Guilt Trip
Active member
Not crazy about having Simmonds there either. I think he should go back with JT and try Galchenyuk with M&M.CarltonTheBear said:
Leafs @ sens - Mar. 25th, 7:00pm - TSN4, Fan 590
- Thread starter CarltonTheBear
- Start date
dappleganger
Active member
azzurri63 said:
Refs need to learn to just let the goal stand (it went in the net) and then look at the review and call it back if it was not a good goal. It's that simple.
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:Tell that to Simmonds.
Wait: could it have been a Peelian make-up non-call?
Of course not. Peel was the first and only ref to do such a thing and the league made it abudantly clear those types of actions would lead to dismissal.
Highlander
Active member
I'd like to see this for at least one game:
Galchenyuk-Matthews-Marner
Hyman-JT-Marner
Simmonds-Spezza-Thornton
Souperman-Kerfoot-Engvall
Galchenyuk seems to have a lot of go, I would like to see that with the other two.
Galchenyuk-Matthews-Marner
Hyman-JT-Marner
Simmonds-Spezza-Thornton
Souperman-Kerfoot-Engvall
Galchenyuk seems to have a lot of go, I would like to see that with the other two.
ZBBM
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:Tell that to Simmonds.
Wait: could it have been a Peelian make-up non-call?
Of course not. Peel was the first and only ref to do such a thing and the league made it abudantly clear those types of actions would lead to dismissal.
The courage the league showed there almost reduced me to tears of gratitude.
bustaheims
Active member
caveman said:
And Nylander scratched for no reason.
azzurri63
Active member
Nik said:
Our 4 top paid players aren't being overpaid to have great analytic numbers. All part in parcel to points produced but you can have all the possession, shot corsi #s etc but if you're not producing it's a problem. Yes Marner and Matthews are good when you look at where they are compared to other stars. Matthews again isn't 100% but Marner has 20 points in his last 20 games and 7 of those in 2 games a while back so not exactly lighting it up. JT and Nylander not even going to go there. Every player goes through droughts so don't expect them to pot 2-3 points every night but a point a game from the top 2 is a disappointment and JT and Nylander should be point a game players which they aren't. Especially with the PP time these guys get. When you go back a couple weeks and your best line on a nightly basis was Hyman-Engvall-Mikheyev that's a concern.
Highlander
Active member
sorry repeated Marner on Line 2, goes like this:bustaheims said:
Galchenyuk-Matthews-Marner
Hyman-JT-Nylander
Simmonds-Spezza-Thornton
Souperman-Kerfoot-Engvall
Kin
New member
azzurri63 said:
Well, you probably should because once again you're just showing how little you understand the game. Nylander is not overpaid relative to his production. Even right now. If you think you can find a consistent 30 goal/60 point player as a UFA for what they're paying Nylander then you are, as per usual wrong. Expecting him to be a point per game player for 7 million a year is so wildly out of touch with what the actual NHL pay scale is that it's embarrassingly ignorant.
azzurri63
Active member
Nik said:
Ya I don't know anything about the game. You do. You're right I'm wrong. You have your opinion I have mine. For such a smart ass maybe look up Nikolaj Ehlers or David Pastrnak who are averaging a point or more a game and get paid less to Nylander who were used as comparisons to Nylander before he signed. You don't have a f'n clue. I could go on and on with a bunch of guys who are averaging a point a game and who don't make anything near the money he makes. Do some research or maybe you don't need to because you know it all.
Kin
New member
azzurri63 said:
You clearly don't because players signed as RFA's aren't on the market and their salaries don't reflect market rates. A player's production relative to their salary is only meaningful in as much as whether or not you could replace them via the free agent market at a similar cost or if the money, again via players the Leafs could actually sign, would be better spent elsewhere. Players outpacing their RFA contracts don't alter the free agency market or what is actually available to teams in terms of using the money they have at hand. Nobody can sign a player like Pastrnak or Ehlers for that price on an actual open market so it doesn't reflect a realistic target for how those dollars should perform.
These are just fundamental concepts of sports economics that a child would be able to understand.
azzurri63
Active member
Nik said:
I understand hard to compare salaries when a guy signed 4-5 years ago obviously salaries have gone up. I wouldn't have signed Nylander especially after holding out and maybe you can make a strong argument that the Leafs overpaid. I know Pastrnak plays on arguably the best line in hockey but for my money no comparison between the two. I made this argument back when we signed the top 2 stars and I'll say it again for young players coming off an ELC neither Marner nor Matthews deserved what they got not this early in their careers. Because of that Dubas has had to fill in positions with either guys from overseas or scrubs from other teams. Are they great players no exception but hard to look what these guys are making when other stars around the league who also have signed recently make less. Matthews is great don't get me wrong and in my opinion the teams MVP but he's no McDavid and Marner love the kid but he's overpaid. Other teams sign their guys and always seems to be for less. Rantanen 9.25 per, Point 6.75, are they any worse than Marner? Who would you rather have on your team? If I had to choose between Point and Marner I'll take Point at less than 7 million and FYI basically has been a point a game or better the last 3 years something Nylander hasn't done in his career. Unfortunately the whole system is kinda unfair due to taxes etc. The playing field is a little skewed which I'm sure comes into play.
herman
Well-known member
Zee said:
I don't really mind the terms. Sure it looks like paying bigger bucks earlier, but it also means their next deals encompass more prime playing years than diminishing returns. Assuming we haven't completely pooched the pandemic situation (ha), the eventually rising cap benefits earlier big bucks.