Mitch Marner: what now?

[Bates]

90 point winger with great center. I think most if those guys produce 70 plus in same situation.

Lee literally played three seasons with the exact same C and never approached 70 points.

The rest of the team and situation changes that IMO. But let's say I playing your splitting hairs game and only assume 60 pts. Still a better deal for the Leaf's and rest of lineup as Lee isn't getting $9 million so even more to spend.

 

[Kin]

The rest of the team and situation changes that IMO. But let's say I playing your splitting hairs game and only assume 60 pts.

It's not splitting hairs, it's pointing out the flaws in the theory. For instance here, by "assuming" 60 points you're assuming roughly 10 points higher than Lee's average point total playing on Tavares' wing. He only cracked 60 points once and he did that in a year while shooting 19% and getting 250 PP minutes.

By contrast, last year, Marner scored about 150% of Lee's best total with Tavares while getting roughly 80% of the PP time, playing a regular PK shift, with a lower shooting % than his average and being 5 years younger than Lee in these comparative seasons.

There are similar problems with signing just about everyone you mentioned. Some of them are too old(Pavelski), some of them don't have any sort of regular scoring track record(Nyquist) and more than one aren't even wingers.

I get why there's comfort in looking at a mass of players and just assuming the Leafs will be able to pluck the one they like best out of that lineup and sign them to a deal that makes us happy but I don't think that's what the UFA market has historically been. Something can't really be a better deal without knowing what the actual deal would be.

 

[Hobbes]

With the dollars being mentioned I'm very confident we can sign 75% of Marner for $9 million or less riding shotgun for Tavares.

Which players on the UFA market do you think represent 75% of Marner?

Or another angle on that...

Marner at $13M probably means Sparks will be back-up again (or a hail Mary on another league min. back-up) who will play perhaps 20 games at and could easily be several games' difference in the standings, and leave us with an over-worked Freddie come playoff time again. Marner at $10M (or whatever) would give some flexibility to upgrade that back-up spot and still have lots of cap room and four extra first round picks to use in trying to trade for upgrades to what will otherwise be a defence filled up with league min. reclamation projects and/or rookies. Moving Kappy up to play with John would be a reduction in offence, sure, but perhaps those dollars spent elsewhere would cut the GA down by more than the loss in GF.

 

[hap_leaf]

The rest of the team and situation changes that IMO. But let's say I playing your splitting hairs game and only assume 60 pts.

It's not splitting hairs, it's pointing out the flaws in the theory. For instance here, by "assuming" 60 points you're assuming roughly 10 points higher than Lee's average point total playing on Tavares' wing. He only cracked 60 points once and he did that in a year while shooting 19% and getting 250 PP minutes.

By contrast, last year, Marner scored about 150% of Lee's best total with Tavares while getting roughly 80% of the PP time, playing a regular PK shift, with a lower shooting % than his average and being 5 years younger than Lee in these comparative seasons.

There are similar problems with signing just about everyone you mentioned. Some of them are too old(Pavelski), some of them don't have any sort of regular scoring track record(Nyquist) and more than one aren't even wingers.

I get why there's comfort in looking at a mass of players and just assuming the Leafs will be able to pluck the one they like best out of that lineup and sign them to a deal that makes us happy but I don't think that's what the UFA market has historically been. Something can't really be a better deal without knowing what the actual deal would be.

I don't see the need to identify the actual player, I get what he is saying and tend to agree with it.

 

[Kin]

Marner at $13M probably means Sparks will be back-up again (or a hail Mary on another league min. back-up) who will play perhaps 20 games at and could easily be several games' difference in the standings, and leave us with an over-worked Freddie come playoff time again. Marner at $10M (or whatever) would give some flexibility to upgrade that back-up spot and still have lots of cap room and four extra first round picks to use in trying to trade for upgrades to what will otherwise be a defence filled up with league min. reclamation projects and/or rookies. Moving Kappy up to play with John would be a reduction in offence, sure, but perhaps those dollars spent elsewhere would cut the GA down by more than the loss in GF.

I'm assuming you mean no Marner rather than Marner at 10 million because Marner at 10 million means no extra first round picks.

Regardless, I agree that I'd rather have Marner at 10 million than 13 but if that's not the choice then you do sort of have to play the ball where it lies. Would it make it impossible to improve the back-up goalie position? No, it just might mean that you'd have to move someone like Kapanen which I would rather do than not have Marner in the lineup.

But that said, I'm open to the concept of there being a better use of the money than signing Marner at whatever it takes to sign him, I just don't buy it as a vague "Don't worry we'll just sign somebody/convince another team to give us someone good" idea. A bunch of bad plans don't aggregate into one good plan.

 

[Hobbes]

Marner at $13M probably means Sparks will be back-up again (or a hail Mary on another league min. back-up) who will play perhaps 20 games at and could easily be several games' difference in the standings, and leave us with an over-worked Freddie come playoff time again. Marner at $10M (or whatever) would give some flexibility to upgrade that back-up spot and still have lots of cap room and four extra first round picks to use in trying to trade for upgrades to what will otherwise be a defence filled up with league min. reclamation projects and/or rookies. Moving Kappy up to play with John would be a reduction in offence, sure, but perhaps those dollars spent elsewhere would cut the GA down by more than the loss in GF.

I'm assuming you mean no Marner rather than Marner at 10 million because Marner at 10 million means no extra first round picks.

Regardless, I agree that I'd rather have Marner at 10 million than 13 but if that's not the choice then you do sort of have to play the ball where it lies. Would it make it impossible to improve the back-up goalie position? No, it just might mean that you'd have to move someone like Kapanen which I would rather do than not have Marner in the lineup.

But that said, I'm open to the concept of there being a better use of the money than signing Marner at whatever it takes to sign him, I just don't buy it as a vague "Don't worry we'll just sign somebody/convince another team to give us someone good" idea. A bunch of bad plans don't aggregate into one good plan.

Sorry...should have been clearer there. If the reports are true, it's a safe assumption that $10M isn't going to get it done, but in terms of the "what's the walk-away point?" it's relevant. The valuation being discussed isn't really Marner at 13 vs Marner at 10...it's Marner at 13 and no cap space without moving another significant piece vs a hole at 1st line right wing, $10M-ish of cap space and four 1st round picks.

On the overall point of a bird in hand vs a couple snakes masquerading as a birds in the bush, I completely agree.

 

[Bates]

The rest of the team and situation changes that IMO. But let's say I playing your splitting hairs game and only assume 60 pts.

It's not splitting hairs, it's pointing out the flaws in the theory. For instance here, by "assuming" 60 points you're assuming roughly 10 points higher than Lee's average point total playing on Tavares' wing. He only cracked 60 points once and he did that in a year while shooting 19% and getting 250 PP minutes.

By contrast, last year, Marner scored about 150% of Lee's best total with Tavares while getting roughly 80% of the PP time, playing a regular PK shift, with a lower shooting % than his average and being 5 years younger than Lee in these comparative seasons.

There are similar problems with signing just about everyone you mentioned. Some of them are too old(Pavelski), some of them don't have any sort of regular scoring track record(Nyquist) and more than one aren't even wingers.

I get why there's comfort in looking at a mass of players and just assuming the Leafs will be able to pluck the one they like best out of that lineup and sign them to a deal that makes us happy but I don't think that's what the UFA market has historically been. Something can't really be a better deal without knowing what the actual deal would be.

Like I said the change from playing on a team's only line alone should get the guy 10 points. It's not easy to play against a checking line every night of your career. That's what the Leaf's offer with 2, maybe even 3 decent scoring lines with the extra cash. But hey what the heck throw Lee out,  still a few guys to fill the role. I might add that until this past season Marner hadn't broke 70 points and then he did. And maybe it Isn't 75% of Marner in terms of just poibts, but a little more physical game allows for an upgrade scoring wise on the other wing. Many possibilities on what to do with this new found Cap space.

 

[princedpw]

https://twitter.com/Account4hockey/status/1143575912660766720

If true... and I'm doubtful about that... bye Mitch.

If I was a GM and had 13M cap space and 4 1st round picks to improve my team, signing Marner wouldn?t be the first thing I?d try to do.

 

[ZBBM]

Those numbers are pure crap. 

 

[Guilt Trip]

Those numbers are pure crap. 

That's Dreger, aka Paul Marner, Ferris, trying to drive up the price?

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

You know, I get it that this in within Marner & Co. prerogative to test the waters, but I really can't remember another player being this public about his intentions and basically like a big F.U. to the Leafs.

 

[Highlander]

Just can't see Mitch wanting to play outside of his childhood dream, its why Tavares came home for less money.  Maybe Johnny T should have a talk with Oppie Mitch. Or is that Fonzie T.
If he takes a 13 million offer sheet, save the 13 mill and lets take 4 firsts.

 

[Bullfrog]

You know, I get it that this in within Marner & Co. prerogative to test the waters, but I really can't remember another player being this public about his intentions and basically like a big F.U. to the Leafs.

I haven't seen a single quote from Marner in weeks. In what way is he being public?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

You know, I get it that this in within Marner & Co. prerogative to test the waters, but I really can't remember another player being this public about his intentions and basically like a big F.U. to the Leafs.

I haven't seen a single quote from Marner in weeks. In what way is he being public?

Dreger isn't just making up these claims that Marner/his camp expect to meet with teams once his interview period opens.

 

[Bender]

$13 or $14M for Marner? I'll believe it when I see it. If it comes to that, hopefully we can sign someone else (like Panarin) for a more reasonable amount and use the extra for another position of need (we do need a defense, after all). And the picks will be icing on the cake.

The big risk is that we let Marner go and aren't able to sign a really good player to take his spot.

In this hypothetical world, if Marner signs for $13M, Panarin or equivalent won?t be signing for $9M.

There's only so many dollars to go around

 

[Bullfrog]

You know, I get it that this in within Marner & Co. prerogative to test the waters, but I really can't remember another player being this public about his intentions and basically like a big F.U. to the Leafs.

I haven't seen a single quote from Marner in weeks. In what way is he being public?

Dreger isn't just making up these claims that Marner/his camp expect to meet with teams once his interview period opens.

I suppose I just don't see that as "a big FU" to the Leafs as Rob does.

 

[princedpw]

It seems reasonable to keep in mind the fact that none of the top RFAs have signed ? Point, Rantanen, Aho, Tkachuck, Laine, Boeser, ...  Marner?s great, but so are some of those other guys.  My understanding is that Tampa?s got just about as tough a time with the cap this year and next as Toronto.  So Marner?s situation isn?t all that unusual. Are all these guys offer sheet targets? If they were, that would certainly be a remarkable change from business as usual in the NHL over the last decade. Or is the media maybe just jerking our chains a little and overselling the offer sheet possibility for Toronto only?

 

[Kin]

It seems reasonable to keep in mind the fact that none of the top RFAs have signed ? Point, Rantanen, Aho, Tkachuck, Laine, Boeser, ...  Marner?s great, but so are some of those other guys.  My understanding is that Tampa?s got just about as tough a time with the cap this year and next as Toronto.  So Marner?s situation isn?t all that unusual. Are all these guys offer sheet targets? If they were, that would certainly be a remarkable change from business as usual in the NHL over the last decade. Or is the media maybe just jerking our chains a little and overselling the offer sheet possibility for Toronto only?

That's certainly possible but I think something people often overlook is it really does take two to tango on offer sheets. A lot of the guys you're talking about may very well not want to leave their teams and their teams want to take care of them but they're just waiting for some sort of market to be established. If they're not interested in an offer sheet, there's not going to be that noise around them.

If Marner is genuinely ok with leaving if he doesn't get the deal he wants he could very well be a target and none of the other guys are.

 

[Zee]

I'm at Pearson on the lookout for Marner all day.

 

[93forever]

As always I'm pretty skeptical about that until I see it but it does sort of fit in with the idea that once you're willing to cross the line of making that offer sheet worth 4 firsts, the idea that the difference between, say, 11.5 over 5 and 13 over 5 would stop you doesn't really make sense. Even with the Leafs, if Marner makes sense at 11.5, it's really hard to think of what the extra 1.5 million could get you that switches things.

When you're up against the cap it makes a huge difference. All things being equal and say the Leafs are 1.5 over means a roster player making that over an ELC would have to go. In the Leafs case, Hyman would have to go because Brown's contract wouldn't cover it. If not that route, then you trade a Kappy, Johnsson, Kadri which in turn makes your team weaker. So while it can be done, generally GMs don't look to make their teams weaker.

I would be willing to trade Kadri.  He's a good physical player, but he has hurt the team with his suspensions.  I would try to package Kadri for a d-man.