Player Discussion Marner

[ToneDog]

Yes. You even provided the proof.

He's got a NTC. The difference is that Mitch cannot be put on waivers. Slight difference, yes, but not much in the big picture IMO.

People still don’t understand what the movement clauses mean.

The difference between No Trade Clause (NTC) and No Movement Clause (NMC) in NHL is1234:

• NTC means the player cannot be traded without approval.
• NMC means the player cannot be waived, assigned to minors, or traded without approval. This also means they cannot be exposed in an Expansion Draft and must be protected.
• A player with NTC can’t be traded, but could be put on waivers and sent to the minors.
• A player with NTC or NMC must accept a move by waiving his clause in order to be traded.
• Modified No Trade or No Movement (M-NTC or M-NMC) means players submit a list of teams they can or cannot be traded to3.

 

[seanlinden]

Closer to what...? 4 wins? 5 again?

The point is, they aren't close, and they aren't a John Klingberg and a Bertuzzi away from getting 13 more wins.


It seems like they were told that Marner was open to it, from people around the Leafs, though as you said, the timing of that relative to the NMC kicking in is unknown. They at least framed it in a way that suggested that it was a possibility.

I personally have no reason to doubt their info or knowledge - they've normally been right about this stuff. Worth noting that Kypreos had a similar angle too

No they're not. but a Ryan O'Reilly and a $7-8m defenceman in place fo Timothy Liljegren, quite possibly.a lot closer.

 

[myleafs]

Jonas & Mirtle both more or less confirmed that he was open to moving last summer, even as the NMC kicked in. I do wonder how much of that equation has changed this summer, and frankly, how much of a prick Ferris is prepared to be for a client that clearly needs a change of scenery.


We just don't know where this is going to go, but I do wonder what appetite the team has to resign him - in a hypothetical world, getting out from under Tavares' $11m probably means you could, at least on paper, spend on a Marner extension, but what belief do you have that this guy can punch through?

Ultimately, I believe extending him at the right price is the much better play than losing him for nothing - I've never believed in the idea that $10.9M in cap space is this super valuable thing, because you still need to spend it, and that nets you another Klingberg and Bertuzzi.

Was this team one Klingberg and one more Bertuzzi away from doing anything in the post-season? Absolutely not.

Im not a huge Bert fan but id take 2 playoff Berts over one playoff marner all day everyday

 

[Antropovsky]

People still don’t understand what the movement clauses mean.

A 8th year is a pretty big deal when you are 27. Unless he wanted, which he probably does, to take the Matthews route and sign a shorter deal. Though, it might not be a wise decision because his offensive totals might drop substantially without an elite center to fall back on. In Marners case, I think his safest option would be to take an 8 year sign and trade if someone is crazy enough to do it.

 

[ACC1224]

He's got a NTC. The difference is that Mitch cannot be put on waivers. Slight difference, yes, but not much in the big picture IMO.


The difference between No Trade Clause (NTC) and No Movement Clause (NMC) in NHL is1234:

• NTC means the player cannot be traded without approval.
• NMC means the player cannot be waived, assigned to minors, or traded without approval. This also means they cannot be exposed in an Expansion Draft and must be protected.
• A player with NTC can’t be traded, but could be put on waivers and sent to the minors.
• A player with NTC or NMC must accept a move by waiving his clause in order to be traded.
• Modified No Trade or No Movement (M-NTC or M-NMC) means players submit a list of teams they can or cannot be traded to3.

My bad, I had never seen a full NTC, I assumed the were all modified.
Strange to not just give the NMC when the player needs to agree anyway.

Still the situation is/was totally different.

 

[myleafs]

True, but for $11M you could also have Kerfoot, Holl, and Ceci.

Point is, blowing a huge hole in the lineup in favor of $11m in cap space doesn't make you better. Spending that money wisely, does, but building through free agency is often a fool's errand - which is why I'd much prefer trying to facilitate a trade where the Leafs get something tangible and cost-controlled back that they can insert straight into the core.

It would never happen, but something along the lines of a Clayton Keller player in return.


I generally agree, and would prefer the trade route - just pointing out that losing him for nothing is worst case scenario imo.

I don't believe no Marner + $11m in cap space is a net positive.

Or you could have Marchessault and a Hyman

 

[Punch Drunk Loov]

Or you could have Marchessault and a Hyman

Yeah the argument to keep Marner for 12M+ (he's not signing for 11M) because we could strike out on a Kerfoot or Holl is not a good reason to keep Mitch.

12M is an enormous amount of cap space that can afford basically any player in the league other than Mitch

 

[Gary Nylund]

Or you could have Marchessault and a Hyman

Yeah it's a weird argument - maybe we'll spend the cap space poorly. I look at it this way, spending the cap space elsewhere might turn out to be cap space well spent, then again it might not. But if you spend it on Marner, it's almost certainly not well spent so it seems like taking a chance on someone else is the obvious choice.

 

[Nineteen67]

A 8th year is a pretty big deal when you are 27. Unless he wanted, which he probably does, to take the Matthews route and sign a shorter deal. Though, it might not be a wise decision because his offensive totals might drop substantially without an elite center to fall back on. In Marners case, I think his safest option would be to take an 8 year sign and trade if someone is crazy enough to do it.

There is only team that would sign him to a 5 yr deal at at 8 yr AAV

 

[Nineteen67]

Or you could have Marchessault and a Hyman

Signing Tavares still irks me, because his 11 million is really 15 million when the extra 4 million in overpayments in added in…….And they would have still been able to sign Hyman

 

[Antropovsky]

There is only team that would sign him to a 5 yr deal at at 8 yr AAV

Pitts?

 

[robertmac43]

He is going to end up staying imo. Don't love it but It seems like the reality of the situation

 

[ACC1224]

Or you could have Marchessault and a Hyman

No chance Edmonton moves Hyman.

 

[Trapper]

Pitts?

Dubas would be all over Marner. He can and he would.

 

[Jojalu]

James Mirtle had an interesting comment about the Marner camp today on the Leaf Report. I checked the podcast and the audio snip is accurate.

https://x.com/MapleGlazed_/status/1787981739660324882

That's pretty ridiculous.

Why does he surround himself with people that shelter him? Grow up!! You are a married man.

 

[3blizzard4]

No chance Edmonton moves Hyman.

Yup. They will erect a statue of Hyman when its all said and done.

 

[Drytoast]

Let's agree to disagree here.

$11m is nice, but you now have a huge hole in your lineup for someone who eats a lot of minutes, plays in all situations, and goes up against the oppo's top players. That's not something that's easily replaced, which is why, ideally, the trade route, where you can replace at least 1 or 2 of those aspects, is the best case scenario here, and him walking away for nothing, is the worst.

in the playoffs? Huge hole? The hole was having to play him heavy minutes to justify your cap structure which placed him as a leader.

That was a negative.

 

[Ianturnedbull]

There really should be a separate thread discussion about Marner's "...like God's" comment at the locker clean out. The fans are really letting him off the hook. Yeah I know he's a disaster when it comes to the media, but this is just so crazy.

 

[Antropovsky]

Dubas would be all over Marner. He can and he would.

Dubas would reimpliment his train Marner to be a leader program. Who better than Crosby? By the time Marner is 35 he just might be ready to lead! Better put him on an A rotation right away though, to fullfill his hand shake agreement that Paul negotiated with the long term contract. If he doesn't, the security team will be sent to harrass Dubas.

 

[notDatsyuk]

I know I’m of the minority but I want Mitch to stay. He’s a phenomenal hockey player and does everything so well. The team will never get back the value Mitch brings in any trade.

Why has Mitch become the whipping boy over Tavares? That doesn’t make sense to me. Tavares makes more money, is supposed to be the leader, and is much worse.

He's a very good player who does many things well IN THE REGULAR SEASON. He does not do them nearly as well in the playoffs.

Yes, we won't get an equivalent player in a trade, but that's mainly because of his contract. If he were paid about 8, we could trade him for equal value, but the overpayment is handicapping.

I don't think he is the whipping boy over Tavares so much as an added one. Pretty much everyone agrees that signing JT was a mistake, and are pretty much resigned to having to wait until his contract expires. His situation is similar to Marner's in that he's overpaid, but to a greater extent. For example, if his cap hit for next year was only $4M, he could likely be traded for equivalent value.

Yes, Tavares makes more money - but only $100K, or 1% more. Negligible.

(The 'realistic' values of 8 for Mitch and 4 for JT are just my opinion - I've seen other posters with both higher and lower numbers for each. And of course they both have NMCs.)

 

[Punch Drunk Loov]

There really should be a separate thread discussion about Marner's "...like God's" comment at the locker clean out. The fans are really letting him off the hook. Yeah I know he's a disaster when it comes to the media, but this is just so crazy.

He was just throwing out a sports cliche to fill the time and he mangled it as he usually does. I don't think there was anything else to the comment.

 

[socko]

 

[Ianturnedbull]

He was just throwing out a sports cliche to fill the time and he mangled it as he usually does. I don't think there was anything else to the comment.

He borrowed it from Wendel Clark who said something similar to the media before the playoffs started.

Wendal Clark

Vs

Mitch Marner

Which one do fans actually treat like gods, or have in high regard?

 

[Jojalu]

We had a media day thread but it’s gone….

That end of season media availability was a disgrace. It showed they have no clue what the problems are and rather looking in the mirror they tried to blame the media and fans for picking a scapegoat.

And some think making Matthews the Captain would solve some of the problems. He’s no leader based on those comments and it makes me think he’ll never win. I can only speculate, but I don’t think he was even injured.

Hilarious.

You really think they were going to come out and throw Marner under the bus? They were doing what good team-mates do. Speak highly in public and take care of internal issuea in private.

Plus Nylander and Rielly were very honeat and forthcoming

 

[Nineteen67]

Hilarious.

You really think they were going to come out and throw Marner under the bus? They were doing what good team-mates do. Speak highly in public and take care of internal issuea in private.

Plus Nylander and Rielly were very honeat and forthcoming

I expected accountability and not blaming the media. Especially from a guy that didn’t play because he was something….sick, couldn’t be bothered, tired, who knows.