Marleau signed [3 years, $6.25mil AAV]

[herman]

Has there been a forward like Thornton who came off of scoring 7 goals signing for anywhere near $8m, ever.

Don't get me wrong, he's a helluva player, but that $ per goal ratio has got to be a record.

Yeah, that's probably a safe assumption. The only other time in the past 10 seasons that a forward has scored less than 10 goals but 50 or more points was in 2015-16 when Mike Ribeiro did it.

Joe Thornton is listed as having taken 146 (!!!) attempts at the net in 1429 min of ice time last season, to the tune of 6.13 per 60 min, which translated to 82 shots on goal in 79 games -- just over 1 SoG per game. | link

 

[gilmourthegreat]

Seems unlikely. Usually people with facts tend to bring them to the party, not ask if they can borrow some.

Your petulance speaks volumes.

That seems like a safer assumption. Like I said though, I don't think there's such thing as a "typical" player in the NHL who's productive at 37 so I wouldn't say anything definitively.

Regardless I sort of reject the initial premise. I don't think the positive reaction to this deal is based on the idea that Marleau is, through the life of the deal, the exact same player he was last year.

I reject your characterization of my premise. I was surprised at people who thought his recent production (about 47 points per year) would be representative of his production during the contract.

Rather that for the length of the deal that he's probably going to actually play for he stays a productive player.

Ah, the old unassailably vague assertion. I suspect 'productive' will mean whatever you want it to mean at a later date. This is not a point of view, this is a tactic. Conversation doesn't need to have a winner.


Long story short, I think that based on the normal decline for human athletes between 37 and 39, Marleau is likely to decline between now and the second year of his deal. I think the third year is risky and may cost us will cost us, whether it be a pick to move him or a undeserved spot on the roster. The Datsyuk deal has been referenced, but let's not forget the hockey world was stunned by the return Holland received. Teams like Arizona don't need to overpay in a trade to reach the cap floor, they can just overpay a free agent instead. Marleau's NMC means we won't be able to put him in the minors even if he's unplayable.

 

[gilmourthegreat]

Challenge: accepted!

Performance at Various Ages
Age	37			39
Player	Points	Games	Points/Game	Points	Games	Points/Game
Roberts	48	72	0.66	40	58	0.69
Nieuwendyk	50	64	0.78	56	65	0.86
Doan	47	69	0.68	47	72	0.65
Jagr	42	51 (KHL)	0.82	54 35 (age 41)	73 45 (age 41)	0.74 0.78 (age 41)
Recchi	64	83	0.77	48	72	0.67
Shanahan	62	67	0.92	14	34	0.41
Andreychuk	33	74	0.45	34	72	0.47

The only person on that list that had markedly better production at 37 was Shanahan, but his 0.92 ppg is a bit of an anomaly. I guess you're out $5.

Well played for putting this together, thanks.

The ppg is meaningful, but I suspect that the significantly reduced amount of games these all-time greats played is not a coincidence. Given the impact of age on physical health, I find the total points scored between the age groups, 346 vs 293, to be representative of what you can expect from other players who age similarly. In fact, given the level of hockey talent this group had, I think most other players, including ones as good as Marleau, will be lucky to decline as slowly.

But to the point, your claim was for the average player. In that case, you're more likely to be correct because the average player is out of the league before 39. Marleau is still considered one of the better skaters in the league, so I don't foresee his production dropping off a cliff unless he gets injured. That could happen to a younger player too.

He certainly is one of the fastest, but I personally find that speed is one of those abilities which declines steeply when it finally starts to go. Unlike Marleau, most of the best older players I recall (Lemieux, Orr, Jagr, Macinnis, Chelios) didn't rely on speed. For the record I will be cheering for every goal he scores and want to be proved wrong.

 

[Kin]

Your petulance speaks volumes.

Hey, the moment you want to bring actual facts to the discussion the way Bullfrog did I'm all ears.

Ah, the old unassailably vague assertion.

Sure, much like "this signing was good" or "this player is bad" are vague assertions without defined statistical parameters. Most people seem relatively capable of powering through such vagaries though.

The Datsyuk deal has been referenced, but let's not forget the hockey world was stunned by the return Holland received. Teams like Arizona don't need to overpay in a trade to reach the cap floor, they can just overpay a free agent instead.

No, the hockey world wasn't "stunned"(a vague term that I'm sure will mean whatever you want it to mean in your next post) by that deal because the hockey world generally understood what you don't seem to about those deals. Overpaying a free agent isn't a solution for a team like Arizona because that involves actually paying the player the sum of their cap hit. Acquiring deals like the Datsyuk deal allows them to reach the cap floor without actually spending real money.

Acquiring deals like this is a way for those teams to save money. Overspending on free agents doesn't do that. That's why these dead money deals have value.

 

[Kin]

He certainly is one of the fastest, but I personally find that speed is one of those abilities which declines steeply when it finally starts to go. Unlike Marleau, most of the best older players I recall (Lemieux, Orr, Jagr, Macinnis, Chelios) didn't rely on speed. For the record I will be cheering for every goal he scores and want to be proved wrong.

Selanne, Gartner, Coffey, Niedermayer...

And which Orr is this referring to? Because Bobby was effectively finished at 28.

 

[Coco-puffs]

He certainly is one of the fastest, but I personally find that speed is one of those abilities which declines steeply when it finally starts to go. Unlike Marleau, most of the best older players I recall (Lemieux, Orr, Jagr, Macinnis, Chelios) didn't rely on speed. For the record I will be cheering for every goal he scores and want to be proved wrong.

Selanne, Gartner, Coffey, Niedermayer...

And which Orr is this referring to? Because Bobby was effectively finished at 28.

Niedermayer retired at 36.  Not a good example.... the rest are fine though; and Orr's name being mentioned made me laugh out loud a little too loudly for the office.

 

[Bender]

He certainly is one of the fastest, but I personally find that speed is one of those abilities which declines steeply when it finally starts to go. Unlike Marleau, most of the best older players I recall (Lemieux, Orr, Jagr, Macinnis, Chelios) didn't rely on speed. For the record I will be cheering for every goal he scores and want to be proved wrong.

Selanne, Gartner, Coffey, Niedermayer...

And which Orr is this referring to? Because Bobby was effectively finished at 28.

I'd also argue the game has changed since  a lot of those slower players retired. You could get away with being Darian Hatcher before, not anymore.

 

[gilmourthegreat]

Hey, the moment you want to bring actual facts to the discussion the way Bullfrog did I'm all ears.

You belittle yourself with this tone. Athletes notably decline in their late 30's, if you don't agree with this established fact that's fine.

Sure, much like "this signing was good" or "this player is bad" are vague assertions without defined statistical parameters. Most people seem relatively capable of powering through such vagaries though.

The thing is, your vagaries seem less like genuine expressions of belief and more like calculated strategies.  You rarely commit to a point of view while simultaneously demanding specifics from others, all in the name of oneupsmanship. It can be exhausting to read.

No, the hockey world wasn't "stunned"

https://www.nhl.com/news/red-wings-gm-holland-pulls-off-magical-datsyuk-trade/c-281048512

Semantics?

 

[gilmourthegreat]

Niedermayer retired at 36.  Not a good example.... the rest are fine though; and Orr's name being mentioned made me laugh out loud a little too loudly for the office.

Yeah my bad. Based on footage Orr had an old-man game near the end. My point is that smart players usually hold up better than athletic specimens, which makes future reliance on Marleau's speed risky.

 

[Coco-puffs]

Niedermayer retired at 36.  Not a good example.... the rest are fine though; and Orr's name being mentioned made me laugh out loud a little too loudly for the office.

Yeah my bad. Based on footage Orr had an old-man game near the end. My point is that smart players usually hold up better than athletic specimens, which makes future reliance on Marleau's speed risky.

I think you are underestimating Marleau's smarts here then.  As much as his speed stands out, the guy scores lots of goals because he knows where to be in the offensive zone to capitalize- whether its tap ins, rebounds, slot shots etc.  He didn't get to over 500 career goals only on his speed.

 

[herman]

https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2017/07/04/lou-lamoriello-toronto-maple-leafs-offseason-additions-want-reassure-everybody-core-young-players/

Let?s talk a little bit about this deal. Obviously, you went after him. I assume this was not entirely a Lou Lamoriello initiative, and that you had conversations with your cohorts there at MLSE. Was there a consensus that this was a guy that you felt you wanted to get?

Lamoriello: I feel very comfortable answering that. It was a unanimous consensus on the player. He had a lot of teams that were interested in him for a lot of different reasons.

First of all, the player he is and the way he plays, and what his abilities are, and also the type of individual he is ? that played a role into the decision. With the young players, we saw them last year and what they did and what they?re capable of doing, but they need the education, the professionalism and the support staff to help them grow in every way.

When you?re able to get a player like Patrick Marleau who, in our opinion, still has a lot of hockey left? put age aside, his skating abilities are what makes it very, very attractive. He?s an elite skater. Skaters who sort of labour in the latter part of the career, they have a difficult time. And with the way he is taking care of himself throughout his whole career, he?s played just about every game he could play, including the whole season the last three years.

Yes, there is always a risk in any decision that you make, but with where the team is at, what he can bring to the players that we have and the education process, it was really a [unanimous] decision. It was unanimous amongst our whole group with what he can do. Yes, it?s a pricey contract. We feel that this is probably the only time in the careers of the young players that we have that we could take this type of a chance. When I say chance ? getting a player like this to help, not only on the ice but off the ice and in the locker room, with the growth. You can?t emphasize enough how important that is.

I know it's appealing to authority, but it's so relieving to know that Dubas signed off on this too.

Unless he didn't because he wasn't included in the discussion *hyperventilates

 

[Zee]

https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2017/07/04/lou-lamoriello-toronto-maple-leafs-offseason-additions-want-reassure-everybody-core-young-players/

Let?s talk a little bit about this deal. Obviously, you went after him. I assume this was not entirely a Lou Lamoriello initiative, and that you had conversations with your cohorts there at MLSE. Was there a consensus that this was a guy that you felt you wanted to get?

Lamoriello: I feel very comfortable answering that. It was a unanimous consensus on the player. He had a lot of teams that were interested in him for a lot of different reasons.

First of all, the player he is and the way he plays, and what his abilities are, and also the type of individual he is ? that played a role into the decision. With the young players, we saw them last year and what they did and what they?re capable of doing, but they need the education, the professionalism and the support staff to help them grow in every way.

When you?re able to get a player like Patrick Marleau who, in our opinion, still has a lot of hockey left? put age aside, his skating abilities are what makes it very, very attractive. He?s an elite skater. Skaters who sort of labour in the latter part of the career, they have a difficult time. And with the way he is taking care of himself throughout his whole career, he?s played just about every game he could play, including the whole season the last three years.

Yes, there is always a risk in any decision that you make, but with where the team is at, what he can bring to the players that we have and the education process, it was really a [unanimous] decision. It was unanimous amongst our whole group with what he can do. Yes, it?s a pricey contract. We feel that this is probably the only time in the careers of the young players that we have that we could take this type of a chance. When I say chance ? getting a player like this to help, not only on the ice but off the ice and in the locker room, with the growth. You can?t emphasize enough how important that is.

I know it's appealing to authority, but it's so relieving to know that Dubas signed off on this too.

Unless he didn't because he wasn't included in the discussion *hyperventilates

"It was a unanimous consensus on the player." says Lamoriello "myself, Brendan, Mark, we all loved him"

 

[slapshot]

These example contracts seem less plausible to me than what I was discussing. But anyway, I don't really care about how plausible it is for Williams to have signed.  I'd be more interested if you wanted to argue simply that you'd prefer Marleau and his contract on the leafs vs Williams and his contract, under the assumption you simply had your choice.

Right, again, I don't think comparing deals a team signed to deals they may or may not have been able to is a particularly fair avenue of criticism but never let it be said I'm not accommodating. I do prefer Marleau and his deal to Williams and his and here are the reasons why:

- Marleau is, I think, a better player. His 27 goals last year were more than Justin Williams has scored in a season since 2006-2007. Over the course of his career, he's averaged 28 goals per 82 games. This is a full 33% higher than Williams averaging 21 over 82.

- Marleau fits the Maple Leafs better and is more versatile. Marleau primarily plays left wing, as he is a left handed shot, which is the team's weakest position. Williams plays RW, the team's strongest position. Marleau also has experience at C and can fill in there at a pinch, with pretty solid face off numbers. Williams, to my knowledge, has never played C in the NHL.

- While neither guy was a regular PK contributor last year, Marleau has been as recently as 2015-2016. Williams hasn't been a regular PK contributor since 2006-2007. Marleau has twice been a top 10 Selke finisher while I can't find evidence Williams ever received a vote. If Marleau is a better defensive player, he also does it while taking significantly fewer penalties than Williams.

-  I think the financials are irrelevant for reasons we've discussed. The Leafs aren't going to be a team in desperate need of cap space in the next two years and I don't think Marleau will be here for the 3rd.

- I think your various intangibles, leadership and experience and size(which I suppose is tangible but its value isn't) favour Marleau almost universally.

Sure.  These are good examples.  There is still some risk until the deal has actually been made.

I suppose that's true in the abstract but let's keep in mind what these deals are. A dead cap hit of 6 million for a retired player is basically a way for a team like Arizona or Vegas(or whatever other team might be at the floor) to save millions of dollars.

So while I acknowledge there's a nominal risk that the deal might be hard to move if, say, no teams are in that situation I'm pretty confident that hockey in Arizona isn't going to be super profitable in two years time. In which case I'm not terribly worried about this management group's ability to give away money. If I were, I'd probably have bigger doubts about their abilities that worried me more than the potential downside of this deal.

This is a good point.  Would Lou threaten to use that if the consensus is that Marleau is still able to score 20 goals (or Marleau thinks he can)?

Well, keep in mind that I think that it's a moot point as I think the structure of this deal does everything but print PATRICK MARLEAU WILL NOT PLAY IN 2019-2020 in big bright neon letters.

I think this is a case of the Leafs using their financial means to effectively pay Patrick Marleau 8.5 million per year for two years of hockey while spreading out the cap hit at a time when the cap concerns are so small that it's one of the rare times when I can say, as I did in the pre-cap days, that it's not my money so I don't really care how the Leafs spend it because it won't have a negative impact elsewhere.

But even if I'm wrong, even if the structure of this deal doesn't reveal a single thing about its intentions, I think Lamoriello(if it's even him in charge at that time) has proven to be pretty unsentimental about these things and, quite frankly, if Marleau has degenerated to the point where he's no longer a useful enough forward to keep around then I don't even think it's all that drastic a tactic. I think any UFA knows that despite whatever deal they sign, they still have to earn their place in the lineup.

I would tend to agree with your assessment Nick. I think we still get two decent years out of Marleau and he's not around for the third. I don't think this deal is so much about either Marleau or JVR about getting more first class leadership in the dressing from someone who actually has a great skill set as well. JVR probably has more in the offensive tank simply because he's younger, but I've never seen him as a particularly effective defensive player, and occasionally quite the opposite. With Marleau your getting a guy with a lot of skill but that also pays attention to the fine details of the 200-foot game. I think Babcock also really likes his demeanor, so I think the Leafs are weigh a part of the price they paid, not only to what Marleau brings on the ice, but to the dressing room in general, and because they could afford to.

 

[Kin]

I know it's appealing to authority, but it's so relieving to know that Dubas signed off on this too.

Unless he didn't because he wasn't included in the discussion *hyperventilates

Not that it matters a great deal but the idea of an appeal to authority as a logical fallacy really only applies when you're talking about a level of authority granting a certain omnipotence rather than, say, a specific area of expertise.

"He's the President, so he probably knows what he's doing when it comes to science" is, for instance, a fallacious appeal to authority. "He's the head of the Physics department at CalTech, so he probably knows what he's talking about when it comes to physics" isn't.

So I don't think "he's a GM, so he knows a lot about hockey, so his making this move is good evidence that it will be a successful one" is an appeal to authority so much as it just is a general falsehood.

I'd probably be more concerned with the fact that you think that if there was dissension regarding this move, Lamoriello would say so.

 

[herman]

I'd probably be more concerned with the fact that you think that if there was dissension regarding this move, Lamoriello would say so.

There are greater things to be concerned about me. I just spent the day defending Hyman's value.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

"It was a unanimous consensus on the player." says Lamoriello "myself, Brendan, Mark, we all loved him"

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

"It was a unanimous consensus on the player." says Lamoriello "myself, Brendan, Mark, we all loved him"

3 years is a long time.

 

[disco]

I think it's noteworthy that a guy drafted second overall 20 years ago is willing to leave the only team he's ever known and move across the continent with his wife and four kids to begin again at age 37. I heard that the Leafs went after him the moment free-agency began. They probably weren't the only club willing to give that third year. A sweetheart deal sure, but still a huge move for a guy nearing the end of his career. I think it speaks to the way Toronto is being perceived now. There's not only a real opportunity to win here now and play with skilled players, but the club seems competently run from the top down.

 

[ZBBM]

Someone should tap Lou and the shoulder and whisper in his ear that "a unanimous consensus" is self-contradictory.

Yeah, I get that nobody's paying him for his grammar. But I bet Dubas wouldn't have said that.

 

[disco]

https://twitter.com/c_marleau/status/890725595327234048

Welcome to the 6ix Patrick.