Rank the top 10 most valuable assets in the league today

[bobholly39]

I’m really not sure if he’s a guaranteed top 10 when you include salary. Second highest AAV in the league for only 5 years (taking him right to UFA) and can’t stay healthy enough to reach 80pts.

1.McDavid
2. Mackinnon
3. Kucherov

Are obviously ahead. Just other level of players who also have better contracts (in some cases much better)

Then you have up and coming players like Dahlin, Heiskanen and Pettersen who you could easily argue are more valuable based on ELC and potential.

Add in other young guys who have done just as good if not better than Matthews at a much better contract in Barkov, Scheifele, Pastrnak, Draisaitl (don’t care if he plays with McDavid, still a 50/50 guy), Gaudreau, Aho, Eichel, etc

Some GMs may value experience and skill and prefer Kane/Crosby too.

Finish off with tough to compare D like Hedman, Doughty, Karlsson and Jones and it’s far from a guarantee that he is a top 10 asset with the contract he signed and missing time in 2/3 seasons.

I think that's a fair take.

Just keep in mind my post was in response to someone arguing that Matthews was a top 10 liability in the league.

I do think you are undervaluing pedigree/hype/reputation in valuing Matthews. Maybe those factors shouldn't matter as much as things like actual ability and accomplishments, and $$ value - but I think they still do matter a lot among GMs. So for example sticking to just forwards - I think those are reasons that if you poll a majority of GMs among the league - they take Matthews above EP, or Pastrnak, or Drai, Aho, Eichel etc.

 

[bobholly39]

While I agree with you that you can't just get a seth jones (signed as a RFA with no arbitration rights) out of thin air with cap space, you are still undervaluing the 6 mill in cap space. Its the still the difference between a Tavares/Erik Karlsson/Panarin in UFA versus a Kevin Hayes.

I think you're looking at it wrong though.

If Colorado was 5M$ away from the cap today (assume all their players are signed). And Karlsson or Tavares made it to UFA this summer. And one of those players expressed serious interest in signing with Colorado for ~11M$ per. Well - Colorado wouldn't say "sorry no cap space - let's go sign Kevin Hayes". They'd go "ok - let's clear away ~6M$ in cap space and sign this player. Maybe we even package a prospect or 1st round pick to get a team to eat a contract - but for Karlsson/Tavares it's worth it!"

So - yes cap space matters. But at the end of the day - teams will make room to pay for top players. Look at Toronto? I know they haven't signed Marner yet - but they cleared room to afford him now. After signing Matthews/Nylander and signing Tavares a year ago. Tampa keeps finding new ways to get talent, etc.

So if I get to pick between McDavid and Mckinnon - and if I believe McDavid is clearly superior and the safer pick for the future (higher ceiling, pedirgee, consistency, maybe will last longer, etc) - to me the 6M$ in cap space is almost meaningless.
Now if someone wants to argue that long term McKinnon will age better, or might reach McDavid's level, or will last longer/be more consistent - sure, those would be valid reasons to pick him over McDavid. But I wouldn't let 6M$ decide it for me. Give me the better player.

 

[nbwingsfan]

I think that's a fair take.

Just keep in mind my post was in response to someone arguing that Matthews was a top 10 liability in the league.

I do think you are undervaluing pedigree/hype/reputation in valuing Matthews. Maybe those factors shouldn't matter as much as things like actual ability and accomplishments, and $$ value - but I think they still do matter a lot among GMs. So for example sticking to just forwards - I think those are reasons that if you poll a majority of GMs among the league - they take Matthews above EP, or Pastrnak, or Drai, Aho, Eichel etc.

Fair take as well, but you do wonder if the hype/reputation would be as high if he was not drafted by Toronto though (or any other major Canadian Market).

For example, Eichel was viewed as essentially the same level of talent coming out of the draft, but was almost immediately forgot about when he was drafted by Buffalo and not a major market.

FWIW I’d personally have Matthews in the top 10.

 

[bobholly39]

Fair take as well, but you do wonder if the hype/reputation would be as high if he was not drafted by Toronto though (or any other major Canadian Market).

For example, Eichel was viewed as essentially the same level of talent coming out of the draft, but was almost immediately forgot about when he was drafted by Buffalo and not a major market.

FWIW I’d personally have Matthews in the top 10.

Toronto plays part of it yes. But I think there's a few reasons why Matthews > Eichel in value.

1. Hype of being #1 OA after McDavid. McDavid got so many people invested in the draft and how much a #1OA is worth - and than Matthews (a really strong prospect in his own right) followed that, and so some of the hype was passed on

2. Matthews had a fantastic rookie season. And also - a fantastic 1st game. Right from the start he kept performing and living up to the hype and kept getting people to build onto that hype (of the #1 OA after McDavid)

3. Toronto. Toronto market helped play up a lot of those things. Toronto media has helped build up his value/potential as well.

If you look at Eichel - I think out of all of the top prospects in recent years (McDavid, Matthews, Laine, Dahlin etc) he had arguably the weakest rookie season. It wasn't bad or anything, especially for a rookie - but any talk that had been present in his draft year about "wow could Eichel be picked over McDavid or become almost as good" died away very quickly
Then - Matthews came along - and although as a prospect Matthews and Eichel are close, I think Matthews was slightly better - and performed super well from the start, and so Eichel's hype/reputation again took a slight step back.

I think if Buffalo had achieved playoff success - Eichel would be looked at a bit better. Matthews and Toronto right away made the playoffs and so it got people talking. I don't think it's so much that Buffalo is a small market, it's just the that hype around Eichel didn't take off as it did for Matthews for a variety of reasons.

That's why to me there's a very, very clear ranking of Matthews > Eichel in terms of asset value. Even though as a player, I think it might be closer to Matthews ~ Eichel

 

[GirardSpinorama]

I think you're looking at it wrong though.

If Colorado was 5M$ away from the cap today (assume all their players are signed). And Karlsson or Tavares made it to UFA this summer. And one of those players expressed serious interest in signing with Colorado for ~11M$ per. Well - Colorado wouldn't say "sorry no cap space - let's go sign Kevin Hayes". They'd go "ok - let's clear away ~6M$ in cap space and sign this player. Maybe we even package a prospect or 1st round pick to get a team to eat a contract - but for Karlsson/Tavares it's worth it!"

So - yes cap space matters. But at the end of the day - teams will make room to pay for top players. Look at Toronto? I know they haven't signed Marner yet - but they cleared room to afford him now. After signing Matthews/Nylander and signing Tavares a year ago. Tampa keeps finding new ways to get talent, etc.

So if I get to pick between McDavid and Mckinnon - and if I believe McDavid is clearly superior and the safer pick for the future (higher ceiling, pedirgee, consistency, maybe will last longer, etc) - to me the 6M$ in cap space is almost meaningless.
Now if someone wants to argue that long term McKinnon will age better, or might reach McDavid's level, or will last longer/be more consistent - sure, those would be valid reasons to pick him over McDavid. But I wouldn't let 6M$ decide it for me. Give me the better player.

Now, to preface, I'm not saying I would take Mack over McDavid (even with the 6 mill gap). But the 6 mill is NOT meaningless even in the face of comparing elite players is what I'm saying. Obviously its relatively less important, I agree with that. If you're trading between Mack and McDavid, throwing in an extra 3rd round pick is meaningless (just example), but 6 mill for 4 years is not. This is four years of cap that is literally buy out proof (its basically a worse contract than Lucic if you think about it). If it was that easy for a team to clear cap space, Nashville wouldn't have traded Subban for horrible value (two 2nd round picks for a former norris winner?).

This isn't the NBA where one player can will the team into the playoffs and (also a soft cap). You can just sign your superstar and worry about the rest later. Almost every player except for the stars are (Just A Guy, JAG). In the NHL, for a near the cap contender in its window, fitting an additional 6 mill is already not "easy", fitting in 6 more mill on top of that means trading away a core piece.
Depending on the current state of the team, its a tough decision.

 

[bobholly39]

Now, to preface, I'm not saying I would take Mack over McDavid (even with the 6 mill gap). But the 6 mill is NOT meaningless even in the face of comparing elite players is what I'm saying. Obviously its relatively less important, I agree with that. If you're trading between Mack and McDavid, throwing in an extra 3rd round pick is meaningless (just example), but 6 mill for 4 years is not. This is four years of cap that is literally buy out proof (its basically a worse contract than Lucic if you think about it). If it was that easy for a team to clear cap space, Nashville wouldn't have traded Subban for horrible value (two 2nd round picks for a former norris winner?).

This isn't the NBA where one player can will the team into the playoffs and (also a soft cap). You can just sign your superstar and worry about the rest later. Almost every player except for the stars are (Just A Guy, JAG). In the NHL, for a near the cap contender in its window, fitting an additional 6 mill is already not "easy", fitting in 6 more mill on top of that means trading away a core piece.
Depending on the current state of the team, its a tough decision.

I don't think 6M$ in cap space is meaningless at all. Just look at Toronto paying a 1s round pick to get a team to take Marleau from them. (I think Subban is a bad example - that trade is horrible and i suspect some of it has to do with his value being impacted by off-ice reasons - he should be worth a lot more).

I really think $$ doesn't matter much when you start at the very very top of the league - the 2 probably most valuable assets. Even a "win now" team like Tampa fully against the cap probably wouldn't decide between the 2 based on $$ amount. I think it's more about how long you realistically expect to keep the player, and how well you expect him to be in the short/medium/long-term future.

If for example McDavid in a trade talk said to your team "I'm going to come give you my 100% effort, but come UFA time I absolutely plan on testing the market, so just giving you a heads up" and in contrast Mack said "playing for your city is a dream come true - I want to retire with you guys" - Well, even if you believe McDavid is better the fact that you keep McKinnon longer has value. But it's really less about the $$ to me.

Maybe if you had 2 players who you felt were super close in ability - like a Tavares vs Stamkos, or Eichel vs Matthews - at that point a 4-5M$ difference in salary makes a huge difference. But for a clearly better player - I think you just pay more. Especially for a McDavid, a generational talent who could be a core building block to a dynasty on the right team.

If instead of the top 10 assets this thread was about the top 50 assets - I'd feel a lot less strongly about this when talking about the assets ranked ~30-40 in value. It's really for the absolute top guys where I feel $$ matters less than the actual player, and how long you expect to keep him/how well you expect him to be long-term.