Proposal: (NYR/TOR/Utah) Marner Liljegren, Trouba Kakko

[GAGLine]

NYR probably can't afford to re-sign Trouba now in 2026. Lindgren and Schneider get raises this summer and then Miller gets a raise the summer after that. Trouba is just there until his contract is up. Marner would be the same idea but 2025 UFA instead of 2026. A quality player to provide scoring depth to a cup contender that won't be there beyond their contract. Liljegren would be there to be the third pairing RHD to at least start the season, and then perhaps be a trade asset later on if he doesn't seem like a good fit for the Rangers moving forward. Cup contenders need depth players and trade chips.

Marner isn't a depth player and his value to the Rangers is limited because we can't afford to re-sign him. We don't need Liljegren as a trade chip. I'm not sure where you got the idea that cup contenders need them. No, cup contenders need good players.

Even if Kakko never takes that next step, we have winger prospects who will get a chance to fill that void. Panarin has 2 years left and could be re-signed. The last thing we need is another high-priced winger. We need defensemen more than anything. Trouba may be gone within 2 years, and we have very few defensive prospects in the pipeline. Over the next 3 years, we only have 5 picks in the first 4 rounds of the draft. Three of those picks are in the 1st round. Trading one of them for a player who will only be here for 1 year is a bad idea.

I know Toronto fans want to trade Marner anywhere and everywhere right now, but the Rangers aren't the team.

 

[Warden of the North]

Why does NYR do this?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I think this is good for everyone, but Utah may be looking to add players, not be used to dump salary.

For the people saying Marner has more value, the salary cap still dictates his value. Who has the money to pay his cap hit? Not that many teams. His value is absolutely lower than it would otherwise be. It’s the same sort of thing with Trouba. People who are calling him a cap dump are doing so because of his salary, not that he’s not an NHL player. He clearly would present real value to the Leafs in this trade if the cap was creatively worked around like this suggestion.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Only in a market where Rempe is considered an NHL player would Trouba not be considered a cap dump.

You can’t have it both ways. Either Trouba is a cap dump or Marner cap hit shouldn’t matter as much as it does. Both players have the same problem for their value, and that’s their contract. You can’t try to say it shouldn’t matter for Marner but does for Trouba.

Zero chance Trouba waives to Canada. He's made it very clear that he wants to play somewhere his wife can actually do her job (nurse/doctor).
Also Utah isn't a cap dump team anymore, they also only have 2 retention slots and probably aren't going to use one on a guy they don't own.

Pretty sure it was somewhere where she can complete her doctor education, whatever that entails. Sounds like that was a lot more difficult in Canada.

I believe she’s now completed that and is now a full doctor, although I confess that I’m only speculating.

 

[Gecklund]

You can’t have it both ways. Either Trouba is a cap dump or Marner cap hit shouldn’t matter as much as it does. Both players have the same problem for their value, and that’s their contract. You can’t try to say it shouldn’t matter for Marner but does for Trouba.


Pretty sure it was somewhere where she can compete her doctor education, whatever that entails. Sounds like that was a lot more difficult in Canada.

I believe she’s now completed that and is now a full doctor, although I confess that I’m only speculating.

You can considering Marner is a top line winger. Trouba is a 4-6 D.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Why does NYR do this?

Trouba is close to a cap dump. Schneider has overtaken him in the top four. Trouba is still a useful player and the captain and all that, but we can’t afford to pay 8M for a third pair defenseman.

Kakko is very much on the outs. There’s a chance we keep him in a second line or third line winger role, but he also could be traded in the next year or two. Our two best prospects Perreault and Othmann are wingers, so we’re going to need to find the room for them soon.

It’s kind of a good value trade. Marner is a huge upgrade on Kakko. He can play RW1 with Kreider and Zibanejad. We’ve been looking forever for someone to play with them, and someone who can actually drive play since both of them are PP specialists. Even if it’s only a year, it could be a bridge to Perreault and Othmann in that spot. Kakko doesn’t fit with them. And then on defense, Liljegren can play bottom pair RHD minutes. That’s all we’d need. That’s what Trouba does now. Would I give up a first round pick and Kakko to get a 100+ point player for a year? Yes, I absolutely would.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

You can considering Marner is a top line winger. Trouba is a 4-6 D.

Ridiculous.

And that’s not even true. Calling Trouba a 4-6 is insulting. Drop the 5-6. He’s absolutely at least a 4. His good seasons he’s a 2. He’s having a bad season, so this season probably a 4. I’ll split the difference and say he’s been a 3 over the last four years.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

You can’t have it both ways. Either Trouba is a cap dump or Marner cap hit shouldn’t matter as much as it does. Both players have the same problem for their value, and that’s their contract. You can’t try to say it shouldn’t matter for Marner but does for Trouba.


Pretty sure it was somewhere where she can complete her doctor education, whatever that entails. Sounds like that was a lot more difficult in Canada.

I believe she’s now completed that and is now a full doctor, although I confess that I’m only speculating.

She had her degree already, but she can only practice it in the US. She is not legally allowed to practice in Canada without a new degree. There is a lot of speculation on that being why Meredith Gaudreau got Johnny to leave Calgary too

 

[Gecklund]

Ridiculous.

And that’s not even true. Calling Trouba a 4-6 is insulting. Drop the 5-6. He’s absolutely at least a 4. His good seasons he’s a 2. He’s having a bad season, so this season probably a 4. I’ll split the difference and say he’s been a 3 over the last four years.

Great he’s a second pairing D. That’s not close to worth Marner. Adding on a failed prospect isn’t the difference either.

 

[bernmeister]

Trouba is close to a cap dump. Schneider has overtaken him in the top four. Trouba is still a useful player and the captain and all that, but we can’t afford to pay 8M for a third pair defenseman.

Kakko is very much on the outs. There’s a chance we keep him in a second line or third line winger role, but he also could be traded in the next year or two. Our two best prospects Perreault and Othmann are wingers, so we’re going to need to find the room for them soon.

It’s kind of a good value trade. Marner is a huge upgrade on Kakko. He can play RW1 with Kreider and Zibanejad. We’ve been looking forever for someone to play with them, and someone who can actually drive play since both of them are PP specialists. Even if it’s only a year, it could be a bridge to Perreault and Othmann in that spot. Kakko doesn’t fit with them. And then on defense, Liljegren can play bottom pair RHD minutes. That’s all we’d need. That’s what Trouba does now. Would I give up a first round pick and Kakko to get a 100+ point player for a year? Yes, I absolutely would.

Trouba concur
KK - no

We are not signing bread at 11.6+ if at all = 1 w spot
If Zib stays at pivot, current 1RW slot [presently Ros.] that = another w slot
= 2 total Ws slots for Gabe P + Oth

We are NOT DEALING KK esp if it is likely to = loss of value when adding pivot to him + Cuylle is the way to go.

 

[Strangle]

Deal done on/after July 1st
(for Trouba NTC/NMC purposes and Marner signing bonus purposes)

to New York Rangers
Mitch Marner (50% retain by Utah) [ 1y @ $5.4515m ]
Timothy Liljegren [ RFA ]
( Rangers receive approx $2.0m to $3.0m in cap space )

to Toronto Maple Leafs
Kaapo Kakko [ RFA ]
Jacob Trouba [ 2y @ $8.0m ]
( Toronto receives approx $2.0m to $3.0m in cap space )
( Utah may be required to dump contract - worst ELC minor leaguer - to TOR maybe ? )

to Utah Raptors
2025 NYR 1st Round Pick
( Utah adds $5.4515m in cap, but only $0.3875m actual dollars )
( NYR may be required to dump contract - worst ELC minor leaguer - to Utah maybe ? )

Can Toronto trade a 1st to Utah to retain 50% on Marner and we just cut out the middle man all together?

Is that illegal?

I’d rather keep Marner if we can have him at 50% salary

 

[Strangle]

Yeah. Doing cap-retention intermediary type deals is a long ways from the sort of splash i think Utah are going to want to make for their inaugural season.



This. Frankly, i could really see Utah being one of the small handful of teams that might actually be interested in a player like Marner. Regardless of his playoff reputation, he's hugely productive and flashy in the regular season. That can still drum up some excitement and help get a team like Utah make it to the playoffs in the first place.


I could see something around Marner for Schmaltz (poor man's Marner but way cheaper on the cap, though with a rising cash salary that wouldn't bother Toronto)...plus whatever other pieces and futures.

Every team in the league is interested in Marner

 

[Rpenny]

these threads are fun

 

[Golden_Jet]

Even if a team says "we're not going to take cap dumps for draft picks and prospects anymore", we're talking about a team with 40 million dollars in cap space taking on only 1 single year of a salary dump, having to pay less than 10% of that in actual dollars, and getting a 1st round draft pick for doing it. If there's every going to be a situation where you make an exception, this is as good as any. Almost any team in the league that had $40 million in cap space would consider taking on $5 million cap hit for one year while paying less than $400,000 in dollars in exchange for a 1st round pick. Lottery team, playoff team, contender, any of them. It's just really good asset management. The only reason this rarely ever happens is because teams never have 40 million dollars in cap space.

They only have 10 players signed, and zero defense signed.

 

[Rpenny]

Also. My guess is that Utah is done taking on Cash for picks

Picks the next 3 drafts rounds and picks
2024
1-1
2-3
3-3
4-2-
5-1
6-2
7-1

2025
1-1
2-4
3-2
4-1
5-1
6-1
-

2026
1-1
2-3
3-2
4-1
5-1
6-1
7-1

Total picks in the first 3 rounds in the next 3 drafts is about 20

How many picks have they had in the first 100 picks in the last 3 drafts?

2023-7
2022-7
2021-4

Utah will be moving out picks to get better players that are signed long term. Utah wants to make the playoffs next year.

 

[lanceuppercut75]

They only have 10 players signed, and zero defense signed.

Blue = RFA
Green = doesn't need waivers to go to AHL

Keller - Cooley - Guenther
Maccelli - Hayton - Schmaltz
Crouse - Bjugstad - Doan
Carcone - McBain - Kerfoot
Jenik - N Smith

Moser - Durzi
Valimaki - Kesselring
Kolyachonok - Soderstrom
UFA 7TH DEFENSEMAN

Ingram
Vejmelka

Most of those RFA's are too good or too valuable or both to put on waivers or not qualify and let walk in UFA. They're going to either sign most of them. They may afterwards trade a few of them, I don't know. To say "they have no defense signed" is literally true but not an accurate representation of their blueline. At minimum 3 of those defenseman are too good to let walk or put on waivers. Arguably 4 or 5 or 6 of them.

They have so much dang cap space that even signing several of the better players available on July 1sts will STILL leave them with lots of cap space. Which is why I think they wouldn't mind retaining 5 million on Marner for one year. They're just so rich in cap space this year that they could use as much cap space as they wanted to in order to improve their roster and become competitive, and they'd STILL have cap space left over. Why not take the "free" 1st round pick?

 

[Golden_Jet]

Blue = RFA
Green = doesn't need waivers to go to AHL

Keller - Cooley - Guenther
Maccelli - Hayton - Schmaltz
Crouse - Bjugstad - Doan
Carcone - McBain - Kerfoot
Jenik - N Smith

Moser - Durzi
Valimaki - Kesselring
Kolyachonok - Soderstrom
UFA 7TH DEFENSEMAN

Ingram
Vejmelka

Most of those RFA's are too good or too valuable or both to put on waivers or not qualify and let walk in UFA. They're going to either sign most of them. They may afterwards trade a few of them, I don't know. To say "they have no defense signed" is literally true but not an accurate representation of their blueline. At minimum 3 of those defenseman are too good to let walk or put on waivers. Arguably 4 or 5 or 6 of them.

They have so much dang cap space that even signing several of the better players available on July 1sts will STILL leave them with lots of cap space. Which is why I think they wouldn't mind retaining 5 million on Marner for one year. They're just so rich in cap space this year that they could use as much cap space as they wanted to in order to improve their roster and become competitive, and they'd STILL have cap space left over. Why not take the "free" 1st round pick?

I’m aware of who is RFA to sign thanks though,
Utah/Arizona is done aquiring picks they have said, they want some quality players.

They have loads of picks, including 10 second round picks in next 3 years. Think they would prefer to spend that on a player.

 

[seanlinden]

Can Toronto trade a 1st to Utah to retain 50% on Marner and we just cut out the middle man all together?

Is that illegal?

I’d rather keep Marner if we can have him at 50% salary

Yes, it is illegal for the Leafs to do that.

However, it is not illegal for any other team to do that. So, any contending team that's interested in Marner (and that Marner is willing to go to), will probably have the ability to get him at $5.5m for this season. It most likely wouldn't be Utah as they don't seem to be in the business of acquiring more picks, but Chicago, Anaheim, certainly possible.

Even Tavares, if the Leafs and him don't have a longer term plan, may be a realistic target for this. At $5.5m for 1 year, he probably has value in excess of what it would cost a 3rd party to take on the retention.

 

[Strangle]

Yes, it is illegal for the Leafs to do that.

However, it is not illegal for any other team to do that. So, any contending team that's interested in Marner (and that Marner is willing to go to), will probably have the ability to get him at $5.5m for this season. It most likely wouldn't be Utah as they don't seem to be in the business of acquiring more picks, but Chicago, Anaheim, certainly possible.

Even Tavares, if the Leafs and him don't have a longer term plan, may be a realistic target for this. At $5.5m for 1 year, he probably has value in excess of what it would cost a 3rd party to take on the retention.

NGL, I would like to see teams able to get retention on their own players

 

[seanlinden]

NGL, I would like to see teams able to get retention on their own players

Personally, I don't think it falls within the "spirit" of the salary cap.

I get the motive behind allowing retention -- you want to move a guy who is underperforming, you should be able to.... however, once you get into some of these "double retention deals", where players are being traded twice essentially so that a team that has nothing, and had nothing to ever do with the player retains 50%, you're kind of outside of the spirt of why the retention is there in the first place.

While I think there are obviously bigger fish to fry like the LTIR abuse, if, for example, the Leafs do a Marner deal where they retain 0, and some other team retains 50%, to send him to a contender, it wouldn't suprise me to see that become a topic of discussion for the next CBA, and perhaps put in a rule that requires a player to be on a roster for a mimumum amount of time before he can have salary retained by a team.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Deal done on/after July 1st
(for Trouba NTC/NMC purposes and Marner signing bonus purposes)

to New York Rangers
Mitch Marner (50% retain by Utah) [ 1y @ $5.4515m ]
Timothy Liljegren [ RFA ]
( Rangers receive approx $2.0m to $3.0m in cap space )

to Toronto Maple Leafs
Kaapo Kakko [ RFA ]
Jacob Trouba [ 2y @ $8.0m ]
( Toronto receives approx $2.0m to $3.0m in cap space )
( Utah may be required to dump contract - worst ELC minor leaguer - to TOR maybe ? )

to Utah Raptors
2025 NYR 1st Round Pick
( Utah adds $5.4515m in cap, but only $0.3875m actual dollars )
( NYR may be required to dump contract - worst ELC minor leaguer - to Utah maybe ? )

I like the deal, in fact, NYR wouldn’t have to pay the 1st because we can absorb Marner. problem is that Trouba will def have Canadian teams on his MNTC.

 

[Strangle]

Personally, I don't think it falls within the "spirit" of the salary cap.

I get the motive behind allowing retention -- you want to move a guy who is underperforming, you should be able to.... however, once you get into some of these "double retention deals", where players are being traded twice essentially so that a team that has nothing, and had nothing to ever do with the player retains 50%, you're kind of outside of the spirt of why the retention is there in the first place.

While I think there are obviously bigger fish to fry like the LTIR abuse, if, for example, the Leafs do a Marner deal where they retain 0, and some other team retains 50%, to send him to a contender, it wouldn't suprise me to see that become a topic of discussion for the next CBA, and perhaps put in a rule that requires a player to be on a roster for a mimumum amount of time before he can have salary retained by a team.

I get what you’re sayin, and I agree to an extent

I just think that I’ve come to understand that the real spirit of the salary cap is just cost certainty. Retaining on your own players doesn’t affect that cost certainty, so just like the LTIR shenanigans, it really fits the actual spirit of the salary cap, just not the one we want it to fit

I don’t see why another team should be able to fit Marner in at $5m per year, but that door is closed to the leafs.

 

[seanlinden]

I get what you’re sayin, and I agree to an extent

I just think that I’ve come to understand that the real spirit of the salary cap is just cost certainty. Retaining on your own players doesn’t affect that cost certainty, so just like the LTIR shenanigans, it really fits the actual spirit of the salary cap, just not the one we want it to fit

I don’t see why another team should be able to fit Marner in at $5m per year, but that door is closed to the leafs.

The "purpose" of the salary cap is cost certainty.

The "spirit" of the salary cap is competitve equality.

 

[HanSolo]

There is no chance Utah's owners are going to allow their team to continue to be a cap allocation broker but points for effort.

 

[Strangle]

The "purpose" of the salary cap is cost certainty.

The "spirit" of the salary cap is competitve equality.

I know that’s what we want to believe, but it’s really not even the spirit of the cap. Unfortunately