I’ll let you all in on a little secret. I have a lot easier time writing about the Maple Leafs when things are going bad. Trade everyone, fix the powerplay, who should Toronto draft? That’s the low hanging fruit.

Right now, things are going a little too well in Leafs land, sure there is room for improvement, but it feels like nitpicking, being unnecessarily pessimistic, or putting the cart ahead of the horse. I’m thinking that adding a disclaimer to posts criticizing keeping Ryan Reaves in the lineup will need the disclaimer that Craig Berube is doing a solid job, the goaltending is fantastic, and perhaps risking rocking the boat when things are going well is unnecessary.

That said, here are a few nitpicky, pessimistic, and cart before the horse topics in the middle of the Leafs’ 10-2-1 run.

The rosters have been released for the Four Nations Cup? Tournament? Shindig? And while I can appreciate that some are excited for this event and have big feelings about the decisions that have been made, I fall into the “this isn’t for me” crowd, and while I won’t “poo poo” it for those starved for something resembling a best on best international tournament, I can’t muster too many opinions on what looks like a hybrid of the All-Star game and the World Cup of Hockey tournaments which haven’t meant much to me either.

At the end of the day, I’m a Toronto Maple Leafs fan and the NHL putting on tournaments that jeopardize the health of the Leafs’ star players and increase their chance of fatigue for the playoffs isn’t for me.

It’s largely because of that stance that rather than making cases for why John Tavares, Chris Tanev, Morgan Rielly, Anthony Stolarz, or Joseph Woll didn’t make the cut, I’ll do a happy dance that some of the old Leafs will get a chance to rest their achy bones and the Leafs’ goaltending tandem that features two goaltenders taking on the biggest workloads of their career will receive a two-week break from games in the heart of the season.

All of this works out pretty well for the Leafs and perhaps Craig Berube can find a way to load-manage Auston Matthews, William Nylander, and Mitch Marner after the fact.

The December roster freeze is coming up fast and with that, a brief flurry of trade rumours will appear before very little comes of it.

There is no reason to believe that anything is imminent on the Leafs front other than as their roster gets healthier Brad Treliving may want to move on from his surplus of NHL players, especially if he believes that Fraser Minten and Nikita Grebenkin are ready now, and if there is an appetite to see more of someone like Alex Steeves. At the very least Toronto is still holding onto Matt Benning that they are likely trying to find a home for.

If there was a December where Toronto could make a trade, it’s probably this one.

The mere possibility of a trade has triggered the question, who on the Leafs will likely stay put. I don’t like the term untouchable because theoretically if Connor McDavid was being shopped, the Leafs have no untouchables. Instead, the question becomes who is staying put this season and on the Leafs roster it is probably the following:

Auston Matthews; Matthew Knies; Mitch Marner; William Nylander; John Tavares; Max Pacioretty; Fraser Minten; Nikita Grebenkin; Steven Lorentz; Bobby McMann; Jake McCabe; Chris Tanev; Morgan Rielly; Oliver Ekman-Larsson; Anthony Stolarz; Joseph Woll

Beyond that, it’s hard to apply any level of job security to a player, even Max Domi who is a safe bet to stay but maybe hasn’t earned it.

Where things get interesting are when it comes to the Leafs draft picks and prospects. Understandably there is a desire to win now, and futures should be on the table, but at the same time, the Leafs’ prospect pool is already dangerously shallow and with no first round pick this season, will there be a reluctance to move their draft picks and/or top prospects like Easton Cowan? Absolutely. Again, depending on who the target is and how much term they have.

After that Cowan or future firsts, things get a bit murkier. Ben Danford hasn’t had a stellar draft plus one year, and others like Topi Niemela and Noah Chadwick aren’t necessarily sure things but still have some hype around them. Are the Leafs prepared to risk potential for help now? I’d argue that they probably should, and perhaps holding onto Nick Robertson too long serves as a cautionary tale.

Sometimes it is fun to ask questions that there are no clear answers for. I feel like this is one of those questions as the answer is that it clearly varies from player to player, but I think the reason for asking the question is more important than the actual answer.

The question is: How much money can a team offer a player that they will forego putting a no trade or no movement clause in their contract?

Like I said, it is going to vary a lot. Someone like John Tavares that might put a premium on a stable home for his family might not bend on the clauses at all, and some free agents that have hit the open market might have more of a mercenary approach and would happily take a few extra dollars in exchange for leaving the control over where they play entirely in the hands of their GM.

It’s a spectrum.

The reason why I find it intriguing is that with the salary cap escalating, overpayments on players will become less of an issue, but not having flexibility over rosters will be more of a challenge for GMs. In theory the player you are offering a ton of money to is a player that you are excited about and want to keep for the duration of the contract, but the reality is that it doesn’t always play out that way. The reality is that teams fall into rebuilding cycles as well and moving on from expensive players is beneficial, as is having greater flexibility on where they can be sent.

Using William Nylander’s contract as an example (acknowledging that it looks like he got the best of both worlds, the money and the clauses), the question would be whether Nylander at $11.25M AAV for 8 years and a full no movement clause is preferable to William Nylander at say $13M AAV for 8 years but he can be sent anywhere. (I’m using Nylander as an example purposely to avoid a Marner debate and because of the “what is done is done aspect of his situation.)

As the salary cap creeps over $100M, that $1.75M (as an example, who knows it likely costs even more to hand complete control over to the GM) seems like a small price to pay for flexibility and an opportunity to either recoup assets or open up a roster spot later in a deal.

Anyway, this is food for thought on a December weekend and the reality is star players will already be paid at record breaking rates with their no trade clause status intact. It would be interesting to see if we see any deals that go above and beyond on salary to avoid the clauses though, as the benefit of flexibility for the team would be worth tapping into in a changing cap environment.