Rumor: Kypreos says Matthews will be 13.5M (Haggling over term)

[Divine]

Well if you want to continue to play the game of what if? Had Matthews been on Buffalo and Eichel was in Toronto. Eichel has proven he can win a cup leading a good team in scoring. Matthews has proven he can lead a good team to the playoffs and usually be one and out, though I doubt even the Bobby Orr could have led those Sabres teams to the playoffs.

Great, now we can put Eichel in Phil Kessel's calibre.

A player who needs to be on a better team to contribute. If he wants to elevate himself, maybe he can show up in the regular season, or be the best player on his team.

He was outscored at even-strength, in goals, and in the second, third and fourth rounds by a player making half his salary.

He really racked up those powerplay points against the Western conference's worst playoff team - the WC2 Winnipeg Jets. I'll give him credit for that.

 

[Conbon]

So unfortunate for the Leafs that they haven't realized that all this guy cares about is getting paid the most amount of money that he can. Winning is not a priority and they are going to commit this kind of money to a perennial loser.

 

[mattihp]

He's worth it and should get it. Pretty much guarantees that they won't be able to build a better team around him, though.

So unfortunate for the Leafs that they haven't realized that all this guy cares about is getting paid the most amount of money that he can. Winning is not a priority and they are going to commit this kind of money to a perennial loser.

I don't wanna be mean to Toronto, but pretty sure their aim is profit too. They have the resources to build winning teams, but it's easier to build a team that just brings profit.

 

[Seras]

Most people would move to the other side of their country if it meant an additional 25k per year all the while laughing at their former employers who bring up "loyalty" and "teamwork" as a way for them to stay

It's easy to leave $1,000,000s of other peoples money on the table, all it costs you is well... Nothing, nothing at all.

But, but winning is everything!

 

[myleafs]

I think your reading comprehension could use work. This was my argument the entire time, I'm glad you finally read it.

The great thing is though, no one has Eichel in the calibre that you do. You can continue to hype up Eichel, the rest of the world views him as a Phil Kessel.

Eichel got 10M with 0 playoff points.
Therefore, Matthews probably deserves 15M with 44 points?

Seriously, Eichel got 10 million X 8 after a career high 57 point regular season and 0 playoff points.

If we're using that as the comparable, Matthews probably gets 15M per no matter the term.

What in the tarnation are you even talking about? Kessel?....wha??? the rest of the world views him like that?...zoinks

 

[myleafs]

Great, now we can put Eichel in Phil Kessel's calibre.

A player who needs to be on a better team to contribute. If he wants to elevate himself, maybe he can show up in the regular season, or be the best player on his team.

He was outscored at even-strength, in goals, and in the second, third and fourth rounds by a player making half his salary.

He really racked up those powerplay points against the Western conference's worst playoff team - the WC2 Winnipeg Jets. I'll give him credit for that.

How can you have watched Eichel in these playoffs and come away thinking...yea he is just like kessel?

 

[Divine]

How can you have watched Eichel in these playoffs and come away thinking...yea he is just like kessel?

Because he's not good enough until he's on a team with other threats - then he's great on the PP.

 

[Boxscore]

Oooh, great post. Thx for the insight.

A few things:

1) After a decent look at the cap situation, Leafs have a LOT of highly paid players about to hit UFA next summer ie flexibility. Guys like Brodie, Bertuzzi, Nylander, Klingberg etc, tens of millions in contracts. So... I think Tre will look at like, "ok we have a bunch of guys playing here let's see who I actually want as part of the team going forward" and I would not be surprised at ALL if he chose someone like Bertuzzi at 6-7m over Willie at 9 or 10, for example, or if they found a Luke Schenn - type defenseman for 2-3 mil (even 3-4 mil) and let both Brodie and Klingberg walk. Anyway the point is Leafs have flexibility next summer... and also with the cap projected to go up 4-4.5m, I honestly don't know what the max number for Matthews / Marner would be, but I suspect something around 14-15m for each, esp depending on the other roster decisions (ie Bertuzzi over Willie would mean lower cap hit). I honestly don't know what that number is though. Could be 13.25, could be more, who knows.

This is also dependent on how everyone plays this year and who the team ends up deciding to keep.

2) Also, the thing I just realized is that all of the fans are complaining that the core has been great during the reg season but has continuously underperformed when it matters most. Well, isn't that on the coach? Yes, it is on the coach -- on a normal team, Keefe would have already been fired. So why is coach Keefe getting a pass and everyone's like, "TRADE MARNER! TRADE MATTHEWS!" First step is to fire the coach and see how the players play under someone who's actually won something (like Lavi oops too bad). But, Quenneville is still available.

I think the first thing I would ask my bosses is something around coach Q. Not sure how much time is enough time, but if Babcock can coach again...

***

You said, "If Matthews isn't willing to budge and give us a hometown discount, then I am convinced he's selfish, spoiled, and not the kind of leader who will sacrifice when the playoffs become nasty."

That's an interesting take, probably a good one. However on the ice he is definitely a good player -- most blocked shots of any forward in the league (?), legitimate 200 ft game, and also he scores. On the ice, he's amazing.

But, also greedy -- or at least inarguably greedier than some other superstars (Bergeron played for 2.5m this last year).

***

I guess the question is... in a cap league, can you win with greedy players who also are good at hockey? I think that's the question here. Thx for the previous detailed response, much appreciated

1. Yes, but all those players need to be upgraded which will cost more money. The Leafs haven't had any success in the playoffs because they have 5 uber talented players (yet mostly soft) and a bunch of bargain bin flotsam and jetsam rounding out the roster. All these vet pieces you name need to be replaced with better options. You simply cannot do that if Matthews, Nylander, and Marner are all getting raises. Impossible.

2. Yes, some of it is on the coach, but not all of it. And that's apparent because this same core underachieved under a Stanley Cup, and future HHOF coach, in Mike Babcock, the same way they've laid eggs under Keefe. These superstars are talented but soft as Kleenex and have no desire to engage in warfare, which is the only way to win in the playoffs. The coach can't help these dudes grow a heart or instill a hatred of losing into them.

3. Yes, Matthews is great at hockey. Yes, he's a spoiled, selfish brat. Can you win with these players? I say no. Not when they dip in the playoffs like Matthews does while displaying a nonchalant attitude with losing. In order to win with these guys, you need to surround them with multiple unsung heroes who carry the team and do all the dirty work when the game is on the line -- guys like Tkachuk, Bennett, Palat, Marchessault, Point, Maroon, Perry, Pavelski, Barbashev, etc. Kids like Matthews and Marner are good enough to get you there but they are not closers. They are cream puffs who lack killer instinct. And they are lead by another marshmallow man in Tavares. When Nylander and Rielly are your toughest stars, you know you're in trouble when the games mean something.

The biggest problem with Matthews is not his weaknesses or deficiencies, it's his sense of entitlement and greed. Instead of leaving money on the table so he can be better supported by players who help him elevate his game, he's arrogant to the point where he wants all the money and can care less about team balance or winning anything substantial. Plain and simple -- he'd rather make every dollar and lose, than make great money and win. What's that tell you about him?

As for your ultimate question: Can you win in a cap league with greedy players who are also good at hockey? The honest answer is: it depends on the player -- how great and how clutch they are. But if the Oilers can't get it done with two all-time greats in McDavid and Draisaitl (who are a level above Matthews) then I wouldn't be taking the Leaf's odds here.

 

[PainForShane]

Eichel has shown he cannot lead a team to the playoffs, Matthews has shown he can.

I'm sorry, what?

 

[Divine]

I'm sorry, what?

Read it again, focus on the word 'to'.

Jack Eichel needs to join a team that's already made the finals so he can hop on the bandwagon. If you drafted him (as a rebuilding team) and you expect him to carry you to the playoffs, it's never happening, he's not talented enough. He's a good supporting player.

Phil Kessel had the same problem in Toronto, he's a supplemental player. He got to Pittsburgh and looked great in the playoffs, like Eichel, some people felt he should have won the Conn Smythe in Pittsburgh.

 

[PainForShane]

Read it again, focus on the word 'to'.

And how is that relevant to anything. This entire time you've both been talking about what Matthews has done in the playoffs, not in the regular season. Meaning one of you is moving the goalposts all the way to a different continent, good luck figuring out which one of you it is

 

[Divine]

And how is that relevant to anything. This entire time you've both been talking about what Matthews has done in the playoffs, not in the regular season. Meaning one of you is moving the goalposts all the way to a different continent, good luck figuring out which one of you it is

Oh, I know, it's what the winter soldier has been doing this entire time.

Eichel's regular season doesn't matter. According to him, GM's don't care about regular seasons. In fact, his new stance is Eichel's playoff points don't matter. All that matters is Eichel's series wins.

Eichel > Matthews, Marner, McDavid, Draisaitl because he won more playoff series in his first year in the playoffs as a young 26 year old centre joining a team who has already been in the Finals. He has elevated himself among the greats because really - what great players have won the Cup in their first season in the playoffs? He might be the greatest of all time.

 

[PainForShane]

Oh, I know, it's what the winter soldier has been doing this entire time.

Eichel's regular season doesn't matter. According to him, GM's don't care about regular seasons. In fact, his new stance is Eichel's playoff points don't matter. All that matters is Eichel's series wins.

Eichel > Matthews, Marner, McDavid, Draisaitl because he won more playoff series in his first year in the playoffs as a young 26 year old centre.

There are very few things more sad and pathetic than a poster who continually argues nonsense and / or irrelevant points in bad faith. Better luck figuring out who I am referring to this time

 

[Boxscore]

I'll break it down for you. Mackinnon does not win a Cup without Makar. He could not get out of the second round without Makar going God-mode, as his history has shown. He made it out of the second round once in his career, and it's when Makar went God-mode and won the unanimous Conn Smythe. Seriously, Makar had 5 more points than Mackinnon, Makar plays defense. Makar put up 29 points in 20 games as the 1D with great defense, and you're saying they win that championship without Makar? Replace Mackinnon with Matthews and that team still wins that Cup. Mackinnon was outscored by both Makar and Rantanen.

Eichel is a great example of a supplementary player. He's never good enough to carry a team to the playoffs alone, but add him to a team that's already made the SCF along with a #1D and #1RW and he can carry them to the Cup. Basically, the same as Phil Kessel. He couldn't do it in Toronto, but you add him to another team where he doesn't need to carry the team, and he won 2 Cups. Your argument about Eichel being a superstar for joining a team that made the Cup without him and then winning as a supplementary piece is asinine at best. You take a team that goes to the Finals, add a #1 Cup-winning D, a #1RW, and a #1C - and you give all the credit to the #1C? If Eichel is a superstar, then so is Phil Kessel. Did you see Phil Kessel's playoff stats in Pittsburgh?

McDavid and Draisaitl play a different style than Matthews and Marner in the playoffs. The Leafs strategy in the playoffs is defense first, low scoring hockey. Which is why they allow much fewer goals than Edmonton in the playoffs. Edmonton's strategy is we got two of the best offensive players in the world, let's outscore our problems. Edmonton plays a completely loose open-end hockey. It's great against defensive teams because they can't produce that much, but it's horrible against deep competitive teams (Vegas, Colorado). Edmonton can beat teams like LA and Calgary with their style, sure, but they're not actual contenders. That's why despite McDavid and Draisaitl going 2PPG in the playoffs, they can still get swept. It's not the teams fault - the coach basically says no defense, outscore your problems - which is why it's really hard to compare their point totals until they prove they can have success with that style.

This is nonsense. Winning teams with talented players win because those players match their talent with heart, hustle, and results. Is luck or a hot hand often involved? Sure. But teams make their own luck. Is there any coincidence that the offseason before the Avs won the Cup, Nate MacKinnon had his famous, "I haven't won sh!t" press conference, which he followed up with getting in pristine shape and challenging his teammates to lay off the sugars and take their diets more seriously? The next year they win the Cup and MacKinnon is a beast, along with Makar, Rantanen, etc. That's what real leaders do. While MacKinnon was doing that, Matthews was following Justin Bieber around and making stupid videos.

You can try to justify why Matthews and Marner can't win in the playoffs all you want but it has nothing to do with talent, and it never has. It has everything to do with heart, desire, anger, dedication, leadership, and character. These guys treat the game like EASports CHEL. They want all the flashy stats when it doesn't mean anything. They want all the money. They want the celeb status. They want to dress funny and carry purses. They want all the fanfare. What they don't want is to commit to the Leafs, sacrifice a few bucks to help improve their odds, or get dirty in the trenches and pay the price come playoffs. This is a fact.

 

[Divine]

There are very few things more sad and pathetic than a poster who continually argues nonsense and / or irrelevant points in bad faith. Better luck figuring out who I am referring to this time

No idea, go read the Winter Soldier's posts.

This is nonsense. Winning teams with talented players win because those players match their talent with heart, hustle, and results. Is luck or a hot hand often involved? Sure. But teams make their own luck. Is there any coincidence that the offseason before the Avs won the Cup, Nate MacKinnon had his famous, "I haven't won sh!t" press conference, which he followed up with getting in pristine shape and challenging his teammates to lay off the sugars and take their diets more seriously? The next year they win the Cup and MacKinnon is a beast, along with Makar, Rantanen, etc. That's what real leaders do. While MacKinnon was doing that, Matthews was following Justin Bieber around and making stupid videos.

You can try to justify why Matthews and Marner can't win in the playoffs all you want but it has nothing to do with talent, and it never has. It has everything to do with heart, desire, anger, dedication, leadership, and character. These guys treat the game like EASports CHEL. They want all the flashy stats when it doesn't mean anything. They want all the money. They want the celeb status. They want to dress funny and carry purses. They want all the fanfare. What they don't want is to commit to the Leafs, sacrifice a few bucks to help improve their odds, or get dirty in the trenches and pay the price come playoffs. This is a fact.

It's not as simple as Mackinnon challenging his team. What happened this year? Did he lay off the gas and settle for a first round exit to an expansion team who's never made the playoffs before? Mackinnon couldn't do it without Makar being the best player on their team. Mackinnon was third on his team in playoff scoring behind Makar and Rantanen. Giving Mackinnon all the credit is disingenuous.

 

[Boxscore]

It's not as simple as Mackinnon challenging his team. What happened this year? Did he lay off the gas and settle for a first round exit to an expansion team who's never made the playoffs before? Mackinnon couldn't do it without Makar being the best player on their team. Mackinnon was third on his team in playoff scoring behind Makar and Rantanen. Giving Mackinnon all the credit is disingenuous.

Nothing is simple when it comes to winning a Stanley Cup. For starters, only 1 team out of 32 can win. But the first thing you need are players and leaders who are 100% dedicated and absolutely hate losing. If you have players who are okay with losing -- especially if they are your best players or leaders -- your culture is whacked. That's problem number one for the Leafs.

So, MacKinnon not repeating the year after a lengthy Cup run is no surprise. How many teams are winning B2B Cups in a hard cap era? And no one player deserves all the credit, and that includes Cale Makar. The Avs are a well-balanced team and the year they won, all their heavies were bringing it, MacKinnon included. But his presser and challenge to his teammates showed dedication and leadership -- and both play a massive part in winning a championship.

And since we're referencing MacKinnon... the summer after winning a Cup, he's up for a new deal and literally could have demanded a blank check to fill in any amount. What does he do? He commits to 8 years for just 700k more than Matthews currently makes on a deal he signed years ago. And here we are again with Matthews (after another annual playoff disappointment) asking for 13.5 a pop on a short-term deal. I'm sorry, but the excuses, justification, and apologies for Auston Matthews need to end with Leafs fans.

 

[Divine]

Nothing is simple when it comes to winning a Stanley Cup. For starters, only 1 team out of 32 can win. But the first thing you need are players and leaders who are 100% dedicated and absolutely hate losing. If you have players who are okay with losing -- especially if they are your best players or leaders -- your culture is whacked. That's problem number one for the Leafs.

So, MacKinnon not repeating the year after a lengthy Cup run is no surprise. How many teams are winning B2B Cups in a hard cap era? And no one player deserves all the credit, and that includes Cale Makar. The Avs are a well-balanced team and the year they won, all their heavies were bringing it, MacKinnon included. But his presser and challenge to his teammates showed dedication and leadership -- and both play a massive part in winning a championship.

And since we're referencing MacKinnon... the summer after winning a Cup, he's up for a new deal and literally could have demanded a blank check to fill in any amount. What does he do? He commits to 8 years for just 700k more than Matthews currently makes on a deal he signed years ago. And here we are again with Matthews (after another annual playoff disappointment) asking for 13.5 a pop on a short-term deal. I'm sorry, but the excuses, justification, and apologies for Auston Matthews need to end with Leafs fans.

I would agree with Mackinnon signing a more generous contract. The tax advantages of Colorado might help. Tampa Bay and Florida seem to get players under market value also.

That said, Mackinnon won a Cup but I wouldn't overestimate his speeches contribution to it. He was third on the team in playoff scoring when they won the Cup. He was third on the team in playoff scoring against last year when he lost to a first-year playoff team.

If Matthews was third on the team in scoring, would he get all the credit? Matthews was third on the team in scoring this year and people are claiming he chokes. Meanwhile Mackinnon being third on the team in scoring makes him a born leader. The argument is not consistent.

I think the real problem is the Leafs so far haven't been good enough to have Matthews not lead the team and win the Cup. Colorado obviously was a deeper team when they won the Cup (Mackinnon, Kadri, Rantanen, Makar, Landeskog). As soon as they lost some depth, they were a first round exit.

I wouldn't say what Matthews does off the ice impacts his on-ice performance the way you think. Mackinnon can yell at players for eating donuts, but it's not like he lead his team to the Cup the following year. He was third on the team in scoring. There were two players who contributed more points. Right now, it seems Matthews cannot afford to be third on the team in scoring if the Leafs want success.

Matthews was playing through injury last year, hopefully this year it will be better. It's just an unfair standard to say Matthews must 'lead his team to the Cup' and then referencing Mackinnon who was third on the team as the one who lead them - when Makar was clearly the best player on Colorado, Rantanen second.

 

[Boxscore]

I would agree with Mackinnon signing a more generous contract. The tax advantages of Colorado might help. Tampa Bay and Florida seem to get players under market value also.

That said, Mackinnon won a Cup but I wouldn't overestimate his speeches contribution to it. He was third on the team in playoff scoring when they won the Cup. He was third on the team in playoff scoring against last year when he lost to a first-year playoff team.

If Matthews was third on the team in scoring, would he get all the credit? Matthews was third on the team in scoring this year and people are claiming he chokes. Meanwhile Mackinnon being third on the team in scoring makes him a born leader. The argument is not consistent.

I think the real problem is the Leafs so far haven't been good enough to have Matthews not lead the team in win the Cup. Colorado obviously was a deeper team when they won the Cup (Mackinnon, Kadri, Rantanen, Makar, Landeskog). As soon as they lost some depth, they were a first round exit.

That said, I wouldn't say what Matthews does off the ice impacts his on-ice performance the way you think. Mackinnon can yell at players for eating donuts, but it's not like he lead his team to the Cup the following year. He was third on the team in scoring. There were two players who contributed more points. Right now, it seems Matthews cannot afford to be third on the team in scoring if the Leafs want success.

Matthews was playing through injury last year, hopefully this year it will be better. It's just an unfair standard to say Matthews must 'lead his team to the Cup' and then referencing Mackinnon who was third on the team as the one who lead them - when Makar was clearly the best player on Colorado, Rantanen second.

You keep saying "why does MacKinnon get all the credit" when nobody is giving him all the credit. No one player wins a Cup by themselves. But MacKinnon has done his part. He's produced, he's been a leader, he's challenged his teammates after losing, and he's put his money where he mouth is (literally) and has sacrificed personal financial gain for the betterment of his team.

You appear to envy the depth MacKinnon has around him but fail to contribute him taking less money on deals as a major reason for the Avs being able to build superior depth. And it's not just MacKinnon -- Mikko Rantanen actually took less money than Marner (after Marner signed) and he committed for 8 years. Point being, the Avs players have their priorities in place, and the Leafs don't, which is also why the Avs won a Cup and the Leafs have won 1 round in 7 years.

You can't have it both ways. You can't endorse overpaying Matthews and Marner then complain the Leafs have a depth problem. Depth pieces cost money, Great depth pieces cost a lot of money. Matthews and Marner both know this.

 

[Divine]

You keep saying "why does MacKinnon get all the credit" when nobody is giving him all the credit. No one player wins a Cup by themselves. But MacKinnon has done his part. He's produced, he's been a leader, he's challenged his teammates after losing, and he's put his money where he mouth is (literally) and has sacrificed personal financial gain for the betterment of his team.

You appear to envy the depth MacKinnon has around him but fail to contribute him taking less money on deals as a major reason for the Avs being able to build superior depth. And it's not just MacKinnon -- Mikko Rantanen actually toss less money than Marner (after Marner signed) and he committed for 8 years. Point being, the Avs players have their priorities in place, and the Leafs don't, which is also why the Avs won a Cup and the Leafs won 1 round in 7 years.

You can't have it both ways. You can't endorse overpaying Matthews and Marner then complain the Leafs have a depth problem. Depth pieces cost money, Great depth pieces cost a lot of money. Matthews and Marner both know this.

The main argument for the pay difference is that the take home salaries in Denver are higher due to much, much lower income taxes versus Toronto.

In Canada, it seems you need to pay players a premium to get them to sign. It's not a problem exclusive to the Leafs. The reality seems to be that most players don't want to play in Canada, so they must be paid more to stay there. Taxes may be a reason, the policies may be another reason. It seems most players, even Canadian born, have come out and say they don't want to play in Canada. That's an obstacle a team in another country can't change. The Raptors had that same problem in the NBA, the Blue Jays in the MLB. That's the problem when you run a sport in multiple countries where one country is much bigger than the other.

If the NHL cared about true parity - they would assess post-tax income against the cap. I know people here like to pretend that athletes don't care about millions of dollars, but when you got a short career and are retired by 40, those extra millions of dollars add up.

 

[PainForShane]

1. Yes, but all those players need to be upgraded which will cost more money. The Leafs haven't had any success in the playoffs because they have 5 uber talented players (yet mostly soft) and a bunch of bargain bin flotsam and jetsam rounding out the roster. All these vet pieces you name need to be replaced with better options. You simply cannot do that if Matthews, Nylander, and Marner are all getting raises. Impossible.

2. Yes, some of it is on the coach, but not all of it. And that's apparent because this same core underachieved under a Stanley Cup, and future HHOF coach, in Mike Babcock, the same way they've laid eggs under Keefe. These superstars are talented but soft as Kleenex and have no desire to engage in warfare, which is the only way to win in the playoffs. The coach can't help these dudes grow a heart or instill a hatred of losing into them.

3. Yes, Matthews is great at hockey. Yes, he's a spoiled, selfish brat. Can you win with these players? I say no. Not when they dip in the playoffs like Matthews does while displaying a nonchalant attitude with losing. In order to win with these guys, you need to surround them with multiple unsung heroes who carry the team and do all the dirty work when the game is on the line -- guys like Tkachuk, Bennett, Palat, Marchessault, Point, Maroon, Perry, Pavelski, Barbashev, etc. Kids like Matthews and Marner are good enough to get you there but they are not closers. They are cream puffs who lack killer instinct. And they are lead by another marshmallow man in Tavares. When Nylander and Rielly are your toughest stars, you know you're in trouble when the games mean something.

The biggest problem with Matthews is not his weaknesses or deficiencies, it's his sense of entitlement and greed. Instead of leaving money on the table so he can be better supported by players who help him elevate his game, he's arrogant to the point where he wants all the money and can care less about team balance or winning anything substantial. Plain and simple -- he'd rather make every dollar and lose, than make great money and win. What's that tell you about him?

As for your ultimate question: Can you win in a cap league with greedy players who are also good at hockey? The honest answer is: it depends on the player -- how great and how clutch they are. But if the Oilers can't get it done with two all-time greats in McDavid and Draisaitl (who are a level above Matthews) then I wouldn't be taking the Leaf's odds here.

Thx for the well thought out response, glad you're here and thx for making sense. Will respond to each numbered point.

1) I disagree that each of the players Tre brought in will need to be upgraded. I see it more like Tre is trying to remake the team while also giving himself cap flexibility. What I mean is, he brought in a bunch of guys so he can evaluate who he wants on the team -- he'll keep a few (to your point, with raises), but not all. If somebody like Bertuzzi comes in and scores 30G while playing with an edge, that makes Willie and his 9-10m ask expendable -- same with Max Domi who could easily rediscover his form and get 60-70 points. Anyway I'm pretty sure Tre's not trying to keep all those guys long term, he's seeing which ones stick which will then help him remake the team a little bit (potentially including the core).

2) Forgot about Leafs with Babs, thanks for that. Babs was never going to be the best coach for these guys though -- I remember an interview with Chris Chelios re: the end of his career in Detroit -- I'm paraphrasing this but Cheli basically said some version of: "I knew I'd have trouble with Babs because there was no creativity, all he wanted us to do was skate in straight lines" -- that's not going to be effective with offensively creative players like the Leafs have. It might work for Columbus whose entire team except for Gaudreau, Laine, Werenski are all grinders, but Toronto wasn't the right fit.

Re: coaching in general, I do think that one of the main jobs of a coach is to get the team ready to play, and Keefe consistently did not do that against Florida. Of course the players are responsible too, but as a neutral I'd give Keefe... idk maybe 50% of the blame? Some relatively high non-trivial percentage. And as a first year NHL head coach I can't imagine most teams would have kept him for so long. Esp because the Leafs are squarely in their cup window and Lavi was available.

3) Well said about Matthews and other core members. I think you need a core with some toughness that also plays hard, Leafs currently don't have that. BUT, if Bertuzzi or Domi do well with the Leafs, and they become part of the core while WIllie goes away (see point #1)... I mean maybe your core can get there. Maybe you have to drop Willie anyway if he asks for too much $$, but even if that happens maybe it's not the worst thing IF these other guys can become core pieces.

***

Appreciate your answer to my "ultimate question" -- that's a great way to describe it, thx for that. You brought up a great point in that players have to be clutch in order for teams to win. If Leafs core raise their games in elimination games like (insert any superstar from any sport), Leafs win all of those playoff elimination games in the past however many years. Re: EDM, I do think as a neutral that Leafs have a stronger roster, they haven't really been clutch though.

Put another way in a must-win game 7, if I have one player to pick I'm picking Sid, McD, MacK, Kucherov, Makar, Vasi, Shesty, heck maybe even Erik Karlsson based on those two crazy runs he had with Ottawa. Most of those guys you mentioned are at least worth considering. No way I'm picking anyone currently on the Leafs, not even really considering it. And as a neutral, I think THAT is the main problem with the Leafs rn.

***

So then... what do you do with Matthews. I think you have to pay him, regardless of the above you're still a better team with him than without him, even if he's disappeared in the big moments. If I were a Leafs fan, I'm not sure I'd be happy about it. But realistically what else can you do -- if he walks, there goes your championship window, maybe you get to another one in 5-7 years or so but maybe not. Especially bc his no trade means you won't be able to get much of a return for him in a trade, if you can even trade him at all. So I think you're sort of stuck with him even though you're not sure you can win with him leading the team. Definitely a tough spot to be in.

Thx for the context / discussion and your thoughtful answer, very much appreciated. Thx!

 

[PainForShane]

The main argument for the pay difference is that the take home salaries in Denver are higher due to much, much lower income taxes versus Toronto.

In Canada, it seems you need to pay players a premium to get them to sign. It's not a problem exclusive to the Leafs. The reality seems to be that most players don't want to play in Canada, so they must be paid more to stay there. Taxes may be a reason, the policies may be another reason. It seems most players, even Canadian born, have come out and say they don't want to play in Canada. That's an obstacle a team in another country can't change. The Raptors had that same problem in the NBA, the Blue Jays in the MLB. That's the problem when you run a sport in multiple countries where one country is much bigger than the other.

If the NHL cared about true parity - they would assess post-tax income against the cap. I know people here like to pretend that athletes don't care about millions of dollars, but when you got a short career and are retired by 40, those extra millions of dollars add up.

More nonsense.

The main argument for the pay difference between MacK and AM34 ask is that after leading his team to the cup (yes, the off-ice stuff does matter), MacK wanted to be the highest paid player in the league. McD was making 12.5, so MacK asked for 12.6. So, enough to become the highest paid player for a year or two and that's all. That is clearly not what Auston Matthews is doing rn (with regard to both the leading the team to a cup and the reported salary ask / demand).

Not sure what international income tax rates have to do with the salary ask. Keep making stuff up though, but realize you're not fooling anybody and haven't been for quite some time

 

[Boxscore]

The main argument for the pay difference is that the take home salaries in Denver are higher due to much, much lower income taxes versus Toronto.

First, this is completely irrelevant. As long as the cap number is the same for both the Avs and Leafs, players can only be paid so much if they want a chance to win, period.

Secondly, someone else in another thread pointed out that Auston Matthews is taxed in the state of Arizona because that's where his primary residence is. And their income taxes are lower than Colorado, so that's a moot point. Not to mention, Matthews gets paid in American dollars and gets to spend it in Canada. His $11,900,000 salary in USD = $15,760,000 CAD.

No matter how you want to slice it, Matthews isn't struggling to find his next meal. When you're talking about a kid who will make over 200 million playing hockey, when is enough, enough? Would he rather make 214 million and win nothing or make 196 million and have a legit chance to win multiple Cups?

The excuses must stop lol. I know you like him -- and I do too -- but we need to be honest about him and his contract demands.

 

[Divine]

More nonsense.

The main argument for the pay difference between MacK and AM34 ask is that after leading his team to the cup (yes, the off-ice stuff does matter), MacK wanted to be the highest paid player in the league. McD was making 12.5, so MacK asked for 12.6. So, enough to become the highest paid player for a year or two and that's all. That is clearly not what Auston Matthews is doing rn (with regard to both the leading the team to a cup and the reported salary ask / demand).

Not sure what international income tax rates have to do with the salary ask. Keep making stuff up though, but realize you're not fooling anybody and haven't been for quite some time

I have no idea what you're talking about, but you've created your own argument.

 

[Divine]

First, this is completely irrelevant. As long as the cap number is the same for both the Avs and Leafs, players can only be paid so much if they want a chance to win, period.

Secondly, someone else in another thread pointed out that Auston Matthews is taxed in the state of Arizona because that's where his primary residence is. And their income taxes are lower than Colorado, so that's a moot point. Not to mention, Matthews gets paid in American dollars and gets to spend it in Canada. His $11,900,000 salary in USD = $15,760,000 CAD.

No matter how you want to slice it, Matthews isn't struggling to find his next meal. When you're talking about a kid who will make over 200 million playing hockey, when is enough, enough? Would he rather make 214 million and win nothing or make 196 million and have a legit chance to win multiple Cups?

The excuses must stop lol. I know you like him -- and I do too -- but we need to be honest about him and his contract demands.

It depends, if Matthews cares about money, that's his prerogative and good on him. It's human nature, do you see players turning down max contracts in the NBA? Of course money is a factor, why wouldn't it be? Right now, the Leafs are a better team with Matthews than without.

I would prefer a shorter term contract with AM. He's constantly dealing with wrist injuries and it gives the Leafs an out. There's other players hitting the market soon that I believe the Leafs should position themselves for in case Matthews only cares about money. Unfortunately for the Leafs, that time is not now. If Matthews walks today, the Leafs are left much weaker. Dubas has positioned the team horribly, and the Leafs couldn't rebuild or re-tool now even if they wanted to because Dubas traded away 1st round picks like they were worthless.

I also don't get why Matthews gets labelled the money-hungry player out of the 3. Matthews signed his extension in-season the year prior. Nylander was willing to miss a year until he could get every last dollar from the Leafs, he didn't sign until the last possible day without missing the season. Marner didn't sign until training camp. Of the 3, Matthews seems the least money-hungry ironically.

 

[Boxscore]

Thx for the well thought out response, glad you're here and thx for making sense. Will respond to each numbered point.

1) I disagree that each of the players Tre brought in will need to be upgraded. I see it more like Tre is trying to remake the team while also giving himself cap flexibility. What I mean is, he brought in a bunch of guys so he can evaluate who he wants on the team -- he'll keep a few (to your point, with raises), but not all. If somebody like Bertuzzi comes in and scores 30G while playing with an edge, that makes Willie and his 9-10m ask expendable -- same with Max Domi who could easily rediscover his form and get 60-70 points. Anyway I'm pretty sure Tre's not trying to keep all those guys long term, he's seeing which ones stick which will then help him remake the team a little bit (potentially including the core).

2) Forgot about Leafs with Babs, thanks for that. Babs was never going to be the best coach for these guys though -- I remember an interview with Chris Chelios re: the end of his career in Detroit -- I'm paraphrasing this but Cheli basically said some version of: "I knew I'd have trouble with Babs because there was no creativity, all he wanted us to do was skate in straight lines" -- that's not going to be effective with offensively creative players like the Leafs have. It might work for Columbus whose entire team except for Gaudreau, Laine, Werenski are all grinders, but Toronto wasn't the right fit.

Re: coaching in general, I do think that one of the main jobs of a coach is to get the team ready to play, and Keefe consistently did not do that against Florida. Of course the players are responsible too, but as a neutral I'd give Keefe... idk maybe 50% of the blame? Some relatively high non-trivial percentage. And as a first year NHL head coach I can't imagine most teams would have kept him for so long. Esp because the Leafs are squarely in their cup window and Lavi was available.

3) Well said about Matthews and other core members. I think you need a core with some toughness that also plays hard, Leafs currently don't have that. BUT, if Bertuzzi or Domi do well with the Leafs, and they become part of the core while WIllie goes away (see point #1)... I mean maybe your core can get there. Maybe you have to drop Willie anyway if he asks for too much $$, but even if that happens maybe it's not the worst thing IF these other guys can become core pieces.

***

Appreciate your answer to my "ultimate question" -- that's a great way to describe it, thx for that. You brought up a great point in that players have to be clutch in order for teams to win. If Leafs core raise their games in elimination games like (insert any superstar from any sport), Leafs win all of those playoff elimination games in the past however many years. Re: EDM, I do think as a neutral that Leafs have a stronger roster, they haven't really been clutch though.

Put another way in a must-win game 7, if I have one player to pick I'm picking Sid, McD, MacK, Kucherov, Makar, Vasi, Shesty, heck maybe even Erik Karlsson based on those two crazy runs he had with Ottawa. Most of those guys you mentioned are at least worth considering. No way I'm picking anyone currently on the Leafs, not even really considering it. And as a neutral, I think THAT is the main problem with the Leafs rn.

***

So then... what do you do with Matthews. I think you have to pay him, regardless of the above you're still a better team with him than without him, even if he's disappeared in the big moments. If I were a Leafs fan, I'm not sure I'd be happy about it. But realistically what else can you do -- if he walks, there goes your championship window, maybe you get to another one in 5-7 years or so but maybe not. Especially bc his no trade means you won't be able to get much of a return for him in a trade, if you can even trade him at all. So I think you're sort of stuck with him even though you're not sure you can win with him leading the team. Definitely a tough spot to be in.

Thx for the context / discussion and your thoughtful answer, very much appreciated. Thx!

1. I think you are right about Treliving and his approach this year. I think this is his, "all-in year" and we'll see what happens. Bertuzzi, Domi, and Reaves add a dimension to the Leafs they've lacked forever. Klingberg adds a veteran D and PP punch. If the Leafs don't win it all this year they're in trouble. On paper at least, this is their best chance to date.

2. Babs is Babs, but he has a winning pedigree. The fact that this core choked under him the same way they fold under Keefe speaks volumes of them as players, and I don't see it as much as an indictment of the coach. Especially considering Keefe was able to help them enough to dominate in regular seasons. Did he suddenly turn into a poor coach? I doubt it. Did he tell Auston Matthews to let Steven Stamkos ragdoll him on home ice? Did he tell Marner to make constant no-look passes to the opponent in the defensive zone? I don't think any coach is perfect -- and I'm not a massive Keefe guy -- but I don't blame the coaches, not when this team is loaded with talent and a high-priced core of stars.

3. Here's how I see this playing out -- the Leafs make a decent run this year because those character additions pay off. However, Bertuzzi and Domi put themselves in positions to cash in after the season and the Leafs cannot afford them, plus the core. I think, due to the greedy nature of some of our players, the Leafs lose a couple of nice depth pieces and one main core player. So unless they win the cheese this year, it was 1 step forward then 3 steps back for us.

4. Yes, Matthews is leveraging the Leafs to cave in because he knows he has them in a vulnerable position. That's what greedy players do, not leaders who love their club. The Leafs have to sign Matthews, although I think it should hit a point where he needs to be challenged and called out about his true desire to play in Toronto.