Quick links:  Login  |  Sign up  |  Site Rules  |  Support TMLfans


Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Average Joes

Leafs Rumours & Speculation / Re: McDavid
October 03, 2019, 12:43:10 PM
I would think that things would have to be extremely bad for him to demand a trade. Like the owner shooting his dog that his wife bought before she passed away. That sounds familiar.   

Edmonton will want at least a young 1st line C in return and not another rebuild. Mathews + Johnsson or Kappy. 
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Leafs to announce captain
October 02, 2019, 12:05:49 PM
Quote from: Nik the Trik on October 01, 2019, 10:20:46 PM

Something to maybe consider with regards to the Captaincy is that while things like the fairly nebulous quality of "leadership" is important, it is also very much about being the public face of the organization and representing the team at various events and things.

As a result, there is a chance that Tavares may not be the best fit because he just started a family and may not want to spend a bunch of nights out at charity dinners and general gladhanding. Sundin, who was as public a face as the franchise had, was able to be as good at that side of the job as he was because he didn't have a family until he stopped playing.

I see no issue with naming Tavares in terms of time commitment with having a family. His wife does not work. Having a family can help mature a person. He is less likely to be out boozing and getting into trouble. For all we know his wife might love to go out to charitable events and would encourage it.

I would certainly be glad if Mathews is not named captain. Listening to him explain the recent incident was cringe worthy. A captain should be able to express themselves to their teammates, media, refs and coaches in an effective manner when under pressure. I understand that it is only one incident. Maybe it is just me but I would rather follow someone with more experience and maturity. 
NHL Transactions / Re: Point signs 3-year bridge deal
September 23, 2019, 04:10:21 PM
The tax situation is not as clear cut as Florida vs Ontario income taxes.  There are ways to save mentioned in the Forbes article. They apply to Tavares but some of which could apply to Marner especially since he got most of it in bonus money.   Point reportedly got a good chunk in bonus but not all of it.  www.forbes.com/sites/seanpackard/2018/07/06/john-tavares-could-save-nearly-12-million-in-taxes-on-his-new-contract/#2259c4aa1ab7

It would be interesting if someone could calculate the anticipated tax rate for Marner by using whatever tax savings are available. Add something reasonable for endorsements and then compare that to other RFAs.

Quote from: Nik the Trik on July 30, 2019, 07:17:01 AM

Something else to consider is that Gardiner may not be over the moon with the role the Leafs would be offering him. I think we've all generally accepted that the Leafs will be going with 4 forwards and a D on the PP and the PP will be handled by Rielly and Barrie. If some other team is offering Gardiner more of a PP focused role with maybe a defensive partner that would allow him to roam a bit more he may be better situated than he would be here.

I never understood the argument that he would come here for a year well under market value, play healthy and then next year make his money.  Unless he suddenly starts playing on the top PK unit his minutes are going to reduced. In the unlikely event that he was told he was going to play on the PK that is not going to help his point total$. It would be a poor career move for him to sign here. 
Non-Hockey Chatter / Re: Useless Thread
July 25, 2019, 03:59:11 PM
I coached all my daughters teams for five years. Coaches can be jerks too. In a novice tourney final the other coach purposely picked dark jerseys knowing I only had dark. They also had white. The tourney president made us borrow jerseys because we were 1st. The rules were not clear on that point but they wouldn't budge and I wanted to come back next year.  I had checked with this team's convener pre-tourney to make sure they had both colours since I told them I could only wear dark.  That was a mistake. They used it as a strategy to make my girls uncomfortable.  The parents on that team were running in the stands high-fiving, holding huge signs and screaming their heads off. They were crazy.  Unfortunately, our goalie let in almost every shot and we lost.
Quote from: Nik the Trik on July 23, 2019, 03:12:21 PM
Quote from: Average Joes on July 23, 2019, 02:49:23 PM
Kane was also more interesting than Marner due to those criminal charges he had with the cab driver.

I actually think there are some pretty interesting parallels between Kane and Marner. Kane was negotiating his extension the year after his team had signed a big deal free agent and negotiating it alongside the team's other top young player, a C who was arguably more valuable and who, while not producing as many points, had scored significantly more goals in fewer games.

Thing is, Kane's deal had a higher AAV than Hossa's(admittedly due to those dodgy backdiving deals) and was exactly equal to the deal they gave Toews. So from strictly an ego stroking point of view, as opposed to just dollars and cents or cap %, Chicago's offer maybe had more appeal.

I do think that players may be more influenced or concerned by what the players in the same dressing room are getting paid rather than the player 500 miles away.  Similar to how I would feel with someone at work compared to someone in the same position at a different business.  Which makes the Mathews contract problematic in negotiations even when it probably is not a good comparable for Marner.  The Kane/Toews is a great example you brought up. 
Quote from: Nik the Trik on July 23, 2019, 02:38:49 PM
Quote from: Average Joes on July 23, 2019, 02:29:34 PM
Kane had 28 points in 22 games in the playoffs the year he was signed to the extension.  He was a big part of that cup win. Does that not have significant value compared to regular season points?   

Well, no. He signed the deal in December of 2009. The Blackhawks won the cup, and Kane got those 28 points in 22 games, in the spring of 2010.

Which, again, speaks to what I'm saying. If Kane had waited to sign his second contract until after his third year, he probably would have been able to ask for and get more armed with a better regular season and a cup. This is true with a lot of guys who sign extensions after their second years(not so much the cup part as the growth in the third year part. A lot of guys we think of as having signed really good value 2nd contracts signed them after their 2nd seasons instead of their 3rd. Tavares is a good example).

Your right.  My apologies. 

Kane was also more interesting than Marner due to those criminal charges he had with the cab driver.
Kane had 28 points in 22 games in the playoffs the year he was signed to the extension.  He was a big part of that cup win. Does that not have significant value compared to regular season points?   

Nash was a goal scoring beast leading the NHL in his second year.  Not so much on points though. I find Kane the better comparable with their more similar point structure. 
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Contracts for the Big-3
October 18, 2018, 01:06:15 PM
Quote from: Joe S. on October 18, 2018, 12:13:49 PM
Let's say nylander doesn't sign by the end of November. How does that affect his rfa status? So he'll lose this ability to play in the nhl this year, and next season he's still and rfa and leafs property?

He will have the same RFA status next year as this year. No arbitration rights and leaf property. 
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Contracts for the Big-3
October 05, 2018, 10:12:25 AM
Quote from: IJustLurkHere on October 05, 2018, 09:18:14 AM

So, I'm not sure how people believe contract negotiations work, but No negotiation I've ever heard works by a TV like scripted process where 6 turns to 8 turns to 6.5 turns to 7.5 turns to 7 and everyone shakes hands...

By no means the perfect meet down the middle but there is usually give and take with each offer.  Sometimes it doesn't work that way of course.  I have never negotiated a sports contract. I have negotiated employment contracts for clients but not many.  Most of my experience is negotiating a ton of litigation claims.

What I fear is if Nylander's side won't budge from $8 million if Toronto came up on their offer. That tends to drag things out on negotiations from my experience and upsets the side that came up. This is with the view that in the $6s seems to be where more of the comparable contracts are at. Not that we have any idea what is actually going on.
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Contracts for the Big-3
October 05, 2018, 08:24:51 AM
Part of me wonders if a little of what is going on is the agent not wanting to be perceived as caving as he apparently did with Gaudreau. Having such a reputation can have a negative impact in future negotiations.

If the reports are true that Nylander's agent is stuck at $8 million I have to wonder whose turn it is to make the next offer. If it is Nylander's it is usually pretty unreasonable to stick at your number unless you found the leafs offer nearly insulting. The exception is usually that you are hell bent on staying put. Although there are also people that stay near their initial ask then come down significantly. I find that a bad way to negotiate and it drags things out unnecessarily. At least this is my experience from settling a ton of litigation claims. A different game of course than what we have here but I see similarities.
i don't think hockey fares very well on difficulty in winning.

I don't follow soccer and don't really understand it but the UEFA Champions League has a ton of teams just competing to get into the league. That seems much harder than hockey.

In baseball you have to play far more games to win.

From my poor observation only I bet it takes longer to become competitive in baseball and football than hockey. The quick rebuilds are not as frequent.
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Jake Gardiner
July 18, 2018, 10:32:52 AM
I agree that a late 1st is probably a reasonable example of what you might get for Gardiner. I would not want to give up our 2nd best defenceman for a 30% or so chance of an NHL player in 3-4 years.  I think the time to accumulate prospects by trading away good roster players passed when the ink dried on Tavares' contract.

Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Jake Gardiner
July 17, 2018, 02:17:57 PM
If they are well within the playoffs at the trade deadline I cannot imagine why they would trade him.  I thought the goal was to make as many good runs as possible in as many years as possible.  Between now and the next few years your forward group is probably in its best condition before some gradual decline (Tavares) or you loose players like Kadri due to salary cap issues.  Weakening the defence by trading Gardiner weakens one of your better years to compete.   

In hindsight trading JVR and Bozak would probably have been wise. I somewhat hesitate to say that in the slight risk that without them they would have performed poorly against Boston and Tavares would have been less confident in Toronto's future success. 
Quote from: Nik the Trik on July 09, 2018, 01:19:34 PM
Quote from: Significantly Insignificant on July 09, 2018, 01:05:33 PM
So how does the probability change if the Leafs face the Lightning in the first round versus the second or the third?  If you are going to have to play a tough team, you are going to have to play a tough team. 

You can argue that by facing them in the second round, they may have injuries, but you can't plan for that.   Also the Leafs may get injuries as well.  In order to be the best team in the league, you are going to have to beat the best teams in the league. 

My argument isn't that playing a lower ranked team wouldn't be better.  My argument is that you can't outrun playing good opponents by changing the playoff format.

I think the argument is that if you're in a tough division, the likelihood of getting sort of a flukey run to the cup where by luck you manage to miss out on heavyweights from your own conference is lower.

I agree with you that the Leafs should be focused on building a team where they are the heavyweights but I think there's something to be said for maybe putting off the biggest battles until it's absolutely necessary. If a particularly tough series takes more out of a team than an easier one than you'd prefer for your toughest series to be your last one.


Scenario 1:  Bruins and Lightning.   Scenario 2:  Devils and Lightning. 

Your probability of getting to round 3 is greater with scenario 2.  For argument sake let us say you are 50/50 to beat the Bruins and 50/50 vs the Lighting.  The devils you are 66/34 to win.  In scenario 1 you have a 25% chance to make it to round 3.  In scenario 2 it is 33% because you were less likely to get knocked out vs the Devils.

The above does not even factor in that you are probably playing more games vs the Bruins if you get past them and thus at greater risk of fatigue/injury.