Salary Cap: Marner Contract Discussion - Winter is coming

[Mess]

Old thread is full.

Away we go ..

Click to read more...

 

[Da Cool Rula]

Has this beaten the Nylander thread yet?

 

[Sypher04]

Please for the love of god end this already lol

 

[Nooodles]

Has this beaten the Nylander thread yet?

Not even close.
We passed thread xxx with Willy...

 

[Nithoniniel]

The equivalent of 'Winter is Coming' for this saga would be waiting until December only for Marner to sign a two week contract.

 

[Notsince67]

They don't have to get a better player to make the team better though.

All they have to do is improve in areas of greater need than just scoring more points.

They don't have to get a better player to make the team better though.

All they have to do is improve in areas of greater need than just scoring more points.

Elite players are not easily replaceable with anything other than elite players and the availability tends to be opportunistic rather than a maintenance item. Every position is an opportunity cost. That is why a guy whose goals against replacement is worth more than 2 guys with each having exactly half his number.
It is like traditional cost accounting that looks at incremental cost to maximize efficiency at the expense of theory of constraints theory. An incremental improvement of yield at the expense of theoretical limits to organizational capacity limits is not prudent because there is an inherent production assumed with positional organizational overhead.

A replacement level player will produce a base amount of net points in a given position. The economic benefit is anything above 0 which is the average .
In a theoretical example (just picking names) assuming GAR is absolutely correct lets look at AHO and Tkachuk vs Marner.
Again I am only using these numbers as a theoretical discussion because I dont really intend to open up a qualitative argument of these individuals....
GAR...Aho + Tkachuk = 21
Marner = 18.1

Lets assume Tkachuk gets signed at 7.5 MM and Marner gets signed for 10.5mm
Cost of Aho+Tkachuk= 16mm for a theoretical improvement of 2.9 GAR
The team is spending more but it is producing more right? Is that better?
Not really. Ennis is now signed for 800K and he produced a GAR of 1.6.
Assuming that a person like him is easily acquirable, lets balance the comparison...2 positions against 2 positions.
Aho + Tkachuk costs 16MM for a combined GAR of 21 and Marner + Ennis costs 11.3MM for a combined GAR of 19.7MM.
1.3 GAR increase will costs 4.7MM more. In a cap world, the difference in money is more than Johnnson who has a 6.2 GAR.

Based on this theoretical test, the numbers dont support AHO+Tkachuk replacing Marner. It seems counter intuitive because both are great. Positional opportunity costs and yield mean a lot.
One can dispute my example by nitpicking who I picked but it doesn't negate the object lesson. The saying that the team who gets the best player wins the trade is pretty credible.​

 

[Bigmarycombo]

I can’t keep stressing this enough
Over Pay your core players if you have to
Don’t overpay the lesser players

Matthews nylander overpaid no big deal
Marner to be overpaid no big deal

Any one of Johnsson Kapanen Moore etc can be traded to make room for the stars without us losing one iota of depth.

 

[biotk]

@Nithoniniel

Your perspective is about getting the most out of our every cap dollar so we are as competitive as possible, right? Well, what matters then is the value of their on-ice impact compared to cap dollars spent. I suggest looking at Dom Luszczyszyn's model for that. Guys like Marner, Tavares, and Matthews has enough impact on-ice to be worth well more than what they cost us.

Sure. At the same time Dom's on-ice impact value for Toronto's roster zips past 95M without including Marner, Dermott, Freddie, the backup, Kessel's money owed etc. Add them in and it stands at about 150% of the cap.

How good are Matthews, Marner and Tavares going to be if all their teammates are league min or ELCs?

Toews and Kane got paid - and never won a cup since.
Crosby and Malkin got paid - and didn't win another cup for 7 years - when their cap hit % had fallen significantly.
Matthews, Tavares, Nylander (and presumably Marner) got paid - they hadn't won a cup, and it is extremely unlikely that the Leafs will carrying their cap hits.

 

[ULF_55]

Elite players are not easily replaceable with anything other than elite players and the availability tends to be opportunistic rather than a maintenance item. Every position is an opportunity cost. That is why a guy whose goals against replacement is worth more than 2 guys with each having exactly half his number.
It is like traditional cost accounting that looks at incremental cost to maximize efficiency at the expense of theory of constraints theory. An incremental improvement of yield at the expense of theoretical limits to organizational capacity limits is not prudent because there is an inherent production assumed with positional organizational overhead.

A replacement level player will produce a base amount of net points in a given position. The economic benefit is anything above 0 which is the average .
In a theoretical example (just picking names) assuming GAR is absolutely correct lets look at AHO and Tkachuk vs Marner.
Again I am only using these numbers as a theoretical discussion because I dont really intend to open up a qualitative argument of these individuals....
GAR...Aho + Tkachuk = 21
Marner = 18.1

Lets assume Tkachuk gets signed at 7.5 MM and Marner gets signed for 10.5mm
Cost of Aho+Tkachuk= 16mm for a theoretical improvement of 2.9 GAR
The team is spending more but it is producing more right? Is that better?
Not really. Ennis is now signed for 800K and he produced a GAR of 1.6.
Assuming that a person like him is easily acquirable, lets balance the comparison...2 positions against 2 positions.
Aho + Tkachuk costs 16MM for a combined GAR of 21 and Marner + Ennis costs 11.3MM for a combined GAR of 19.7MM.
1.3 GAR increase will costs 4.7MM more. In a cap world, the difference in money is more than Johnnson who has a 6.2 GAR.

Based on this theoretical test, the numbers dont support AHO+Tkachuk replacing Marner. It seems counter intuitive because both are great. Positional opportunity costs and yield mean a lot.
One can dispute my example by nitpicking who I picked but it doesn't negate the object lesson. The saying that the team who gets the best player wins the trade is pretty credible.​

Why are you limiting yourself to like players when there are greater needs?

Since the discussion is hypothetical what if you could land the best goaltender in the league or the best defenseman in the league. In reality you wouldn't get either for marner...

And Aho and Tkachuk did not play with Tavares.

 

[Kiwi]

I can’t keep stressing this enough
Over Pay your core players if you have to
Don’t overpay the lesser players

Matthews nylander overpaid no big deal
Marner to be overpaid no big deal

Any one of Johnsson Kapanen Moore etc can be traded to make room for the stars without us losing one iota of depth.

I don't know what depth means to you but where I'm from trading Kapanen or Johnsson is by definition losing depth, those guys are at least 3rd liners and if you trade them and replace them with lesser player your depth got worse

Your last sentence makes literally no sense

 

[PromisedLand]

Hey Dubas and Marner wake the F up ffs

 

[MapleLeafs9]

Remember when Nylander called Dubas just before the deadline and said “alright let’s get a deal done” and a contract was done in a few minutes? Marner needs to suck it up and do this before camp. Let’s get this side show over with already!

 

[LeafSteel]

Remember when Nylander called Dubas just before the deadline and said “alright let’s get a deal done” and a contract was done in a few minutes? Marner needs to suck it up and do this before camp. Let’s get this side show over with already!

I really don't want Dubas doing this again.

It worked out great for Nylander, as he got paid his full salary with a raise, and had an excuse for having a poor season in that he missed camp and sat out.

It did NOT work out so great for us. We got an ineffective player, msessed up our chemistry mid-season and burned a year off of Nylander's hard-fought for contract. Not a great deal for us at all.

I would rather make it clear to Mitch that if he misses camp, he's going to sit the season or he can take his chances getting hurt in Europe playing for peanuts because our $9.5 million offer isn't high enough for him.

I don't want another mid-season interruption and I don't want us p***y-footing around again with this crap. Sign and show up or sit and rot.

...... having said that, I think he signs half-way through camp.

 

[MapleLeafs9]

I really don't want Dubas doing this again.

It worked out great for Nylander, as he got paid his full salary with a raise, and had an excuse for having a poor season in that he missed camp and sat out.

It did NOT work out so great for us. We got an ineffective player, msessed up our chemistry mid-season and burned a year off of Nylander's hard-fought for contract. Not a great deal for us at all.

I would rather make it clear to Mitch that if he misses camp, he's going to sit the season or he can take his chances getting hurt in Europe playing for peanuts because our $9.5 million offer isn't high enough for him.

I don't want another mid-season interruption and I don't want us *****-footing around again with this crap. Sign and show up or sit and rot.

...... having said that, I think he signs half-way through camp.

That’s why I said he needs to do this before camp

 

[LeafSteel]

That’s why I said he needs to do this before camp

Agreeing with you 150%.

 

[LeafalCrusader]

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Bridge deal please

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

Hey Dubas and Marner wake the F up ffs

Marner hears ya. Marner don’t care.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Bridge deal or sit em

 

[Notsince67]

Why are you limiting yourself to like players when there are greater needs?

Since the discussion is hypothetical what if you could land the best goaltender in the league or the best defenseman in the league. In reality you wouldn't get either for marner...

And Aho and Tkachuk did not play with Tavares.

I said that elite players are opportunist situations. Which goalie did you have in mind and how many extra goals will that goalie prevent that will offer up a clear advantage to losing marner. Which is the best defenseman that you demand a team to give up for Marner. My point is that you need a comparably elite player in exchange for Marner and you haven't proposed one. I would be curious to see what you propose.
As for Tavares, you are completely conflating fantasy that Tavares is the reason why Marner did so well because Tavares carried him. 2017-18, Tavares EV GAR was 4.3 while Marners was 7.1. By every measure, (GAR, g/60 and p/60 at even strength), Tavares benefited more playing with Marner than the other way around. It is just insanity that people think differently.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I've already looked at and posted their ES P/GP over different time periods because I know a lot of people put more emphasis on more recent years, but I didn't like the idea of excluding years entirely, so I decided to see how the production of these major RFAs would look when I weighted the years. I decided to make each previous year worth half of the one that comes after it, which makes the 3rd ELC year worth 57.16%, 2nd ELC year weighted at 28.58%, and the 1st ELC year weighted at 14.29%.

ES P/GP

Matthews: 0.76
Marner: 0.71
Point - 0.64
Rantanen - 0.64
Aho - 0.61
Tkachuk - 0.58
Meier - 0.55
Boeser - 0.53
Connor - 0.52
Laine - 0.42

Matthews and Marner still solidly at the top in 1st and 2nd place.

Also a reminder that on top of this, Matthews and Marner have been the 2 best per-minute PP producers of these players over their ELCs. The difference is that they get the least PP TOI/GP of any of these forwards except Meier, largely because of PP opportunities, a team stat.

We have special talents here. Appreciate them.

 

[notdoneyet]

I don't know what depth means to you but where I'm from trading Kapanen or Johnsson is by definition losing depth, those guys are at least 3rd liners and if you trade them and replace them with lesser player your depth got worse

Your last sentence makes literally no sense

My point is let's say we have to trade someone
Pick whichever one you want to keep
I'd keep johnsson

We have Moore playing on the fourth line
Are you telling me that moor couldn't play up higher
In the lineup and do whay kappanen can do,

Then we just put in another fourth liner that is
Sitting in the stands to replace Moore

We have depth right now going to be stuck on the fourth line because there are no spots

You don't lose stars to keep so called depth

 

[Kiwi]

My point is let's say we have to trade someone
Pick whichever one you want to keep
I'd keep johnsson

We have Moore playing on the fourth line
Are you telling me that moor couldn't play up higher
In the lineup and do whay kappanen can do,

Then we just put in another fourth liner that is
Sitting in the stands to replace Moore

We have depth right now going to be stuck on the fourth line because there are no spots

You don't lose stars to keep so called depth

I love Moore, he's a hard working kid but anybody thinking he's not a massive downgrade on Kapanen is wildly incorrect, same goes for Johnsson and Moore

Losing cheap, young quality 2nd or 3rd line depth is hugely detrimental to the team, that's just factually accurate

We can pay Marner up to 10.55M before we're required to start moving bodies, if that's not enough we've got a serious problem, that should be more than enough

 

[jrgtml67]

Very odd...media rumor was Jake was waiting on Leafs...Jake signed. I thought DuBas maybe said ya sorry Jake..meaning Marner deal close enough

 

[Kamiccolo]

If you are paying big money get term. Rather 11 x 6 than 9.5 x 3