Guru Tugginmypuddah
Well-known member
herman said:
There is our best player right there.
Armchair President/GM 2023-2024
- Thread starter herman
- Start date
There is our best player right there.
Jolly good show chaps
Member
Rob said:
Where? Looks like he has disappeared.
Redleaf
Active member
I get the implication, just posting the stats for games 5, 6, 7 but it?s kind of a small sample size to base any quality assessment of who the best players are/is.
You?re removing all of the 82 game seasons games plus more than half of all the playoff games.
I mean I guess it makes a point but not a particularly strong one .
You?re removing all of the 82 game seasons games plus more than half of all the playoff games.
I mean I guess it makes a point but not a particularly strong one .
Redleaf
Active member
Bender said:
I?d say thats a pretty consistent theme among all four of the so called core-4 players. Take any one of them and surround them with players who thrive under pressure and they will all look better. The problem appears to be more about them as a group and not so much as individuals. That?s my take anyways.
herman
Well-known member
Bullfrog said:
Me neither, but outside of Tavares (unmoveable, captain, took a discount), the most inefficient contract is Marner's.
And like, Bender mentioned, if you need to shore up multiple positions, 11M can go a very long way, let alone the returning assets. I think Calgary would need to add to a Lindholm/Andersson for Marner (1 week left before NMC, next contract will try to match Matthews', not as good as Matthews).
Marner is not irreplaceable. He provides tremendous on-ice value offensively and defensively in one player. He is also relatively easy to isolate and gameplan around. Because of his usage and tendencies, nerfing him cuts the feet off his entire line / PP unit in the playoffs. His offensive value is covered by Nylander (exceeded if you don't count secondary assists and give Willy the PP role instead); his defensive value can be covered by much cheaper effort-energy forward. Nylander's next contract won't even go up to Marner's current cap hit.
Because Marner is recognized to provide tremendous on-ice value, he would net far greater return in a trade than anyone on this team short of Matthews. I don't like moving elite players either, but we're paying a low Tier 1 cap hit for a Tier 2 star. Would it not make more cap-sense long term to have Matthews surrounded by 3 or 4 more 7-9M players, rather than 2 13M+ trying to one-line carry a bunch of 3-4M plugs?
Bullfrog
Active member
99 points, Selke finalist, plays PP and PK.
He's pretty damn close to irreplaceable.
So I don't necessarily agree that surrounding Matthews with more 7-9M players is better. it certainly could be, but giving up Marner isn't getting you that.
The only reason I'd trade Marner is for a player of equal caliber.
He's pretty damn close to irreplaceable.
So I don't necessarily agree that surrounding Matthews with more 7-9M players is better. it certainly could be, but giving up Marner isn't getting you that.
The only reason I'd trade Marner is for a player of equal caliber.
bustaheims
Well-known member
Bullfrog said:
Agreed. He's an elite player on both sides of the puck. I'm not sure how that makes him a "tier 2 star." He's been voted the best in the league at his position for two straight seasons, and, while Tkachuk probably takes that honour this season, Marner likely gets the 2nd team All Star spot.
dappleganger
Active member
Kinda like Edmonton has two "top ten forwards", Toronto might have that too.
I still try to talk him into $8.8mil for vanity reasons but I'd have no problem with a $9mil AAV for Willy if it came to that. More or less lines up with the Filip Forsberg contract, and right now statistically Nylander has an almost identical profile to Forsberg when he signed. If Nylander waits though that number will only go up if he has another PPG+ season under his belt.
Circling back to them gives me big "we're not re-signing ROR and Acciari" vibes.
I'd take one of them back at $1.5mil though. So a pay cut for Kerfoot or no raise for Kampf. I don't see either player settling for that before July 1st though.
I'd take one of them back at $1.5mil though. So a pay cut for Kerfoot or no raise for Kampf. I don't see either player settling for that before July 1st though.
herman said:
Well Hayes to STL hasn't been officially completed but yeah if that does go down it would seem like ROR could be less of a priority for both of them. Don't think it officially closes the door though. Colorado would seem like they still have cap space to add ROR as a 3C if they wanted with Landeskog on LTIR. And if he returns to STL they'd probably be getting him at the best possible price/discount so it's possible he could be squeezed in there if they clear out a bit of salary.
CarltonTheBear said:
I'd happily take kerfoot back at 2.5 Great defensive impacts, durable, good speed, chips in a timely goal now and again? I doubt they'd get more on the FA market.
Kampf is sort of in no man's land where he's probably better than a 4th line player on a team that's less deep, but he's not in toronto, so you can't pay him like he is. But another team probably would. So good luck to the guy, he deserves a pay bump and more minutes elsewhere. Ideally, a player like him gets backfilled from the farm system if it's being managed well.