Discussion in 'Toronto Maple Leafs' started by willmma, Feb 8, 2019.
I see people are still latched onto the idea that the McDavid was anywhere near market value.
Then I guess Crosby and Ovechkin were underpaid when they signed their deals too?
Everyone except Matthews lol
More angst in this thread than Hamlet.
Nope, pretty much just McDavid. He gifted the Oilers 3 years. Any argument that says Matthews is overpaid that is based on comparing his 5 year term to McDavid's 8 makes a far stronger case that McDavid's 8 year term is underpaid relative to the precedents available at the time he was signed.
Matthews is worse than Crosby, he signed for 2.7% less cap (15.6% relative ) than him on the same term.
McDavid is equal to Crosby, he signed for .6% cap less (3.4% relative ) than him, and gave up 3 extra years.
If you use the standard wavey uses to normalize Matthews to 8 years to take Crosby to 8 years (add 1% per year):
McDavid is equal to Crosby, he signed for 3.6% less cap (17.7% relative) to what Crosby should have gotten for 8 years
Which comparison seems more out of wack?
That's not the word I'd use
I get what you are saying.
How come when other teams get guys on lower than "market value"(which is speculation of what that is) it means you can't compare though? How come it is only comparable if you find someone else who got paid the max or projected "market value"? Why aren't ALL contracts considered? That team did something right to get him at that price. Since all contracts are negotiated and there is no set value on every player, why are only some results fair to use? I think what is making some mad is more...why can EDM, BOS, NASH, TBAY etc seem to get players to sign less than the max or "market value" and we couldn't?
^ Pretty much.
Giving Matthews brutal contract a pass because a rival team negotiated better against the best player in the game and/or has a more selfless player doesn't make this one better.
It just means our management negotiated poorly in comparison or are dealing with a player that is completely self-interested in milking every last dollar out of us.
Which is worse I'm not sure..
Comes down to player willingness, salesmanship by gm, and external factors.
Don't get me wrong. This contract is in no way a win. It's a par a best. Between it and Nylander I'd give Dubas a B- at executing market value deals, and a D on persuasiveness. He got fairish deals. Considering the leverage our guys seemed willing to use to get there money that's a fine result. But it's still frustrating that he couldn't get the buy in to create real wins.
Lol they did not negotiate better. If McDavid refused to sign for anything less than 14x8 he'd be making 14x8 right now. If he decided 12.5 only bought 5 years then that's what would have been signed. He and his agent's knew his worth and decided to take less.
And that may cost us a good player like Kap or Johnsson or ... I think this is the real frustration of many. I would say they are both overpayments. Not Milan Lucic bad overpayment or anything like that, but you would think he could get closer to a good "Leafs" deal on at least one of the two. Instead it is a good deal for both Matthews and Nylander.
Man, I was with you in our convo until this. They still had to negotiate to a deal and EDM brass had to sell him on how to make it happen. That is part of negotiations. So yea, they did a better job of working with McDavid to take less in the interest of the team.
.5 too high for Willy, 1-1.4 to high for Matthews.
1.5-1.9 total overpayment, on two top liners (one who is top 5ish by position)
Looking through the lineup is see a lot of places where 1.5-1.9 million was spent less efficiently.
Like I said. By no means a win, and that sucks. But also nowhere near the market re-defining hugely anomalous loss people are spouting
Team accomplishment is really the only thing that matters.
Yeah, I'm pretty much in the same boat. We need some sandpaper on the team as a whole, as I don't think the Leafs are too difficult to beat - they're not going to grind out a lot of wins so to speak. Defensively we still need some help too; I'd love to see Pesce brought in, but that would depend on the cost. Zaitsev and Hainsey being replaced/pushed would be a positive for the team - Hainsey's a good player to have, but not at the minutes Babcock is pushing on him - Zaitsev had a decent rookie season, but it looks like he gets lost and nervous out there at times; kind of like a crappier version of Gardiner.
I'm with you on values. I had Willy $500-$750 over about the same as you for Matthews. The issue is those overpayments come at a time when we are heading into a cap crunch. We haven't won anything yet and we may lose a good asset for the cap already. Not good to have to do this before you win.
Hard to argue this.
A mil extra for the 3 amigos I know it is chump change for Leafs but it does affect the freakin CAP
But I get it you are representing mega multi-millionaires in ownership and Shanny and Babs
So if Dubas could have got Tavares for say $9-9.5 million AAV, Nylander for $5.5- 6 million AAV, Matthews for $10 AAV, and Marner for say $8 million AAV, would that be considered a big win for him ?
Management has been embarassing around the trio signings to begin with, from Shanahan begging players to the media to take discounts, to getting fleeced by the Matthews camp, and the lil ol' Nylander saga.
Matthews didnt deserve more than Tavares(even on his "discount") and leaves a lot to be desired in his play the last 2 years, even with his goal totals. Coming from a guy who would have paid him 13m at the beginning of the year when he looked like he had "it" back.
I know it's the early stages of what looks like a massive salary hike for the entirety of NHL players, but it's pretty rough and for as little talking as our front office does, it feels like sometimes they talk too much.
Yes it would. But it is not for him. It is for the team. It is very hard to represent rich people when you are the poor guy with rich people both above and below you. If it was me I would have used that card a lot harder. But maybe he was told to get them done.
I feel like there is a trap coming here, but what the heck.lol
If you are using the same term for each deal and Marner at 6-7 years...I would think most would call that a win on all deals.
But even if the bolded is true, wouldn't you think that's even more reason to lock them up for 8 years?
Great post. Especially the first paragraph.
Not if the 8 year numbers were much higher. That would kill us even more next year.
I'm just trying to figure out what would actually be good value for some. Personally I think Tavares is overpaid, maybe not today for some, but in 2-3 years when he slows down big time (not the greatest skater to begin with) that deal is going to look horrendous. Matthews I would have put at around $10.034/10.534 million AAV, but the second Tavares got $11 million AAV, I knew Matthews wouldn't except less. Marner probably could have been had for $9 million, and now I doubt he get under $10 million... Why should Marner be the only one who "sacrifices" ?
Separate names with a comma.