That is yet to be seen. A huge aspect of team defense is having a forward group that is strong enough defensively to go toe to toe with the leagues best and still produce. Marleau can do that, it's not a given the Johnsson/Kapanen etc. can.
Salary Cap: Marleau's 3rd Year
- Thread starter LeafsOHLRangers98
- Start date
That is yet to be seen. A huge aspect of team defense is having a forward group that is strong enough defensively to go toe to toe with the leagues best and still produce. Marleau can do that, it's not a given the Johnsson/Kapanen etc. can.
Boutette
Been there done that
- Sep 28, 2017
- 2,991
- 1,056
This is the new argument that the Leafs must keep and pay out Marleaus 6.25 million in cap next year? LWer Marleau on his own can make up for our bottom 10 RD and also make up for the loss of our #2 LD next year. Awesome. He's a keeper then.
kb
Registered User
- Aug 28, 2009
- 15,296
- 21,762
Throw More Waffles
Unprecedented Dramatic Overpayments
- Oct 9, 2015
- 12,939
- 9,885
Let's be honest here, you have no idea if there is or isn't a handshake deal in place and stating there isn't as if it was a fact is delusional. Same goes for how the contract is structured, you say it's meaningless, maybe it is and maybe it isn't.
It's funny, same thing happened with Stamkos and then Tavares - hundreds of people posted that they KNOW for sure if he is or isn't signing (I wish I had a buck for every time I read "book it" on this site in those posts). Same with JVR being or not being traded and now the same thing with the Marleau contract. Me, I'm perfectly willing to stay real, admit that I have no insider information and am thus in the dark just like everyone else. There have been some good arguments made in favour of there being a handshake deal in place, it seems plausible to me and I hope that's the way it is.
We'll all find out at the same time.
It’s pretty silly to just defend horrible contracts under the argument “there may be a cap circumventing handshake deal.”
It’s specious reasoning.
Gary Nylund
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2013
- 30,736
- 23,986
Speaking of which, you shouldn't be addressing me as I'm not defending anything, just saying that I can understand both sides of the argument.
What's silly IMHO is ridiculing people who are speculating that there may be a handshake deal in place. Not saying that's you but that's something many people have been doing. Like I said, it's all speculation and I see nothing wrong with that especially considering it may well be true. If speculation wasn't allowed then 99% of posts on this board wouldn't be allowed.
AllDay28
Registered User
- Oct 15, 2015
- 3,611
- 2,705
pretty naive to think an iron man would sign a essentially 2 yr deal with a final yr in his 40s making 1 mil without some agreement in place. Kovalchuk just got a near identical contract.
Furthermore, no no trade, and he makes 1 real world mil to his cap. If he doesnt go to SJ who just got Ek, im sure Vegas or Zona would take him. Sucks but lets not feel too bad, playing for a great Sharks team + up and coming Leafs team + raking in $$ cant be that bad
Furthermore, no no trade, and he makes 1 real world mil to his cap. If he doesnt go to SJ who just got Ek, im sure Vegas or Zona would take him. Sucks but lets not feel too bad, playing for a great Sharks team + up and coming Leafs team + raking in $$ cant be that bad
AllDay28
Registered User
- Oct 15, 2015
- 3,611
- 2,705
a lot of naive people in the world. To think this industry is so clean that it wouldnt have backdoor deals.. i mean, contracts are completely ironed out by 12pm on signing day but youre not allowed to do anything but talk to the players before 12. Shocker
kb
Registered User
- Aug 28, 2009
- 15,296
- 21,762
Gary Nylund
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2013
- 30,736
- 23,986
or all these players on back diving deals all of a sudden finding "outs" when their deals get down to 1m pay per
folks called this back in the day and got called out for it and yet, here we are
they was spot on right.
No, it's literally a direct counterargument to the extremely optimistic assumption that we have "3-4 guys that can do what he does at 1/6th the cost".
You make some great points but reeeallly need to back off on the strawmanning and forcing things into false binaries, comes off as extremely childish.
No one disputes that that are benefits to reallocating that money. No one says we "must keep him"
What people are saying is that "until something comes to light, it is wishful thinking to assume that he will be gone, and it's not the end of the world if he's not because he still brings value"
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 75,686
- 41,666
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 75,686
- 41,666
kb
Registered User
- Aug 28, 2009
- 15,296
- 21,762
Why don't you give it a rest already? You speculated, I responded with facts. There is absolutely nothing that points to any handshake deal, so I can respond over and over with the hard facts until you understand them.
Oh, Marleau just got an A? Yup, he's got a handshake deal for sure.
Gary Nylund
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2013
- 30,736
- 23,986
Gary Nylund
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2013
- 30,736
- 23,986
I think the idea is that they trade him first, isn't that what CHI did with Hossa?
Boutette
Been there done that
- Sep 28, 2017
- 2,991
- 1,056
Not if he retires after agreeing to waive his NMC after being paid 95% of the 19 million he signed up for.
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 75,686
- 41,666
