GOAL: Claude Giroux opens scoring
Follow live coverage of tonight's Game 3 as the Battle of Ontario shifts to Ottawa with the Leafs up 2-0 on the Senators
The Toronto Maple Leafs and Ottawa Senators are going to overtime of Game 3 in their first-round playoff series. Watch: ESPN2 (U.S.) | Sportsnet/CBC (Canada)
ESPN2 (U.S.) | Sportsnet/CBC (Canada) Streaming: Fubo (try for free)
Subscribe to The Athletic on an exclusive offer here. Connections: Sports Edition Spot the pattern. Connect the terms Find the hidden link between sports terms
P2 18:22 - Senators 1, Maple Leafs 0
Ridly Greig goads William Nylander into taking an offensive zone tripping penalty, setting a pick by stepping in front of the Senators forward to give Ottawa a five-on-three power play. The Senators promptly score with Claude Giroux beating a screened Anthony Stolarz. Huge goal.
P2 19:45 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
William Nylander takes a tripping penalty. It's a five-on-three penalty for the Ottawa Senators.
P2 20:00 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
The Maple Leafs and Senators begin the second period of Game 3. Four-on-four action and then an Ottawa powerplay.
Not too long now until the second period of tonight's Game 3. There will be four-on-four hockey to start the period.
Getty Images Dom M.: McMann with 7 hits that period is great to see. Like that line tonight.
McMann with 7 hits that period is great to see. Like that line tonight. John M.: Bad penalty by Knies.
Bad penalty by Knies. Brent S.: Love it when Willy gets physical.
Love it when Willy gets physical. Alex B.: Playoff Nylander is an animal.
Getty Images
Shots:
Hits:
Faceoffs won:
Blocked shots:
Leafs forward Matthew Knies took a penalty at 20:00 of the first period for cross-checking Ridly Greig deep in the offensive zone. Earlier this series, Knies told reporters "it is definitely annoying" watching Greig's on-ice antics. Score another one for the Senators irritant.
Read more below about Greig becoming the "villain" of this series.
GO FURTHER
'Little rat': How Senators' quiet pest Ridly Greig became a hockey villain
P1 0:00 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
After one period, the Maple Leafs and Senators are 0-0. At the end of the period, Matthew Knies takes a cross-checking penalty.
There will be four-on-four hockey to start the second period.
P1 1:18 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
The Maple Leafs head to the powerplay after the Brady Tkachuk penalty. Toronto has four PP goals this series.
P1 3:51 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
Got to admit, I was a little bit surprised William Nylander elected to unleash a slap shot rather than going towards the net on that breakaway chance.
Linus Ullmark easily makes the save. Nylander smiles afterward.
Still 0-0 under four to play in the first period.
P1 4:01 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
Bobby McMann can't quite tip the puck into the back of the net. Linus Ullmark makes the save.
The third line looks a lot more energetic and active tonight.
P1 5:28 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
Five minutes left in the first period. Still a 0-0 game.
Mitch Marner is showing defensive prowess in his own zone, checking Shane Pinto along the boards, which results in a turnover.
The Leafs defensive play continues to shine.
P1 7:24 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
It's Linus Ullmark's turn to make a big save. John Tavares in the high slot fires a wrist shot that Ullmark gobbles up.
Still a 0-0 game. Both goalies playing well so far.
Tim Stützle just had one of the best looks the Senators have created all series, coming off the bench and taking a Drake Batherson pass while skating into the slot. However, Leafs goaltender Anthony Stolarz came out to the top of his crease to swallow up the Stützle shot. Stolarz is looming large over this series so far.
P1 8:50 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
The best chance of the game belongs to Tim Stützle. He comes through the slot and fires a wrist shot that's denied by Anthony Stolarz.
The Maple Leafs goalie is standing tall. It's still a 0-0 game.
P1 10:31 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
Dylan Cozens fires a wrist shot that's stopped by Anthony Stolarz. It's 0-0 at the first TV timeout of the game.
Take a breather, hockey fans. A fun start to Game 3 with end-to-end action.
P1 13:02 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
John Tavares steps back onto the ice. Toronto successfully kills the Ottawa powerplay.
Not many Grade A chances for the Senators on that powerplay opportunity.
P1 14:11 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
Mitch Marner's effective penalty killing is on display again. He deflects a Brady Tkachuk pass out of the zone, showcasing his active stick.
P1 15:04 - Maple Leafs 0, Senators 0
Brady Tkachuk draws the penalty on four-on-four, courtesy of John Tavares.
It's now four-on-three for 43 seconds. Big opportunity for Ottawa.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
No, the Maple Leafs should not (and cannot) run it back: Mirtle mailbag
A couple weeks ago, we put out the call for mailbag questions from Maple Leafs fans after another disappointing playoff exit for Toronto. Subscribers didn't disappoint in contributing nearly 350 for us to filter through, something I plan on doing between now and free agency. We'll start with these two, which hit on a theme I've heard a lot since the Leafs were eliminated on May 18. Advertisement From Curtis P.: 'The core of the Leafs hasn't gotten it done yet, but every season is a new opportunity — just like rolling dice, past outcomes don't dictate future results. This team is different; they've grown, adapted, and learned. The right move isn't to dismantle everything, but to plug that second-line centre hole and tweak the depth. If the price is right, why not run it back with a team that's already shown it can compete at the highest level? The Atlantic Division is the toughest in the league, and if we can get through that, the sky's the limit. A few adjustments could be the key to finally breaking through.' From Danny A.: 'Are we holding the Leafs to different standards than other teams? Why isn't 'perennially in the mix in a league where anyone in the playoffs had as good a chance as any other' at least considered a mild success? Mitch Marner seems as good as gone, but it feels to me like re-signing him and keeping the core as a bridge to the rising cap (which was the original plan that a frozen cap killed) would be as good a plan as any.' Even though I've been around this team and fan base for a long, long time, I've been surprised how many of you want the status quo. Even after all of the losing. Even after the way they were eliminated in the second round this time around. If what happened this year — an ugly Game 7 loss in the second round against a terrific opponent — was happening for the first, or second, or even third or fourth time, then you could rationally argue to run things back. Leafs management did just that for years, after some really tough outcomes in the playoffs in the six seasons between 2019 and 2024. (I'm counting 2017 and 2018 as a young team going through growing pains and losing to more experienced opponents.) But as we sit here, three weeks out from free agency in 2025, we know that's not what has happened. The loss to the Panthers wasn't the second or third time something like this has occurred. It's not a new phenomenon for a talented Leafs core to no-show in two of the biggest games of the year. It has happened again and again and again in remarkably similar fashion. Advertisement The Leafs' core isn't young anymore. They aren't learning lessons. William Nylander is 29. Mitch Marner turned 28 during the playoffs, and Auston Matthews will join him there in September. Key veterans like Morgan Rielly and John Tavares are on the back nine of their careers at 31 and 34. Can we chalk up the implosions in Games 5 and 7 to bad luck that can be overcome with another roll of the dice? Are we sure these aren't loaded dice, set to land on snake eyes more often than not? Is next season a new opportunity if you attempt the same thing again, for an eighth consecutive season, with those five players making up the majority of your star power and cap space? And how can you be sure that's the right course of action when it hasn't been so many times before? We aren't holding the Leafs to a different standard than other teams. What they've done in running it back for so many years is unlike anything an unsuccessful franchise in pro sports has done. It's hard to find a good comparison for an organization keeping that much of its core together for that long with this little to show for it. (The closest comp would likely be the 2018 Washington Capitals who won the Stanley Cup after years of failed attempts, but even then, it was really only Alex Ovechkin, Nick Backstrom and defenceman John Carlson who were together for seven-plus seasons before winning, which would be akin to keeping Auston Matthews, William Nylander and Morgan Rielly — not all five members of the Leafs' core. The Mike Greens, Alexander Semins and Brooks Laichs weren't kept in Washington through that many years of postseason disappointment.) Most management groups in this situation would have pulled the plug on this configuration and tried to adapt three or four years ago. Certainly by 2023, when they still had an out to make major moves. Advertisement As for if being 'perennially in the mix' is considered a mild success, sure, we can call it that. These Leafs are a mild success! Nine consecutive years in the playoffs in the Matthews era, something no other NHL team has done. Tenth in playoff games played — and 11th in wins — since drafting him first overall. Two trips out of the first round and none past the second. But no one is arguing that the Leafs have been an unmitigated disaster the way they were previously. They're arguing that mild success isn't good enough, not when the goal is to win the Stanley Cup. They're arguing about what the best path forward is to be more than a mild success. How do they win it all? What do they need to get over the top, before the inevitable rebuild comes 'round again? Maybe you believe that's possible with this group. But what we're seeing in these big games is repeated evidence that something is wrong, and that gets reinforced when I talk to people behind the scenes. At this point, they very much agree they need a rethink. The GM isn't coming out after the postseason and saying his team needs to change 'some DNA' for show. This core has been kept together so long that it's become stale and dysfunctional, on and off the ice. They've been kept together so long that they don't even believe in themselves anymore. Think about it: If Marner truly believed they were right there, just about to break through, and there was a good chance of winning the Stanley Cup in his hometown with the Leafs, why wouldn't he have been willing to negotiate throughout the year for an eight-year deal worth massive money? Why did he seem so withdrawn and noncommittal? To me this goes beyond negotiating strategies and a players' camp trying to push for the maximum dollar figure on July 1. It's about something being fundamentally off, for Marner and for this organization. The strange thing is the player seemed to recognize it before management did, which puts the Leafs in a real bind. It appears almost certain at this point that they'll lose one of the best players in the NHL for very little in return, which is why some fans are getting cold feet about breaking up the core. Even if you believe this group needs change, these are hardly ideal circumstances under which to do it. Advertisement However, the next steps in Toronto shouldn't be the mass destruction of the roster. For one, that's not even going to be possible, not with free agency coming fast and so much of this group under contract, with no-movement and no-trade clauses. What GM Brad Treliving and his staff need to do instead is to try to identify how they can change the cast around the core members who stay in such a way that it resets the environment and allows them to be better in critical situations. Watch those playoff failures and analyze the team's shortcomings — not just with the core, but at every position, up and down the lineup. There are a lot of different ways the Leafs need to be better, but realistically, only some of them can be addressed this offseason. Assuming Marner is leaving, the change has to be focused on building a more well-rounded and less top-heavy roster, one that gets contributions down the lineup the way Florida has this postseason. One that can control play better and produce more offence when games get tight in the playoffs. That is going to be challenging with the Leafs' lack of trade assets, a weak free agent class, and the number of quality players Toronto needs to add, but challenging does not equal impossible. The best front offices in the league have made transformations like this in recent years — swapping out core players, making bold trades and underrated signings — and been better for it on the other side. The Panthers, for example, had terrific regular season success — winning the Presidents' Trophy in 2022 — but were swept in the second round and decided they needed to make major changes. Four of the eight biggest-minute players on that roster were gone the next offseason. They've continued to adapt and evolve over the last few years, adding key core pieces through trades and free agency, including Seth Jones, Brad Marchand, Matthew Tkachuk and Niko Mikkola. That's not to say the Leafs haven't changed. The blue line, especially, has undergone a dramatic makeover in a similar time frame, with defensive defenders Chris Tanev and Jake McCabe replacing T.J. Brodie and Jake Muzzin. But you'd be hard-pressed to call Toronto's moves a successful re-envisioning, given how similar (and how small) they look when up against a championship-level opponent in a playoff series. It's time to try something new, to cut deeper and ask the tough questions about why things haven't worked. Advertisement In an ideal world, the Leafs would have properly identified the need for this level of change before Marner was set to walk for nothing. We're going to be litigating the fallout of that for years to come, but that doesn't change the fact that trying the same thing again next season should have been out of the question either way. The only positive out of Marner's decision is it finally removes the 'run it back' option from the equation. It gives the Leafs a chance to reimagine what that $11 million in cap space can do for them in the playoffs if deployed differently, in support of the players who remain. And to acknowledge that mild success isn't good enough after nearly a decade of trying. (Top photo of Brad Treliving: Steve Russell / Toronto Star via Getty Images)
New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
Who says no to these NHL trades (involving things that cannot actually be traded)?
In the NHL, you can't trade coaches. There was a time when you could, and it happened in 1987, when New York Rangers GM Phil Esposito sent a first-round pick to the Quebec Nordiques for head coach Michel Bergeron in a surprise swap. It was a creative move. It also didn't work, with Bergeron lasting less than two seasons, and the league quickly moved to make sure it wouldn't be tried again. These days, coaches are one of many assets a team is not allowed to trade. Advertisement Or are they? After all, we occasionally see coaching quasi-trades, like when John Tortorella and Alain Vigneault essentially swapped teams after being fired in 2013. More recently, the Rangers and Penguins didn't actually pull off a Mike Sullivan and David Quinn for Dan Muse trade, but it kind of worked out that way. Let's use that as inspiration. We've got time to kill between Stanley Cup Final games, so I put out a call to readers: Send me your 'who says no?' trade proposals involving things that cannot actually be traded. And you sure did. Can we pull off a blockbuster, or will it just be too complicated to make a trade in the cap era NHL? Let's find out. Note: Submissions have been edited for clarity and style. What are the Leafs lacking? Heart and grit. They vowed to change their DNA in the offseason. They need to disrupt their core even if it means losing some skill and finesse. So: To Edmonton: Carlton the Bear To Toronto: Hunter the whatever that is — Mike H. As mascots go, Hunter is a lot worse but also more intimidating, which is probably exactly the sort of move the Leafs will be looking to make this summer. After all, if you're going to acquire a vicious, ugly animal with crazed eyes and no instincts beyond preying on the weak and vulnerable, at least Hunter comes cheaper than Sam Bennett. But what's in it for the Oilers? Is the upgrade from Hunter to Carlton enough to justify disrupting a winning mix? I wasn't sure, so I reached out to the world's foremost experts on NHL mascots: Mark Lazerus' children. Here's what his daughter had to say: 'I think that a Hunter and Carlton trade wouldn't be good because real lynxes live in Alberta. Also, Carlton doesn't wear pants and Edmonton is really cold, so Carlton would freeze. In conclusion, Hunter is with his family and Carlton won't freeze his butt off.' Advertisement The no-pants thing is a strong catch. Sorry, Leafs fans, but the Oilers say no. To Pittsburgh: The rights to 'Brass Bonanza' To Carolina: Exclusive naming rights to Sebastian Aho — Dan H. I kind of love this one. Both teams are getting something of value. We might have a match. And sure, it looks lopsided at first glance. 'Brass Bonanza' is a legitimate star in this league. It's solidly in the GOAT conversation when it comes to novelty goal songs. But it's also the source of controversy among Hurricanes fans, with some embracing it while others see it as nostalgia for a team that they have no personal connection to. So you could argue that the Hurricanes would benefit from making a clean break from the Whalers stuff, and getting the exclusive naming rights to your biggest star isn't a bad way to do it. And of course, the Penguins get a fun new goal song that they can play (checks current roster) dozens of times during the season. I honestly think this one is a win-win. (In related news, Other Sebastian Aho apparently signed with the Penguins last summer. Who knew?) The PWHL receives: The Lady Byng, the Mark Messier, the Jennings, the King Clancy, the Clarence S. Campbell Bowl, the Prince of Wales trophy and a sixth-round pick The NHL receives: The PWHL expansion process and the PWHL Gold Plan — Peter B. Terrible trade. The PWHL doesn't just say no, it hangs up and immediately blocks the number as spam. Seriously, what kind of HFBoards madness is this? It's a classic 'seven nickels for a silver dollar' trade proposal. You're bundling up all the trophies that nobody wants and trying to get not one but two superstar-level concepts in return. This kind of lopsided offer would get you kicked out of my fantasy football league, Peter, do better. St. Louis receives: the 2012 and 2014 Stanley Cup runs Los Angeles receives: the Greatest Show on Turf success and the 1999 Super Bowl — Dylan C. As if L.A. would ever care about Rams football. Advertisement To the Arizona hockey ownership group: Terry Pegula To Buffalo: Alex Meruelo Meruelo is immediately placed on waivers and goes unclaimed. — Todd C. Yeah, we had a lot of Sabres fans trying to offload Pegula, and let's just say you weren't asking for much in return. Real buy-low opportunity right here. I can't imagine why. Still, Arizona says no. This is a classic salary dump, where a big-money player who hasn't been productive in years gets sent out to pasture. Given that, having the destination be Arizona is a nice touch. But while you're taking a bad contract bad in Meruelo, I think Arizona's going to want a few assets in return for taking Pegula's bigger commitment. To the Rangers: Jim Ramsay To Montreal: Dancin' Larry — 'Zach' Other fan bases may need an explainer on this one. Ramsay is the trainer the Rangers fired a few years ago. He was hired in Montreal, but many Rangers fans still view his exit as a symptom of the dysfunction of the Chris Drury/Jim Dolan era. So from the New York perspective, you could view this as trying to right a wrong. But Dancin' Larry, the Rangers superfan and scoreboard regular? He's fine, I guess, but I'm not completely sure he's a fit for Montreal. They're not really a dancing bunch, you know? Maybe if it was 'Telling a Boring Story About Some Guy From the 1930s Larry' we'd have a fit, but right now I think Montreal says no, holding out for more. Maybe toss in a proper hot dog recipe, New York. (By the way, I can't recommend Dancin' Larry's Instagram page highly enough. Just page after page of photos of him with Rangers fans, and he's doing the exact same face and pose in all of them. Not a pixel of difference. Seriously, it might just be a template. How do you move this guy? Get an NTC in that next extension, Larry, this can be a cruel business.) To Dallas: Hosting the Minnesota state high school tournament through 2030 To Minnesota: The Stars/North Stars name, mascots, colors, jerseys — Anonymous I'll admit, I was surprised how many of you want to trade the old North Stars branding back to Minnesota. Apart from trades involving palm trees going to Buffalo or lower tax rates for California and New York, the North Stars stuff was the most common concept by far. Does this deal work? It might. At least Dallas is getting something of value, which it could use to continue to build its fan base. I think the price is just too steep, given it'd be losing its name and branding. Dallas says no, but I could see a counteroffer involving just the classic North Stars stuff heading to Minnesota instead. Then again, what if there were a way for Dallas to acquire new branding? Well, about that … Vancouver needs new ownership and it's always better if it's someone local. If only there was a Vancouverite who randomly owned another team in the league … and if that team happened to have bad uniforms, that would be great, since the Canucks have three completely different logo/uniform/color schemes in their arsenal and can't seem to decide which one to run with. To Vancouver: Owner Tom Gaglardi, who has always wanted to own the Canucks anyway To Dallas: The orange, red and black 'Flying Skate' uniform/color scheme, and an agreement to pay all costs associated with rebranding Dallas to something more appropriate, like Outlaws. — Phil G. Hmm … I mean, part of the art of pulling off a truly great trade is finding an asset that's underappreciated, maybe because it's stuck down the depth chart. As Phil points out, the Canucks have one of the greatest uniform designs of all time just sitting around. The Flying Skate should be Vancouver's primary uniform — it never should have lost the job in the first place — but for whatever reason, it's not. OK, so let's send it somewhere that will give it the chance to be the superstar it should be. The logic is solid. Advertisement That said, you're not getting Gaglardi for a uniform. The owner may be the most important position on a modern NHL team, and Gaglardi would be a massive upgrade for the Canucks franchise. Dallas says no. But it's amicable. It's not closing the door if the Canucks wanted to circle on something down the road. In the meantime, one more for the Canucks … To Vancouver: The Leafs' 1950-51 Stanley Cup win To Toronto: The Canucks' 2011 Stanley Cup Final appearance The Canucks get a Stanley Cup, but one so long ago they'll still be mocked by opposing fans. But one is better than zero. Did they exist in 1951? Let's not worry about the details. The Leafs get yet another devastating loss to the Bruins in the playoffs, but at least this time in a Stanley Cup Final and all the good memories that go with that sort of run. A team that locals mostly like and have fond memories of, legends in the market. (Do not ask what other markets think.) All it costs is a Cup so long ago most fans don't remember it. Note: Canucks retain the riot, due to a NMC. — Greg P. On the surface, this one makes a lot of sense. The Canucks are getting the better asset — a Cup win is obviously better than a near-miss — but the recency bias plays a factor. And the Leafs are dealing from a position of strength, with the 'old Cup wins that nobody really remembers' cupboard pretty much overflowing. That said, Greg mentions the potential problem. While Vancouver fans hate how 2011 ended, it's still a pretty beloved version of the team. If you trade the whole run, that means you lose the Game 7 OT win over the Blackhawks, the Kevin Bieksa bank shot and other fun memories. Do you give all of that up just so you can ditch the Sabres at the 'zero Cups in franchise history' table? You have to give up something to get something, but that's pretty steep. My gut is that Vancouver says no, partly because it just doesn't want to let Leafs fans be happy. But I'd like to hear from Canucks fans in the comments to confirm. And since we're trying to end some Leaf droughts … To Montreal: The 1967 Stanley Cup championship To Toronto: The 1993 Stanley Cup championship The 1967 Cup would give Montreal the last Original Six win and a second run of five straight Cups within a decade. And having won in 1986 would mean their current drought wouldn't be appreciably longer. The '93 Cup reduces Toronto's drought dramatically, and gives them the honor of being the last Canadian team to win a Cup. Plus, we could stop talking about Kerry Fraser forever. — Sean B. Who says no? Every other fan base. They lose out on making fun of the Leafs' record Cup drought, the Habs get even more ammo for their history-firehose, and the last Canadian Cup win somehow becomes even more of a thing because Toronto won't shut up about it. The only gain for the other fan bases would be Leafs fans giving the Fraser stuff a rest after 33 years, and let's be honest, we wouldn't honor that part of the deal. Advertisement So yeah, everyone else hates this deal … which means there may be something here for the two teams involved. As beloved as that rag-tag band of old-timers from the 1967 team has become, I think this is a pretty easy 'yes' for the Leafs. It's a little dicier for Montreal, although I think Sean B. is making a decent case. Ultimately, while it's close, I think Montreal probably says no. Somebody break the bad news to Marty McSorley. Want to send in your trade proposal for a future version of this column? Email this address. (Top photo of Hunter the Lynx: Steph Chambers / Getty Images)
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
NHL Insider Links Panthers to Mitch Marner in Bold Pre-Free Agency Move
NHL Insider Links Panthers to Mitch Marner in Bold Pre-Free Agency Move originally appeared on Athlon Sports. Speculation continues to swirl around the future of Toronto Maple Leafs forward Mitch Marner. An unexpected report brought a new possible destination to the table. Advertisement The 28-year-old winger is set to become an unrestricted free agent on July 1, and multiple sources have indicated that Toronto is weighing scenarios to recoup value before his departure. Among the options being discussed is a sign-and-trade arrangement, in which the Maple Leafs would sign Marner to an eight-year contract and immediately flip him to a team of his choosing. According to David Pagnotta of The Fourth Period, this outcome is unlikely but not off the table. A "plausible" scenario, in Pagnotta's words, would involve Toronto trading Marner's negotiating rights before July 1 to give another team a head start in talks. On Saturday, Cam Robinson of Elite Prospects fueled Pagnotta's beliefs with a report confirming there's "real smoke" about the Florida Panthers' interest in Marner. Advertisement Robinson reported that Florida is "gearing up to make a run" at Marner, even before he reaches free agency. "There's real smoke that the Florida Panthers could be gearing up to make a run at Marner," Robinson wrote. "Word is that Toronto has opened the door to a sign-and-trade scenario, where they ink Marner to a max-term extension (eight years) and then flip him to recoup some level of value." Toronto, having Marner's negotiating rights, is the only franchise that can add an extra year to the winger's extension, making it eight years long instead of the seven-year deal all other 31 franchises can offer him. Toronto Maple Leafs forward Mitch Marner (16) and Florida Panthers forward Matthew Tkachuk (19) exchange words after a 2023 Stanley Cup Playoff Hamilton-Imagn Images Marner, who posted a career-high 102 points this past season, is expected to reach the market to evaluate all options on the table, and he's not publicly committed to either leaving or returning to Toronto. Advertisement Pagnotta noted that an extension is far less likely than with fellow veteran forward and pending free agent John Tavares. Robinson confirm that belief in his report. "The Leafs know that Marner is all but assured to leave," Robinson wrote. "For the acquiring team, moving a draft pick to avoid a bidding war is a very palatable cost. Whether Marner is keen for that route is another thing." Regarding other potential offers, Robinson quoted one source close to the matter, saying, 'That Marner to LA report is pure rubbish,' with regards to the Los Angeles Kings being one of the most-linked teams to the Maple Leafs star. Advertisement Related: Mitch Marner's Potential Maple Leafs Exit Sparks Unexpected Debate Related: Maple Leafs' Coaching Announcement Is Turning Heads This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jun 8, 2025, where it first appeared.
