Value of: Mitch Marner

[Jerkbait]

You have no idea if the leafs offer was the lowest.

Its common knowledge he left money on the table from several teams...

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Elite players get paid like elite players. Dubas could've done better on the negotiations, maybe a mil or so, but he's being paid for being elite. The problem isn't his contract, the problem is there's too much elite talent up front. He was on pace for 90+ points again, how many 90+ point wingers are there in the league ? Especially those who can penalty kill. His downfall is his size, he can't be physical enough and loses puck battles, but in terms of using his stick and positioning defensively, absolutely elite.

Top 5 winger in terms of points last season
6th overall in points per game among wingers in this season and last season

The discussion comes up of Pasta, but nobody mentions that he signed his contract before he exploded into the superstar he is now.

That being said, there is no need to move him and especially not retaining salary to move him. If they absolutely need to, Nylander is the guy that will be going. Much friendlier contract and he's a legitimate top line player. And since cap seems to be an issue, he is a much more enticing option, and probably has more trade value based on what i've read regarding Marners contract.

What is your standard for elite? The big dollar players have to show up when it matters otherwise they are not elite

 

[Mugzy97]

Zibanejad - 7.13% of Cap, after a 37 point season, and a prior career high of 51 points.
Mike Hoffman - 7.11% of Cap, for two seasons of 48 and 59 points.
Brayden Point - 8.28% of Cap, for seasons of 66 and 92 points.. .but a short-term contract (Over the short-term, a great contract for Tampa)
Tyler Johnson - 6.67% of Cap, after two years at 38 and 45 points... had a prior high of 72 points, has a high of 50 points since.. not exactly a better player than Nylander
Marchessault - 6.67% of Cap, after a career high of 51 points, though signed in the middle of career year.
Karlsson - 7.24% after two year average of 67 points, off a down year.
Horvat - 7.33% of cap, after a career year of 52 points, and 40 points before that.
Schwartz - 7.33% of cap, after an injury shortened season, with 22 points.. best was 63 points before that, and hasn't been over 60 points since.
Couturier - 6.07% of cap, after four years in the league, and a best season of 39 points. He had 118 points after four seasons...

Nylander got 8.76% after his first two years, averaging 61 points per.

There isn't a single player on your list, who had near 122 points, after their first two years in the league. Couts had less points after four years. Point is a comparable, though is contract length isn't a comparable.

The reality is, you have to compare what the players did before the contract, and what % of the cap it is... You've picked players who have grown into their contracts, in some cases signed many years ago, and simultaneously concluded Nylander can't grow, as all of these other guys did.

--------------------

More direct comparables include

Pastranak - @ 8.89% of cap, for one season of 70 points, and a prior best of 26 points
Kyle Connor @ 8.76% for two year total of 123 points. (One more point than Nylander... same cap hit)
Keller @ 8.77% for two year total of 112 points.
Landeskog @ 8.66% for 52 and 17 points (missed games due to injury)

Owned by context

 

[Deas]

Zibanejad - 7.13% of Cap, after a 37 point season, and a prior career high of 51 points.
Mike Hoffman - 7.11% of Cap, for two seasons of 48 and 59 points.
Brayden Point - 8.28% of Cap, for seasons of 66 and 92 points.. .but a short-term contract (Over the short-term, a great contract for Tampa)
Tyler Johnson - 6.67% of Cap, after two years at 38 and 45 points... had a prior high of 72 points, has a high of 50 points since.. not exactly a better player than Nylander
Marchessault - 6.67% of Cap, after a career high of 51 points, though signed in the middle of career year.
Karlsson - 7.24% after two year average of 67 points, off a down year.
Horvat - 7.33% of cap, after a career year of 52 points, and 40 points before that.
Schwartz - 7.33% of cap, after an injury shortened season, with 22 points.. best was 63 points before that, and hasn't been over 60 points since.
Couturier - 6.07% of cap, after four years in the league, and a best season of 39 points. He had 118 points after four seasons...

Nylander got 8.76% after his first two years, averaging 61 points per.

There isn't a single player on your list, who had near 122 points, after their first two years in the league. Couts had less points after four years. Point is a comparable, though is contract length isn't a comparable.

The reality is, you have to compare what the players did before the contract, and what % of the cap it is... You've picked players who have grown into their contracts, in some cases signed many years ago, and simultaneously concluded Nylander can't grow, as all of these other guys did.

--------------------

More direct comparables include

Pastranak - @ 8.89% of cap, for one season of 70 points, and a prior best of 26 points
Kyle Connor @ 8.76% for two year total of 123 points. (One more point than Nylander... same cap hit)
Keller @ 8.77% for two year total of 112 points.
Landeskog @ 8.66% for 52 and 17 points (missed games due to injury)

Reasoning and ability to judge what's a relevant comparison to what. Love it regardless of my stance in the discussion.

About Nylander's contract I do think it could end up one of the best in the league, and it's so strange to see him repeatedly being called overpaid. This is common in Sweden too, where I've become pretty sure he's impopular because of his style, looks and seemingly laid back personality (there's no other explanation). This despite being absolutely lights out in the last two WC:s.

 

[AvroArrow]

What is your standard for elite? The big dollar players have to show up when it matters otherwise they are not elite

Being over a PPG, being defensively responsible, being a specialist on the PP and PK. The only thing you can say Marner doesn't have is size/physicality. That's his biggest weakness, and probably will be his biggest weakness for his entire career. His contract situation is blown so out of proportion. He's about 1M overpaid, also he's still extremely young, 23 if i'm not mistaken.

McDavid and Drai got bounced out of the qualifying series as well, are they not elite and even better players than Marner ? That's not a good way to measure talent. A badly constructed team, does not make a player bad.

 

[AvroArrow]

zibanejad
mike hoffman
brayen point
tyler johnson
marchessault
william karlson
horvat
jaden schwartz
sean couturier

i can go on and on and on. these are all better players then nylander. all round better players. thy all make around 5 mil. i can keep going. if i include defense pft nylanders contract is so bad. there is about 30-50 nhl players who are significantly better then him and make way less... leaf fans can over value him all they want. he is a one dimensional over paid winger.

Zibanejad - Signed his contract way before becoming a star player
Point - 6.75M ... really ?
Johnson - Had one 70 point season 6 years ago, since then his highest is 50. 31 in 65 last year
Marchessault - LOL not even comparable
Karlsson - Nylander has out produced him 2 years in a row now and he's younger
Horvat - Nylander has outproduced him every single year, and Horvat signed his contract extension, for 2017-18
Schwartz - Nylander has out produced him every year and is younger
Couturier - Signed his contract ages ago when he was looking like an average player

Brayden Point is the only guy mentioned who has a legitimate case, rest are just names you're throwing out there for the sake of having some sort of argument

 

[karhukissa]

McDavid and Drai got bounced out of the qualifying series as well, are they not elite and even better players than Marner ? That's not a good way to measure talent. A badly constructed team, does not make a player bad.

Marner: 5gp 0+4 / McDavid: 4gp 5+4 and Drai 4gp 3+3

I can see a big difference. Toronto is badly constructed team yes, but pretty much completely disappearing during playoffs tells about something. Edmonton duo played well but it's still not enough at this stage if your whole team behind you is pretty much trash.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Being over a PPG, being defensively responsible, being a specialist on the PP and PK. The only thing you can say Marner doesn't have is size/physicality. That's his biggest weakness, and probably will be his biggest weakness for his entire career. His contract situation is blown so out of proportion. He's about 1M overpaid, also he's still extremely young, 23 if i'm not mistaken.

McDavid and Drai got bounced out of the qualifying series as well, are they not elite and even better players than Marner ? That's not a good way to measure talent. A badly constructed team, does not make a player bad.

I'm not singling Marner out. You said there is too much elite talent upfront but maybe it's not as good as some think?

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

no i actually names a random few that are significantly better players that make way less money. nylanders contract is horrible. what you name wayne simmonds who clearly isnt good enough for todays nhl and also got over paid and tyler bozak? what ever. you guys are nuts. i dont care. think nylanders contract is good. what ever makes you sleep at night.

There's a whole bunch of players making 5 M plus with far less production I don';t think you understand what a market is nor the context of when someone signs a contract relative to said production. Your "nuts" is my "ill-informed".

 

[Dache]

Of course, I mean it wouldn't apply here. Unless you can can give me an example where each of the three gets Mitch Marner and the Leafs get the other three players.

Why would the definition of the sky is the limit to what the leafs could get for Marner have to mean that multiple teams could share Marner?

 

[Dache]

Its common knowledge he left money on the table from several teams...

Yup. So we know some teams offered more, where in there does it say the leafs offered the lowest of everyone?

 

[Leaf Fans]

Why would the definition of the sky is the limit to what the leafs could get for Marner have to mean that multiple teams could share Marner?

In th definition you provided "...there are no limits and that anything is possible." I mentionedas one of the limits being logic and then gave the example of a logical impossibly to show that there are limits and not everything is possible.

 

[Dache]

In th definition you provided "...there are no limits and that anything is possible." I mentionedas one of the limits being logic and then gave the example of a logical impossibly to show that there are limits and not everything is possible.

The term the sky is the limit was used in the context of a trade return for Marner which is what you were curious about and I provided information. Now you’re talking about literally anything being possible? Why shift the goalposts here? Are you by chance not just looking for information on what the sky is the limit could mean in this situation?

 

[Fatass]

I'm not singling Marner out. You said there is too much elite talent upfront but maybe it's not as good as some think?

Matthews is fabulous. JT is great. MM is great. WN is good. After those three, the Leafs are kind of sad up front, and no one really stands out to me. On D they have Muzzin and Reilly, then nothing.
Imo, MM is the guy who stands out as the best trade chip to fill some of the holes. Maybe the best value in an MM trade is to get back three experienced guys, who all play hard (the right way)?

 

[Leaf Fans]

The term the sky is the limit was used in the context of a trade return for Marner which is what you were curious about and I provided information. Now you’re talking about literally anything being possible? Why shift the goalposts here? Are you by chance not just looking for information on what the sky is the limit could mean in this situation?

No, "...there are no limits and that anything is possible" is from your post. I simply pointed out that that is not the case. No goal post were moved. I suppose I could have also said Marner with 3 million retained would not get MaDavid.

 

[Habs10025]

The Leafs need to shake things up in some way. By no means is it likely that Marner will be moved but I did read a blog suggesting a big return. I know he is a great player but his contract will be very difficult to ever live up to.

With the cap not likely to go up for 3 seasons what do we think the return for Marner (5yrs left at 10.89mil) could be?

To LA
Marner.

To Toronto
Doughty.

 

[Dache]

No, "...there are no limits and that anything is possible" is from your post. I simply pointed out that that is not the case. No goal post were moved. I suppose I could have also said Marner with 3 million retained would not get MaDavid.

Yes that is from my post. But this whole “conversation” started from a poster saying if the leafs retained on Marner the sky is the limit, referencing his trade value, not referring to odd things such as if the leafs retained on Marner can animals now talk. So yes. You are trying to now change the topic because I think you were trying to be condescending to the first poster as you often do and now see there was no reason to be.

 

[Fatass]

To LA
Marner.

To Toronto
Doughty.

This is one MM trade that (conceptually) works well for both teams. Cap hits are really close. LA gets a flashy forward, and their fans (it’s LA) love that. Leafs get a true number one D man (who is also mean) and they clearly need that.
I don’t think Dubas is willing to change from his beliefs though, so an MM trade (even though for Doughty is fair value) will not even be on his radar.

 

[Leaf Fans]

Yes that is from my post. But this whole “conversation” started from a poster saying if the leafs retained on Marner the sky is the limit, referencing his trade value, not referring to odd things such as if the leafs retained on Marner can animals now talk. So yes. You are trying to now change the topic because I think you were trying to be condescending to the first poster as you often do and now see there was no reason to be.

Yes, on page one I quoted a poster called Colt55 who wrote "Retain 3 mil and the sky is the limit". I asked about the sky and you decided chime in first literally and then with the idiom. You also presented a definition so I worked of that. First by telling you there were salary cap limitations and then logical limitations. I gave you examples of both. I have not been condescending ( I rarely am) Nor have I attempted at anytime to change the subject or move goal posts.

 

[Fatass]

Yes, on page one I quoted a poster called Colt55 who wrote "Retain 3 mil and the sky is the limit". I asked about the sky and you decided chime in first literally and then with the idiom. You also presented a definition so I worked of that. First by telling you there were salary cap limitations and then logical limitations. I gave you examples of both. I have not been condescending ( I rarely am) Nor have I attempted at anytime to change the subject or move goal posts.

why would the Leafs retain on MM, when they are in cap trouble? Why not trade for equal money coming back, like (a poster just suggested) Doughty? Or, for a package of hard to play against experienced players who’s cap equals MM?

 

[Dache]

Yes, on page one I quoted a poster called Colt55 who wrote "Retain 3 mil and the sky is the limit". I asked about the sky and you decided chime in first literally and then with the idiom. You also presented a definition so I worked of that. First by telling you there were salary cap limitations and then logical limitations. I gave you examples of both. I have not been condescending ( I rarely am) Nor have I attempted at anytime to change the subject or move goal posts.

What is the point of even asking about the sky if not to be condescending? You’re clearly well aware that the poster meant that with retention Marner could be traded for a very high return. Your posts are constantly condescending and are chiming in to conversations that had nothing to do with what you comment about.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Zibanejad - 7.13% of Cap, after a 37 point season, and a prior career high of 51 points.
Mike Hoffman - 7.11% of Cap, for two seasons of 48 and 59 points.
Brayden Point - 8.28% of Cap, for seasons of 66 and 92 points.. .but a short-term contract (Over the short-term, a great contract for Tampa)
Tyler Johnson - 6.67% of Cap, after two years at 38 and 45 points... had a prior high of 72 points, has a high of 50 points since.. not exactly a better player than Nylander
Marchessault - 6.67% of Cap, after a career high of 51 points, though signed in the middle of career year.
Karlsson - 7.24% after two year average of 67 points, off a down year.
Horvat - 7.33% of cap, after a career year of 52 points, and 40 points before that.
Schwartz - 7.33% of cap, after an injury shortened season, with 22 points.. best was 63 points before that, and hasn't been over 60 points since.
Couturier - 6.07% of cap, after four years in the league, and a best season of 39 points. He had 118 points after four seasons...

Nylander got 8.76% after his first two years, averaging 61 points per.

There isn't a single player on your list, who had near 122 points, after their first two years in the league. Couts had less points after four years. Point is a comparable, though is contract length isn't a comparable.

The reality is, you have to compare what the players did before the contract, and what % of the cap it is... You've picked players who have grown into their contracts, in some cases signed many years ago, and simultaneously concluded Nylander can't grow, as all of these other guys did.

--------------------

More direct comparables include

Pastranak - @ 8.89% of cap, for one season of 70 points, and a prior best of 26 points
Kyle Connor @ 8.76% for two year total of 123 points. (One more point than Nylander... same cap hit)
Keller @ 8.77% for two year total of 112 points.
Landeskog @ 8.66% for 52 and 17 points (missed games due to injury)

Hence my "I don';t think you understand what a market is nor the context of when someone signs a contract relative to said production. Your "nuts" is my "ill-informed"." comment to said poster.

 

[Leaf Fans]

What is the point of even asking about the sky if not to be condescending? You’re clearly well aware that the poster meant that with retention Marner could be traded for a very high return. Your posts are constantly condescending and are chiming in to conversations that had nothing to do with what you comment about.

wanted to know what the poster meant by the sky. I have rarely chimed into a conversation that has nothing to do with what I am commenting about. Though admittedly it has happened. Though I have never been condescending. Though I suppose with this conversation, as you chimed in the conversation without knowing what you were commenting about, it applies to you as well.

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

Probably will need to retain a few mil on Marner in order to move him

Marner + Andersen for Price + Weber

 

[Dache]

wanted to know what the poster meant by the sky. I have rarely chimed into a conversation that has nothing to do with what I am commenting about. Though admittedly it has happened. Though I have never been condescending. Though I suppose with this conversation, as you chimed in the conversation without knowing what you were commenting about, it applies to you as well.

How did I not know what I was chiming in on? It was the first comment in the conversation. Just look through your post history. I see 7-10 condescending posts just from Sunday to now. But yet you have no problem being one of the posters pointing out leaf hate around here.