Is it winning or money that counts?

[SniperOnTheWing]

Care to explain why?

Seriously? Okay, so according to you we should:

- Suck for like 20 years

- Finally draft great young superstars like Marner and Matthews who can turn a franchise around

- Trade them away as soon as they need contracts because, shocker, GREAT YOUNG PLAYERS COST MONEY

- Keep the much older player in Tavares who has like four years of prime left, rather than the two guys who haven't even entered their primes yet

- Gamble on a bunch of draft picks and hope a couple of them turn out nearly as good as the players you just let walk because they wouldn't give you a charity deal

- When the handful players who happen to turn out good enough to be worth more than $7M start asking for their fair salary you're not going to pay them because players and agents will somehow crack under your mighty GM powers

- Then when nobody buys into your fantasy nonsense what, trade those players for more draft picks and keep the cycle going forever? Meanwhile the 'greedy' stars you traded away are in their primes and torching the league for some other team

That's Ottawa Sens levels of idiocy. Maybe even worse. I can't even believe someone would think any of that would have the slightest chance of working out well for the Leafs.

You have to pay good players. It's that simple. That means you lose some guys out the bottom. It's a fact of life. Pittsburgh has been doing this for years and has won Cups with one core in place and other guys rotating in and out, we can do the same. We just have to give it more than five frigging minutes minutes before we start making foolish hot takes like trading Matthews and letting Marner walk

 

[Kamiccolo]

I agree 1000% on this take. If you're Kadri or Reilly...what the hell are you thinking right now? You left money on the table and Willy and Mathews just walked by and said thanks for that and filled their pockets. It is going to kill the team. people are wondering why Kadri is no longer Kadri this year with his "gritty" play...well I think I know why. Why should he kill his body for almost 1/3 of Mathews salary and be told he is so important to the team...really?

All of those other teams that people talk about like Pitts, LA and Chicago actually WON SOMETHING before everyone got bloated deals...so it was a thank you in a sense. They did not get paid before (Malkin and Crosby kind of did before winning cups 2+3) they won a cup. Here we are paying guys like they had won awards and cups. This will kill the team going forward. The morale has got to be pretty low because of this. And, you can't blame Marner for wanting to get paid now that everyone else has his share of the pie. Not one bit.

To add to this, he's also watching Matthew float for a month before and after he signs this deal. What kind of message does this send?

 

[Kamiccolo]

Seriously? Okay, so according to you we should:

- Suck for like 20 years

- Finally draft great young superstars like Marner and Matthews who can turn a franchise around

- Trade them away as soon as they need contracts because, shocker, GREAT YOUNG PLAYERS COST MONEY

- Keep the much older player in Tavares who has like four years of prime left, rather than the two guys who haven't even entered their primes yet

- Gamble on a bunch of draft picks and hope a couple of them turn out nearly as good as the players you just let walk because they wouldn't give you a charity deal

- When the handful players who happen to turn out good enough to be worth more than $7M start asking for their fair salary you're not going to pay them because players and agents will somehow crack under your mighty GM powers

- Then when nobody buys into your fantasy nonsense what, trade those players for more draft picks and keep the cycle going forever? Meanwhile the 'greedy' stars you traded away are in their primes and torching the league for some other team

That's Ottawa Sens levels of idiocy. Maybe even worse. I can't even believe someone would think any of that would have the slightest chance of working out well for the Leafs.

You have to pay good players. It's that simple. That means you lose some guys out the bottom. It's a fact of life. Pittsburgh has been doing this for years and has won Cups with one core in place and other guys rotating in and out, we can do the same. We just have to give it more than five frigging minutes minutes before we start making foolish hot takes like trading Matthews and letting Marner walk

Sorry are you claiming to not know the difference between wanting to trade kids for wanting to be paid and not bending over? What comparable is Matthews? He signed for more than McDavid over a f***ing 8 year deal ffs. How can you defend it? He bent over the leafs, regardless of his ability.

 

[Leafidelity]

Fandom aside, I can't fault anyone anywhere for trying to get as much money as they can at work.

 

[SniperOnTheWing]

Sorry are you claiming to not know the difference between wanting to trade kids for wanting to be paid and not bending over? What comparable is Matthews? He signed for more than McDavid over a ****ing 8 year deal ffs. How can you defend it? He bent over the leafs, regardless of his ability.

Draisaitl signed for $8.5M and everybody said he bent Chia over too. Now he's on track for 50 goals and 100 points. Now he's a steal. Just had to HAVE SOME PATIENCE which is a foreign concept to most apparently.

I can defend it because I'm capable of seeing past the end of my nose unlike 90% of the people here. It looks high in year one, it'll be a bargain in a couple of years if not sooner. I wonder how many will eat their crow when that happens.

 

[Crysis]

Seriously? Okay, so according to you we should:

- Suck for like 20 years

- Finally draft great young superstars like Marner and Matthews who can turn a franchise around

- Trade them away as soon as they need contracts because, shocker, GREAT YOUNG PLAYERS COST MONEY

- Keep the much older player in Tavares who has like four years of prime left, rather than the two guys who haven't even entered their primes yet

- Gamble on a bunch of draft picks and hope a couple of them turn out nearly as good as the players you just let walk because they wouldn't give you a charity deal

- When the handful players who happen to turn out good enough to be worth more than $7M start asking for their fair salary you're not going to pay them because players and agents will somehow crack under your mighty GM powers

- Then when nobody buys into your fantasy nonsense what, trade those players for more draft picks and keep the cycle going forever? Meanwhile the 'greedy' stars you traded away are in their primes and torching the league for some other team

That's Ottawa Sens levels of idiocy. Maybe even worse. I can't even believe someone would think any of that would have the slightest chance of working out well for the Leafs.

You have to pay good players. It's that simple. That means you lose some guys out the bottom. It's a fact of life. Pittsburgh has been doing this for years and has won Cups with one core in place and other guys rotating in and out, we can do the same. We just have to give it more than five frigging minutes minutes before we start making foolish hot takes like trading Matthews and letting Marner walk

Oh you mean what Crosby did? 8.7 when Ovie was getting 9.5??? That kind of charity???
I'm not sold on this core moving forward, all the skill in the world, no heart, and no desire to win cups even though they play in the center of the hockey universe....
Muskoka five all over again (but with more skill.)
And yes I would actually take my chances with 7-8 first round picks over Matthews and Marner both at what, 11+? Yikes.
This team needs the type of guys that live for the playoffs and who also bring the skill.

 

[Kamiccolo]

Draisaitl signed for $8.5M and everybody said he bent Chia over too. Now he's on track for 50 goals and 100 points. Now he's a steal. Just had to HAVE SOME PATIENCE which is a foreign concept to most apparently.

I can defend it because I'm capable of seeing past the end of my nose unlike 90% of the people here. It looks high in year one, it'll be a bargain in a couple of years if not sooner. I wonder how many will eat their crow when that happens.

Term is the difference. By the time Matthews starts becoming "underpaid" he is a UFA and will get an even bigger contract.

 

[Leafs87]

I've said it a few times before.... but those contracts created problems in the dressing room.

At the beginning of the season, this team seemed to be having fun and had a very positive overall atmosphere. Sure, Nylander was sitting out. But nobody really knew the specifics for why. There was a very clear "team first" mentality.

Then Nylanders contract was signed, and it was higher than league wide comparables (especially when consideriing ufa years eaten up). The team noticeably slowed down after that contract. Then Matthews signed his heavily inflated contract. And things really changed. The team is barely .500 since the Matthews contract rumours started.

And I genuinely believe it changed things dramatically. Remember, the overpayments to Matthews and Nylander means other leaf players will have to take less or get moved. So there was no longer a "team first" mentality. It was every man for himself. And it's shown on the ice.

Compare that to Tampa, where all of the players take discounts. It's created a "team first" mentality. To the point where the team shows WAY more effort in a game against the leafs, even though they'd already secured 1st overall in the league, and the leafs were fighting for home ice advantage.

So, yeah. There are locker room problems as a result of these overpayments. It's destroyed the "team first" culture that we saw in October and November.

I agree with you and I’ve made similar posts in the past. I honestly never saw a team first mentality but there was better effort and the team played better. I’ve never really seen players stand up for one another. In the other hand the comments by Marners agent after the Matthews signing were very telling. That was the first time they spoke out about each other. I still think Matthews May be moved at one point. The effort he shows for that type of contract isn’t acceptable.

The Nylander contract is okay I think, and I understand his motives more. The leafs were legit low balling him and he wasn’t sure how much of the contract he’d play as a leaf if he did take a discount.

 

[SniperOnTheWing]

Oh you mean what Crosby did? 8.7 when Ovie was getting 9.5??? That kind of charity???
I'm not sold on this core moving forward, all the skill in the world, no heart, and no desire to win cups even though they play in the center of the hockey universe....
Muskoka five all over again (but with more skill.)
And yes I would actually take my chances with 7-8 first round picks over Matthews and Marner both at what, 11+? Yikes.
This team needs the type of guys that live for the playoffs and who also bring the skill.

Crosby's deal is irrelevant. It was signed ages ago and is a format that hasn't even been legal since the last lockout. Trim those last four nose-diving years off his deal to make it legal by today's standards and his AAV would have been over $10M. And you're talking like an $800k difference between him and Ovie, big deal lol.
This core hasn't even been together for three full seasons yet nor have they all hit their primes. You're making a knee jerk reaction and that's exactly how real GMs, who know what they're doing, don't operate.

 

[Crysis]

Crosby's deal is irrelevant. It was signed ages ago and is a format that hasn't even been legal since the last lockout. Trim those last four nose-diving years off his deal to make it legal by today's standards and his AAV would have been over $10M. And you're talking like an $800k difference between him and Ovie, big deal lol.
This core hasn't even been together for three full seasons yet nor have they all hit their primes. You're making a knee jerk reaction and that's exactly how real GMs, who know what they're doing, don't operate.

It's relevant because he signed it FOUR YEARS after Ovie signed his similar deal which also isn't currently legal, and he took LESS.

 

[SniperOnTheWing]

Term is the difference. By the time Matthews starts becoming "underpaid" he is a UFA and will get an even bigger contract.

Yeah, and the cap will be higher too especially once Seattle comes in.

People are deathly afraid of the $10-11M number, but $10M today isn't the same as it was back when Toews and Kane extended for example. It was absurd sounding then but it's becoming more and more normal as the cap rises.

And some day when the next wave of guys like Jack Hughes or whoever start signing $15M AAV deals out of their ELC's we'll wonder how we ever got so upset about our franchise center signing for $11M out of his. And the cycle will go on. It's all relative.

 

[frog]

Times have changed. Everyone has to find that medium balance between money and loyalty. Probably Nylander is the only guy we can say is truly selfish.

I remember that old Colorado team with: Sakic, Forsberg, Blake, Foote, Roy, Hedjuk, Tanguay and Drury and each year they all took discounts because it was known that the team came first. After the 2nd stanley cup half of the guys broke rank and started asking for more money. But they waited to be selfish which I 100% agree with. There is a time and a place to be selfish and I never at all faulted Foote or Forsberg or Blake for moving on for more money at the latter half of their careers. They were loyal to the team but then decided to add a few more millions at the end. A good compromise. I haven't seen that team-spirit with any team in a long time

 

[SniperOnTheWing]

It's relevant because he signed it FOUR YEARS after Ovie signed his similar deal which also isn't currently legal, and he took LESS.

Good for him, he took $800k less on his irrelevant-in-2019 contract than Ovie took on his irrelvant-in-2019 contract. His loss I guess.

 

[Crysis]

Good for him, he took $800k less on his irrelevant-in-2019 contract than Ovie took on his irrelvant-in-2019 contract. His loss I guess.

Denial is strong on this one.
The point is he was/is the better player and took a home town discount to help his team.

 

[Superstar]

Times have changed. Everyone has to find that medium balance between money and loyalty. Probably Nylander is the only guy we can say is truly selfish.

I remember that old Colorado team with: Sakic, Forsberg, Blake, Foote, Roy, Hedjuk, Tanguay and Drury and each year they all took discounts because it was known that the team came first. After the 2nd stanley cup half of the guys broke rank and started asking for more money. But they waited to be selfish which I 100% agree with. There is a time and a place to be selfish and I never at all faulted Foote or Forsberg or Blake for moving on for more money at the latter half of their careers. They were loyal to the team but then decided to add a few more millions at the end. A good compromise. I haven't seen that team-spirit with any team in a long time

We don't need Matty and Willy to take discounts...they didn't even take fair market value, but took premiums that Dubas was willing to fork over...that's the big problem because their examples mean every player on this team who needs a contract would at least look to be overpaid, and why not since the next guy is?

 

[frog]

We don't need Matty and Willy to take discounts...they didn't even take fair market value, but took premiums that Dubas was willing to fork over...that's the big problem because their examples mean every player on this team who needs a contract would at least look to be overpaid, and why not since the next guy is?

Nylander kind of f***ed things up for sure, hindsight is always right but he should have been traded

 

[The Beyonder]

I think wanting both is the pipe dream. Take as much money as they can and they confusingly wonder why their useful teammates have to be traded because they aren't affordable.

The pipe dream is expecting players to take a lot less for the mere possibility of winning. Nothing is guaranteed. This is the reality that agents tell their players. I'm sure they tell them also that loyalty means almost nothing in sports, how crappy would it be for a player to take a discount for the team and then find themselves traded to a crappy team in a crappy city and realize they compromised for nothing. It's up to the GM to make it work. And just because players take what their worth doesn't change their goals on the ice.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

It’s a job, money is what matters. NHL players have limited times to earn, they usually try to maximize it.

They might take a small paycut to keep playing with a team they like playing for but it’s still about money.

 

[GoldenGOOSE]

Willy looked pretty amazing tonight. Boy that kid can skate circles around people and he is starting to use that incredible shot more too.

 

[67Leafs67]

Theoretically both. Winning = more money as a basic principle. Look, I know we like to throw out all these theories about character and stuff, but these guys are competitive and driven to win, otherwise they wouldn't be in the show. I don't think that there has ever really been a time where there were 'noble' hockey players everywhere, who took paycuts chivalrously in order to facilitate a winning environment. Hockey players are no more greedy than other people working in other jobs, it just happens to be a bigger industry with less jobs, which means higher salary.

But I still think that players are just as motivated as ever to win a Stanley Cup. It's a childhood dream, it's the thrill of competition, and the rush of testosterone. Ultimately, it is their job, so money is their primary concern, but that doesn't throw winning out of the window entirely.

 

[FraumBallard]

Draisaitl signed for $8.5M and everybody said he bent Chia over too. Now he's on track for 50 goals and 100 points. Now he's a steal. Just had to HAVE SOME PATIENCE which is a foreign concept to most apparently.

I can defend it because I'm capable of seeing past the end of my nose unlike 90% of the people here. It looks high in year one, it'll be a bargain in a couple of years if not sooner. I wonder how many will eat their crow when that happens.

50 goals and 100 points is nothing in this no hit beer league.
It was a big deal back when Men played in the NHL.

 

[FraumBallard]

Theoretically both. Winning = more money as a basic principle. Look, I know we like to throw out all these theories about character and stuff, but these guys are competitive and driven to win, otherwise they wouldn't be in the show. I don't think that there has ever really been a time where there were 'noble' hockey players everywhere, who took paycuts chivalrously in order to facilitate a winning environment. Hockey players are no more greedy than other people working in other jobs, it just happens to be a bigger industry with less jobs, which means higher salary.

But I still think that players are just as motivated as ever to win a Stanley Cup. It's a childhood dream, it's the thrill of competition, and the rush of testosterone. Ultimately, it is their job, so money is their primary concern, but that doesn't throw winning out of the window entirely.

Yeah.
Disagree.
These Leafs won't even throw or
take a bodycheck.
Nothing at all like past generations.
Clint Eastwood is right.
p***y generation.

 

[Pilky01]

Winning is for junior hockey. The pros are about making money. It’s a business. Fans are literally the only group of people with an emotional investment in these teams.

For the players, winning is just a happy coincidence.

 

[Trinity]

according to the Leaf "true fans" Tavares/Mathews/Nylander were all signed to team friendly deals so i'm guessing they put winning ahead of money since they all took discounts

According to non-Leafs fans, they are all overpaid.

 

[Crysis]

Winning is for junior hockey. The pros are about making money. It’s a business. Fans are literally the only group of people with an emotional investment in these teams.

For the players, winning is just a happy coincidence.

Well then perhaps it's time the league completely overhauled how it compensates players.
How about this:

Salary cap: $35 million USD
League minimum: $500k USD
League maximum: $5 million USD
Win one round: team splits $5 million USD
Win two rounds: team splits an additional $10 million USD
Win three rounds: team splits an additional $15 million USD
Win the cup: team splits an additional $20 million USD

All playoff winnings will be split based on the percentage of the cap each player represents. Works out to the cup winning team splitting an additional $50 million USD.
This might be the only way to get passion back into the league at this point.