Yeah, I just don't get why there is a third year. There is no way he had other 3 year offers.

I also don't like how people are saying he's an easy trade at that price. I think it likely will be easy to trade him, but I don't like the assumption. We may doubt it will be a problem (and it probably won't be). But if it was a 2 year contract, we would be certain of it.
- prock

I am guessing he never plays that 3rd season, or plays somewhere else, or retires and the contract is traded.

On the other hand, maybe he is still a good player and the Leafs want him on the team.

Or maybe they just need to eat that salary for a year. 1 year of one bad contract doesn't mess up the team... regardless of whether Sens fans want to put all their hope into it.

I am guessing he never plays that 3rd season, or plays somewhere else, or retires and the contract is traded.

On the other hand, maybe he is still a good player and the Leafs want him on the team.

Or maybe they just need to eat that salary for a year. 1 year of one bad contract doesn't mess up the team... regardless of whether Sens fans want to put all their hope into it.
- Aetherial

35 plus contract. If he isn't going to count against the cap, he has to be traded. I don't even think sending him to Robidas island works. It has to be a trade.

but yes, you're right, he could very well still be scoring more goals than Bobby Ryan scores points in 3 years.

35 plus contract. If he isn't going to count against the cap, he has to be traded. I don't even think sending him to Robidas island works. It has to be a trade.

but yes, you're right, he could very well still be scoring more goals than Bobby Ryan scores points in 3 years.
- prock

I know.

That is why I assume we end up paying it.

Yeah. I never denied it. I don't think it will hurt them, but I don't see why it was necessary. Surely he didn't have any other offers anywhere near that.

I don't really care though, as I say, I don't think it will hurt them.

The 3 signings are just plugging holes. I won't say they're great signings, like some will try to claim. I think they're rather insignificant. I would rather they have spent the money they spent on Marleau, on an upgrade at D.

However, if this allows them to (and they actually do) trade Bozak or JVR, for either a dman, or some high picks, then I'm happy with it. (which, of course, I said from the beginning). If they do that, it's actually incredibly shrewd. Until that point though, I think the signings are rather "meh".
- prock

I think it was a good signing. A quiet vet who won't command the spotlight and just reinforce the young core. You're bound to either overpay in term and length in UFA. The last year won't coincide with some cap complications but it might be one of those good problems if the kids keep developing.

I suspect Marner, Nylander and Matthews might be in store for a slight regression or a temporary plateau as teams will adjust but you can't deny the high skill level all three possess.

I think it was a good signing. A quiet vet who won't command the spotlight and just reinforce the young core. You're bound to either overpay in term and length in UFA. The last year won't coincide with some cap complications but it might be one of those good problems if the kids keep developing.

I suspect Marner, Nylander and Matthews might be in store for a slight regression or a temporary plateau as teams will adjust but you can't deny the high skill level all three possess.
- Cape Breton Bruins

I think you are right on all accounts... but that 3rd year of the Marleau contract might hurt.

As far as signing vets in general... I have no problem with short term veteran signings for a very young team to fill holes until kids are ready. I have no idea where Sens fans even find room to criticize it.

I think it was a good signing. A quiet vet who won't command the spotlight and just reinforce the young core. You're bound to either overpay in term and length in UFA. The last year won't coincide with some cap complications but it might be one of those good problems if the kids keep developing.

I suspect Marner, Nylander and Matthews might be in store for a slight regression or a temporary plateau as teams will adjust but you can't deny the high skill level all three possess.
- Cape Breton Bruins

I don't really think he brings much the Leafs don't already have in spades.

Which is why I say, if it means they trade off someone like JVR, it ends up being JVR for Marleau and a first, or something like that, in which case it's a pretty big win.

I think you are right on all accounts... but that 3rd year of the Marleau contract might hurt.

As far as signing vets in general... I have no problem with short term veteran signings for a very young team to fill holes until kids are ready. I have no idea where Sens fans even find room to criticize it.
- Aetherial

so, we're pretty much all on the same page. The signing is decent, not spectacular, but nobody is really a fan of the third year, but all feel the chances of hurting them aren't particularly high. And they may be able to turn it into a big win.

so, we're pretty much all on the same page. The signing is decent, not spectacular, but nobody is really a fan of the third year, but all feel the chances of hurting them aren't particularly high. And they may be able to turn it into a big win.
- prock

yup

I'm not sure why he's going down that road. Does he think as Toronto sports fans we aren't happy with what's going on?

It's an absolutely great time to be a sports fan in Toronto.
- prock

Yeah, cheering on those last place jays must be a lot of fun, or great, as you say.

Yeah, cheering on those last place jays must be a lot of fun, or great, as you say.
- D0PPELGANGER

So much better to cheer for the winless Red Blacks!

So much better to cheer for the winless Red Blacks!
- Feeling Glucky?

I hear it's better than going to a turds game.

Their parking lot is way better.

Budget team just gave 3rd liner 3.1M/year.


Love it.
- Feeling Glucky?

So are they a "budget team" ............ kind of an oxymoron isn't it?

How about this one?
https://twitter.com/dju08...status/886965793552052224

I hear it's better than going to a turds game.

Their parking lot is way better.
- prock

there is no parking at Redblacks games........ have you seen what they've done to the former parking lot around the Stadium?

there is no parking at Redblacks games........ have you seen what they've done to the former parking lot around the Stadium?


- D0PPELGANGER

Have I seen the Redblacks stadium?

Is this a joke question?

I've been to Winnipeg on work. Not an enjoyable experience. I've never been sent to Ottawa on work. Fingers crossed I never do. I've been to Ottawa when I was in school. But I was just there to play Carleton's lacrosse team (I played for Western).

Have I seen the Redblacks stadium?

Is this a joke question?

I've been to Winnipeg on work. Not an enjoyable experience. I've never been sent to Ottawa on work. Fingers crossed I never do. I've been to Ottawa when I was in school. But I was just there to play Carleton's lacrosse team (I played for Western).
- prock

Wow, lacrosse ........ that's a tough sport. What year was it that you came to play vs Carleton, and who won?

Wow, lacrosse ........ that's a tough sport. What year was it that you came to play vs Carleton, and who won?
- D0PPELGANGER

I played for Western in 95 and 96. I don't recall who won those particular games, it was a long time ago. Most likely we did. We were the Ontario Bronze medalists both those years. Brock won just about every year (the St Catherines region has a lot of 6 nations, and many of them go to Brock. Lacrosse very popular there). I don't recall who was the second place team either year. Maybe Queens? Trent? I don't remember.

Edit - not as tough a sport as you think either. The universities play field lacrosse. Not box lacrosse. It's much more wide open, and not as much hitting. I mean, cross checking is legal and all, and they don't have to have the ball (within 9 feet IIRC), but a cross check when you're running is not the same as a cross check when you're on skates.

I played for Western in 95 and 96. I don't recall who won those particular games, it was a long time ago. Most likely we did. We were the Ontario Bronze medalists both those years. Brock won just about every year (the St Catherines region has a lot of 6 nations, and many of them go to Brock. Lacrosse very popular there). I don't recall who was the second place team either year. Maybe Queens? Trent? I don't remember.

Edit - not as tough a sport as you think either. The universities play field lacrosse. Not box lacrosse. It's much more wide open, and not as much hitting. I mean, cross checking is legal and all, and they don't have to have the ball (within 9 feet IIRC), but a cross check when you're running is not the same as a cross check when you're on skates.
- prock

Still impressive.

The Champions get the Baggataway Cup, right?

Still impressive.

The Champions get the Baggataway Cup, right?
- D0PPELGANGER

If they do, I don't remember that. It was a long time ago. And we never won it, so I don't have any plaque or anything.

Lacrosse wasn't an overly supported sport in those days. We weren't funded by the school. I think only a couple of the universities funded their lacrosse team in those days. For all I remember there may not have even been a big cup.

If they do, I don't remember that. It was a long time ago. And we never won it, so I don't have any plaque or anything.

Lacrosse wasn't an overly supported sport in those days. We weren't funded by the school. I think only a couple of the universities funded their lacrosse team in those days. For all I remember there may not have even been a big cup.
- prock

I played in the regional playoffs, to see which team would be sent to the Little League World series, back in the 60's ............. the American teams kicked our asses, did not win a game.

I played in the regional playoffs, to see which team would be sent to the Little League World series, back in the 60's ............. the American teams kicked our asses, did not win a game.
- D0PPELGANGER

Field lacrosse was much the same. When I was in high school, I played in a tournament in Christchurch, West Virginia. A bunch of 16, 17, 18 year old boys, set loose on the place. The US teams ruined us. We lost most games by 10 to 15 goals. We were playing a bunch of private schools. I remember one was "Georgetown Prep Academy".

But they were all scared of us. We play lacrosse a lot tougher than they do. We hit like it's hockey. They don't. It's considered a "gentleman's sport" down there.

We attracted quite a crowd. All the teams in our division hated us. But the teams in all the other divisions would all come and watch our games. They thought it was hiliarious.

So are they a "budget team" ............ kind of an oxymoron isn't it?

How about this one?
https://twitter.com/dju08...status/886965793552052224
- D0PPELGANGER

Which word is it that you don't understand?
Budget, team, or oxymoron?

Which word is it that you don't understand?
Budget, team, or oxymoron?
- Feeling Glucky?

you keep saying the Sens owner is cheap ............ but he had no problem bringing in Burrows, and handing him a 2 year extension ........... and every time another player is re-signed, you always comment on how that player is now over paid ............ but you continue with the "cheap owner" narrative.

You can't have it both ways


Methinks you're just automatically negative about anything the Sens do, even though you continually contradict yourself in the process.


So are the Senators overpaying their players .............. or is the Owner to cheap to pay the players ........... which is it?


I know your answer will somehow be spun into both.

you keep saying the Sens owner is cheap ............ but he had no problem bringing in Burrows, and handing him a 2 year extension ........... and every time another player is re-signed, you always comment on how that player is now over paid ............ but you continue with the "cheap owner" narrative.

You can't have it both ways


Methinks you're just automatically negative about anything the Sens do, even though you continually contradict yourself in the process.


So are the Senators overpaying their players .............. or is the Owner to cheap to pay the players ........... which is it?


I know your answer will somehow be spun into both.
- D0PPELGANGER

The owner is cheap and the GM is an idiot.

There is no contradiction there.

you keep saying the Sens owner is cheap ............ but he had no problem bringing in Burrows, and handing him a 2 year extension ........... and every time another player is re-signed, you always comment on how that player is now over paid ............ but you continue with the "cheap owner" narrative.

You can't have it both ways


Methinks you're just automatically negative about anything the Sens do, even though you continually contradict yourself in the process.


So are the Senators overpaying their players .............. or is the Owner to cheap to pay the players ........... which is it?


I know your answer will somehow be spun into both.
- D0PPELGANGER

LOL! Burrows!

The owner overpays bad players which is cheaper than paying a fair price for great players.