Mitch Marner: what now?

[Guilt Trip]

https://twitter.com/PierreVLeBrun/status/1142506591037677574

I wonder if and how much other teams will be turned off by Marner's camp in recognizing that he's negotiating in bad faith, pretending to show interest in playing for those other teams, but really just trying to get those teams to negotiate Toronto's contract for them.  For many reasons, it's a situation that I can see many GMs not having an interest in wading into.  Man, would I love it if Marner didn't get a single RFA offer.

That's what I was thinking too. No interest at all would be sweet.

I would love for that to be the case, not because I want Marner to be crushed or anything, but because it would probably speed up the process with him signing a deal with the Leafs.

However, I don't imagine that will happen.  I think that a lot of teams will take their shot with Marner.  If it doesn't pan out, oh well.  It costs them nothing to talk to him, and if they ever did manage to get him, regardless of how small of a chance there is, then I think that would be seen as a win initially by the team that gets him.  Long term it's probably a bad move though.

Which is why all this posturing is silly to me.  You have a third year player that got 94 points.  The Leafs want him here, and he wants to be here.  I don't know why the Leafs have chosen to take a hard line in the sand approach with Marner, whereas they are willing to just give Matthews whatever he wants.  In my mind they are both of equal importance and you should treat both as such.  I can maybe see them not wanting the term to line up with Matthews so that Nylander, Matthews and Marner all go to UFA status in the same year, but then add a year in, or knock it down by two, and then get the dollar figure to line up.  I think ideally they want to deal with Matthews and Nylander in the same year and Tavares and Marner in the same year.

We have no idea how the Matthews' negotiations went. One thing we do know, it was kept quiet from the Matthews/Leafs camps. We also don't know if the Leafs are hard balling Marner. What if they've offered 10 or 11 x 8 already? Would that be unfair? By all accounts he should be coming in around 9-9.5 million. Why should the Leafs overpay if they don't have to? Marner is an exceptional player but they are not equal.

He most likely wants 11.6x5 years. Highest paid winger in league history.

That might earn him a ticket out of Dodge lol.

 

[Bullfrog]

I would love for that to be the case, not because I want Marner to be crushed or anything, but because it would probably speed up the process with him signing a deal with the Leafs.

However, I don't imagine that will happen.  I think that a lot of teams will take their shot with Marner.  If it doesn't pan out, oh well.  It costs them nothing to talk to him, and if they ever did manage to get him, regardless of how small of a chance there is, then I think that would be seen as a win initially by the team that gets him.  Long term it's probably a bad move though.

Which is why all this posturing is silly to me.  You have a third year player that got 94 points.  The Leafs want him here, and he wants to be here.  I don't know why the Leafs have chosen to take a hard line in the sand approach with Marner, whereas they are willing to just give Matthews whatever he wants.  In my mind they are both of equal importance and you should treat both as such.  I can maybe see them not wanting the term to line up with Matthews so that Nylander, Matthews and Marner all go to UFA status in the same year, but then add a year in, or knock it down by two, and then get the dollar figure to line up.  I think ideally they want to deal with Matthews and Nylander in the same year and Tavares and Marner in the same year.

What makes you think the Leafs have drawn any sort of line?

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

I would love for that to be the case, not because I want Marner to be crushed or anything, but because it would probably speed up the process with him signing a deal with the Leafs.

However, I don't imagine that will happen.  I think that a lot of teams will take their shot with Marner.  If it doesn't pan out, oh well.  It costs them nothing to talk to him, and if they ever did manage to get him, regardless of how small of a chance there is, then I think that would be seen as a win initially by the team that gets him.  Long term it's probably a bad move though.

Which is why all this posturing is silly to me.  You have a third year player that got 94 points.  The Leafs want him here, and he wants to be here.  I don't know why the Leafs have chosen to take a hard line in the sand approach with Marner, whereas they are willing to just give Matthews whatever he wants.  In my mind they are both of equal importance and you should treat both as such.  I can maybe see them not wanting the term to line up with Matthews so that Nylander, Matthews and Marner all go to UFA status in the same year, but then add a year in, or knock it down by two, and then get the dollar figure to line up.  I think ideally they want to deal with Matthews and Nylander in the same year and Tavares and Marner in the same year.

What makes you think the Leafs have drawn any sort of line?

Or that it's in sand.

 

[Bullfrog]

Or even silica-based?

 

[Kin]

I wonder if and how much other teams will be turned off by Marner's camp in recognizing that he's negotiating in bad faith, pretending to show interest in playing for those other teams, but really just trying to get those teams to negotiate Toronto's contract for them.  For many reasons, it's a situation that I can see many GMs not having an interest in wading into.  Man, would I love it if Marner didn't get a single RFA offer.

Maybe it's just me but I don't think that free agents do a lot of negotiating. Especially not in a situation like this one. Realistically Marner's people will be going to various teams and saying "We want a certain number, the Leafs aren't willing to meet us there, will you offer it?".

For the teams, it's the easiest thing in the world to call up Marner's agent and make an offer. Good faith or not, if you're genuinely interested in offersheeting Marner all you can do is make your best offer and hope he takes it and the Leafs don't match. If he doesn't, you're not out anything and you're making the offer knowing that even if Marner is thrilled to sign with you the ultimate decision about where he plays next year isn't in his hands.

 

[rdowdall]

I would love for that to be the case, not because I want Marner to be crushed or anything, but because it would probably speed up the process with him signing a deal with the Leafs.

However, I don't imagine that will happen.  I think that a lot of teams will take their shot with Marner.  If it doesn't pan out, oh well.  It costs them nothing to talk to him, and if they ever did manage to get him, regardless of how small of a chance there is, then I think that would be seen as a win initially by the team that gets him.  Long term it's probably a bad move though.

Which is why all this posturing is silly to me.  You have a third year player that got 94 points.  The Leafs want him here, and he wants to be here.  I don't know why the Leafs have chosen to take a hard line in the sand approach with Marner, whereas they are willing to just give Matthews whatever he wants.  In my mind they are both of equal importance and you should treat both as such.  I can maybe see them not wanting the term to line up with Matthews so that Nylander, Matthews and Marner all go to UFA status in the same year, but then add a year in, or knock it down by two, and then get the dollar figure to line up.  I think ideally they want to deal with Matthews and Nylander in the same year and Tavares and Marner in the same year.

What makes you think the Leafs have drawn any sort of line?

Well, I don't really have anything concrete to go on here.  Here is how I am looking at it, and maybe I am looking at it wrong.  The Matthews negotiation was done in February.  He signed a deal that made him the second highest paid player in the NHL, and they only bought up one year of unrestricted free agency.  By all accounts they didn't really dicker to much with Matthews.  I'm sure he asked for 13 million and only wanted to sign for 4 years, but if you think about it, the Leafs didn't really come down that much there.  They gave him what he wanted more or less.  He got the money he wanted and the term he wanted.

Early after the playoff defeat, there were plenty of people saying that Marner wanted a similar deal to the one that Matthews signed.  I think if they had offered the same deal, he would be signed by now.  However it looks like they are only willing to give Marner 11 million if he is willing to go 8 years.  So what is the hold up here?  These dealings seem to be much more acrimonious that the Matthews deal.  Why try this with Marner, and not Matthews?  Why not sign both of them at the same time to the same deal the same way Chicago did with Toews and Kane? 

 

[herman]

Probably because the team does not see them as equivalent value.

 

[rdowdall]

Probably because the team does not see them as equivalent value.

I guess I differ with the team on that then.  Probably why I don't agree with the path they are taking with Marner.

 

[Guilt Trip]

However it looks like they are only willing to give Marner 11 million if he is willing to go 8 years.  So what is the hold up here?  These dealings seem to be much more acrimonious that the Matthews deal.  Why try this with Marner, and not Matthews?  Why not sign both of them at the same time to the same deal the same way Chicago did with Toews and Kane? 

We don't know what they're offering to Mitch and again we have no idea how the Matthews negotiations went. If the Leafs are offering 11 over 8 and Marner's camp is turning it down, then he'll be gone. He is not worth Matthews money, sorry. You take the centre and the goal scorer every time over the winger. That's 2 major ups he has on Marner.

 

[Kin]

We don't know what they're offering to Mitch and again we have no idea how the Matthews negotiations went. If the Leafs are offering 11 over 8 and Marner's camp is turning it down, then he'll be gone. He is not worth Matthews money, sorry. You take the centre and the goal scorer every time over the winger. That's 2 major ups he has on Marner.

If Marner wants 11 over 8 he's not asking for Matthews money. Matthews got 11.6 over 5 and by most accounts the price tag on an 8 year deal would have been in the 13-14 range. Marner's price tag, if that is what he's asking, is substantially lower.

 

[rdowdall]

However it looks like they are only willing to give Marner 11 million if he is willing to go 8 years.  So what is the hold up here?  These dealings seem to be much more acrimonious that the Matthews deal.  Why try this with Marner, and not Matthews?  Why not sign both of them at the same time to the same deal the same way Chicago did with Toews and Kane? 

We don't know what they're offering to Mitch and again we have no idea how the Matthews negotiations went. If the Leafs are offering 11 over 8 and Marner's camp is turning it down, then he'll be gone. He is not worth Matthews money, sorry. You take the centre and the goal scorer every time over the winger. That's 2 major ups he has on Marner.

The rumor is that they have offered 11 over 8, and Marner wants it for 5, and the Leafs are saying that if it's a 5 year deal then the contract has to be around 10.  That's just a rumor. 

So Chicago should have taken a hard line with Kane, but given Toews pretty much what he wanted?

 

[bustaheims]

The rumor is that they have offered 11 over 8, and Marner wants it for 5, and the Leafs are saying that if it's a 5 year deal then the contract has to be around 10.  That's just a rumor. 

That rumoured was shot down by basically everyone credible, and was borne out of pure speculation.

 

[Guilt Trip]

The rumor is that they have offered 11 over 8, and Marner wants it for 5, and the Leafs are saying that if it's a 5 year deal then the contract has to be around 10.  That's just a rumor. 

So Chicago should have taken a hard line with Kane, but given Toews pretty much what he wanted?

You're basing stuff off rumours. You and nobody outside of Dubas /Leafs and the Marner camp know for sure what's going on so stop with the hard line crap. Stop assuming they are because he hasn't signed yet. And again, we have no idea what Matthews asked for do we?

 

[rdowdall]

The rumor is that they have offered 11 over 8, and Marner wants it for 5, and the Leafs are saying that if it's a 5 year deal then the contract has to be around 10.  That's just a rumor. 

That rumoured was shot down by basically everyone credible, and was borne out of pure speculation.

Sorry, I misunderstood what Dreger was saying on TSN.  I thought he had said that 11 million dollars had been discussed.

This is the followup tweet from Dreger:

https://twitter.com/DarrenDreger/status/1142104969765457920

I originally had read the rumour here:

https://puckprose.com/2019/06/20/nhl-rumors-mitch-marner-rejected-long-term-offer-maple-leafs/

Particularly this segment:

This report comes from Elliotte Friedman during a recent segment with Tim & Sid. The Leafs are reportedly willing to pay him $11 million, but only if the contract is a long-term one. Friedman said Marner would probably sign if it the term was shorter, but he doesn?t seem too interested in a long-term deal.

So Dreger is saying that 11 million was never broached, but Friedman is.  Am I supposed to only believe one of those guys when it comes to rumours?  I have not seen anything from Bob McKenzie or Pierre Lebrun concerning the term and dollar amount for Marner's contract. 

 

[herman]

Probably because the team does not see them as equivalent value.

I guess I differ with the team on that then.  Probably why I don't agree with the path they are taking with Marner.

Judging by how they?ve angled it so far, they see Marner somewhere between Matthews and Nylander, leaning closer to Nylander. Prior to the Tavares boost, they had Nylander around 6.5M in line with Ehlers and Pastrnak. Under the old RFA market, that?s fairly accurate.

Before we get into another Marner vs Nylander thing, remember that Marner has consistently received the cushiest wing gig for every season he has played. Not that he hasn?t deserved it.

 

[rdowdall]

The rumor is that they have offered 11 over 8, and Marner wants it for 5, and the Leafs are saying that if it's a 5 year deal then the contract has to be around 10.  That's just a rumor. 

So Chicago should have taken a hard line with Kane, but given Toews pretty much what he wanted?

You're basing stuff off rumours. You and nobody outside of Dubas /Leafs and the Marner camp know for sure what's going on so stop with the hard line crap. Stop assuming they are because he hasn't signed yet. And again, we have no idea what Matthews asked for do we?

So Matthews is just a good guy and signed a deal real quick because he is awesome, loves Toronto and everything about the Maple Leafs but Marner is a bad egg destined to destroy this team with his greedy behaviour?

When negotiating a deal, there has to be a willingness from both sides to come to an agreement.  I'm basing this off of the fact that the Matthews deal was signed very quickly, and the Marner deal is not.  Also I am using the Nylander deal as a point of reference where it appeared that a team had a very specific dollar amount in mind for the player and would not come down from that.

I'll take rumours out of the equation then.  Dubas has said he wants Marner to be a Leaf, and Marner has said he wants to stay a Leaf, but a deal is not done.  So there is a disagreement about something there.

 

[rdowdall]

Probably because the team does not see them as equivalent value.

I guess I differ with the team on that then.  Probably why I don't agree with the path they are taking with Marner.

Judging by how they?ve angled it so far, they see Marner somewhere between Matthews and Nylander, leaning closer to Nylander. Prior to the Tavares boost, they had Nylander around 6.5M in line with Ehlers and Pastrnak. Under the old RFA market, that?s fairly accurate.

Before we get into another Marner vs Nylander thing, remember that Marner has consistently received the cushiest wing gig for every season he has played. Not that he hasn?t deserved it.

I agree with what you are saying Herman, but why did they make Matthews the highest paid player on the team?  Higher than the UFA center they signed in the offseason?  What has Matthews done so far that says he should be paid more than Tavares?

This article:

https://thehockeywriters.com/toronto-maple-leafs-auston-matthews-next-step/

shows the defensive stats for Matthews this last year, and it isn't anything spectacular.  I'm not saying he can't get better, or won't get better, but they signed him to a contract before he has actually shown that he is going to get better in that department and start to become this force at both ends of the ice.

 

[herman]

Second contracts are generally paying for potential based on past performance. UFA deals are different due to market forces.

This is the first time Tavares has created 40 goals. Matthews did it in his rookie year. He was more or less on pace for 40 in each of the past two seasons but cut short due to injury. Goal scoring centres (at even strength) are unicorns with wings (pegacorns?). He has warts in his defensive game for sure (as does McDavid and Eichel and Ovechkin etc) but that?s what dominant 20 year olds normally have to go through.

 

[herman]

The Leafs best centre by defensive measures is arguably Nylander lol.

 

[rdowdall]

Second contracts are generally paying for potential based on past performance. UFA deals are different due to market forces.

This is the first time Tavares has created 40 goals. Matthews did it in his rookie year. He was more or less on pace for 40 in each of the past two seasons but cut short due to injury. Goal scoring centres (at even strength) are unicorns with wings (pegacorns?). He has warts in his defensive game for sure (as does McDavid and Eichel and Ovechkin etc) but that?s what dominant 20 year olds normally have to go through.

Right, but something doesn't quite jive there.  Stamkos is a better pure goal scorer than Crosby and McDavid, but both of them are regarded as the better players and have better contracts than him.  Also, Kucherov's deal pays him more than Stamkos.  So if there is a premium on goal scoring centers, shouldn't Stamkos be regarded higher?

I'm going to back up a bit because I think I am going down a bit of a rat hole.  Regardless of what the dollar or term amount of the contracts are, there seems to be a favoritism towards Matthews.  It started in the first year of their contracts when they didn't give Marner bonuses but they gave them to Matthews.  I guess one could argue that it was because Matthews was a first overall pick and Marner was 4th.

I don't understand that favoritism because, to date, I fail to see what Matthews has brought to the table that Marner hasn't?