The Case For Bringing Back The Core

[ShaneFalco]

So the only thing that really changed is Dubas - who Shanny wanted back. Core and Keefe back it seems
Good times

 

[Captain Crunch]

There was an Elliotte Friedman quote to something along the lines of "they want to de-prioritize the core 4".... and I think that's absolutely the correct vision. For too long, pretty much every other forward position on the roster has been given somewhat of a "free pass" in terms expected contribution.... they don't necessarily need to all score, but the team needs a much "deeper" identity.

The problem is -- you spend all that money on the core 4, and you have to have a revolving door of depth behind them.... anyone who establishes their worth prices themselves out.

The Salary cap went up $1m from 21-22 to 22-23... but pretty much that entire increase went towards the goaltending position in going from Campbell & Mrazek to Murray & Samsonov.

There is a path for 23-24 -- figure you can get Samsonov at $3.5m, you have Woll at $767k, get rid of Murray, and that's

Even if you figure you can get Samsonov on a $3.5m deal, get rid of Murray, and that's $2.2m of additional space, plus the $1m cap increase, where you can go to work a little bit with $3.3m of incremental space.

The challenge is, as I see it, it's shortlived. Matthews probably wants $1.5m more, Nylander probably wants a $3.5m increase. They've just undone your savings from the previous year, and sure, the cap is probably going to go up $3-4m -- that's just going to have UFA salaries skyrocket that year.


As for Matthews... to me, it's all about the money. If he wants to do a short term deal to ensure he remains in control of his career, that's one thing & workable. If he wants to do a short term deal to ensure he's keeping up with salary cap inflation, then I think you've gotta trade him. You can't win with a marquee player who is focused on ensuring he has the highest cap hit possible throughout, as that same player is also ensuring that the team around him is as non-competitive as possible.

To me, if Matthews wants to sign a 2 or 3 year deal -- great, 2 years at $11.5m or 3 years at $12m. His last deal was signed based on signed a deal based on the assuming the cap would jump substantially, which it obviously hasn't. Give the Leafs a legitimate chance to win with him, and be underpaid for a couple of years.

The other thing you need to take into account is what it's going to cost to get rid of Murray, whether we trade him or buy him out (this one is really not an option). We have precious few draft picks to include in any trade, and there will very likely be some salary retention if we are lucky enough to be able to trade him. Also, I don't rally have a problem if Mathews wants to be the highest paid player, although personally I don't feel he is worth it. so as long as he does what MacKinnon did and only take $100,000 more than what MacKinnon makes, then okay. If he wants any more than that, then obviously his main priority is looking out for himself, rather than be willing to help the team out, so I would trade him.

 

[ShaneFalco]

The problem is -- you spend all that money on the core 4, and you have to have a revolving door of depth behind them.... anyone who establishes their worth prices themselves out.

Exactly

 

[Captain Crunch]

have to agree with this statement...........

Sorry, but I disagree. One got a bit more than JT and the other one just a bit less. It's only my opinion, but I think they both based how much they wanted on what JT was given. But of course, I've been wrong more often than I've been right, so what do I know! Haha

 

[rumman]

Sorry, but I disagree. One got a bit more than JT and the other one just a bit less. It's only my opinion, but I think they both based how much they wanted on what JT was given. But of course, I've been wrong more often than I've been right, so what do I know! Haha

they'd just use other overpaid players as comparable, no shortage of overpaid players in the NHL imo............

 

[Maple Leaf]

You don't need a core
Look at Vegas
They have 1 good player

 

[Captain Crunch]

I'm sure the agent would know what a comparable is, and wouldn't have to be told by the GM to use appropriate ones.
Which is why they got contracts consistent with the history of post-ELC contracts, not UFA contracts.

We paid the biggest contracts because they had some of the best pre-signing periods of any young players throughout the cap era. That's how this works.
Matthews and Marner got the 6th and 10th highest value post-ELC contracts in the cap era, term considered.
Their pre-signing periods ranked higher than that, and their careers are trending to rank higher than that.

So after 7 straight seasons of playoff failure (okay, okay, they did manage to squeak out 1 playoff round victory this year), maybe, just maybe, paying our 3 core players $33 million (and more because they will get some kind of a raise), they will FINALLY get us past at least the 2nd round. (Fingers, toes, and whatever other body parts you can cross) Oh yeah, definitely gonna' happen. smh

 

[ToneDog]

So after 7 straight seasons of playoff failure (okay, okay, they did manage to squeak out 1 playoff round victory this year), maybe, just maybe, paying our 3 core players $33 million (and more because they will get some kind of a raise), they will FINALLY get us past at least the 2nd round. (Fingers, toes, and whatever other body parts you can cross) Oh yeah, definitely gonna' happen. smh

Dekes will never admit fault with the contracts. Take with a grain of salt.

Seriously is there anybody else defending the 4 contracts that I do not have on ignore ?

 

[GoonieFace]

I will probably get roasted, but cap % is such a bad way of measuring contracts. McDavid is the best player in the league, hands down. He makes $12.6 mil, no one should be close to that and I don’t care if he signed 2 years ago. I get the NHLPA won’t like it, but who cares

 

[rumman]

You don't need a core
Look at Vegas
They have 1 good player

completely unfair assessment, they have lots of good players, they're just not diva-esque type players..........

 

[Dekes For Days]

So after 7 straight seasons of playoff failure (okay, okay, they did manage to squeak out 1 playoff round victory this year), maybe, just maybe, paying our 3 core players $33 million (and more because they will get some kind of a raise), they will FINALLY get us past at least the 2nd round.

You do realize that we didn't have 3 core players making 33m for our 2017, 2018, 2019, or 2021 playoff losses, right?

 

[Captain Crunch]

Dekes will never admit fault with the contracts. Take with a grain of salt.

Seriously is there anybody else defending the 4 contracts that I do not have on ignore ?

Oh believe me, he and I have had many discussions. He would rather die on the hill he's standing on than admit he's wrong (which we all know he is, hahaha)!

 

[ToneDog]

completely unfair assessment, they have lots of good players, they're just not diva-esque type players..........

Yeah Petro, Theodore, Marchesseault, Stone, Stephenson, Barbashev, Whitecloud, Martinez, Karlsson, Smith are chopped liver. They could use a Marner and Nylander or two.

Oh believe me, he and I have had many discussions. He would rather die on the hill he's standing on than admit he's wrong (which we all know he is, hahaha)!

I'm thinking/hoping his contract expires June 30th. LOL.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Oh believe me, he and I have had many discussions. He would rather die on the hill he's standing on than admit he's wrong (which we all know he is, hahaha)!

I'm obviously not going to say that I'm wrong when I am correct, and have extensively proven that I am correct in all of those many discussions.
Technically, by the logic you're using, you should actually be concluding that it's impossible to win with superstars on ELCs.
But that kind of exposes the inherent flaw in that whole surface level argument, doesn't it.

 

[Captain Crunch]

You do realize that we didn't have 3 core players making 33m for our 2017, 2018, 2019, or 2021 playoff losses, right?

You do realize that we didn't have 3 core players making 33m for our 2017, 2018, 2019, or 2021 playoff losses, right?

Yes, Tavares got hurt in the Habs series (wasn't that the one where we had won 3 games without him as well as also being up 3 games to 1, meaning WE ONLY HAD TO WIN ONE MORE GAME, COUGH, COUGH, CHOKE, CHOKE!). And I should have started with 2018, the year Matthews and Marner looked after themselves rather than any concerns for the team (and Dubas got totally taken to the cleaners)! As for the other 2 years, who of these three got hurt and missed substantial time in the playoffs, because I honestly can't remember.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Yes, Tavares got hurt in the Habs series (wasn't that the one where we had won 3 games without him as well as also being up 3 games to 1, meaning WE ONLY HAD TO WIN ONE MORE GAME, COUGH, COUGH, CHOKE, CHOKE!). And I should have started with 2018, the year Matthews and Marner looked after themselves rather than any concerns for the team (and Dubas got totally taken to the cleaners)! As for the other 2 years, who of these three got hurt and missed substantial time in the playoffs, because I honestly can't remember.

Tavares wasn't signed yet and Matthews/Marner were on ELCs for our playoff losses in 2017 and 2018.
Matthews and Marner were on ELCs for our playoff loss in 2019.
Tavares missed the 2021 playoff loss with an injury.
We have only had our 33m core 3 in the 2020, 2022, and 2023 playoffs.

 

[ToneDog]

Yes, Tavares got hurt in the Habs series (wasn't that the one where we had won 3 games without him as well as also being up 3 games to 1, meaning WE ONLY HAD TO WIN ONE MORE GAME, COUGH, COUGH, CHOKE, CHOKE!). And I should have started with 2018, the year Matthews and Marner looked after themselves rather than any concerns for the team (and Dubas got totally taken to the cleaners)! As for the other 2 years, who of these three got hurt and missed substantial time in the playoffs, because I honestly can't remember.

With half the cap going to 4 playoff dwarfs, an injury to one or if a team nullifies one, the Leafs are done. Bigger problem is 3 of the 4 wilt/smile/cries/disappears in the playoffs when a player breathes on them.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Higher and lower cap hit than what? Matthews, Marner, and Tavares aren't equal players. Tavares was in their range in cap hit because he was UFA.
13.84% of the cap for the age 28-34 seasons of Tavares. That doesn't seem unreasonable or inconsistent with history.

You said a longer term should get a lower cap hit for a UFA. We gave Tavares maximum term, so therefore you think $11M is a lower cap? How much do you think he should have been given?

$9M for 5 or 6 years without the NMC would have been reasonable for him.

 

[Captain Crunch]

Tavares wasn't signed yet and Matthews/Marner were on ELCs for our playoff losses in 2017 and 2018.
Matthews and Marner were on ELCs for our playoff loss in 2019.
Tavares missed the 2021 playoff loss with an injury.
We have only had our 33m core 3 in the 2020, 2022, and 2023 playoffs.

I can't argue with those facts, Dekes, but I will counter with: we didn't do diddly squat in the playoffs with them in their ELC years when they weren't taking up so much of the cap, and haven't done any better since they signed their extensions (although they did manage to barely get by Tampa these playoffs). We have seen how much the d needs to be improved, and the difficulty in surrounding this core (who you HAVE to admit have never fared well when it mattered the most) with good enough depth players. Also, Tavares is not going to age well with his contract. So please tell me how you see this team overcoming these obstacles by giving Marner and Matthews (very doubtful Nylander gets anywhere close to what his next contract could be) substantial raises (we will see if they're in it to win it, or just looking out for themselves)???

 

[notDatsyuk]

Yes, John Tavares. The guy that was top 2 amongst NHL C's in goals and points over the 3 years before signing, top 10 since entering the league.

Fourth in goals, sixth in points, and twelfth in PPG from 15-16 to 17-18, but why confuse the issue with facts?

He was signed here to be a 2C, and his production, even with one or the other of two of the best RW in the league, hasn't been great.

Have you watched him play? Other than banging in rebounds and setups while standing in the slot (more and more just on the PP), and being very good at faceoffs, he hasn't brought much.

 

[Dekes For Days]

You said a longer term should get a lower cap hit for a UFA. We gave Tavares maximum term, so therefore you think $11M is a lower cap? How much do you think he should have been given? $9M for 5 or 6 years without the NMC would have been reasonable for him.

Tavares got a lower cap hit on a 7 year term than he would have on, for example, a 5 year term. Not sure what's confusing about this.
9m for 5-6 years and no NMC is a ridiculous suggestion. That's completely out of touch with Tavares' quality and contract valuation in the NHL.

For reference, these are the other UFA contracts in the 13-14% range...
Iginla through ages 31-35.
Spezza through ages 25-31.
Nash through ages 26-33.
Elias through ages 30-36.
Lecavalier through ages 29-39.
St Louis through ages 30-35.
Perry through ages 28-35.
Gaborik through ages 27-31.
Hossa through age 29.
Benn through ages 28-35.

I fail to see how you arrive at Tavares as some weird outlier.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Dekes will never admit fault with the contracts. Take with a grain of salt.

Seriously is there anybody else defending the 4 contracts that I do not have on ignore ?

I mostly just enjoy the unintentional humour.

You mention 4 contracts. Three really bad ones (Matthews, Marner and Tavares), but the fourth? Nylander's term could have been longer, but he's at least producing close to value. Rielly's hit may be a bit high but not bad. Who's your fourth?

 

[4thline]

Fourth in goals, sixth in points, and twelfth in PPG from 15-16 to 17-18, but why confuse the issue with facts?

He was signed here to be a 2C, and his production, even with one or the other of two of the best RW in the league, hasn't been great.

Have you watched him play? Other than banging in rebounds and setups while standing in the slot (more and more just on the PP), and being very good at faceoffs, he hasn't brought much.

You're right, I grabbed an extra year, top 2 was over the previous 4 years. In any case, both sets of numbers reflect an elite 1C, so, good catch I guess?

He was signed here to be the 2nd high end 1C in a great 1-2 punch, like the previous 3 cup winners had at the time of his signing. That's not the same as being brought in to be a 2C. His production has been more than fine.

Yes. He slowed down a bit this past season, but "he hasn't brought much" is completely misleading. The numbers speak for themselves. He's a very boring hockey player, the superstar grinder archetype. His offensive game is built on hustle/body position, intelligence, and putting the puck in the net, not flashy skills.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Tavares got a lower cap hit on a 7 year term than he would have on, for example, a 5 year term. Not sure what's confusing about this.
9m for 5-6 years and no NMC is a ridiculous suggestion. That's completely out of touch with Tavares' quality and contract valuation in the NHL.

For reference, these are the other UFA contracts in the 13-14% range...
Iginla through ages 31-35.
Spezza through ages 25-31.
Nash through ages 26-33.
Elias through ages 30-36.
Lecavalier through ages 29-39.
St Louis through ages 30-35.
Perry through ages 28-35.
Gaborik through ages 27-31.
Hossa through age 29.
Benn through ages 28-35.

I fail to see how you arrive at Tavares as some weird outlier.

Just watching him play, I fail to see how you arrive at those players as comparables. How many of them were signed to be second line players?

 

[ToneDog]

I mostly just enjoy the unintentional humour.

You mention 4 contracts. Three really bad ones (Matthews, Marner and Tavares), but the fourth? Nylander's term could have been longer, but he's at least producing close to value. Rielly's hit may be a bit high but not bad. Who's your fourth?

It was the 4, including Nylander's. Yes, he has outperformed it the last few years but it was an overpay at the time compared to Pasta IMO. He was also made whole for missing 2 months. Rielly's contract is good if we get closer to playoff Rielly. Hopefully it is not bad in years 3+ as Seravelli predicts.