2024 Offseason Thread: Changes

[Bill_Berg]

Listening to the FAN morning show about this tweet and their bottom line is if the leafs re-sign Marner they are the biggest joke franchise in the history of sports. That?s what they said.

It?s fun being a leafs fan.

Funny, First Up said if they don't resign him, and let him walk, which is 100% up to Marner, that's the worst scenario possible. I guess we're a joke to matter what happens.

It's fun being a Leafs fan.

 

[herman]

[*] unless Leafs can sell Marner on the change, EF thinks it goes into next season, as playing with Matthews is his best bet for a pay day

And here's a solution. Playing with Matthews might be Marner's best chance at a big payday, but it's likely not the team's best chance at playoff success. Berube spreads the attack out, lets Mitch drive his own (or Tavares's) line, and we'll see if he's a $100m player for any team he really wants to be on. I have my doubts!

Correct. Marner has never driven a line, and throwing 10+M (now 12+) at someone to ride sidecar is silly. I could see the surface logic of pairing your premiere playmaker with your shooty sniper centre, but uh, so could everyone else? Iced out both players by pinching off Marner whenever he had the puck in the playoffs.

This is why I wanted to spin him off last year before the NMC for someone like Lindholm and a top-4 defenseman.
Guy1-Matthews-Guy2
Whoever-Lindholm-Nylander
Lunch-Tavares-Pail
Fast-4th-Line

 

[Joe S.]

Listening to the FAN morning show about this tweet and their bottom line is if the leafs re-sign Marner they are the biggest joke franchise in the history of sports. That?s what they said.

It?s fun being a leafs fan.

Funny, First Up said if they don't resign him, and let him walk, which is 100% up to Marner, that's the worst scenario possible. I guess we're a joke to matter what happens.

It's fun being a Leafs fan.

Yeah and they also said letting him walk for nothing is the worst case scenario.

I just love that the Toronto media wants to make this as difficult as possible for the Leafs and Marner.

I?d like the think that other NHL gms aren?t influenced by media rhetoric, but this is the NHL after all, the bushiest of bush leagues.

 

[azzurri63]

Team is in a pickle regardless. Marner has to waive and move on. Get what you can for him I think there are teams that will pay up. His game is not going to change come playoffs. I personally have seen enough of him and the core more the core staying together. They've had their opportunities and haven't delivered so time to move on. It sucks because Mitch is an exceptional player. Tre needs to change the makeup of this team. Only thing making this more difficult is Tavares coming off the books next year so they may think holding on to Marner is fine. Problem is what are you going to pay him. He doesn't need a raise but will want one so you may be losing him after this season anyways. I've said it before the players get everything and these NMC's are the problem.

 

[mr grieves]

[*] unless Leafs can sell Marner on the change, EF thinks it goes into next season, as playing with Matthews is his best bet for a pay day

[*]And here's a solution. Playing with Matthews might be Marner's best chance at a big payday, but it's likely not the team's best chance at playoff success. Berube spreads the attack out, lets Mitch drive his own (or Tavares's) line, and we'll see if he's a $100m player for any team he really wants to be on. I have my doubts!

[*]Correct. Marner has never driven a line, and throwing 10+M (now 12+) at someone to ride sidecar is silly. I could see the surface logic of pairing your premiere playmaker with your shooty sniper centre, but uh, so could everyone else? Iced out both players by pinching off Marner whenever he had the puck in the playoffs.

This is why I wanted to spin him off last year before the NMC for someone like Lindholm and a top-4 defenseman.
Guy1-Matthews-Guy2
Whoever-Lindholm-Nylander
Lunch-Tavares-Pail
Fast-4th-Line

[*]
I agree that the time to trade him was last year. But that ship's sailed, so why not just roll

Guy1-Matthews-Guy2
Lunch-Tavares-Marner (or Nylander)
Pail-UFA-Nylander (or Marner)
Fast-4th-Line

Marner can put up a 100-point season and come through in the playoffs, and then get paid what he wants, or he doesn't and picks between Nylander's contract here or $100/7 or whatever in Columbus or wherever?

 

[Bender]

Listening to the FAN morning show about this tweet and their bottom line is if the leafs re-sign Marner they are the biggest joke franchise in the history of sports. That?s what they said.

It?s fun being a leafs fan.

Funny, First Up said if they don't resign him, and let him walk, which is 100% up to Marner, that's the worst scenario possible. I guess we're a joke to matter what happens.

It's fun being a Leafs fan.

Yeah and they also said letting him walk for nothing is the worst case scenario.

I just love that the Toronto media wants to make this as difficult as possible for the Leafs and Marner.

I?d like the think that other NHL gms aren?t influenced by media rhetoric, but this is the NHL after all, the bushiest of bush leagues.

For a hockey mad town it'd be impossible for sports media not to talk about it. This is the market. If I had the time I'd love to pick the brain of soccer fans watching Juventus or Man U and talk about the media there and how they're the problem.

 

[cw]

Again, the content of what's being said through the media is all just posturing for bargaining position on both sides. However, how it's being said points towards a divorce happening one way or another.

Can't you concede that what's being said is possibly true and that it's not just posturing?

I believe Marner would prefer to stay. I also believe he believes he won?t get what he and his camp think he?s worth, and he is open to pursuing it elsewhere, hence the loveless ?Marner will fulfil his contractual obligation? position.

Everything ever said to the media in this industry is for the purpose of posturing. That?s how negotiations work when there is public interest.

In the meantime, the Leafs front office just told their insiders to can it because it?s not helping their position.

Friedman, on the 32 Thoughts podcast, has declared a moratorium on the topic of Marner

?To end the news segment, I am going on a Mitch Marner moratorium. You cannot say anything about this topic without somebody going berserk,? Friedman told co-host Jeff Marek.

?This is why this is the hardest topic to discuss in the NHL. This is why it is so complicated to the future of this and the outcome of this is so complicated because you can?t say a thing without somebody getting mad. Even when you?re trying to not say anything remotely controversial, people are getting mad.?

The Leafs are using Chris Johnston to tell the rest of the league who is interested in Marner they have to step up their offers if they want anything to done.

?The Leafs are not leaning on Mitch Marner right now. They have not decided 100 percent they have to trade him and or that they're going to make life uncomfortable and they're getting the list of names. None of that's what's going on," Johnston said on his podcast on Friday.

?I think there's some frustration just about all the public discourse about it. And look, that's the nature of the beast when you're that player. And when the possibilities are on the table that we're talking about," Johnston said. "But at this point in time, I don't think the Leafs have a deal for them. And I don't think they've gone to them and asked them for a list or anything like that. I think they have to, it does not make any sense for the Leafs to go to war with this player, to make this any more public than it already is.?

Transcriptions from:
https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/toronto-maple-leafs/latest-news/i-am-going-on-a-mitch-marner-moratorium-does-the-discourse-on-the-maple-leafs-star-forward-need-a-break

https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/toronto-maple-leafs/latest-news/report-maple-leafs-have-not-decided-100-percent-that-they-have-to-trade-mitch-marner

And if you want to know what the Marner camp is thinking, just watch for Darren Dreger.

The stuff about 'posturing' seems almost comical in a sad way to me.
Some sort of media perceived contractual poker game is claimed to be going on ... when Marner got dealt a contractual Royal Flush years ago that so many in the media couldn't or can't seem to figure out. The only questions in this game are maybe how many chips the Leafs are going to lose and where Marner will be playing in the future. The top ten NHL scorer over the last eight years and the Leafs top playoff scorer over the last eight years is going to get a big, long contract by July 2025. The only question remaining for Marner is from which NHL team and he is the only one who is going to make that decision. Media and fans can?t and won't. Ditto for Leafs management.

Marner doesn't have to discuss another contract with or a trade from the Leafs for the rest of his life if that is what he wants. There isn't a credible or substantial thing the Leafs, their fans or the media can do about that. Marner doesn't have to posture for anyone. His posturing was on the ice and is largely done. He already has phenomenal top 10 in the NHL/top of his team in the playoffs scoring stats over the last 8 years. He already possesses a contract that gave him the exclusive right to make these decisions. Marner is the one who has to be courted. He doesn't have to posture to get people to court him. The only posturing he's going to be observing are from those offering contracts for 2025 and beyond as they fall over themselves and buckets of money trying to sign him.

Treliving didn't give Marner that existing contract. But I think he's handled this situation badly. He doesn't control the media but he could have significantly deflated the Marner media pi?ata circus - for example: by making a declaration like he did with Matthews & Nylander announcing a desire to re-sign them last year. Heat is on him more than Marner then. What ever happened to stand up for your teammates? Marner is apparently a popular player in the locker room. The real flaw: Treliving seemed to overlook that whatever he might want to do with Marner requires serious puckering up to kiss Marner?s ass because Marner has the final say no matter what - it is in his contract in black and white. Not doing so is a strike against Treliving and whatever he wants to do as it hurts his relationship with Marner. That has been echoed by Friedman saying everyone is getting mad. I certainly don't blame the Marner camp. Stupid is as stupid does.

 

[cabber24]

One thing the Leafs have established is that paying 4 forwards 48% of the cap does not work.

I cannot for the life of me comprehend how satisfied some of you are with Marner's playoff performances. The best of the worst is still not good and games 5-7 do matter. I cannot believe anyone who actually watched the games could make this argument. The rest of the core is locked so the reallocation available is Marner.

The Leafs very well could be worse off without him but they are not going to win with so much cap allocation upfront.

I posted this in January and it's still very relevant:

I wanted to analyze if we keep the core four would we have any additional cap available to allocate elsewhere?

Now Core 4 percentage of cap = (11.64+11+10.9+6.96)/83.5 = 48.51%

25/26 Projected
Salary Cap Guess= $91.5
Facts: AM = $13.25 WN = $11.5
Guesses: MM: $12.25, JT = $5.0

Projected Core 4 percentage of cap = (13.25+11.5+12.25+5)/91.5 = 45.90%

The difference in percentages equates to $2.4M more to spend.

If we had just $2.4M more to spend today we couldn't win. I don't think keeping the core 4 intact makes sense if they're serious about winning.

I think MM has to go.

 

[Bender]

Again, the content of what's being said through the media is all just posturing for bargaining position on both sides. However, how it's being said points towards a divorce happening one way or another.

Can't you concede that what's being said is possibly true and that it's not just posturing?

I believe Marner would prefer to stay. I also believe he believes he won?t get what he and his camp think he?s worth, and he is open to pursuing it elsewhere, hence the loveless ?Marner will fulfil his contractual obligation? position.

Everything ever said to the media in this industry is for the purpose of posturing. That?s how negotiations work when there is public interest.

In the meantime, the Leafs front office just told their insiders to can it because it?s not helping their position.

Friedman, on the 32 Thoughts podcast, has declared a moratorium on the topic of Marner

?To end the news segment, I am going on a Mitch Marner moratorium. You cannot say anything about this topic without somebody going berserk,? Friedman told co-host Jeff Marek.

?This is why this is the hardest topic to discuss in the NHL. This is why it is so complicated to the future of this and the outcome of this is so complicated because you can?t say a thing without somebody getting mad. Even when you?re trying to not say anything remotely controversial, people are getting mad.?

The Leafs are using Chris Johnston to tell the rest of the league who is interested in Marner they have to step up their offers if they want anything to done.

?The Leafs are not leaning on Mitch Marner right now. They have not decided 100 percent they have to trade him and or that they're going to make life uncomfortable and they're getting the list of names. None of that's what's going on," Johnston said on his podcast on Friday.

?I think there's some frustration just about all the public discourse about it. And look, that's the nature of the beast when you're that player. And when the possibilities are on the table that we're talking about," Johnston said. "But at this point in time, I don't think the Leafs have a deal for them. And I don't think they've gone to them and asked them for a list or anything like that. I think they have to, it does not make any sense for the Leafs to go to war with this player, to make this any more public than it already is.?

Transcriptions from:
https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/toronto-maple-leafs/latest-news/i-am-going-on-a-mitch-marner-moratorium-does-the-discourse-on-the-maple-leafs-star-forward-need-a-break

https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/toronto-maple-leafs/latest-news/report-maple-leafs-have-not-decided-100-percent-that-they-have-to-trade-mitch-marner

And if you want to know what the Marner camp is thinking, just watch for Darren Dreger.

The stuff about 'posturing' seems almost comical in a sad way to me.
Some sort of media perceived contractual poker game is claimed to be going on ... when Marner got dealt a contractual Royal Flush years ago that so many in the media couldn't or can't seem to figure out. The only questions in this game are maybe how many chips the Leafs are going to lose and where Marner will be playing in the future. The top ten NHL scorer over the last eight years and the Leafs top playoff scorer over the last eight years is going to get a big, long contract by July 2025. The only question remaining for Marner is from which NHL team and he is the only one who is going to make that decision. Media and fans can?t and won't. Ditto for Leafs management.

Marner doesn't have to discuss another contract with or a trade from the Leafs for the rest of his life if that is what he wants. There isn't a credible or substantial thing the Leafs, their fans or the media can do about that. Marner doesn't have to posture for anyone. His posturing was on the ice and is largely done. He already has phenomenal top 10 in the NHL/top of his team in the playoffs scoring stats over the last 8 years. He already possesses a contract that gave him the exclusive right to make these decisions. Marner is the one who has to be courted. He doesn't have to posture to get people to court him. The only posturing he's going to be observing are from those offering contracts for 2025 and beyond as they fall over themselves and buckets of money trying to sign him.

Treliving didn't give Marner that existing contract. But I think he's handled this situation badly. He doesn't control the media but he could have significantly deflated the Marner media pi?ata circus - for example: by making a declaration like he did with Matthews & Nylander announcing a desire to re-sign them last year. Heat is on him more than Marner then. What ever happened to stand up for your teammates? Marner is apparently a popular player in the locker room. The real flaw: Treliving seemed to overlook that whatever he might want to do with Marner requires serious puckering up to kiss Marner?s ass because Marner has the final say no matter what - it is in his contract in black and white. Not doing so is a strike against Treliving and whatever he wants to do as it hurts his relationship with Marner. That has been echoed by Friedman saying everyone is getting mad. I certainly don't blame the Marner camp. Stupid is as stupid does.

Why do you say it's media "perceived?" Why is is the stuff about posturing sad? I don't think Treliving overlooked bending over backwards for Darren Ferris at all, I think he said no thanks.

 

[Bullfrog]

Only one more year of Tavares's $11M cap hit though. So that percentage will drop.

Keep Marner and figure out how/if to retain Tavares next year.

 

[Bullfrog]

Why do you say it's media "perceived?" Why is is the stuff about posturing sad? I don't think Treliving overlooked bending over backwards for Darren Ferris at all, I think he said no thanks.

herman's comments on posturing suggest that any of Marner's quotes are in service of posturing without any concession that they might be genuine on Marner's part.

 

[herman]

Why do you say it's media "perceived?" Why is is the stuff about posturing sad? I don't think Treliving overlooked bending over backwards for Darren Ferris at all, I think he said no thanks.

herman's comments on posturing suggest that any of Marner's quotes are in service of posturing without any concession that they might be genuine on Marner's part.

This is what I said:

Again, the content of what's being said through the media is all just posturing for bargaining position on both sides. However, how it's being said points towards a divorce happening one way or another.

Can't you concede that what's being said is possibly true and that it's not just posturing?

I believe Marner would prefer to stay. I also believe he believes he won?t get what he and his camp think he?s worth, and he is open to pursuing it elsewhere, hence the loveless ?Marner will fulfil his contractual obligation? position.

Everything ever said to the media in this industry is for the purpose of posturing. That?s how negotiations work when there is public interest.

 

[Bender]

One thing the Leafs have established is that paying 4 forwards 48% of the cap does not work.

I cannot for the life of me comprehend how satisfied some of you are with Marner's playoff performances. The best of the worst is still not good and games 5-7 do matter. I cannot believe anyone who actually watched the games could make this argument. The rest of the core is locked so the reallocation available is Marner.

The Leafs very well could be worse off without him but they are not going to win with so much cap allocation upfront.

I posted this in January and it's still very relevant:

I wanted to analyze if we keep the core four would we have any additional cap available to allocate elsewhere?

Now Core 4 percentage of cap = (11.64+11+10.9+6.96)/83.5 = 48.51%

25/26 Projected
Salary Cap Guess= $91.5
Facts: AM = $13.25 WN = $11.5
Guesses: MM: $12.25, JT = $5.0

Projected Core 4 percentage of cap = (13.25+11.5+12.25+5)/91.5 = 45.90%

The difference in percentages equates to $2.4M more to spend.

If we had just $2.4M more to spend today we couldn't win. I don't think keeping the core 4 intact makes sense if they're serious about winning.

I think MM has to go.

And I mean it's not just about extending MM, it's about feeding the ego that he deserves more than Willy now, and I wouldn't be shocked if his ask is at 13M, or even equal to Matthews. At what point do we say enough is enough?

 

[Bullfrog]

He's consistently put up more points than Nylander while also getting Selke trophy nominations. He's got a solid argument that he deserves more.

 

[Bullfrog]

Why do you say it's media "perceived?" Why is is the stuff about posturing sad? I don't think Treliving overlooked bending over backwards for Darren Ferris at all, I think he said no thanks.

herman's comments on posturing suggest that any of Marner's quotes are in service of posturing without any concession that they might be genuine on Marner's part.

This is what I said:

Again, the content of what's being said through the media is all just posturing for bargaining position on both sides. However, how it's being said points towards a divorce happening one way or another.

Can't you concede that what's being said is possibly true and that it's not just posturing?

I believe Marner would prefer to stay. I also believe he believes he won?t get what he and his camp think he?s worth, and he is open to pursuing it elsewhere, hence the loveless ?Marner will fulfil his contractual obligation? position.

Everything ever said to the media in this industry is for the purpose of posturing. That?s how negotiations work when there is public interest.

Indeed. That doesn't refute my point. "I believe" he'd prefer to stay followed with "everything ever said" supports what I said.

My view is probably different as I'm in a licensed profession, but public interest means something quite different to me. There's no public interest in this "negotiation." I doubt very that either the Maple Leafs or Marner's agents will rely on public commentary to express their opinions. I'm certain they'll be fully articulated to the other party in private.

In any case, I respect your opinions and am not trying to undermine your views. I just agree with cw that the opinions on posturing are comical.

 

[cabber24]

Only one more year of Tavares's $11M cap hit though. So that percentage will drop.

Keep Marner and figure out how/if to retain Tavares next year.

I put the math above it's still too much of a percentage of the cap with the core's raises and a Tavares drop.

 

[herman]

My view is probably different as I'm in a licensed profession, but public interest means something quite different to me. There's no public interest in this "negotiation." I doubt very that either the Maple Leafs or Marner's agents will rely on public commentary to express their opinions. I'm certain they'll be fully articulated to the other party in private.

In any case, I respect your opinions and am not trying to undermine your views. I just agree with cw that the opinions on posturing are comical.

Perhaps public interest isn?t the exact term in these situations, as it?s not taxpayer money or anything like that. I liken it more to a union-bargaining situation.

In this case, there is a clear and documented pattern of this agent (and this NHL insider) using the media as a pressure point in their favour. And Ferris does it regularly for his other clients too (to much less effective results usually).

I didn?t think it was controversial to say media statements are posturing for bargaining position lol. I merely say it to remind us not to take them at face value. It?s like the first numbers we hear about in arbitration.

 

[azzurri63]

One thing the Leafs have established is that paying 4 forwards 48% of the cap does not work.

I cannot for the life of me comprehend how satisfied some of you are with Marner's playoff performances. The best of the worst is still not good and games 5-7 do matter. I cannot believe anyone who actually watched the games could make this argument. The rest of the core is locked so the reallocation available is Marner.

The Leafs very well could be worse off without him but they are not going to win with so much cap allocation upfront.

I posted this in January and it's still very relevant:

I wanted to analyze if we keep the core four would we have any additional cap available to allocate elsewhere?

Now Core 4 percentage of cap = (11.64+11+10.9+6.96)/83.5 = 48.51%

25/26 Projected
Salary Cap Guess= $91.5
Facts: AM = $13.25 WN = $11.5
Guesses: MM: $12.25, JT = $5.0

Projected Core 4 percentage of cap = (13.25+11.5+12.25+5)/91.5 = 45.90%

The difference in percentages equates to $2.4M more to spend.

If we had just $2.4M more to spend today we couldn't win. I don't think keeping the core 4 intact makes sense if they're serious about winning.

I think MM has to go.

I agree with you totally. He's the one to go and next year the team can be improved even more with Tavares' 11 M off the books. The whole core are soft as hell but Mitch and I get it due to his size might be more-so but if your not willing to do whatever it takes to win in the playoffs then it's time to say goodbye. He doesn't deserve a raise. Like I said earlier though with these NMC's the team is in a pickle unless Mitch waives.

 

[cw]

I believe Marner would prefer to stay. I also believe he believes he won?t get what he and his camp think he?s worth, and he is open to pursuing it elsewhere, hence the loveless ?Marner will fulfil his contractual obligation? position.

You are definitely entitled to your opinion.
It is not something I would bet on at this point.
The way Treliving has handled things, the odds of it have gone up.
I think it is more prudent to let the decision maker go through the process and see if that is how it turns out.

Everything ever said to the media in this industry is for the purpose of posturing. That?s how negotiations work when there is public interest.

Marner did say on his exit press scrum that he wants to stay and talks could get underway (paraphrased).
That is the only direct quote of Marner or Ferris that I can recall.

In terms of negotiations, when Treliving floated looking at all the options - including trading Marner, the negotiations Marner was receptive to in May appear to have been shutdown and he apparently is resolved to start the season without a contract in a Leafs jersey.

I do not see that as posturing. It's basically saying "We're not negotiating a trade with you. We have a no move clause. Screw off until after the season starts." (at which point, they all know it is really tough to trade a $10.9 mil cap hit and remain competitive for the playoffs - if one were able to get Marner's blessing & pull that off within a limited number of destinations).

In other words, "We're heading towards the UFA market. If you want in on it early, play nice in the media. Otherwise, you won't have anything to worry about with respect to Marner in July 2025 ... he'll be gone for nothing."

There's no posturing over terms or dollars. They're just enforcing the signed contract and will entertain offers down the road.

 

[cw]

Only one more year of Tavares's $11M cap hit though. So that percentage will drop.

Keep Marner and figure out how/if to retain Tavares next year.

I put the math above it's still too much of a percentage of the cap with the core's raises and a Tavares drop.

When Tavares contract drops off, if they've re-signed Marner for Nylander-esque dollars, I don't think they're that much out of alignment with other contenders. Because all three deals are recent, there will be some sawtooth effect where they'll be higher in the near term and lower as the contracts age and other team have to sign their stars.

To state simply: I wonder about going from core 4 to core 2. If not Marner, where is his core 3 replacement coming from? It sure gives me some pause.