I'd sign kadri 4 mil for 4 years. Could be a huge steal
that would be worth considering... though not sure if Kadri would take that. Might cost at least $4.5 if we want him for 4 years.
I'd sign kadri 4 mil for 4 years. Could be a huge steal
I suppose we have a different value for a player who has had 39 points and 50 points his past two seasons. Our whole problem is we overpay guys like this and never play hard ball, and that has caused the original cap issues. It's not what we pay our stars, it's that we overpay average players.
Chicago paid their 2nd line C 2 mil last year , a guy named Brad Richards. Now granted he took a discount to try for a cup but still, they paid him a reasonable amount, not first line forward/elite second line money. We need to learn this lesson.
I suspect some of you are remembering Kadri's shortened season near point a game pace and viewing him as that kind of player, which granted he may have the potential to duplicate over a full season, but he has never done this.
Read my last post. You're confused in overpaying the wrong players.
Leafs have ALWAYS paid the wrong players. Have always overpaid players with horrible analytics. Kadri? Kadri is the opposite. For everything, analytics shows him to be an elite 2C (many of his categories are tweeners between 1C and 2C). We will never succeed by paying 'hard-working players'. Leafs sign guys like Clarkson, Bozak, Bolland, etc to contracts that are HUGE and fans back it up by saying "He plays with heart" or "He tries so hard". That sort of reasoning is why the Leafs have ended up where they have.
Kadri, Gardiner, Rielly, Nylander, Marner, Marincin, Percy are all apart of our futures and I'm grateful. They all play amazing possession games.
He may well be "elite" in possession stats etc but his offense just isn't in the financial territory you are talking about. I must be so confused I forgot that possession stats win games and goals and points are not nearly as important...
A tad condescending for an opinion. Obviously we rate the player differently and value different things. Time will tell who management is of a closer mind with. I hope I notice in my state of confusion.....
He may well be "elite" in possession stats etc but his offense just isn't in the financial territory you are talking about. I must be so confused I forgot that possession stats win games and goals and points are not nearly as important...
A tad condescending for an opinion. Obviously we rate the player differently and value different things. Time will tell who management is of a closer mind with. I hope I notice in my state of confusion.....
I don't think it is too early to think of the structure of payment at all. I think more than ever, (regardless if it rises or not) you don't want to have a situation where you are overpaying for the 2nd tier talent (and I will stress this right now - I am not saying Kadri, or anyone else is 2nd tier talent - but at the same time, they should not be paid like overall elite talent (on 2nd contracts, or third contracts, either).
For example: Whatever path Rielly goes: say it is structured that it is a bridge, then a long term (right before UFA), then structured that you purchase UFA years - any defensive prospect that comes up that is just as good (or can even potentially threaten to be better than Rielly) has the path laid out for them. You can expect a 2 year, a bridge, and then what not. (give or take a year or two).
and so on, and so forth down the line. Rather than being all willy nilly with the funds
I'm not sure I understand how this is a dichotomy...
I suppose we have a different value for a player who has had 39 points and 50 points his past two seasons. Our whole problem is we overpay guys like this and never play hard ball, and that has caused the original cap issues. It's not what we pay our stars, it's that we overpay average players.
Chicago paid their 2nd line C 2 mil last year , a guy named Brad Richards. Now granted he took a discount to try for a cup but still, they paid him a reasonable amount, not first line forward/elite second line money. We need to learn this lesson.
I suspect some of you are remembering Kadri's shortened season near point a game pace and viewing him as that kind of player, which granted he may have the potential to duplicate over a full season, but he has never done this.
If Bernier or Kadri would go for this... we should tell them that we want both of them long term... and we're willing to offer a long term contract... but what we really want to do is sign them to a 2 or 3 year contract... then trade them at the deadline the year their contract expires... and then sign them to a nice big UFA contract as a reward.
What would ultimately be best for the team is to sign each of them to a 1 year contract, say at $5 mil... with the handshake understanding that they get traded at the deadline and then resign next year for $5.5 mil for 1 year, again traded at deadline... then we'll be finished collecting our prospects, and we lock them up for a fair deal. Think of the return we could get for Kadri and Bernier at the deadline... and then we get them right back for free.
Problem is, I doubt they go for such a plan because they'll want the guaranteed huge payout because there's always a risk that you get injured or whatever and can't continue playing in the NHL.
How about this plan:
Offer them 3 years at $12 million ($4 million per year each).
Then present them with this alternative offer:
Offer them each 1 year at $6 million. Tell them that they'll be traded at the deadline. Then guarantee to sign them for another 1 year deal at $6 million each the next year. This second deal I guess can't be in writing, but it would be a gentlemen's agreement that the Leafs will honour no matter what the circumstance. Then we trade them at the deadline again... and then sign them to a long term contract after that since we'll be heading for the playoffs with lots of our prospects having made the jump.
From the perspective of Bernier and Kadri, they make the same amount of money in 2 years instead of 3. If they take the Leafs at their word (it would have to be the word of Shanny and Babcock that this is 100% set in stone)... then there's no additional risk on their part such as injury risk.
So instead of locking them up now... we get to trade them each twice over the next two years at the deadline... we can retain salary on one of them this year (and I think both of them next year)... but most teams have cap room built up and are able to absorb high cap hit players at the deadline due to how the cap works and the fact that the salary cap is irrelevant in the playoffs. But that's potentially an extra 4 first round picks doing things this way. And we can still sign them both after the two years to fair deals. We should still have cap space since so many people will be on their ELC... and we don't mind compensating them, especially for holding up their end of the bargain and staying with Toronto and netting us those extra picks/prospects.
He may well be "elite" in possession stats etc but his offense just isn't in the financial territory you are talking about. I must be so confused I forgot that possession stats win games and goals and points are not nearly as important...
A tad condescending for an opinion. Obviously we rate the player differently and value different things. Time will tell who management is of a closer mind with. I hope I notice in my state of confusion.....
1)
If that's your entire analysis of Kadri then I hardly know what to say. The word simplistic comes to mind though.
2)
It seems like a waste of time for you to respond to my post when you don't address what I said (hint - analytics).
You don't like the guy, that's fine. But your arguments are non-existent so it seems like also a waste of time to continue this discussion with you.
ROFL. You really need to work on your social skills, or lack there of. I actually did acknowledge the analytics however I am looking at the full picture. Possession stats are important, and his hypothetical production potential is very nice also but to suggest that is the entire picture and the only factors that will establish his value is fairly selective and ignores other elements like size, physicality, character and production, yet my view is simplistic.
I guess we better just hope Kadri never hits 60 points or he will be an 8 million dollar player. But you are right about one thing, I am probably wasting my time responding to you.
Kadri as an RFA is about $4M, that's for one season, and then he will be about $5.1M during his UFA years.
A great comparable for his UFA years is Dubinsky, whose new contract starts this year and carries a $5.85M cap-hit. He's better established than Kadri, but both have similar styles and ceiling at this point. Dubinsky is worth over 8% of the cap limit, and I would say Kadri is okay at about 7.5%, which is where the $5.1M number comes from.
So talking a multi-year deal at $4.6 - $4.75M wouldn't be out of the question on a 2/3 year deal.
I wonder if the behavioral incidents from last year could hinder Kadri during arbitration?? It is fair to compare his on-ice production to other players in regards to comparable salaries but what about his off-ice behavior? Arbitrator may discount his salary comparable to a similar RFA who has a clean off-ice record.
The evidence that can be used in arbitration cases:
The player's "overall performance" including statistics in all previous seasons.
Injuries, illnesses and the number of games played.
The player's length of service with the team and in the NHL.
The player's "overall contribution" to the team's success or failure.
The player's "special qualities of leadership or public appeal."
The performance and salary of any player alleged to be "comparable" to the player in the dispute.
Evidence that is not admissible:
The salary and performance of a "comparable" player who signed a contract as an unrestricted free agent.
Testimonials, video and media reports.
The financial state of the team.
The salary cap and the state of the team's payroll.