Author Topic: Mitch Marner  (Read 26911 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline bustaheims

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 20379
  • 56!
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #315 on: December 21, 2018, 11:54:33 AM »
Seems like a very underrated candidate for worst trades in franchise history.

I don't know about that. That trade brought Fuhr to the Leafs, which ultimately became Andreychuk and Jonsson (who is a candidate for one of the worst trades in franchise history). Without this trade, the great runs of 93 and 94 don't play out the same way.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

TMLfans.ca

Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #315 on: December 21, 2018, 11:54:33 AM »

Offline CarltonTheBear

  • Global Moderator
  • Sittler Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 22779
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #316 on: December 21, 2018, 12:15:07 PM »
I don't know about that. That trade brought Fuhr to the Leafs, which ultimately became Andreychuk and Jonsson (who is a candidate for one of the worst trades in franchise history). Without this trade, the great runs of 93 and 94 don't play out the same way.

I mean the trade itself was a 22-year old PPG centre for two older, declining players who didn't really do anything as Leafs. And during a time when the Leafs needed youth a heck of a lot more than veterans. I'm not really that big into expanding trade trees to judge a single transaction, especially since it's not like 93 and 94 actually got us the Cup. And who knows what the team could have done with Sundin (assuming he was still acquired), Gilmour, and Damphousse for a few years.


Offline bustaheims

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 20379
  • 56!
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #317 on: December 21, 2018, 12:30:23 PM »
I mean the trade itself was a 22-year old PPG centre for two older, declining players who didn't really do anything as Leafs. And during a time when the Leafs needed youth a heck of a lot more than veterans. I'm not really that big into expanding trade trees to judge a single transaction, especially since it's not like 93 and 94 actually got us the Cup. And who knows what the team could have done with Sundin (assuming he was still acquired), Gilmour, and Damphousse for a few years.

Sure, in isolation, it's not a great trade. It's still a long way from the worst in franchise history conversation, though, and it directly lead to a significant piece of the best Leafs team the city had seen since the late 70s.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Offline Bender

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 4931
  • Gender: Male
  • Hot diggity daffodil!
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #318 on: December 21, 2018, 12:59:56 PM »
I mean the trade itself was a 22-year old PPG centre for two older, declining players who didn't really do anything as Leafs. And during a time when the Leafs needed youth a heck of a lot more than veterans. I'm not really that big into expanding trade trees to judge a single transaction, especially since it's not like 93 and 94 actually got us the Cup. And who knows what the team could have done with Sundin (assuming he was still acquired), Gilmour, and Damphousse for a few years.

Sure, in isolation, it's not a great trade. It's still a long way from the worst in franchise history conversation, though, and it directly lead to a significant piece of the best Leafs team the city had seen since the late 70s.
But couldn't a 22yo PPG player also be a significant piece in those runs? Either way I just don't understand why we basically gave away a Nylander equivalent for old declining players. I think Damphousse seems like an underrated player.
"They say you can judge a man by the company he keeps. So here is the professor's oldest friend, a grotesque, stinking lobster." - Bender

Online Guilt Trip

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1457
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #319 on: December 21, 2018, 01:40:16 PM »
I think Damphousse seems like an underrated player.
I think he was somewhat under appreciated here if memory serves. He was a very good player. Not elite, but very good.

Offline hockeyfan1

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 7958
  • Gender: Female
  • #TorontoStrong
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #320 on: January 18, 2019, 01:35:28 AM »
Whoa, Marner!


Offline Zee

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 10566
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #321 on: January 18, 2019, 06:46:38 AM »
Whoa, Marner!

Make sure Paul Marner doesn't find out about this

Online Guilt Trip

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1457
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #322 on: January 18, 2019, 02:10:47 PM »
Whoa, Marner!

Make sure Paul Marner doesn't find out about this
Hahaha, Matthews will be the second lol..Only reason he wasn't the first was because of injuries. Isn't it awesome to have these 2 KIDS on our team!!!
« Last Edit: January 18, 2019, 02:15:29 PM by Guilt Trip »

Offline disco

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1940
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #323 on: February 01, 2019, 10:25:00 AM »
Invalid Tweet ID
« Last Edit: February 01, 2019, 10:30:42 AM by disco »
"I'm here for (4.5) more years. Then I'm gonna stay for two more because we'll be really good." - Coach Mike Babcock

Offline louisstamos

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1347
    • View Profile
    • Treestar
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #324 on: February 01, 2019, 10:40:24 AM »
Invalid Tweet ID

I guess the argument is not all those teams have cap issues like the Leafs do where they might not necessarily match.  But Tampa certainly does, and Winnipeg to a degree too.

Offline Nik the Trik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 24605
  • Some Guy On a Message Board
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #325 on: February 01, 2019, 10:45:52 AM »
I guess the argument is not all those teams have cap issues like the Leafs do where they might not necessarily match.  But Tampa certainly does, and Winnipeg to a degree too.

It's a lousy argument because it still misses the central problem with offer sheets. Either an offer sheet is prohibitively expensive in which case the player's not worth the offer or it isn't in which case the team that can match it will.

The idea that any team's cap issues would necessitate them passing on a reasonable deal for one of their elite young players is basically making the argument that the Leafs would rather keep Kadri or Zaitsev over Marner.
Give a man the reputation of an early riser and he can sleep 'til noon
-Mark Twain

Offline CarltonTheBear

  • Global Moderator
  • Sittler Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 22779
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #326 on: February 01, 2019, 11:23:41 AM »
Interesting hypothetical that I saw floated around: let's say Marner signs an offer sheet for $11-12mil on July 1st. The Leafs would then have one week to decide to match it or take the compensation of four 1st round draft picks. During that week, they speak to one of the big-3 free agents (Karlsson, Panarin, and Stone) and agree in principal to a contract. Let's say $11mil for Karlsson, $10mil for Panarin, and $9mil for Stone. Or whatever. Basically the question is would you take the four 1st round draft picks as compensation for Marner and use that cap space to sign one of those 3 free agents instead of matching the offer sheet and keeping Marner?

Offline Bullfrog

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 4666
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #327 on: February 01, 2019, 11:40:09 AM »
Goodbye Marner, hello Panarin + 4 1st rounders.

In truth, it's a hard decision to make, but you could do a lot with those picks.

Offline Nik the Trik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 24605
  • Some Guy On a Message Board
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #328 on: February 01, 2019, 11:45:09 AM »

I wouldn't do it. I don't like any of those UFAs enough(except Karlsson but I'm not thrilled with paying him that much past 34 or 35).

To some extent though it would depend on the team that made the offer sheet. But even then I think the Kessel rule should apply here in terms of future draft picks where you have to evaluate the trade in terms of the worst possible outcome re: the picks. Having 4 bonus 25-32 slot picks just doesn't seem that exciting.
Give a man the reputation of an early riser and he can sleep 'til noon
-Mark Twain

Offline bustaheims

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 20379
  • 56!
    • View Profile
Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #329 on: February 01, 2019, 11:46:40 AM »
Interesting hypothetical that I saw floated around: let's say Marner signs an offer sheet for $11-12mil on July 1st. The Leafs would then have one week to decide to match it or take the compensation of four 1st round draft picks. During that week, they speak to one of the big-3 free agents (Karlsson, Panarin, and Stone) and agree in principal to a contract. Let's say $11mil for Karlsson, $10mil for Panarin, and $9mil for Stone. Or whatever. Basically the question is would you take the four 1st round draft picks as compensation for Marner and use that cap space to sign one of those 3 free agents instead of matching the offer sheet and keeping Marner?

I think you have to consider it. I'm less sold on Stone - he's having a great season, but I think he's more of a 60ish point guy that the point-a-game guy he's been this year; whereas Panarin and Karlsson are at a similar talent level as Marner. Even still, with those 4 extra 1st round picks . . .
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

TMLfans.ca

Re: Mitch Marner
« Reply #329 on: February 01, 2019, 11:46:40 AM »