12 Mar 2026 01:17:55
Toronto:

Jake O'Brien Centre
Jagger Firkus LW and can play RW
Tyson Jugnauth Defense
1st in 2027 Seattle's lowest one
2nd in 2027 Seattle's lowest one

Seattle:
Matthews and Reilly

This trade allows us to stock the cupboards in a large way with prospects and picks. Also give us $20 Million and Change and a chance to add either through Free agency or by utilizing other Leaf Roster players and Picks to take on a higher end player with larger salary, with the freed up cash from those Contracts.

It allows Seattle to fill 2 of the 3 Roster Spots they need to fill without losing Roster players in the trade and still leaves them $13 million to fill that last roster spot.

1.) 12 Mar 2026
12 Mar 2026 13:52:54
The issue with moving either Matthews or Nylander is that they are the only two real goal scorers the Leafs have (Knies might be 30-35 guy), so if we don't get goal scorers back, the Leafs better find some in free agency or in the trade.
I like O'Brien, but there are no real scorers here coming to the Leafs. When considering there are two guys about to turn 22 (Firkus, Jugnauth) and never played a game in the NHL, by your own evaluations, that makes them less valuable than a Nic Robertson.

Doesn't seem like much of a return when the picks are the lowest they have as well.
Is the idea the Leafs are kind of paying Seattle to take Rielly and his full contract? For the picks, is it lowest (worst one)? Or highest (best one)?

2.) 13 Mar 2026
12 Mar 2026 22:32:09
Thing is every one of those players keeps progressing at every level they play year by year. Highest (best) one. My trade suggestion in this post is to get rid of Matthews and Reilly, keeping Nylander and keeping Robertson. Stocking the cupboards with good prospects, draft picks and salary.

Biggest things I saw in these prospects wasn't just their regular season stats, but how they step up in the playoffs. I might be wrong with O'Brien but this year's OHL playoffs will be his proving ground. I just see a good step up with Jugnauth and Firkus in their past in the playoffs and a progressive adaptation to high levels as they go forward. My past evaluations on other players that have not played in the NHL are players whose stats are meager in comparison. How are we paying Seattle to take Reilly's contract? If we were to break it down, which when it is a package deal we shouldn't need to do, I would say Matthews for the 1st, Jake O'Brien and Jugnauth, and O'Reilly for the 2nd and Firkus.



This is not a retool. This is a rebuild-start trade. If you want old used-to-be goal scorers in return then yeah go for free agency and waste money. Stock up on young potential that can score at each level as they progress. We have to suck it up for that growth. Yes I said it was worth keeping Robertson ahead of another trade prospect only because that prospect has not shown the ability to keep that productivity. It's not a tried and true science and I might be wrong but I would rather have a young scoring team than one that doesn't. We suck no matter what this year at scoring.

No problem with the criticism. Just given that Seattle is one of the few teams that can swing a deal like this. Give some alternatives

3.) 13 Mar 2026
13 Mar 2026 12:28:44
It wasn't criticism, it was questions.
You said lowest of the 1st and 2nd pick, which are the worst ones. I questioned if that is what you meant. If so, the return is less than what you actually meant. If you value two prospects less than Robertson, again, not much value there coming back.
I questioned how you value the two prospects based on some of your previous comments on prospect evaluation. You've explained. You didn't just suggest keeping Robertson over a previous prospect, you said it made you grin and explained they weren't even close to about even value wise.
So, you value Jugnauth and Firkus as more than Robertson then? Trying to gauge how good you think these prospects are.


Otherwise the deal is;
Matthews for the 1st, Jake O'Brien and Jugnauth(less value than Robertson), and O'Reilly for the 2nd and Firkus(less value than Robertson). If you add that originally your post had the two picks were the worst they had, doesn't like like much for Matthews unless Leafs are kind of paying Seattle to take Rielly. Hence the questions.
You said keep Robertson after this deal. Are you not concerned about the lack of size in general as two of the prospects you are bringing in lack size and keeping Robertson (and Cowan I assume).

4.) 13 Mar 2026
13 Mar 2026 18:52:30
So to clarify. The picks would be the best 1st and the best 2nd that Seattle has. And as far as keeping Robertson as well as Nylander. I think Robertson with the right younger linemates with speed could thrive with a more freewheeling offense.

I'm not that concerned about the size as much as the want to win and the ability to turn it up a notch at each level of hockey as they advance. Minnesota is the smallest team in the league height-wise and even though most teams were looking for big forwards at the deadline, in two of their deals they got Bobby Brink and Robby Fabbri. Two smaller guys, which, considering their GM Bill Guerin was a big power forward, maybe speaks a little towards teams now looking at different factors in regards to size.

Interesting part is that Firkus is compared to Debrincat and Kaprizov and Jugnauth is compared to Quinn Hughes.

Hey it's all subjective opinions we all have and no-one really knows until it's all said and done. I just see Firkus in the NHL next year and Jugnauth no later than the following year, with O'Brien possibly going right from junior to the NHL. If that was the case I would rather see them in the Blue and White developing than in another team's NHL lineup.