[tsn] Marner Watch 2019

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

We sign star players and people are complaining about maybe not being able to replace the Dorsett's and Stralman's 4 years from now?

[Pete]

We sign star players and people are complaining about maybe not being able to replace the Dorsett's and Stralman's 4 years from now?

 

Yea, some forget we found Stralman on the scrap heap. He was about to be out of the league.

 

There are always players to be had, somewhere, on the cheap.

[Phil]

Yea, some forget we found Stralman on the scrap heap. He was about to be out of the league.

 

There are always players to be had, somewhere, on the cheap.

 

And those guys are always open to joining a winning team.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Future]

We sign star players and people are complaining about maybe not being able to replace the Dorsett's and Stralman's 4 years from now?

Nobody's complaining about it lol. It's just exploring what might happen in a few years, and whether or not it will be similar to Toronto's issue.

[Sod16]

You can't do an effective "grid" for three years from now. What you can do is talk about general trajectories, and those would indicate that there's a good chance that three years from now, we will be where Toronto is now, especially with the big contracts teams are giving players coming off entry level deals.

[Pete]

You can't do an effective "grid" for three years from now. What you can do is talk about general trajectories, and those would indicate that there's a good chance that three years from now, we will be where Toronto is now, especially with the big contracts teams are giving players coming off entry level deals.

Wrong the same way you can talk about talent trajectories is the same way you could talk about potential salary trajectories. So you can do an effective grid.

 

Winding up like Toronto is one of about 27 potential scenarios that could possibly play out over the course of three years.

 

I could just as easily say there's not a good chance that we wind up like Toronto. But I posted a lineup that says we won't, right up there for debate... and you won't post a lineup that says we will...and have it challenged.

 

This whole thread went by and there's no solid proof at all that there's a cap issue.

 

And frankly, if Toronto was a little bit smarter with spending on defense, they might have a cup as they worried about dismantling their team.

 

and at the end of the day, every team that's good and drafts while we'll have this problem. Toronto, Tampa, it's the price of being good at developing and good at winning in a cap league.

[Albatrosss]

Exactly.

[josh]

Wrong the same way you can talk about talent trajectories is the same way you could talk about potential salary trajectories. So you can do an effective grid.

 

Winding up like Toronto is one of about 27 potential scenarios that could possibly play out over the course of three years.

 

I could just as easily say there's not a good chance that we wind up like Toronto. But I posted a lineup that says we won't, right up there for debate... and you won't post a lineup that says we will...and have it challenged.

 

This whole thread went by and there's no solid proof at all that there's a cap issue.

 

And frankly, if Toronto was a little bit smarter with spending on defense, they might have a cup as they worried about dismantling their team.

 

and at the end of the day, every team that's good and drafts while we'll have this problem. Toronto, Tampa, it's the price of being good at developing and good at winning in a cap league.

There are “cap issues” if you expect to keep everyone. But that doesn’t happen. Either underperforming kids move on, or they step up and replace underperforming veterans.

[Phil]

Link:

[Pete]

Link:

 

So, more of what we already knew?

[Albatrosss]

Link:

 

no bets are off. Shanny will get crucified in Toronto if he lets Marner walk. it would be a career ending mistake in shanny lets it happen

[Phil]

He can't "walk." He's a restricted free agent. The best they can hope for, a la the OP, is an offer sheet (which won't come). The only alternatives are waiting it out (Nylander), or trading him.

[Albatrosss]

walk...I meant losing him. I understand he's not a UFA

[Phil]

Link:

[LindG1000]

Link:

 

Thanks Paul.

[Phil]

Link:

[BrooksBurner]

Good for Marner. There's no way he should get less than Matthews. He shoud get at least the same contract.

[ThirtyONE]

Good for Marner. There's no way he should get less than Matthews. He shoud get at least the same contract.

 

I mean... in a vacuum, sure. Unfortunately we don't live in one. There are different circumstances with every team and it's clear that the leafs are in some cap trouble. Is it okay to take slightly less than Mathews? I think so.

[BrooksBurner]

I mean... in a vacuum, sure. Unfortunately we don't live in one. There are different circumstances with every team and it's clear that the leafs are in some cap trouble. Is it okay to take slightly less than Mathews? I think so.

 

They should have made him a priority rather than signing a bunch of mid range players to out themselves where they are.

[Gravesy]

They should have made him a priority rather than signing a bunch of mid range players to out themselves where they are.

 

But....they didn't. And here we are.

[ThirtyONE]

They should have made him a priority rather than signing a bunch of mid range players to out themselves where they are.

 

But you also need to fill a roster. You can't have 5 good players and 19 garbage men. Top heavy teams do not win.

 

Honestly, it seems to be becoming more and more obvious that this group of three (Nylander, Marner, and Matthews) won't be able to stick together forever. I'd seriously consider trading one of Marner or Nylander for an ace defender.

[Future]

Top heavy teams do not win.

The back-to-back Cup champion Penguins say hello.

 

Even the Blues' playoff scoring was ridiculously top heavy. If you have a dynamic top 6, then you just need a bottom 6 who can PK and not fuck it up. That's not expensive.

[LindG1000]

The back-to-back Cup champion Penguins say hello.

 

Even the Blues' playoff scoring was ridiculously top heavy. If you have a dynamic top 6, then you just need a bottom 6 who can PK and not fuck it up. That's not expensive.

 

I think that was the model Toronto was aiming for. That got thrown out the window with the Draisaitl deal and the subsequent Nylander holdout. Doubly so now that Toronto capitulated to the Draisaitl model twice (Nylander and Matthews).

 

Toronto's wisest move is the 3 year bridge deal at this point. You'll get the big three together for three more years, and at that point you'll be staring down a much larger cap due to the upcoming TV deal (provided the NHL doesn't...you know, NHL it up). If Marner proves to be worth it, pay him or move Nylander.

 

Writ large, the NHL and NHLPA clearly need a better model for young players and their contracts, and possibly a lower duration limit on contracts.

[Dunny]

What is this TV deal I keep hearing about? Is it the US deal? With who?

 

The next Canadian deal will be a fraction of the current one, so factor that in, too. Rogers has lost their shirt on the current deal, and only CTV (TSN) could bid against them, and they're not going to pony up the same money Rogers did.

 

Where is this TV money coming from?

[BrooksBurner]

But you also need to fill a roster. You can't have 5 good players and 19 garbage men. Top heavy teams do not win.

 

Honestly, it seems to be becoming more and more obvious that this group of three (Nylander, Marner, and Matthews) won't be able to stick together forever. I'd seriously consider trading one of Marner or Nylander for an ace defender.

 

Sure, but they could have made it work by signing Marner first. They gave out like 11 million to sign Ceci, Johnssen, and Kapanen. Why should Marner bend because they fucked up with choosing who to give money to?