How can teams prevent situations like Marner & Laine?

[FMichael]

8 year ELC?

 

[Pyrophorus]

Bob Mackenzie wouldn’t risk his credibility by lying.

I'm saying he doesn't know the full story either. Nobody does.

 

[ThinIce61]

Draft crappy players

 

[Evgeny Oliker]

Gamble on players earlier by locking them up before they really explode and break out production wise.

Pretty much.

Also a 4 year ELC instead of 3 might help...the max cap hit will have to go above $925,000 of course.

GMs just don’t have much time before those 3 ELC years run out...it’s hard to deal with. We now have RFAs getting crazy money after their ELC runs out...

 

[Crede777]

Pretty much.

Also a 4 year ELC instead of 3 might help...the max cap hit will have to go above $925,000 of course.

GMs just don’t have much time before those 3 ELC years run out...it’s hard to deal with. We now have RFAs getting crazy money after their ELC runs out...

The RFAs are getting "crazy money" because GM's are too scared to force players to sit out of the NHL.

GM's have all the leverage under the CBA and are just weakly just giving in to demands.

 

[Evgeny Oliker]

The RFAs are getting "crazy money" because GM's are too scared to force players to sit out of the NHL.

GM's have all the leverage under the CBA and are just weakly just giving in to demands.

That’s just not true.

Look at Nylander situation:
He sat out. Still got paid well. The end result was he came back rusty and sucked...which hurt Toronto at the end of the season and in playoffs.
Not to mention all the media circus all this caused.

 

[BM14]

Draft interior talent.

 

[discostu]

Keeping a core together has a lot of variables, all generally tied to smart management, but, one of the underrated keys to doing this is having playoff success early. Players maybe be willing to sacrifice some compensation for team success, but they probably want to experience something of that success first (cup preferably, but finals at minimum).

 

[dukeofjive]

Have a better gm or just wait for the owners to lock the league so they can press reset on those bad contracts. So teams can afford there players again,

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

1) Don't overpay one guy and expect others not to notice.
2) Lock 'em up earlier.
3) Be willing to trade the holdout.

Leafs did everything wrong- happy Marner got his money, seems a tad much for me, but that's a direct result of Matthews and Nylander having gotten what they wanted. If Nylander had value, and I assume he did, I woulda put my foot down there and dealt the guy. Probably woulda resulted in paying Marner a bit less.

Not sure what I'd offer Laine, but if he doesn't like it I'd move him. Uncertain what you get outta him, he has lots of value- move on.

I mean, you have to be a good GM to avoid these situations. That's it. Not saying that's easy in reality, but it's also not some huge mystery.

Edit- also, hate the suggestions regarding max salaries, longer ELCs, etc. Pay players their worth, if an idiot GM wants to overpay let 'em. Smart teams and dedicated players will win out, but I see no reason to keep players from enjoying the freedom of supply and demand. We'd rather let the billionaire owners get richer instead?

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Can't spell dumbass without Dubas, he really made his own bed here...and ****ed every other GM along the way. It seems like he learned from his mistake based on the way he's handling Marner but time will tell. Hopefully contracts like Werenski's will help return to the norm.

Narrator: He didn’t.

 

[Crede777]

That’s just not true.

Look at Nylander situation:
He sat out. Still got paid well. The end result was he came back rusty and sucked...which hurt Toronto at the end of the season and in playoffs.
Not to mention all the media circus all this caused.

First off, I'm talking about having them miss the entire season.

Second, yes it may hurt the team a bit in the short run, but the message needs to be sent that it will hurt the player even more.

The message needs to be: Absent an offersheet, the player's choice is either sign the contract on the team's terms or miss a season and tank their next contract. Market price isn't determined by production, it is determined by options. The more options a player has, the higher his pay. That is why UFA's get such ridiculous contracts. But if an RFA only has one option, that option is by default the market price for that player.

If the players don't like it, maybe they'll give up UFA leverage to get more RFA leverage in the next CBA negotiation.

 

[Evgeny Oliker]

First off, I'm talking about having them miss the entire season.

Second, yes it may hurt the team a bit in the short run, but the message needs to be sent that it will hurt the player even more.

The message needs to be: Absent an offersheet, the player's choice is either sign the contract on the team's terms or miss a season and tank their next contract. Market price isn't determined by production, it is determined by options. The more options a player has, the higher his pay. That is why UFA's get such ridiculous contracts. But if an RFA only has one option, that option is by default the market price for that player.

If the players don't like it, maybe they'll give up UFA leverage to get more RFA leverage in the next CBA negotiation.

While in theory I agree with you, in real life this is just not working.

Looking at Laine and Connor. If both of them hold out the entire season do you think Jets have any shot at winning their division or conference? Probably not.

So unfortunately rfas do have a lot of leverage. It shouldn’t be that way of course. If a new cba can put some kind of cap on what rfas can sign for that might help.

A longer ELC would help too

 

[Flukeshot]

The best players deserve the best money regardless of age. The open (kind of for RFAs) market will dictate pay.

The 3 yr ELC system gives teams a falsely low cap savings when it comes to elite young talent.

Arguably a guy like McDavid missed out on fair ~$30m in earnings his first 3 seasons because of the ELC system.

The system works fine. If these RFAs truly felt their teams weren't offering close to fair value they'd pursue offersheets themselves.

 

[McDavidCrushedLarkin]

Don't be crappy GM's and get bent over by holdouts for starters.

 

[StreetHawk]

The RFAs are getting "crazy money" because GM's are too scared to force players to sit out of the NHL.

GM's have all the leverage under the CBA and are just weakly just giving in to demands.

If you don’t have a Marner in your lineup and you’ve already reserved cap space for him and do not use it you very likely use up a prime year of Tavares and 1/5 years you have Mathews locked up not to mention Reilly moves another year closer to ufa.

GMs in theory have the leverage but if your job is on the line or the rest of the roster is ready to make a run you’re not going to sacrifice a season for 1 contract.

Now, if you’re say a team like Ottawa and they had a Marner they could afford to press him but if he’s also the main attraction for fans you hurt ticket sales by not having him. Plus you logically have cap space to sign him.

Teams logically have the leverage but they also need to win and once the season starts it’s much harder to make trades to balance out contracts.

 

[Crede777]

If you don’t have a Marner in your lineup and you’ve already reserved cap space for him and do not use it you very likely use up a prime year of Tavares and 1/5 years you have Mathews locked up not to mention Reilly moves another year closer to ufa.

GMs in theory have the leverage but if your job is on the line or the rest of the roster is ready to make a run you’re not going to sacrifice a season for 1 contract.

Now, if you’re say a team like Ottawa and they had a Marner they could afford to press him but if he’s also the main attraction for fans you hurt ticket sales by not having him. Plus you logically have cap space to sign him.

Teams logically have the leverage but they also need to win and once the season starts it’s much harder to make trades to balance out contracts.

It is also unfortunately a prisoner's dilemma situation because teams can't collude. If Toronto takes a hard line stance but, say, Winnipeg doesn't, then Toronto's efforts would be for naught.

 

[Bedards Dad]

paying young players good money for their prime/peak years?

the question should be how do we prevent teams from the contracts like Lucic, Eriksson, Ladd, etc.

You are asking 2 different questions.

You dont want to avoid paying your good young players; Laine/Marner. You want to avoid signing the anchor contract players who are rewarded for what they did, not what they will do; Lucic, Eriksson, Ladd, etc

 

[ijuka]

Simple, really.

Make a hard cap of 3 years as the duration for post-ELC deals(meaning immediately following ELC).

 

[PromisedLand]

Introduce NFL rules i.e. no guaranteed contracts

 

[Placid Perspicuity]

Don't be crappy GM's and get bent over by holdouts for starters.

I see you post quite often about how you feel that Dubas is such a bad GM, yet he’s helped to put together a pretty impressive roster.

He might not be perfect, but he’s certainly doing something right. (Or at the very least, better than whatever team you pretend to support while obsessing over the Leafs.)

 

[torniojaws]

Well, it is a bit special case right now with the upcoming new TV contract. That only happens every what 20-25 years?

 

[7even]

Let's work with facts. Players' peak productions come between 23-26. Players want to be compensated for the best years of their careers. This is why current RFAs are ballooning their asks. As a GM, you have two options: sit the player, or trade the player. Sitting a player for an entire year thus depriving them completely of an NHL salary will do two things: make you feel better, and completely torpedo the relationship with the player. That player won't play for you again, or maybe they'll sign a short contract and bounce. That's the nuclear option. The second option is to trade them. Ok, let's consider that. You have a player asking for what their 23-26 years will be worth, let's say $10M dollars. The player is going to ask that of you and of any other team in the league, because that's what they believe their intrinsic value is, so that's immutable. Now consider the perspective of the acquiring GM. You have to give up value for the player you're acquiring, AND you have to give up $10M in cap space. Is that worth it, for anyone? So back to the GM of the holdout, you can either ratchet up your offers, and alter the rest of your cap landscape, or you can trade an elite young player heading into his prime for less than what he's worth. What do you do?

 

[Menzinger]

Introduce NFL rules i.e. no guaranteed contracts

I'd love to see the league adopt that + get rid of elcs and lessen rfa control.

Each side benefits