Mitch Marner: what now?

[herman]

You are looking at it right here right now. I'm playing the long game holding Cap hits so I can ice the best team every year with salaries held when I can. Tavares was signed when we had them. We would still have all 3 if we held strong in negotiations. The only one of the 3 we risked offer sheet from was Matthew's. If we had held to our $6 million or less for Nylander he would have signed last fall or this summer, I would have forced that issue. We are one of the few teams in the League that is just giving players what they want, it is unlikely to be successful

I actually don't see anything being done here. Hand waving is not a strategy.

 

[Kin]

If they're just giving players what they want, why did the Nylander negotiations last until the last minute?

And if other teams aren't, why have literally zero teams let a player sit for the season rather than come together on a deal?

 

[Bates]

If they're just giving players what they want, why did the Nylander negotiations last until the last minute?

You don't think they caved and gave Nylander what he wanted?? Do you think it was a hard negotiation with Matthew's?

 

[Bates]

You are looking at it right here right now. I'm playing the long game holding Cap hits so I can ice the best team every year with salaries held when I can. Tavares was signed when we had them. We would still have all 3 if we held strong in negotiations. The only one of the 3 we risked offer sheet from was Matthew's. If we had held to our $6 million or less for Nylander he would have signed last fall or this summer, I would have forced that issue. We are one of the few teams in the League that is just giving players what they want, it is unlikely to be successful

I actually don't see anything being done here.

Nothing would have to be done as the players in question have nowhere to go? We would have the same players right now plus some money to add.

 

[Bullfrog]

If they're just giving players what they want, why did the Nylander negotiations last until the last minute?

You don't think they caved and gave Nylander what he wanted?? Do you think it was a hard negotiation with Matthew's?

No, I don't think that. It was rumoured that he wanted $8M AAV.

Matthews is one of the best players in the league, I really don't think negotiations were quite difficult, except perhaps on term.

 

[Bates]

If they're just giving players what they want, why did the Nylander negotiations last until the last minute?

And if other teams aren't, why have literally zero teams let a player sit for the season rather than come together on a deal?

So you think the Tampa lineup have signed for their maximum worth. Possibly other teams do a better job of selling the benefits of their team and contract.

 

[herman]

You are looking at it right here right now. I'm playing the long game holding Cap hits so I can ice the best team every year with salaries held when I can. Tavares was signed when we had them. We would still have all 3 if we held strong in negotiations. The only one of the 3 we risked offer sheet from was Matthew's. If we had held to our $6 million or less for Nylander he would have signed last fall or this summer, I would have forced that issue. We are one of the few teams in the League that is just giving players what they want, it is unlikely to be successful

I actually don't see anything being done here.

Nothing would have to be done as the players in question have nowhere to go? We would have the same players right now plus some money to add.

What are their numbers? What would they possibly sign for at the negotiation deadline that makes realistic sense? They are otherwise not on the roster under your operating parameters.

 

[Bates]

If they're just giving players what they want, why did the Nylander negotiations last until the last minute?

You don't think they caved and gave Nylander what he wanted?? Do you think it was a hard negotiation with Matthew's?

No, I don't think that. It was rumoured that he wanted $8M AAV.

Matthews is one of the best players in the league, I really don't think negotiations were quite difficult, except perhaps on term.

Compared to out rumour of under 6 long term.

 

[Bullfrog]

Nothing would have to be done as the players in question have nowhere to go? We would have the same players right now plus some money to add.

If a team is playing real hardball with an RFA, why wouldn't an opposing team make a reasonable offer to sign the player?

 

[Bates]

You are looking at it right here right now. I'm playing the long game holding Cap hits so I can ice the best team every year with salaries held when I can. Tavares was signed when we had them. We would still have all 3 if we held strong in negotiations. The only one of the 3 we risked offer sheet from was Matthew's. If we had held to our $6 million or less for Nylander he would have signed last fall or this summer, I would have forced that issue. We are one of the few teams in the League that is just giving players what they want, it is unlikely to be successful

I actually don't see anything being done here.

Nothing would have to be done as the players in question have nowhere to go? We would have the same players right now plus some money to add.

What are their numbers? What would they possibly sign for at the negotiation deadline that makes realistic sense? They are otherwise not on the roster under your operating parameters.

Had Willie sat all last season I'm fairly confident his contract right now would be quite a bit less.

 

[Bullfrog]

If they're just giving players what they want, why did the Nylander negotiations last until the last minute?

You don't think they caved and gave Nylander what he wanted?? Do you think it was a hard negotiation with Matthew's?

No, I don't think that. It was rumoured that he wanted $8M AAV.

Matthews is one of the best players in the league, I really don't think negotiations were quite difficult, except perhaps on term.

Compared to out rumour of under 6 long term.

Well, that's just nuts. I don't know what else to say. Nylander might have taken under $6M on a two or maybe even a three deal. Long term? No way.

 

[Bullfrog]

If they're just giving players what they want, why did the Nylander negotiations last until the last minute?

And if other teams aren't, why have literally zero teams let a player sit for the season rather than come together on a deal?

Is the answer "because they're weak-willed human beings that are worse negotiators than me and Bates"?

 

[herman]

Had Willie sat all last season I'm fairly confident his contract right now would be quite a bit less.

It's really hard to agree with where you're coming from unless you have substantiation, precedence, and otherwise supporting data for your argument. Negotiation isn't a chart-topping Backstreet Boys song.

 

[Kin]

Is the answer "because they're weak-willed human beings that are worse negotiators than me and Bates"?

Well, that or NHL contracts are negotiated by professionals who have to actually consider their business and careers and not by someone who doesn't know what he's talking about and keeps moving the goalposts whenever one of his terrible arguments gets laughed at.

 

[Bates]

If they're just giving players what they want, why did the Nylander negotiations last until the last minute?

You don't think they caved and gave Nylander what he wanted?? Do you think it was a hard negotiation with Matthew's?

No, I don't think that. It was rumoured that he wanted $8M AAV.

Matthews is one of the best players in the league, I really don't think negotiations were quite difficult, except perhaps on term.

Compared to out rumour of under 6 long term.

Well, that's just nuts. I don't know what else to say. Nylander might have taken under $6M on a two or maybe even a three deal. Long term? No way.

So we would have an extra million for 2 or 3 years. We are still ahead in the timeline.

 

[Bates]

Had Willie sat all last season I'm fairly confident his contract right now would be quite a bit less.

It's really hard to agree with where you're coming from unless you have substantiation, precedence, and otherwise supporting data for your argument. Negotiation isn't a chart-topping Backstreet Boys song.

It's really hard to produce hard evidence when almost all other cases have seen the teams do better with 2nd contracts. It seems we are the team that most players are demanding more from?? That might change this year as a few RFA's are following the Nylander playbook, one I wish we weren't the Leaders on.

 

[herman]

Had Willie sat all last season I'm fairly confident his contract right now would be quite a bit less.

It's really hard to agree with where you're coming from unless you have substantiation, precedence, and otherwise supporting data for your argument. Negotiation isn't a chart-topping Backstreet Boys song.

It's really hard to produce hard evidence when almost all other cases have seen the teams do better with 2nd contracts. It seems we are the team that most players are demanding more from?? That might change this year as a few RFA's are following the Nylander playbook, one I wish we weren't the Leaders on.

True, it is impossible to find evidence for something that doesn't happen, but I'm going to hold this line. Perhaps next season, we'll have a more reasonable answer.

 

[Bates]

Had Willie sat all last season I'm fairly confident his contract right now would be quite a bit less.

It's really hard to agree with where you're coming from unless you have substantiation, precedence, and otherwise supporting data for your argument. Negotiation isn't a chart-topping Backstreet Boys song.

It's really hard to produce hard evidence when almost all other cases have seen the teams do better with 2nd contracts. It seems we are the team that most players are demanding more from?? That might change this year as a few RFA's are following the Nylander playbook, one I wish we weren't the Leaders on.

True, it is impossible to find evidence for something that doesn't happen.

Could it be possible that most RFA's know they hold little power at present time and were not willing to risk a lost or bad season so they sign a bridge deal or a deal that favors the team?

 

[herman]

Could it be possible that most RFA's know they hold little power at present time and were not willing to risk a lost or bad season so they sign a bridge deal or a deal that favors the team?

Like Jacob Trouba in Winnipeg or PK Subban in Montreal? I don't think that's the sort of contract path I'd want our core players to walk through.

It costs more in the long run to nickel and dime your best players, either with their next contract (Subban), or with the loss of talent/performance (Trouba/Subban) from the lineup, or taking an L on the subsequent trades.

The guys you squeeze are the tier 3 and below players like Kapanen, Johnsson.

 

[Kin]

I think there's a broader economic reality that needs to be considered. So long as players are worth what they're asking for(and not in a "according to the NHL salary structure" sense but in a "is this their market value" sense) there's going to be a tremendous amount of pressure from ownership for deals to be signed. Given that just about every hockey player is worth what they're asking for in that sense, there's always going to be that pressure to get a deal done.

And if I was a billionaire owner and my GM came to me and said he wanted to significantly disrupt the team and potentially sour my relationship with a player I want to build my franchise around in the interest of saving a few percentage points on the cap, I'd probably be more inclined to find a GM competent enough to win without that extra few percent.