Marner to Vegas is finally happening

[mr grieves]

This is, simply put, a hockey disaster. Maybe not the darkest day in Leafs history. Well, actually maybe it is.

July 1, 2023.

 

[Andy007]

I have to say, I don't really understand the hyperbole and the rehetoric from each of the "sides" (i.e. anti vs pro Marner) about this whole situation. Marner wasn't traded 2 years ago before his NMC kicked in because Shanahan/Management wanted to keep him long-term. Then, within the course of those 2 years, Marner decides he doesn't want to return, and thus the Leafs can't trade him for anything of (significant) value. How is that anyone's fault? To bemoan the fact the Leafs didn't trade him before his clause kicked in doesn't make sense; they wanted to keep him and re-sign him. Marner, as he is completely entitled to do, simply elected not to re-sign here.

It just is a crappy, worst-case scenario that we have to deal with. It sucks,and it happens but hopefully now Toronto can better manage their Cap, make smart moves and maybe (the horror!) develop some players in-house.

 

[mr grieves]

I have to say, I don't really understand the hyperbole and the rehetoric from each of the "sides" (i.e. anti vs pro Marner) about this whole situation. Marner wasn't traded 2 years ago before his NMC kicked in because Shanahan/Management wanted to keep him long-term. Then, within the course of those 2 years, Marner decides he doesn't want to return, and thus the Leafs can't trade him for anything of (significant) value. How is that anyone's fault? To bemoan the fact the Leafs didn't trade him before his clause kicked in doesn't make sense; they wanted to keep him and re-sign him. Marner, as he is completely entitled to do, simply elected not to re-sign here.

It just is a crappy, worst-case scenario that we have to deal with. It sucks,and it happens but hopefully now Toronto can better manage their Cap, make smart moves and maybe (the horror!) develop some players in-house.

Folks bemoaning how this was managed are bemoaning the management wanting to keep the core 4 together, because they (the moaners, not management) anticipated this outcome. “It makes no sense to bemoan signing David Clarkson on July 1, 2013; at that time they wanted him and signed him to contract they needed to get him” If you remove consequences of management's decisions from consideration, you’re setting an absurdly low bar

 

[Andy007]

Folks bemoaning how this was managed are bemoaning the management wanting to keep the core 4 together, because they (the moaners, not management) anticipated this outcome. “It makes no sense to bemoan signing David Clarkson on July 1, 2013; at that time they wanted him and signed him to contract they needed to get him” If you remove consequences of management's decisions from consideration, you’re setting an absurdly low bar

Oh, I understand people who wanted to see Marner traded years ago, before the NMC clause kicked in, bemoaning how this turned out, absolutely. They have carte blanche to criticize management's decision to keep the core 4 together. The ones who always wanted Marner re-signed; however, no rue for you!

 

[mr grieves]

Oh, I understand people who wanted to see Marner traded years ago, before the NMC clause kicked in, bemoaning how this turned out, absolutely. They have carte blanche to criticize management's decision to keep the core 4 together. The ones who always wanted Marner re-signed; however, no rue for you!

Ah! I understand now. I don't remember anyone around here who's now "anti" Marner saying they wanted the Leafs to hold onto him even if his NMC was about to kick in.

 

[Andy007]

Ah! I understand now. I don't remember anyone around here who's now "anti" Marner saying they wanted the Leafs to hold onto him even if his NMC was about to kick in.

I think there are alot of folks who are angry that Marner didn't sign and either blame him (anti-Marner), or the team (pro-Marner). Obviously the plan was to extend him, and it just didn't work out.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Oh, I understand people who wanted to see Marner traded years ago, before the NMC clause kicked in, bemoaning how this turned out, absolutely. They have carte blanche to criticize management's decision to keep the core 4 together. The ones who always wanted Marner re-signed; however, no rue for you!

I would kind of add to all of this by saying that I don't think many/any of the anti-Marner crowd 2 years ago were saying he should be traded because they were worried he was going to make the decision to walk away from the team after his contract was done. Like maybe people started to suspect this was a possibility at the start of this season, but I don't think anyone would have guessed it 2 years ago. It was always just "well he's going to be too expensive when he re-signs".

 

[herman]

I, for one, wanted to trade him before the NMC so the team could have a better chance at balancing the lineup, and get rid of the negotiation cycle, and give Marner some peace to find joy in the game again.

I was pretty sure a sign and trade could be done in an amicable fashion (he could’ve had the whole UFA experience too), but it turns out one side wanted to be petty about it.

 

[cabber24]

I don't even think it was the worst thing to see him play out the contract. We came within a game of beating the eventual champs. Teams usually let contracts ride out if they believe they have a legitimate shot. If we won, he would probably come back. What would the Leafs have to pay Rantanen for him to stay? Do we want a $12M Rantanen?

 

[cw]

Marner basically stating this was the case for the past 2ish years, but also disengaging with any trade talks or extensions, after Shanahan forced the front office to let the NMC kick in is not helping his PR.

No that is not what he said
Marner said in May 2024 he loved it in Toronto and wanted to get contract discussions underway.
"That'd be a goal. I've expressed my love for this place. Obviously, I've grown up here so we'll start thinking about that (new contract) now and try to figure something out,"
Marner was all ready to work out a new deal to remain in Toronto in May 2024. Something changed.
Treliving said something else in June 2024 and the media circus went off.
All those trade rumours is what caused Marner to step back. From the Vegas press conference

"1:07:43 And um you know, last year in Toronto or two years ago really kind of, you know, stuff um you know, we didn't win obviously. Um we didn't do what we wanted to do. Um stuff started kind of going, you know, a little north, a little south. We didn't know what was going to happen. Um, a lot of trade rumors all last summer. Didn't know what was going to happen in that regard either. And, um, you know, as soon as the year started up, um, you know, we're ready to commit and and play hockey and, you know, see what would happen. But, you know, at the same time, we're willing to take it to the distance and, you know, kind of told Toronto that, uh, that was our plan."

Marner's GM was not committed to keeping Marner around.
Some media "5% chance Marner's here in September .."
So the media circus of trade rumours last summer caused Marner to pull back from doing a deal that he wanted to go forward with in May 2024. Those are Marner's words in May 2024 and very recently.
McCrimmon called out some of the crap. He had to phone Karlsson to tell him the media reports of Vega trading Karlsson to Toronto for Marner were complete "bullshit"
Treliving said re-signing Matthews and Nylander were top priorities. Treliving effectively said trading Marner was a possibility they had to look at. Re-signing Marner was never expressed as a priority by Treliving.
Leafs management let the ugly rumours go on because maybe it would discourage Marner from wanting to be in Toronto and get him to accept a trade or knock his contract value down.

Who wants to play long term for a GM who isn't committed to wanting them around? I wouldn't.

In terms of Marner's commitment last season, he became the 5th Leaf to put up a 100+ point season (with his linemate hurt). Without that sort of performance, the Leafs don't win the division and get home ice. I do not know how he could do such a thing without really trying to help his team every game. According to your narrative, Berube is a complete coaching idiot who gave Marner more ice time than any other Leaf in the playoffs and second most ice time during the regular season - to a player just going through the motions - not committed. If that is the case, we need a new coach. But it isn't the case - it's just a bunch more BS nonsense. By mid September,2024, they were getting clues Marner's wife was pregnant -> parents for the first time. Treliving didn't care. They tried to trade him anyway. Marner enforced his no movement clause in part to protect his family. That was his contractual right negotiated in good faith.

Marner left a GM who didn't want him - didn't really value what he brought to his team or that GM would have snuffed the rumours out immediately - like McCrimmon did with Karlsson. Marner has left to play for a GM and team who truly wanted him.

It was a stupid move on Treliving's part because we knew the UFA market was thin and we knew the cap was going up substantially so that July 1 would be pretty barren for signing replacements with Marner's cap money. That all got said a long time ago. Treliving wasn't listening or watching.

If they sign Pacioretty, the Leafs will be the oldest team in the league. They're second oldest right now. Their collection of prospects are rated around 28th out of 32 teams. The Leafs have the worst Draft Pick Value Total of the 32 teams on PuckPedia (they're pretty barren). So they're all loaded up with some cap money but have little in assets to land someone truly deserving of that hefty contract. That's the way it is going to be for the next couple of years with Matthews. Easton Cowan is probably too small to play for Treliving anyway.

Marner wanted to be here and a stupid GM ticked him off.

 

[cw]

What I don’t get is if he always intended to go to Vegas, why did he block the 3 way trade? I know we’ll never know but I do find that a little puzzling, if it is true.

a) that was sketchy - they didn't seem to have a deal - sounded more like tire kicking trying to find something plausible
b) his wife was pregnant, first time parents, both families around to help in Toronto - a move is heck of a thing to undertake under those circumstances (Marner expressed something roughly to that effect)
c) depending on what was coming back, he could feel like he was bailing out on the guys he'd been playing with. He wanted one last crack with the guys he'd been playing with for 8-9 years. A little like Sundin wanting to hang around ... If Vegas really wanted him, they could hook up this summer.
d) Becoming a UFA gives you a choice: of potentially all 32 teams on your own timeline. A trade by the current GM circumvents that and the decision process is shorter and more error prone.

 

[bustaheims]

If the GM not making him a priority is enough to get him to want to leave, he never really wanted to stay.

If the team and GM didn’t value him, they wouldn’t have offered him $13M+ to stay here.

 

[mr grieves]

Marner wanted to be here and a stupid GM ticked him off.​

Your evidence for this is one pretty (and characteristically) mealy mouthed quote from Marner in spring 2024. On the other side of that, there’s how his team handled his last negotiation—took it past the contract’s expiry—and plenty of credible reporting from people who are around the team and who get fed by Marner’s camp, and/or know when and why the media is getting fed, that Marner was losing interest in being a Leaf back in 2023.

His team seems not to have been forthright with the GM when he got here, and then his team declined to discuss a deal when that opportunity became available to both parties:

From Tre interviewed by Kyper and Bourne:

“I think Mitch is a tremendous player. I said it the day I got here. He is a top player and an unbelievable talent. Just look at his statistical production since he entered the league and in his time with the Leafs. He was a great Leaf.

We approached Mitch’s camp, even from the time I got here, about what his plans were. Those were always to be a Leaf. At the appropriate time, when we could, we approached him about engaging in a contract discussion. They made it clear that they wanted to wait.

As you go through that process, if you have been in the business long enough, you have gut feels about how things are going to go. By no means do I criticize the player. It is the player’s right.

You look at other options. Mitch negotiated a No-Movement Clause, which is fully in his rights. When we look at opportunities to move on or opportunities for potential transactions, at the end of the day, Mitch held the cards.

I am not going to get into the weeds here on those discussions. I think those are between me, his representative, and the player. I ask for honest conversations with my players and representatives. Those are held in confidence.”​

If I thought Marner wanted to stay here and would’ve done so at $12m but for Brad Treliving, I’d’ve been very upset this week. But I did my grieving for the talent downgrade and asset loss back in summer 2023, when this outcome was easy to see coming. That I’m sort of happy to see him go had more to do with relief that it’s finally over, and it doesn’t mean I don’t think Marner was the second best player on the team and the Leafs will be worse without him.

 

[AtomicMapleLeaf2]

I'm tired of this thread, I'm moving on and looking to next year. Lots of great posts

 

[Bender]

I think the fact that it's Marner who primarily wanted to leave is making this all a little bit easier for me. If he was 100% committed to staying and it was Treliving who made the call to let him walk I'd probably be spending the next several years, if not longer, constantly wondering if that was the right move. At this point though it was entirely out of the teams hands. Marner moved on, the team moved on, the fans will have to move on too.

Treliving repeatedly tried to sign him even when he just arrived according to the GM himself, which is getting conveniently forgotten. The Leafs didn't let him walk without trying to retain him. At the end of the day this is a Marner/Shanahan mess and both are very culpable and the hand wringing is getting tiring. Shanahan is gone, Marner is gone, now let's see how this shakes out.

 

[Bender]

If the GM not making him a priority is enough to get him to want to leave, he never really wanted to stay.

If the team and GM didn’t value him, they wouldn’t have offered him $13M+ to stay here.

Bourne today called he and his camp the most sensitive group in hockey history and I really don't think that's a stretch. Bourne is not a guy that I think generally speaks hyperbolically, and he did work as part of the Leafs org. That's enough for me, and the additional revisionist history nitpicking at what most players and agents wouldn't consider hard red lines of aggrievement is bordering on lunacy at this point. Give me Point, a lower cap hit, and a non-meddling camp over Marner every day of the week.

 

[Bullfrog]

Talent out the door, yes; I have a different opinion on the level of utility being lost here, but still there is a loss nonetheless. To say it's the best Leaf player being lost for virtually nothing is a stretch, though; maybe you are more flexible than I am.

But I think this makes the Leafs a better team because of all that off-ice stuff is also walking out the door, and the reset opportunity to build a deeper lineup where more players have roles and feel important. Having one player taking up all those minutes is, while technically efficient albeit expensive, means less space and opportunity for anyone else to step up.

No more Marner negotiations to deal with is a huge win. Getting anything back at all, let alone someone that matches his playoff goal scoring output and defensive utility, is a win.

So, outside of Sundin, who would even come close to Marner?

I don't know how anyone can think this makes the Leafs a better team. "all that off-ice stuff?" More players feel important? Serious?

Who cares about space and opportunity when you have one of the most talented players in the league who's still in his 20s? (well, you I suppose.)

 

[Bender]

So, outside of Sundin, who would even come close to Marner?

I don't know how anyone can think this makes the Leafs a better team. "all that off-ice stuff?" More players feel important? Serious?

Who cares about space and opportunity when you have one of the most talented players in the league who's still in his 20s? (well, you I suppose.)

If the team goes further next year in the playoffs then it's irrelevant. Do we think without Marner the team could do much worse than winning two rounds in nine years?

If there a hole without him? Yes. Will filling what he brings be difficult? Yes. Can we replace him one to one? No. Can more depth be a better way forward? Let's see. Because what we were doing hasn't worked.

 

[Bender]

Folks can occupy themselves with side issues of not liking Marner's personality, not liking his agent's personality, not liking his father's personality, not liking the fact that he is wasn't acting the way you think somebody from Toronto should be acting, having a boycrush on a different player, the relative income tax structure of jurisdiction A vs B. That's all just fine.

It's all noise from off the ice, though.

On the ice, the bottom line is that Leafs just lost their best all-round player, one of the best they ever had, one of the best they will have in the foreseeable future, and will be replacing him with a motley collection of run-of-the-mill journeymen — a mess of pottage, if I may quote the Good Book. The Marchand dream was always just that, a pipe dream. There is no one coming to the rescue. No amount of lineup tweaking is going to make up for the loss.

The Leafs will be a worse team next year, and quite likely for the remainder of the Matthews era. Their chances of winning the Cup just went down. Harp all you want about the Core 4s failures to date, but talent wins championships. When you have it, you do everything to keep it. You keep trying to build on it. You don't let it slip through your fingers.

Could they win a Cup without Marner? Of course. But the already low odds are now lower.

This is, simply put, a hockey disaster. Maybe not the darkest day in Leafs history. Well, actually maybe it is.

PS: Almost forgot to add: and much less FUN to watch. That is not insignificant.

Darkest day in Leafs history? Really? Just off the top of my head Ace Bailey was almost literally killed on the ice and his playing career ended.

 

[ZBBM]

Brad Treliving on whether he would've handled the Mitch Marner situation differently in hindsight: "At the end of the day, there wasn't a path to a different outcome"

On the second day of free agency, General Manager Brad Treliving (courtesy of Real Kyper & Bourne) discussed the fallout of Mitch Marner’s exit, the team’s new offseason additions, and the holes still to be filled on the roster. There are some Leafs fans who are disappointed that there wasn’t a...

mapleleafshotstove.com

Here's a tip for you, Brad: you don't get to excuse yourself by saying the outcome was inevitable. That's nonsense. You don't get to pronounce judgment on yourself. That will come in time when, perhaps, a consensus will emerge one way or the other. I think a consensus will come about, and I am pretty confident which way this will go down in hockey history, but we'll just have to wait and see.

In the meantime, this segment of the interview was just self-serving.