Salary Cap: Marner contract discussion XVIII (continued)

[BertCorbeau]

Think it’s safe to say Marner’s offer sheet leverage is close to gone.

Just get a deal signed FFS

 

[TheDoldrums]

If you're Marner's camp, why wouldn't you be looking for a 2 year deal from the Leafs?

There is going to be new money coming to the league through Seattle expansion & a new US tv deal. If percentage of the cap is a concern, why not wait until the cap goes up?

Because then a lockout happens in two years and Marner isn't getting paid.

edit: or not

 

[MyBudJT]

Because then a lockout happens in two years and Marner isn't getting paid.

The lockout would be next season. A two year deal protects you from a lockout threat.

 

[TheDoldrums]

The lockout would be next season. A two year deal protects you from a lockout threat.

thought it was after two more seasons, my b

 

[ACC1224]

If you're Marner's camp, why wouldn't you be looking for a 2 year deal from the Leafs?

There is going to be new money coming to the league through Seattle expansion & a new US tv deal. If percentage of the cap is a concern, why not wait until the cap goes up?

No reason to think that two years hasn't been discussed.
One year would be of no interest.

 

[Mess]

If you're Marner's camp, why wouldn't you be looking for a 2 year deal from the Leafs?

There is going to be new money coming to the league through Seattle expansion & a new US tv deal. If percentage of the cap is a concern, why not wait until the cap goes up?

Marner's camp would accept a 2 year deal as that would protect him in case of a lockout 2020-21 year and get paid for 2 years instead of just one.

Leafs Ownership would frown on Dubas thinking it would be silly giving him 2 years at big money and then get only 1 year of service, and pay him to no play for them.

If Leafs give Marner a 2 year deal at $8.5 mil bridge deal and there is a lockout in year number 2 that means Leafs are paying Marner $17 mil for 1 year of service for 2019-20.

This would really depend on the status of the CBA and odds of a lockout, which owners and management would know more than players.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

That is Marner's case and leverage to claim he is validating the JT signing and contract at $11 mil..

Johnny can continue to score more goals and be a PPG player with Marner as his wingman, and Ferris/Marner are certainly making that case why Mitch deserves to be paid like JT and AM as a result.

Without Marner driving the lines offense Tavares is likely +$2 mil overpaid and more like a $9 mil player not $11 mil.

This sounds like the kind of BS argument Marner's camp would try to make up to justify earning Matthews' contract and having every GM in the NHL laugh at them.

 

[showtime8]

Marner's camp would accept a 2 year deal as that would protect him in case of a lockout 2020-21 year and get paid for 2 years instead of just one.

Leafs Ownership would frown on Dubas thinking it would be silly giving him 2 years at big money and then get only 1 year of service, and pay him to no play for them.

If Leafs give Marner a 2 year deal at $8.5 mil bridge deal and there is a lockout in year number 2 that means Leafs are paying Marner $17 mil for 1 year of service for 2019-20.

This would really depend on the status of the CBA and odds of a lockout, which owners and management would know more than players.

You would have to think that the league would do whatever it could to prevent the lock-out from happening. I know that lock-outs have become expected with Bettman, but there are too many factors that contribute to the league losing. You've got the TV rights deal that will be a factor in the US, there are rumours that Rogers is losing money on the TV deal in Canada, you've got a new franchise coming in with Seattle, you've got momentum with Vegas as a potential legit market for hockey in the US until 2020 that will begin to compete for time with the NFL & Raiders franchise moving there. It just seems like there is too much at risk for a complete year long lock-out.

A 2 year contract could still be a gamble for the Leafs based on what you mentioned, but I think the other option would be a 3 year deal & I'm not sure how much the AAV would be on that. 8.75? 9?

 

[JT AM da real deal]

They don’t have the cap room, but I would imagine he would take less to play there. Terrific city, great housing, and no state tax.

Yeah no state tax makes a huge difference in take home pay. It is 13% in Ontario so a lot of money. and Alberta where Kadri declined is over 15%.

 

[Mess]

You would have to think that the league would do whatever it could to prevent the lock-out from happening. I know that lock-outs have become expected with Bettman, but there are too many factors that contribute to the league losing. You've got the TV rights deal that will be a factor in the US, there are rumours that Rogers is losing money on the TV deal in Canada, you've got a new franchise coming in with Seattle, you've got momentum with Vegas as a potential legit market for hockey in the US until 2020 that will begin to compete for time with the NFL & Raiders franchise moving there. It just seems like there is too much at risk for a complete year long lock-out.

A 2 year contract could still be a gamble for the Leafs based on what you mentioned, but I think the other option would be a 3 year deal & I'm not sure how much the AAV would be on that. 8.75? 9?

1 year deal is bad for Marner if there is a lockout (no pay), and 2 years is bad for Leafs for the same reason (paying him to not play).

A 2 year deal (with a lockout) also makes Marner an unsigned RFA again and right back to where we sit right now only 2 years later.. Dubas to pay Marner through a lockout and then battle again in 3 years would not be smart management. IMO

A 3 year deal for both sides is the best result for both of the 3 options, because even if there is a work stoppage for part of a year, then Marner still comes out the other side with a contract and not RFA status. 3 years still makes Mitch an RFA only a 1 year from UFA status and then his 8 year term deal could be signed.

So it would go 3 year ELC + 3 year bridge + 8 year (unless the CBA changes this).

 

[JT AM da real deal]

You would have to think that the league would do whatever it could to prevent the lock-out from happening. I know that lock-outs have become expected with Bettman, but there are too many factors that contribute to the league losing. You've got the TV rights deal that will be a factor in the US, there are rumours that Rogers is losing money on the TV deal in Canada, you've got a new franchise coming in with Seattle, you've got momentum with Vegas as a potential legit market for hockey in the US until 2020 that will begin to compete for time with the NFL & Raiders franchise moving there. It just seems like there is too much at risk for a complete year long lock-out.

A 2 year contract could still be a gamble for the Leafs based on what you mentioned, but I think the other option would be a 3 year deal & I'm not sure how much the AAV would be on that. 8.75? 9?

We will see how much Gary can handle? The players want to eliminate the 15% escrow holdback. The players want to eliminate the arena sponsorship money loopholes where non hockey revenue goes to owners pockets. It might be too much for Gary to manage. If owners push back then the entire CBA will change directions to a push for a freer market system. I think the owners are pretty happy with system right now and players might find a way to make it work with changes above. The Leafs would be the biggest losers. They would not care about the escrow as 15% is peanut money to them. But the sponsorship monies would be a huge sticking point for them. But for 90% of other teams the situation is totally reversed. It is too early to know exactly how things are going to go.

 

[Clark4Ever]

We will see how much Gary can handle? The players want to eliminate the 15% escrow holdback. The players want to eliminate the arena sponsorship money loopholes where non hockey revenue goes to owners pockets. It might be too much for Gary to manage. If owners push back then the entire CBA will change directions to a push for a freer market system. I think the owners are pretty happy with system right now and players might find a way to make it work with changes above. The Leafs would be the biggest losers. They would not care about the escrow as 15% is peanut money to them. But the sponsorship monies would be a huge sticking point for them. But for 90% of other teams the situation is totally reversed. It is too early to know exactly how things are going to go.

No chance the players are getting a share of the arena sponsorship revenue. Escrow might be reduced, but I can't see it being eliminated outright. I also think arbitration has to implemented as a dispute resolution mechanism for players coming off their ELC to avoid this nonsense that we're now seeing league wide with an unprecedented number of RFAs.

If the NHLPA is going to play hardball, I would support a lockout. The NFL should be the model for all professional sports leagues in North America. These players don't realize how good they have it under the current CBA.

 

[Notsince67]

i think dubas watches the games, i've seen him there

My comment is directed at the poster who has a track record of identifying with Dubas in some fantasy world and believing that a game must be mathematically digitized before any evaluation can be done.

 

[Confucius]

If you're Marner's camp, why wouldn't you be looking for a 2 year deal from the Leafs?

There is going to be new money coming to the league through Seattle expansion & a new US tv deal. If percentage of the cap is a concern, why not wait until the cap goes up?

If you're the Leafs why pay him for a year when we may not play? No way we do a 2 year deal and noway we trade him. Hope he signs an offer sheet, if it's low enough, we match if it's not we take the 4 1sts and see ya later.

 

[Maple Leaf]

Might be the best time to trade Marner

 

[Walshy7]

thought it was after two more seasons, my b

I thought it was the league can instigate a lockout next offseason and the players could go on strike the year after? the opt out of cba for each party was staggered?

 

[JT AM da real deal]

No chance the players are getting a share of the arena sponsorship revenue. Escrow might be reduced, but I can't see it being eliminated outright. I also think arbitration has to implemented as a dispute resolution mechanism for players coming off their ELC to avoid this nonsense that we're now seeing league wide with an unprecedented number of RFAs.

If the NHLPA is going to play hardball, I would support a lockout. The NFL should be the model for all professional sports leagues in North America. These players don't realize how good they have it under the current CBA.

I actually agree with you which is why many people like Orr believe a strike/lockout is inevitable. The players will hold tight on the 2 main issues they have. and the owners will have to decide if they want to keep the existing CBA framework in place or not? If they want to keep the CBA in place they can't keep withholding escrow from players to make up the differences when they are secretly taking sponsorship money outside of the CBA. There is a complete lack of trust between the 2 sides. If they don't care about CBA then the players are fine with letting market forces prevail on compensation. Everyone needs to remember here this CBA is a Bettman/owners deal the players could care less about the CBA.

 

[Confucius]

Might be the best time to trade Marner

You wont get a player worth 4 1sts for Marner.
4 1sts plus money earmarked for Marner to get another player is way more than we will get offered for Marner in a trade.

Odds are Marner wont get offer sheeted now anyway. He'll have to play for what Dubas offers. Take it or leave it.

 

[napoleon in rags]

i think dubas watches the games, i've seen him there

Nah, his nose is buried in his phone.

 

[ToDavid]

thought it was after two more seasons, my b

The lockout would have some impact though so you're not way off base. Qualifying offers are based on salary alone, not including signing bonuses. So Marner would want a high salary in year 2 of that deal to establish a high qualifying offer (like the Timo Meier deal) but that could put him at risk of losing a lot of money if there was a lockout (where you receive your signing bonuses but not your salary).

If there is a bridge deal on the table my guess would be 3 years. Signing bonuses in years 1 and 2 and then $10m+ in salary in year 3.

 

[JayfromNB1219]

That is Marner's case and leverage to claim he is validating the JT signing and contract at $11 mil..

Johnny can continue to score more goals and be a PPG player with Marner as his wingman, and Ferris/Marner are certainly making that case why Mitch deserves to be paid like JT and AM as a result.

Without Marner driving the lines offense Tavares is likely +$2 mil overpaid and more like a $9 mil player not $11 mil.

naw dude...I will wait and see this year...
Marner-finally had someone super skilled to play with (energy boost for the season)
Tavares- finally had a star to play with plus he came home in a hugely publicized deal (energy boost for the year)

now that the honeymoon has worn off we will likely see what these two are actually worth

 

[PromisedLand]

Lol I do think looking at Total points when it comes to AM doesn’t paint the whole picture. He has been injured and underused. Hopefully he gets past these injuries and gets more TOI and goes crazy so we can stop worrying. P/60 shows when he’s playing he’s good.

Bickering here is crazy.

But yeah.....Marner thread

I wonder if his camp used this in contract negotiations; saying that if Matthews got the same amount of ice-time as other offensive players (ex: McDavid) he would have put up more points....?

 

[Menzinger]

If you're Marner's camp, why wouldn't you be looking for a 2 year deal from the Leafs?

There is going to be new money coming to the league through Seattle expansion & a new US tv deal. If percentage of the cap is a concern, why not wait until the cap goes up?

Leafs have little desire to agree to that unless Marner would be willing to give them an aav at like 5-6.9 mil

 

[Menzinger]

Imo a 1-2 year deal means that neither side was able to find a compromise on a more logical deal (3 or 6 year) which still puts up his future with the Leafs at an uncertain place especially if the relationship cant be repaired between player and team. If he comes back in a year or 2 and asks for 15 mil aav on his third contract hes not getting that in Toronto from this front office

 

[JT AM da real deal]

Greetings Leafs fans. I'm going to be up front here. By my name some of you old timers may figure out I'm a Canucks fan...but I'm also someone who moved from Van City as a child and has lived on Long Island, New York since the 70's and am a bigtime Islanders fan. Before you grab your pitchforks, and while recognizing I'm not supposed to come here, I want to make it clear I come in peace. I just want to give you the impression from the outside, and as a fan of a team who would love to find a way to poach MM from you. Not as vendetta for what JT did (OK, maybe a little) but because of the player and how he would help take the Isles to the next level. Having said all that most of us believe Marner has absolutely no interest in moving on. Makes zero sense. JT went home to become a Hero, why the Hell would Marner split from where he's already a hero to become a Villain? He'll get his money. It's a game of chicken that will play itself out...with MM in a Leafs uniform. Will it be 3,4 years or the 6,7,8 that the Leafs want? Dunno. That's why chicken games are played. In no way do I believe Marner's camp will let this get to a point where the bridge is so burned they trade him. If Dubas pushes this to that place as a ploy, and does it well, it is Marner who will cave. Yes he may use a team like the Islanders or anyone else who may submit an OS as leverage (we're used to that after seeing what Panarin did). But I do have a question. Obviously you guys have made some moves already trying to clear space. I'm curious, though, when push comes to shove and Marner gets his double digit millions who are the candidates to be moved if they have to clear more space? Or can Dubas do this circuitously through more moves like the Clarkson trade without having to touch his roster? A quick note on JT. I know from the outside it appeared that we are Neanderthals, and I'm not going to disagree that some Islanders fans behaved as such. But you'd really need to understand the entire context of what went on and how it played out to grasp that the animosity came from a truly legitimate place, and most of us expressed it appropriately. The level of behavior you saw from some Islanders fans way exaggerated it, but again you'd need to know all the ins and outs. If you did you might understand better where it came from. I will not respond as I want to get in and get out of here given my stated allegiances and understanding of the climate between our fanbases. Cheers!

If someone decides to OS Mitch over 10.7M then Leafs will take the 4 1st rounders. But no one has done it. Why it is Marner himself. You are going to have to go to 13.5M AAV to get him. and even likely a little higher depending on state tax situation. Bottom line is no one wants to pay him that kinda money. But he requires that to come out better than Leafs deal. The whole thing is a big joke when you really get into the $$$. The Leafs are well aware of the hockey and non hockey comp. If he was best player in league sure what da h*ll do it. But he is not even a top 5 winger. It is a total joke. Complete game of BS Ferris is playing while he nickels and dimes Dubie up from 10M for 8 years.