What Is Best For Matthew Tkachuk

[robrob74]

39 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

So Are we a play off team without Tkachuk in our lineup? - The answer is Yes

Are we a better playoff team with 7.5 m in free agents? The answer could be Yes depending on the players available.

Are we a better team paying Tkachuk 8 or 8.5 or 9 this season and the next few. I think the answer is No

Sitting Tkachuk for a year might be the best thing for the Flames and the League.

 

I can agree with that. It just really depends on the players. 

 

A lot say he is a major pest. He didn’t play that way this whole season. He went for the points and barely got under anyone’s skin.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

I can agree with that. It just really depends on the players. 

 

A lot say he is a major pest. He didn’t play that way this whole season. He went for the points and barely got under anyone’s skin.

He was still 2nd on the team/17th overall in that department. I think players are just learning to ignore him.

[robrob74]

5 minutes ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

He was still 2nd on the team/17th overall in that department. I think players are just learning to ignore him.

 

Yup! That entered my mind as I was typing my response, as a probability.

 

i think I think like the more schrewed GMs. I want the good guys to get paid but not the percentage of the cap they get because you just can’t win once they’re making top dollars.

[travel_dude]

Some really bizzare coments here about Tkachuk.

He plays the hardest minutes against the best players.

His linemates are a guy who scores about 45 points and a guy that hasn't scored above 34 points in 3 years.

Draws more penalties than 99% of players in the league.

Produces on the PP.

 

Sure, why would we need someone like that over an overpaid UFA or a bunch of PTO that couldn;t get jobs.

We'd be fine without him for the season.

Made the playoffs once without him.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

Some really bizzare coments here about Tkachuk.

He plays the hardest minutes against the best players.

His linemates are a guy who scores about 45 points and a guy that hasn't scored above 34 points in 3 years.

Draws more penalties than 99% of players in the league.

Produces on the PP.

 

Sure, why would we need someone like that over an overpaid UFA or a bunch of PTO that couldn;t get jobs.

We'd be fine without him for the season.

Made the playoffs once without him.

 

I think he is captain material. I think he does almost everything well. I also think he benefits more than some give credit for by playing with Backlund and Gaudreau (when on the PP). 

 

I think if he is so good on the PP and is an elite play driver, have him play the 2nd PP and make it dangerous instead of putting all of the big guns on PP1?

 

lets see how dangerous he is on his own.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

6 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I think he is captain material. I think he does almost everything well. I also think he benefits more than some give credit for by playing with Backlund and Gaudreau (when on the PP). 

 

I think if he is so good on the PP and is an elite play driver, have him play the 2nd PP and make it dangerous instead of putting all of the big guns on PP1?

 

lets see how dangerous he is on his own.

He wont drive either PP nor is he needed to. Since he parks himself in the goal crease and gets either the rebounds or tip ins put him on PP2 with the shooting d-men. If you want, try Lucic in front of the net on PP1 and see what happens.

[cccsberg]

11 hours ago, travel_dude said:

Some really bizzare coments here about Tkachuk.

He plays the hardest minutes against the best players.

His linemates are a guy who scores about 45 points and a guy that hasn't scored above 34 points in 3 years.

Draws more penalties than 99% of players in the league.

Produces on the PP.

 

Sure, why would we need someone like that over an overpaid UFA or a bunch of PTO that couldn;t get jobs.

We'd be fine without him for the season.

Made the playoffs once without him.

Look, I love Tkachuk, but no single player, e.g. “McJesus” up north, guarantees success.  It is a team game and the whole team needs to work to ensure a high probability of success.  The problem with giving Tkachuk the $8.5-$9mm he may want (and deserve?) is it upsets the delicate balance BT has worked to put together.  If Tkachuk signs a high ($6-$7mm) bridge deal for let’s say 3 years the team aspect is maintained and when up for renewal it happens after the Gio contract and he can lead the way forward.  We saw last year that Tkachuk with the team came up short, Tkachuk at high $s is likely worse internally and without Tkachuk is likely worse, but at least cohesive and provides a great opportunity for a new guy, e.g. Dube.  That’s my take anyways.  Perhaps the players are all on Tkachuk’s side and it all falls apart without him..... that’s the risk.  

[travel_dude]

My comments about him have nothing to do with what I think he is worth.

But, let me put it this way.

3 years is dumb.

It doesn't buy anything.

Future cap screw up.

 

By making that deal, they are coming back to the table just short of UFA, and he would have arbitration rights.

Depending on the structure of the deal, the qualifying off could be high enough that Tkachuk signs it and then is a pending UFA.

Not saying he does, but any contract offer discussed before that is tabled has to be high enough tp buy all but one year of UFA status.

I just don;t get the logic.

[jjgallow]

Tkachuk is worth every penny.

 

There is no comparison to Gaudreau.  Points wise, Tkachuk is doing things at 21 that Gaudreau didn't manage until he was 23.

 

Goals wise...well,  it took Gaudreau until 26 to be comparable.

 

Then there's size, physical presence, etc.

 

That said, I don't care whether they sign him or trade him.    A player should consider taking a bit of a discount to stay in a great hockey city like he is in.

 

If he's going to be greedy and won't do a bit of a deal, trade him.    But get full value.   Because he's for real.

 

 

[cccsberg]

16 hours ago, travel_dude said:

My comments about him have nothing to do with what I think he is worth.

But, let me put it this way.

3 years is dumb.

It doesn't buy anything.

Future cap screw up.

 

By making that deal, they are coming back to the table just short of UFA, and he would have arbitration rights.

Depending on the structure of the deal, the qualifying off could be high enough that Tkachuk signs it and then is a pending UFA.

Not saying he does, but any contract offer discussed before that is tabled has to be high enough tp buy all but one year of UFA status.

I just don;t get the logic.

I agree with most of your points, it’s crazy out there.  However, it seems that these RFAs have decided to take control of their careers by whatever means required.  Now, I don’t necessarily disagree with that sentiment, I just realize we’ve got to start thinking guys will be gone ASAP of their own volition, unless a team ponies up UFA-type $s for their second contracts.  I’m not going there as I feel it is destructive to team-building and the game overall.   As I’ve stated many times, this is the ultimate team game, and I want a powerful team not just a couple of superstars but weakness everywhere else.  Look at the Oilers.....junk.   Look at the TML, can’t win a first round series.... it goes on and on.  Tkachuk currently is an excellent player and could develop even further, but he is still only the 4th or 5th best player on the team.  Sign him for 3 years, we’ll have 3 solid contending years before major, core changes are required.  It’s the new NHL.

[cccsberg]

12 hours ago, jjgallow said:

Tkachuk is worth every penny.

 

There is no comparison to Gaudreau.  Points wise, Tkachuk is doing things at 21 that Gaudreau didn't manage until he was 23.

 

Goals wise...well,  it took Gaudreau until 26 to be comparable.

 

Then there's size, physical presence, etc.

 

That said, I don't care whether they sign him or trade him.    A player should consider taking a bit of a discount to stay in a great hockey city like he is in.

 

If he's going to be greedy and won't do a bit of a deal, trade him.    But get full value.   Because he's for real.

 

 

Tkachuk is for real, but a simplistic age/production comparison is a bit disingenuous.  Gaudreau went the college route so never had a chance to prove what he could do very young, in the NHL.  In college he did pretty good, leading his team to a National Championship plus scoring over 2pts per game, close to an all-time college record.  Also, Gaudreau is THE DRIVER for the team and gets max defensive attention plus physical abuse, way more than Tkachuk does.  Tkachuk does an admirable job on the Backlund shutdown line, but let’s be honest, many, many top lines don’t even know what defense is much less know how to play it.  Tkachuk is very good, but implying he is way ahead of Gaudreau and much more valuable is just not right.

[travel_dude]

12 hours ago, jjgallow said:

Tkachuk is worth every penny.

 

There is no comparison to Gaudreau.  Points wise, Tkachuk is doing things at 21 that Gaudreau didn't manage until he was 23.

 

Goals wise...well,  it took Gaudreau until 26 to be comparable.

 

Then there's size, physical presence, etc.

 

That said, I don't care whether they sign him or trade him.    A player should consider taking a bit of a discount to stay in a great hockey city like he is in.

 

If he's going to be greedy and won't do a bit of a deal, trade him.    But get full value.   Because he's for real.

 

 

 

I don't know he's being greedy or not.

It's about what makes sense to the team and for him.

Marner is being greedy.

Matthews was a greedy deal.

Tkachuk should be the highest paid Flames, even only just the reality of a higher cap.

 

[travel_dude]

55 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

I agree with most of your points, it’s crazy out there.  However, it seems that these RFAs have decided to take control of their careers by whatever means required.  Now, I don’t necessarily disagree with that sentiment, I just realize we’ve got to start thinking guys will be gone ASAP of their own volition, unless a team ponies up UFA-type $s for their second contracts.  I’m not going there as I feel it is destructive to team-building and the game overall.   As I’ve stated many times, this is the ultimate team game, and I want a powerful team not just a couple of superstars but weakness everywhere else.  Look at the Oilers.....junk.   Look at the TML, can’t win a first round series.... it goes on and on.  Tkachuk currently is an excellent player and could develop even further, but he is still only the 4th or 5th best player on the team.  Sign him for 3 years, we’ll have 3 solid contending years before major, core changes are required.  It’s the new NHL.

 

And my point has been all along that you sign a deal that makes sense.

3 years does not.

If there was a chance at 4-5 for 3 years then yes, it would be a good bridge deal.

That doesn;t exit anymore, and most of that is rising salaries.

 

I would not be opposed to 5, 6, 7 or 8 years.

But we are limited by available cap, not what the player is worth.

He should not make 10m.

Kucherov is on a 3rd contract at 9.5m.

But he's also not a defensive foward.

And he plays with one of the league's best players. 

Eventually you have to pay Tkachuk that money.

 

Many teams look at inflation and rising cap as opportunity.

Sign while it's lower.

Commit to 8 years and be sone with it.

We didn;t sign Gaudreau long term because of an artificial Gio cap.

Dumb move in retrospect.

McD and Drai signed long term because they are core.

Gio is not core long term.

JH, Mony and Tkachuk are.

Too much waste on middling players.

Lucic, Frolik, Bennett, Janko, Ryan....

When I say mddling, I mean for depth players.

If any of them play in the top 6, then they are paid their worth (except Lucic).

4th line or limited production on the 3rd line make them overpaid, some not too bad but still a little overpaid.

 

[cross16]

Again nothing ground breaking or surprising but Tkachuk come up in Friedman's 31 Thoughts

 

Quote

The dynamic is similar with Matthew Tkachuk in Calgary. A five-to-eight year term makes him the highest-paid Flame. Everyone understands that. But how much higher than Gaudreau and Mark Giordano is the question. 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/31-thoughts-tense-rfa-waiting-game-hits-final-stages/

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Again nothing ground breaking or surprising but Tkachuk come up in Friedman's 31 Thoughts

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/31-thoughts-tense-rfa-waiting-game-hits-final-stages/

 

Werenski recently signed a 3-year deal.  He will still be RFA after his contract ends.  I think the Flames and Tkachuk should look more closely at a 3-year deal if the concern is keeping the cap hit down.

 

• Tkachuk will still be RFA after the contract finishes. Not necessarily a bad thing for Tkachuk if he can structure the deal similar to Timo Meier where the final year is $10-mil.  If the Flames don't qualify him then he goes UFA one year earlier.
• Cap supposed to go up in 2-years from new US TV deal.  Tkachuk could cash in from a significantly higher team cap at that point.
• Giordano's contract is done.  No more "you can't get paid more than Giordano".

[bosn111]

Some posters are saying things similar to my thoughts. I guess where I come at this contract dealing is from the idea that some players have caused a significant inflation in contracts that the concept of a salary cap was intended to prevent. The issue with the constantly rising cap has helped with this as well.

 

The whole concept of a cap was to keep salaries in check as teams needed to be able to sign a full team to contracts and so no single contract was disproportionate to the rest. The recent signings of certain young stars has definitely thrown that whole system out of whack.

 

When I look at the contracts of players like Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin and such I can accept where the payment comes from. When Crosby signed his 8.7 mil per season deal, he had played 2 seasons, Both were 30+ goals and 100 point + seasons include at least a point per game pace in the playoffs. He was, in of himself, the new heart of the team. Malkin signed the same cap contract the following year with slightly lower stats, but only just. He had 85 and 106 points. He also had .8 and over 1 point per game over 2 playoff runs. Ovechkin seemed to get more money for his higher goal totals, even though he had fewer points than either Crosby or Malkin and virtually no playoff experience. While these were huge contracts at the time, and still are in terms or dollar amounts, these 3 were, and are still, some of the best players in the NHL and were absolutely on the rise.

 

I am willing to point to the McDavid contract as similar to these 3 above. He got paid following a 30 goal, 100 point season and is on the rise. I believe his contract is too high, I would have expected more in the low 10 mil range based on Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin but at least it is a player who is considered a perennial all star and likely a lock for hall of fame. Draisaitl was overpaid, it was 2 seasons later that he broke 80 points in a season and 30 goals, so 8.5 was a little much. These 2 really started the inflation for young players.

 

Matthews is insane overpayment. There is no reason based on what he has accomplished to deserve the money he got. His numbers are lower than Draisatl but he makes nearly 50% more? That is not simply inflation, that is a foolish GM. Matthews has only broken 70 points once, has limited playoff success with his team, has hit 40 goals once. Even with his goal scoring results being better than McDavid, he trailed McDavid in numerous other aspects and had a better team to work with than McDavid did. He should not have gotten much more than 10 mil a season.

 

The Leafs shot themselves in the foot with Matthews, causing Nylander's cap hit to inflate, and now Marner's. Nylander had 22 and 20 goals in successive 61 point seasons. He has not accomplished better and this past season was not even on pace to match those numbers. I guess the agent said more than half the goals, almost as many points, he should be paid more than half the salary of Matthews. While this makes sense, Matthews was overpaid. Nylander should have been in the 5 - 6 range, not almost 7. Marner has outperformed Nylander, and points wise Matthews though has fewer goals than Matthews, so he is deserving of more money than Nylander. IF points alone are the judge, Marner should make more, but there are often premiums for goals (Ovechkin, Matthews) and so he likely deserves similar or less. I would peg Marner in the 8-9 mil range realistically, but due to Matthews and Nylander contracts, he is likely going in the 10+ range.

 

This brings us to Tkachuk. 34 goals, 77 points. Preceded by 24, 49 and 13, 48. Tkachuk has not hit 40 goals, so his premium that route is lower than that of Matthews. He has not hit the same assists and points as Marner, so that bumps down a bit. He is better than Nylander. In a reasonable world, Tkachuk should be in the 7.5-8 mil range based on results and historically signed contracts, but with the Matthews, Nylander, Drasaitl inflations, you know that his agent is looking in the 9-10 range easily. 

 

Thanks in large part to a few GM's willing to give out significantly inflated contracts, they have screwed over the other teams, which is what the salary cap was designed to avoid. I hope that the Flames can use the Aho contract as leverage to bring the Chucky contract back down to 8.5 or less. 30 goals, 83 points is a much closer comparable directly, it was an offer sheet and therefore actually a reasonable number. Still hope to get it closer to 8 but Aho's 8.45 is likely an easy comparison for Tkachuk. Mind you, Aho performed in the playoffs so that might help lower cap hit a little. Also Kucherov at 39,100 and 41, 128 is only 9.5 mil and he has some playoff results as well so that should help in the Flames favour as well.

 

Even if the Flames can get Tkachuk for 8 mil, they still need to move out close to 1.5 mil salary to re-sign him and Mange. More if they want any wiggle room and more still for a 7th Man with Valimaki out all season.

 

 

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

29 minutes ago, bosn111 said:

Some posters are saying things similar to my thoughts. I guess where I come at this contract dealing is from the idea that some players have caused a significant inflation in contracts that the concept of a salary cap was intended to prevent. The issue with the constantly rising cap has helped with this as well.

 

The whole concept of a cap was to keep salaries in check as teams needed to be able to sign a full team to contracts and so no single contract was disproportionate to the rest. The recent signings of certain young stars has definitely thrown that whole system out of whack.

 

When I look at the contracts of players like Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin and such I can accept where the payment comes from. When Crosby signed his 8.7 mil per season deal, he had played 2 seasons, Both were 30+ goals and 100 point + seasons include at least a point per game pace in the playoffs. He was, in of himself, the new heart of the team. Malkin signed the same cap contract the following year with slightly lower stats, but only just. He had 85 and 106 points. He also had .8 and over 1 point per game over 2 playoff runs. Ovechkin seemed to get more money for his higher goal totals, even though he had fewer points than either Crosby or Malkin and virtually no playoff experience. While these were huge contracts at the time, and still are in terms or dollar amounts, these 3 were, and are still, some of the best players in the NHL and were absolutely on the rise.

 

I am willing to point to the McDavid contract as similar to these 3 above. He got paid following a 30 goal, 100 point season and is on the rise. I believe his contract is too high, I would have expected more in the low 10 mil range based on Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin but at least it is a player who is considered a perennial all star and likely a lock for hall of fame. Draisaitl was overpaid, it was 2 seasons later that he broke 80 points in a season and 30 goals, so 8.5 was a little much. These 2 really started the inflation for young players.

 

Matthews is insane overpayment. There is no reason based on what he has accomplished to deserve the money he got. His numbers are lower than Draisatl but he makes nearly 50% more? That is not simply inflation, that is a foolish GM. Matthews has only broken 70 points once, has limited playoff success with his team, has hit 40 goals once. Even with his goal scoring results being better than McDavid, he trailed McDavid in numerous other aspects and had a better team to work with than McDavid did. He should not have gotten much more than 10 mil a season.

 

The Leafs shot themselves in the foot with Matthews, causing Nylander's cap hit to inflate, and now Marner's. Nylander had 22 and 20 goals in successive 61 point seasons. He has not accomplished better and this past season was not even on pace to match those numbers. I guess the agent said more than half the goals, almost as many points, he should be paid more than half the salary of Matthews. While this makes sense, Matthews was overpaid. Nylander should have been in the 5 - 6 range, not almost 7. Marner has outperformed Nylander, and points wise Matthews though has fewer goals than Matthews, so he is deserving of more money than Nylander. IF points alone are the judge, Marner should make more, but there are often premiums for goals (Ovechkin, Matthews) and so he likely deserves similar or less. I would peg Marner in the 8-9 mil range realistically, but due to Matthews and Nylander contracts, he is likely going in the 10+ range.

 

This brings us to Tkachuk. 34 goals, 77 points. Preceded by 24, 49 and 13, 48. Tkachuk has not hit 40 goals, so his premium that route is lower than that of Matthews. He has not hit the same assists and points as Marner, so that bumps down a bit. He is better than Nylander. In a reasonable world, Tkachuk should be in the 7.5-8 mil range based on results and historically signed contracts, but with the Matthews, Nylander, Drasaitl inflations, you know that his agent is looking in the 9-10 range easily. 

 

Thanks in large part to a few GM's willing to give out significantly inflated contracts, they have screwed over the other teams, which is what the salary cap was designed to avoid. I hope that the Flames can use the Aho contract as leverage to bring the Chucky contract back down to 8.5 or less. 30 goals, 83 points is a much closer comparable directly, it was an offer sheet and therefore actually a reasonable number. Still hope to get it closer to 8 but Aho's 8.45 is likely an easy comparison for Tkachuk. Mind you, Aho performed in the playoffs so that might help lower cap hit a little. Also Kucherov at 39,100 and 41, 128 is only 9.5 mil and he has some playoff results as well so that should help in the Flames favour as well.

 

Even if the Flames can get Tkachuk for 8 mil, they still need to move out close to 1.5 mil salary to re-sign him and Mange. More if they want any wiggle room and more still for a 7th Man with Valimaki out all season.

 

 

Great post and I agree on most of your points. The only problem I see is you're only using hard #s to justify salaries whereas although not 100% certain, alot more tangibles are likely factored in during discussions. (PP, face off, defensive awareness, etc). How much are those factors used? no idea. All I know is you're right about the salaries getting out of hand again which lets me believe were in for another lockout in the near future.

[travel_dude]

6 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Werenski recently signed a 3-year deal.  He will still be RFA after his contract ends.  I think the Flames and Tkachuk should look more closely at a 3-year deal if the concern is keeping the cap hit down.

 

• Tkachuk will still be RFA after the contract finishes. Not necessarily a bad thing for Tkachuk if he can structure the deal similar to Timo Meier where the final year is $10-mil.  If the Flames don't qualify him then he goes UFA one year earlier.
• Cap supposed to go up in 2-years from new US TV deal.  Tkachuk could cash in from a significantly higher team cap at that point.
• Giordano's contract is done.  No more "you can't get paid more than Giordano".

 

I get what you are saying, but why would the Flames want it.

Tkachuk gets a QO and signs it.

He gets north of $10m for a year and gets to go UFA his next year.

Bad deal for the Flames for a short term cap savings.

Great deal for Tkachuk.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

I get what you are saying, but why would the Flames want it.

Tkachuk gets a QO and signs it.

He gets north of $10m for a year and gets to go UFA his next year.

Bad deal for the Flames for a short term cap savings.

Great deal for Tkachuk.

 

Because they get short term cap savings and still retain the rights to Tkachuk after year 3.  An eight year extension can still happen at that point.  They may get to keep the "no one gets paid more than Giordano" for 3 years.

 

So somehow average $6.75-mil over 3 years.

[redfire11]

3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Because they get short term cap savings and still retain the rights to Tkachuk after year 3.  An eight year extension can still happen at that point.  They may get to keep the "no one gets paid more than Giordano" for 3 years.

 

So somehow average $6.75-mil over 3 years.

With JG's contract due in 3 years and our cap most likely rising significantly in 2 years would not a 2 year deal be productive for both parties?

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Because they get short term cap savings and still retain the rights to Tkachuk after year 3.  An eight year extension can still happen at that point.  They may get to keep the "no one gets paid more than Giordano" for 3 years.

 

So somehow average $6.75-mil over 3 years.

 

I get the cap part, but I don't follow how giving Tkachuk a QO of $10m benefits them.

He goes UFA the next year if he accepts, which he would be crazy not to do.

A pending UFA Tkachuk is more expensive.

[The_People1]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

 

I get the cap part, but I don't follow how giving Tkachuk a QO of $10m benefits them.

He goes UFA the next year if he accepts, which he would be crazy not to do.

A pending UFA Tkachuk is more expensive.

 

Depends what's more important.  "the cap part" may weigh more than everything else combined.

[cross16]

20 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Werenski recently signed a 3-year deal.  He will still be RFA after his contract ends.  I think the Flames and Tkachuk should look more closely at a 3-year deal if the concern is keeping the cap hit down.

 

• Tkachuk will still be RFA after the contract finishes. Not necessarily a bad thing for Tkachuk if he can structure the deal similar to Timo Meier where the final year is $10-mil.  If the Flames don't qualify him then he goes UFA one year earlier.
• Cap supposed to go up in 2-years from new US TV deal.  Tkachuk could cash in from a significantly higher team cap at that point.
• Giordano's contract is done.  No more "you can't get paid more than Giordano".

 

I don't mind the 3 year idea, not ideal but at this point it may be where it winds up but I really don't like the 10mill qualifying offer idea. The only way that would work is Tkachuk would have to take less than gaudreau and even for 3 years i'm not sure that is going to happen. Tkachuk has more negotiating power than Meir. 

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't mind the 3 year idea, not ideal but at this point it may be where it winds up but I really don't like the 10mill qualifying offer idea. The only way that would work is Tkachuk would have to take less than gaudreau and even for 3 years i'm not sure that is going to happen. Tkachuk has more negotiating power than Meir. 

 

The irony is though, Tkachuk might be worth $10-mil in 3-years time so it's somewhat of a non-issue.  Partly because he will prove he's that good and partly because the cap will go up significantly from a new US TV Deal.  We can try to extend him during his final year too to avoid the qualifying offer entirely.

[robrob74]

41 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

The irony is though, Tkachuk might be worth $10-mil in 3-years time so it's somewhat of a non-issue.  Partly because he will prove he's that good and partly because the cap will go up significantly from a new US TV Deal.  We can try to extend him during his final year too to avoid the qualifying offer entirely.

 

 

Marner just turned down $11m per for 7yrs because in 3 years they could sign an even bigger contract.  

 

Apparently these players don't like winning. With salaries that high it’s next to impossible to build a competitive team around them. Jesus!