Mitch Marner: what now?

[CarltonTheBear]

All I'm saying is that we were told last summer that the money trumps everything for big name UFAs.  Then it turned out that sometimes it's bedsheets.

And also lots and lots of money.

 

[ZBBM]

This all assumes Marner wants to leave Toronto.  And there are many reasons why he may well not want to.

Signing an offer sheet doesn't necessarily mean he wants to leave Toronto -- it might mean he wants to use what little leverage he has an RFA to force the team that holds his rights to pay him what he thinks he's worth.

Not that I think Dubas ought to look at it that way.

If he really doesn't want to leave, and that's his bottom line, he won't risk it by signing an offer sheet.  If OTOH that's not his ultimate bottom line, he will.

 

[ZBBM]

All I'm saying is that we were told last summer that the money trumps everything for big name UFAs.  Then it turned out that sometimes it's bedsheets.

And also lots and lots of money.

But not the most money.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

But not the most money.

Sure, we still made him the 2nd highest paid player (at the time) in the league though.

 

[ZBBM]

But not the most money.

Sure, we still made him the 2nd highest paid player (at the time) in the league though.

I meant that he could have signed for more elsewhere -- wasn't that reportedly the case?

 

[Bender]

Well fair enough. I hope the GMs of other teams don't agree with you or we'll be looking at four firsts of unknown value.

Well, if Dubas agrees with me it won't matter as he'd match an offer sheet. Which, for the record, I think is the smart move. Match the offer sheet, let Marner play for a year or so and if you dont like his contract trade him while in the drivers seat.

Basically do what Nashville did with Weber. That worked out ok.

Depends on what the offersheet is too though. Or would you pay him max dollars?

Considering they could probably sign him tomorrow for Matthews money I'm not sure that's super relevant.

It will be if some team throws 13 million at him.

No team will do that. There aren't that many that can afford that let alone the picks. He's not McDavid.

 

[Zee]

But not the most money.

Sure, we still made him the 2nd highest paid player (at the time) in the league though.

I meant that he could have signed for more elsewhere -- wasn't that reportedly the case?

All reports were San Jose offered 7x13 = $91M

 

[Bender]

The RFA salary ?system? artificially devalues performance when players are at their peak, and the UFA market overvalues current performance from past achievements.

It?s good that RFA contracts are trending up for the superstars. Sucks a bit that we have three in the vanguard, but this is the new reality and honestly, Nylander should?ve been paid more.

It's kind of funny that the contract people were complaining about turns out to be the best value deal of the 3. Imagine if the Leafs had signed Marner last summer at the reported 8x$9M before Nylander signed.  Nylander would have demanded something closer to that number since the previous 2 seasons were comparable to Marner and he would have been justified in doing so.

I have a hard time believing management wouldn't bite on that. I mean, why not bet on your stars? And if I were a player why wouldn't I bet on myself? Generally players of Marner's ilk will have better 3rd yr seasons than 2nd, so why sign a contract early?

 

[ZBBM]

But not the most money.

Sure, we still made him the 2nd highest paid player (at the time) in the league though.

I meant that he could have signed for more elsewhere -- wasn't that reportedly the case?

All reports were San Jose offered 7x13 = $91M

Thanks Zee, I thought I remembered something like that.

Of course, nowadays there are plenty of things I think I remember that may not square exactly perfectly with so-called reality. 

 

[Zee]

The RFA salary ?system? artificially devalues performance when players are at their peak, and the UFA market overvalues current performance from past achievements.

It?s good that RFA contracts are trending up for the superstars. Sucks a bit that we have three in the vanguard, but this is the new reality and honestly, Nylander should?ve been paid more.

It's kind of funny that the contract people were complaining about turns out to be the best value deal of the 3. Imagine if the Leafs had signed Marner last summer at the reported 8x$9M before Nylander signed.  Nylander would have demanded something closer to that number since the previous 2 seasons were comparable to Marner and he would have been justified in doing so.

I have a hard time believing management wouldn't bite on that. I mean, why not bet on your stars? And if I were a player why wouldn't I bet on myself? Generally players of Marner's ilk will have better 3rd yr seasons than 2nd, so why sign a contract early?

At the time Marner's best season was 69 points.  A contract of $9M would have seemed like a huge overpay last summer.  Also it would have set up Nylander to also ask for $9M.  Remember going into last summer people were predicting Marner and Nylander to be between $6.5-$7.5M on "fair" deals.

 

[Zee]

But not the most money.

Sure, we still made him the 2nd highest paid player (at the time) in the league though.

I meant that he could have signed for more elsewhere -- wasn't that reportedly the case?

All reports were San Jose offered 7x13 = $91M

Thanks Zee, I thought I remembered something like that.

Of course, nowadays there are plenty of things I think I remember that may not square exactly perfectly with so-called reality. 

The older I get I have a hard time remembering last week let alone last year lol

 

[ZBBM]

The RFA salary ?system? artificially devalues performance when players are at their peak, and the UFA market overvalues current performance from past achievements.

It?s good that RFA contracts are trending up for the superstars. Sucks a bit that we have three in the vanguard, but this is the new reality and honestly, Nylander should?ve been paid more.

It's kind of funny that the contract people were complaining about turns out to be the best value deal of the 3. Imagine if the Leafs had signed Marner last summer at the reported 8x$9M before Nylander signed.  Nylander would have demanded something closer to that number since the previous 2 seasons were comparable to Marner and he would have been justified in doing so.

I have a hard time believing management wouldn't bite on that. I mean, why not bet on your stars? And if I were a player why wouldn't I bet on myself? Generally players of Marner's ilk will have better 3rd yr seasons than 2nd, so why sign a contract early?

My thinking all along is that the Leafs are going to have to overpay Marner, and probably significantly -- maybe up into the 11s. 

Like Nik said awhile back in this thread, they set the clock running when they signed JT.  They can't burn up his prime waiting for one of four 1sts to maybe develop into 80% of the player Marner is already, or using one or more of those 1sts to trade for that player.

 

[Zee]

The RFA salary ?system? artificially devalues performance when players are at their peak, and the UFA market overvalues current performance from past achievements.

It?s good that RFA contracts are trending up for the superstars. Sucks a bit that we have three in the vanguard, but this is the new reality and honestly, Nylander should?ve been paid more.

It's kind of funny that the contract people were complaining about turns out to be the best value deal of the 3. Imagine if the Leafs had signed Marner last summer at the reported 8x$9M before Nylander signed.  Nylander would have demanded something closer to that number since the previous 2 seasons were comparable to Marner and he would have been justified in doing so.

I have a hard time believing management wouldn't bite on that. I mean, why not bet on your stars? And if I were a player why wouldn't I bet on myself? Generally players of Marner's ilk will have better 3rd yr seasons than 2nd, so why sign a contract early?

My thinking all along is that the Leafs are going to have to overpay Marner, and probably significantly -- maybe up into the 11s. 

Like Nik said awhile back in this thread, they set the clock running when they signed JT.  They can't burn up his prime waiting for one of four 1sts to maybe develop into 80% of the player Marner is already, or using one or more of those 1sts to trade for that player.

That's fine, but they still have to call the bluff.  The season doesn't start until October.  Let him sit, if the imaginary offer sheet comes in at between 10-11 then the Leafs match.  If no offer sheet comes in what leg does Marner have to stand on saying the "market" deems him worth that much?

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

The RFA salary ?system? artificially devalues performance when players are at their peak, and the UFA market overvalues current performance from past achievements.

It?s good that RFA contracts are trending up for the superstars. Sucks a bit that we have three in the vanguard, but this is the new reality and honestly, Nylander should?ve been paid more.

It's kind of funny that the contract people were complaining about turns out to be the best value deal of the 3. Imagine if the Leafs had signed Marner last summer at the reported 8x$9M before Nylander signed.  Nylander would have demanded something closer to that number since the previous 2 seasons were comparable to Marner and he would have been justified in doing so.

I have a hard time believing management wouldn't bite on that. I mean, why not bet on your stars? And if I were a player why wouldn't I bet on myself? Generally players of Marner's ilk will have better 3rd yr seasons than 2nd, so why sign a contract early?

My thinking all along is that the Leafs are going to have to overpay Marner, and probably significantly -- maybe up into the 11s. 

Like Nik said awhile back in this thread, they set the clock running when they signed JT.  They can't burn up his prime waiting for one of four 1sts to maybe develop into 80% of the player Marner is already, or using one or more of those 1sts to trade for that player.

That's fine, but they still have to call the bluff.  The season doesn't start until October.  Let him sit, if the imaginary offer sheet comes in at between 10-11 then the Leafs match.  If no offer sheet comes in what leg does Marner have to stand on saying the "market" deems him worth that much?

So do the Leafs want to play chicken with one of their star players?  I'm still of the opinion that paying your star players is never a mistake.  I'd rather "overpay" Marner than say someone like Kapanen. 

Give Marner $11ish million a year and be done with it.

 

[Zee]

The RFA salary ?system? artificially devalues performance when players are at their peak, and the UFA market overvalues current performance from past achievements.

It?s good that RFA contracts are trending up for the superstars. Sucks a bit that we have three in the vanguard, but this is the new reality and honestly, Nylander should?ve been paid more.

It's kind of funny that the contract people were complaining about turns out to be the best value deal of the 3. Imagine if the Leafs had signed Marner last summer at the reported 8x$9M before Nylander signed.  Nylander would have demanded something closer to that number since the previous 2 seasons were comparable to Marner and he would have been justified in doing so.

I have a hard time believing management wouldn't bite on that. I mean, why not bet on your stars? And if I were a player why wouldn't I bet on myself? Generally players of Marner's ilk will have better 3rd yr seasons than 2nd, so why sign a contract early?

My thinking all along is that the Leafs are going to have to overpay Marner, and probably significantly -- maybe up into the 11s. 

Like Nik said awhile back in this thread, they set the clock running when they signed JT.  They can't burn up his prime waiting for one of four 1sts to maybe develop into 80% of the player Marner is already, or using one or more of those 1sts to trade for that player.

That's fine, but they still have to call the bluff.  The season doesn't start until October.  Let him sit, if the imaginary offer sheet comes in at between 10-11 then the Leafs match.  If no offer sheet comes in what leg does Marner have to stand on saying the "market" deems him worth that much?

So do the Leafs want to play chicken with one of their star players?  I'm still of the opinion that paying your star players is never a mistake.  I'd rather "overpay" Marner than say someone like Kapanen. 

Give Marner $11ish million a year and be done with it.

What's the harm?  There's a market system in place, if he thinks he can get 11 somewhere else go and prove your point.  Will he be so upset that the Leafs went through this process that he doesn't perform to the best of his abilities?  Teams and players go through these sorts of things all the time and for the most part, players stay with their teams long term despite the contract battles.

 

[princedpw]

The RFA salary ?system? artificially devalues performance when players are at their peak, and the UFA market overvalues current performance from past achievements.

It?s good that RFA contracts are trending up for the superstars. Sucks a bit that we have three in the vanguard, but this is the new reality and honestly, Nylander should?ve been paid more.

Why is that ?good??  Why do you want the wealthiest players to get wealthier at the expense of the less wealthy players?

 

[herman]

The RFA salary ?system? artificially devalues performance when players are at their peak, and the UFA market overvalues current performance from past achievements.

It?s good that RFA contracts are trending up for the superstars. Sucks a bit that we have three in the vanguard, but this is the new reality and honestly, Nylander should?ve been paid more.

Why is that ?good??  Why do you want the wealthiest players to get wealthier at the expense of the less wealthy players?

It?s only good when the cap allocation starts to pull away from the UFA mushy middle that always get overpaid (at the expense of younger players getting opportunity).

Superstars have been taking haircuts since the cap era started.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Why is that ?good??  Why do you want the wealthiest players to get wealthier at the expense of the less wealthy players?

Phrase this another way: don't you want the best players to get wealthier at the expense of the worse players?

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/hailey_salvian/status/1141146953914441729

Radio hit transcripts for context
https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2019/06/19/toronto-maple-leafs-rumours-mitch-marner-patrick-marleau/

I?ve said this before and I?ll say it again: When the NHL put the entry-level system in place and put restrictions on what guys get, when you come out of entry-level, you only get certain rights. One of them is not salary arbitration. That was always initially viewed as a huge win for the owners. They?ve got no rights, basically. It?s withhold services or sign your contract. Everybody assumed that meant that these guys would be in a real tough spot. The exact opposite has happened. These players have become so good, so fast, and meant so much to their teams ? all across the NHL. They all want $8, 9, 10, 11 million.

If there was salary arbitration, I think the clubs would be happy. There would be a mechanism to settle it and you would have to throw out comparables. They?d go to arb and point to Mark Stone and Nikita Kucherov. ?Tell us why you should get more than $9.5 million.?  He?d go, ?Auston Matthews.? And they?d go, ?We?ve got so many more comparables at $9.5. That?s what you deserve.?

 

[Frank E]

Are there any teams that have 3 forwards combined to make ~40% of the cap?