Run it back again, what choice do they have? Brady Tkachuk for Marner, yeah right. If everyone walks so be it. No one can stomach a rebuild anytime soon. Can't flip half your D line at the deadline and expect the team to gel that quickly. Bring back Schenn and another McCabe like UFA and a season together will hopefully lead to better D come playoff time. If the core cannot do it, we're finished.
The Core
- Thread starter hobarth
- Start date
Significantly Insignificant said:
Short of Matthews saying "I want out and I want out right now" I don't think there's any chance we'll see him get traded. They'll use all the time they have to get him signed. So July 1st isn't that big of a deal, but getting this done before the regular season starts will be very important.
Guru Tugginmypuddah
Active member
What's every ones acceptable number for Matthews? I would do 8 years $100 million.
Rob said:
I know he's coming off an underwhelming follow-up to a Hart winning season, but this would still be a steal for Matthews (which is hilarious because it's obviously a ridiculous amount of money).
Guru Tugginmypuddah
Active member
Nik said:
Nik said:
Well then we might as well make it $13.4 million.
Bender said:
I think reasonable in either of those is relative to whether you focus on the negatives or the positives of the deal. I think if the term is short that is great. You don't know what state a player is going to be in after 8 years of hockey. Even a player like Matthews can fall off. You sign him for 4 years, see where he is at, and then assess. Also, with the last deal being signed before he is 35, he can retire, and his cap comes off the books. I actually think that shorter terms on deals are better, and it takes a player that is confident in their abilities to sign them. It's the GM's problem to resign him. Maybe the Leafs trade him in his early 30's.
As for the AAV, what would Matthews get on the open market? If he signs at 13.4 I think that is less than what he would get if he went to free agency, so that seems reasonable to me. It depends on if you compare it to what he could get versus what you would like him to sign for.
azzurri63 said:
Because that is how finances work in sports. Look at the NFL. There is no better QB in the game than Mahomes, but every year, the QB that is up for renewal makes more, because inflation exists.
It's not about whose better when it gets to the financial situation. This is their job. I could see a comment from Matthews like "Hey you have to pay me more because I have to put up with unknown people saying derogatory things about me and questioning my desire to play this game on a nightly basis".
Guilt Trip
Active member
Yup he has to raise the bar to keep the NHLPA happy as well. MacKinnon isn't worth more then McD but he's an elite forward and needed to go above him.Significantly Insignificant said:
Kin
New member
Significantly Insignificant said:
Exactly. What the people who constantly whine about this don't get is that one player signing a below market deal, or even lots of players, doesn't fundamentally change the market. Lots of guys got deals with higher AAVs than Crosby, FA defensemen will get higher deals than Makar...hell, San Jose apparently offered John Tavares 13 million a year when he signed here and Matthews is considerably more valuable than Tavares is.
The Cap artificially restricts the market but it doesn't fundamentally alter the reality of what these guys are worth.