Petrus
Registered User
Leafs might need to retain a bit on MM too.
Nobody knows. It’s fun to speculate. But if the dollars in and out match for both teams I see no reason to.
Leafs might need to retain a bit on MM too.
This 2mm overpaid is just a lazy regurgitation of an ignorant misconception.Not sure why Marner getting shit on here when he's outscored Matthews every season except (barely) this past season. Toronto gave Matthews a similar contract, so Marner obviously going to ask for the same deal and he even settled for less!
In a flat cap era it’s not just MM that is getting s bit too much. There’s are lots of these types of contracts signed that were done with the expectation if the cap going up. MM is 1-2 mil too much, but that’s because the flat capThis 2mm overpaid is just a lazy regurgitation of an ignorant misconception.
Totally manageable for what he brings.In a flat cap era it’s not just MM that is getting s bit too much. There’s are lots of these types of contracts signed that were done with the expectation if the cap going up. MM is 1-2 mil too much, but that’s because the flat cap
Well the poster I was replying to was the one that said 9.5 so maybe go argue with them if that’s what you’re trying to do, and is 69 points not 60 something? I knew he had 2 seasons of 60 something points to start and didn’t feel the need to look up the exact numbers. Again what have I said that’s incorrect as you claim? Absolutely nothing, but it seems you’re just looking to argue for some unknown reason. If you like to pay 8.5-9.5m for exactly 69 points then power to you, but I think that would have also been a mistake.When was that exactly? The year before his contract was up, he was 69 points and the later half of the year was at an over 90 point rate after he got off the third line. By all reports, he was asking around 8.5 for an early signing. Nothing is accurate with your statement
How does a negotiated position a year before he signs have anything to do with anything. He signed a deal after over 100 games of over a 90 point scoring rate an yet you pick 60 out of the air and claim close enough?. Give up while u can.Well the poster I was replying to was the one that said 9.5 so maybe go argue with them if that’s what you’re trying to do, and is 69 points not 60 something? I knew he had 2 seasons of 60 something points to start and didn’t feel the need to look up the exact numbers. Again what have I said that’s incorrect as you claim? Absolutely nothing, but it seems you’re just looking to argue for some unknown reason. If you like to pay 8.5-9.5m for exactly 69 points then power to you, but I think that would have also been a mistake.
Totally manageable for what he brings.
Leafs didn't make the playoffs.What did he bring in playoffs?
Look at his possession numbers relative to the rest of the teamWhat did he bring in playoffs?
Give up while I can? So clearly you’re here to argue rather than actually have hockey conversations but I’ll give this one more try. The poster I commented on saidHow does a negotiated position a year before he signs have anything to do with anything. He signed a deal after over 100 games of over a 90 point scoring rate an yet you pick 60 out of the air and claim close enough?. Give up while u can.
So I never brought up the off-season before, nor did I bring up 9.5m. If you have an issue with any of this maybe go waste that posters time. Now what I did comment was that if that true, I don’t think giving Marner 9.5m at that time would have been a good idea since he was coming off a 60 something point season (that included a hot streak that you are obsessed with and using to negate the rest of the entire season). So now that you’ve called me a liar for absolutely no reason, please tell me what I have been incorrect about since I’ve asked 3 times?Signing Tavares was never the issue. The issue was not resigning Marner prior to his first season with Tavares when he was reportedly willing to sign for $9.5 million and then allowing to ride shotgun to a top 10 C in the league and then negotiating with him.
Look at his possession numbers relative to the rest of the team
Then Toronto probably should approach the league and propose the rule, that games are won by possession numbers and not by goals. And problem is solved.
21 points in 25 games. he wasn't good against Columbus but let's not pretend he hasn't produced anything in the playoffs.
I don't even think the bolded is necessarily the case. He was awful in Game 1, but as the series wore on I thought he was fine. Not great or at the level he's capable, but not bad outside of his horrendous Game 1.
In a vacuum, Marner and Parayko probably have similar value. IMO, Parayko as a RHD plays a more valuable position, but Marner is certainly very, very good.
However, we are not in a vacuum, but in a salary cap league, and a flat cap league at that. Parayko literally makes half of what Marner does. You could have two Parayko's(or one Parayko, and 85% of Faulk) on your team for every one Marner. That makes Parayko significantly more valuable.
yeah. there is no information that I am aware of that has Marners ask that high. It is a pretty good consensus that mid eights would have signed him for 7 to 8 years. That would have been a bargainGive up while I can? So clearly you’re here to argue rather than actually have hockey conversations but I’ll give this one more try. The poster I commented on said
So I never brought up the off-season before, nor did I bring up 9.5m. If you have an issue with any of this maybe go waste that posters time. Now what I did comment was that if that true, I don’t think giving Marner 9.5m at that time would have been a good idea since he was coming off a 60 something point season (that included a hot streak that you are obsessed with and using to negate the rest of the entire season). So now that you’ve called me a liar for absolutely no reason, please tell me what I have been incorrect about since I’ve asked 3 times?
If smarmy replies are all you have to a good answer of what he did in the playoffs in the context of what he is paid, then perhaps you save it for a child who would care for such banterThen Toronto probably should approach the league and propose the rule, that games are won by possession numbers and not by goals. And problem is solved.
Theoretically, sure. In reality, probably not. Raw trade value doesn't necessarily mean anything when it comes to availability of trades. When the Oilers were looking to trade Hall for the best defenseman they could get their hands on, the league wasn't very forthcoming. Structure, both positional and financial, is just as important as the collection of talent. The Leafs making Marner available would be evidence of that.
I wouldn't dismiss the quantity packages being suggested here. They may be an accurate reflection of what other teams can actually afford to give up. That's not to say the Leafs should or would trade him in that type of trade, mind you.
Then Toronto probably should approach the league and propose the rule, that games are won by possession numbers and not by goals. And problem is solved.
If smarmy replies are all you have to a good answer of what he did in the playoffs in the context of what he is paid, then perhaps you save it for a child who would care for such banter
Yeah, I'm not even gonna point you out what Toronto fans said about Marner during the series vs Columbus, I don't have time for this, but I assure you, there were a lot of funny things there... funny, considering all these attempts from Toronto fans to defend Marner... Much funnier, than my "smarmy replies".