This just might not be the Leafs’ year
It seems to me now you wait for years for your team to become competitive, and then you face the prospect of losing some of those players. So I ask myself: What’s the point of being a fan when your team faces the prospect of losing the players you’ve been following, just to make another team better? — Allen A.
Haven’t you always watched a team that trades young players that make another team better? (Lanny McDonald, Tiger Williams, Randy Carlyle, Russ Courtnall, Kenny Johnsson, Vincent Damphousse, Steve Sullivan, Jason Smith, Brad Boyes, Alex Steen, and all those first-round picks that could have been Scott Niedermayer, Roberto Luongo, Tyler Seguin, Dougie Hamilton.) So why stop now when the reason they trade is because they have so many of them, not because of a misguided notion that making the playoffs is enough. I wouldn’t trade Nazem Kadri. Two more seasons at $4.5 million and he is exactly the type of player who excels in the playoffs. He’s also one of the only Leafs not afraid to mix it up and push back. If anything, I see this recent stretch as Nylander increasing his trade value by showing that he can handle the centre role. With Tavares and Matthews firmly entrenched as the top-two centremen, $7 million is WAY too much to pay a third centre. Which of the two would you trade if you were in Kyle’s shoes? — Bill L.
Depends on the return. It’s high for both. But I’d be tempted to trade Kadri. Play declines after 28. I don’t think you want both Kadri and Tavares aging together. I am 59 and don’t remember 1967, the last time the Leafs won the Cup. What do you think their odds are this year? They sure are exciting to watch. — Ron .K
I’ve come around to the opinion that this is not their year. I just think their core players are too young and haven’t quite learned how to win. Getting out of the division might be tough too. The first two rounds will be murderous in the Atlantic Division. Simple question. Assuming we play Boston and we lose, let’s say, in six or seven and the games are all close … should we really be upset if they lose? I know everyone wants to get past the first round but can we be honest and say maybe the Leafs just are not the better team? Does anyone believe they are a team ready for a deep run, that they are a “top tier” — say a top-four team — in the league? Or should we be OK that we stay on the plan, let the core continue to develop with the understanding that slow and steady is the way to go. — Richard G.
Kind of interesting that we’re all giving up on the Leafs already. If they go out in the first round but play well in each game, I don’t think you can ask much more. Last year, they were out of their element, deers in the headlights. This year they at least have to show they know what playoff hockey is all about. The NHL and apparently yourself are missing the point about the playoff format. And it’s not just Leaf fans that don’t like it, although they seem to get blamed for everything. Do you think fans in Tampa, Winnipeg and Calgary like it much either? And what about just the pure hockey fan that wants to see the best teams possible have a chance to be in the final? Now at least three of the top teams are gone in the first or second round. Makes for an anticlimactic fi- nals. The first round was always great cause there was usually an upset in the first round.— Craig M.
Well if you want No. 1 in the East to play No. 1 in the West in the Stanley Cup final, then why even have playoffs? You want the playoffs because they’re fun and exciting and there are upsets. Tampa is getting the lowest wild card, so I’m pretty sure their fans are OK with whatever the schedule maker throws their way. Same will be true for the top seed in the West, likely Calgary. The road is tougher for everybody else. If you can’t beat the top seed, what difference does it make if you face them in the first, second, or third round?
Read more on Kevin McGran’s Breakaway Blog at thestar.com. Send your hockey questions to askkevinmc
gran@gmail.com. The Star reserves the right to edit for clarity, punctuation and space.