SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Affectionate_Side_64

Member Since
Jul. 18, 2022
Favourite Team
Toronto Maple Leafs
Forum Posts
2372
Posts per Day
3.4
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 28 at 5:16 a.m.
Thread: All in 2025
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 28 at 4:38 a.m.
Thread: All in 2025
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 28 at 1:36 a.m.
Thread: Jones
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 21 at 2:15 p.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>tkecanuck341</b></div><div>WTF are you talking about? When it comes to the player not mattering, I'm talking about Marleau. He didn't spend a single day as a member of the Hurricanes, the Leafs were dumping $6.25M in dead cap space. Cap space is cap space.

You're not trading an elite player with term. You're trading a very good player with one year remaining. If you want the #8 pick this year, you don't get compensated for the term. The only way this adds value is if Toronto actually puts the pen to paper and trades the 8th year. Otherwise why would Seattle compensate Toronto for that? Marner could change his mind about extending the day after being traded. If you want to make the pick a 2025 pick and do a sign-and-trade on July 1, then I'm sure Seattle will compensate the Leafs' for that.

Retain 50% on Marner's contract and this is a fair return. At full value, Seattle easily says no.</div></div>

He didn't spend a single day as a member on the hurricanes, therefore that 6.25 is entirely dead cap. Marner is a top 3RW in the game, which means his cap hit is a positive contribution to the team. Is this really lost on you?

As I've already explained, any marner deal will include an extension, similar to tkachuk, PLD, Meier, etc. Instead of referencing similar deals you're choosing to talk out of your ass.

And of course marner is elite, that's well established. He's top 5 in scoring as a winger over that contract and was a selke finalist last year. I'll leave it at that because its not up to me to educate you on the basics.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 20 at 9:25 p.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>tkecanuck341</b></div><div>I didn't say Marner is a cap dump. Marner is a good player, but you're not getting him in a vacuum. You're having to deal with a very tight cap situation all around the NHL.

Several years ago, the New York Islanders had to practically give away Devon Toews because they couldn't afford the cap hit. Vegas had to give away Max Pacioretty for the same reason. Both guys are excellent players that aren't cap dumps, but their value was negated because the team acquiring them was giving them back cap space in return.

I think you're outing yourself as a homer when you say that Guentzel isn't close to the player Marner is. I bet if you asked Toronto fans, a lot of them would have preferred Guentzel to Marner on the team in this season's playoffs.

Also, if you're getting a 2024 1st round pick in this trade return, there can be no extension in place here either, because Marner is not eligible to sign an extension until several days after the draft.

Yes Marleau. I'm not sure why it matters what player it is. The point is that $6.25M in cap space cost a 1st round pick 5 years ago. It doesn't matter who the cap space was for. Cap space is even more expensive now since next season's salary cap is still significantly below the 50/50 split due to the lag formula. It won't be back to normal until 2026-27.</div></div>

Jesus christ... it matters who the player is because marner is not a cap dump and is worth his contract. Just questioning why the player matters here shows the level of intelligence I'm dealing with.

Go look at the examples I gave you and come back with something sensible. No, the guentzel trade is not comparable. If you want to use a dubas trade involving an elite player with term, then look to the one he made when he acquired Karlsson.

You can not officially sign a contract until July 1st, that doesn't mean an extension wouldn't be in place. Clearly marner would want to ensure that is the case.

This may surprise you, but this is an obvious underpayment from Seattle's point of view, something I did purposely to avoid ignorant arguments like this. There's always that one I suppose!
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 20 at 8:52 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 20 at 8:26 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 20 at 7:42 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 20 at 7:31 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 19 at 11:27 p.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ship</b></div><div>obv would suck to trade marner because of his offensive mind, just if you look at the leafs as a whole, i do think their overall team is better after this trade. it's a luxury to have all that offensive talent, but maybe a luxury that can't quite be afforded anymore. just my two cents. appreciate the effort on this attempt tho.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ship</b></div><div>obv would suck to trade marner because of his offensive mind, just if you look at the leafs as a whole, i do think their overall team is better after this trade. it's a luxury to have all that offensive talent, but maybe a luxury that can't quite be afforded anymore. just my two cents. appreciate the effort on this attempt tho.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ship</b></div><div>obv would suck to trade marner because of his offensive mind, just if you look at the leafs as a whole, i do think their overall team is better after this trade. it's a luxury to have all that offensive talent, but maybe a luxury that can't quite be afforded anymore. just my two cents. appreciate the effort on this attempt tho.</div></div>

Nah I agree. Without the cap I'm not trading the guy, but given the strength of those 3 forward lines, as well as the cal and assets a marner trade brings us, it kind of makes sense... I was on the "trade willy for hanifin and lindholm" train last year too, only because I thought that was the last opportunity to shift from the core 4.

Appreciate your feedback as well!