Value of: Mitch Marner this offseason (2.5 mil retained)

[dgibb10]

Barring Ferris giving his client bad advice to further built his reputation as a hard ass, all of the bolded are linked.

If he's willing to waive his NMC for a given team, he's probably willing to extend, if the team is willing to extend him at a number he excepts, they clearly value him highly and aren't troubled by his playoff foibles. That list of mutually agreeable destinations might be small, and that will limit things, but there's no reason to expect outside of the range of recent/semi recent Forward trade & signs

Examples of recent trade and signs (extension done within days, unsigned RFA or 1 year from UFA only)

• Turris for Girard, Kamenev, 2nd
• *Stone for Brannstrom, Lindberg, 2nd
• Pacioretty for Suzuki, Tatar, 2nd
• Debrincat for 1st, 4th, Kubalik, Sebrango
• Dubois for Vilardi, Iafallo, Kupari, 2nd
• *Meier+5th (and stuff) for 1st, 2nd, 7th, Zetterlund, Mukhamadullin, Okhotiuk
• *Horvat for 1st, Beauvillier, Raty
• Tkachuk for Huberdeau, Weegar, 1st

* denotes deadline(ish) trade

Including RFAs is wild, not the same at all.

Also none of them had 11 mill AAVs and full NMCs

 

[gritdash60]

Everyone is real quick to give shit to Marner for Leafs not performing in the playoffs, but the truth is he has has 11 goals, 39 assists and a plus-minus of +10 in 57 games in the playoffs in his career.

Which other team has a player with similar stats in postseason, while being a 100point player in the regular season that fans will say "yeah ship him out, hes the problem"?

Im not saying Leafs should continue with their initial plan moving forward, but people suggesting Marner is some kind of bum who has no value are just batshit crazy. If Red Wings got Marner i would be just f***ing laughing and dancing around with joy, dude is one of the best wingers in the world.

Edit: Not for 14million or something absolutely ridiculous that Toronto probably offers him, but like in normal numbers.

8x10 for Marner, yep lets do it Stevie.

 

[Ciao]

There's no upside for the Leafs in trading Marner.

They need to dump Tavares and make a deal with the devil aka Darren Ferris to sign Marner.

I love Tavares and can't stand Marner and his agent, but that's what needs to be done in the best interests of the Leafs. Brutal outcome, but necessary.

 

[4thline]

Including RFAs is wild, not the same at all.

Also none of them had 11 mill AAVs and full NMCs

The 11m is a valid difference, does make it harder to fit in. That being said

• none were traded with as little cash owed as Marner (potentially could be)
• there's no guarantee Marner's full cap hit for next season will be included
• none of the players were top 10 in points and points per game over the last 5 seasons with 2 1st team allstar nods.

The stretches to include were the deadline deals, that's why I starred them.
As to the RFA/UFA distinction and the NMC- it's functionally noise, IF he's willing to extend with a given team. All of those deals were shaped by the players desires on where to play, and the returns were contingent on them extending. No extension- those trades don't happen. The only functional difference comes in on the alternative course of action.
If Marner won't extend/ won't waive, only one thing happens- he plays out the last year of his deal then becomes a UFA. If Dubois/Debrincat/Tkachuk wouldn't extend and sewered the deals, the right holding teams could either

• get a one year deal done (either via negotiation or arbitration), let them play out the last year of their deal and then become UFA (functionally the same as Marner)
• get the one year deal done, and trade them for a much lesser return as a pure rental (the only added value to their RFA/no trade protection status)

 

[seanlinden]

The 11m is a valid difference, does make it harder to fit in. That being said

• none were traded with as little cash owed as Marner (potentially could be)
• there's no guarantee Marner's full cap hit for next season will be included
• none of the players were top 10 in points and points per game over the last 5 seasons with 2 1st team allstar nods.

The stretches to include were the deadline deals, that's why I starred them.
As to the RFA/UFA distinction and the NMC- it's functionally noise, IF he's willing to extend with a given team. All of those deals were shaped by the players desires on where to play, and the returns were contingent on them extending. No extension- those trades don't happen. The only functional difference comes in on the alternative course of action.
If Marner won't extend/ won't waive, only one thing happens- he plays out the last year of his deal then becomes a UFA. If Dubois/Debrincat/Tkachuk wouldn't extend and sewered the deals, the right holding teams could either

• get a one year deal done (either via negotiation or arbitration), let them play out the last year of their deal and then become UFA (functionally the same as Marner)
• get the one year deal done, and trade them for a much lesser return as a pure rental (the only added value to their RFA/no trade protection status)

You have hit the nail squarely on the head here...

The only appreciable differnce between a guy 1 year away from UFA (i.e. Tkachuk, Dubois) is that Marner is 2 years older. Personally, I don't think that's much of a factor, considering Marner doesn't exactly play the most physically-abusing game.

Beyond that, whether a guy has no trade protection, but specifies "these are the 4-5 teams that I am willing to sign with", or has a full NMC, and gives you a list of 4-5 teams that he's willing to sign with.

Even when it comes down to a willingness to give a "proper" list.... NHL players like security. I'm sure Marner wants to get his next deal done this year, just as much as Dubois and Tkachuk did last year. To walk into a lame-duck season is incredibly risky when you're talking about a contract that will likely be between $90m and $100m.

The other element at play for a contender, because of teh way Marner's contract is structured, there is the option of getting a 1-year repreive on the cap hit. Wait until July 2 to formalize the deal, have a 3rd team involved to take on a chunk of his cap hit.

As you've also mentioned, none of the guys traded have had the resume Marner does, even if it's only regular season. Well over a point per game in each of the last 5 seasons. A pace of 100 points overall over a 5-season stretch.

Even in the playoffs, 50 points in 57 games in his career. Dubois had 26 in 38 games. Tkachuk had 15 in 27 games prior to being traded. Let's not forget, he wasn't good against Boston, but he had 14 points in 11 games last year, leading the Leafs.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Barring Ferris giving his client bad advice to further built his reputation as a hard ass, all of the bolded are linked.

If he's willing to waive his NMC for a given team, he's probably willing to extend, if the team is willing to extend him at a number he excepts, they clearly value him highly and aren't troubled by his playoff foibles. That list of mutually agreeable destinations might be small, and that will limit things, but there's no reason to expect outside of the range of recent/semi recent Forward trade & signs

Examples of recent trade and signs (extension done within days, unsigned RFA or 1 year from UFA only)

• Turris for Girard, Kamenev, 2nd
• *Stone for Brannstrom, Lindberg, 2nd
• Pacioretty for Suzuki, Tatar, 2nd
• Debrincat for 1st, 4th, Kubalik, Sebrango
• Dubois for Vilardi, Iafallo, Kupari, 2nd
• *Meier+5th (and stuff) for 1st, 2nd, 7th, Zetterlund, Mukhamadullin, Okhotiuk
• *Horvat for 1st, Beauvillier, Raty
• Tkachuk for Huberdeau, Weegar, 1st

* denotes deadline(ish) trade

The Dubois deal really isn't that great. A nothing prospect in Kupari, an injury prone Villardi, a cap dump in Iafallo, and a 2nd.

 

[dgibb10]

The 11m is a valid difference, does make it harder to fit in. That being said

• none were traded with as little cash owed as Marner (potentially could be)
• there's no guarantee Marner's full cap hit for next season will be included
• none of the players were top 10 in points and points per game over the last 5 seasons with 2 1st team allstar nods.

The stretches to include were the deadline deals, that's why I starred them.
As to the RFA/UFA distinction and the NMC- it's functionally noise, IF he's willing to extend with a given team. All of those deals were shaped by the players desires on where to play, and the returns were contingent on them extending. No extension- those trades don't happen. The only functional difference comes in on the alternative course of action.
If Marner won't extend/ won't waive, only one thing happens- he plays out the last year of his deal then becomes a UFA. If Dubois/Debrincat/Tkachuk wouldn't extend and sewered the deals, the right holding teams could either

• get a one year deal done (either via negotiation or arbitration), let them play out the last year of their deal and then become UFA (functionally the same as Marner)
• get the one year deal done, and trade them for a much lesser return as a pure rental (the only added value to their RFA/no trade protection status)

Nope. RFAs are viewed differently in terms of control.

You hear a lot about UFAs "traded with extension", mostly from fans convinced it will jack up the return. In reality, it does not often happens and when it does it doesn't significantly increase the trade package from that of a traditional rental.

No, Horvat and Stone were not traded with extensions in place. They negotiated their contracts after being traded.

Again, RFAs are not the same.

And yes, NMCs do play a factor. If a player has no trade protections you can sell him as a rental to any team in the league. If a player has a full NMC, you can only trade him to destinations he okays.

Matthew Tkachuk for example was an RFA, and he signed at a bargain 9.5 mill AAV.

If Mitch Marner is willing to sign at a bargain like tkachuk, sure, he'll get a much larger package. But he's known to be very difficult in negotiations, and will likely be asking for a contract at 12.5 mill+. That contract is not adding any value to Mitch Marner

 

[KingDeathMetal]

There are a bunch of teams that will have 10-30 million to play with, there are non cap teams and after July 1st Marner's salary is like 925k

He's moveable in the off season with relative ease on the issue of cap room. The obstacle is his NMC


It's too internet fringe for me to blame a team president, no other fanbase cares about theirs (maybe some Canadian markets might) It's a super fan zealot issue.

It's not a real problem, it's something for 24/7 Leafers endlessly dissect. As a Leafs fan I'll admit to the nuclear cringe of obsessions like this.

I think we found Shanahan's burner account.

View attachment 869985

Weird, Spotrac didn't have it listed.

 

[BHawk21]

Barring Ferris giving his client bad advice to further built his reputation as a hard ass, all of the bolded are linked.

If he's willing to waive his NMC for a given team, he's probably willing to extend, if the team is willing to extend him at a number he excepts, they clearly value him highly and aren't troubled by his playoff foibles. That list of mutually agreeable destinations might be small, and that will limit things, but there's no reason to expect outside of the range of recent/semi recent Forward trade & signs

Examples of recent trade and signs (extension done within days, unsigned RFA or 1 year from UFA only)

• Turris for Girard, Kamenev, 2nd
• *Stone for Brannstrom, Lindberg, 2nd
• Pacioretty for Suzuki, Tatar, 2nd
• Debrincat for 1st, 4th, Kubalik, Sebrango
• Dubois for Vilardi, Iafallo, Kupari, 2nd
• *Meier+5th (and stuff) for 1st, 2nd, 7th, Zetterlund, Mukhamadullin, Okhotiuk
• *Horvat for 1st, Beauvillier, Raty
• Tkachuk for Huberdeau, Weegar, 1st

* denotes deadline(ish) trade

Good post

Chicago- 20th, Vancouver 2nd, and Reichel
Nashville- Kemmell and 22nd
LA- 21st and Fiala

What else.

 

[Dion TheFluff]

Good post

Chicago- 20th, Vancouver 2nd, and Reichel
Nashville- Kemmell and 22nd
LA- 21st and Fiala

What else.

swap Kemmell with Moldendyk/Askarov/L'Heureux + 2nd and I'd be interested. Don't really need more scoring wingers in pipeline. Need to diversify the pool a bit.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Good post

Chicago- 20th, Vancouver 2nd, and Reichel
Nashville- Kemmell and 22nd
LA- 21st and Fiala

What else.

I think this is wildly overestimating the value Marner has. Not because he's not as good as this value, but because he has a full NMC and will be able to hand pick his location that he gets traded to.

 

[BHawk21]

I think this is wildly overestimating the value Marner has. Not because he's not as good as this value, but because he has a full NMC and will be able to hand pick his location that he gets traded to.

They do have the option to just keep him for the year. This is like Kane saying he will only play for the Rangers but the Rangers had to pay Chicago a conditional 2nd because if they didnt pay enough the hawks could just say no and play out the year.

 

[Empoleon8771]

They do have the option to just keep him for the year. This is like Kane saying he will only play for the Rangers but the Rangers had to pay Chicago a conditional 2nd because if they didnt pay enough the hawks could just say no and play out the year.

Yeah then lose him for nothing as a UFA next year.

The fact that Kane was only traded for a conditional 2nd should make you realize why Marner's value is far less than what you think it is.

 

[BHawk21]

Yeah then lose him for nothing as a UFA next year.

The fact that Kane was only traded for a conditional 2nd should make you realize why Marner's value is far less than what you think it is.

The trade was at the deadline for a 33 year old injured Kane. Marner is still a 100 point 27 year old.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The trade was at the deadline for a 33 year old injured Kane. Marner is still a 100 point 27 year old.

Kane had 45 points in 54 games when he was moved for only a 2nd. What do you think players with that kind of production normally get moved for as rentals?

There are countless examples of players bringing back depreciated values due to having NTCs or NMCs influencing where they can be traded to. If Kane somehow doesn't count, what about when the Leafs got a pretty underwhelming return for Kessel in 2015?

The Kessel return in 2015 (basically Kapanen, Harrington and a 1st for Kessel) is probably what the Leafs are looking at if they trade Marner this off-season.

 

[BHawk21]

Kane had 45 points in 54 games when he was moved for only a 2nd. What do you think players with that kind of production normally get moved for as rentals?

There are countless examples of players bringing back depreciated values due to having NTCs or NMCs influencing where they can be traded to. If Kane somehow doesn't count, what about when the Leafs got a pretty underwhelming return for Kessel in 2015?

The Kessel return in 2015 (basically Kapanen, Harrington and a 1st for Kessel) is probably what the Leafs are looking at if they trade Marner this off-season.

I agree but it wont be for nothing because Toronto is still trying to win this year. Theres a threshold that has to be met to make it worth it to them to lose a 100pt player.

 

[mydnyte]

Nope. RFAs are viewed differently in terms of control.

You hear a lot about UFAs "traded with extension", mostly from fans convinced it will jack up the return. In reality, it does not often happens and when it does it doesn't significantly increase the trade package from that of a traditional rental.

No, Horvat and Stone were not traded with extensions in place. They negotiated their contracts after being traded.

Again, RFAs are not the same.

And yes, NMCs do play a factor. If a player has no trade protections you can sell him as a rental to any team in the league. If a player has a full NMC, you can only trade him to destinations he okays.

Matthew Tkachuk for example was an RFA, and he signed at a bargain 9.5 mill AAV.

If Mitch Marner is willing to sign at a bargain like tkachuk, sure, he'll get a much larger package. But he's known to be very difficult in negotiations, and will likely be asking for a contract at 12.5 mill+. That contract is not adding any value to Mitch Marner

No Tax state discount ( ...thats a huge advantage in a hard cap world the league continues to ignore
Leafs would need to pay an additional $1,568,339 to equal out his take home pay.
so, 9.5 in Florida = 11,068,339 in Toronto, slight difference yes?

 

[dgibb10]

No Tax state discount ( ...thats a huge advantage in a hard cap world the league continues to ignore
Leafs would need to pay an additional $1,568,339 to equal out his take home pay.
so, 9.5 in Florida = 11,068,339 in Toronto, slight difference yes?

Cool. That doesn't change his cap hit.

 

[mydnyte]

Cool. That doesn't change his cap hit.

cap hit for the same $$ is 9.5 in Florida but, 11+ in Toronto. how is that not a different cap hit?
No/Low tax states have a HUGE CAP advantage.
next season for example, its the equivalent of almost 15 million extra cap space for fla over to.

 

[WildWolfdog]

Everyone is real quick to give shit to Marner for Leafs not performing in the playoffs, but the truth is he has has 11 goals, 39 assists and a plus-minus of +10 in 57 games in the playoffs in his career.

Which other team has a player with similar stats in postseason, while being a 100point player in the regular season that fans will say "yeah ship him out, hes the problem"?

Im not saying Leafs should continue with their initial plan moving forward, but people suggesting Marner is some kind of bum who has no value are just batshit crazy. If Red Wings got Marner i would be just f***ing laughing and dancing around with joy, dude is one of the best wingers in the world.

Edit: Not for 14million or something absolutely ridiculous that Toronto probably offers him, but like in normal numbers.

8x10 for Marner, yep lets do it Stevie.

^ this argument has been torn apart so many times it's not worth repeating. After the WSH series and I think one Boston series his goals and points have come in blowouts or meaningless losses (1 goal against Boston when game was done, etc.)

He has like 3 points in the last 10 games that went past game 4 I think.

Marner's empty points mean jack shit when he repeatedly not only fails to get any points but is essentially a shell of a player whenever the elimination games come up.

 

[FerrisRox]

Marner extended should at least return same as Eichel (around the same or little less, plus he had that surgery issue) or more then Dubois return. Lets stop pretending he is a cap dump, no player this elite is given away for free.

Tell that to Jaromir Jagr. He was traded for Russ Lupashek, Kris Beech and Michal Sivek. And the Penguins had to add Frantisek Kucera just to get that!

Three years later he was traded straight-up for Anson Carter.

 

[4thline]

The Kessel return in 2015 (basically Kapanen, Harrington and a 1st for Kessel) is probably what the Leafs are looking at if they trade Marner this off-season.

That trade highlight the impact of scouting and luck. At the time Dumoulin and Harrington were very comparable pieces, with Hunter coveting Harrington from their Knight history. Flip those dmen and the Pens dont win their cups, and who knows what the 18 and 19 leafs do with a cheap Dumo added to the ELC stacked years.

Its why I'm not opposed to such a package, if you're right/lucky the upside is huge.

 

[Junohockeyfan]

Marner getting the Kessel treatment is not a good look on the Leafs franchise.

 

[Gaberd2608]

That trade highlight the impact of scouting and luck. At the time Dumoulin and Harrington were very comparable pieces, with Hunter coveting Harrington from their Knight history. Flip those dmen and the Pens dont win their cups, and who knows what the 18 and 19 leafs do with a cheap Dumo added to the ELC stacked years.

Its why I'm not opposed to such a package, if you're right/lucky the upside is huge.

Marners production and fitness level is higher than Kessel. Marner has less baggage as well not withstanding money. Marner also aledgidly wants to stay in toronto. Late first and meh prospects probably wont get it done. There is pressure to do better in toronto at the moment. A trade needs to at least have the argument it makes the leafs better imo.

 

[Tripod]

Marners production and fitness level is higher than Kessel. Marner has less baggage as well not withstanding money. Marner also aledgidly wants to stay in toronto. Late first and meh prospects probably wont get it done. There is pressure to do better in toronto at the moment. A trade needs to at least have the argument it makes the leafs better imo.

You are unlikely to have a trade where the Leafs are better right after the trade.

But with the possible freed up cal space and what they do with it, gives them the chance.

In the end, what they are doing has not worked. Being "different" could be just the change they need.