No, he's not. Probably one of the stupidest claims I've seen on HFBoards, and that includes Leaf fans claiming Matthews is better than McDavid.
No GM in the world would support your argument here. Traditional stats, advanced stats, 5v5 stats...its not that close, Pasta is better. Mack was a better comparable to Pasta until Nate went off last year. Mikko's an elite player, top 30 or so but Pasta and Nate are top 10 and there should be a difference in the pay.
So are you suggesting that Pastrnak is actually a 13 million player or what? What do you think the difference between Mikko and Pasta should be if they both signed TODAY?
I'd say Pasta at 13.5 and Mikko at 11.0 on a Matthews like contract that left some prime years at the end. Heck I'd say more than Matthews but I think the Loafs panicked and gave AM too much.
That's why you trade him instead of letting him walk IF you don't think you can sign him. I don't think anyone should be frustrated with Mikko, he produces the numbers he does pretty consistently and should be paid a lot of money for that. Its just that giving him say 1.5m more AAV than you should is actually more consequential than it seems. That's been the Loafs thinking here, give everyone market and even market + deals and now look at how they have to consider shedding a good player like Marner or Nylander just to make it work in the future.
Unlike the leafs we’re never going to be a situation where we’re using 50% of our salary to 4 players though. Frankly I think the leafs really got f***ed by COVID and the flat cap, even more so than all the other teams which is why they’re in the position they’re in right now. I don’t see us being in that situation even if we end up overpaying Mikko, especially with the cap going up.
I mean the difference in advanced stats and traditional stats is basically nothing between Mikko and Pasta. Since 21-22 Pasta has 300pts in 236 games. Mikko has 301pts in 237 games.
Yeah but our top 5(6 if Nuke comes back) players take up a very significant chunk of cap. Not quite as serious as the big 4 in Toronto but still causing clear issues going forwards.
What Nate got paid is his and the teams business. Nate should make as much or more than Matthews wouldn't you say?
I really think this is a fallicy.
The cap will be going up though, so with every year the % cap hit gets lower on each deal.
The Leafs have been fine mostly in my opinion. I do think they have been lacking in the defensive aspect of the game. Just not good enough two way or even acceptable enough defensive play from a lot of their dmen over the last many years. Of course, the Avs were in the same boat until the minute Makar actually joined the NHL roster and then he showed us how quickly change can come for a team.
The problem with the Leafs committing big money to 4 forwards is that they simply haven't been difference makers when it counts. That's more on the players than the philosophy specifically. I do believe that they could win, if Matthews, Marner and Nylander would actually pull their weight and take over games when it matters.
I honestly don't put Rants at that level anymore. He's just not on the same level as MacKinnon and Makar as a player. He's got points, but he does not affect the game in any other way like those two do. I just can't in good concious say he's on the same level.
Well that's pretty unfair to Rantanen, because we are talking about the #2C in the world and #1D in the world. Yeah, pretty hard to be on the same level.
It's all symantics I suppose. I perfectly see what you are saying and I'm cool with your way of looking at it. But for me, when you watch an Avs game there is a very, very clear difference that two of those guys are operating on a completely different level. That's why I can't keep Rants there. He was there though in my eyes for close to four years.
I mean does Mackinnon really affect the game outside of the offensive side of the game? Mackinnon doesn’t win face offs and the difference between him and Rants defensively isn’t that huge.
