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

[Jamieh]

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.

Do you wonder why Keller was so willing to sign for 8 years? While most RFA's are trying to sign shorter deals?

 

[Jakey53]

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 don't know why you say Chayka guessed wrong on Domi. Chayka may have loved Domi, but Domi wanted out. I also think Chayka liked Strome but RT did not. Why are you saying it's a "guessing strategy"? I think Chayka has thought out these deals in great detail in his way of evaluation, and it probably involved RT, scouts etc.

 

[rt]

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

Pretty sure Matthews is the only one on the list that did it right after the draft. The other guys took at least one season and in Panarin’s case, several years.

 

[Mosby]

I think both Domi and Strome see a decrease in points per game this season. Not drastic, but a decrease for sure.

 

[SniperHF]

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

It's worth keeping in mind that scoring is up, so more recent rookies *should* be higher in the list.

But yes Keller's rookie year has been slowly getting memory holed like Domi's.

 

[BUX7PHX]

Do you wonder why Keller was so willing to sign for 8 years? While most RFA's are trying to sign shorter deals?

That's why Chayka is actually being smart about this. Every single year, the market has the potential to reset.

I will use your point as an example. Rule of thumb would state $1 M per every 10 points. Was that the same rule of thumb 10 years ago or 20 years ago?

Player salaries for good players will rise. That has an effect on everyone. The 4th line grinder who made $1 M in 2009-10 is likely to be making $1.3 M now, just due to inflation of salaries.

So, by asking why Keller would be interested in signing a long term deal, I doubt it has anything to do with Keller saying to himself that he isn't worth that amount and that he has to sign it now. Instead, that speaks to the idea that Chayka is doing what other teams aren't: locking up players before they see their market grow to a level where the contract creates difficulties for the team.

If anything, it also means that the players we have are in it for the good of the team. If Keller thought he was significantly more than the value signed for, he wouldn't have taken the offer. I think that Keller likes Arizona, wants to be here, and has proven that even on a bad year, 50-60 points is a floor for him.

 

[TheLegend]

Craig Morgan with another huge article this morning covering a few things. Mostly about the thought process on Keller’s contract with comments from Keller’s agent Scott Bartlett.

“Following the herd will ensure that you’ll never be number one.” — John Chayka

“When it’s a year out, there is still some forecasting going on on both sides. The market hasn’t set yet and certainly, there will be another market next year with some other RFAs that come up. There’s a host of benefits to the team in doing it a year early. You don’t have to worry about offer-sheet possibilities but for us it’s more about planning ahead, being proactive. Now we know what we’ve got for the next nine years with that specific player and we can slot him into our lineup and work around that. You can manage your cash flows. You know what the structure is in terms of signing bonuses. With a player like that, who we knew we wanted to have around for a long time, those benefits outweighed the inherent risks.” - Chayka

More......

“If his years would have been reversed at 47 points and 65 points, psychologically that’s a big difference, but we don’t think the player got worse. We look at the entire body of work,” Chayka said. “He’s done it at the NHL level and now he’s had a struggle of about 40 games that really impacted his overall body of work at the NHL level but we feel confident that this is going to be a productive player at the NHL level for a long time.

“There’s a strong analytical piece to that. You’re looking at comps and you’re looking at trends and you’re looking at some underlying information that leads to the production. And if you’re giving someone $57 million, you’ve got to understand how they’re going to react to that psychologically, how they’re going to react to coaching and training and all those kinds of things after there is a big, life-changing event. You’re forecasting humans and that’s a difficult thing to do, but if you get it right it is obviously beneficial and you get some value on the team side of things.” - Chayka

So they did take into consideration the lack of skilled linemates for Keller, because of all the injuries. and that he was beginning to come out of the 40 game stretch of funk he was in.


———


Article also goes into Soderstrom some.... looks like he’ll go back to Sweden but they’re also looking at Tucson to get him more time on the smaller ice. But they want him to be comfortable where he’s at so that’s going to be a big factor.

 

[varano]

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.

Well to be clear... Mcdavid left money on the table to help the oilers build a team.... Which Chiarelli then squandered.

 

[Jamieh]

That's why Chayka is actually being smart about this. Every single year, the market has the potential to reset.

I will use your point as an example. Rule of thumb would state $1 M per every 10 points. Was that the same rule of thumb 10 years ago or 20 years ago?

Player salaries for good players will rise. That has an effect on everyone. The 4th line grinder who made $1 M in 2009-10 is likely to be making $1.3 M now, just due to inflation of salaries.

So, by asking why Keller would be interested in signing a long term deal, I doubt it has anything to do with Keller saying to himself that he isn't worth that amount and that he has to sign it now. Instead, that speaks to the idea that Chayka is doing what other teams aren't: locking up players before they see their market grow to a level where the contract creates difficulties for the team.

If anything, it also means that the players we have are in it for the good of the team. If Keller thought he was significantly more than the value signed for, he wouldn't have taken the offer. I think that Keller likes Arizona, wants to be here, and has proven that even on a bad year, 50-60 points is a floor for him.

That 4th line grinder is probably League min now, along with his 3rd line friends on many teams. So we agree, Keller has little financial risk by signing this deal, that kinda really means someone else has a greater risk.

 

[cobra427]

“There’s a strong analytical piece to that. You’re looking at comps and you’re looking at trends and you’re looking at some underlying information that leads to the production. And if you’re giving someone $57 million, you’ve got to understand how they’re going to react to that psychologically, how they’re going to react to coaching and training and all those kinds of things after there is a big, life-changing event. You’re forecasting humans and that’s a difficult thing to do, but if you get it right it is obviously beneficial and you get some value on the team side of things.” - Chayka

Chayka didn't get it right with Domi or Strome, hope he is right on Keller.

 

[TheLegend]

Or maybe he did get it right....... or maybe he wanted something better.

 

[BUX7PHX]

That 4th line grinder is probably League min now, along with his 3rd line friends on many teams. So we agree, Keller has little financial risk by signing this deal, that kinda really means someone else has a greater risk.

Keller has little financial risk, you are right. So, is your argument that we just got a player signed long term with little financial risk for the player? He didn't get drastically over paid, nor did he get under paid. The risk will obviously come in continued development, but I don't see an extreme danger that Keller will plateau and/or stagnate.

I didn't even read the interview that Chayka gave, but just about everything I mentioned was in the response. Every year, the market kind of resets itself. In 3 years, Keller's production may warrant an $8-8.5 M AAV for the same deal. While we may underpay a bridge deal at age 20 and 21, we may be over-paying AAV at age 29 and 30, when on the last years of that type of deal.

I always like to think that our GM is basically saying that for our best players, we are going to give you the money and term to cover during your most productive years. For forwards, that can mean paying them at age 20, and expecting them to peak between 22 and 31. For defense, that peak may be between 24-32, as defense takes longer to pin down development. Hence, why Chychrun signed a short deal with the intention of getting another multi year, higher dollar extension and why we didn't jam an 8 year deal on him.

 

[Jamieh]

Keller has little financial risk, you are right. So, is your argument that we just got a player signed long term with little financial risk for the player? He didn't get drastically over paid, nor did he get under paid. The risk will obviously come in continued development, but I don't see an extreme danger that Keller will plateau and/or stagnate.

I didn't even read the interview that Chayka gave, but just about everything I mentioned was in the response. Every year, the market kind of resets itself. In 3 years, Keller's production may warrant an $8-8.5 M AAV for the same deal. While we may underpay a bridge deal at age 20 and 21, we may be over-paying AAV at age 29 and 30, when on the last years of that type of deal.

I always like to think that our GM is basically saying that for our best players, we are going to give you the money and term to cover during your most productive years. For forwards, that can mean paying them at age 20, and expecting them to peak between 22 and 31. For defense, that peak may be between 24-32, as defense takes longer to pin down development. Hence, why Chychrun signed a short deal with the intention of getting another multi year, higher dollar extension and why we didn't jam an 8 year deal on him.

It really depends on what Keller is as to whether he is under, over, or fairly paid. Had Keller reproduced a 60 whatever point season this contract would have been a far better move. But in reality he produced 47 points. Now there is a better than average chance he moves back to the 60 something point range so this conversation will be moot. But that is why some of us wondered why rush and take that risk, he would have been unlikely to get much more after a successful season. And in isolation it's even less if a big deal. But we also wondered about what Raanta was, why rush Chick, why rush Schmaltz, why rush Dvorak??? And that is why I suggest Chayka is either a genius or could bury the franchise again. Hoping for a win on two and no more than 1 loss imo and he is the smartest guy. Time will tell.

 

[AZviaNJ]

I think both Domi and Strome see a decrease in points per game this season. Not drastic, but a decrease for sure.

speaking of Max, will be very interesting to see the outcome of his contract negotiations with MTL.

 

[TheLegend]

speaking of Max, will be very interesting to see the outcome of his contract negotiations with MTL.

Montreal media already has a full court press on.

 

[BUX7PHX]

“There’s a strong analytical piece to that. You’re looking at comps and you’re looking at trends and you’re looking at some underlying information that leads to the production. And if you’re giving someone $57 million, you’ve got to understand how they’re going to react to that psychologically, how they’re going to react to coaching and training and all those kinds of things after there is a big, life-changing event. You’re forecasting humans and that’s a difficult thing to do, but if you get it right it is obviously beneficial and you get some value on the team side of things.” - Chayka

Chayka didn't get it right with Domi or Strome, hope he is right on Keller.

Maybe. Domi may have wanted a better bridge deal. Maybe we weren't offering north of $3M per year and there were questions about both a short and long term signing.

In the big scheme of things though, if Domi had a 72 point season with us after signing a $3.1 M bridge deal, where does that put us on a long-term deal? The 72 points just reset his market, where he was a 50-55 point player before. If Domi has another year with 70+ points, an 8 year deal probably starts with an $8 and possibly a $9. Same thing could happen to Keller if we hadn't done this. Keller goes for 64 points and 71 points during a 2 year bridge deal, and we are paying way more than $7.15 M per year over 8 years. Even if his bridge deal was kind of modest, like $3.3 M AAV for two years, in a 10 year time span, we are likely paying $6.6 M for those two years, plus another $8-8.5 M over 8 years. Last I checked, that's pretty much the same amount of money he would be making anyhow. Even if he has a bad year in those 2 bridge seasons, by only cracking 50-55 points, how much does that now put him at? He probably still is in the $7 - 7.5 M annual range, so we maybe got him for $200k less per year?

To me, the advantage gained is that should the player break out in one of the bridge year deals, the market and deal can't reset, since the player is now signed long term. If the player underperforms on the bridge deal, it likely won't affect the type of long term deal that the player is looking for in the same way that an over performance does. As an example, scoring 10% fewer points in the bridge deal (dropping Keller from 56 to 50 points) could mean that his AAV goes from 7.15 to 6.40 M. But does a 10% increase from 56 to 62 points, on average, yield an increase from 7.15M to 7.85 M?

As Chayka mentioned, a good year kind of resets the market to the point where you are paying more relative to what could have been had.

 

[cobra427]

Maybe. Domi may have wanted a better bridge deal. Maybe we weren't offering north of $3M per year and there were questions about both a short and long term signing.

In the big scheme of things though, if Domi had a 72 point season with us after signing a $3.1 M bridge deal, where does that put us on a long-term deal? The 72 points just reset his market, where he was a 50-55 point player before. If Domi has another year with 70+ points, an 8 year deal probably starts with an $8 and possibly a $9. Same thing could happen to Keller if we hadn't done this. Keller goes for 64 points and 71 points during a 2 year bridge deal, and we are paying way more than $7.15 M per year over 8 years. Even if his bridge deal was kind of modest, like $3.3 M AAV for two years, in a 10 year time span, we are likely paying $6.6 M for those two years, plus another $8-8.5 M over 8 years. Last I checked, that's pretty much the same amount of money he would be making anyhow. Even if he has a bad year in those 2 bridge seasons, by only cracking 50-55 points, how much does that now put him at? He probably still is in the $7 - 7.5 M annual range, so we maybe got him for $200k less per year?

To me, the advantage gained is that should the player break out in one of the bridge year deals, the market and deal can't reset, since the player is now signed long term. If the player underperforms on the bridge deal, it likely won't affect the type of long term deal that the player is looking for in the same way that an over performance does. As an example, scoring 10% fewer points in the bridge deal (dropping Keller from 56 to 50 points) could mean that his AAV goes from 7.15 to 6.40 M. But does a 10% increase from 56 to 62 points, on average, yield an increase from 7.15M to 7.85 M?

As Chayka mentioned, a good year kind of resets the market to the point where you are paying more relative to what could have been had.

I get all that, I get the rationale. My point is this. With young players, you better understand what you are trading away, what you are receiving, and what you are paying for in dollars and how much term. Galchenyuk didn't work out, Domi and Strome did elsewhere. I know we got talent in return but still.

I see why Chayka signed Keller, the term and the money. I'm not questioning the deal on it's own. I'm questioning weather we should trust Chayka's decisions with young players. I think there is a little bit of too much confidence maybe in Chayka, thinking he can predict the future of young players, he is a very inexperienced GM with no leadership around him to bounce decisions off of. I hope DVO/Schmaltz/Chych/Keller all have career years and Chayka looks smart with these signings. In my opinion, he hasn't looked smart so far.

 

[Jakey53]

I get all that, I get the rationale. My point is this. With young players, you better understand what you are trading away, what you are receiving, and what you are paying for in dollars and how much term. Galchenyuk didn't work out, Domi and Strome did elsewhere. I know we got talent in return but still.

I see why Chayka signed Keller, the term and the money. I'm not questioning the deal on it's own. I'm questioning weather we should trust Chayka's decisions with young players. I think there is a little bit of too much confidence maybe in Chayka, thinking he can predict the future of young players, he is a very inexperienced GM with no leadership around him to bounce decisions off of. I hope DVO/Schmaltz/Chych/Keller all have career years and Chayka looks smart with these signings. In my opinion, he hasn't looked smart so far.

Chayka has not won a damn thing at the NHL level as GM, and RT has not won a damn thing as NHL head coach, in fact, their records are not encouraging. Chayka does things that you and I shake our head at, but my opinion, signing Schmaltz and Keller were two good moves. Many players under performed last year, and if that happens again, and we miss the playoffs, changes could be coming.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I get all that, I get the rationale. My point is this. With young players, you better understand what you are trading away, what you are receiving, and what you are paying for in dollars and how much term. Galchenyuk didn't work out, Domi and Strome did elsewhere. I know we got talent in return but still.

I see why Chayka signed Keller, the term and the money. I'm not questioning the deal on it's own. I'm questioning weather we should trust Chayka's decisions with young players. I think there is a little bit of too much confidence maybe in Chayka, thinking he can predict the future of young players, he is a very inexperienced GM with no leadership around him to bounce decisions off of. I hope DVO/Schmaltz/Chych/Keller all have career years and Chayka looks smart with these signings. In my opinion, he hasn't looked smart so far.

The reason that I think I will see this one out is because there are a lot of little things that have been done that can attribute to Chayka and growth.

The first thing is that no GM wants any one of their players to fail. What sort of attitude does that bring? The team he inherited is the one that he inherited and he is no more or less beholden to any player. In fact, the only statement that I remember from the year when he and Maloney were together, Chayka mentioned going after Brad Richardson. He has been one of our better forwards, ugly injury notwithstanding.

Given the scope of what we have learned in interviews and stories, he will try to maximize our tools in any way legally possible. For one purpose or another, we could not maximize the most out of Domi or Strome on the ice. We tried to maximize the trade value for them and did okay, but not to the level of seasons those players had after being traded.

If Domi was indeed incendiary behind the scenes, then the GM has to shape the team a certain way. We needed goal scoring and we had a Domi replacement in Keller. For Strome, I think that the rift was caused by not being disciplined enough to see Strome ever really buy in. I don't think anyone can disagree that we never saw the best Strome had to offer here, period. Even when he was at his best in the 11 game call up, I don't know if the commitment was there. Any sort of not being able to buy in to the locker room, the system, the offseason, whatever it may be requires some change. He at least has the balls to identify an issue and take corrective steps. Even if he missed on those players, I don't believe that someone will miss on all of them.

And that is kind of the micro level of what we are looking at. This is a shrewd business dealing where he is taking the idea of building up and seeing the build get maximized. Chayka has done so with our scouting department in general, our AHL team has far better depth and a much deeper pipeline to bring competition into the organization. Our drafting looks odd, and then over time, we see more than just the Haytons and Soderstroms - instead we see Jenik, Dineen, Bahl, Steenbergen. Players that could get a call up and/or be poised to progress.

With as much progress made, even with some blips on the radar, I think that there should be a lot more trust in the direction. In three years, people will think of how good of an investment this was, and it kind of parallels the steps to get all our ducks in a row, as an organization.

 

[XX]

speaking of Max, will be very interesting to see the outcome of his contract negotiations with MTL.

If you want a definitive example of how 'smart' this Keller deal already is, look no further than the Marner drama. A player they had 100% faith in and knew would be good, yet they didn't sign him to a big deal after coming off a 69 point season. Now they're looking at demands north of $11m a year because they put Marner in total control.

Had they just gritted their collective teeth and paid a bit more than they'd have liked on an 8 year deal last summer, they would have him under control and under his current ask. Now they're looking at possibly trading him and not getting 100% value in the process.

Chayka took one look at the drama going on with some of these RFAs and said "f*** that."

 

[Jamieh]

If you want a definitive example of how 'smart' this Keller deal already is, look no further than the Marner drama. A player they had 100% faith in and knew would be good, yet they didn't sign him to a big deal after coming off a 69 point season. Now they're looking at demands north of $11m a year because they put Marner in total control.

Had they just gritted their collective teeth and paid a bit more than they'd have liked on an 8 year deal last summer, they would have him under control and under his current ask. Now they're looking at possibly trading him and not getting 100% value in the process.

Chayka took one look at the drama going on with some of these RFAs and said "**** that."

Marner and Agent stated many times last summer they would not be signing until after this season as they knew playing with Tavares was going to drive his price up. There was no option to sign him.

 

[Canis Latrans]

Marner and Agent stated many times last summer they would not be signing until after this season as they knew playing with Tavares was going to drive his price up. There was no option to sign him.

I know it's semantics, but if another player is "driving your price up," doesn't that just indicate that your price shouldn't actually be going up because it hinges on that other player. Also, I think this really drives home how far in advance Chayka has things planned out. Sure there were decent free agents that we could have signed, like Gardiner, but it's already a strength of the team, kind of analogous to Toronto adding another major weapon to their offense in Tavares last year when other areas needed the boost more. I just wonder if that no option to sign him is really because Tavares incurred so many limits onto their cap number.

 

[Jamieh]

I know it's semantics, but if another player is "driving your price up," doesn't that just indicate that your price shouldn't actually be going up because it hinges on that other player. Also, I think this really drives home how far in advance Chayka has things planned out. Sure there were decent free agents that we could have signed, like Gardiner, but it's already a strength of the team, kind of analogous to Toronto adding another major weapon to their offense in Tavares last year when other areas needed the boost more. I just wonder if that no option to sign him is really because Tavares incurred so many limits onto their cap number.

I would keep or get a high end center any day over paying top dollar for a good winger, but that might just be me.

 

[Coyotedroppings]

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.

So if he has a good year you will finally shut up about the coaching?

 

[TheLegend]

I’m not holding my breath.....