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.


Messages - mr grieves

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 117
1
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Marner signs 6 year, $10.893mil AAV contract
« on: September 14, 2019, 02:29:17 PM »
How are Bergeron and Marchand compatibles? They are 34 and 31 and signed their contracts years ago.

Bergeron and Marchand occupy the 1F and 2F slots on the Bruins' roster, just as Matthews and Tavares do on the Leafs' roster.

The contracts and players are not comparable, for the reason you note and others besides, but if we're comparing how the Leafs roster, as a thing that allocates cap % to different slots in the lineup, measures up against that of Bruins or any other team, they're comparable. They're just slots you fill with C.H.%.

2
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Marner signs 6 year, $10.893mil AAV contract
« on: September 14, 2019, 01:28:46 PM »
The salary structure the Leafs have now got is not one that's ever been seen in the Stanley Cup Finals. That's concerning.
Not going to argue the numbers, but the doesn't the makeup of the team sort of resemble the 16/17 penguins stanley cup teams? High quality top forwards, one or two top defencemen, a good goalie, and a mishmash of spare parts for the bottom part of the lineup?

Yes, that'd be the model the Leafs are aiming at. But, with their high-quality top forwards under big contracts, the Penguins didn't win until they made some moves for secondary talent and quality depth -- and they could only do that after a couple years passed and the cap rose to push the C.H.% of their top talent down, which gave them the space to add.

Dom at the Athletic looks at top-4 players' cumulative cap hits in his recent piece. A bit of that:

Quote
Few teams might have what the team has up front, but no other team is paying for it the way Toronto is... The Bruins arent spending 50 percent on Patrice Bergeron, Brad Marchand, David Pastrnak and Charlie McAvoy... You could go on and on throughout the league. The four highest-paid contracts take up 37 percent of a teams cap hit on average, thanks to many other stars taking much friendlier deals. The Leafs 49.7 percent is 5 percentage points higher than the next-highest team: Tampa Bays 44.7 percent.

Link: https://theathletic.com/1210323/2019/09/14/can-the-leafs-win-with-their-current-cap-structure-after-signing-mitch-marner/

It's just a snapshot of this coming season, and there's no longitudinal analysis of teams that've made the Finals vs. those that've fallen short. But I think it's safe to conclude, since the Leafs are in uncharted territory, no team that's made the Final has had the Leaf's current cap structure.

Dom's bottom line is a "wait and see" -- a lot hinges on whether Marner did, in fact, re-set the market. If not, they're at a competitive disadvantage for the time being, even if they do avoid the bloated middle class and get a lot out of low-end contracts.

3
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Marner signs 6 year, $10.893mil AAV contract
« on: September 14, 2019, 12:10:25 PM »
The salary structure the Leafs have now got is not one that's ever been seen in the Stanley Cup Finals. That's concerning.
Not going to argue the numbers, but the doesn't the makeup of the team sort of resemble the 16/17 penguins stanley cup teams? High quality top forwards, one or two top defencemen, a good goalie, and a mishmash of spare parts for the bottom part of the lineup?

Yes, that'd be the model the Leafs are aiming at. But, with their high-quality top forwards under big contracts, the Penguins didn't win until they made some moves for secondary talent and quality depth -- and they could only do that after a couple years passed and the cap rose to push the C.H.% of their top talent down, which gave them the space to add.



4
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Marner signs 6 year, $10.893mil AAV contract
« on: September 14, 2019, 11:12:13 AM »
Its not a black and white kind of thing in terms of making or breaking the club but it does put them at a competitive disadvantage against Tampa.  Tampa gets to add a player like MacDonough vs a replacement-level guy on the leafs with their savings on Stamkos/Kucherov vs Matthews/Marner.  At least until that Vasilevsky contract kicks in.

That's the bottom line here, for me.

However one views Marner's contract in isolation or versus comparables, there's a team-wide allocation of cap dollars here. The salary structure the Leafs have now got is not one that's ever been seen in the Stanley Cup Finals. That's concerning.

5
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Marner signs 6 year, $10.893mil AAV contract
« on: September 13, 2019, 08:46:45 PM »
Offense for the next decade goes through the Four Horsemen. 40 million, half the cap.


Four players at 50% of the cap.

I really like this team's Cup chances... in 3 or so years, under an $88-90M cap.

Till then... oh well.

6
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Mitch Marner: what now?
« on: September 13, 2019, 12:52:13 PM »
I think the issue here is Marner doesn't want to play second fiddle and Matthews will always be the guy. The star, the guy in the spotlight and the face of the franchise.

Until opening day passes, it's hard to say that this isn't just his agent doing what he's supposed to do--wait for the moment where the team's need and the available dollars peak before signing--but I thought Jeffler's read of the situation was reasonable and could be what's going on. Maybe he does want to be "the guy." But that's just not going to happen on a team with two first overall picks, one of whom is a natural goal scorer the likes of which the league hasn't seen since Ovechkin arrived and, to boot, a center.

7
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Mitch Marner: what now?
« on: September 13, 2019, 11:14:19 AM »
Dubas should have leaked that Marner turned down the Tavares deal a month ago.
Why even bother trying to be professional anymore, if being dastardly works so much more effectively.

Is it even outside of the scope of an agent's or GM's professional duties to do this?

They're in an entertainment industry that attracts a lot of public attention, about which a lot of consumers have various feelings and on which they'll act in various ways. Why wouldn't a worker's rep leak stories about his client being treated unfairly by the bosses if it can result in public pressure on the employer to do better by the worker? Why wouldn't a manager do the same about an employee's poor behavior if it can result in public pressure on the employee to behave in way the employer would prefer?

Seems to me neither side is doing their job very effectively if they aren't trying to use all tools available to get the outcome they want. We accept and expect such uses of the media and public relations in the movie, TV, and record businesses, and professional sport is a closer to those businesses than most others.

8
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Mitch Marner: what now?
« on: September 12, 2019, 12:06:07 PM »
If Marner sits the year, their relationship isn't done until Marner turns 27 -- or thereabouts.
I believe he means in a functional sense, not contractual.
Yes, and I meant leveraging the latter to force a desired outcome in the former.
Leveraging the latter seems like it would only make the former worse.

If the man wants a Matthews contract, which would disrupt their roster blueprint by forcing them to cut fat they no longer have, then I'm not so sure.

The premise of the negotiations thus far seems to be that the Leafs need Marner more than he needs them. This is not true. That's the nature of being a restricted free agent.

9
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Mitch Marner: what now?
« on: September 12, 2019, 11:46:22 AM »
If Marner sits the year, their relationship isn't done until Marner turns 27 -- or thereabouts.

I believe he means in a functional sense, not contractual.

Yes, and I meant leveraging the latter to force a desired outcome in the former.

For all the talk of leverage, pressure points, and relationships, there's the brute fact that if Marner wants to play professional hockey in North America, he does so either for the Maple Leafs or where the Leafs think it worth their while for him to play.

10
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Mitch Marner: what now?
« on: September 12, 2019, 11:37:29 AM »
He'd have ZERO leverage for that.  If he doesnt' sign, he's not earning more than a couple of million in the KHL or a couple hundred thousand in the NLA.  Anything above 4M is the Leafs hoping to gain favour with their camp by not squeezing him extremely hard in that situation.
That may be true, but if you can't get them to agree to a deal it's not happening.  If he ends up sitting out the entire year this relationship is all but done.

If Marner sits the year, their relationship isn't done until Marner turns 27 -- or thereabouts.

11
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Mitch Marner: what now?
« on: September 11, 2019, 01:18:14 PM »
So, with the leaked contract, Dubas has started playing the Ferris/Paul game.

Six (?) months late, or so.

Using exactly as much leverage as the RFA player has is not, imo, really wielding all of the power that the CBA gives managers over their RFAs. But it's a start, I guess.


12
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Mitch Marner: what now?
« on: September 11, 2019, 11:05:50 AM »
The idea that Marner was ever going to sign for less than 10 was never tenable.  Now it looks like 11 is the floor, except for all that cap implication stuff that I don't understand.

But, at this point, how?

I just opened CapFriendly, put Horton and Clarkson on LTIR, sent every player after Hyman's 2.25m to the minors if they made over Kenny Agostino's $737k (goodbye Mikheyev, Moore, Shore, Petan), got the defense so no one after Dermott is making over $700k (welcome to the Marlies, Ben Harpur), swapped out Hutchinson for Kaskisuo to save $25k, went with only 2 scratches... and only then can I find over $10M in cap space (10.625). Have 3 extra players and it's, at most, about $9.925m.

If signing him for under 10 "was never tenable," they haven't been able to afford Mitch Marner for most of the summer.

And if 11 is the floor, they don't have much choice but to move him.

Or to ruin his career.

13
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Mitch Marner: what now?
« on: September 10, 2019, 02:36:46 PM »
If the Leaf's are going to do a bridge with Marner that leads to a $13 or $14 million qualifying offer they may as well just go for the Matthews type dollars right now long term. Correct the roster now and move forward.

There are no more "corrections" they can make to the roster. It's pretty well optimized from a cap perspective. Are they going to trade Andersen or Rielly? The RFAs they've signed within the last year? Maybe a big-dollar vet on the wrong side of the aging curve? They've still got, uh, Tavares? We know Cody Ceci can't be moved without destroying Toronto's reputation throughout the league, so that's out.

Just "pay him Matthews money now so you don't have to exceed that in 4 years" isn't an option.

Hence the bridge.

14
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Mitch Marner: what now?
« on: September 10, 2019, 12:40:40 PM »
I think the purpose of the bridge, for the Leafs, is to get Marner under a contract that doesn't necessitate any more ugly roster or asset-management decisions in the next few years. The QO coming out of the deal doesn't mean that much, especially since they won't be able to sign him for any less than the high-end of that last year ($14M, say) anyway, given cap inflation.

15
https://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2019/9/6/20682213/why-did-the-maple-leafs-pick-cody-ceci-over-jake-gardiner

Doesn't address loading the contract with a hefty signing bonus and then trading him to another team that has the cap space and wants a $2m (or whatever) former first rounder. That would've freed up cash enough to make an offer to Gardiner that would've been competitive with, likely better than, what he ultimately signed for.

Once they signed a deal that committed them to playing Ceci for the year, they did pick him over Gardiner and none of the Zaitsev contract, Ceci's agent, or arbitration and QO rules had anything to do with it.

So why? 
1. LH/RH balance (bad reason)
2. Desire to keep D salaries low in 2020-21 forward (true, those are some pricey forwards), requiring...
3. Belief that Gardiner is redundant/extravagant with Sandin/Liljegren coming along and ready to take top-4 positions next season (seems unlikely! But they know their farm better'n I do, so... maybe?)

Some of those might be good reasons to suffer Ceci for a season, but, even then, there's the bad asset management Nik outlined above.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 117