Rangers would Match that offer

If anyone must criticize, please be constructive, otherwise you have failed to prove me wrong here.

Leafs are not trading Marner as he is a franchise player......name me a player in the NHL that can play 5x5, PP and PK like him and tell me if he is not a franchise player.

Is he worth all that cap space at the expense of depth pieces though?
Being top-heavy on superstar talent is detrimental, not beneficial, in the modern NHL, you need 4 lines and deep defensive depth for your team to succeed.
Hence why teams like Vegas, NYI, and St. Louis which have no big-name superstars but can roll 4 lines and have deep defensive depth are doing so well in the modern NHL, while top-heavy offensive juggernauts with average-to-poor defense like Toronto and Edmonton aren't getting over the hump.

Shattenkirk isn't signing for that low and what is this idea of signing everyone to a four-year deal

Kings decline. They are not going to take on big contracts and give up draft picks during their rebuild.

so let me get this straight... you think the rangers just let georgiev walk for 900k with zero compensation coming back to them even though fans on here wanted to trade him for a 1st...

Then shattenkirk has had a real solid year should get a decent next contract yet 4 years x 1.8m probably about 2-3m too short on that deal.

Lastly, you think adding 1 ufa year of freddy andersen to the kings to take marners cap hit "sweetens the deal"? They arent trading their future goalie to overpay another 30 year old goalie. Time lines dont matchup at all for their roster.

Also, keep in mind everyone, all of these rosters on this website, whether they're from me, from you, or someone else, are fantasy, not reality.
Indeed, we put thought and effort into ideas as to how to improve rosters, and it involves good use of creative thinking, but none of us are truly experts on this subject as we are not actually in the unenviable position of GM but are instead just operating a GM simulator.
I'm not an expert on this subject, I will admit, but in the grand scheme of things, neither are you, as you're not an actual GM, so there's no need to get offended if you disagree with the roster.

So - I'd recommend that you get rid of the goalie stuff on this. Marner to the Kings for a package is worth discussing - but you've added in some stuff that's getting everyone hung up. Keep Anderson, add a little money to the deals you signed for Shattenkirk, Fast & Beaulieu - I think a rational discussion can happen with that. I don't know if the Kings are looking for a $10M contract though, where they have Doughty....

and kopitars at 10m too... that would make 3 10+ million contracts

If healthy all year - Leafs would have had a 3rd line of Johnsson/Mikheyev - Kerfoot - Kappy. So a top 5 league wide 3rd line on paper. Injuries made this impossible, but it's not like Leafs were forced to roll out Petan and Agostino as 3rd liners all year because of our top heavy big 4.

You have Johnsson on your 1st line, so you obviously like him and Kappy was just traded for a 1st and a decent prospect - so why bring up this "need" to improve the Leafs depth?

Spezza played well on the 4th line, Engvall will be a good 4th liner if he stays. Robertson and Barabanov are 2 players that are likely on the roster next year, and should be very capable bottom 6 players, and both seem to play a similar "puckhound" style.

You're way overreacting to a 5 game series with these 100 UFA signings/trades. If Marner is moved (99.9% chance it doesn't happen) it's for a youngish, cost controlled, legit Top 4 option.

Leafs may sign a Perry/Simmonds to add some 3rd line "heavy" play, and they are obviously on the hunt for a Top 4 upgrade. They may also make a change in nets - I really doubt it's a 8 to 10 player overhaul.

They are a young team. Young teams improve when their youth progresses, not through trades or signing 30 year olds.

TB is the example Toronto is following, no need to mention those other teams.

In isolation the Marner idea makes some sense for Los Angeles, The problem is that the Kings hope to draft THEIR Mitch Marner with the second overall pick in this year's draft, and so wouldn't give up four key elements of their core roster going forward for Marner. And, as others have pointed out, one year of Freddie doesn't move the needle appreciably.

To give you some idea of the value of those players to the Kings, I think that they're three of the nine players Los Angeles will protect in this year's expansion draft (4-4-1). So it's a great trade for Toronto, but not appealing to the Kings.