Marleau signed [3 years, $6.25mil AAV]

[slapshot]

The media is sure going to town on the Marleau contract's 3rd year. I'm not too worried about. I have confidence, the Shanaplan can make it go away if they need to. Meanwhile, the Leafs certainly have a plethora of forwards. Assuming these are the top 12. They have at least 3 leftovers plenty capable of playing.

Top 12
Marleau Matthews Nylander
JVR    Bozak    Marner
Komo Kadri Brown
Martin Moore Hyman

Leftover: Kapanen, Sosh and Leivo

It seems a pretty sure bet that at some point, they move some of their inventory up front for the top 4 RD man. Hard to say when that will be or even who that will be? JVR might seem like the obvious option, but it just depending on what RD men become available and what the other teams want in return. What JVR, Bozak and Komo are going to want to re-up and whether any of them are open to hometown discounts?

Maybe the trading partner is more interested in stocking up with young players than a JVR. Who knows what value may be attached to a guy like Jeremy Bracco by trade deadline next year or anyone else by then. I think the Leafs are going to be patient and see how what they have fits in, but then again I could be wrong.

 

[princedpw]

Williams has moved around a little and doesn't seem particularly attached to a team (unlike Marleau).  But, sure, I agree -- Williams might be unwilling to come to Toronto under any circumstances.  He also might have been sold on Toronto for $4/year. We'll never know.  Still, Williams to Toronto at 4.5-5.5/year seems as reasonable a fantasy conjecture as many people will make.

Except that's why it's probably not a great idea to compare real deals to ones that may or may not have ever been possibilities. I'd prefer Shattenkirk at 3 years, 22.5 million to Hainsey at 2/6 but that doesn't factor too much into how I look at the Hainsey deal.

These example contracts seem less plausible to me than what I was discussing. But anyway, I don't really care about how plausible it is for Williams to have signed.  I'd be more interested if you wanted to argue simply that you'd prefer Marleau and his contract on the leafs vs Williams and his contract, under the assumption you simply had your choice.

I'm not trying to repeat myself but, with all due respect, I'm not sure you do get my argument. Saying that the "risk" can be ameliorated by trading away a draft pick in the final year isn't my argument. My argument is that trading his final year contract might not "cost" anything.

Look at the Datsyuk and Pronger deals. This was the Datsyuk deal:

To Arizona: pick #16, Pavel Datsyuk

To Detroit: picks #20 and #53, Joe Vitale

Then, for Pronger:

To Arizona: Chris Pronger, Nicklaus Grossman

To Philadelphia: Sam Gagner, Conditional 3rd or 4th round pick

In both cases, the teams that traded the dead money deals gained picks. I won't necessarily go so far as to say they were assets but the teams that had them got rid of them without really sacrificing a thing.

Sure.  These are good examples.  There is still some risk until the deal has actually been made.

As to the possibility that Marleau would refuse and demand to play I think we can kind of ignore that because the idea that he'd choose to ride the bus in the AHL vs going home to San Jose family for a pretty small pay check relatively seems unlikely to the point of real never seen before dedication.

This is a good point.  Would Lou threaten to use that if the consensus is that Marleau is still able to score 20 goals (or Marleau thinks he can)?

The risk is not large enough for me to have nixed the signing, but I still believe it is there. I do think the leafs should "go for it" and if it causes an issue in year 3, so be it.

 

[Bullfrog]

I'm definitely happy about this signing. I'm surprised by the value of the contract, but I'm not overly worried about it.

It's nice to be in a spot where these types of players are being signed as complementary players to the young core.

 

[Kin]

These example contracts seem less plausible to me than what I was discussing. But anyway, I don't really care about how plausible it is for Williams to have signed.  I'd be more interested if you wanted to argue simply that you'd prefer Marleau and his contract on the leafs vs Williams and his contract, under the assumption you simply had your choice.

Right, again, I don't think comparing deals a team signed to deals they may or may not have been able to is a particularly fair avenue of criticism but never let it be said I'm not accommodating. I do prefer Marleau and his deal to Williams and his and here are the reasons why:

- Marleau is, I think, a better player. His 27 goals last year were more than Justin Williams has scored in a season since 2006-2007. Over the course of his career, he's averaged 28 goals per 82 games. This is a full 33% higher than Williams averaging 21 over 82.

- Marleau fits the Maple Leafs better and is more versatile. Marleau primarily plays left wing, as he is a left handed shot, which is the team's weakest position. Williams plays RW, the team's strongest position. Marleau also has experience at C and can fill in there at a pinch, with pretty solid face off numbers. Williams, to my knowledge, has never played C in the NHL.

- While neither guy was a regular PK contributor last year, Marleau has been as recently as 2015-2016. Williams hasn't been a regular PK contributor since 2006-2007. Marleau has twice been a top 10 Selke finisher while I can't find evidence Williams ever received a vote. If Marleau is a better defensive player, he also does it while taking significantly fewer penalties than Williams.

-  I think the financials are irrelevant for reasons we've discussed. The Leafs aren't going to be a team in desperate need of cap space in the next two years and I don't think Marleau will be here for the 3rd.

- I think your various intangibles, leadership and experience and size(which I suppose is tangible but its value isn't) favour Marleau almost universally.

Sure.  These are good examples.  There is still some risk until the deal has actually been made.

I suppose that's true in the abstract but let's keep in mind what these deals are. A dead cap hit of 6 million for a retired player is basically a way for a team like Arizona or Vegas(or whatever other team might be at the floor) to save millions of dollars.

So while I acknowledge there's a nominal risk that the deal might be hard to move if, say, no teams are in that situation I'm pretty confident that hockey in Arizona isn't going to be super profitable in two years time. In which case I'm not terribly worried about this management group's ability to give away money. If I were, I'd probably have bigger doubts about their abilities that worried me more than the potential downside of this deal.

This is a good point.  Would Lou threaten to use that if the consensus is that Marleau is still able to score 20 goals (or Marleau thinks he can)?

Well, keep in mind that I think that it's a moot point as I think the structure of this deal does everything but print PATRICK MARLEAU WILL NOT PLAY IN 2019-2020 in big bright neon letters.

I think this is a case of the Leafs using their financial means to effectively pay Patrick Marleau 8.5 million per year for two years of hockey while spreading out the cap hit at a time when the cap concerns are so small that it's one of the rare times when I can say, as I did in the pre-cap days, that it's not my money so I don't really care how the Leafs spend it because it won't have a negative impact elsewhere.

But even if I'm wrong, even if the structure of this deal doesn't reveal a single thing about its intentions, I think Lamoriello(if it's even him in charge at that time) has proven to be pretty unsentimental about these things and, quite frankly, if Marleau has degenerated to the point where he's no longer a useful enough forward to keep around then I don't even think it's all that drastic a tactic. I think any UFA knows that despite whatever deal they sign, they still have to earn their place in the lineup.

 

[gilmourthegreat]

Not a fan of the deal, too much term. Marleau is almost certain to significantly decline between now and the end of year two, let alone year three.

Something to consider that I haven't seen mentioned much; if we are not able to dump Marleau by July 1 2019 (i.e. before the majority of his last year's salary is paid), and we are in a cap crunch, we will not be able to extend Matthews and Marner ahead of free agency and they will be ripe for offer sheets. I imagine we would match almost any sheet, but it might put us in cap hell.

This could have been avoided with a shorter term. I can't get over how optimistic some people are that a 37 year-old player will match his recent performance going forward.

 

[Rebel_1812]

I don't like this signing.  For that kind of money, they could have got Phaneuf back.  They needed a defenseman not another forward.

1) This doesn't prevent or preclude us from getting another defenseman.
2) If needed, we can trade JvR and/or Bozak for cap space and/or assets required.

1) Yes it does stop moves for a defenseman due to cap space.
2) JVR will put up better numbers than Marleau in each year of that contract.  Keeping JVR would be better than singing Marleau and trading JVR.

 

[Kin]

Not a fan of the deal, too much term. Marleau is almost certain to significantly decline between now and the end of year two, let alone year three.

What is that based on? Is it a carefully considered and measured statistical knowledge of the aging patterns of hockey players? Or is it just assuming as a given that once players reach a certain age it's a long and unbroken downward slope?

Is being an effective hockey player unusual at 39? Sure, but it's also unusual at 37. Being effective at 37 is an exception and, quite frankly, I'm not sure it's any smaller of an exception than being a good player at 39 is.

Look at guys like Nieuwendyk, Roberts, Iginla, Doan, Jagr, Recchi, Shanahan, Andreychuk...HOF or near HOF level players, which Marleau is, seem like reasonable bets at being able to produce at 38 or 39 if they're still able to produce at 37.

 

[gilmourthegreat]

What is that based on? Is it a carefully considered and measured statistical knowledge of the aging patterns of hockey players?

Yes.

Is being an effective hockey player unusual at 39? Sure, but it's also unusual at 37. Being effective at 37 is an exception and, quite frankly, I'm not sure it's any smaller of an exception than being a good player at 39 is.

I think if you check the record books you'll find the average 37 year-old performs better than the average 39 year-old. I'm surprised this is in dispute. 

Look at guys like Nieuwendyk, Roberts, Iginla, Doan, Jagr, Recchi, Shanahan, Andreychuk...HOF or near HOF level players, which Marleau is, seem like reasonable bets at being able to produce at 38 or 39 if they're still able to produce at 37.

'Still able to produce' is somewhat of a truism; of course they can still skate and shoot, but I will bet you $5 that the average production of the above group at 37 was much better at 37 than at 39. I will also bet that their production at 35 was better than their production at 37.

When do you think Marleau's production will significantly decline? 40 as opposed to 39?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Something to consider that I haven't seen mentioned much; if we are not able to dump Marleau by July 1 2019 (i.e. before the majority of his last year's salary is paid), and we are in a cap crunch, we will not be able to extend Matthews and Marner ahead of free agency and they will be ripe for offer sheets. I imagine we would match almost any sheet, but it might put us in cap hell.

Nylander and Marner become RFAs on July 1st 2019, but they become eligible to sign an extension on July 1st 2018, and that's almost certainly when it will happen, regardless of Marleau's contract. IF, and I do think it is a big if, Marleau's contract stays with us during the entire term and we can't LTIR him then the problems it will create cap wise will effect our teams bottom-6 forwards by making us go cheap on depth players. It won't create any problems for Matthews/Nylander/Marner.

 

[Zee]

Something to consider that I haven't seen mentioned much; if we are not able to dump Marleau by July 1 2019 (i.e. before the majority of his last year's salary is paid), and we are in a cap crunch, we will not be able to extend Matthews and Marner ahead of free agency and they will be ripe for offer sheets. I imagine we would match almost any sheet, but it might put us in cap hell.

Nylander and Marner become RFAs on July 1st 2019, but they become eligible to sign an extension on July 1st 2018, and that's almost certainly when it will happen, regardless of Marleau's contract. IF, and I do think it is a big if, Marleau's contract stays with us during the entire term and we can't LTIR him then the problems it will create cap wise will effect our teams bottom-6 forwards by making us go cheap on depth players. It won't create any problems for Matthews/Nylander/Marner.

You mean Matthews and Marner right?  Nylander becomes an RFA a year earlier (next season) so they can extend him now.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Nylander and Marner become RFAs on July 1st 2019, but they become eligible to sign an extension on July 1st 2018, and that's almost certainly when it will happen, regardless of Marleau's contract. IF, and I do think it is a big if, Marleau's contract stays with us during the entire term and we can't LTIR him then the problems it will create cap wise will effect our teams bottom-6 forwards by making us go cheap on depth players. It won't create any problems for Matthews/Nylander/Marner.

You mean Matthews and Marner right?  Nylander becomes an RFA a year earlier (next season) so they can extend him now.

Yep, thanks just mis-typed for whatever reason.

 

[herman]

https://theleafsnation.com/2017/07/04/leafs-ufa-review-an-inefficiently-efficient-week/

I find a lot to agree with in this take on the Leafs' off season so far.

On the Leafs? end of things, their goal is to win hockey games, not win the best bang-for-buck award. While I?m probably one of the bigger proponents of ?just get the best 20 players on the ice? you?ll find, an environment like that also has its fair share of diminishing returns; particularly when you have to change your system and play style to fit four lines and three pairs that are nothing alike.

Being realistic, you want the most talented players that fit your system, so long as your system is modern enough. Toronto?s up-tempo, slot-heavy, cycle-heavy game that seems to often involve racing between the two offensive zones and putting the puck in threatening areas is one that is likely to pay dividends, so long as your entire team can play it, and doesn?t fall apart against meaningful competition.

[...]

Well, it?s a good thing that Patrick Marleau can still flip over to centre in a pinch, can still kill penalties, can still put 20 pucks in the net, and can still fly like the kids can.

It?s a good thing that while Ron Hainsey isn?t ever going to be confused for Bobby Orr and isn?t going to drive play at a top level, he?s still floating around even on good teams while playing against all forms of compeition, and can play on both the left and right sides. Oh, and while he?s not an elite skater, he can still move a little too.

Dominic Moore?s relative shot attempt numbers were horrific, but so were his regular linemates (Riley Nash and Tim Schaller), and relative is relative to the second best possession team in the league. Yet, he was still a league above Smith, still wins those pesky Babcock-requested faceoffs, has an extra gear that Boyle simply didn?t, and can still put points on the board.

Sorry Franson.

We paid more than I wanted to, but we had LTIR cap space to use, and if it wasn't used, we could only pay off a nominal amount of the performance bonuses going forward anyway, so we might as well use it. I'm glad we stuck with players would could still skate and have a history of skilled play. I'm also glad we didn't get all those defensive defensemen that our conference rivals went for with 4M+ deals.

 

[Zee]

https://theleafsnation.com/2017/07/04/leafs-ufa-review-an-inefficiently-efficient-week/

I find a lot to agree with in this take on the Leafs' off season so far.

On the Leafs? end of things, their goal is to win hockey games, not win the best bang-for-buck award. While I?m probably one of the bigger proponents of ?just get the best 20 players on the ice? you?ll find, an environment like that also has its fair share of diminishing returns; particularly when you have to change your system and play style to fit four lines and three pairs that are nothing alike.

Being realistic, you want the most talented players that fit your system, so long as your system is modern enough. Toronto?s up-tempo, slot-heavy, cycle-heavy game that seems to often involve racing between the two offensive zones and putting the puck in threatening areas is one that is likely to pay dividends, so long as your entire team can play it, and doesn?t fall apart against meaningful competition.

[...]

Well, it?s a good thing that Patrick Marleau can still flip over to centre in a pinch, can still kill penalties, can still put 20 pucks in the net, and can still fly like the kids can.

It?s a good thing that while Ron Hainsey isn?t ever going to be confused for Bobby Orr and isn?t going to drive play at a top level, he?s still floating around even on good teams while playing against all forms of compeition, and can play on both the left and right sides. Oh, and while he?s not an elite skater, he can still move a little too.

Dominic Moore?s relative shot attempt numbers were horrific, but so were his regular linemates (Riley Nash and Tim Schaller), and relative is relative to the second best possession team in the league. Yet, he was still a league above Smith, still wins those pesky Babcock-requested faceoffs, has an extra gear that Boyle simply didn?t, and can still put points on the board.

Sorry Franson.

We paid more than I wanted to, but we had LTIR cap space to use, and if it wasn't used, we could only pay off a nominal amount of the performance bonuses going forward anyway, so we might as well use it. I'm glad we stuck with players would could still skate and have a history of skilled play. I'm also glad we didn't get all those defensive defensemen that our conference rivals went for with 4M+ deals.

That's the common thing I've seen through the Leafs signings for far, all the guys they got can still skate well and play with some hustle.  I always liked Moore, I think he's a perfect 4th line guy cause he gives you honest minutes, is always hard after the puck and is still pretty quick. Marleau has always been a good skater, and Hainsey can get around as well.  Look forward to seeing how this team competes in the fall.

 

[Bullfrog]

Is being an effective hockey player unusual at 39? Sure, but it's also unusual at 37. Being effective at 37 is an exception and, quite frankly, I'm not sure it's any smaller of an exception than being a good player at 39 is.

I think if you check the record books you'll find the average 37 year-old performs better than the average 39 year-old. I'm surprised this is in dispute. 

Look at guys like Nieuwendyk, Roberts, Iginla, Doan, Jagr, Recchi, Shanahan, Andreychuk...HOF or near HOF level players, which Marleau is, seem like reasonable bets at being able to produce at 38 or 39 if they're still able to produce at 37.

'Still able to produce' is somewhat of a truism; of course they can still skate and shoot, but I will bet you $5 that the average production of the above group at 37 was much better at 37 than at 39. I will also bet that their production at 35 was better than their production at 37.

When do you think Marleau's production will significantly decline? 40 as opposed to 39?

Challenge: accepted!

Performance at Various Ages
Age	37			39
Player	Points	Games	Points/Game	Points	Games	Points/Game
Roberts	48	72	0.66	40	58	0.69
Nieuwendyk	50	64	0.78	56	65	0.86
Doan	47	69	0.68	47	72	0.65
Jagr	42	51 (KHL)	0.82	54 35 (age 41)	73 45 (age 41)	0.74 0.78 (age 41)
Recchi	64	83	0.77	48	72	0.67
Shanahan	62	67	0.92	14	34	0.41
Andreychuk	33	74	0.45	34	72	0.47

The only person on that list that had markedly better production at 37 was Shanahan, but his 0.92 ppg is a bit of an anomaly. I guess you're out $5.

But to the point, your claim was for the average player. In that case, you're more likely to be correct because the average player is out of the league before 39. Marleau is still considered one of the better skaters in the league, so I don't foresee his production dropping off a cliff unless he gets injured. That could happen to a younger player too.

 

[herman]

Not a huge fan of picking up players that old, but if they're that age and still trucking at that pace in this soul-sucking league, they've gotta be doing something fantastically right (and possibly fanatically so). That's some extra semi-intangible value, right there. It's not a huge concern for our kids yet (go metabolism!), but I think that message comes across stronger from vets who've done the grind, than nutritionists hired by the team.

 

[Kin]

Yes.

Seems unlikely. Usually people with facts tend to bring them to the party, not ask if they can borrow some.

When do you think Marleau's production will significantly decline? 40 as opposed to 39?

That seems like a safer assumption. Like I said though, I don't think there's such thing as a "typical" player in the NHL who's productive at 37 so I wouldn't say anything definitively.

Regardless I sort of reject the initial premise. I don't think the positive reaction to this deal is based on the idea that Marleau is, through the life of the deal, the exact same player he was last year. Rather that for the length of the deal that he's probably going to actually play for he stays a productive player. As I said and as the frogman indicated, I think the odds of that are fairly good when you look at the history of players like him.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I'm predicting it now: as long as Marleau isn't used in a shutdown role (i.e. plays with either Matthews or Bozak instead of Kadri) he'll put up more points than he did last season. His high shooting percentage likely goes back to his career norm but that'll be more than balanced out by the fact that he'll earn a lot more assists.

Getting ice-time with a guy like Thornton this season likely helped boost his goal totals but they also crushed his assist numbers. If I remember correctly Thornton only scored like 3 or 4 goals on an actual goalie this past season. And he also played a lot with guys like Joel Ward and Michael Boedker, neither of whom are known for putting the puck in the net. I think you can definitely make the case that Marleau's quality of teammates might actually go up this season. He's also going from the 25th ranked PP last season to the 2nd best one.

 

[disco]

I'm predicting it now: as long as Marleau isn't used in a shutdown role (i.e. plays with either Matthews or Bozak instead of Kadri) he'll put up more points than he did last season. His high shooting percentage likely goes back to his career norm but that'll be more than balanced out by the fact that he'll earn a lot more assists.

Getting ice-time with a guy like Thornton this season likely helped boost his goal totals but they also crushed his assist numbers. If I remember correctly Thornton only scored like 3 or 4 goals on an actual goalie this past season. And he also played a lot with guys like Joel Ward and Michael Boedker, neither of whom are known for putting the puck in the net. I think you can definitely make the case that Marleau's quality of teammates might actually go up this season. He's also going from the 25th ranked PP last season to the 2nd best one.

I'll second that. Matthews/Nylander or Marner/Bozak. That's some high skill right there. If he plays on Auston's left he get's at least the ten goals Hyman should have buried.

 

[Frank E]

I'm predicting it now: as long as Marleau isn't used in a shutdown role (i.e. plays with either Matthews or Bozak instead of Kadri) he'll put up more points than he did last season. His high shooting percentage likely goes back to his career norm but that'll be more than balanced out by the fact that he'll earn a lot more assists.

Getting ice-time with a guy like Thornton this season likely helped boost his goal totals but they also crushed his assist numbers. If I remember correctly Thornton only scored like 3 or 4 goals on an actual goalie this past season. And he also played a lot with guys like Joel Ward and Michael Boedker, neither of whom are known for putting the puck in the net. I think you can definitely make the case that Marleau's quality of teammates might actually go up this season. He's also going from the 25th ranked PP last season to the 2nd best one.

Has there been a forward like Thornton who came off of scoring 7 goals signing for anywhere near $8m, ever.

Don't get me wrong, he's a helluva player, but that $ per goal ratio has got to be a record.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Has there been a forward like Thornton who came off of scoring 7 goals signing for anywhere near $8m, ever.

Don't get me wrong, he's a helluva player, but that $ per goal ratio has got to be a record.

Yeah, that's probably a safe assumption. The only other time in the past 10 seasons that a forward has scored less than 10 goals but 50 or more points was in 2015-16 when Mike Ribeiro did it.