A couple weeks back we held a survey of our readership, you can read the results of the survey here and here. The final part of your responses is running today, and it is a look at some of the more interesting trade proposals you offered up to us. And now we will judge them.
The preface for us judging trade proposals is that honestly, it’s not like anything we’d offer up as a suggestion would be much better. The only thing more ridiculous than trade proposals are the actual trades that get completed in the NHL. GMs all come at things with their own reasoning and know how the deal fits into what they want to accomplish, outsiders have the simplified view of just wanting good players. And while the proposals we received had a bias towards looking at the Leafs wants and needs more than their trade partner, these five proposals below are worth having some discourse on.
Trade #1: Mason McTavish to the Leafs for Easton Cowan, Max Domi, and a 2028 2nd round pick
Michael Mazzei: The Leafs say no because Easton Cowan is involved in the deal and while it results in them getting back Mason McTavish, I am sure they would rather find another way to get him that doesn’t involve Cowan going the other way. I also find it hard to believe that the Ducks will be okay with only getting a second-round pick out of this trade when they would likely want a first. Unfortunately, there isn’t really another prospect that the Leafs may be more inclined to move that the Ducks may be interested in. So unless the Leafs decide to throw in a first instead, any proposal may not seem realistic.
Arun Srinivasan: This is an intriguing proposal but ultimately, I think the Ducks would wait for a better package. It really depends on what their evaluation of Cowan looks like. Cowan is coming off a season where he won Memorial Cup MVP and he fits the Ducks’ current timeline, where they are rebuilding and their core has still yet to hit their prime. Does he project as a top-six forward, or a reliable third-line scorer with plus-defence at the NHL level? If it’s the former, this becomes a more attractive idea to the Ducks, and Domi’s contract isn’t too onerous if viewed as an expiring deal, with the second-round pick working as a sweetener. It’s plausible to be sure, and perhaps I’m talking myself into it in real-time, but ultimately I think the Ducks may wait for a better package, from a team with a deeper pool.
Alex Hobson: This should be a no-brainer for the Leafs, and for the Ducks it’s likely whatever the opposite of a no-brainer is (a brainer?). For as intriguing as Cowan is, getting an already-established NHL centre who’s only two years older than Cowan who would seamlessly take the torch from John Tavares on the second line is well worth the price of a top prospect, a fun albeit inconsistent middle-six forward and a second-rounder three years from now. That said, Ducks almost certainly say no.
Jon Steitzer: From a Leafs perspective bringing in McTavish seems like a no brainer. He checks the boxes of youth, offence, and could be the heir apparent to John Tavares’ second line centre role and I can’t imagine the Leafs scoffing at anything they are giving up here no matter how excited they are about Cowan.
The Ducks side is trickier, and I can’t imagine they are interested in punting their competitive years back further by gambling on Cowan panning out and the absolute crap shoot of a second round pick. Domi might be a nice add for them because he along with Cowan given them usable roster parts now, but a rebuilding team can’t be giving up the best player available when his age fits the window where they should be competitive again. Operating like Buffalo West is a bad idea.
Maybe an improvement to the deal would be the inclusion of either Bobby McMann or Nick Robertson, which allows the Ducks to upgrade their offence, which was already their biggest area of need before dealing McTavish.
Trade #2: Jordan Kyrou for Nick Robertson, a 1st round pick and a “B” prospect
Michael: The Blues say no because they likely feel they aren’t getting enough offence back to fill the void left behind by Jordan Kyrou. There’s also zero shot that Kyrou gets traded to the Leafs because of his no-trade clause, combined with the fact that he likely isn’t on good terms with head coach Craig Berube. I don’t see any scenario where his inclined to waive it and reunite with his old bench boss, so no proposal will be realistic.
Arun: I’d personally love this but the Blues would say no. Kyrou is the best player in this package, including the unnamed first-round pick, he’s recorded three consecutive 30-goal, 70-point seasons and he’s firmly in his prime, matching the Auston Matthews-William Nylander focused timeline. It’s not a direct swap of course, but considering the Blues went on an absolute heater in the second half of the year, it’s likely they view themselves internally as a Cup contender and trading Kyrou will see them trending downwards immediately.
Alex: This would be an excellent deal and one I think the Maple Leafs would happily make. The problem is that for a team like the Blues, who probably don’t see themselves as a rebuilding team, trading one of their best players with the only returning NHLer being a guy who’s still trying to find his footing in the NHL, this probably isn’t feasible. Leafs say yes, Blues say no.
Jon: Like McTavish, Kyrou is an interesting target for the Leafs and might be the best Marner replacement option out there. You can 100% see the appeal for the Leafs even if it involves the continued burning of future assets.
From the Blues perspective, there is a lot left to be desired here even if the framework isn’t far off. Robertson is a decent young option to include, but from a salary perspective the Leafs would want to include more here too. The first round pick is absolutely far, but do the Blues want to wait until 2028 for their return on a top line player? That’s the earliest the Leafs can offer it. And “B” prospect is open to interpretation. By the Leafs shallow prospect pool standards, Easton Cowan and Ben Danford are probably their “A” prospects and then it opens up the rest. Does Hildeby, Chadwick, or Hopkins get it done based on what the Blues are prioritizing?
If this deal was to work it feels like it would have to be Kyrou for Robertson, Carlo, Danford, and Hopkins. It gives the Blues a first rounder now in Danford, a good prospect in Hopkins, and Robertson and Carlo are good roster pieces. Carlo might not fit a need for the Blues but is a valuable asset that allows for another defensive trade. The problem is that seems like the Blues having to do the Leafs a favour when already giving up the best player in the deal.
Trade #3: Nazem Kadri for David Kampf, Calle Jarnkrok, a 1st and a 5th round pick
Variations: Robertson, Kampf and Danforth for Kadri and a fourth OR Nazem Kadri for Carlo, Robertson and McMann
Michael: There is zero evidence to suggest that the Flames will conduct business in good faith with the Leafs as long as Brad Treliving is the GM. It has been reported that Calgary will always up the price with Toronto and Treliving drives a hard bargain, so it will be near impossible for the two sides to get any deals done. That includes the return of Nazem Kadri, who seems happy to be a Flame and likely isn’t itching to get out of town.
Arun: This one is fascinating, because of all the contingencies it may involve. More to the point: the first-round pick is the alluring part for the Flames. Calgary is seemingly stuck in an identity crisis, where it won’t commit to a full rebuild, but it isn’t close to real contention, either. Kadri is an excellent player, he’d be a perfect fit for the Maple Leafs, and the Flames know this. Kampf and Jarnkrok have virtually no trade value at this point, and it may take one of Easton Cowan or Ben Danford to make it compelling for the Flames. Toronto’s prospect pool simply doesn’t matter at this point either, it should consider trading all of its young players with the exception of Matthew Knies, if Kadri is made available.
Alex: Leafs say yes, Flames once again say no because it seems like Flames general manager Craig Conroy is not interested in conducting any kind of business with Brad Treliving. The idea of a cap-dump for cap-dump deal that involves a fan favourite who would bolster their offensive group is something the Leafs would probably be fine to part with a first-rounder for, but again, the road block here is the Leafs/Flames relationship.
Jon: The idea of the Flames and Leafs coming together on a deal seems unlikely, but in the NHL when there are only 31 potential trade partners and the principal player involved has a no movement clause, sometimes you have to get past it. I think the Flames could get past dealing Kadri to the Leafs if they felt like they fleeced Treliving and all three of the deals seem to benefit Calgary when you consider he’ll soon be 35 years old, carries a $7M cap hit, and they won’t be contenders any time soon.
From a Leafs perspective, it is about the now and right now Kadri is helps them. The rising salary cap means that they can gamble on contract that might age poorly, and a 2028 1st and a 5th round pick plus salary dumps isn’t much. Nor is Carlo, Robertson, and McMann, which might actually fit the Flames tastes more.
The idea of giving up Danforth for Kadri seems like a little much especially when you consider how old the Leafs blueline, but in comparison to deals we’ve seen Brad Treliving make in recent years, this is plausible and like I said, there might need to be a premium paid to make something work with Calgary.
Trade #4: Ross Colton for Nick Robertson
Michael: It is a doable trade from a salary cap perspective even if it puts the Leafs a bit over the cap, which is legal to do in the offseason. The issue lies in the fact that Nick Robertson isn’t enough to match the value of Ross Colton as the latter is able to take faceoffs which makes him a bit more lucrative. A more realistic scenario is a package centered around David Kampf since he and Colton have two years left on their respective contracts and a hypothetical trade keeps the Leafs under the cap. Having said that, the Leafs would still have to add so I don’t see this one happening but it’s the closest one to reality so far.
Arun: This trade seems to work for both parties. Robertson’s pace and offensive invention matches the Avalanche’s high-octane style and perhaps this is a location where he’ll unlock all of his offensive talent. Colton is a known commodity who can be slotted through the lineup and can provide some needed secondary scoring, with some Cup-winning experience as well. Will Colton’s $4-million cap hit through 2026-27 prove to be too rich for the Maple Leafs? That appears to be the only logical holdup here.
Alex: Had the Leafs already added Dakota Joshua, Nic Roy, and Matias Maccelli, I think the Leafs would be a little more inclined to do this, but there’s something to be said about adding too much in one area of wealth. Just because the Leafs are coming off an era where they had too much tied up in their core, doesn’t mean they need to shift to having an abundance of bottom-six forwards on multi-year deals.
Jon: I don’t have a lot to say on this one and it feels like the Leafs have already been stockpiling Ross Colton types. I like this deal if it is one for one but if the Leafs are adding (which value wise it would dictate they would), I’d pass if I was Toronto.
On the Avalanche side of things if there is an appetite to shed salary, add depth scoring at the cost of usable all situation player or they just want to get a bit younger, I guess I could see this. But right now they are cap compliant and without much left in free agency that they’d want to add, they’ll likely stay the course with Colton.
Trade #5: Dougie Hamilton for Morgan Rielly
Variations: Dougie Hamilton for Domi and Rielly OR Robertson, Rielly, Hildeby and a pick for Dougie Hamilton and some duster
Michael: I think the idea of the Leafs having their eyes set on adding a high-end puck moving defenceman makes a lot of sense, especially one that Treliving is familiar with in Dougie Hamilton. Where I struggle with this one is whether or not the New Jersey Devils would be interested in getting Morgan Rielly back and if he is even interested in leaving to begin with. All indications the last few months indicate that he is happy to remain a Leaf so he would block any trade that sends him away, making any trade proposal for Hamilton a moot point.
Arun: I would imagine any Rielly-Hamilton deal will involve a lot more ancillary parts. Viewed as a one-for-one deal, it may be difficult to get the Devils to agree. Hamilton seems to be phasing out of his prime, but he’s still a gifted offensive defenceman who creates havoc off the rush for opponents. Rielly can still operate as a second-pair defenceman, but he also showed signs of decline during the 2024-25 campaign, particularly while defending in rush scenarios. Toronto would still need to move some money around to stomach Hamilton’s contract and perhaps the Devils would take on Kampf or Jarnkrok as low-risk, medium-reward augmentations to their bottom-six. This one is compelling, but ultimately, it may need some layered negotiations before a deal comes to fruition.
Alex: We’re having this discussion because Morgan Rielly had a down-year offensively. We did the same thing two years ago. A Morgan Rielly trade might benefit the Leafs for cap reasons, but at this point I feel like fans who want Hamilton over Rielly just want something new. I don’t think either team would jump to make this deal for the sole reason that you’re basically just swapping a similar player with opposite handedness. Crazier things have happened, I guess.
Jon: I like that the variations capture three very different scenarios here: 1 for 1, Devils need to take back more salary and the Leafs need to add Robertson, Hildeby and a pick to make it fair.
The motivation for the Devils to trade Hamilton is largely in needing to make a bit of cap space for signing Luke Hughes. Potentially a Rielly for Hamilton 1 for 1 deal does that. I could see the Devils having a preference for right shot coming back as that would fit their lineup card a lot more and riffing on the idea Domi and Rielly for Hamilton, maybe Domi and Carlo is the right balance as Domi played well under Sheldon Keefe.
There’s also the matter of the no movement clauses. With Hamilton we just naturally assume he’d want to be a Leaf because who wouldn’t (eye roll) and because he’s from Toronto and had success with Treliving before.
Morgan Rielly gets treated like there is no possibility that he’d ever want to leave Toronto because who would (double eye roll), but objectively he might not see himself as a fit with Craig Berube, he had success with Sheldon Keefe, and while he’d be playing in New Jersey there is a good chance that he’d choose to live the short commute away in Manhattan. If he’s going to waive his no movement clause, the Devils might be one of the better options.
The biggest hiccup here seems like the Devils could do better and before moving Hamilton they are likely placing daily cold calls around the league to whatever teams Ondrej Palat would waive his no movement clause for (the fact that he was not bought out is one of the most confusing things about this summer.) If the Leafs found a way to make the Devils Palat problem go away as part of a bigger deal, I’d say this could very likely get done.
Which deals do you like? Who says yes or no? Tell us in the comments below and thanks to everyone who participated in the survey and submitted trade proposals.