Confirmed with Link: Clayton Keller, Coyotes agree on 8-year, $7.15M AAV extension

[BUX7PHX]

Eichel and McDavid signed deals that at the time, would have been considered overpayment. McDavid's pace to the time that he signed the deal would have been an average of 100 points, so there is an expectation to continue to perform better.

Same deal with Eichel's contract, based on the $1M per 10 points, should be about $2.0 M lower based on what he has done.

That's why I am saying that you pay for what you project them to be, and why, Jamieh, you are arguing against the idea that Keller does improve performance, and it makes zero sense to do so. Go on other boards and tell them how bad of a deal they made because they gave a little more now. There is a bet on the player to get better than what he is over the course of a long-term deal.

This is not anything new, but it is acceptable when other teams do so, like the Eichel and McDavid examples above, but totally unacceptable for the Coyotes?

 

[Jamieh]

Eichel and McDavid signed deals that at the time, would have been considered overpayment. McDavid's pace to the time that he signed the deal would have been an average of 100 points, so there is an expectation to continue to perform better.

Same deal with Eichel's contract, based on the $1M per 10 points, should be about $2.0 M lower based on what he has done.

That's why I am saying that you pay for what you project them to be, and why, Jamieh, you are arguing against the idea that Keller does improve performance, and it makes zero sense to do so. Go on other boards and tell them how bad of a deal they made because they gave a little more now. There is a bet on the player to get better than what he is over the course of a long-term deal.

This is not anything new, but it is acceptable when other teams do so, like the Eichel and McDavid examples above, but totally unacceptable for the Coyotes?

I'm really not arguing that Keller won't improve, but do you mean from 65 points or 47 points?? You might have also left out that McDavid is the best player in the world and Eichel plays center in Buffalo. Perspective matters.

 

[Jamieh]

I'm really not arguing that Keller won't improve, but do you mean from 65 points or 47 points?? You might have also left out that McDavid is the best player in the world and Eichel plays center in Buffalo. Perspective matters.

Edit: And FTR It's getting old talking to me about other boards as I don't go on any but this one.

 

[rt]

I am happy we have signed him, I do not regret it. However I still have concerns about timing of signing and contract. So I cannot answer no regrets, I hope to not be correct and think I will be fine with it next season.

Wriggle, wriggle. Non specific, unsupported criticisms without any work done to provide any backup. Always the same. Vaguely displeased, seemingly always inevitably because the Coyotes just aren’t the Leafs. There’s an easy fix for that.

 

[Jamieh]

Wriggle, wriggle. Non specific, unsupported criticisms without any work done to provide any backup. Always the same. Vaguely displeased, seemingly always inevitably because the Coyotes just aren’t the Leafs. There’s an easy fix for that.

It seems you bring the Leaf's up more than I do. Neither of your answers reflect my thoughts so I can't give you one of them.

 

[hbk]

Schmaltz only needs to average 4 more points a season from 2 years ago to be worthy of his deal based on the 10 point/million standard.

When it’s phrased like this it actually makes the deals much more reasonable. Hardly bet the farm status.

I’m admiring the gumption for Chayka to believe and act on a philosophy. He’s not being conservative and he’s definitely doing his own thing. Does he set the standard going forward on philosophy for roster construction and contracts. That’s what I find fascinating.

 

[Jamieh]

Schmaltz only needs to average 4 more points a season from 2 years ago to be worthy of his deal based on the 10 point/million standard.

When it’s phrased like this it actually makes the deals much more reasonable. Hardly bet the farm status.

I’m admiring the gumption for Chayka to believe and act on a philosophy. He’s not being conservative and he’s definitely doing his own thing. Does he set the standard going forward on philosophy for roster construction and contracts. That’s what I find fascinating.

That's why I said Chayka is either a genius or will bury the team. In fairness you have now suggested 3 of his deals where players only need to get around 10 more points to be worth their contract. For me it's not the taking a gamble that bothers me, it's taking it 4 or 5 times. But as I said if you win 2 if those you are probably doing fine as I highly doubt any will be big losers. That averages it all out and you win big if you can move the losing deals along the way.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I'm really not arguing that Keller won't improve, but do you mean from 65 points or 47 points?? You might have also left out that McDavid is the best player in the world and Eichel plays center in Buffalo. Perspective matters.

I kind of planned for this, and it responds to both yours and Jakey's assertions:

Average points per season, extrapolated across 82 games, based on past performance:
McDavid: 100 points (15-16 to 17-18 season)
Eichel: 69 points (15-16 to 17-18 season)
Keller: 56 points (17-18 to 18-19 season)

The reason the seasons are what they are is because these players signed respective extensions the offseason after.

If we use that as the salary (based on past performance) the players should earn $10 M (McDavid AAV), $6.9 M (Eichel), and $5.6 M (Keller).

Those three actually received:
McDavid: $12.5 M AAV
Eichel: $10.0 M AAV
Keller: $7.15 M AAV

So, maybe GMs sign players using the past as the base, but they tack a percentage on top for where they think the player can get to.

This is the percentage increase on top of what the player's production should pay them:
McDavid: 25% ($12.5 M AAV vs 10.M production AAV)
Eichel: 44.9% ($10 M vs $6.9 M)
Keller: 27.5% ($7.15 M vs $5.6 M)

For some players with a higher upside, they get paid a percentage above their performance between 20-45%, because they are expected to get better.

 

[Jamieh]

I kind of planned for this, and it responds to both yours and Jakey's assertions:

Average points per season, extrapolated across 82 games, based on past performance:
McDavid: 100 points (15-16 to 17-18 season)
Eichel: 69 points (15-16 to 17-18 season)
Keller: 56 points (17-18 to 18-19 season)

The reason the seasons are what they are is because these players signed respective extensions the offseason after.

If we use that as the salary (based on past performance) the players should earn $10 M (McDavid AAV), $6.9 M (Eichel), and $5.6 M (Keller).

Those three actually received:
McDavid: $12.5 M AAV
Eichel: $10.0 M AAV
Keller: $7.15 M AAV

So, maybe GMs sign players using the past as the base, but they tack a percentage on top for where they think the player can get to.

This is the percentage increase on top of what the player's production should pay them:
McDavid: 25% ($12.5 M AAV vs 10.M production AAV)
Eichel: 44.9% ($10 M vs $6.9 M)
Keller: 27.5% ($7.15 M vs $5.6 M)

For some players with a higher upside, they get paid a percentage above their performance between 20-45%, because they are expected to get better.

So are you saying you are 100% faithful in Keller increasing as the other two? That's the argument you are making? And they both play a position that pretty much always gets a premium over Keller' .

 

[BUX7PHX]

I'm really not arguing that Keller won't improve, but do you mean from 65 points or 47 points?? You might have also left out that McDavid is the best player in the world and Eichel plays center in Buffalo. Perspective matters.

So, to bring into the perspective further, Eichel received a 45% increase vas a 27.5% for Keller. That is because Eichel has an elite floor and medium to elite ceiling. McDavid only get 25% because his superstar floor only limits him to having a medium ceiling.

As an example, how do you pay a guy $14 M a year, when in the past 19 seasons, the highest amount of point scored is 128 by Kucherov last year.?Based on the $1M per 10 pts argument, he would earn $12.8M.

Keller has a high floor, with a potential mid to elite ceiling.

That's how payment tiers are figured out - past performance can dictate the floor, but they have further potential that can lead to payment increase. If we paid Keller a 45% increase on production like Eichel, we did a poor job. I even think that Eichel maybe only should get 40% more, as a peak.

EDIT: I am countering your next argument almost before you even posted. No - Keller is not worth a 45% increase. He probably is about a 20-25% increase, maybe 30% at max, but I am not going to be upset at going 2.5% over.

McDavid can only go 25% above, partially because he would have to reach numbers in consecutive years that no one has hit in the past 20.

 

[BUX7PHX]

So are you saying you are 100% faithful in Keller increasing as the other two? That's the argument you are making? And they both play a position that pretty much always gets a premium over Keller' .

This is why my posts are long. People struggle with comprehension. I never stated that Keller deserves a similar raise category to what Eichel got.

As you said, it is all variable. There are tiers of players, for arguments sake let's call it superstar, elite, high, medium and low. These are the players floors, to a degree.

Players also have potential, which gets represented as the ceiling.

Eichel is in the superstar/elite floor, and he has a high ceiling and can still reach 100+ points. Therefore his percentage growth is higher. Personally, I would have put him in line for a 30-45%, and would have tried to cap that raise at roughly 35-40%. He got 45%, which is still not a bad deal. For Keller, he is at a high/elite floor with a medium to high potential therefore his percentage is lower. But still reasonable, in the 20-30% on top range.

Players who are medium to high floors, even with a high ceiling, will probably get a 10-25% increase in a longer term deal, relative to what they have already produced.

For veterans, there is greater potential for decline, so the percentages are less likely to cap out, but more likely to see a negative potential relative to past production (negative potential more likely for the 35+ crowd).

 

[cobra427]

So, to bring into the perspective further, Eichel received a 45% increase vas a 27.5% for Keller. That is because Eichel has an elite floor and medium to elite ceiling. McDavid only get 25% because his superstar floor only limits him to having a medium ceiling.

As an example, how do you pay a guy $14 M a year, when in the past 19 seasons, the highest amount of point scored is 128 by Kucherov last year.?Based on the $1M per 10 pts argument, he would earn $12.8M.

Keller has a high floor, with a potential mid to elite ceiling.

That's how payment tiers are figured out - past performance can dictate the floor, but they have further potential that can lead to payment increase. If we paid Keller a 45% increase on production like Eichel, we did a poor job. I even think that Eichel maybe only should get 40% more, as a peak.

EDIT: I am countering your next argument almost before you even posted. No - Keller is not worth a 45% increase. He probably is about a 20-25% increase, maybe 30% at max, but I am not going to be upset at going 2.5% over.

McDavid can only go 25% above, partially because he would have to reach numbers in consecutive years that no one has hit in the past 20.

I see your points but I think you might be missing a few things. Premium position, a 1C is way more valuable. Also, the points per million argument in my opinion is not linear. A 90 point player is worth more then 1 million per 10 points versus a 60 point player, who might be worth less. You can pay your for sure elite level talent Marner/Mathews on a bigger metric, but not your almost elite like Keller. There is a curve there.

Before I get blasted again, I like Keller and I am glad we signed him long term. I hope he gets 80 points on average the next 8 years.

 

[Jakey53]

No as it is extremely unlikely. As to the tune of probably 20 or less players as the norm.

I am happy we have signed him, I do not regret it. However I still have concerns about timing of signing and contract. So I cannot answer no regrets, I hope to not be correct and think I will be fine with it next season.

You're happy we signed him,but you have regrets, and you will be fine with it next season? You should be a politician because you make no sense.

 

[Jakey53]

I see your points but I think you might be missing a few things. Premium position, a 1C is way more valuable. Also, the points per million argument in my opinion is not linear. A 90 point player is worth more then 1 million per 10 points versus a 60 point player, who might be worth less. You can pay your for sure elite level talent Marner/Mathews on a bigger metric, but not your almost elite like Keller. There is a curve there.

Before I get blasted again, I like Keller and I am glad we signed him long term. I hope he gets 80 points on average the next 8 years.

So, now you are happy we signed him. You and Jamieh have been drinking the same kool aid.

 

[hbk]

I think we all agree that we expect Keller to play a hell of a lot harder and be a hell of a lot better than he was last year.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I see your points but I think you might be missing a few things. Premium position, a 1C is way more valuable. Also, the points per million argument in my opinion is not linear. A 90 point player is worth more then 1 million per 10 points versus a 60 point player, who might be worth less. You can pay your for sure elite level talent Marner/Mathews on a bigger metric, but not your almost elite like Keller. There is a curve there.

Before I get blasted again, I like Keller and I am glad we signed him long term. I hope he gets 80 points on average the next 8 years.

I 100% agree. That is a major reason why McDavid only made 25% above what his past value was, and the reason why is because while you could easily make the case that he could be at 40-50% above that value, which would make him worth $14.5 M AAV and would put him at 120-130 points consistently. Only 5 players since 2000-01 season have reached 120+ points: Jagr twice (06-07 and 00-01), Kucherov (18-19), Thornton (05-06), and Crosby (06-07). So giving him $14.5 M would mean hitting that magic number that hasn't really been hit all that much in the past 19 seasons. And 4 of them happened in 06-07 season or before. That's exactly how the percentages and points per million argument won't ever be linear. There is a situational assessment for all players, including caps on production and the veteran minimum.

It's not anything ground-breaking, but when one considers that a player like Eichel earned a 45% raise above his past production and Keller received 27.5%, did we really overpay? That falls in line with Eichel being drafted higher, playing a premium position and likely a more productive ceiling to reach. As an example, if Eichel goes from averaging 69 to 88 points over three years and Keller goes from 56 to 69 points on average over a three year period, they are both increasing their production by about 24%, they could be considered to have similar growth, even though I would still bet on Eichel increasing his production more than Keller.

 

[BUX7PHX]

One other thing that hasn't been mentioned: inflation.

While the cap is not guaranteed to increase every year, I will bet that in 8 years, the cap number will raise roughly 6-10% from year 1 to year 8. Wouldn't surprise me if it was above $90 M sooner as opposed to later. In other words, while this specific deal did not inflate, the inflation allows for current signings to stay with a trend. If inflation is expected at 6% anyhow, a player is actually making less money on his contract, as inflation will affect future value (meaning that a player with similar stats who is signed to a similar percentage over production would earn more if it happens 6 years from now, as opposed to now).

 

[42]

I think we all agree that we expect Keller to play a hell of a lot harder and be a hell of a lot better than he was last year.

One thing's for sure: if Keller doesn't put up career high points this year, everyone will be raising their disillusionment with the contract.

 

[Jakey53]

One thing's for sure: if Keller doesn't put up career high points this year, everyone will be raising their disillusionment with the contract.

This team will probably end up having more talent than last years team, and if Keller does not perform to at least his rookie level play, attention will turn to RT's coaching. There really is no excuse for Keller not to have his best year. Last year Kelly did not play well, did not give that second effort that is needed at the NHL level, and did not deserve the TOI that he received. Keller knows this more than anyone, and I expect his best year of his career.

 

[cobra427]

So, now you are happy we signed him. You and Jamieh have been drinking the same kool aid.

Yes, but not at those terms/dollars.

 

[Jakey53]

Yes, but not at those terms/dollars.

Then you are not happy? Either you are happy with the contract or not? What would you have signed him for?

 

[cobra427]

Then you are not happy? Either you are happy with the contract or not? What would you have signed him for?

I am mixed on it. I would have waited another year and would be willing to pay more per year if Keller had 80+ points. If he gets 55 points or less, I would pay less and maybe less term. 8 years and $7 mill is a big bet. I hope Chayka is right but this is a guessing strategy in a way. I am also worried about Chayka's ability or reliance on his own analytics and evaluation of young players. Chayka guessed wrong on Domi/Strome as an example.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I am mixed on it. I would have waited another year and would be willing to pay more per year if Keller had 80+ points. If he gets 55 points or less, I would pay less and maybe less term. 8 years and $7 mill is a big bet. I hope Chayka is right but this is a guessing strategy in a way. I am also worried about Chayka's ability or reliance on his own analytics and evaluation of young players. Chayka guessed wrong on Domi/Strome as an example.

I disagree with this assessment.

How likely is it that Keller hits 47-56 points again? I think he has established that in a bad year, he can put 50 points up.

The dilemma is what if we give him a 2 year bridge and he goes for 58 and something above 65 points. Well, those point totals have now reset his market value slightly as an increase. While he has proven his ability a little more, now the same 8 year deal can hit $7.75 or $8 M or more as an AAV.

To me, the risk you run of over-valuing the player slightly is way worse than under-valuing the player slightly.

 

[cobra427]

I disagree with this assessment.

How likely is it that Keller hits 47-56 points again? I think he has established that in a bad year, he can put 50 points up.

The dilemma is what if we give him a 2 year bridge and he goes for 58 and something above 65 points. Well, those point totals have now reset his market value slightly as an increase. While he has proven his ability a little more, now the same 8 year deal can hit $7.75 or $8 M or more as an AAV.

To me, the risk you run of over-valuing the player slightly is way worse than under-valuing the player slightly.

I had rather have 3 years in the NHL to assess his value and I would pay market value at that time versus an year deal at $7 mill after a 47 point season. The difference is that Chayka thinks he knows what he has in Keller. Now Chayka knows way more then me, I am not disputing that. What I am disputing is his evaluation of young players and their potential.

 

[WrinkledPossum]

Saw this today. Didn't realize Keller's rookie year was THAT good.