The Chicago Blackhawks will be looking to add serious firepower to the lineup next season. To do so, the Hawks will kick the tires on every top free agent on the market this offseason to see who would be interested in coming over to the Windy City.
As an article in the Chicago Sun-Times pointed out back in March, the Blackhawks have had trouble luring top free agents to a team that’s still very much in the midst of rebuilding. For instance, the piece pointed out the concerted effort to sign Jake Guentzel last summer. However, Guentzel preferred to sign with the Tampa Bay Lightning.
Why?
According to the article, Guentzel passing on the Blackhawks was largely due to their lack of competitiveness at this point. While there’s reason to believe that’s the case, the fact is that the Blackhawks have put key pieces in place to be a long-term contender.
So, that brings us to Mitch Marner.
Will the Chicago Blackhawks pursue Mitch Marner?
Absolutely. The Blackhawks will make a run at the biggest free-agent fish this summer. The Hawks have the cap space and an open spot on their top line for a guy like Marner to step in and run the show.
But then again, there’s reason to believe that landing Marner isn’t everything that he’s cracked up to be. So, let’s explore the argument against signing Mitch Marner this offseason.
Signing Mitch Marner would be terrible idea for Chicago Blackhawks
The contract itself
Let’s start from the top. Mitch Marner has said all along that he wanted to make more than Auston Matthews’ $13.6 million contract. When Matthews signed his deal last season, it made him the highest paid player in the league. Since then, Leon Draisaitl’s $14 million AAV became the most lucrative contract.
That situation meant that Marner’s asking price starts at $14 million. Now, that’s not much of an asking price because he’s not willing to budge from that. Marner and his camp believe he’s worth every penny and will be looking to cash in.
Then, there’s term. Marner wants the highest AAV in the league to go with a max-term, seven-year deal. Unless the Blackhawks trade for his rights before the opening of free agency, the most they can offer is seven years. So, seven years at, say, $14 million AAV is out of the question. It’s far too much money tied into one player who has yet to win anything meaningful in the NHL.
Lack of proven success
The tail end of the previous point makes Marner a desirable free agent, but not the kind that teams would break the bank for.
Marner hasn’t won anything during his time in the NHL. No Cups. No major awards. No outstanding individual achievements. Yes, he has a solid track record of putting up points in the regular season. He’s the type of player that makes everyone around him better.
But that hasn’t translated into postseason success. Not even a deep playoff run.
An argument could be made that it’s not his fault that the Toronto Maple Leafs haven’t been successful. That’s partially true. But the fact is that when his team has needed him to step up, Marner hasn’t been there.
As the Blackhawks look to build a contending team, they’ll need consummate gamers. Guys that can step up and play their best hockey when the chips are on the table.
Thus far, that hasn’t been Mitch Marner.
Marner's contract could become an albatross
Let’s assume for a second that the Blackhawks go all-in and pay whatever it takes to get Marner. That situation could tip the scales in favor of the Hawks, making the team a wild card contender this upcoming season.
That’s good in the short term. But what about the long term?
The problem is that the Hawks will need to max out Marner’s contract. That situation could mean Marner’s contract might become an albatross down the road. Let’s think about five or even six years down the road.
Will Marner still be an effective player at around 33 or 34 years old?
What if injuries catch up to him?
Will the Blackhawks be able to trade his contract then?
Those questions should raise legitimate concerns for the Blackhawks since the club will be expected to compete by then. As such, an anchor of a contract like Marner’s could make it tough for the Hawks to re-sign players or attract new free agents.
If Marner doesn’t live up to his mega-contract, a buyout could be on the horizon. That situation means dead cap space further limiting the team’s ability to utilize its resources to build a winning team.
If Marner were five years younger, I’d say go for it. But in my estimation, any team that signs him long term, other than the Toronto Maple Leafs, will be taking a huge gamble that might not yield the desired outcomes.
