Confirmed with Link: Maple Leafs re-sign Nikita Zaitsev for 7 years, $4.5M per

[Randy Randerson]

No getting around it, the term is the biggest risk here.

But this is the way of the NHL and the cap system. Younger players just don't get to UFA ages and if you think you have something... key word "think"... you've got to gamble on what is usually a limited set of data.

Just the way it is.

Could work. Might not. But if they feel after 1 year that they see something in the player... this is the way business is done nowadays.

No sense criticizing the reality.

Term might also be the factor that makes this deal the most team-friendly as well. What we got out of him last year seems fine at a $4.5M cap hit in a $73M cap world. By the end of the contract it will likely be an $85-$90M cap, so if he continues to play at the same level that's a great deal, if he improves at all then it could be one of the better contracts in the league

 

[TheProspector]

When Babcock paired Rielly (-20) and Zaitsev (-22) together as his top pairing to test their abilities to go up against the toughest competition on a nightly basis of the opposition the experiment failed based on that +/- factor of Leafs finishing pucks out of their own net as a result. Those 2 Dman considered among Leafs best were the 2 worst +/- Leaf players on the season.

In sharp contrast the top 4 +/- Leaf leaders were;
1) Gardiner +24
2) Polak +10
3) Hunwick +8
4) Carrick +8

So when any on these Dmen are on the ice paired together then more pucks go into the opposition net.

With 3 balanced offensive lines playing in front of the defense core, same coach, same system, playing in front of the same goalie producing completely opposite results is something worth analyzing why the drastic contrast.

What this shows is that Mo Riells and Zaitsev are on the ice there are more defense breakdowns and high goals against and as a shutdown tandem it simply doesn't work.

It's a rare day where I agree with Mess, but no, +/- isn't totally useless, even if it is quite flawed. The typical criticism of +/- is that it's a team stat, and players benefit/suffer from the ups and downs of their teammates. So when the +/- relative to their teammates is so massive, it tells you something.

But even using defensive micro stats, he's bad -- the worst. 65% exit success, and only 42.7% with possession.

And I honestly don't know how the eye test is telling anyone anything different. He looked good in international play, and he looked extremely overtaxed in the NHL.

 

[Battle Lin]

i dont know whos our best D, its pretty darn close, no1 knows for sure really...but i 100% know that zaitsev was babcocks most trusted defender last season, he used him against the best players in the nhl more than anyone else and as much as he could in all defensive zone situations

 

[Pookie]

Term? he is our best all around dman and he is only 25?

Yep. 7 years to a player with 1 year of NHL experience is a risk.

But again, it's the nature of the NHL cap world. You have to do it.

Best is subjective. I'm not attending that argument but appreciate the invitation

 

[TheProspector]

i dont know whos our best D, its pretty darn close, no1 knows for sure really...but i 100% know that zaitsev was babcocks most trusted defender last season, he used him against the best players in the nhl more than anyone else and as much as he could in all defensive zone situations

....and he failed miserably at it. So, if Babcock's estimation is right, we have a serious problem on D. (which we probably do, given our GA.)

And instead of addressing it this offseason, we added at F. So mystifying.

 

[Pookie]

Term might also be the factor that makes this deal the most team-friendly as well. What we got out of him last year seems fine at a $4.5M cap hit in a $73M cap world. By the end of the contract it will likely be an $85-$90M cap, so if he continues to play at the same level that's a great deal, if he improves at all then it could be one of the better contracts in the league

Exactly. That's why it's a gamble.

Could work out.

With the UFA age where it is, this type of thing is the norm though. Lots of teams gamble on players through their UFA years.

This contract is no different.

Way of the cap world.

 

[TheProspector]

Exactly. That's why it's a gamble.

Could work out.

With the UFA age where it is, this type of thing is the norm though. Lots of teams gamble on players through their UFA years.

This contract is no different.

Way of the cap world.

It is true -- it could work out. Doesn't make a great deal for 2017.

 

[Tall Morty]

....and he failed miserably at it. So, if Babcock's estimation is right, we have a serious problem on D. (which we probably do, given our GA.)

And instead of addressing it this offseason, we added at F. So mystifying.

The season doesn't start for another 2 and a half months... Plenty of offseason left.

Not to mention, we signed Hainsey, Borgman, Rosen and drafted Liljegren. May not be a lot of help this year, but they could be huge building blocks for the future, depending
on development.

 

[TheProspector]

The season doesn't start for another 2 and a half months... Plenty of offseason left.

Not to mention, we signed Hainsey, Borgman, Rosen and drafted Liljegren. May not be a lot of help this year, but they could be huge building blocks for the future, depending
on development.

Hainsey replaces Hunwick (and by most/all measurements is a downgrade, and the Stanley Cup-winning Pittsburgh Penguins agree with that assessment.... probably after watching Hainsey fail for an entire period to clear the puck once in game 5).

 

[Mr Hockey]

Yep. 7 years to a player with 1 year of NHL experience is a risk.

But again, it's the nature of the NHL cap world. You have to do it.

Best is subjective. I'm not attending that argument but appreciate the invitation

Best "all around" ... a guy like Gardiner, Shattenkirk, etc are not a good all around dman.

Hedman is a better all around dman than Karlsson, etc

 

[Battle Lin]

....and he failed miserably at it. So, if Babcock's estimation is right, we have a serious problem on D. (which we probably do, given our GA.)

And instead of addressing it this offseason, we added at F. So mystifying.

well jeeze babs must be a horrible hockey coach then, putting the guy in the same role almost the entire year even though he completely sucked at it

 

[Mr Hockey]

It's a rare day where I agree with Mess, but no, +/- isn't totally useless, even if it is quite flawed. The typical criticism of +/- is that it's a team stat, and players benefit/suffer from the ups and downs of their teammates. So when the +/- relative to their teammates is so massive, it tells you something.

But even using defensive micro stats, he's bad -- the worst. 65% exit success, and only 42.7% with possession.

And I honestly don't know how the eye test is telling anyone anything different. He looked good in international play, and he looked extremely overtaxed in the NHL.

Conor Carrick should easily be in our top pairing with Rielly, with those stats.

 

[wc17]

It's a rare day where I agree with Mess, but no, +/- isn't totally useless, even if it is quite flawed. The typical criticism of +/- is that it's a team stat, and players benefit/suffer from the ups and downs of their teammates. So when the +/- relative to their teammates is so massive, it tells you something.

But even using defensive micro stats, he's bad -- the worst. 65% exit success, and only 42.7% with possession.

And I honestly don't know how the eye test is telling anyone anything different. He looked good in international play, and he looked extremely overtaxed in the NHL.

Life comes at ya quick in the NHL

He said it himself that he has a lot less time to pick up the puck and make a play on the smaller ice...now, what is he gonna do about it? If he works on making quicker plays/decisions when in the d-zone and is able to get the puck into one of our forwards hands instead of slamming it up the boards so much, he'll be a steal at 4.5 mil. If not, he becomes a #4-6 dman, and probably overpaid at that point for a long time.

Time will tell. Lets give him a chance to improve...

 

[Battle Lin]

your 1st pairing D mostly on when 1st or 2nd lines are on...2nd pairing often on when 2nd and 3rd lines are on...and 3rd pairing most the time match up against 3rd and 4th lines

your 1st pairing shares the ice with sid, connor, malkin, kane, benn, tavares, stamkos, kopitar, ovie, getzlaf, seguin, gaudreau, toews, laine, tarasenko, backstrom, hall players like that...when these players are on the ice, ya man, of course, ya they gonna score some goals, they gonna have the puck, they gonna get the puck, they have to, they suppose to...when these players get off the ice for rest, omg its like night and day

your 2nd pairing still defends very good nhl players, but not the biggest stars...and then your 3rd pairing gets the rest...how the heck you use these stupid stats to judge your defenders, maybe you should watch the games instead of looking at these stats

 

[PromisedLand]

Expecting Zaitsev to bring some offense this upcoming season and improved D. That exit metric is out of context. Zaitsev never had a break in terms of not facing opposition's top line in his first NHL season

 

[Mr Hockey]

Zaitsev first season playing in N America on the small ice, playing hard minutes! a little context below which is always missing from the guys with a narrative...

Nikita Zaitsev ...

Conar Carrick ....

Gardiner is #131 on OppCF60 list, if your curious

 

[bobermay]

Expecting Zaitsev to bring some offense this upcoming season and improved D. That exit metric is out of context. Zaitsev never had a break in terms of not facing opposition's top line in his first NHL season

This. I expect a few more goals out of Zaitsev. Kid has a pretty good shot.

 

[bunjay]

This is a pretty low-risk move, I don't know why people think otherwise. $4.5 mil is second pairing money, and Zaitsev is already that.

 

[thewave]

This is a pretty low-risk move, I don't know why people think otherwise. $4.5 mil is second pairing money, and Zaitsev is already that.

Was a fine signing at a good rate.

 

[Drew311]

The beauty of this deal is Zaitsev at worst is a 2nd pairing defenseman, and he's paid like one. If he is able to play in the top pairing for the next 7 years it's an absolute steal. If he settles into the 2nd pairing it's a reasonable deal, and will only get better as the years go by and the cap goes up.

 

[mclaren55]

Great signing for the price tag. Will be nice to see him progress under Babcock, and the value is great. I understand the apprehension some of you are feeling, but where else are you going to get a kid like him for 4.5/year? Nothing but upside to this deal.

 

[Mr Hockey]

Copy and pasted from a site, not my info or opinions

+ The X-Axis represents the PPQB metric (i.e., a defensemans ability to drive possession, generate scoring chances, and make plays). Players who fall far to the rights (e.g., Karlsson, Petry, Byfuglien, Brodie) were strong in this area in 2016/17. On the other hand, players on the left hand side (e.g., Weber, Klefbom, Edler, Gardiner) were less strong at quarterbacking the power play.

+ The Y-Axis represents the PPGS metric (i.e., a defensemans ability to score on the powerplay). Players who are high up on the graph (e.g., Weber, Phaneuf, Giordano) are strong in this area. Players at the bottom (e.g., Rielly, Zaitsev, Markov), less so.

+ Now that does not mean that Rielly, Zaitsev, Markov don't bring value on the power play. In fact, all 3 are above average at quarterbacking the power play. When paired with a strong shooter or offensively gifted scorers, either of the 3 could be well-suited to QB a power play.

 

[PuckMagi]

The beauty of this deal is Zaitsev at worst is a 2nd pairing defenseman, and he's paid like one. If he is able to play in the top pairing for the next 7 years it's an absolute steal. If he settles into the 2nd pairing it's a reasonable deal, and will only get better as the years go by and the cap goes up.

It's a bit of a gamble, but probably one worth taking.

We can't just always play it safe. We gotta make our moves when the opportunity presents itself.

We picked up Andersen for not a huge price (30th pick and a 2nd round... meh)... we signed him for 5 years 5 million before he ever played a game for us.

We saw the chance to get a #1 goalie and we got him and locked him up. If you pass on that deal cause it's too "risky" ... where would we be at right now?

We saw a chance to get a quality defender... we liked what we saw... so we lock him up for 7 years at a reasonable price. Yes, it's a gamble... but we're making moves. We can't just sit on our hands. Gotta play the game.

 

[Joey Hoser]

Copy and pasted from a site, not my info or opinions

+ The X-Axis represents the PPQB metric (i.e., a defensemans ability to drive possession, generate scoring chances, and make plays). Players who fall far to the rights (e.g., Karlsson, Petry, Byfuglien, Brodie) were strong in this area in 2016/17. On the other hand, players on the left hand side (e.g., Weber, Klefbom, Edler, Gardiner) were less strong at quarterbacking the power play.

+ The Y-Axis represents the PPGS metric (i.e., a defensemans ability to score on the powerplay). Players who are high up on the graph (e.g., Weber, Phaneuf, Giordano) are strong in this area. Players at the bottom (e.g., Rielly, Zaitsev, Markov), less so.

+ Now that does not mean that Rielly, Zaitsev, Markov don't bring value on the power play. In fact, all 3 are above average at quarterbacking the power play. When paired with a strong shooter or offensively gifted scorers, either of the 3 could be well-suited to QB a power play.

Couple things to consider:

Rielly barely played on the PP last year. His sample is probably small compared to all those big names.

Leafs have a PP strategy that doesn't exactly revolve around defensemen. There was usually just 1 on the ice and the PP was moreso quaterbacked by forwards on the half-boards.

Not saying you're wrong, but the comparisons might not work all that great.

 

[Duke Silver]

Thought this was interesting:

Shots-per-60 on the PP last season:

1. Rielly - 12.36 (73 mins)
2. Gardiner - 9.14 (210 mins)
3. Zaitsev - 6.70 (161 mins)

Rielly also had the best points-per-60 on the PP:

1. Rielly - 4.12
2. Zaitsev - 4.09
3. Gardiner - 3.43

And far-and-away the best primary assists-per-60 on the PP:

1. Rielly - 1.65
2. Gardiner - 0.57
3. Zaitsev - 0.37

Rielly had the best Corsi and Fenwick percentages of those 3 as well, with the man advantage.

So why the hell isn't Rielly getting more time on the PP?