Trapper
Registered User
- Nov 21, 2013
- 23,741
- 11,005
Confirmed with Link: Leafs sign LW/C Patrick Marleau (3 years, $6.25 AAV, NMC) - Part II
- Thread starter BertCorbeau
- Start date
- Status
Suntouchable13
Registered User
What do we get out of giving Marleau a 3rd year? What does he get out of it? He could have just signed for 2 if his intention to retire anyway. Is it the signing bonus?
senor martinez
Komarov's cohonez
- Oct 1, 2014
- 3,186
- 0
Menzinger
Kessel4LadyByng
They get the ability to give him a ton of money for the first two years while keeping the caphit lower.
In terms of actual dollars he's making 8+ million a year prior to the start of that 3rd season.
Pookie
Wear a mask
- Oct 23, 2013
- 16,172
- 6,684
I would say it's unusual that people actually paying attention to buyouts and bad contracts.
And good on them for learning something from history.
We will all watch the games. You don't need to pretend that people that don't want history to repeat are somehow not fans of the team/sport. That's a pretty self serving stance and not at all connected to reality
Jack Bauer
Registered User
There are people who worry more about cap space then they enjoy victories. We see it here regularly even now as we've turned the corner from our full on rebuild that some can't simply enjoy the success and need to find something negative to obsess over.
It's not a self serving stance. It's very much a reality for some people.
Pookie
Wear a mask
- Oct 23, 2013
- 16,172
- 6,684
Well enjoy playing with your strawmen.
It's quite possible to enjoy the success AND be concerned about contract decisions that have risk associated with them
CanadasTeam
Registered User
Daisy Jane
everything is gonna be okay!
- Jul 2, 2009
- 70,212
- 9,189
why would you be concerned about contract decisions if we're being successful? why not worry about that when it[s actually time to worry about it - if at all?
Because contracts can affect success into the future Daisy
Every bad contract that the team can't stash on LTIR is money that can't be spent somewhere else on the roster
Menzinger
Kessel4LadyByng
I think it's legitimate to be concerned about contract management/cap, I even think it's fine to be concerns about potential negative effects of the Marleau contract.
At present I don't see a problem just yet, hence my lack of concern/dislike of it.
At present I don't see a problem just yet, hence my lack of concern/dislike of it.
Pookie
Wear a mask
- Oct 23, 2013
- 16,172
- 6,684
I guess it's a matter of whether you want that band you love to have the longevity and solid album after album or you just want the one hit.
Sort of like saying why worry about retirement planning. Live in the moment. Truth to that of course but the reality is that for most people, retirement will come. Why think about it?
Simply because decisions today impact the reality of tomorrow
ELCs will expire. We don't want to have contract clean ups. We want 1st and 2nd round picks. Etc.
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 73,621
- 38,987
Pookie
Wear a mask
- Oct 23, 2013
- 16,172
- 6,684
I know right?
Why plan anything? Retirement? Mortgage? Saving for a vacation? Running a business with a 5 year plan?
Close your eyes and live on impulse. I'm sure that's a sure fire way to have long term success.
Red Wings also got a 2nd round pick.
It was Datsyuk and 16th for 20th for 53rd.
It was pretty much a standard trade down deal with Datsyuk's contract involved.
Muston Atthews
Bunch of Bangerz
And you're talking strawmen
You don't see the difference between a 3 year contract and any of those other things?
Daisy Jane
everything is gonna be okay!
- Jul 2, 2009
- 70,212
- 9,189
And you're talking strawmen
or that the people who actually have access to the books didn't? all summer people wanted to make this drama, and it's not.
LeafsBro
34 I 91 I 16
We're fans though. Planning for retirement, etc has nothing to do with this. We don't really need to be stressing out about the long term implications of NHL contracts. That's for management to worry about, and I'm quite confident that they do have a plan in place for how they're going to manage our cap situation. It's their job. We don't exactly know how things are going to pan out, but why not just enjoy the moment and the fact that we might be genuinely competing for the cup for the first time in what seems like forever.
I always assumed that the fans who worry so much about team financials are simply egotists who like to think they know more than the people who are actually running team.
What makes you think they don't have a plan? There are lots of options. Some that have Marleau with the kids all in the team contributing and some that involve Marleau no longer on the ice and his cap hit not being a big deal to the Leafs. You always provide the negatives as "what ifs". Like "what if" Marleau doesn't waive his NTC, "what if" he gets injured, as though you don't think management hasn't thought of it and as though there aren't options available. There are options and I'm sure the management.l have weighed the risks with their mitigation -- like professionals do.
Pookie
Wear a mask
- Oct 23, 2013
- 16,172
- 6,684
Watching a Cup run and being concerned about risky deals aren't mutually exclusive. You can do both.
For a team that has had players like Komisarek, Gleason, Lupul, Robidas, Tucker, Cowan on the books for years... you'd think that some fans would at least pause to note that for every $1M cap hit spent on players not playing, that's an opportunity cost that takes the team away from useful players that could contribute.
Muston Atthews
Bunch of Bangerz
Clark4Ever
What we do in hockey echoes in eternity...
All of the contracts you listed were signed by previous management regimes with the exception of Cowan, and that was integral to unloading Phaneuf's contract which was worthwhile.
Your logic is sound, but I just haven't seen any evidence to suggest the contrary with respect to the modus operandi of the current management regime.
The Marleau contract is not going to handcuff us long term. It was a move designed to take advantage of a unique window of opportunity.
This cap hit at 2 years would have been perfect given the objectives of the team, for whatever reason the 3rd year was required ($$) and they did what they could to mitigate the risk by making it a very tradeable cap hit (with his consent)
Items for consideration
The opportunity cost of using that 6.25m the first year is absolutely nothing. In order for us to have gained capped wise by not spending that money we'd have to cut costs to not only get out of LTIR territory but also have the room to both absorb injuries while leaving enough 4.6M bonus cushion. Basically waste a prime year to win by handicapping ourselves
In the second year- the opportunity cost is simply the alternative players that could be on the roster minus any potential cost of acquisition. The cap is in decent shape
The objective was to add talent to this roster to take advantage of the Matthews/Marner/Nylander elc's. Getting good short term talent without jeopardizing the future by shelling out picks and prospects left us with a very limited pool of players, of which he was the best.
The bottom line is that the team decided to add to the roster and try to win these next two years, and risk potentially having a tighter year in 19/20. No core players are put at risk, but we might just not have an optimum lineup
Items for consideration
The opportunity cost of using that 6.25m the first year is absolutely nothing. In order for us to have gained capped wise by not spending that money we'd have to cut costs to not only get out of LTIR territory but also have the room to both absorb injuries while leaving enough 4.6M bonus cushion. Basically waste a prime year to win by handicapping ourselves
In the second year- the opportunity cost is simply the alternative players that could be on the roster minus any potential cost of acquisition. The cap is in decent shape
The objective was to add talent to this roster to take advantage of the Matthews/Marner/Nylander elc's. Getting good short term talent without jeopardizing the future by shelling out picks and prospects left us with a very limited pool of players, of which he was the best.
The bottom line is that the team decided to add to the roster and try to win these next two years, and risk potentially having a tighter year in 19/20. No core players are put at risk, but we might just not have an optimum lineup
- Status
