Tribute Jack Campbell Discussion

[Confucius]

I'm not sure why some people always seem to think that a lack of deal equals a lack of negotiation, but regardless, Campbell was not eligible for an extension until the same day Andersen left, so your statement that "not extending Campbell before letting Andersen walk is a complete fail" is confusing and factually incorrect. Also, the same day Andersen left, Mrazek was signed, so I'm not sure where you're getting this supposed loss of leverage from.

Yes I know it all happened the same day but you didn't answer do you think there was negotiating go on beforehand? If they were negotiating with Campbell they would have known back then he may not have been interested in this 1a/1b goalie setup. We chose our direction back then, the hole only becomes deeper now. Unless you hope Soup blows up and tanks the rest of the year. I would have extended Soup 1st is all I'm saying. And much like you seem to think the other deals were done on the same day they should have extended Soup that day as well.

 

[Mess]

This is starting to feel like the Hyman situation with Campbell because the better he plays the more his contract rises to the point where a 6 year X $6 mil deal has priced himself out of the Toronto market and Leafs move on with what they have Mrazek and what they might add on the cheaper side to go along with that, despite wanting to keep him.

From the Campbell side it feels more like the Marner contract situation, where management could have gotten him locked up the year earlier ($8.5 mil) for much less, and then allowing the player to "Prove it" in his contract year and the outcome is a much higher AAV ($10.9 mil), and in a salary cap world that is bad for business as it hurts team competitiveness.

Last summer Leafs might have gotten Campbell signed for 4 X $4 mil realistically to share the net with Mrazek equally on 50/50 split who got $3.8 mil X 3 with a tandem plan.

Now with Campbell playing 28 of 36 games (78% of all games) he will be asking for true starters money if this trend continues and he again plays all Leaf playoff games as well. Then you are likely facing a Jacob Markstrom like scenario of 6 X $6 mil ask with the stats to back that up.

 

[hotpaws]

We have cap space (you need that for Campbell too FYI), and paths to create more. I'm not sure what would make you think that we would do absolutely nothing goalie-wise if Campbell leaves.

so now it's gone from we're fine without Soup to we can replace him easily him . lol

but you keep doing you with your spinning and goal post shifts , we'll touch base in the summer and see what your saying then

 

[Confucius]

This is starting to feel like the Hyman situation with Campbell because the better he plays the more his contract rises to the point where a 6 year X $6 mil deal has priced himself out of the Toronto market and Leafs move on with what they have Mrazek and what they might add on the cheaper side to go along with that, despite wanting to keep him.

From the Campbell side it feels more like the Marner contract situation, where management could have gotten him locked up the year earlier ($8.5 mil) for much less, and then allowing the player to "Prove it" in his contract year and the outcome is a much higher AAV ($10.9 mil), and in a salary cap world that is bad for business as it hurts team competitiveness.

Last summer Leafs might have gotten Campbell signed for 4 X $4 mil realistically to share the net with Mrazek equally on 50/50 split who got $3.8 mil X 3 with a tandem plan.

Now with Campbell playing 28 of 36 games (78% of all games) he will be asking for true starters money if this trend continues and he again plays all Leaf playoff games as well. Then you are likely facing and Jacob Markstrom like scenario of 6 X $6 mil ask with the stats to back that up.

Not only has Soup played 28 but Mrzak has only played 4, I know he has been injured but he was available for more than 4 starts. If they were 1A/1B shouldn't Soup be resting and not out there at every logical opportunity? Can't have it both ways if he is a 1A/1B utilize him that way. If he is a number 1 pay the man and lets move on. I still think it will only get more expensive the longer this drags on.

I don't believe the he won't sign talk either, he seems to like us we are a good team, we have a closer who can't close a deal. Git er done Kyle.

 

[Twine Tickler]

Money is just 1 factor in Jack's decision to stay or go elsewhere.

I think for sure he'd get more money elsewhere at this point. But Jack love Toronto, it's painfully obvious. I think as long as we are not in the offensively low territory a deal will get done.

There are definitely some similarities to this and the Hyman situation, but I just don't see a situation where Jack isn't the only priority after the season is done. Just listen to any of his teammates and more importantly Sheldon talk about Jack. They cannot say enough good things. provided his demands are not astronomical, he will be a Leaf. I feel very confident about that. He just doesn't strike me as a greedy human being at all. He will go down as one of the biggest fan favorites in Leaf history if he resigns. I am sure that has to be appealing to some degree. A small town Michigander now starting goalie for an original 6 franchise and beloved by the entirety of the fanbase. He's mentioned it several times how much that means to him. There is no dollar value that you can place on that emotional connection. We have the upper hand on any potential poachers IMO. Again, as long as we don't offend him, a deal will get done

 

[Gary Nylund]

Then why would they want to sign him?

Is this a trick question or something? Player values are always in flux, for example this season Kadri's value has gone up, Marner's value has gone down, Campbell's value has gone up but nobody knows for sure where we'll be one month, two months or three months from now.

If they want to sign him it will be for the same reason any player is signed - they figure it's in the best interest of the team to do so.

We have cap space (you need that for Campbell too FYI), and paths to create more. I'm not sure what would make you think that we would do absolutely nothing goalie-wise if Campbell leaves.

So if we can't get Campbell, no problem we'll just get someone else? That's worked our well for us over the last couple decades, hasn't it?

But perhaps I'm missing something, who are the goalies that you figure would be available to us this summer who you consider to be on Jack's level or better?

 

[ACC1224]

Is this a trick question or something? Player values are always in flux, for example this season Kadri's value has gone up, Marner's value has gone down, Campbell's value has gone up but nobody knows for sure where we'll be one month, two months or three months from now.

If they want to sign him it will be for the same reason any player is signed - they figure it's in the best interest of the team to do so.



So if we can't get Campbell, no problem we'll just get someone else? That's worked our well for us over the last couple decades, hasn't it?

But perhaps I'm missing something, who are the goalies that you figure would be available to us this summer who you consider to be on Jack's level or better?

What I meant was if his value goes down it means he's had a poor playoffs. Will they want to commit to that?

 

[Confucius]

Is this a trick question or something? Player values are always in flux, for example this season Kadri's value has gone up, Marner's value has gone down, Campbell's value has gone up but nobody knows for sure where we'll be one month, two months or three months from now.

If they want to sign him it will be for the same reason any player is signed - they figure it's in the best interest of the team to do so.



So if we can't get Campbell, no problem we'll just get someone else? That's worked our well for us over the last couple decades, hasn't it?

But perhaps I'm missing something, who are the goalies that you figure would be available to us this summer who you consider to be on Jack's level or better?

I think the Oilers will go allin for Soup, they may even overpay.

 

[ShaneFalco]

I think the Oilers will go allin for Soup, they may even overpay.

They always have to overpay

 

[ShaneFalco]

If jack walks does anyone here think Mrazek could be a dependable, solid #1 and they look for a cheaper back-up?

 

[4thline]

Andersen signs Mid August, he was a free agent July 1st. We signed Mrzak in the beinning of August. There was a month of negotiating that should have went on.

You're forgetting that everything got pushed back because of the delayed season.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Yes I know it all happened the same day but you didn't answer do you think there was negotiating go on beforehand? If they were negotiating with Campbell they would have known back then he may not have been interested in this 1a/1b goalie setup.

I'm sure there were discussions, though there would have been restrictions on what those discussions could have consisted of prior to that point, and he was ineligible to sign prior to that point, so your suggestion of "extending Campbell prior to letting Andersen walk" was literally impossible. I also don't know why you think Campbell would have been dictating team goaltending decisions, or why you think he would be upset with the totally reasonable signing of Mrazek.

We chose our direction back then, the hole only becomes deeper now.

What hole? The only choice we made was to have two good goalies under contract this year.

I would have extended Soup 1st is all I'm saying.

Not only do we not know whether Campbell was willing to sign at all, let alone for a reasonable price back then, it was, again, literally impossible to extend Campbell first. And there's no way to conclude a loss of leverage from losing Andersen when we signed his replacement the same day.

 

[ACC1224]

If jack walks does anyone here think Mrazek could be a dependable, solid #1 and they look for a cheaper back-up?

We may have to find out. Seems like a risky proposition.

 

[ToneDog]

If jack walks does anyone here think Mrazek could be a dependable, solid #1 and they look for a cheaper back-up?

Doubt you can find a true #1 for under $5m AAV and Leafs will be left with Jack's 1.65m for a new backup.

 

[Dekes For Days]

so now it's gone from we're fine without Soup to we can replace him easily him . lol

I didn't say we could "replace him easily". I disagreed with your suggestion that we would make zero goaltending moves and just go into the season with Mrazek and Woll if Campbell decides to leave. And while Campbell would be an unfortunate loss, we would survive if it does end up happening, just like every other time people have had panic attacks predicting our downfall whenever anybody leaves the team.

 

[4thline]

Teams shows willingness to sign a tandem goalie in the ballpark of 4m for mid-term
Goalie that they view more highly does not get signed for 4m for mid-term.

Reasonable conclusion: Goalie didn't want to sign for that.
SuperGenius conclusion: The team clearly didn't offer comparable money, opportunity missed.

 

[The Podium]

This is starting to feel like the Hyman situation with Campbell because the better he plays the more his contract rises to the point where a 6 year X $6 mil deal has priced himself out of the Toronto market and Leafs move on with what they have Mrazek and what they might add on the cheaper side to go along with that, despite wanting to keep him.

From the Campbell side it feels more like the Marner contract situation, where management could have gotten him locked up the year earlier ($8.5 mil) for much less, and then allowing the player to "Prove it" in his contract year and the outcome is a much higher AAV ($10.9 mil), and in a salary cap world that is bad for business as it hurts team competitiveness.

Last summer Leafs might have gotten Campbell signed for 4 X $4 mil realistically to share the net with Mrazek equally on 50/50 split who got $3.8 mil X 3 with a tandem plan.

Now with Campbell playing 28 of 36 games (78% of all games) he will be asking for true starters money if this trend continues and he again plays all Leaf playoff games as well. Then you are likely facing a Jacob Markstrom like scenario of 6 X $6 mil ask with the stats to back that up.

How many times are you going to repeat the exact same info?

 

[4thline]

Doubt you can find a true #1 for under $5m AAV and Leafs will be left with Jack's 1.65m for a new backup.

We're almost certainly budgeting more to the goaltending than 5.45, so Jack's 2021 cap hit is is kind of immaterial.

 

[4thline]

How many times are you going to repeat the exact same info?

I reckon about as often as the "Horton's LTIR makes Marleau a league min player" nonsense. Which is to say at every opportunity until the situation is resolved

 

[Gary Nylund]

What I meant was if his value goes down it means he's had a poor playoffs. Will they want to commit to that?

Poor is a relative term so I don't see how anyone can answer this question.

If jack walks do
Does anyone here think Mrazek could be a dependable, solid #1 and they look for a cheaper back-up?

Not me. If we had no other option then you never know, he could do a good job but I wouldn't want to bet on it.

Not only do we not know whether Campbell was willing to sign at all, let alone for a reasonable price back then, it was, again, literally impossible to extend Campbell first. And there's no way to conclude a loss of leverage from losing Andersen when we signed his replacement the same day.

We never know for certain what goes on behind the scenes but it seems like a safe assumption. A guy who's never been paid a lot being offered a contract that sets him up for life, I think it seems like 99% yes he would be willing to sign. But if you can think of a reason that he would be unwilling to sign at all, I'd love to hear it.

As far as reasonable price goes, sure that's always an issue. But if he was deemed to be someone who will not sign for a reasonable price, maybe they should have decided at that point to go in another direction. If he's not reasonable today, why would he be reasonable tomorrow especially then tomorrow he has much more leverage? Who knows what happened but I sure hope Dubas wasn't trying to nickel and dime him, I would have been willing to overpay him to keep him myself, not "infinitely" overpay to borrow your term but overpay him somewhat, sure.

 

[Mess]

Not only has Soup played 28 but Mrzak has only played 4, I know he has been injured but he was available for more than 4 starts. If they were 1A/1B shouldn't Soup be resting and not out there at every logical opportunity? Can't have it both ways if he is a 1A/1B utilize him that way. If he is a number 1 pay the man and lets move on. I still think it will only get more expensive the longer this drags on.

I don't believe the he won't sign talk either, he seems to like us we are a good team, we have a closer who can't close a deal. Git er done Kyle.

The plan was tandem and there is no reason that Campbell and Mrazek can't be alternating every game now that Petr is back.

Other than a management decision and wanting to win each game and Campbell clearly gives the Leafs the best odds for that. So hard for management not to abandon their own plan here.

Campbell 28 games 2.13 GA/G and .931 sv% with 4 SO
vs
Mrazek 4 games 3.59 GA/G and .882 sv%.

The Mrazek contract at $3.8 mil X 3 has to be among the worst return on investment goalie deals out there, and the only one laughing is Campbell and his agent all the way to the bank on his next deal if this trend continues (why wouldn't it baring injury), because if that is what Leafs management were willing to pay a backup playing in < 20 starts then how much is a true starter with sparkling personal stats (among league best) worth to the Leafs?

I would imagine many Leaf fans who believe Campbell is the real deal would want the Leafs to pay him and play him as the starter and prefer Leafs figure out how to dump Mrazek for cheap and use most if not all of the recaptured money towards Campbell's next deal.

 

[ToneDog]

We're almost certainly budgeting more to the goaltending than 5.45, so Jack's 2021 cap hit is is kind of immaterial.

Sure but anything more has to come from elsewhere. Guessing how much they spend on goaltending will come down to what is available.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Teams shows willingness to sign a tandem goalie in the ballpark of 4m for mid-term
Goalie that they view more highly does not get signed for 4m for mid-term.

Reasonable conclusion: Goalie didn't want to sign for that.
SuperGenius conclusion: The team clearly didn't offer comparable money, opportunity missed.

You're making an assumption here that I'm not sure is valid - maybe Dubas didn't view Campbell more highly because he had the same view some other seem to have - small sample size etc.?

Mid term also covers a broad range - maybe Dubas was only willing to offer 3 years and Campbell held out for 4?

All we can be reasonably sure of as of today, is that we were unwilling to meet his demands whatever they were (assuming he was willing to sign at all, I think that's a safe assumption) in the summer, and now we wish had given him what he was asking for.

 

[hotpaws]

I didn't say we could "replace him easily". I disagreed with your suggestion that we would make zero goaltending moves and just go into the season with Mrazek and Woll if Campbell decides to leave. And while Campbell would be an unfortunate loss, we would survive if it does end up happening, just like every other time people have had panic attacks predicting our downfall whenever anybody leaves the team.

i never said we wouldn't make goaltending moves you added that and no one's having a panic attack except for you needing to spin everything as a positive

but as i said we'll touch base back in the summer and see how your bestie handles our goaltending situation if he's still employed by the team and what non sense you'll be spewing then

 

[Dekes For Days]

i never said we wouldn't make goaltending moves

That's exactly what you said. Your first comment was that "i guess some of us aren't are confident in Mzarek/Woll/Hutch as you are". I then explained that we wouldn't be going into the season making zero goaltending moves if Campbell decided to leave, and your response was to claim that we didn't have the cap space to do "something else" other than the Mrazek/Woll/Hutch combo, which is wrong.

no one's having a panic attack

Oh, quite a few are. You'd think they would have learned by now.