Marner signs 6 year, $10.893mil AAV contract

[Kin]

And what's the idea here? What did the management team think was going to happen if they met Tampa Bay in the playoffs? That the Leafs $33M core 3 forwards would not only outplay Tampa's $25M ones but also outplay them by so much that the advantage Tampa has farther down its line-up would be negated? You have to be supremely confident in Matthews, Tavares, and Marner to make that bet, and, even then, it's a weird way to build a team.

Ok. So I'm Tavares' agent. You're Kyle Dubas. Convince me to sign for what Stamkos is getting. Or Point/Marner. Or Matthews/Kucherov. Or Hedman vs. virtually any other elite defenseman in the NHL.

At some point "But lookit Tampa..." isn't the answer to everything and you realize they're the exception, not the rule.

 

[bustaheims]

Also, really, the Kucherov thing. Their roster and salary structure would look quite different if he was healthy to start the season. Creating almost $10M in cap space isn't the easiest thing in the world.

 

[Chris]

What about Tampa? If you take their 4 highest cap hits you get about $5 mill less than the Leafs top 4. Tampa has a whole bunch of supporting cast forwards in the $4-$6 mill range. They seem to be a pretty good team. That's what the Leafs could have been. Now they have to hope several of the young players hit early, or that they find cheap gems in the free agent pool. Nick Robertson does not look ready to me and is frequently injured. Rodion Amirov have never played over here. Pavel Gogolev? 20 years old, looked promising in AHL but...it's a lot to hope for. Maybe Anderson makes the jump and we get improvements from Brooks, Engvall, Mikheyev (if they're all even in the organization next year). Maybe.

Tampa has done a much better job of A) spreading that money across forwards and D, B) signed players for below market value because of their tax situations, and C) $5M in cap space is a lot more than it initially seems like. They were also desperate for a team to take Tyler Johnson off their hands this season, and had Kucherov on LTIR all season, which allowed them a lot more flexibility. The Kucherov thing makes them a very poor direct comparison - their playoff roster would be well over the cap. Between the expansion draft and cap issues, their depth is also going to take a big hit this offseason.

They were already basically begging teams to take Tyler Johnson off their hands this offseason. I imagine they'll be regretting a few of those other mid-level deals in the next few seasons.

I had forgotten about Kucherov being out most of the season  : and your other point about the tax situation is certainly important and the league should probably figure out a way to account for that when setting the cap. Ultimately, though, if the Leafs had that extra $5 mill or so (saved from the big 3/4) they could have had a much better supporting cast. One that may still get destroyed by Tampa or Colorado but at least they'd probably get there. And if you get there, anything can happen.

Edit to add...give me one Cup and I'll happily take on whatever problems those mid-level contracts might cause down the road.

 

[Kin]

Like, I really don't know what to say to some people. I mean, I wish Dubas got to negotiate Matthews extension after two years of 14 and then 21 goals the way Colorado got to with Mackinnon but...he didn't? It sure would have been better for the Leafs cap situation if Matthews didn't immediately become one of the best goal scorers in the league and then stay there but...he did?

 

[bustaheims]

Like, I really don't know what to say to some people. I mean, I wish Dubas got to negotiate Matthews extension after two years of 14 and then 21 goals the way Colorado got to with Mackinnon but...he didn't? It sure would have been better for the Leafs cap situation if Matthews didn't immediately become one of the best goal scorers in the league and then stay there but...he did?

People love pointing to the outliers as proof.

 

[Kin]

I had forgotten about Kucherov being out most of the season  : and your other point about the tax situation is certainly important and the league should probably figure out a way to account for that when setting the cap.

I always think it's weird that people give so much credit to the tax difference, which is probably overstated, and don't care at all about the practical realities of playing in Tampa, to a largely disinterested public, vs. playing in Toronto with a rabid and critical media following.

Like Mitch Marner right now is probably waking up to thousands of tweets telling him he's a bad person for not scoring enough in the playoffs and people don't think that plays any role in negotiations.

 

[ZBBM]

Maybe, but you can't just keep giving away those pieces for nothing (Johnsson) or for a poor return (Kadri).

I don't think Johnsson had a ton of value, quite frankly, as he was coming back from a major injury and a disappointing year. Also, it's too early to write Anderson off as nothing - he's a "might be something useful in a year or two."

As for the Kadri deal, it's unfortunate how that turned out, but if Barrie was a good fit for the Leafs, we'd see that deal in a very different light. In hindsight, it doesn't look great, but in terms of value at the time, it was a pretty decent return for a guy the entire league knew the Leafs were looking to move.

Johnsson was starting the Leafs top 6.  I would think that would get you, what, maybe a 2nd? Or a 3rd?  Something more than a reclamation project.

The problem with the Kadri deal is that Dubas targeted (or settled for) the wrong kind of defenseman as the main piece.  Kerfoot definitely returned some value, but Kadri was worth way more than that.

 

[Kin]

Johnsson was starting the Leafs top 6.  I would think that would get you, what, maybe a 2nd? Or a 3rd?  Something more than a reclamation project.

Kind of in a bit of a paradox there. He was starting in the Leafs top 6 but managed 8 goals in 43 games. Seems to me like that probably isn't seen as super valuable.

Either way, if he was worth that to a team, a team would have offered that.

 

[rdowdall]

I had forgotten about Kucherov being out most of the season  : and your other point about the tax situation is certainly important and the league should probably figure out a way to account for that when setting the cap.

I always think it's weird that people give so much credit to the tax difference, which is probably overstated, and don't care at all about the practical realities of playing in Tampa, to a largely disinterested public, vs. playing in Toronto with a rabid and critical media following.

Like Mitch Marner right now is probably waking up to thousands of tweets telling him he's a bad person for not scoring enough in the playoffs and people don't think that plays any role in negotiations.

I'm going to build an app for hockey players called "Poke Check Twitter".  It will massage the content of the tweet for the hockey player to make it more manageable.  So something like:

"I hope you die in a tire fire"

becomes:

"I hope you die in a tire fire.  I really like your hair though.  Are you conditioning it daily, or do you follow a different regimen?"

I think that softens the blow a lot, and it should really help the mental disposition of hockey players in Canada who have to put up with some pretty over-the-top tweets simply because they didn't play that hockey good. 

 

[ZBBM]

Johnsson was starting the Leafs top 6.  I would think that would get you, what, maybe a 2nd? Or a 3rd?  Something more than a reclamation project.

Kind of in a bit of a paradox there. He was starting in the Leafs top 6 but managed 8 goals in 43 games. Seems to me like that probably isn't seen as super valuable.

Either way, if he was worth that to a team, a team would have offered that.

I don't recall that they were forced to trade Johnsson at that point in time for whatever reason ? or were they?  If not, then I think Dubas should have waited to see if changing circumstances brought a better return.

 

[Kin]

I had forgotten about Kucherov being out most of the season  : and your other point about the tax situation is certainly important and the league should probably figure out a way to account for that when setting the cap.

I always think it's weird that people give so much credit to the tax difference, which is probably overstated, and don't care at all about the practical realities of playing in Tampa, to a largely disinterested public, vs. playing in Toronto with a rabid and critical media following.

Like Mitch Marner right now is probably waking up to thousands of tweets telling him he's a bad person for not scoring enough in the playoffs and people don't think that plays any role in negotiations.

I'm going to build an app for hockey players called "Poke Check Twitter".  It will massage the content of the tweet for the hockey player to make it more manageable.  So something like:

"I hope you die in a tire fire"

becomes:

"I hope you die in a tire fire.  I really like your hair though.  Are you conditioning it daily, or do you follow a different regimen?"

I think that softens the blow a lot, and it should really help the mental disposition of hockey players in Canada who have to put up with some pretty over-the-top tweets simply because they didn't play that hockey good.

I mean, I'm fairly sure none of these guys read their twitter accounts beyond some of the choicer DMs but sure.

 

[Kin]

I don't recall that they were forced to trade Johnsson at that point in time for whatever reason ? or were they?  If not, then I think Dubas should have waited to see if changing circumstances brought a better return.

They were up against the cap and wanted to pursue Brodie and so forth. So they weren't forced to, but they did decide the money would be better spent elsewhere. And I think with good reason.

But even so, that's a different criticism than he was worth a lot more than they got. And it's not like his season this year changed the narrative much.

 

[mr grieves]

This became a conventional wisdom around here and for good reason (Davey Clarkson!), but it's possible to go too far in the other direction, no?

If you're so penny wise in the middle of your roster that you can't afford guys who can score a goal here or there, you risk looking pound foolish when only 1 of your 4 stars is going and the likes of Engvall, Mikheyev, Simmonds are bumbling attempts that somewhat higher paid guys are converting in other series.

No, you're making an excellent point. Your position of "The Leafs paying their superstars as much as they did has hurt their ability to add depth via free agency" is a much better position than the "Actually it's really good and smart to have no scoring depth" one that we are.

"That we are" ... what? "Holding," I guess? I suppose your point is that I'm straw-manning you. Okay.

To be clear: I don't think you or anyone else here thinks it's really good and smart to have no scoring depth, but I do think anyone who's sanguine about things like the Marner contract doesn't have a very realistic idea of how the Leafs are going to get that scoring depth. Just draft up some good young guys, fill up the pipeline, and no shortcuts -- you know, like Tampa!

Well, ok then...

But:

At some point "But lookit Tampa..." isn't the answer to everything and you realize they're the exception, not the rule.

 

[Kin]

I suppose your point is that I'm straw-manning you. Okay.

To be clear: I don't think you or anyone else here thinks it's really good and smart to have no scoring depth, but I do think anyone who's sanguine about things like the Marner contract doesn't have a very realistic idea of how the Leafs are going to get that scoring depth. Just draft up some good young guys, fill up the pipeline, and no shortcuts -- you know, like Tampa!

Well, ok then...

But:

At some point "But lookit Tampa..." isn't the answer to everything and you realize they're the exception, not the rule.

I guess the one very minor inconsequential difference is that I never said "like Tampa" or anything approaching it because I actually believe that Tampa is not the only team in the NHL that has managed to draft and develop depth pieces and I think it's actually a pretty reasonable target for a team investing more money in scouting and development than anyone else as opposed to, say, convincing a perennial Norris contender to sign for less than 8 million per year.

But kudos on that very organic theatrical flourish that bore absolutely no relation to anything I'd said. And sorry for accusing you of putting words in my mouth.

 

[rdowdall]

I had forgotten about Kucherov being out most of the season  : and your other point about the tax situation is certainly important and the league should probably figure out a way to account for that when setting the cap.

I always think it's weird that people give so much credit to the tax difference, which is probably overstated, and don't care at all about the practical realities of playing in Tampa, to a largely disinterested public, vs. playing in Toronto with a rabid and critical media following.

Like Mitch Marner right now is probably waking up to thousands of tweets telling him he's a bad person for not scoring enough in the playoffs and people don't think that plays any role in negotiations.

I'm going to build an app for hockey players called "Poke Check Twitter".  It will massage the content of the tweet for the hockey player to make it more manageable.  So something like:

"I hope you die in a tire fire"

becomes:

"I hope you die in a tire fire.  I really like your hair though.  Are you conditioning it daily, or do you follow a different regimen?"

I think that softens the blow a lot, and it should really help the mental disposition of hockey players in Canada who have to put up with some pretty over-the-top tweets simply because they didn't play that hockey good.

I mean, I'm fairly sure none of these guys read their twitter accounts beyond some of the choicer DMs but sure.

Ah, but now they could.

 

[L K]

I had forgotten about Kucherov being out most of the season  : and your other point about the tax situation is certainly important and the league should probably figure out a way to account for that when setting the cap.

I always think it's weird that people give so much credit to the tax difference, which is probably overstated, and don't care at all about the practical realities of playing in Tampa, to a largely disinterested public, vs. playing in Toronto with a rabid and critical media following.

Like Mitch Marner right now is probably waking up to thousands of tweets telling him he's a bad person for not scoring enough in the playoffs and people don't think that plays any role in negotiations.

I'm going to build an app for hockey players called "Poke Check Twitter".  It will massage the content of the tweet for the hockey player to make it more manageable.  So something like:

"I hope you die in a tire fire"

becomes:

"I hope you die in a tire fire.  I really like your hair though.  Are you conditioning it daily, or do you follow a different regimen?"

I think that softens the blow a lot, and it should really help the mental disposition of hockey players in Canada who have to put up with some pretty over-the-top tweets simply because they didn't play that hockey good.

I mean, I'm fairly sure none of these guys read their twitter accounts beyond some of the choicer DMs but sure.

I?m sure these guys are all taught not to do it for internet asshole reasons but wasn?t there a little mini controversy with people attacking April Reimer that got big enough to get media attention?

 

[mr grieves]

I guess the one very minor inconsequential difference is that I never said "like Tampa" or anything approaching it because I actually believe that Tampa is not the only team in the NHL that has managed to draft and develop depth pieces and I think it's actually a pretty reasonable target for a team investing more money in scouting and development than anyone else as opposed to, say, convincing a perennial Norris contender to sign for less than 8 million per year.

Great. Now tell which ones have done that while allocating 50% of their cap to their top 4 players and dealing with the various knock-on effects that follow (e.g. trading away picks to get out from under contracts like Marleau's, not being able to keep those drafted-and-developed contributors through their second contracts).

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Like, I really don't know what to say to some people. I mean, I wish Dubas got to negotiate Matthews extension after two years of 14 and then 21 goals the way Colorado got to with Mackinnon but...he didn't? It sure would have been better for the Leafs cap situation if Matthews didn't immediately become one of the best goal scorers in the league and then stay there but...he did?

Not only is all of that true, but also MacKinnon's contract became a real example for all the elite RFAs to follow about how many tens of millions they could leave on the table if they settle for too little over too many years too soon.

 

[Kin]

Great. Now tell which ones have done that while allocating 50% of their cap to their top 4 players and dealing with the various knock-on effects that follow (e.g. trading away picks to get out from under contracts like Marleau's, not being able to keep those drafted-and-developed contributors through their second contracts).

In the last 5 years the Leafs have had 4 first round picks, 6 second round picks and 6 third round picks. The Marleau pick is one pick. Not being able to sign everyone to second contracts enables teams to trade some players and acquire picks to restock the cupboards.

Not having the ability to sign everyone you want to second contracts, which applies to any contending team to some degree, narrows a window. It doesn't eliminate it. Good teams can still draft and develop.

 

[Arn]

I think it was justified to try the "four superstars" model and tinker round the edges.

I also think it is justified now to consider pivoting away from it. And as a few have said probably Marner is the most vulnerable to going.

A kay questions that comes to my mind -

Would Matthews score less without Marner? I don't think he would. But even if he did in the regular season I think it's more than balanced out by additions elsewhere in depth or in goal or wherever you can spread the $10m over say 3 positions instead of 1.

I'd be inclined to go one more season with the 4, though.