Quoting: I_Know_Nothing_About_Hockey_Or_Any_Sport2
Not every team is in as desirable and cheap a location as Tampa and it's understandable that some places need to pay players more to get contracts, but that doesn't mean Matthews and Marner aren't overpaid.
Well it also really depends on a couple of factors. Does anyone think Marner would have signed the same contract Point did, adjusted for the tangible aspects? I don't think so. So then why would Marner assume he can get what he got but Point wouldn't do the same?
I would say this though, if Marner accepted the exact same contract Point did but adjusted for this intangible combo of weather/tax/team buy-in/quality/etc, how much would it be? Maybe 7.5-8M right? I think as you start tacking on years to that contract, the final number comes eerily close to what he is at now and more than likely is a little lower granted but not drastically lower.
Its hard to put an exact number on that variable but lets assume just for fun its an exact 10% "Tampa" factor. (Players on average want to be paid 10% more than what an equivalent in Tampa would settle for.)
Assuming every year on Point's contract brings up his AAV by 1M give or take so if he is willing to sign 3 years for 6.75, 4 years for 7.75, etc, the new prorated amount for Marner using this logic would 10.73M.... its less than current but not a huge amount less.
Regardless it comes down to that variable factor that no one can agree on. I do feel though that if before any RFA's signed this year, Point was offered 10Mx6 years, no one would have batted an eye in terms of it not being a fair offer for him.