Mitch Marner discussion

[Dekes For Days]

Zecca pointed out a player that failed, but was given a $150k signing bonus. He was able to buy a car, pay for his schooling, buy a condo outright, and help his brother pay tuition.

For a player who is at risk of not making the NHL, and thus at risk of not receiving their full salary, then signing bonuses are more beneficial, because they are guaranteed that money regardless of where they play. This has no relevance to a player like Marner, who is guaranteed to be in the NHL and get his full salary regardless.

Can you explain to me what the advantage is for the team to give out signing bonuses?

In a trade scenario, Marner would be worth more and the Leafs would have more options, as the actual salary cost of Marner for a receiving team would be less than his cap hit. This doesn't mean the intention is to trade, but it's always good to utilize any available options to increase the value of your assets.

The aav was lower than even Carolina expected.

The cap hit is probably lower than they expected, but that's because they likely expected well above market on an offer sheet, and they expected to sign Aho to an 8 year deal, not because 8.5m x 5 is below market value.

 

[hotpaws]

The cap hit is probably lower than they expected, but that's because they expected 8 years, not because 8.5m x 5 is below market value.

so Aho was only worth 8.5m but you've argued endlessly Marner was worth 11m and considering how you've also endlessly argued Mathews is worth his deal because goal scoring centers are worth more than play makers or wingers maybe you should explain why you believe Marner is worth 2.5m more than Aho considering Aho is a center and scores more than Mitch

 

[Willchel Marlynder]

Matthews hasn't missed a beat, but the team definitely misses him.

 

[ShaneFalco]

Polarizing? There is a small number of very vocal haters, majority love him.

Disagree - go on any social media platform or other boards - that's why he did the whole video "apology" thing. There was backlash
Nylander pulled none of that crap in his teams negotiations. It's not necessary at all

 

[Dekes For Days]

considering how you've also endlessly argued Mathews is worth his deal because goal scoring centers are worth more than play makers or wingers

You seem to have mistaken me for somebody else. I haven't argued that that was why Matthews was worth his deal...

Aho's goal-scoring has also taken a significant jump from his pre-signing levels, for the record.

 

[hotpaws]

You seem to have mistaken me for somebody else. I haven't argued that that was why Matthews was worth his deal...

Aho's goal-scoring has also taken a significant jump from his pre-signing levels, for the record.

i've got the right person and you still haven't explained why you believe Marner was worth 2.5m more at the time they signed

Aho's scoring didn't take a significant jump up outside of this year so far and he always scored more than Marner and plays C so quit your spinning and explain why you believe Mitch was worth 2.5m more than Aho

 

[Throw More Waffles]

For a player who is at risk of not making the NHL, and thus at risk of not receiving their full salary, then signing bonuses are more beneficial, because they are guaranteed that money regardless of where they play. This has no relevance to a player like Marner, who is guaranteed to be in the NHL and get his full salary regardless.

In a trade scenario, Marner would be worth more and the Leafs would have more options, as the actual salary cost of Marner for a receiving team would be less than his cap hit. This doesn't mean the intention is to trade, but it's always good to utilize any available options to increase the value of your assets.

The cap hit is probably lower than they expected, but that's because they likely expected well above market on an offer sheet, and they expected to sign Aho to an 8 year deal, not because 8.5m x 5 is below market value.

So the team "perk" of signing bonuses for players like Marner and Matthews is (lol) it's easier to trade them while 100% in their prime years, even thought they were given nmc's right when they could. That perk is apparently equal as players making bankloads of extra cash due to front-loading according to a sports agent and financial advisor.

This ones next level...

 

[Throw More Waffles]

i've got the right person and you still haven't explained why you believe Marner was worth 2.5m more at the time they signed

Aho's scoring didn't take a significant jump up outside of this year so far and he always scored more than Marner and plays C so quit your spinning and explain why you believe Mitch was worth 2.5m more than Aho

They can't even use their "taxes" lame excuse, because Aho was on record saying he wasn't sure Carolina would be able to afford to match it.

 

[Antropovsky]

For a player who is at risk of not making the NHL, and thus at risk of not receiving their full salary, then signing bonuses are more beneficial, because they are guaranteed that money regardless of where they play. This has no relevance to a player like Marner, who is guaranteed to be in the NHL and get his full salary regardless..

This is entirely wrong... money today is worth more than money tomorrow. Marner has a team helping him with business they certainly know this and understand its advantage even though you dont.

this proves the importance of posters having to defend their arguments, you have proven you know very little about this topic...and you were loling in your initial response?

 

[Throw More Waffles]

This is entirely wrong... money today is worth more than money tomorrow. Marner has a team helping him with business they certainly know this and understand its advantage even though you dont.

this proves the importance of posters having to defend their arguments, you have proven you know very little about this topic...and you were loling in your initial response?

I highly recommend agent provocateur with Allan Walsh. It's endless dispelling of the myths used to rationalize the unprecedented dramatic overpayments. A few weeks ago they talked about signing bonuses/front loading and just how ridiculously significant it is for the players to invest and make more money. They cite a player who was cut after his rookie year, but had a $150k signing bonus. Through the wealth advisor investing it, they were able to get that player a car, buy a condo, pay for his schooling, and help with his brothers tuition. Now imagine Marner and his 15 mil signing bonus compared to Rantanen and his (lol) $0 signing bonus. It's outrageous.

Episode they say is coming up soon? Dispelling the myth that players pay more taxes in Canada. Can't WAIT for that one.

 

[Notsince67]

so Aho was only worth 8.5m but you've argued endlessly Marner was worth 11m and considering how you've also endlessly argued Mathews is worth his deal because goal scoring centers are worth more than play makers or wingers maybe you should explain why you believe Marner is worth 2.5m more than Aho considering Aho is a center and scores more than Mitch

Centers vs wingers is a myth of correlation vs causation. Centers are usually better players but there have been great wingers in the past who made even more as a percentage of the cap than Marner and not named Ovechkin.

 

[Dekes For Days]

i've got the right person

You clearly don't, because I haven't made that argument.

and you still haven't explained why you believe Marner was worth 2.5m more at the time they signed

First off, it's not 2.5m. The difference in their contracts is 2.4m, and Marner's contract bought an extra year, making their contract difference at equal terms less than 2m. But yes Marner was easily worth more than Aho at time of signing, and I've shown that countless times in countless threads. Marner had a higher pre-signing level of production in both game states - overall and primary, and a higher peak, so I'm not sure why you think Aho's contract would be equal.

Aho's scoring didn't take a significant jump up outside of this year so far and he always scored more than Marner

Aho's goals per game post-signing is 50% higher than his goals per game pre-signing, so yes, it did take a significant jump. Aho only averaged about 3 more non-EN goals/82 than Marner through his ELC, for the record.

 

[Dekes For Days]

So the team "perk" of signing bonuses for players like Marner and Matthews is (lol) it's easier to trade them while 100% in their prime years, even thought they were given nmc's right when they could. That perk is apparently equal as players making bankloads of extra cash due to front-loading

money today is worth more than money tomorrow.

Lol, they don't get "bankloads of extra cash". They have the option to make a relatively small amount extra if they choose to invest the money. Increasing an assets trade value is never a bad thing, even if you don't have the intention to trade at the time. Them getting pretty standard NMCs for 1 or 2 years doesn't change anything. Also I never said perfectly equal - I've already noted that they are used to offset tax disadvantages.

 

[Gary Nylund]

This is entirely wrong... money today is worth more than money tomorrow. Marner has a team helping him with business they certainly know this and understand its advantage even though you dont.

this proves the importance of posters having to defend their arguments, you have proven you know very little about this topic...and you were loling in your initial response?

There are people saying otherwise? Yikes! What can I say, my ignore list is the gift that keeps on giving.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Centers vs wingers is a myth of correlation vs causation. Centers are usually better players but there have been great wingers in the past who made even more as a percentage of the cap than Marner and not named Ovechkin.

Fun fact: 6 out of the top 10 highest value post-ELC contracts in the cap era were wingers.

 

[Dekes For Days]

There are people saying otherwise?

Nobody said otherwise actually.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

Lol, they don't get "bankloads of extra cash". They have the option to make a relatively small amount extra if they choose to invest the money. Increasing an assets trade value is never a bad thing, even if you don't have the intention to trade at the time. Them getting pretty standard NMCs for 1 or 2 years doesn't change anything. Also I never said perfectly equal - I've already noted that they are used to offset tax disadvantages.

Who to trust? Dekes for Days on the internet? Or Frank Zecca, wealth manager of Steph Curry, Michael Phelps, Chris Paul, and numerous hockey players?

Tough one...

What a huge advantage for the leafs. They could trade Marner easier next year (but not the 2 after). Wow. BIG advantage. I'm sure that was the intent. I'm sure it was the LEAFS fighting hard to front load his contract. Lol. Marner didn't even want it. I'm sure Dubas enforced it. Why? So that it's slightly easier to trade him next year. What a complete and total freaking joke.

And that's great for the mlse right? I'm sure they're thrilled. "Hey, let's give Marner 41 million for 3 seasons, then trade him when he's 'real money' cheap". That sure makes sense...

 

[Dekes For Days]

Who to trust? Dekes for Days on the internet? Or Frank Zecca, wealth manager of Steph Curry, Michael Phelps, Chris Paul, and numerous hockey players?

This is called the appeal to authority fallacy, and that's before we even get into the fact that you're inaccurately paraphrasing what he's said, and misrepresenting what I've said.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

This is called the appeal to authority fallacy, and that's before we even get into the fact that you're inaccurately paraphrasing what he's said, and misrepresenting what I've said.

Yeah, listening to experts as opposed to anonymous strangers on the internet is "appeal to authority". He couldn't have been ANY clearer about how important that 150k signing bonus was for that player, and what they were able to do with it. Now imagine Marners (lol) 15 mil signing bonus compared to Rantanen's (lol) ZERO signing bonus.

 

[Niagara Bill]

Centers vs wingers is a myth of correlation vs causation. Centers are usually better players but there have been great wingers in the past who made even more as a percentage of the cap than Marner and not named Ovechkin.

Who?

 

[Stephen]

This is called the appeal to authority fallacy, and that's before we even get into the fact that you're inaccurately paraphrasing what he's said, and misrepresenting what I've said.

To be fair to the other guy, a pro sports wealth manager would be a pretty authoritative voice on the subject.

 

[Aus34Matt]

not sure 'hate' is correct...tough to really hate someone who doesn't directly affect me.

but highly dislike is accurate.

possibly my most disliked Leaf since I started watching the team.

hate, dislike... tomayto, tomahto...

 

[Gabriel426]

Having money now is always better than having money in the future.
Just look at what you can afford at 500k for a condo last year and what is a 500k condo this year.
To argue signing bonuses is not an advantage is quite foolish.
The flip side of having money now could be players just blowing them on stupid thing like NFTs or parties and stuff but that’s have more to do with individuals than general consensus.

 

[Gabriel426]

This is called the appeal to authority fallacy, and that's before we even get into the fact that you're inaccurately paraphrasing what he's said, and misrepresenting what I've said.

Honestly, you really can’t believe that.
Like if you get sick, do you just search for treatment over the internet instead of seeing your doctor or go to hospital?

 

[Dekes For Days]

Yeah, listening to experts as opposed to anonymous strangers on the internet is "appeal to authority".

You're not "listening to experts". You have nothing to back up any of your claims, so you're deferring to incorrectly paraphrasing something some guy on a podcast said about an entirely different situation, and improperly applying your incorrect understanding to this situation.

He couldn't have been ANY clearer about how important that 150k signing bonus was for that player, and what they were able to do with it.

As I've already explained, in that situation where it's a player at risk of failing in the NHL, the signing bonus is more important, because the signing bonus is guaranteed regardless of whether that player is playing in the NHL. That has no relevance to somebody like Marner, who is established as an NHL superstar, and will be making their entire contract regardless of how it is distributed.

Like if you get sick, do you just search for treatment over the internet instead of seeing your doctor or go to hospital?

Of course not. I also don't listen to what one guy says on a podcast, horribly twist what was actually said, and then incorrectly try and apply it to a situation it doesn't apply to.