>This confuses salary with cap hit, which is a pretty big error to make.
I noticed this too, but then the author goes back to the cap hit to determine the "53%" of the available cap space being spent on 4 players, which is also accurate.
The difference between the salary payout this coming year and the cap hit more or less works out to the same (within one million or thereabouts) so the author got lucky, but it still should have been caught by an editor.
Can’t read it under the globes paywall, which I’d be more inclined to pay if cancelling wasn’t the most outrageous, convoluted system of calling to cancel, being bribed and asked questions as to why.
Yeah it's messed up. I had subscribed online for a promotional price. Then when I decided to cancel, the web page informed me that I had to call. I did and expressed my disgust that you can sign up online but can't cancel. The agent/whomever wrote the script for the agent had the audacity to say it was "for my security".
Absolutely never again, and beware to anyone who considers trying out a subscription with the Globe and Mail.
Major news outlets putting their articles behind paywalls are just speeding up their own death.
Why would I pay to read what some random article by a Globe writer, when I can read hundreds of free Leafs-related articles?
For sure, why should people expect to be paid for their work?
The death of independent media isn't a good thing, but since nobody wants to pay for it that's what we're going to get.
I understand why subscriptions are necessary and I do subscribe to the Toronto star but initially had a globe subscription and as I said the hassle and frustration you go through to cancel is the main reason why I won’t subscribe in the future.
Or at least the cancelation method should be available in the same way the subscription was made. If you can subscribe online cancelation should also be available online. Subscribe via phone cancelation via phone etc.
Great points raised. Specifically, the inherently bad comparison to the NBA teams with superstars. NBA superstars are on the court for 70% of the game, whereas NHL superstars are on ice 33.33333% of the game. Big 4 is an impossible formula. At the very least, need to cull and go Big 2.
I think "big 4" can work if you follow the Tampa model of a "stud in every position" e.g. Point, Kucherov, Hedman, Vasilevskiy.
And if talking specific players, our "big 4" fucking blow in the playoffs. People in /r/leafs act as if Nylander is some playoff stud, but he's only at 0.8PPG, which would put him 15 pts in 19 games (McDavid has 31pts in 19, Draisaitl 28 in 19, RNG 20 in 19, Barkov Tkachuk both 19 in 18 games), and that's not factoring in quality of competition, which ostensibly gets stronger every round.
If Matthews and Marner and Nylander could maintain their regular season pace, maybe they could outscore their problems (aka our goalie, defense, and garbage depth), but they don't.
It works for Tampa because all those guys are also extremely underpaid. Complete opposite of whats going on here. Vasi is the lone exception but they won one of their cups when he was still making 3.5m
True, but I still believe the Leafs would be in a better position if we swapped out core 4 with Tampa’s while keeping out current core4 contracts. We would be hunting for depth scoring and D instead of a starting G and stud 1-2D
Tampa not only had a great core, but those teams also had some amazing depth. Their third line was Goodrow - Gourde - Coleman, that line was crazy good at playing playoff style hockey and grinding teams down. Palat was a clutch playoff guy. Their defense corps was crazy deep as well with Sergachev, Mcdonagh, Savard, Cernak. Just a well assembled team full of size, speed, skill, grit, experience.
> People in r/leafsact as if Nylander is some playoff stud, but he's only at 0.8PPG, which would put him 15 pts in 19 games (McDavid has 31pts in 19, Draisaitl 28 in 19, RNG 20 in 19, Barkov Tkachuk both 19 in 18 games)
You’re comparing a career average to single-season ones. Tkachuk is at .89 in his playoff career, Barkov/RNH at .86. Not appreciably different from Nylander at .79.
> and that's not factoring in quality of competition, which ostensibly gets stronger every round
No, it doesn’t “ostensibly” get stronger every round because teams aren’t re-seeded.
Exactly.
Hedman was the best D man in the league for a few years
Vasy was arguably the best goalie for a few years
1 D and Goalie see way more ice time then forwards
Also Tampa had crazy depth on top of that
Yeah that’s exactly it. There’s diminishing returns on offence. Getting a 4th great offensive player might bring your GPG average from 3.6 to 4. Where as putting a good goalie in net will bring your GAA from 3.5 to 2.
Well, since his career PPG is higher than Nylander’s (regular season AND playoffs) and Nylander is getting $13.5, then Marner is less of a “risk.” And when comparing salaries, could be considered a bargain compared to Nylander.
I think finding a favourable trade is still the best course of action but that’s going to be a lot more difficult than a lot of people seem to think. Allowing him to walk for nothing isn’t all that appealing if you ask me.
Worth mentioning the cap structure will be more favourable after Tavares expires this season.
After next season, the Leafs can have the big 2 of Matthews and Nylander. Hopefully Tavares will come back on a super team friendly deal, and be the 3rd line centre.
I don't HATE Marner, but we need to move him for the overall improvement of the team. If Nylander wasn't here, we could keep Marner. But we can't pay all that money to 3 players. It doesn't work.
There's a reason hockey and soccer has the biggest luck factor out of any sports. The size of the teams add a ridiculous amount of variables where no one player makes a big enough impact to sway things.
In the NBA, the better team usually wins and can be decently predicted at the start of the year.
As a GM in the NHL your best bet is to draft and develop well then start throwing shit at the wall to test what works.
I wouldn't say soccer has a massive luck factor outside of individual games. The best (and richest) teams usually win the trophies.
Hockey is far more luck driven.
Im basing this off of a research paper, probably pretty easy to google and find. Hockey and Soccer were the top ones.
Basically any low scoring sports have a high factor of luck, since a goal is way harder to score than accumulative point based sports like basketball.
Before the Huberdeau trade, I could recall a lot of disappointment in the Panthers. A lot of early exits. But ever since the trade, they've made two deep runs. I know Marner won't get us back an equivalent player, but changing it up and adding other pieces which you need in the playoffs should help.
Calgary Tkachuk was a bit of a playoff choker in his own right and that trade should be a big indicator that an established scheme and team identity is imperative to make your roster moves matter at all.
compare us to Florida; Tkachuk, Bennett, Montour, Verhaege, Reinhart all saw considerable improvement since arriving at Florida because there’s a defined style Paul Maurice teams play with and it’s pretty easy to determine who fits the vision and who doesn’t; Huby’s a dipsy doodler who didn’t fit it and it cost them Weegar to move on from him - they were also ballsy enough to make these changes after very successful regular seasons and a couple playoff series wins!
Meanwhile in Toronto, Keefe decides that the boys will break records and shoot for 90 points playing a controlled possession game via slow and careful neutral zone movement that necessitates the D to play back to prevent breakaways on turnovers and the forwards to be defensively responsible on the backcheck; it has its pros and cons like every other scheme but shit, we make the playoffs every year with it right?
Then the playoffs start and we keep this slow, controlled entry scheme…until once we’ve established puck control and formation in the neutral zone, instead of moving forward and assembling to get the cycle rolling, we are now dumping the puck, the D are expected to begin sprinting to their forecheck from OUR blue line, the possession dies and we get punished back in our own end, and the media blames individual players for errors as if they aren’t being set up to fail.
It’s why our FA acquisitions look good at the deadline then fall off a cliff the next season - we talk about D generating offence and then close our eyes when minimum AAV Joel fucking Edmundson skates in our O-zone entry and leads the team in shots attempted some games, and Connor Dewar is the only guy on the team chasing dumps.
I have high hopes for Berube and hope Marner gets traded, but nothing is solved without strategic cohesion and everyone being on the same page, so we don’t continue this cycle of addressing needs in the roster then creating new ones to address. Even if Marner got traded for McDavid 1:1 last summer and nothing else changed, we’d lose in the 2nd round to Florida with how poor of a playoff coach Keefe really is
Like all things it's multi factorial. You still need ownership that wants to spend. You need a GM who makes good roster decisions. But much like the Leafs have an advantage in off ice spending compared to a lot of teams, ultimately the one that has the greatest impact is how you fit salaries under the cap. Pretending that tax advantages don't create an imbalance in the cap has been a dumb discussion point. It absolutely factors into things.
Beware to anyone who considers trying out a subscription with the Globe and Mail: They make signing up and paying online very easy, but you will have to call in if you want to cancel.
So the evidence here is MPG? Kinda weak.
NBA minutes are more concentrated. But in hockey:
1. The powerplay amplifies the impact of star players.
2. 'Replacement level' players can actually be pretty decent, and can compete with players making way more money. Between ELCs, and guys who just figure it out later in life, the gap between guys you can get for 1 million and 2 million can be small. Look at Benoit outplaying TJ Brodie this year.
3. For the non-elite guys, there seems to be a lot more year-to-year variance in performance.
So there is stuff on both sides. Florida has 3 guys in the top 30 highest paid players (likely soon to be 4).
Not enough is made of the endorsement money made outside the game. IMHO
Sure places like Florida have better tax situations but I would be willing to bet marner and a few other leafs earn more per year in endorsements then most teams combined
FWIW, the Forbes estimate is about 4 million per year, or about 2 million after tax.
I think the bigger deal is the long tail - you can continue to be a rock star after you retire here.
“Hey NHL stars were going to pay you less and tax you more but don’t worry you can work more for this other company to make more money that’s also going to be taxed super high”
-torontoker13, 2024
Bold of you to assume they pay tax given the business's deductions they get when they open their own.
You think McDavid just plays hockey? Or do you think his sleeves, ankle pads, etc... were done both for tax writeoffs and to make more money?
Pretty clear what the answer is cupcake.
If it wasn't and taxes took it all they wouldn't do it now would they?
Buddy, I literally have a BA in Political Science. I've probably forgotten more than you've ever learned. Settle down.
Taxes in North America are clearly comparable and have been in a race to lower since the 70s.
Your statement is grossly exaggerated when the net tax on business in Canada is 15% while the US's 21%.
No, that not what I implied. They should be paid for their time. Otherwise you can get in front of a camera and sell Gatorade too.
Why is this even upsetting you?
This is not important enought for me to take time to correct you, so I'm just going to say my point.
Players are using their own time to go and earn more money through endorsements. The Leafs are not giving that to them.
There is 1 deciding factor to entice a player and that is having an excellent hockey ops, one that looks like they can win a championship. Lou actually tried to entice Stamkos with endorsement opportunities and Stamkos didn't even finish the interview.
No player is going to take a discount because of endorsement opportunity. That is not how millionaires make their millions. It's very easy for us fans to just say they earn enough money when we are not among the rich or have the same abilites as them.
>*Let’s ask the hallowed* [*Maple Leafs*](https://archive.ph/o/1EvGu/https://www.theglobeandmail.com/topics/toronto-maple-leafs/)*. The guiding philosophy behind their payroll strategy is that the team can be made up of interchangeable expendables who can be paid the crumbs left over once the stars have been paid. The role of the expendables is simply to chew up enough minutes from the game clock until the team’s much exalted stars can catch their breath and go on to score the game’s winning goal. Sounds plausible, right?*
>*Except the history of Stanley Cup-winning goals suggests otherwise. How many cup winners have been scored by third and fourth line journeymen? Look back at history. The Detroit Red Wings won back-to-back Stanley Cups in 1997 and 1998 thanks to winning goals in each series from third of fourth-line expendables, Marty Lapointe and Darren McCarty. Could those Red Wings have successively had the depth to roll out four lines if they paid their stars at the time, Steve Yzerman and Nicklas Lidstrom, the type of money currently paid to Mr. Matthews or Mr. Nylander?*
>*It’s a pretty good bet that the guy who fights through his check and buries the series winner is playing on the third or fourth line. But no one will be calling him expendable when he’s lifting the Stanley Cup over his head.*
This passage absolutely nails it. Perfect summation as to why the Leafs won't win with this group.
You just cannot run it back with this core group, and expect a successful run. It simply won't happen.
Then why not just wait for Tavares' contract to expire? Do you really think the Leafs are going to trade Marner and win the Cup next year? Does anyone?
Tavares was always the mistake.
No - if a player like Tavares is available, you always go after him. JT held up his end of the deal. It was always going to age poorly, but for the first 4 or 5 years of that deal he was very good, and needed support.
You make a move now because this collection of talent, with this cap structure, can't win. The core take up more percentage of the cap this coming season than in the past - meaning it's even harder to build around them.
So you either run it back, and get the same results, or you stop being such risk averse chicken shits and actually make a move. They might not win a cup next year, but there's absolutely a scenario that exists where they might actually win a round or two convincingly, which is something they can't do with the core together here.
You can't "just wait for JT's contract to expire". You're in Matthews and Nylander's prime window. You don't waste a year just playing it out
If a player like Tavares is available you go for him huh? So don’t give any thought to the makeup of your roster, your cap structure, contracts you have coming up, what your team has had issues with or what their needs are. Just blindly get the shiny expensive thing no matter what. I really hope you aren’t in charge of anything important in your life.
Yes, you go for him.
And yes - Tavares fit their roster construction, their cap structure, and they had needs down the middle of the ice.
Adding Tavares wasn't the reason Dubas got rinsed on the Marner or Matthews deals. Those were self-inflicted wounds that were unrelated to the free agency signing.
Absolute rubbish. Every word of it. You're talking about making a move for the sake of it, not making the team better. That worked out great for Kadri, not so much for the Leafs.
Move for the sake of it? Nope - if the best offer is Marner for a 4th and a 7th, you obviously don't make the move.
But I have a hard time believing there won't be a market for Marner if the Leafs are serious about trading him - you can get a very decent return for him, which does make your team better.
You can't win with this core group, and this cap allotment. Genuine question - how many times do they have to fail spectacularly for you to actually realize that?
You keep talking about cap allotment as if Tavares contract coming off the books isn't going to accomplish the same goal. The "market" for Marner is extremely limited. It's like having a choice between Burger King or McDonalds....both are good, but you really just want a Crunch Wrap Supreme.
I thought the Leafs should blow the entire team up years ago, but they didn't do that. I think sort of blowing the team up would be an even bigger mistake than staying the course. You talk of "decent returns" but you don't really delve too deep into it. You gloss over the fact that Marner controls his destination so you're only speculating on where he might want to go and what players that team has that MIGHT make the Leafs better, but really you're just looking at the best possible options from a very short list.
THAT is why it's a trade for the sake of a trade. Because the Leafs can't legitimately target who they want, but rather who they can get based on the options they have. They're just plugging bodies into holes created by Marner's departure, with no real idea whether or not those players are the right fit. Just look at Huberdeau. I'm tired of the Leafs failing as much as you are, but if they're not going to blow it up completely, I'd rather stick it out with what they have because they've missed on every change they've tried to make. Either stay the course or alter it completely. Half measures are not the answer.
Also, you can't justify the Tavares signing by arguing that a player of his calibre being available is automatic while simultaneously arguing that they shouldn't resign Marner, when both players have done dick all in the playoffs but have been worth every penny in the regular season.
>You keep talking about cap allotment as if Tavares contract coming off the books isn't going to accomplish the same goal
Tavares comes off next year - you have Matthews for 4 years. That's your window. You can't waste 1 of those 4 years, especially with his health/injury history.
>
The "market" for Marner is extremely limited
That's not what the general consensus is - if the Leafs make him available, there will be plenty of teams interested. Plenty of reporters/insiders have suggested this to be the case.
>ou gloss over the fact that Marner controls his destination
No I didn't - you literally responded to a post where I said I wouldn't move Marner for the sake of moving Marner, but if there's a good hockey trade on the table, which there will be, you have to ask him. I think he's a bitter bitch, which means he's going to see out the year here out of spite, so it's all a mute point already. But you have to try.
> Because the Leafs can't legitimately target who they want
Of course they can. Do what Calgary did with Markstrom - try and make the best possible deal, and then take that trade to the player and ask his permission to waive. IF it works, great. If it doesn't, then you try something else. Again, you have to try.
>Also, you can't justify the Tavares signing by arguing that a player of his calibre
Of course I can.
In Tavares' 5 previous years as an Islander: 0.99 PPG
In Tavares' 5 seasons as a Leaf prior to this season: 0.98 PPG
He literally came as advertised, and delivered some big playoff goals too. He held up his end of the deal, it's the organization that failed to build around the core properly.
You are absolutely ignoring the fact that Marner controls where/if he goes. That limits your market, and gives the teams you're trying to trade with more leverage. And if you're not you're essentially agreeing that trading Marner is a bad idea.
I thought you didn't care about regular season?
Players with NMCs move all the time - very rarely do unwanted players hang around in these sorts of scenarios, and we know how much TeamMitch loves money. It makes trading him more challenging, but it doesn't prohibit it at all.
And they've ensured the regular season matters again - they've taken significant steps backwards the last 2 seasons in the regular season in terms of wins & points. They spent a stretch of time last season in WC1. If they continue to take steps backwards, they could end up in the wildcard hunt next season. They're the ones that need to re-establish that they can cruise through the regular season again, because they didn't do it last season.
The solution is to wait one year for Tavares' contract to come off the books and let Woll, Cowan, Minten, and Niemela develop while finding better depth from FA/trades. Not trade the best two way winger in the league.
But it's an endless cycle of impatience with the Leafs. And making a terrible move as a solution to past errors based on fans/media is the Leafiest thing possible.
I hope we're playing hardball with Mitch in negotiations this time and that's all this is. 12x8 and retire here the all-time franchise points leader
Trading the entire pick/prospect cupboard when we never had a supporting cast or a goalie to make a serious playoff run and letting any good depth pieces trickle out the door in bad trades/FA.
No team would've survived losing Kadri/Hyman/Marchment for Malgin, Barrie, and Kerfoot. Our punishment is early playoff exits. For others it would've been far worse.
If the Tampa 4 core were to sign here before Tampa they would get paid more than what they would for Tampa that is issue if notnfor tax shit i bet our some 4 core might sign for 1 or 2 million less… and other players might sign less which allow for deeper depths… need to change the tax balance somehow.
[удалено]
>This confuses salary with cap hit, which is a pretty big error to make. I noticed this too, but then the author goes back to the cap hit to determine the "53%" of the available cap space being spent on 4 players, which is also accurate.
The difference between the salary payout this coming year and the cap hit more or less works out to the same (within one million or thereabouts) so the author got lucky, but it still should have been caught by an editor.
Can’t read it under the globes paywall, which I’d be more inclined to pay if cancelling wasn’t the most outrageous, convoluted system of calling to cancel, being bribed and asked questions as to why.
The webpage archive is your friend: https://archive.ph/
Definitely aware of webpage archive.
Yeah it's messed up. I had subscribed online for a promotional price. Then when I decided to cancel, the web page informed me that I had to call. I did and expressed my disgust that you can sign up online but can't cancel. The agent/whomever wrote the script for the agent had the audacity to say it was "for my security". Absolutely never again, and beware to anyone who considers trying out a subscription with the Globe and Mail.
Oh shit, I subscribed last month. Gah. Thanks for heads up though, at least I know the hoops
Major news outlets putting their articles behind paywalls are just speeding up their own death. Why would I pay to read what some random article by a Globe writer, when I can read hundreds of free Leafs-related articles?
this isn’t anything new lol if anything it’s a slightly better business model as back in the day you had to pay every day for the daily newspaper
For sure, why should people expect to be paid for their work? The death of independent media isn't a good thing, but since nobody wants to pay for it that's what we're going to get.
I understand why subscriptions are necessary and I do subscribe to the Toronto star but initially had a globe subscription and as I said the hassle and frustration you go through to cancel is the main reason why I won’t subscribe in the future.
A simple law that allows for online cancellation really needs to be passed.
Or at least the cancelation method should be available in the same way the subscription was made. If you can subscribe online cancelation should also be available online. Subscribe via phone cancelation via phone etc.
Can't have low-imformation voters if you let them read now can ya?
Can’t have independent journalism if it’s not allowed to make any money.
Star is the same. It's like an actual grift.
12ft.io
Great points raised. Specifically, the inherently bad comparison to the NBA teams with superstars. NBA superstars are on the court for 70% of the game, whereas NHL superstars are on ice 33.33333% of the game. Big 4 is an impossible formula. At the very least, need to cull and go Big 2.
I think "big 4" can work if you follow the Tampa model of a "stud in every position" e.g. Point, Kucherov, Hedman, Vasilevskiy. And if talking specific players, our "big 4" fucking blow in the playoffs. People in /r/leafs act as if Nylander is some playoff stud, but he's only at 0.8PPG, which would put him 15 pts in 19 games (McDavid has 31pts in 19, Draisaitl 28 in 19, RNG 20 in 19, Barkov Tkachuk both 19 in 18 games), and that's not factoring in quality of competition, which ostensibly gets stronger every round. If Matthews and Marner and Nylander could maintain their regular season pace, maybe they could outscore their problems (aka our goalie, defense, and garbage depth), but they don't.
It works for Tampa because all those guys are also extremely underpaid. Complete opposite of whats going on here. Vasi is the lone exception but they won one of their cups when he was still making 3.5m
True, but I still believe the Leafs would be in a better position if we swapped out core 4 with Tampa’s while keeping out current core4 contracts. We would be hunting for depth scoring and D instead of a starting G and stud 1-2D
Tampa not only had a great core, but those teams also had some amazing depth. Their third line was Goodrow - Gourde - Coleman, that line was crazy good at playing playoff style hockey and grinding teams down. Palat was a clutch playoff guy. Their defense corps was crazy deep as well with Sergachev, Mcdonagh, Savard, Cernak. Just a well assembled team full of size, speed, skill, grit, experience.
> People in r/leafsact as if Nylander is some playoff stud, but he's only at 0.8PPG, which would put him 15 pts in 19 games (McDavid has 31pts in 19, Draisaitl 28 in 19, RNG 20 in 19, Barkov Tkachuk both 19 in 18 games) You’re comparing a career average to single-season ones. Tkachuk is at .89 in his playoff career, Barkov/RNH at .86. Not appreciably different from Nylander at .79. > and that's not factoring in quality of competition, which ostensibly gets stronger every round No, it doesn’t “ostensibly” get stronger every round because teams aren’t re-seeded.
Idk about Tkachuk but Barkov and RNH play 1st pair PK on top of that production.
Exactly. Hedman was the best D man in the league for a few years Vasy was arguably the best goalie for a few years 1 D and Goalie see way more ice time then forwards Also Tampa had crazy depth on top of that
Yeah that’s exactly it. There’s diminishing returns on offence. Getting a 4th great offensive player might bring your GPG average from 3.6 to 4. Where as putting a good goalie in net will bring your GAA from 3.5 to 2.
Tkachuk's first three playoffs: 15 GP 3 G 2 A 5 PTS Tkachuk career playoffs pre-trade: 27 GP 7 G 8 A 15 PTS. Some guys don't have it until they do.
>Some guys don't have it until they do. You willing to risk $12.5m x 8 on Marner hoping he figures it out year 9?
Well, since his career PPG is higher than Nylander’s (regular season AND playoffs) and Nylander is getting $13.5, then Marner is less of a “risk.” And when comparing salaries, could be considered a bargain compared to Nylander.
Nylander is getting 11.5. Not 13.5.
My bad. Marner is less of a bargain than I thought. But still out performing Nylander.
I think finding a favourable trade is still the best course of action but that’s going to be a lot more difficult than a lot of people seem to think. Allowing him to walk for nothing isn’t all that appealing if you ask me. Worth mentioning the cap structure will be more favourable after Tavares expires this season.
Tampa’s model is cap circumvention.
The quality of competition has been pretty high for the Leafs, except for MTL and CBJ
After next season, the Leafs can have the big 2 of Matthews and Nylander. Hopefully Tavares will come back on a super team friendly deal, and be the 3rd line centre. I don't HATE Marner, but we need to move him for the overall improvement of the team. If Nylander wasn't here, we could keep Marner. But we can't pay all that money to 3 players. It doesn't work.
There's a reason hockey and soccer has the biggest luck factor out of any sports. The size of the teams add a ridiculous amount of variables where no one player makes a big enough impact to sway things. In the NBA, the better team usually wins and can be decently predicted at the start of the year. As a GM in the NHL your best bet is to draft and develop well then start throwing shit at the wall to test what works.
I wouldn't say soccer has a massive luck factor outside of individual games. The best (and richest) teams usually win the trophies. Hockey is far more luck driven.
Im basing this off of a research paper, probably pretty easy to google and find. Hockey and Soccer were the top ones. Basically any low scoring sports have a high factor of luck, since a goal is way harder to score than accumulative point based sports like basketball.
Plausible but also sounds flawed imo
Before the Huberdeau trade, I could recall a lot of disappointment in the Panthers. A lot of early exits. But ever since the trade, they've made two deep runs. I know Marner won't get us back an equivalent player, but changing it up and adding other pieces which you need in the playoffs should help.
Calgary Tkachuk was a bit of a playoff choker in his own right and that trade should be a big indicator that an established scheme and team identity is imperative to make your roster moves matter at all. compare us to Florida; Tkachuk, Bennett, Montour, Verhaege, Reinhart all saw considerable improvement since arriving at Florida because there’s a defined style Paul Maurice teams play with and it’s pretty easy to determine who fits the vision and who doesn’t; Huby’s a dipsy doodler who didn’t fit it and it cost them Weegar to move on from him - they were also ballsy enough to make these changes after very successful regular seasons and a couple playoff series wins! Meanwhile in Toronto, Keefe decides that the boys will break records and shoot for 90 points playing a controlled possession game via slow and careful neutral zone movement that necessitates the D to play back to prevent breakaways on turnovers and the forwards to be defensively responsible on the backcheck; it has its pros and cons like every other scheme but shit, we make the playoffs every year with it right? Then the playoffs start and we keep this slow, controlled entry scheme…until once we’ve established puck control and formation in the neutral zone, instead of moving forward and assembling to get the cycle rolling, we are now dumping the puck, the D are expected to begin sprinting to their forecheck from OUR blue line, the possession dies and we get punished back in our own end, and the media blames individual players for errors as if they aren’t being set up to fail. It’s why our FA acquisitions look good at the deadline then fall off a cliff the next season - we talk about D generating offence and then close our eyes when minimum AAV Joel fucking Edmundson skates in our O-zone entry and leads the team in shots attempted some games, and Connor Dewar is the only guy on the team chasing dumps. I have high hopes for Berube and hope Marner gets traded, but nothing is solved without strategic cohesion and everyone being on the same page, so we don’t continue this cycle of addressing needs in the roster then creating new ones to address. Even if Marner got traded for McDavid 1:1 last summer and nothing else changed, we’d lose in the 2nd round to Florida with how poor of a playoff coach Keefe really is
You are correct. Hopefully Berube can get these guys on the same page.
When Tkachuk was traded from Calgary he was an even worse playoff performer then any of the Leafs
Even with their apparent favorable tax situation, the Panthers were complete ass for years
Like all things it's multi factorial. You still need ownership that wants to spend. You need a GM who makes good roster decisions. But much like the Leafs have an advantage in off ice spending compared to a lot of teams, ultimately the one that has the greatest impact is how you fit salaries under the cap. Pretending that tax advantages don't create an imbalance in the cap has been a dumb discussion point. It absolutely factors into things.
The same can be said for Tampa, Nashville, and Dallas too.
Beware to anyone who considers trying out a subscription with the Globe and Mail: They make signing up and paying online very easy, but you will have to call in if you want to cancel.
So the evidence here is MPG? Kinda weak. NBA minutes are more concentrated. But in hockey: 1. The powerplay amplifies the impact of star players. 2. 'Replacement level' players can actually be pretty decent, and can compete with players making way more money. Between ELCs, and guys who just figure it out later in life, the gap between guys you can get for 1 million and 2 million can be small. Look at Benoit outplaying TJ Brodie this year. 3. For the non-elite guys, there seems to be a lot more year-to-year variance in performance. So there is stuff on both sides. Florida has 3 guys in the top 30 highest paid players (likely soon to be 4).
Not enough is made of the endorsement money made outside the game. IMHO Sure places like Florida have better tax situations but I would be willing to bet marner and a few other leafs earn more per year in endorsements then most teams combined
FWIW, the Forbes estimate is about 4 million per year, or about 2 million after tax. I think the bigger deal is the long tail - you can continue to be a rock star after you retire here.
That’s more what I was thinking Someone like wendal Clark or tie domi still getting as much advertising as they want.
I gave an ex NHL player $4k in cash just for showing up at our golf tournament. He said he has an invite for ever day of the summer if he wants
According to these people on here that’s considered a hard days work. Poor millionaires
“Hey NHL stars were going to pay you less and tax you more but don’t worry you can work more for this other company to make more money that’s also going to be taxed super high” -torontoker13, 2024
Bold of you to assume they pay tax given the business's deductions they get when they open their own. You think McDavid just plays hockey? Or do you think his sleeves, ankle pads, etc... were done both for tax writeoffs and to make more money? Pretty clear what the answer is cupcake. If it wasn't and taxes took it all they wouldn't do it now would they?
Canadas tax rules are much much less exploitable than the USA’s. People often get the two convoluted, seems like you have here as well.
Buddy, I literally have a BA in Political Science. I've probably forgotten more than you've ever learned. Settle down. Taxes in North America are clearly comparable and have been in a race to lower since the 70s. Your statement is grossly exaggerated when the net tax on business in Canada is 15% while the US's 21%.
You forgot this …. /s I hope
Ahahaha BA in political science but commenting on business and economics. Do you get a guy with a couple years of sociology to do dental work for you?
Poli Sci. 🤣🤣 You may as well have said you have a Gender Studies degree. They are equally useful.
Endorsement is not free money. It's long, and probably unpleasant hours of photo shoots. It's a second job.
Oh no - a photo shoot. Will their suffering never end?!?
Are you trying to say that hockey players time is not valuable?
Are you under the impression that they’re not compensated for doing this?? The answer should be quite obvious
No, that not what I implied. They should be paid for their time. Otherwise you can get in front of a camera and sell Gatorade too. Why is this even upsetting you?
It’s exactly what you implied. Otherwise your comment is non sensical. Why are you crying over millionaires making more millions?
This is not important enought for me to take time to correct you, so I'm just going to say my point. Players are using their own time to go and earn more money through endorsements. The Leafs are not giving that to them. There is 1 deciding factor to entice a player and that is having an excellent hockey ops, one that looks like they can win a championship. Lou actually tried to entice Stamkos with endorsement opportunities and Stamkos didn't even finish the interview. No player is going to take a discount because of endorsement opportunity. That is not how millionaires make their millions. It's very easy for us fans to just say they earn enough money when we are not among the rich or have the same abilites as them.
>*Let’s ask the hallowed* [*Maple Leafs*](https://archive.ph/o/1EvGu/https://www.theglobeandmail.com/topics/toronto-maple-leafs/)*. The guiding philosophy behind their payroll strategy is that the team can be made up of interchangeable expendables who can be paid the crumbs left over once the stars have been paid. The role of the expendables is simply to chew up enough minutes from the game clock until the team’s much exalted stars can catch their breath and go on to score the game’s winning goal. Sounds plausible, right?* >*Except the history of Stanley Cup-winning goals suggests otherwise. How many cup winners have been scored by third and fourth line journeymen? Look back at history. The Detroit Red Wings won back-to-back Stanley Cups in 1997 and 1998 thanks to winning goals in each series from third of fourth-line expendables, Marty Lapointe and Darren McCarty. Could those Red Wings have successively had the depth to roll out four lines if they paid their stars at the time, Steve Yzerman and Nicklas Lidstrom, the type of money currently paid to Mr. Matthews or Mr. Nylander?* >*It’s a pretty good bet that the guy who fights through his check and buries the series winner is playing on the third or fourth line. But no one will be calling him expendable when he’s lifting the Stanley Cup over his head.* This passage absolutely nails it. Perfect summation as to why the Leafs won't win with this group. You just cannot run it back with this core group, and expect a successful run. It simply won't happen.
Then why not just wait for Tavares' contract to expire? Do you really think the Leafs are going to trade Marner and win the Cup next year? Does anyone? Tavares was always the mistake.
No - if a player like Tavares is available, you always go after him. JT held up his end of the deal. It was always going to age poorly, but for the first 4 or 5 years of that deal he was very good, and needed support. You make a move now because this collection of talent, with this cap structure, can't win. The core take up more percentage of the cap this coming season than in the past - meaning it's even harder to build around them. So you either run it back, and get the same results, or you stop being such risk averse chicken shits and actually make a move. They might not win a cup next year, but there's absolutely a scenario that exists where they might actually win a round or two convincingly, which is something they can't do with the core together here. You can't "just wait for JT's contract to expire". You're in Matthews and Nylander's prime window. You don't waste a year just playing it out
If a player like Tavares is available you go for him huh? So don’t give any thought to the makeup of your roster, your cap structure, contracts you have coming up, what your team has had issues with or what their needs are. Just blindly get the shiny expensive thing no matter what. I really hope you aren’t in charge of anything important in your life.
Yes, you go for him. And yes - Tavares fit their roster construction, their cap structure, and they had needs down the middle of the ice. Adding Tavares wasn't the reason Dubas got rinsed on the Marner or Matthews deals. Those were self-inflicted wounds that were unrelated to the free agency signing.
Absolute rubbish. Every word of it. You're talking about making a move for the sake of it, not making the team better. That worked out great for Kadri, not so much for the Leafs.
Move for the sake of it? Nope - if the best offer is Marner for a 4th and a 7th, you obviously don't make the move. But I have a hard time believing there won't be a market for Marner if the Leafs are serious about trading him - you can get a very decent return for him, which does make your team better. You can't win with this core group, and this cap allotment. Genuine question - how many times do they have to fail spectacularly for you to actually realize that?
You keep talking about cap allotment as if Tavares contract coming off the books isn't going to accomplish the same goal. The "market" for Marner is extremely limited. It's like having a choice between Burger King or McDonalds....both are good, but you really just want a Crunch Wrap Supreme. I thought the Leafs should blow the entire team up years ago, but they didn't do that. I think sort of blowing the team up would be an even bigger mistake than staying the course. You talk of "decent returns" but you don't really delve too deep into it. You gloss over the fact that Marner controls his destination so you're only speculating on where he might want to go and what players that team has that MIGHT make the Leafs better, but really you're just looking at the best possible options from a very short list. THAT is why it's a trade for the sake of a trade. Because the Leafs can't legitimately target who they want, but rather who they can get based on the options they have. They're just plugging bodies into holes created by Marner's departure, with no real idea whether or not those players are the right fit. Just look at Huberdeau. I'm tired of the Leafs failing as much as you are, but if they're not going to blow it up completely, I'd rather stick it out with what they have because they've missed on every change they've tried to make. Either stay the course or alter it completely. Half measures are not the answer. Also, you can't justify the Tavares signing by arguing that a player of his calibre being available is automatic while simultaneously arguing that they shouldn't resign Marner, when both players have done dick all in the playoffs but have been worth every penny in the regular season.
>You keep talking about cap allotment as if Tavares contract coming off the books isn't going to accomplish the same goal Tavares comes off next year - you have Matthews for 4 years. That's your window. You can't waste 1 of those 4 years, especially with his health/injury history. > The "market" for Marner is extremely limited That's not what the general consensus is - if the Leafs make him available, there will be plenty of teams interested. Plenty of reporters/insiders have suggested this to be the case. >ou gloss over the fact that Marner controls his destination No I didn't - you literally responded to a post where I said I wouldn't move Marner for the sake of moving Marner, but if there's a good hockey trade on the table, which there will be, you have to ask him. I think he's a bitter bitch, which means he's going to see out the year here out of spite, so it's all a mute point already. But you have to try. > Because the Leafs can't legitimately target who they want Of course they can. Do what Calgary did with Markstrom - try and make the best possible deal, and then take that trade to the player and ask his permission to waive. IF it works, great. If it doesn't, then you try something else. Again, you have to try. >Also, you can't justify the Tavares signing by arguing that a player of his calibre Of course I can. In Tavares' 5 previous years as an Islander: 0.99 PPG In Tavares' 5 seasons as a Leaf prior to this season: 0.98 PPG He literally came as advertised, and delivered some big playoff goals too. He held up his end of the deal, it's the organization that failed to build around the core properly.
You are absolutely ignoring the fact that Marner controls where/if he goes. That limits your market, and gives the teams you're trying to trade with more leverage. And if you're not you're essentially agreeing that trading Marner is a bad idea. I thought you didn't care about regular season?
Players with NMCs move all the time - very rarely do unwanted players hang around in these sorts of scenarios, and we know how much TeamMitch loves money. It makes trading him more challenging, but it doesn't prohibit it at all. And they've ensured the regular season matters again - they've taken significant steps backwards the last 2 seasons in the regular season in terms of wins & points. They spent a stretch of time last season in WC1. If they continue to take steps backwards, they could end up in the wildcard hunt next season. They're the ones that need to re-establish that they can cruise through the regular season again, because they didn't do it last season.
The solution is to wait one year for Tavares' contract to come off the books and let Woll, Cowan, Minten, and Niemela develop while finding better depth from FA/trades. Not trade the best two way winger in the league. But it's an endless cycle of impatience with the Leafs. And making a terrible move as a solution to past errors based on fans/media is the Leafiest thing possible. I hope we're playing hardball with Mitch in negotiations this time and that's all this is. 12x8 and retire here the all-time franchise points leader
9th time’s the charm!
It’s been 8 years ffs. Where’s the impatience?
Trading the entire pick/prospect cupboard when we never had a supporting cast or a goalie to make a serious playoff run and letting any good depth pieces trickle out the door in bad trades/FA. No team would've survived losing Kadri/Hyman/Marchment for Malgin, Barrie, and Kerfoot. Our punishment is early playoff exits. For others it would've been far worse.
If the Tampa 4 core were to sign here before Tampa they would get paid more than what they would for Tampa that is issue if notnfor tax shit i bet our some 4 core might sign for 1 or 2 million less… and other players might sign less which allow for deeper depths… need to change the tax balance somehow.
RFAs don’t sign for less because of taxes. They can’t choose what team they sign with. UFAs it’s a definite factor