Salary Cap: Marner contract discussion XVIII (continued)

[ACC1224]

yep good point. Although with Seattle due to start around that time would the league like to have a black stain in the face of that? not sure they will, perhaps the PA see that and push hard for ridiculous concessions and the leagues only choice is lockout though.

Whether there will be a lockout or not is irrelevant.
The threat that it could happen would be enough for any player to want to sign something.

 

[Clark4Ever]

Dubas didn’t clear physical dollars, but he put it to FAR better use, filling our top 4 RD hole, while maintaining our Center depth and keeping Kapanen and Johnsson.

Allowing us to dedicate the 10.4Mish of space after Horton on LTIR and demotions, all on Marner.

It’s really not all that hard of a situation to grasp, and how tremendous the cap turn around this summer has been.

Well said. 10 million plus should be more than sufficient to sign Marner for at least 5 years, but his camp needs to come back down to earth first.

 

[Mess]

Wouldn't 1 year leave him potentially without money coming in should a lockout occur?

It would, and it wouldn't be ideal for him.

However what would be his other option if unsigned, and sitting out 2019-20 season and then entering a potential lockout unsigned? If Marner turns down the 1 year deal he could be going without pay for 2 years.

Would it be smart of Dubas to give Marner a 2 year deal just to protect Mitch in case of a lockout, while his bosses MLSE are now paying Marner during a lockout? A 2 year deal wouldn't be in Leafs best interest with a potential work stoppage looming. Can't imagine MLSE would be all that happy with Dubas in this scenario and Kyle might find himself also without pay during a lockout.

So a 1 year deal to get him on the ice or a 3 year bridge deal, if they can't come to terms on a deal 5 or more years on $$. Seems like the 2 most likely scenarios to me to resolve this short-term and kick the can down the road.

 

[Sypher04]

I put a 1 year deal at like 0.1% chance.

 

[ShaneFalco]

Whether they have contracts over the summer or not is largely inconsequential.

What I mean is, I don't think it helps anyone that these things can drag out so long. At least move it back from Dec 1st to like Sept

 

[Jack Bauer]

It would, and it wouldn't be ideal for him.

However what would be his other option if unsigned, and sitting out 2019-20 season and then entering a potential lockout unsigned? If Marner turns down the 1 year deal he could be going without pay for 2 years.

Would it be smart of Dubas to give Marner a 2 year deal just to protect Mitch in case of a lockout, while his bosses MLSE are now paying Marner during a lockout? A 2 year deal wouldn't be in Leafs best interest with a potential work stoppage looming. Can't imagine MLSE would be all that happy with Dubas in this scenario and Kyle might find himself also without pay during a lockout.

So a 1 year deal to get him on the ice or a 3 year bridge deal, if they can't come to terms on a deal 5 or more years on $$. Seems like the 2 most likely scenarios to me to resolve this short-term and kick the can down the road.

How can anyone who has any clue say 1 year is an option in this situation?

The real options here are 3 years or 6 years as the term. There's never going to be a 1 year deal signed by Mitch Marner unless he's a year away from being UFA.

 

[Mess]

Well said. 10 million plus should be more than sufficient to sign Marner to at least 5 years, but his camp needs to come back down to earth first.

$10 mil plus for 5 years is Marner's current ask.

That is not Marner coming down but rather Dubas caving to his current demands.

 

[hullsy47]

I put a 1 year deal at like 0.1% chance.

I think Shanahan is point man now
I like dubas but it's obvious he doesn't scare anybody but I do think these wild rumors of having to trade nylander to free up money is a concern
u dont front load the crap out of a contract just so u can trade a guy
I doubt this was discussed but if dubas even entertained this notion I fully support Shanahan in blocking anything asinine

 

[Walshy7]

$10 mil plus for 5 years is Marner's current ask.

That is not Marner coming down but rather Dubas caving to his current demands.

$10M+? as in Matthews money (so $11M+) is mostly what we hear form "insiders" haven't seen anything about $10M+ I think the leafs would do $10Mx5 if it were an option

 

[Nylander88]

What cap space did Dubas clear out?

He essentially has the exact same amount of money to pay Marner as he did at the start of the summer (which is a good thing - as they decided how much Marner was worth and have stuck to it):

Traded Kadri, Rosen, Marleau, Zaitsev and Brown (18.1M)
Signed or traded for: Kerfoot, Barrie, Ceci, Harpur, Johnsson and Kapanen (18.1M)

Well Marleau was the true clear out. I don't really count resigning your quality young guys (Kapanen,Johnsson, now Kerfoot) as adding cap. Kapanen and Johnsson were going to require a raise all along unless you let them go for a bag of pucks, which would be a massive loss. Zaitsev and Brown we saved money in that deal, and saved term which frees us up next year to give more breathing room again, which may be key in retaining Barrie. Kerfoot is a 1mil savings on Kadri at an extra year than Kadri had left. All the way around yes the money works out the same, but without those moves he wouldn't be able to get Johnsson + Kapanen resigned. The money works out the same, but he's won every deal (marleau aside but that was necessary) and left the appropriate space for Mitch still. I'm personally pleased with his work thus far. He's built imo a better team while having a gun to his head.

 

[Mess]

How can anyone who has any clue say 1 year is an option in this situation?

The real options here are 3 years or 6 years as the term. There's never going to be a 1 year deal signed by Mitch Marner unless he's a year away from being UFA.

From Marner's perspective but what about from Leafs and Dubas perspective?

According to Bob McKenzie, before he left for summer holidays, suggested a 1, 3, +6 or more year deals have been discussed.
- 2 years out because of potential work stoppage.
- 4 years walking him up to unrestricted free agency.
- 5 year deal because of both Matthews and Nylander's deal ending, being avoided.

A 3 year bridge might have among the highest probabilities, however that will be highly dependent on $$$ from both sides. From Dubas' perspective a 3 year bridge deal walks Marner up to 1 year away from UFA status with arbitration rights, and Leafs risk being taking through the arbitration process based on his last contract and market price comparables and being awarded a 1 year deal.

So Dubas has to consider a 3 year deal (possibly paying Marner in year 2 during a work stoppage), then 1 year arbitrator decided ruling then UFA in 4 years. So from Dubas POV a 1 year deal is better than a 3 year bridge deal for the organization all things considered and remember its Dubas that is calling the shots and in full control and offering the contracts not Marner.

Marner's options are sign or sit out or get an OS from another team.

 

[Nylander88]

Not the same thing at all. Dubas traded Marleau to free up money for Kapanen and Johnsson. The other two trades taken together were a wash. Not a cent has been freed up for Marner. Dubas could have (and he could going forward if he needs to) but he didn't - and there was no way that wasn't intentional. The team has a value figure for Marner and they are not budging on it.

That was my main point. We had work to do in resigning these guys and he made it happen. And I think it was a smart move on his part to set a cap space bar that's reasonable for Mitch. He got his work done while leaving just the right amount. It's puzzling the deal hasn't been done yet. Leafs have a clear outline of what works and what doesn't for Mitch

 

[Mess]

$10M+? as in Matthews money (so $11M+) is mostly what we hear form "insiders" haven't seen anything about $10M+ I think the leafs would do $10Mx5 if it were an option

$10.5 mil X 5 years would be an offersheet matching situation for Leafs.

There would be no need for Marner to go out and get an OS with a 2 X 1st + 2nd + 3rd compensation and forcing the Leafs to match if, Leafs are offering him that without one, and the Leafs would be happy at that rate and term.

If reports are correct if Marner wants double digit $$, then Leafs want 7-8 years of term at that rate buying 3-4 years of UFA status from Marner.. Mitch is the one that wants 5 years and Matthews like money, with OS base of $10.5 mil per as his floor.

 

[ACC1224]

It would, and it wouldn't be ideal for him.

However what would be his other option if unsigned, and sitting out 2019-20 season and then entering a potential lockout unsigned? If Marner turns down the 1 year deal he could be going without pay for 2 years.

Would it be smart of Dubas to give Marner a 2 year deal just to protect Mitch in case of a lockout, while his bosses MLSE are now paying Marner during a lockout? A 2 year deal wouldn't be in Leafs best interest with a potential work stoppage looming. Can't imagine MLSE would be all that happy with Dubas in this scenario and Kyle might find himself also without pay during a lockout.

So a 1 year deal to get him on the ice or a 3 year bridge deal, if they can't come to terms on a deal 5 or more years on $$. Seems like the 2 most likely scenarios to me to resolve this short-term and kick the can down the road.

I doubt they would have any issues with a two year deal if it's reasonable.

 

[Nylander88]

Despite the fetishization around here that every move was made to free up money for Marner, the moves were made to build a better team around their core. It had nothing to do with freeing up money for Marner, and indeed no money was freed up for that.​

So let me ask you this. If Marner says screw that I'm worth 11.5mil and he sits....why did we give up a 1st round pick to unload Marleau? If Mitch is on his couch in Markham...wouldn't we still have room to let Marleau play instead of throwing a first out the window? We signed Johnsson + Kapanen....and we can still afford Marleau. So didn't Marleau go for Marner? You allocating Marleau to Kapanen and Johnsson is very odd. We have Kap and Johnsson and can still afford Marleau with no Marner. They didn't unload a first because they couldn't stand to look at Marleau any longer. They did it to have the appropriate space for Mitch.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

What I have heard is Columbus would have gone to 12-12.5M AAV for 7 years in an OS. But Mitch wanted that kinda money for 5 years max. and Columbus was not interested in giving up 4 1st rounders for 5 years. Now I suspect the word has gotten around the league and I suspect interest in Mitch is close to zero at this point now that everyone knows exactly where he is at. So it is back to trying to nickel and dime Dubie. So how far will Leafs go from 10M AAV for 8 years. This is the only thing left to figure out over the summer. Like I said when this thing started I think it will be 10.5M AAV over 6/7/8 years. and likely signed sometime over camp. the Leafs have to get it done by start of season due to CAP implications. but i would bet around start of preseason games at latest.

 

[Mess]

I doubt they would have any issues with a two year deal if it's reasonable.

I would think paying a player during a potential work stoppage, wouldn't be something MLSE would be on board with on just a 2 year deal, where Marner would once again be unsigned coming out of it. IMO

What value is there to MLSE Owners and shareholders to pay Marner millions to sit at home and play video games during a potential work stoppage?

If its say 2 years @$8 mil per, you're essentially potential paying Marner $16 mil for 1 season of work, with a lockout eating up the other year of service. Then right back to where you're at today in 3 years time and in another contract negotiation.

So that wouldn't be something Dubas is likely to toss on the table as an option, but rather use it as leverage, so Marner signs for 3 or more, as a 1 year deal means Marner is not getting paid to sit home and not play so he also would want his contract to expand beyond the potential lockout.

 

[Walshy7]

$10.5 mil X 5 years would be an offersheet matching situation for Leafs.

There would be no need for Marner to go out and get an OS with a 2 X 1st + 2nd + 3rd compensation and forcing the Leafs to match if, Leafs are offering him that without one, and the Leafs would be happy at that rate and term.

If reports are correct if Marner wants double digit $$, then Leafs want 7-8 years of term at that rate buying 3-4 years of UFA status from Marner.. Mitch is the one that wants 5 years and Matthews like money, with OS base of $10.5 mil per as his floor.

the leafs would match anything that isn't 4 x 1st round picks

 

[WTFMAN99]

I doubt they would have any issues with a two year deal if it's reasonable.

IMO 2 years at 6.75M (same % range as Panarin on his 2 year deal) and then negotiate an extension for 8 years with a ton of signing bonuses (especially year 1 that provides Mitch some lock out protection) - New TV deal kicks in, salary cap will go up etc, would likely see him get a higher AAV then Matthews by then, probably something around 12-13M which would be a high mark for a winger.

 

[ACC1224]

I would think paying a player during a potential work stoppage, wouldn't be something MLSE would be on board with on just a 2 year deal, where Marner would once again be unsigned coming out of it. IMO

What value is there to MLSE Owners and shareholders to pay Marner millions to sit at home and play video games during a potential work stoppage?

If its say 2 years @$8 mil per, you're essentially potential paying Marner $16 mil for 1 season of work, with a lockout eating up the other year of service. Then right back to where you're today in year 3 time and in another contract negotiation.

So that wouldn't be something Dubas is likely to toss on the table as an option, but rather use it as leverage, so Marner signs for 3 or more, as a 1 year deal means Marner is not getting paid to sit home and not play so he also would want his contract to expand beyond the potential lockout.

What value is there in paying Matthews or Tavares during a stoppage?
The value comes from the Player playing in the upcoming season.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

So let me ask you this. If Marner says screw that I'm worth 11.5mil and he sits....why did we give up a 1st round pick to unload Marleau? If Mitch is on his couch in Markham...wouldn't we still have room to let Marleau play instead of throwing a first out the window? We signed Johnsson + Kapanen....and we can still afford Marleau. So didn't Marleau go for Marner? You allocating Marleau to Kapanen and Johnsson is very odd. We have Kap and Johnsson and can still afford Marleau with no Marner. They didn't unload a first because they couldn't stand to look at Marleau any longer. They did it to have the appropriate space for Mitch.

If the leafs didn't find a way to offload Marleau, they would be prime targets for a <10.5x5 offersheet, where the compensation would only be 2 first round picks.

Imagine Dubas tried to trade Marleau during the 7 days after Marner signed an offersheet. Other teams would have so much more leverage over him and it likely would have cost much more than a 1st (and Marleau would still have to waive his nmc).

 

[Sypher04]

$10 mil plus for 5 years is Marner's current ask.

That is not Marner coming down but rather Dubas caving to his current demands.

Seems pretty clear to me we don't know Marner's camp is asking or Leafs are offering. Any talk of figures is simply speculative, not fact

 

[Mess]

the leafs would match anything that isn't 4 x 1st round picks

Agreed.

However I was asking why would you think Leafs would take $10 mil X 5 mil option when that is essentially an offersheet matching threshold and not something Leafs have on the table?

Carolina wasn't willing to give Aho $8.5 mil themselves, but willing to accept that amount on matching an offersheet, because of the comp pick compensation..

If Marner wants $10.5 mil X 5 year he will need to get someone to give him an OS first and then Leafs matching it to end up at that point, but not expecting Leafs to offer it themselves.

 

[Clark4Ever]

$10 mil plus for 5 years is Marner's current ask.

That is not Marner coming down but rather Dubas caving to his current demands.

Do you know this for certain, because speculation is that Marner's camp wants a contract similar to Matthews.

I think a 10 million AAV would be palatable for 6-7 years, but Marner's camp doesn't seem to want to budge off their 5 year stance.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

Agreed.

However I was asking why would you think Leafs would take $10 mil X 5 mil option when that is essentially an offersheet matching threshold and not something Leafs have on the table?

Carolina wasn't willing to give Aho $8.5 mil themselves, but willing to accept that amount on matching an offersheet, because of the comp pick compensation..

If Marner wants $10.5 mil X 5 year he will need to get someone to give him an OS first and then Leafs matching it to end up at that point, but not expecting Leafs to offer it themselves.

Ask yourself this? Why would another team invest in meetings, a lawyer and time/money of interaction with league to put together an offer they know Leafs will match? To help Mitch? I don't think so. Keep in mind most of league takes a month or two off in summer to enjoy life too.