Exactly! I don't get why everyone says we're in “cap hell"... I thought that was when a team is up against the cap without good players or at least minimal good players i.e. Edmonton...

×3
People on here easily confuse negiotations with love or hate of a player. What is the reason why agents tell their clients to not attend arbitration hearings? Because in these meetings things are said by GM's/management that hurt the player's chances at a higher salary and more importantly the player's psyche.
Hearing such things rarely ever benefit players. It's sort of the same thing with these contract talks for Marner.

I like Marner and hope he's with the Leafs a long time but when I create or comment on a ACGM, I am purely viewing this from managing Leafs/cap point of view.

It has nothing to do with love or hate for anyone.

I like dubas, I’d want him as my GM because the pros outweigh the cons - I still think he sucks at negotiating lol

This really is the annoying part, and I'm not directing that at fans from other teams. It's more about the tactics that Marner's camp is using by leaking everything to the media, and then the knuckleheads just run with it while ignoring the fact that several teams have rfa negotiations of their own, and lots of those guys are great comparables for Mitch.

And yet, crickets... and almost less than crickets on the only, and much anticipated, OS that they've all been waiting for. How Aho's contract isn't discussed by the media as helping to set the rfa market is beyond me.

The whole thing just smacks of a lack of class and professionalism.

Marner's camp should stick to keeping negotiations in-house. But if they want to make things public, then they should be prepared for the public's response. People can see through this narrative, they're not stupid. Marner's camp is very much making their own bed with all of this

I don't think two prospects get you a top 4 Dman, and there is the issue of trading equal cap. IMO Johnsson or Kapanen would have be traded to get competent Dman help this year.
Tavares...yep the Leafs got him for free last year. But as you suggest there is cap cost at some time \ Usually when he sign a big cap that you have to sacrifice another cap via trade, if not in signing year but in the year of signing. For instance the Leafs Tavares but had to trade Marleau, a first and Brown (and maybe more) to fit in Tavares contract.

Lots of folks think they are entitled to keep their UFAs. Nope by definition those players are FREE for anyone. So in a few years the Leafs (just like other teams) probably won't be able to retain Reilly and Andersson due to cap reaason. Then you pray your ELCs are NHL ready and good.

Right. Leafs aren't in cap hell because they the ability to trade some players and get value back and then be cap compliant. Tampa seems to be worse situation because the guys they might want to trade have NTCs. Somewhat the same with Winnipeg. and San Jose.

Why everyone say the Leafs are in cap hell? Lots of Leaf fans on site. But lots of anti Leafs fans who really don't want present logical discussion or just refuse to look at the facts.

Absolutely agree with what you said.

I'm not sure if you follow baseball at all...if so then look no further than Stroman's arb case a few years ago.

The problem on here is most don't look/make ACGMs as what they think their management would/will do (with a few exceptions usually lol) it's always what they want to see happen, which is fine/fun sometimes, but there is usually no reality in most of them.

He's also new/young give him time...

You took the words right out of my mouth lol

Would only add that all the "anchor" contracts/players that many of us were told had negative value and that no team would touch have all been moved.

10 players from last years roster are not returning this year. And the only move that hurt a bit was Marleau.

The leafs have lots of flexibility

I follow the four major sports leagues (NHL, NBA, NFL and MLB) and am well aware of what happenned with Stroman's arb hearing and it's exactly why I brought it up.
Marner should (I think he has) stay away from commenting on any contract stuff.

I fully believe Marner himself doesn't leak anything but his agent or dad? One of them is leaking this stuff and it's not doing the kid any favors.

The media won't use that distinction because it forces teams to make more trades which in turn gives them more viewers. Teams won't offer sheet Mitch/the Leafs because they know we'll match... I mean look at Montreal's tactic in their OS... Money, other teams don't really have an angle/advantage against the Leafs that will work besides drastically overpaying.

Agreed, about Marner's camp and the terrible negotiation tactics... I hope Ferris will finally learn that this doesn't work especially in a large market where everything gets magnified (fill in the blank with whatever number you see fit) × fold.

That's called “Leaf haters" lol

It's because we are such a big market team that gets so much media coverage because it drives media ratings (rightly or wrongly) they hate us.

I'm a very likable guy. I don't think they hate us. Maybe just you..

I hear what you're sayin, though. And it's all good. In fact it's part of the fun of being a leafs fan

Me too, minus the NFL as I don't have enough time lol.

You're right Marner is doing the right thing by staying away from negotiations (if he truly is) so that we don't have another Stroman situation... Although we kinda do only it's his representatives who are being dysfunctional lol. I think both his dad and agent are the ones leaking things as well...through Dreger, but I can't understand how they haven't figured out that it's not working/hurting yet... Utterly clueless

I think your right lol

Indeed, but sometimes it gets annoying, and some take it to far...

No one will offer sheet him at a 4 1st round picks level. Get over that fantacy. If it's an offer sheet it will be 10.5 x 5 and done. Toronto will get a 1st. This is why there will never be an OS at 3 years. No one is giving up a 1st for only 3 years of a player. These are the issues. If Toronto goes 10.5 on a 5 year deal, they pretty much have him.



What does his age have to do with any of that. The attitude of "we don't have to pay anyone because you are young" is just a rotten attitude to have.
If he's a good player he should be paid, regardless of age.



surely you aren't counting PM, because that's a joke.




I find it hard to believe that he will sign a 3 year deal at all. I have stated multiple times on here, the real issues here isn't about the money it's about the length. He wants to be a FA on his next deal, and the fastest way there is a 4 year deal. If he signs longer than a 4 year deal, there is a premium to pay because they are hitting into his FA years. With how high the cap will be in those years, aka new tv deal, expansion team, etc... that's a large chunk of cash for him to give up.
The only other option I see for him is a 2 year deal. They will return to the table when the new TV deal is signed and the expansion team kicks in and the cap is high. If that happens, Toronto loses. Because he will demand a much larger cap hit off %. They are better off signing a 4 year deal and being done with it.

But the absolute least likely scenarios are 1 and then 3 year deals. Those do nothing for him.

Well Mitch is a hometown kid and I’m sure when he hits the ice again, he will be loved. It just disappoints me to see everyone acting like Mitch would be a passenger without J.T.

Wait if someone offersheets him for 3 years and TO doesn't match, wouldn't that make Marner a RFA again in his next contract? (with the new team)

yes Marner needs 4 years to reach 7 years.
On top of it, no one is going to OS a guy for 3 years. If they are going to give up a 1st they are probably wanting 5 years.

Well I think its pretty safe to say that no team is OS Marner for less than the compensatory four 1sts. Anything less than that, the Leafs easily match, right? So if one happens it pretty much has to be a 10.5m+ offer at whatever amount of years.

I still think for a team in the right situation, an offer sheet is still worth it. It has to be a team that fits some pretty specific criteria though but if that's the case, I'd go for it. But the offer sheet would have to be at minimum cap needed and hopefully for a decent amount of years, like 6-8 or at 3 only so that they have the opportunity to resign him again to a long term contract.

Once again, this would be a bad thing to do for most teams but if the right situation came along, I'd like to see a team go for it.