It sounded like the "Marner will play on your RW for 7 years" aspect of the sales pitch was pretty immense as well.

The tough thing will be if Marner puts up more points that Tavares next year...keep in mind that second half 92-point pace....

How do you convince Marner to take below $10M if Matthews gets the money and Marner is right there in scoring?

It's a legit concern. I know for a fact (friends connected to Marner's family)...that Mitch's camp views themselves at a contract closer to Matthews than Nylander. I'm sure their strategy will be to let Matthews sign first and then play off that number.

But we can't assume what will be the driving priority for these guys...money...chance to win...playing for hometown team...etc. They'd be well within their rights to demand 8 figure salaries but we'll have to wait and see how it all shakes out.

I hope Kyle is correct in keep the group together. My concern...and it's not really problem, is that younger players like Dermot, Grundstrom, Johnson and Liljegren become so good they deserve big raises. Then one of your "core four" has to be traded for cap reasons. But trading good players because you have too many of them isn't a problem really though.

Vanderm. Marner and others are still on RFAs so the Leafs might have some control over their salaries and term. An offer sheet might change that though.

Your problem is with McDavid, eichel, draisaitl etc foregoing bridge deals; that guys like matthews, marner and nylander know they can get 2 huge 7-8 year deals in their career and have no need to do smaller deals

You're absolutely right. As I said, they'd be well within their rights to make those comparisons and ask for similar money. But there's a chance that's lies somewhere > 0% that Dubas could point to each of those players and their lack of playoff appearances and ask if that's what they'd prefer.

Definitely not saying they'll all sign below market value...but hopefully they're open to the conversation.

Well. both the team and player has to agree the long term deal. Kucherov and Stamkos had shorter first RFA contracts, even Tavares. But you're correct there is a tendency for max deals for "stars" coming off their ELCs. I still wonder about Nylander. He might be a guy like Trouba that is looking for to be a UFA as soon as possible so maybe he wants short term del. Marner being a Toronto boy, I think is "more controllable" for the Leafs. Like Tavares would relish being a successful long term Leaf (well that's the plan)

I won't be surprised if we see 3-6 year deals instead of the assumed 8. I know they always want to avoid the 4 year deal that expires before their UFA eligibility...but maybe part of a compromise of committing to a lower salary is that they want to see how realistic a championship is within a shorter time frame...ie. if they're winning 2-3 rounds in the playoffs then maybe re-up again vs 1st round exits and looking to either leave or cash in for top dollar

Thats exactly what it looks like they have discussed with those 3 players. What will be a good gauge is if Nylander takes for a contract cause my understanding is Shanahan has had discussions with them and expained the cost of being part of something great. If Nylander signs for 5.5 ish i think it's safe to say matthews, and Marner will be 1 million less. One thing toronto has that most markets don't is very profitable endorsement deals. So i think this is going to help keep there salaries reasonable.

Before I say what might happen, I need to explain how I view contract terms.
A deal in the 1-3 year range is short term. A deal in the 4-6 range is a medium “I 100% want to win” term. 7/8 years is long term, pay me my money and hopefully we win. Now for the contracts...

Matthews and Marner (I think) will be our version of Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews for ever story. I think they’ll sign matching 6 year $8 Million deals. What that does for them is that when the Tavares contract is up, they will get there big pay days.

Nylander on the other hand is a tough one. If any of our 3 young guns were to sign a “prove it” deal, its him. I think the Team and Nylander meet in the middle, 4 years in the 5-6.750 range.

Just a thought when I looked at the Blackhawks and there players from those cup winning teams. My only concern with this concept is that there retooling now, but if we win a cup or 2 during these contracts I can live with it.

Interesting view. Like all things, it'll be wait and see...but I think twin $8m deals is overly optimistic. Definitely hope you're right though.

Underpaying

Maybe have a read thru the description and comments before posting an utterly useless comment

Very out there, like I said, Kane and Toews did it. Why not them? If it means a strong chance at a cup, which last I checked was the ultimate goal, they would do it like Kane and Toews

Two things helped toews and kane. 1) they had already won the cup when they signed those extentions. 2) their GM at the time was throwing money round like it was nothing if i do recall the reason they fired him was by the end of the offseason he had put them in such a mess cap wise ownership decided to bring in the Bowman's to clean up the mess and keep them competive.

There was tendency when Kane and Toews signed those big contracts by many teams to have really big long term. contracts. I think the GMs and owners at the time thought the cap would rise more than it did. A 90m cap now would lessen the pain of 10m of these players. But at the time, especially with Cup wins, it didn't seem like such a bad decision.

I did I still think they could have much more even with that

I wouldn't say Kane and Toews signing for $10m were team-friendly deals tho....so the $8m per seems low.

As far as the argument that they had already won cups...it kind of brings up the discussion of paying for past performance vs paying for future expectations...but I'd have to imagine the Blackhawks figured they be battling for cups for the foreseeable future with both guys so it made sense.

Dale Tallon essentially got fired because he didn't file qualifying offers to 8 RFA's before the deadline. He somewhat recovered to get all of them signed before they became UFA's...but the belief was that those players and their agents were able to negotiate a higher contract as they now had all the leverage.

We all do. The point was to discuss the possibility of them buying into Dubas' plan and taking less than market value

Toews and Kane didn't sign $10M contracts though, they signed matching 5 x $6.3M (11.09%) after their ELC's expired. The Toronto 2018 equivalent would be 5 x $8.8M for both Matthews and Marner, signed by Christmas.

Personally, though, I don't think those two will be paid the same. Matthews is the better player, plays the more important position and carries more leadership responsibility - and he's the face of the franchise. This isn't Toews/Kane at all.

My guess is that Matthews gets the full 8 years at $11M while Marner goes for something like 5 x $7.75M, with Nylander coming in a bit lower, probably along the lines of 5 x $6.75M or so. If Marner goes 8 years expect something like Draisaitl's $8.5M AAV.

Not true. They signed their first extensions on December 2, 2009 and won their first Cup June 9, 2010.

Players beating expectations is a great problem.

I think your point about the offer sheet situation is more relevant now than ever before. GMs are sort of just waking up to the fact that their players might not stay (see: Tavares signs with TOR). Offer sheets are pretty interesting, and I think GMs might find they need to get even more ruthless to compete. Still, the pick compensation should be pretty valuable to the Leafs in the event someone snaps up a young player via offer sheet.

The Leafs are in Position A when it comes to assets right now. Could still use a D upgrade somewhere in that Top 4, but the forward group is nothing short of ridiculous.