On the second day of free agency, General Manager Brad Treliving (courtesy of Real Kyper & Bourne) discussed the fallout of Mitch Marner’s exit, the team’s new offseason additions, and the holes still to be filled on the roster.
There are some Leafs fans who are disappointed that there wasn’t a major signing of one of the top free agents available to replace Mitch Marner. How would you describe your last 24-36 hours?
Treliving: It has been busy, as it is on July 1. It went as we anticipated. By that, I mean the majority of players whom we looked at as potential fits for us were re-signed by their teams. It is one thing to speculate about who is going to get signed and who would look good. It is another for players to actually get there.
When we looked at the pool of players who we felt could fit into a spot for us, if we talk about a top-six or top-nine role higher in the lineup, the pool became increasingly shallow from what the projections were. When you look at who is a projected free agent on June 27th, that pool of players became a lot less on July 1st.
We were certainly active in talking to a number of players. Whether it is not seeing a fit with us, not wanting to come here, or contractual requirements not fitting, I kind of thought it was going to go the way it did yesterday in terms of not being able to necessarily address — with Mitch leaving — that offensive side of things.
I got to that feeling probably a week ago. Part of that is the reason we looked at the Matias Maccelli deal in terms of a player who can bring some offensive ability — a player who had a down year last year, and we think has more upside there at a relatively inexpensive cost.
That is probably a summary of yesterday. We continue to pick away at it today and moving forward.
If you look back at your two years since arriving in Toronto, is there anything you would’ve done differently regarding Mitch Marner? Would you have pushed harder for a trade list, knowing he may not be coming back? Is there anything you learned through the process that could help you moving forward?
Treliving: It is always great in hindsight to look back and say what you would change. At the end of the day, I don’t think anything is going to change. I am not going to get into the weeds on a blow-by-blow of the Mitch situation.
I think Mitch is a tremendous player. I said it the day I got here. He is a top player and an unbelievable talent. Just look at his statistical production since he entered the league and in his time with the Leafs. He was a great Leaf.
We approached Mitch’s camp, even from the time I got here, about what his plans were. Those were always to be a Leaf. At the appropriate time, when we could, we approached him about engaging in a contract discussion. They made it clear that they wanted to wait.
As you go through that process, if you have been in the business long enough, you have gut feels about how things are going to go. By no means do I criticize the player. It is the player’s right.
You look at other options. Mitch negotiated a No-Movement Clause, which is fully in his rights. When we look at opportunities to move on or opportunities for potential transactions, at the end of the day, Mitch held the cards.
I am not going to get into the weeds here on those discussions. I think those are between me, his representative, and the player. I ask for honest conversations with my players and representatives. Those are held in confidence.
At the end of the day, there wasn’t a path to a different outcome, despite looking at different opportunities or scenarios. We are where we are.
Retrospectively, you always look back at anything you do. How do you do it better? I don’t know if, at the end of the day, there was an option or an opportunity that was going to work and provide a different outcome.
In terms of looking for someone to fill one of those top-six spots, what is the process or timeline for you? Are you calling around the league for a list of players who might be available? What does the process look like? Is it something you are looking to do in the next week? Is it a summer-long venture, looking to fill that hole?
Treliving: Once the season comes to an end, you touch base with every team in the league. You explain what you are looking for. They explain what their situation is. You have a pretty good handle — once you do your individual team meetings — on what is out there.
It comes back to me at that point that there wasn’t a huge appetite for teams to move players. You have a rising cap. You have a shortage of top players. Across the league, I would describe it as: Everybody is trying to take a step. Everybody is trying not to necessarily throw everyone off the boat.
A large portion of the reason for that is that you have a rising cap. In the last number of years, we have operated in a flat or a marginal-increase cap where people run into issues. Now, they have to make decisions and move somebody out. There certainly wasn’t a lot of that going on in the league. Therefore, there are fewer players hitting the market, fewer players available, and more people retaining their own players.
The other piece is just identifying what we are looking for. It is not as simple as saying, “Mitch has moved on. Let’s go replace Mitch.” To me, you kind of have to do that in the aggregate. The opportunity it allows you is more cap space. Can you try to get more depth? Can you try to spread it around? Over the course of a couple of moves, can you replace the offense that is required, or that you’re trying to replace, and spread that out throughout the lineup?
As far as timing, it is a good question. You’d like to do it yesterday. You’d like to do it today. You’d like to do it tomorrow. I don’t know. We don’t play here until October. The question people always ask is, “Are you finished?” I don’t think you are ever finished. You are always looking to try to improve. You don’t know when those opportunities are going to surface — if someone gets into a jam, or whatever the opportunity is.
You have a pretty good handle on what people are trying to do and what players might become available. You take that information and — whether it be through FA or through trade — try to find players who could fit and provide what you are looking for.
You had Mitch Marner running the point on the top power-play unit. Do you expect to see Morgan Rielly back quarterbacking that unit?
Treliving: Well, we are at July 2nd, so we haven’t put it on the wall yet, but those are conversations we have every day. Chief is in here, and we talk. We are side by each right now as we look at different options. Every scenario you look at is on the wall. What job opportunity are you looking to replace? What holes do you have? Who is going to do the different jobs?
Again, I come back to it. With Mitch going away, you are not just taking a player and saying, “He is going to do Mitch’s job.” Now, you have to look at different opportunities. You have to look at different opportunities for different players.
A year ago, we didn’t know if Matthew Knies was going to be a fit with Auston. You don’t know whether there is going to be chemistry.
At the end of the day, we look at how we can use the space that we have, and certainly, offense is an area… We have a guy who has 100 points who has left our team. We think we have replaced a little bit of ability with Maccelli, but we have to do more.
All of the different things that Mitch did — whether it be on the power play, at five-on-five, or penalty killing — are areas we need to replace, whether that is certain players on our team taking on more or taking on different roles, or certainly, looking to add to our roster to help fill it in.
It is probably a long way to answer the question. I don’t know exactly how our power play will break down. We certainly have some ideas, options, and lots of discussions on it. We will see how the days unfold moving forward as we get closer to camp.
With Mitch Marner gone, where are you on the DNA change? Are you still looking for a few more molecules?
Treliving: The whole idea of that comment… We sometimes forget the context or the question that was raised. When you get to the end of the season, everyone is emotional. You lose a Game 7 in the second round, and it feels like you haven’t made the playoffs in 10 years. You have to take a step back.
My observation is that a lot of good things happened with our team last year. Now, in that particular series, at very critical moments… Now, Game 6 (against Florida) was a critical moment. Game 6 in Ottawa was a critical moment. But in the two years that I have been here, we were short some bodies in Game 7 in Boston, and we lost 2-1 in overtime. We didn’t have good games in Game 5 or Game 7 here against Florida.
It doesn’t get talked about, I don’t think, but Game 3 was a great opportunity, too. We were in overtime with an opportunity to go up 3-0. Certainly, with the way it ends in Game 7, in a critical area and a critical moment, we need to be better.
It is not just airlifting in 20 new players and shooting everybody who is here. I get the emotional reactions from people. But it’s about how we can be better. How do we improve? How do we improve mentally? How do we improve in those moments that are critical?
Certainly, personnel is one. Preparation is another. Mental toughness is another. There is a lot that goes into it.
The easy reaction is that any player who is signed gets stuck to “DNA,” but that gives a little context behind the headline of what I was talking about with that.
What are your expectations for Nic Roy? Why was he someone you targeted? Can you also address what you are getting in Michael Pezzetta and Matias Maccelli?
Treliving: Nic may not be the big, sexy name, but to me, Nic is a player who helps you win. If you are trying to be a winning team — as we’ve heard Lou Lamoriello talk about in years past — it is like building an orchestra. You need everybody in the right chair.
Nic was in a situation in Vegas where he was playing behind Eichel, Karlsson, and Hertl. Those are three pretty good centermen. He is a big, right-shot centerman who can kill penalties, play in a matchup role, and play against other teams’ best.
He has a sneaky skill set. He has good hands around the net. He gets to the net. He can kill penalties. He gives us something in the middle of the ice that we didn’t have. He is a right-shot penalty killing option, and on right-side faceoffs, he gives us another option there.
To give you a little insight into the team-building standpoint, we all get infatuated with 1-2-3-4 in terms of lines and first-line centers and second-line centers. Probably 20-plus teams in the league are looking for the prototypical second-line center. But a lot of what the game is is matchups.
I have used the analogy of Winnipeg. No team is perfect, but that is a pretty darn good team that won the President’s Trophy. When you look down the middle of the ice, you have Scheifele as the #1. On paper, you have Namestnikov as #2 and Lowry as #3, but again, it all comes down to deployment.
When you look at our roster now, you have Nic Roy, who can take a lot of defensive heavy lifting with defensive-zone starts, defensive faceoffs, and matchups. When you put those into a pot, it allows you to not necessarily get lost on your 1-2-3 but spread out matchups and situational play that could free up different people when we talk about Auston, John, and Scotty Laughton.
When I look down the middle of our ice right now, it gives us a lot of different options. He was an important player for us to get. It is a player we have had a lot of interest in for a long time. We are excited to get him.
With Maccelli, again, when we look at our roster and subtract Mitch, we are trying to look at the aggregate of how to replace some of the assets Mitch has. One of them is playmaking ability.
Maccelli is coming off a down year, had some injuries, and fell out of favour. He lost some confidence. But when you really dig into him, he is a guy who makes a lot of plays, can retrieve pucks off the wall, goes into traffic, has really good vision, moves around the ice really well, and has the ability to elevate others in terms of making plays.
The thought process behind it: We have people who can finish. A lot of play-driving and offensive distribution is an area that, with Mitch being gone, we were looking for. We felt the opportunity cost was manageable.
We have some ideas where he will fit, but bringing in that skill set was something that we felt had some upside for us.
With Pezzetta, he brings forechecking ability. He skates really well. He is a very willing competitor, which I think you can never have too much of. He plays hard. He is a great teammate. We will see how it all sorts itself out here, but he is a guy who is never going to cheat you with effort.
It goes back to the comment I made earlier. When you are building a team, you need all kinds to fit into different roles. We were glad that Michael came to us. He will give us some juice.
