The Toronto Maple Leafs should be in sell mode at the trade deadline for the first time in a decade.
That much is clear, and I don’t think anybody would argue otherwise at this point. Sitting eight points back of a playoff spot while every division rival seemingly wins every game, coupled with the team’s generally uninspiring play this season, gives the franchise no real choice.
But what does selling look like, and what does it really mean? Further, should the Leafs embark on “rebuild” or a “retool”?
Rebuild vs. Retool
In my view, the difference between a rebuild and a retool boils down to basically this for the Maple Leafs: In a retool, they keep Auston Matthews and William Nylander. In a rebuild, they don’t.
There are arguments for one path over the other, but it’s obvious that neither player is moving between now and March 6. If/when they eventually do, GM Brad Treliving surely won’t be the one in charge. For those reasons, let’s throw this conversation out the window for now. They aren’t waiving their NMCs, both have term left on their deals, and these conversations can be properly entertained at a later date without much risk of reducing either player’s value by holding onto them through the end of this season.
So, what moves can the Leafs make in the meantime? As I see it, there are two goals at the 2026 trade deadline:
- Restock draft picks and young players
- Remove problematic veteran players, particularly those with term
Importing draft picks and young players is the obvious goal at this point. Most fans don’t need any introduction to the Leafs’ draft pick picture, but for those in need of a reminder, this chart sums it up:
Tack on the fact that the Marlies are one of the oldest teams in the AHL, and the Leafs also not drafting in the first round in 2025, and it’s clear that restocking their draft pick capital to the league-allocated baseline is imperative.
The same can be said of the team’s prospect pool. Right now, it’s made up of the organization screwing around with Easton Cowan and Jacob Quillan, hoping they don’t do the same with Ben Danford next season, and a collection of players from which some of whom will probably pan out, but it’s anyone’s guess as to who (and that’s without discussing the relative upside among the group).
Adding draft picks would be the simple part. The Leafs can easily move off their pending UFAs in Scott Laughton and Bobby McMann to recoup draft stock. There are a number of veterans with term they should also be able to move for draft picks quite easily in Nic Roy, Brandon Carlo, and – in a sell-high scenario – OEL. Not to mention one of their three goalies.
Of course, it becomes much more complicated once we start sorting through the who, what, where, when, and how.
The pieces to move, and the potential to retain
All things being equal, it would be nice to retain Bobby McMann and Scott Laughton. They are good players – closer to what the Leafs should want their team to be than not – and they both contribute to the game in multiple ways. However, not everything is equal, and at minimum, the Leafs must explore the trade market for both while weighing the cost of keeping them. I’d at least inquire about the price to keep both, but it’s quite possible the trade value will be too high to resist.
McMann, in particular, should create a really strong trade market. He’s 29, one of the fastest players in the league, big-bodied, can shoot, and can play up and down the lineup. McMann, alongside OEL and perhaps Carlo, represents a real opportunity to fetch a big return. My focus, in particular, would be on acquiring a good young player in return.
Mason Marchment was traded for a second and a fourth-rounder this season, while Kiefer Sherwood was recently moved for a pair of seconds. Considering McMann’s salary relative to Marchment ($1.3M vs $4.5M) and McMann proving he can play in the top six effectively, unlike Sherwood (who never really has, as he’s in more of a “shooting the lights out in a bottom six” role), I’d argue the Leafs should fetch more for McMann. They should conduct their business firmly under this belief. If they don’t, it’s probably worth extending McMann rather than trading him.
Taking it a step further, my question for the Leafs, in general, is how creative they can be in boosting the prices of their players in trades.
There are two specific tactics the Leafs can employ to drive up those prices. The first involves retaining salary, and the Leafs currently have all three of their retention slots available.
For a player like McMann, in particular, his $1.3M AAV is dirt cheap, and most organizations can fit him in without issue. But for clubs where every penny counts — such as the Leafs for the past several years, and many teams are still in this boat – Toronto retaining half of the contract for a few months is easily worth it if it increases the value of the asset. Further, for most of the players the Leafs could look to sell, retaining is worthwhile, be it OEL with two years remaining at $3.5M per season, or Roy with another year at $3M.
The Leafs’ current lack of assets cannot be stressed enough. They must exhaust every avenue to extract every last ounce of value by this trade deadline.
Taking back salary
This brings us to the second, and potentially more controversial, avenue to increasing asset value: taking back salary in return. This is only worth it in a few specific scenarios.
If we continue with McMann as our example, we know that there is likely interest from the Edmonton Oilers. It makes complete sense; they lack scoring depth, McMann can skate with McDavid, he adds some physicality, and he’s from Alberta, to boot (if that matters). The Oilers don’t own their first-round draft pick for this upcoming draft, which the Leafs can leverage in negotiations.
For the Leafs’ most marketable assets, I’m far more inclined to target a young player who can inject youth into the lineup right now rather than simply acquiring draft picks. For Edmonton, it’s 2024-25 Hobey Baker winner Isaac Howard, who has 10 goals and 23 points in 17 AHL games but has not produced much in the NHL yet this season (five points in 28 games). Howard won’t help Edmonton win now, but McMann can (and potentially for the years to come, too). It might be a steep price the Oilers are unwilling to pay one-for-one, but maybe the Leafs can make it a conversation by taking back Andrew Mangiapane’s contract.
Mangiapane simply hasn’t worked out in Edmonton, and the Oilers haven’t been able to move his $3.6M cap hit signed through next season. It’s a real hindrance to them, and if the Leafs could convince him to waive to come home to Toronto, actually receive ice time, and maybe even play alongside Matthews and/or Nylander, it would make the Oilers immediately better while also saving them cap space.
Mangiapane may or may not regain his form, but the prize of the deal would be Howard, with the potential to rebuild a player in Mangiapane, who could be flipped in the future. Mangiapane won’t regain value to the same level, but Montreal effectively did this with Sean Monahan. Calgary paid a first-rounder to move his contract off their books, then Montreal flipped him for a first-rounder afterward. In the end, the Canadiens acquired two firsts for a season and a half of Monahan, then flipped those picks in separate trades for Noah Dobson and Michael Hage.
I don’t know if Howard will be as good an NHLer as any of those above-mentioned players, but there are clear indicators he’s an exciting prospect. He’d immediately become the Leafs’ best or second-best prospect, and for a turning-30 McMann while taking on a season and a half of Mangiapane, it is an easy price to pay. It also makes complete sense for the Oilers.
There are other take-back-salary scenarios I would explore, and most of the potential fits that stand out are on the West Coast.
In Anaheim, Joel Quenneville clearly has no use for Ryan Strome, who has another year on his deal at $5M. Anaheim isn’t necessarily in cap trouble; they have about $40 million in projected cap space this summer, although they will need to lock in Leo Carlsson and Cutter Gauthier, who could arguably push for $10+ million each per season. Still, paying a veteran a lot of money not to play is generally problematic within a team’s structure, especially when they’re shifting into their competitive window.
Strome has eight points in 32 games while averaging a career-low 12:05, and he’s been healthy scratched for stretches. I don’t think Anaheim is so desperate that they’ll simply pay some team to take him off their hands, but if they acquire a good player in the process and their trading partner takes back Strome, it should increase the return.
The Ducks make a lot of sense as a landing spot for Brandon Carlo. Anaheim has just one right-shot defenseman signed through next season — Drew Helleson – compared to Jackson LaCombe, Olen Zellweger, and Pavel Mintyukov on the left (technically, Ian Moore is a righty, but he’s played some forward lately, so I wouldn’t necessarily refer to him as a clear solution on defense). Radko Gudas and Jacob Trouba are both pending UFAs. Carlo is younger than both and should at least be cheaper than Trouba next season.
Even if Anaheim doesn’t fancy itself a contender this season, plugging a right-defense hole on their roster while shedding the Strome contract offers all sorts of value to them this season and beyond. If they can do it without touching their NHL lineup, it’s probably pretty tempting.
There are two left shots behind Jackson LaCombe and only so much power-play time to go around. We already know Mintyukov asked for a trade (or to play games) earlier in the season. He and Zellweger are each averaging 18 minutes per game, and it feels like something will eventually need to give there. Trading one, moving Strome, and plugging a right-shot defense hole as the basis for a deal makes sense for them.
If Anaheim has no appetite for the above scenario, prospect Tristan Luneau, who hasn’t touched the NHL this season and is somewhat blocked in terms of a power-play role (given the Ducks already paid LaCombe and have Zellweger plus Mintyukov as a backup), is an interesting name. He’s 21, a righty, and produced 52 points in 59 games last season in the AHL, but he is in the midst of a down season with just 13 in 41. I wouldn’t take on Strome’s contract for a question-mark prospect experiencing a down year in the AHL production-wise, but as part of a deal involving multiple draft picks and no Strome, there is logic there.
There is also a case for Stian Solberg, the 2024 23rd overall pick who is a left-shot defenseman with a blocked path to the NHL, given the three aforementioned lefties on the Ducks’ roster. Solberg doesn’t represent the same upside as Luneau – which would matter to me – but he’s a heat-seeking missile who could turn into an effective matchup defenseman.
Anaheim also owns three second-round picks next season. Tacking on another young(ish) player like Sam Colangelo, who is 24 and a 6’2 right-shot (which the Leafs lack) with 10 goals in 32 NHL games last season (albeit with a high shooting percentage), is also a potential low-risk addition who could step right in while also offering some potential upside.
This is nowhere near the Fraser Minten plus a first-rounder package the Leafs moved for Carlo. Still, if they can acquire a promising young defenseman who could potentially step right into their NHL lineup (breaking up the 30+ club on the back end), recoup a pick or two, it could present a real swing at some actual potential that could hit sooner than later.
A few other scenarios:
– Warren Foegele has eight points in 43 games in Los Angeles this season while making $3.5M through the end of next season. Alex Turcotte is a 2019 fifth overall pick who hasn’t really panned out, but he can play center. Is there something there?
– The Dallas Stars really need another minute-eater on defense, while old friend Ilya Lyubushkin is making $3.25M for another season to play 16 minutes per night. The Stars also don’t own their first-rounder this draft or in 2028, so they’ll need to give to get. Could Mavrik Bourque, or a new favourite of mine, Justin Hryckowian, be pried out of Dallas while sending them a quality defenseman to chase the Cup with this spring? For a Stars team tight on cap space, the Leafs can also consider retaining dollars to potentially acquire a young center they could try out with Nylander, instead of banking on a 36-year-old John Tavares next year.
– Carolina’s Jesperi Kotkaniemi and his $4.82M contract, which the Hurricanes seemingly haven’t been able to move for years, is interesting in the right scenario, especially knowing the Leafs need an injection of youth down the middle.
I’m sure there are other intriguing options available, but those examples should get the point across. The Leafs would send a contender an asset, remove a headache for them, and acquire a good young player in return. The young player(s) would add to a much-needed youth movement in Toronto, and all of these veterans would at least represent possible reclamation projects who could be shined up to either help the Leafs moving forward or be flipped in a trade (likely with salary retention) for draft capital.
To state the obvious, it’s imperative that the Leafs hit on the young players they acquire, but the idea is to add two quality younger players to an under-25 group that currently includes Easton Cowan, Matthew Knies, Jacon Quillan, Ben Danford, and Dennis Hildeby. There are two established stars in Matthews and Nylander, and other quality veterans in Jake McCabe, Chris Tanev (health dependent), and John Tavares. In a perfect world, the Leafs would somehow strategically tank their way into a top-five pick, and the look and feel of the team would change pretty quickly.
I won’t fool anyone by suggesting the Leafs would be an instant contender, but it gives them flexibility moving forward. There would be young players to move forward with, and the team would either be competitive and proceed accordingly or continue to sell off veterans in a larger rebuild.
Jettisoning Roster Problems
Part of the Leafs’ deadline process should also involve shedding current roster issues. Calle Jarnkrok is an easy sell who won’t net much (a fourth, potentially, with retention?), but he can’t continue occupying a roster spot over a younger option like Jacob Quillan, who should be evaluated in 25 honest games down the stretch.
We’ve already discussed Max Domi too much in this space. He holds the team hostage with his lineup spot, as he can seemingly only semi-produce on the top line, and he really struggles literally anywhere else. To me, he’s emblematic of a culture problem: competes only when it’s convenient, terrible with the media/never accountable for his play, a liability defensively who makes little effort to change it, and he plays on the first line, to boot. You can argue his presence on the roster isn’t that problematic in the overall scheme, but he’s playing on L1, he’s cozied up to the captain, his minutes are way up, and it’s a problem. He has some playoff scoring pedigree that may intrigue some teams. If the Leafs need to retain salary to move him, so be it. Domi should at least net a third-rounder, knowing he offers some offensive production and ability to play center (ostensibly). This is not about maximizing the return for the Leafs, though. It’s about removing the player.
The Leafs also can’t ice a lineup featuring all of Matias Maccelli, Nick Robertson, and Easton Cowan on a nightly basis. I’d like to keep Robertson, but if he has some value, it’s worth exploring. If the Leafs can recoup the third they spent to acquire him last summer by moving Maccelli, it’s the easiest path forward.
On defense, the Leafs need to move off Simon Benoit and, if nothing else, take a look at Henry Thrun and/or William Villeneuve down the stretch. They need to evaluate if those defensemen could be in the mix for next season. Benoit’s contribution is limited, and the Leafs already have too many non-producers on the blue line. They can at least take a look at some younger defensemen who could possibly pass the puck on the tape. Maybe they don’t pan out at all, but in a lost season, the Leafs need to give them minutes to evaluate it one way or the other.
Morgan Rielly is likely an offseason move, but it needs to happen before the start of next season. For now, I will assume there’s no chance of it coming together between now and the beginning of March.
Of course, the Leafs also need to make a decision on Scott Laughton. Either they extend him or trade him, but there’s no in between. I like Laughton and would be happy to keep him for the right number, but with Roy signed through next season (Roy is younger, bigger, and a righty), plus Quillan in the wings, the re-sign ticket would have to make a lot of sense for the 31-year-old Laughton, rather than collecting draft capital in a trade return.
At the same time, if the Leafs can sign Laughton and flip Roy for essentially the Laughton package (a first and a prospect), it is worth exploring. Roy should offer similar value to Laughton last season, as he’s paid the same salary and has been marginally more productive in his career than Laughton, and Roy has a Cup ring. If the Leafs could ever fetch that kind of return for Roy and extend Laughton, it would make a lot of sense.
The “Selling” Path Forward
The Leafs should leave the 2026 trade deadline with a couple of new, promising young players, potentially a couple of reclamation projects to plug holes with, four-plus draft picks added, and a collection of veteran players removed from the team who will either be tough to see go (OEL, Laughton) or rushed to the airport (Domi, Jarnkrok).
The Leafs must open up flexibility moving forward while replenishing draft capital, adding prospects, and moving out veterans to create extra roster room, allowing them to evaluate younger players for the rest of the season. The paths should be open moving forward, whether they want to lean further into rebuilding or if they hit on some players who could help them trend back toward competitiveness under a new coaching staff.
There is a lot of work to do between now and March 6, but the Leafs should have a full Olympic break to prepare and a clear game plan for what needs to be done (selling). Now, they need to execute. This could be a flush-it season, or it could be the start of a years-long downfall. It won’t be decided by the Leafs’ moves at the 2026 trade deadline alone, but there is an opportunity to start turning the page toward a brighter tomorrow if they get the next five weeks right.
