Fraser Minten and Nikita Grebenkin’s disappearances from the Marlies lineup this weekend coincided with a rush of reports out of Philadelphia about Scott Laughton’s potential future. With the Toronto Maple Leafs a noted interested party in the 30-year-old veteran, it only seems right to address the player’s fit with Toronto, the pros and cons of such a trade, and what assets should be off the board in a Laughton deal and why.
The Pros
Laughton is a player I think most NHL teams would like in some role. He’s the model of consistency; in his last six years, he’s been at about a 16 goal, 40 point pace with the Flyers. He’s done so without being a featured piece on the power play, only averaging about three power play points per season since 2019.
With that in mind, he certainly fills a need for the Leafs. Toronto has a chasm between their top-six and bottom-six forwards.
Toronto’s solidified top-six forwards have 82-game scoring paces of:
Nylander: 50
Matthews: 42
Tavares: 37
Knies: 34
McMann: 30
Marner: 25
After that, it’s Nick Robertson who, despite an on-and-off scoring form, is on pace for 14, and in eighth is Max Pacioretty (whose biggest issue this season has been availability) on pace for 11.
From that aspect, adding a guy who’s basically money in the bank for around 15–18 goals a year fully healthy isn’t a bad idea. Especially one that plays almost zero power play time and logs as much time on the penalty kill as Laughton does for Philadelphia.
Laughton slots in almost perfectly as a match-up third-liner, as he has a defensive-zone start percentage over 57% in five of the six seasons.
His possession numbers aren’t great during that stretch, there’s not a single season where his CF% was over 47%, but his on-ice PDO has also been consistently awful (likely due to Philadelphia’s tire fire of a situation in goal the last few years), Laughton’s on-ice save percentage has been below .900 in each of his last four seasons.
These numbers are essentially to say that Laughton plays a ton of high-leverage defensive zone minutes for the Flyers, and his line gets hemmed in pretty often as a result. However, while his defensive numbers don’t look amazing, he’s been marred by some pretty horrific luck.
Laughton also hits a decent bunch (averages around two hits a game), his 110 hits this season would be third amongst Leafs forwards this year behind only Lorentz and Knies. He’s also got experience playing centre; before this season he averaged around 800 face-offs per year for the Flyers.
Given Toronto’s rotating carousel at 3C this year between Minten, Kampf, Domi and Holmberg, bringing in a veteran like Laughton with ample experience playing this specific role is certainly an improvement.
The Cons
Toronto should be aiming higher.
This isn’t a slight against Laughton, whose 12-year NHL career warrants respect, but he hasn’t shown any ability to play a top-six role since his 53-point, age-24 season. Frankly put, in a world (like last season) where any of Nylander, Marner, Tavares or Matthews is injured, Laughton does not offer the skill set to provide offence in a top-six role.
He will have one role with Toronto and that would be as a third-line centre.
The issue?
Philadelphia isn’t even sure Laughton fills that role effectively anymore.
Laughton’s on pace for about half the face-offs he’s had in each of his last four seasons. He’s been played increasingly often on the wing this year when the Flyers are healthy.
In fact, Flyers Head Coach John Tortorella was on the record this season saying, “I prefer him on the wing.”
Frankly, if Laughton isn’t good enough to inspire the confidence to be the in-and-out third-line centre of a floundering Flyers team, whose 23–26–7 record has them as the second-worst team in the Eastern Conference, I’m not completely sold that he’d thrive in Toronto in that same role.
A further point is that Scott Laughton, despite being a 12-year pro, doesn’t exactly have the playoff resume you would hope for. His 2019–20 playoff run with Philadelphia was incredible, he had five goals and nine points in 15 games, but his offensive production has only declined since and he was running hot with a 25% shooting percentage that playoff run.
It’s been five seasons since we’ve seen Scott Laughton in the playoffs and while we hope that his physical, north-south style of game will thrive in a playoff environment, it’s truly an unknown.
For context, Nick Foligno had seven playoff runs under his belt when Toronto parted with a first for him. Ryan O’Reilly’s playoff resume speaks for itself. While Foligno was 33 when Toronto acquired him, O’Reilly was only 31.
O’Reilly essentially cost Toronto a first and third-round pick (Acciari’s asking price around the deadline was a second-rounder) and while he played third-line centre for the Leafs, he was 100% a proven playoff performer and someone who had the skill set to move up and down the line up to provide head coach Sheldon Keefe flexibility come playoff time.
If the 2026 first round Pick is on the table, go hunting for the next Ryan O’Reilly.
What’s a price Toronto should be willing to give up?
Frankly, the following players/pieces must be off the board for the Leafs in a Laughton trade: Minten, Cowan, 2026 first-round Pick.
That leaves the max offer at Florida’s second-round pick this year.
Members of the Flyers fanbase or even the Leafs fanbase might roll their eyes at this. After all, “Barclay Goodrow fetched a first-round pick,” so why shouldn’t Laughton? In reality, many people forget Tampa got a high third-round pick back in the trade from San Jose, which means Goodrow’s true value was probably around a second.
Some Leafs fans may raise their eyebrows at Minten’s inclusion on this “do not trade” list. A lot of arguments I’ve heard from the fanbase is that the best-case scenario for a Fraser Minten is Scott Laughton. While I don’t necessarily hold that view, the truth is that Minten’s value to the Leafs is even higher than that of the 2026 first round pick.
The Leafs guaranteed window is from now until the end of the current Matthews deal which is this year and the next three seasons. Could Matthews re-up? Probably, but Toronto doesn’t have the luxury to operate under that assumption. It also lines up with the true end of Tavares’ productive stretch; I imagine by the 2026–27 season Tavares will almost certainly be a third-line calibre player.
Any player (barring an absolute coup by the Leafs scouting team) drafted in 2026 won’t be an NHLer until the end of the window. Objectively speaking, players like Minten, Cowan and even Grebenkin have more value to the Leafs than that first because they provide cheap depth with the potential to grow and fill important roles within the next two years.
Leafs fans are quick to applaud a guy like Matthew Knies for showing out and excelling on a cheap rookie-level deal and then seem ready to move on from Minten just as he knocks on the door of potentially doing the same.
People forget Matthew Knies didn’t play his first game of hockey for the Leafs until the end of his age-20 season. Fraser Minten has already played 19 games for the Leafs and his age-20 season isn’t even halfway done yet. Matthew Knies played 80 games in his age-21 season last year and only had 35 points and now he’s on pace for 60 points at just 22 years old.
Toronto needs players like Fraser Minten (especially given he’s our only U21 centre anywhere close to the NHL), and if we’re giving up on him right as he’s on the cusp of becoming a full-time player on this team we better be getting someone a whole lot better than Scott Laughton.
Does he fit?
Long story short, I see a fit for Laughton in Toronto. He’s certainly an upgrade over the current bottom-six and offers positives in areas the Leafs could use improvements in. However, like Barclay Goodrow, he’s a good complimentary addition, not the main one and Toronto should treat his trade value as such.
If Toronto is looking to offload its premium trade chips like Minten, Cowan or that 2026 first round pick, the focus should be on a player of a higher quality.
Well like who? And what is your trade proposal?