GhostofPotvin29
Well-known member
I’d factor in some regression from Tavares’ 38 goals.
Marner to Vegas is finally happening
- Thread starter bustaheims
- Start date
I’d factor in some regression from Tavares’ 38 goals.
herman
Well-known member
Might depend on deployment.
The last 3 years he was 36G, 29G, 38G at 5v5, 18G, 9G, 12G on PP. He did shoot a blistering 19.0%, so if that goes back down to 13.6% on his average 252 shots, that's about 34G.
L K
Well-known member
I think it's fine to project some positive stuff but this can go in both directions.
Losing Marner doesn't make it easier for Matthews to score goals. Matthews health should also be a question mark. The mystery behind his injuries leaves it open ended on whether he can actually stay healthy. He scored 40 goals 2 years ago. He scored 33 goals last year. Neither season was limited by Matthews getting a fluke broken hand. It's things like wrist and "maybe back". If healthy I see no reason why Matthews isn't right back to a 50+ goal scorer just from shooting percentage alone. But he has to be healthy for that to happen and we shouldn't be relying on that to be a sure thing.
Maccelli should be better than his last season....but its also easy to just blame it on the coach for not fitting his play style. He wouldn't be the first player who fell off after a couple of promising seasons.
McMann....where did you go? 17 goals in his first 47 games. 3 in the next 27 and 0 in 13 playoff games. Is there more to give there, or did the carriage just turn back into the pumpkin on an undrafted 29 year old. It wasn't just bad luck that led to McMann his scoring drought. His play style really slowed down. He wasn't taking good shots. Wasn't driving the net well.
Robertson. Is he back? If I'm Robertson, I would probably want out. At times it seemed like Berube was trusting him and then completely went away from him in the playoffs. I think there could be a chance for him to get some opportunity up the lineup and on the PP if he does stay.
Tavares is probably due for some age related regression.
Domi...could probably give a little more.
I want the team to be better on paper (and there really wasn't a way to do that with this miserable offseason). I don't want to just rely on best case scenarios for how we can make up lost production.
herman
Well-known member
These were projections based on back of the napkin (err hockey-reference) averages from the last three seasons.
Matthews without Marner will be different, granted. Historically (relatively small sample), it hasn't been a problem for Matthews to score while Marner was out or on a different line.
GhostofPotvin29
Well-known member
Two of his last 4 seasons have been below 11.5 SH% so I’m not totally comfortable assuming that. It’s possible of course.
Lou "started the disrespect" or the camp was ready from the start of Mitch's pro career, and likely before that, to use every ounce of leverage to get what they want, including using anything that could be construed as aggrievement as a real aggrievement?
Guilt Trip
Well-known member
Spin it anyway you'd like but Lou lied to them.
3000 years ago, who cares? Lou was gone eons ago, and Marner got paid?
Listen I don't make defending Lou a common practice but "lied" is pretty hyperbolic. He had like a decade long-policy of not handing out rookie bonuses. That was never a major issue with the Devils because they typically never drafted high but he did hold firm on the policy when it came to another 4th overall pick in Adam Larsson before he left. Policies however do adjust over time.
He quite literally caved on this policy already by giving Marner his full schedule A bonuses ($850k per year). That's $2.55mil more than what Larsson got right there. Marner wanted schedule B bonuses as well but Lou held firm and said no. He wasn't able to do that with Matthews, but I mean, it's just a reality that draft pick status changes things and Matthews was considered a very high end level 1st overall pick.
Also it didn't end up being a $6mil difference. That's the maximum it could have been over 3 years but he would have only hit those bonuses in the final year of his ELC when he was top-10 in the league in assists. The figure that their camp requested and got from Dubas on his second contract to make up for that was $1.6mil.
Exactly. It's not something to poison the well over, and the Leafs should've traded him if it was. And what grates at me is I don't think this is Marner, it's his camp, who even complained about usage and deployment over the years. I cant remember the last time someone hung something as minor as that over a team 9yrs after it originally happened, especially after they acquiesced on everything after that.
It is not twisting anything.
It is a blunt set of established chronological facts.
In May-July 2023, Treliving declared to the media re-signing Matthews and Nylander was a priority. Look up the video.
In May 2024, Marner declared he wanted to re-sign in Toronto. Look up the video.
In June-July 2024, Treliving kicked around in the media maybe trading Marner - (Marner was not declared a priority to re-sign by Treliving. Look up the video.
That contributed significantly to the media firestorm and trade rumours that followed last summer and management did not do a heck of a lot to tamp that down. There is little video on that because they didn't really do it.
In July 2025, Marner stated that firestorm of media and trade rumours significantly contributed to Marner changing his mind and wanting a change of scenery. Look up the video.
Nobody is putting words into peoples mouths.
We can see or read with our own eyes and hear with our own ears those things that really happened. Something occurred to change Marner's mind. He said the rumours and uncertainty over his future had a bunch to do with that (ignoring there was a lot of nasty talk and blame for the playoffs that led to a report of police protecting his home). That is what the parties involved said or did. Things happen for a reason. That is the very plausible reason Marner gave for leaving and he is backed up by what we read, saw and heard in the media. In the wake of rumours for up to $14 mil/yr for his next contract, Marner could easily get the $12 mil/yr he got from Vegas from nearly anywhere in the NHL so it wasn't money. Those are the untwisted chronological facts.
Treliving threw gasolene on the fire by the way he handled it - which is very, very different to how he treated Matthews and Nylander. It caused a big problem for the player wanting to remain with the team - according to Marner himself. Why should Marner hang around to play for a GM who said he may trade him and then tried to trade him proving the GM doesn't really want him? Look at the video on the trade.
Just like it was Marner's right to exercise his NMC - it was Treliving's right to say or do whatever. BUT when a person does something, there are often consequences that they have to take responsibility for. Treliving, whether he likes it or not, will have to take some significant hunk of responsibility for losing Marner for next to nothing because Marner started out very receptive to re-signing in May 2024 and now, he's gone for very little return. There was no big overture for a hometown discount like they did with Tavares.
Leafs have an aged roster with some cap space, no good UFAs to spend it on and few assets to acquire quality players via trade. People said that was what was going to happen with the weak UFA crop and the cap rising so much - and so it was not a big surprise that it happened. That is also largely on management. That is not Marner's fault.
I don't think that is twisting anything. Management had a significant role in Marner's departure and they now have bigger challenges after Marner's departure.
OldTimeHockey
Well-known member
It's not about 3000 years ago. Let's not pretend that it's one isolated incident that led to Marner leaving. Rightly or wrongly, it's been a constant stream of sh*t by the team. Which is fine. As mentioned above, they can treat every player however they'd like to treat them. But let's not pretend that this is all Marner's camp.
- Babcock throws the rookie under the bus
- Lou doesn't give out bonus
- Marner blamed for every playoff loss since 1967
- Marner's not contract not prioritized by the Leafs
- Marner not defended in the media when the media is screaming to trade him
- Leafs attempt to trade him
mr grieves
Well-known member
It’s like Bender said, I think. In life, there are certain types of people always ready to be aggrieved, who marinate on and stew in slights, and push those self-pitying narratives to build up the sense of entitlement needed take, take, take every thing that they can, except, of course, any responsibility for their own failures. These types are generally major causes of toxicity in workplaces, families, non-profits, bowling leagues, and they’re best avoided. I don’t think Marner himself is that way, but professional athletes are corporate entities, made up of the player, the agent, and the broader entourage. By all accounts, Marner’s was the worst one the franchise’s had in a very long time.
How do we know that’s true? First, fair and honest media types who cover the team have long intimated it and have lately been outright saying it. Second, we can see the handiwork of a toxic team around media reports involving the player and team/city/fans. Consider that we heard, within the last year or so, about how some kid walking his dog gave Marner a bit of crap for not signing his last contract the summer he took it to training camp (ie an event that happened 6 years ago). Where does that story come from? What is the purpose of it being leaked? Are the folks who are lamenting how horribly Marner was treated here really asking us to believe no one ever yelled anything rude at Nylander or Matthews or Reilly? Do they even believe that themselves? How on earth could they, unless they were born yesterday?
His camp is toxic and was certainly a part of what’s been not right with this team/era. At least with them gone, we get rid of that, plus we can get more balance/depth in the lineup. That’s cold-comfort, silver-lining stuff though, because you could’ve got all that plus a prospect, pick, and player two years ago. The unrecovered talent loss sucks, but then Shanahan and Dubas sucked as managers when it came to the stars.
Last edited:
Like Marner is the only guy Babcock ever did anything to, Marners is just the one we know of that became very public. What a surprise. He was also fired after that and essentially blacklisted from NHL coaching for years. Using that as ammo for not re-signing after multiple coaches? Please.
And does anyone remember how much heat Willy was getting for holding out and playing like absolute crap and how out of shape he was after the first contract or are we going to retcon that too? Did Willy hold it against the team and fans for not providing value on his contract? When you that level of self interested focus then it really does look like the world is out to get you.
GhostofPotvin29
Well-known member
The team didn’t blame Marner for every playoff loss.
Again, the “contract not prioritized” stuff is incredibly silly. Matthews and Nylander’s deals were up at the end of 2024. They had to be prioritized before Marner. They couldn’t even sign Marner to an extension at that time to begin with. How this is an example of a “constant stream” of stuff from the team is crazy.
GhostofPotvin29
Well-known member
Yes, Matthews and Nylander were a priority because their deals expired in 2024 and not 2025. They had to make decisions on them before they had to on Marner. That isn’t a slight on Marner - unless you’re someone who takes everything as a perceived slight. Someone is going to be re-signed before him, that’s just reality.
Yeah Marner had a full no movement clause. Treliving said if there was a way to make the team better they would look into it, but weren’t going to make a trade for the sake of it. Possibly the most middle of the road answer possible. But again, if you’re someone looking for perceived slights at every turn, you could find one if you want.
Maybe the “firestorm” was a result of Marner’s camp refusing to negotiate with the team on an extension? Turning down a reported offer that would’ve been the richest in team history? Is that how you slight someone?
In fairness though, I think what is being said was that when Matthews and Nylander were both eligible for extensions, Treliving pretty much said that it’s a priority to get these contracts done.
When Marner was up for renewal, he did not have the same attitude. It very much felt like ‘meh, we’ll see what happens’.
I don’t have exact quotes, but that’s how I remember it going down. And I’m not taking sides here, just re-hashing what the narratives were at the time.
GhostofPotvin29
Well-known member
Fair enough.