to a NMC, they need to honor it.

Most players add a NMC not so they stay where they are but so that they can control where they go. With that said just because the FANs want him out does not mean anything what does management want? if they are still ok with the core 4 or Fab 5 then you need to eat this year and fill in the holes temporarily and look forward to 2025 where Cap Space will not be an issue any more

Why do so many Toronto guys keep trying to shoehorn Mitch Marner and his $10.9 million cap hit into cap-stressed rosters like Minnesota ($14.75 million dead cap next season) or Los Angeles ($20.9 million to re-sign Quinton Byfield and fill both goalie positions and eight other roster slots)? Especially when he has a NMC? The proposed trade in this ACGM would subtract one of our only three RhDs, whom we would have to replace at an additional high cost, so it's a non-starter even if the money added up, which it doesn't. Please go play pretend-Marner-is-going-somewhere with teams like Utah and Chicago and Nashville and Columbus (as if Marner would waive his NMC to go to any of those teams!).

I mean that’s the same with any player on the team they play for. They’re not gonna come out and say I want to be traded. People think since he has a NMC and gets to pick where he wants to go he holds no value. If he’s available 31 teams will try and make it work and you’ll be surprised the amount of assets they give up for him when they do.

Any variation of Clarke for Marner, regardless of what you add to either side, is not going to happen. Send the 1st round pick going the other way and still no.

Do you not read? Do you not see Dubois?

I can read better than you can write. Los Angeles cannot afford a trade which is cap-negative by $2.4 million and also requires filling yet another roster slot. Can't you count?

Is it not going to happen or do you not want it to happen?

Let's say you are Marner's agent, maximizing his value in free agency is his primary goal to get him his best contract. He is currently playing with a top-3 in the league center on an offense oriented system. Why in the world would he downgrade his center from Matthews to Kopitar on the most important season of his career?

For LA, granted PLD has been bad but LA would be trading Clarke, Vilardi, Kupari, Iafallo, 2nd, 1st for one year of Marner + Jarnkrok. How can you expect a GM to still stay employed after blunders that result in this?

Well he really shouldn’t be employed after the Dubois blunder

We are not trading Saros. Please take a peak at any of the million misguided Leafs ACGMs over the last while for a better understanding.

What I don’t understand look at the haul Dubois got, and Marner is gonna be traded for nothing? A trade like above saves you from the embarrassment of what PLD was this year

So Saros with 1 year left and you wouldn’t want to gain assets?

So just waste Askarovs years in the A or be a backup? While he could easily be a #1 in the nhl right now. Cool, got it!

Just as a heads up on how to usually discuss trades here. It's about explaining the logic from all three teams involved. Toronto hasn't even started negotiations with Marner, which will need to be the first step before seeing who he'd be open to trading to.

Predators don't have a #1 signed for next season, and will likely need to address that before trading Saros away.

Clarke is LA's best asset and future replacement for Doughty, to move PLD and still have no answer at the 2-3C role for the future is an issue. At wing the Kings have Kempe, Fiala, and Moore who on a cost per point value are all more valuable than Marner is and especially so if Marner want's 12M. If LA is in a rebuild or aiming towards a rebuild, there is no reason to move your 1st rounders or blue chip prospects.

Is not going to happen. Byfield and Clarke are completely untouchable, per Luc Robitaille, Rob Blake, and The Plan™.

Yes, you don't understand goalie development and succession plans. Cool, got it!

Or he gets traded to a place that will offer him 8 x what ever he wants as soon as he gets traded many teams need a superstar to fill seats Utah?

Maybe the trade above is not a fit but that does not mean Saros doesn't get moved This summer or trade deadline. Nashville can't just let him walk

Gretzky was traded no one is Untouchable

The Kraken would decline that offer quite quickly. Seattle's not inclined to move Larsson, who's one half of their top pairing in a surprisingly effective defensive group, and no piece in that offer is going to significantly pique their interest. Kämpf doesn't have much if any trade value and Seattle will have cheaper options to fill their 4C, Voit doesn't move the needle when Seattle has a plethora of superior forward prospects already, and a late third is what it is. In short, offering a trio of low-to-medium value assets for Larsson isn't going to cut it.

Should Neimela be there instead of Voit?

That's an overpay for Saros....just sign a UFA goalie and keep Minten and the first.
Just keep Marner for a year, then have cap space. PLD for six years.....potential horror for any team.
Webber isn't NHL. ready in October. ALL NHL teams need at least seven NHL capable Dmen.
Nothing in for Seattle.

Yes the dream of most superstars is to be traded to teams in rebuilds.

Gretzky wasn't traded, he was sold.

Last I checked, they have outlawed player for cash transactions, so that's not relevant here.

What you don't understand is that there's a third theory governing Marner trades, which is the one to which most of us outside Leafs Nation subscribe: in addition to (1) Marner should get what you think he's worth, and (2) Marner is going to get a lot less than what you think he's worth, there's (3): Marner isn't going to get what you think he's worth because almost teams can't afford it, i.e., he'll cost too much.


(1) That's not what most people think, in large part because (2) very few people think that Marner holds no value. On the contrary: the reason why people decline proposed Marner trades, 9 times out of 10, it's because the cost of paying to acquire him is too high. That's because he's the inevitable result of the by-now-discredited theory of constructing a roster by concentrating a gigantic and inordinate amount of cap space in a very few ultra-high-quality assets.