Player Discussion Mitch Marner, Continued

[ACC1224]

So is Dewar.
Like I mentioned many times, it is not MM the individual but the core collectively. If they collectively still can’t get it done, Leafs need a new core.

Yep and who remains in that new core is is what it will(may) come down to.

I don’t think many consider Dewar part of the core

 

[Antropovsky]

Have to think about Penny's quote "We arent here to sell jerseys"

Would be a bad look for him to turn around and sign Marner in the season and Leafs are ousted in 1st round again. That quote would be making the rounds in the offseason...not a good way to kick off being the CEO.

 

[DarkKnight]

 

[ACC1224]

View attachment 959586

What do those numbers mean?

 

[Hallonbroder]

View attachment 959586

Regular season warrior!

 

[Gabriel426]

Yep and who remains in that new core is is what it will(may) come down to.

I don’t think many consider Dewar part of the core

Making an example of players who is doing their job and providing value every game.

Honestly, if making Dewar a core player and Leafs end up winning the Cup. I don’t think I mind that.

 

[DarkKnight]

Regular season warrior!

You're not even a Leafs fan, get lost keyboard warrior.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I would actually love for this to happen but I think we’d still have the same issues. When Marner eventually leaves I think most of us will realize a big part of the reason we lose is because 34 also does not play like one of the best in the world. 34 does not take over games in the playoffs like MacKinnon or McDavid, so adding Rantanen would feel like more of the same. The key factor is we need 34 to have a monster playoffs IMO, it’s not goaltending, depth scoring, defense but can our golden boy play like the best player on the planet and be healthy.

Matthews, Marner, JT, they've all been playoff disappointments this is true. The fact that Matthews was playing a beast before he got injured against Boston gives me hope, we'll see what happens in the spring (and I hope we haven't signed Marner at that point).

If the Leafs paid Rantanen more than Matthews I wouldn't object.

Matthews probably wouldn't either. Rantanen would easily be the best winger to ever play beside him. I think a culture change is necessary so don't want Marner back for any number.

Rantanen is a much better player and it's not even close.

I wouldn't either.

 

[666]

You can't do total ice time... players get different amounts of ice time and injuries need to be accounted for. Need to use per 60.

Hits taken per 60 last 3 playoffs (NHT only allows 3 year increments)

Sample size too small.
Hits are notoriously unreliable stats.

At least you augmented someone else's bad stats with something a bit better. Still not good.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Lot's of Rantanen talk around here today. Here are some stats:
5v5 last 3 full seasons, both players playing in all the games.

GP TOI GF GA GF%
Mikko Rantanen Nathan MacKinnon 209 2734 182 117 60.9
Mikko Rantanen w/o Nathan MacKinnon 209 717 34 46 42.5
w/o Mikko Rantanen Nathan MacKinnon 209 735 52 38 57.8
w/o Mikko Rantanen w/o Nathan MacKinnon 209 5802 224 197 53.2

site is broken see attachment

Rantanen with Mack is great.
Mack without Rantanen is still great.
The team without either is pretty good.
Rantanen without Mack is really terrible.

The playoff numbers are similar but the sample size is too small.

There could be lots of explanations for it but based on these 3 years worth of numbers it appears that Rantanen REALLY depends on Mack for his success.

Coming from the guy who says points are irrelevant as they're "only 2% of the game", this is mildly amusing. The truth for you seems to be that points matter when you want them to matter, and they don't matter when you don't want them to matter.

 

[666]

Coming from the guy who says points are irrelevant as they're "only 2% of the game", this is mildly amusing. The truth for you seems to be that points matter when you want them to matter, and they don't matter when you don't want them to matter.

First time you didn't ignore stats but you still completely didn't understand them. Not surprised that you can't read but there aren't any points listed here. It's amazing that you could look at those numbers and even think that they represented points. Why do numbers confuse you so much?

 

[Gary Nylund]

First time you didn't ignore stats but you still completely didn't understand them. Not surprised that you can't read but there aren't any points listed here. It's amazing that you could look at those numbers and even think that they represented points. Why do numbers confuse you so much?

GF, GA, GF% ... what do you think the 'G' stands for? You know they give points for goals right? Or do you? Or do you think only goals matter, and points don't? And if points are irrelevant because they're "only 2% of the game", how could goals possibly be relevant?

If only goals matter, then you must have a very low opinion of Marner, but I thought you were a fan? Very hard to follow your "thinking" here. Are you even thinking, or are you just ranting?

 

[nuck]

Marner is different than Willy in that Mitch is a home grown Ontario kid. I would have little fear walking Marner to free agency knowing that HE would like to remain a Leaf so in no hurry to sign elsewhere.. If he did choose to chase top dollar via free agency and leave TO it would be his choice, by turning down a lower offer from the Leafs. Then you would see that $$$ more than Location was his true motivation.

In Colorado they also have an internal Cap and so Rantanen making more than MacKinnon ($12.6 mil) seems to be the sticking point. Leafs could offer Mikko $13 mil X 8 years and still have him fall below Matthews on a similar internal cap limit.

MIkko after perhaps only Kucherov is the best RW in the game. His contract should set the bar particularly for Marner as the ultimate ceiling. While UFA status generally isn't used for comparables as its whatever another team is willing to pay, goes and you can't prevent stupidity by GMs overspending.. But after Leafs got taken hard on the past Marner contract as a RFA, they should be looking to correct the market now. IMO

I would agree that in a reality where the Leafs were able to look at both Mitch and Ranta being available to sign on a given day, it would present a special opportunity. But reality is that it is unlikely Colorado lets him get free and then there is all the other clubs in the league that aren't sitting on Willie and AM so they can bid whatever they like. Would the Leafs risk Mitch actually getting to UFA just to find Rantanen used them to drive his price up and signed at the 11th hour? They paid Willie UFA money to avoid that possibility.

Mitch's ask would have to be obscene for them to let him hit the market. I don't think its a possibility they wait for a Ranta vs Marner option unless Marner wants to be the highest paid player on the club. Even then.... In a world where the team exits 1st round again and Mitch has a finger pointed at him, where Shanny then gets fired for being Shanny, and where #16 still wants $13M from the new sheriff then sure but all that isn't happening. The time for real change was before the NMs kicked in. Now it waits for Matthews deal to expire.

 

[Hellcat]

You can't do total ice time... players get different amounts of ice time and injuries need to be accounted for. Need to use per 60.

Hits taken per 60 last 3 playoffs (NHT only allows 3 year increments)

Hits taken:
Tavares - 8.84/60
Nylander - 4.3/60
Marner - 4.65/60
Matthews - 3.25/60

Hits given:
Tavares - 10.61/60
Nylander - 1.64/60
Marner - 3.48/60
Matthews - 10.94/60

Blocked shots:
Tavares - 1.81/60
Nylander - 1.02/60
Marner - 0.87/60
Matthews - 2.56/60

This is what I expected. Again we shouldn't be measuring 11 million go 7 million Nylander. There's a 55% difference in there pay. Additionally, I'm not a huge Nylander fan either. I do like that he has gamebreaker offense though. Marner doesn't (unless we account for his abilitu to win games for the opposition).

Matthews is engaged physically, contrary to what some others have tried to say about him.

So if he took more hits you'd like him more? So odd.

Elite skaters tend to avoid hits due to their skating ability.

 

[666]

GF, GA, GF% ... what do you think the 'G' stands for? You know they give points for goals right? Or do you? Or do you think only goals matter, and points don't? And if points are irrelevant because they're "only 2% of the game", how could goals possibly be relevant?

If only goals matter, then you must have a very low opinion of Marner, but I thought you were a fan? Very hard to follow your "thinking" here.

You doubled down on that? Wow? GF is goals scored while you are on the ice. Not goals that you actually scored and GA is goals scored against you while you were on the ice. The combination GF% shows how effective in general someone is at offense AND DEFENCE combined.

Of course you actually ignored the data after hyping up Rantanen but that's expected from you.

What you're missing is that you ONLY pay attention to points and don't care about defensive play or anything else when evaluating players and miss the rest of game. Not that points don't mean anything they do just that there is so much more to the game that you are missing.

 

[Gabriel426]

I would agree that in a reality where the Leafs were able to look at both Mitch and Ranta being available to sign on a given day, it would present a special opportunity. But reality is that it is unlikely Colorado lets him get free and then there is all the other clubs in the league that aren't sitting on Willie and AM so they can bid whatever they like. Would the Leafs risk Mitch actually getting to UFA just to find Rantanen used them to drive his price up and signed at the 11th hour? They paid Willie UFA money to avoid that possibility.

Mitch's ask would have to be obscene for them to let him hit the market. I don't think its a possibility they wait for a Ranta vs Marner option unless Marner wants to be the highest paid player on the club. Even then.... In a world where the team exits 1st round again and Mitch has a finger pointed at him, where Shanny then gets fired for being Shanny, and where #16 still wants $13M from the new sheriff then sure but all that isn't happening. The time for real change was before the NMs kicked in. Now it waits for Matthews deal to expire.

Honestly, Avs might just let Rantanen go and signs Bennett, if they don’t go deep in the first playoffs.

Also McD will play a part in UFA this summer. Would Oilers trade him fully knowing he doesn’t want to extend? Or use the next season to convince him to stay? And if McD designs to stay, what will be his contract? If he signs for the max(17.6mil) then don’t you think Rantanen and MM will use that as comparable and ask for 80% of that which is 14mil.

To me that’s another factor why Avs and Leafs should not sign Rantanen and MM now in the off chance that McD wants to leave.

 

[Stephen]

But isn't it equally foolish to base the salary on one year peak production? Mitch is established as a 30-g 100p guy per 82 games. He isn't one of the five or six best players in the game. % of the cap if you must, but its the % of his actual comps and 30g-70a isn't the same as 50-50. If anything they can now point to how the contracts Willie, Huberdeau, and Gaudreau looked after career year paydays. I am definitely not saying he will crash but there is no automatic assumption he will improve or even match this season if it plays out as his best. One years additional inflation doesn't mean they are required to pay him just because his agent wants that. They shouldn't be giving in to the player's ego either.

The time to play fiscally responsible franchise is long past, so whether we're haggling over a demarcation line in salary or percentage of cap, or if Marner needs to usurp Matthews in dollar amount... none of it really matters other than this: the Leafs like how they perform in the regular season with Marner as a core piece, their place as a top 5-7 franchise and the ability to keep knocking on a championship pursuit year to year.

The alternatives are they will have to spend similar money in a high stakes game of musical chairs with superstars and go Rantanen hunting, or they reinvest their cap savings in a bunch of upper middle class contracts, with the risk of falling back into the pack.

 

[Antropovsky]

The Leafs just named AM their new captain and Nylander re-signed long-term for the full 8 year commitment and both were given full NMC contracts by our current GM.

While Nylander's contract today at $11.5 mil is an over-payment in 2024-25 however due to the length and commitment by Willy that contract in 4-5 years with the current Cap increases expected annually will be a value contract to the Leafs down the road.

Marner on the other hand likely over-played his hand in past negotiations, where he wanted TOP $$ and as short term as possible, so he could re-up sooner and prosper personally financially. Marner is likely overpaid by about $2-$2.5 mil annually, and should be on a current 8 x $8.5 mil deal. that would have and additional 2 years remaining after current (if not for our clueless past GM).

Short-term high AAV contracts are good for player but bad for TEAM competitiveness.

The early bird gets the worm as the saying goes. So now Marner (a local Ontario kid) who would love to remain a Leaf no doubt. Missed his gravy train opportunity based on timing of wanting to go last up to the contract table because now CHANGE will have to run through him of the 3 Amigo's.

PS. If Marner would currently accept the Nylander 8 year / $93 mil deal (or thereabouts) he would likely already be re-signed. (regardless of playoff results) as there would be room/value to keep all 3. However I would be willing to bet that both that rate and combined with that full term, is not of interest to Marner. IMO

What a ‘Mess’ of a post

Marner didn’t want short term, he wanted 8 years but Dubas negotiated it down to 6 for some reason.

As the guy that likes to points out misuse of stats there are some posters that are so absurd with it that I don't bother. These people can be ignored.

From Sportsnet:
Per reports, the Maple Leafs previously tabled a long-term offer worth approximately $11 million per season, while Marner’s camp is eying less term in an effort to usher the young star into his final RFA season and an even bigger pay day in a few years.

From TSN
According to TSN’s Shawn Simpson, Marner is seeking a four-year offer sheet, which no team will put up.

 

[Hallonbroder]

You're not even a Leafs fan, get lost keyboard warrior.

Are you calling yourself a fan of this team when you’re more concerned about one player than the team?

 

[Gabriel426]

The time to play fiscally responsible franchise is long past, so whether we're haggling over a demarcation line in salary or percentage of cap, or if Marner needs to usurp Matthews in dollar amount... none of it really matters other than this: the Leafs like how they perform in the regular season with Marner as a core piece, their place as a top 5-7 franchise and the ability to keep knocking on a championship pursuit year to year.

The alternatives are they will have to spend similar money in a high stakes game of musical chairs with superstars and go Rantanen hunting, or they reinvest their cap savings in a bunch of upper middle class contracts, with the risk of falling back into the pack.

I really would not say first round exit is knocking on a championship pursuit, more like being the better half of the league.
Keeping status quo is always the safe method for MGT as taking risks and failure means getting fired.
I have no idea what the Upper MGT view the Leafs. As are they just good with the current revenue, not just gate but also sponsors…. Or do they view winning the Cup as their top priority.

 

[DarkKnight]

Are you calling yourself a fan of this team when you’re more concerned about one player than the team?

Troll. Zzzzz.

 

[ACC1224]

Quick minus.

 

[Stephen]

I really would not say first round exit is knocking on a championship pursuit, more like being the better half of the league.
Keeping status quo is always the safe method for MGT as taking risks and failure means getting fired.
I have no idea what the Upper MGT view the Leafs. As are they just good with the current revenue, not just gate but also sponsors…. Or do they view winning the Cup as their top priority.

Well, think of it this way. If this team is only the Ottawa Senators of the 2000s, you still have a few outlier years where it all comes together for an ECF or Stanley Cup finals. And as imperfect as your Heatley, Spezza and Alfredsson are, you can see how life got worse without them....

So it really comes down to whether the Leafs think they should keep the band together and have the chance to do what they're supposed to, or if they're ready to make big and difficult franchise changing moves.

 

[leafs in five]

What do those numbers mean?

hits taken per 60 I think

 

[nuck]

The time to play fiscally responsible franchise is long past, so whether we're haggling over a demarcation line in salary or percentage of cap, or if Marner needs to usurp Matthews in dollar amount... none of it really matters other than this: the Leafs like how they perform in the regular season with Marner as a core piece, their place as a top 5-7 franchise and the ability to keep knocking on a championship pursuit year to year.

The alternatives are they will have to spend similar money in a high stakes game of musical chairs with superstars and go Rantanen hunting, or they reinvest their cap savings in a bunch of upper middle class contracts, with the risk of falling back into the pack.

But doesn't this get back to the old argument about whether the club needs three elite forwards at all? Two has been the max for almost all Cup winners since the 80s Oilers. The Leafs formula isn't a proven one and hasn't worked so far. They don't need to run Mitch-Willie-Austin or Ranta-Willie-Austin, it just looks so good on paper they keep doing it.

They could have been in the running for Bennett and Reinhart but they have been trying to live out Kyle's wet dream for the last 5 years instead. They can win without any one of the big 3 but having had them we are conditioned to the idea that losing one inevitably makes them worse. If you believe that have Mitch is fundamental to the club having a shot at a Cup I probably can't change that but there is nothing really to support that the 3 musketeers are required to compete other than a bunch of strong regular seasons that have led to nothing. In spite of the treading water I'm not saying give up on it, but getting murdered on every negotiation hasn't worked out so far.