Free Agency and Trades Thread: Post deadline wasteland

[Daisy Jane]

Yeah, Matthews if healthy and on a more successful PP unit probably puts up 80 pts this year. I won't be upset if he makes 10-11M per. After that I cringe but accept it, it makes things tighter though. I don't think he has a strong claim to anything over 11M though.

If the big 3 all took team friendly deals though, they'll be even beloved in the city, we can be more competitive etc etc. I think they want to win. All 3 of them. Marner grew up a Leafs fan, Matthews knows he's the franchise guy and he's going to get his money via endorsements. Nylander? Hard to say but he seems to be more of a team player then everyone gives him credit for.

well i guess it depends. like i don't have an issue of paying them their money but that's the spin. in free agency, basically Stamkos took the money which was seen as less by like everyone (including him or that deal woulda been accepted earlier), to stay with a team going places.

that's why i don't think Matthews will necessarily sign huge deal out of ELC. (again looking at all of Brisson's clients not one of them signed a eight year deal out of ELC when they were Matthews calibre). They all signed high five year deals. so Matty easily could sign a 9/5yr deal or something ("discount/flexibility") and it allows us to do more things

however I do think (I haven't seen) - Matthews is Brisson's first client of the "just pay everyone their money and give them years." era

 

[BertCorbeau]

well i guess it depends. like i don't have an issue of paying them their money but that's the spin. in free agency, basically Stamkos took the money which was seen as less by like everyone (including him or that deal woulda been accepted earlier), to stay with a team going places.

that's why i don't think Matthews will necessarily sign huge deal out of ELC. (again looking at all of Brisson's clients not one of them signed a eight year deal out of ELC when they were Matthews calibre). They all signed high five year deals. so Matty easily could sign a 9/5yr deal or something ("discount/flexibility") and it allows us to do more things

however I do think (I haven't seen) - Matthews is Brisson's first client of the "just pay everyone their money and give them years." era

When is Matthews' UFA eligible? A shorter term could be good for cap management in the short run as it would buy less UFA years, which is why these 8 year deals do not necessarily come at a big discount...

Given the circumstances the Leafs really need to court the big three together to try and take lesser deals for the betterment of the team in the long run. I mean based on the market deals, fair value for Matthews would be $10-$11 mill, and Marner/Nylander would be $6-$7 mill (taking into account a rising cap). Meaning you're into the $22 to $25 million range for the three. If you can get them collectively down to $20 mill or less, the difference means the Leafs could mean an RFA deal for one of the other youngsters who are more complimentary guys (like Kappy).

 

[IWD]

Agreed. TBH I've flipped a little on the Tavares thing - I wasn't as keen on signing him for cap implications but now I'd be more inclined to make a stronger push, if it's not a ridiculous overpayment (like over $11 mill/year). It comes with the understanding though that it will take away from cap space that can be allocated to the blue line and will also mean that the Leafs have to be prudent with other contracts otherwise they'll be in a bind.

I'd imagine that the 6 day talking window would allow the Leafs to present a collective pay structure to Tavares, Matthews, Marner, and Nylander. The Leafs are trending upwards, and Tavares has a strong opportunity to win multiple cups at home.

The Leafs have been very good at managing their cap, and I think they tend to lean a lot on soft power to make their players' financial lives easier, rather than solely on the hard power of salary. I think that the only way that the Isles keep him is by overpaying. It doesn't sound like he's going to stay with them, and it looks like Barzal is going to be their new shiny toy.

 

[Daisy Jane]

When is Matthews' UFA eligible? A shorter term could be good for cap management in the short run as it would buy less UFA years, which is why these 8 year deals do not necessarily come at a big discount...

Given the circumstances the Leafs really need to court the big three together to try and take lesser deals for the betterment of the team in the long run. I mean based on the market deals, fair value for Matthews would be $10-$11 mill, and Marner/Nylander would be $6-$7 mill (taking into account a rising cap). Meaning you're into the $22 to $25 million range for the three. If you can get them collectively down to $20 mill or less, the difference means the Leafs could mean an RFA deal for one of the other youngsters who are more complimentary guys (like Kappy).

I think the "con" here is that I bet that Matthews (being the face of the leafs) would be facing a lot of NHLPA pressure to really raise the stakes. (there's so much at play here). I personally (if i were Buffalo) would have paid eichel that much for that long (that's nothing against Eichel, but i mean. i just feel that McDavid got his big payday so Buffalo was like "here you go."


If I were the Leafs I would show them teams who have sunk costs of players and how they are struggling due to having that much money invested into two players. If they take a collective discount (not buying in UFA years if they don't want to), they would able to get A, B, C, D to maximise the window, and surround them with the best team possible (and work with them to get MORE money via sponsorships etc).

if they don't (which is fair and their right), looking at the data, they would have to get rid of some assets that make the team go which could hinder the window a bit (in terms of deals, trades and other beneficial signings) so it's really up to them if the money is worth that and that they'll do whatever they want.

 

[oldfan2010]

I think it was a good idea to throw a bid in on McDonogh, to bid up the others that were in on him. Try to make them spend more than they want to spend.

 

[Buds17]

I think it was a good idea to throw a bid in on McDonogh, to bid up the others that were in on him. Try to make them spend more than they want to spend.

I'm happy we apparently didn't up our own bid in response to offers from other teams. McDonagh would've been a nice add, but I don't know if we could've done a deal that would've been wise.

 

[paul pearce]

I think it was a good idea to throw a bid in on McDonogh, to bid up the others that were in on him. Try to make them spend more than they want to spend.

Leafs should sign dave hester

 

[Stephen]

I like the idea they helped drive up the price on McDonagh for Tampa and were prudent enough not to make a trade for the sake of a trade on defense, all good.

What I don't like is the move they did end up making for Plekanec at another position ended up costing a 2nd, Rychel and Valiev. Obviously I'm quite pessimistic about Plekanec, but I feel like the 2nd is a pick we probably could have kept in the back pocket and used at the draft, and we never gave Rychel an NHL audition either. Just kind of burned up a bit of the organizational fat without any real purpose. Could have squirreled away the second and used it in a future package.

 

[Stephen]

If we signed John Tavares, that might be when we have to consider moving on from Patrick Marleau (who may be done) and maybe even Nazem Kadri. Kadri is on a very affordable contract for a number 2 center at the moment, but when he gets pushed down to the third spot permanently behind Matthews and Tavares, his $4.5 million deal starts to look like a luxury. But then trading those two might help bring more youth into the system for another round of promotions somewhere around 2021. Something to think about.

 

[Menzinger]

If we signed John Tavares, that might be when we have to consider moving on from Patrick Marleau (who may be done) and maybe even Nazem Kadri. Kadri is on a very affordable contract for a number 2 center at the moment, but when he gets pushed down to the third spot permanently behind Matthews and Tavares, his $4.5 million deal starts to look like a luxury. But then trading those two might help bring more youth into the system for another round of promotions somewhere around 2021. Something to think about.

Maybe. Though an above average 3C is going to cost around 3-4ish million anyways. And Kadri likely will always out perform his contract.

If they sign JT, I think they’ll focus mostly on not spending much money on the wing (outside of Marner/Nylander). Which will likely mean having to move Marleaubin that 3rd year of his contract.

Will be super interesting to see what the Leafs do with their massive amount of capspace next season.

 

[Barilko14]

Dermott should be able to handle 2nd pairing LHD responsibilities. Borgman won't be expensive in the 3rd pairing, probably 900k-1.25M. RHD would consist of Pysyk, Zaitsev and Liljegren by then.

Rielly-Pysyk
Dermott-Zaitsev
Borgman-Liljegren
Cheap #7 - if we have more cap space to play with, spend more here

Wingers won't be much of an issue, Matthews-Tavares-Kadri-New 4C, our wingers will still feature Kapanen, Nylander, Marner, Hyman, Johnsson and likely Grundstrom, maybe Korshkov by then too.

Like I said, you make Tavares work if you get the chance, Only Pittsburgh could match us 1-3 in the East at that point.

I never really focused on the Pysyk trade in your lineup.

So he'd pretty well be the X factor for that team.

Tavares or not, it may take a Brown ++ trade to get a younger affordable top 4 Dman for us to have that solid top 6 we'll need to take that next step.

 

[Barilko14]

I think the "con" here is that I bet that Matthews (being the face of the leafs) would be facing a lot of NHLPA pressure to really raise the stakes. (there's so much at play here). I personally (if i were Buffalo) would have paid eichel that much for that long (that's nothing against Eichel, but i mean. i just feel that McDavid got his big payday so Buffalo was like "here you go."


If I were the Leafs I would show them teams who have sunk costs of players and how they are struggling due to having that much money invested into two players. If they take a collective discount (not buying in UFA years if they don't want to), they would able to get A, B, C, D to maximise the window, and surround them with the best team possible (and work with them to get MORE money via sponsorships etc).

if they don't (which is fair and their right), looking at the data, they would have to get rid of some assets that make the team go which could hinder the window a bit (in terms of deals, trades and other beneficial signings) so it's really up to them if the money is worth that and that they'll do whatever they want.

Which teams are struggling by paying only two players?

What would be your ideal contract for each of the big 3?

 

[Daisy Jane]

Which teams are struggling by paying only two players?

What would be your ideal contract for each of the big 3?

Chicago. Edmonton.
they are the only two teams off the top of my head that has 2 players making a huge chunk of cap. (and Edmonton's hasn't even kicked in yet)

I don't really have an "ideal" contract. i mean I personally would bridge Mitch (and or Nylander), and call it a day and give Matthews what he wants. but as most people here don't like the idea of bridge contracts, i'd basically give Will, maybe a few ticks below Pasta (or the same), not sign Mitch until next season (because you don't have to) and see what 3 years of work = for him, and then see what Matthews wanted to do around 10 to 10.5.

 

[Menzinger]

Though I wouldn’t necessarily say Edmonton is suffering at the moment because of cap reasons, they actually have a fair amount of unused capspace at the moment.

Hawks are getting sunk because some of the guys they’re paying aren’t quite worth the money, (Seabrook, Toews), but then you have the Pens with 4 players making big money and they’re as competitive as ever.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Though I wouldn’t necessarily say Edmonton is suffering at the moment because of cap reasons, they actually have a fair amount of unused capspace at the moment.

Hawks are getting sunk because some of the guys they’re paying aren’t quite worth the money, (Seabrook, Toews), but then you have the Pens with 4 players making big money and they’re as competitive as ever.

right. but there is, of course a difference that the Pens four players making under 9 million each vs. 2 players at a high cap and several others sucking up costs as well.

to me it doesn't matter who is getting the money -it's just that it's money spent.
even the Penguins had to ditch some players overboard to make it work

(which is why the cap is stupid, and it shouldn't exist or there should be a luxury tax but whatever)

 

[Menzinger]

right. but there is, of course a difference that the Pens four players making under 9 million each vs. 2 players at a high cap and several others sucking up costs as well.

to me it doesn't matter who is getting the money -it's just that it's money spent.
even the Penguins had to ditch some players overboard to make it work

(which is why the cap is stupid, and it shouldn't exist or there should be a luxury tax but whatever)

Well, what comes down to is teams with smart management and good scouting will manage to still succeed (I hope the Leafs have each).

The new normal for teams now is a few players are starting to take up the lions share of the cap, and the team has to fill
out the rest with cheaper guys. Can’t really avoid it

 

[Barilko14]

Chicago. Edmonton.
they are the only two teams off the top of my head that has 2 players making a huge chunk of cap. (and Edmonton's hasn't even kicked in yet)

I don't really have an "ideal" contract. i mean I personally would bridge Mitch (and or Nylander), and call it a day and give Matthews what he wants. but as most people here don't like the idea of bridge contracts, i'd basically give Will, maybe a few ticks below Pasta (or the same), not sign Mitch until next season (because you don't have to) and see what 3 years of work = for him, and then see what Matthews wanted to do around 10 to 10.5.

Not really great examples, I'd say Hossa leaving and Seabrook sucking have a bigger effect on Chi then Toews and Kane, and like you said the McDavid contract had nothing to do with this Edmonton season.

Personally I'm hoping we get the 3 of them signed for $25m or less for 8 years, so we know exactly the cornerstones of the team are making for the next 7 years (our prime contending window).

Only way I'd come off that plan is if JT was interested in coming here, or Lou somehow gets that top Dman (and he's expensive).

 

[Daisy Jane]

Not really great examples, I'd say Hossa leaving and Seabrook sucking have a bigger effect on Chi then Toews and Kane, and like you said the McDavid contract had nothing to do with this Edmonton season.

Personally I'm hoping we get the 3 of them signed for $25m or less for 8 years, so we know exactly the cornerstones of the team are making for the next 7 years (our prime contending window).

Only way I'd come off that plan is if JT was interested in coming here, or Lou somehow gets that top Dman (and he's expensive).

again. it doesn't "matter"
because it's money spent.

could Edmonton afford to make trades and do anything (even if it was a long term thing) knowing they has 12.5m to kick in? no.

could Chicago move Seabrook (even doing what some teams do w/expiring high-end contracts) because they have 21m sucked up. no.

once you have a small amount take a big amount of cap, your flexibility is gone. that's the point i'm trying to make. like they don't even have options because they are sucking up that much space in few little people.

if Leafs can put say 1/2 their cap space in 5+ players. then we're good because you can make more moves without being hemmed in.

 

[WTFMAN99]

well i guess it depends. like i don't have an issue of paying them their money but that's the spin. in free agency, basically Stamkos took the money which was seen as less by like everyone (including him or that deal woulda been accepted earlier), to stay with a team going places.

that's why i don't think Matthews will necessarily sign huge deal out of ELC. (again looking at all of Brisson's clients not one of them signed a eight year deal out of ELC when they were Matthews calibre). They all signed high five year deals. so Matty easily could sign a 9/5yr deal or something ("discount/flexibility") and it allows us to do more things

however I do think (I haven't seen) - Matthews is Brisson's first client of the "just pay everyone their money and give them years." era

5 years would be the worst, ufa eligible after. It's 2 or 8. I'd just to 8

 

[Daisy Jane]

5 years would be the worst, ufa eligible after. It's 2 or 8. I'd just to 8

so? if we're a stable franchise with constant success, it won't matter.

 

[WTFMAN99]

so? if we're a stable franchise with constant success, it won't matter.

Bad asset management.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Bad asset management.

so was it bad asset management for Pittsburgh
(Malkin + Crosby)

For Tampa
(Stamkos?)

i keep telling you. the agent for matthews if you look as his track record gets his superstars 5 year deals. i would be more shocked of Matthews signed for 8 vs. 5 due to that. and it's not a "bad" thing if he does. if we are trending upwards every season and manage our cap, it won't matter.

 

[WTFMAN99]

so was it bad asset management for Pittsburgh
(Malkin + Crosby)

For Tampa
(Stamkos?)

i keep telling you. the agent for matthews if you look as his track record gets his superstars 5 year deals. i would be more shocked of Matthews signed for 8 vs. 5 due to that. and it's not a "bad" thing if he does. if we are trending upwards every season and manage our cap, it won't matter.

Trend now is to sign your stars to bigger deals after Montreal tried getting cute with Subban, it cost them much more in the end.

Scheifele, Ehlers, McDavid, Eichel, Pastrnak, Draisitl, Benn, Klingberg etc.

Generally for a forward, their prime years are going to be if we sign them to an 8 year deal out of the gate. Defenseman bloom later.

By going 5 years, he hits UFA sooner, you'll have to sign a new contract sooner for more of a cap hit anyway and if anything goes wrong in that time he can simply walk.

I'll take 8 years.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Trend now is to sign your stars to bigger deals after Montreal tried getting cute with Subban, it cost them much more in the end.

Scheifele, Ehlers, McDavid, Eichel, Pastrnak, Draisitl, Benn, Klingberg etc.

Generally for a forward, their prime years are going to be if we sign them to an 8 year deal out of the gate. Defenseman bloom later.

By going 5 years, he hits UFA sooner, you'll have to sign a new contract sooner for more of a cap hit anyway and if anything goes wrong in that time he can simply walk.

I'll take 8 years.

right. you would.
but he may not.

If you look at the majority of Brisson's clients, they all sign short 2nd year deals (esp if they are high end players).I even acknowledged that this (as far as I know) is Brisson's first high-end client (in this position) where the trend is to buy up all the UFA years. so we'll see. but it wouldn't surprise me (and it shouldn't surprise people if they look at the history), that Matthews will be the same. heck. most of his players stay. the only one that won't (imo) is Tavares, and it's because the Islanders are a gong-show and they suck. I bet you had the islanders had more success/had an arena, he'd stay too.

i've said - i don't mind paying people what they are due. so to me if it's 5 years from now or whenever, whatever. I would take advantage of the CBA when it affords it to us in either situation quite frankly.

 

[WTFMAN99]

right. you would.
but he may not.

If you look at the majority of Brisson's clients, they all sign short 2nd year deals (esp if they are high end players).I even acknowledged that this (as far as I know) is Brisson's first high-end client (in this position) where the trend is to buy up all the UFA years. so we'll see. but it wouldn't surprise me (and it shouldn't surprise people if they look at the history), that Matthews will be the same. heck. most of his players stay. the only one that won't (imo) is Tavares, and it's because the Islanders are a gong-show and they suck. I bet you had the islanders had more success/had an arena, he'd stay too.

i've said - i don't mind paying people what they are due. so to me if it's 5 years from now or whenever, whatever. I would take advantage of the CBA when it affords it to us in either situation quite frankly.

Usually get burnt after that 2nd contract with him though, trend is there. Bite the bullet and see what it takes.

Jones and Forsberg got 5.4M and 6M respectively.

Jones probably would have cost 6.5-7m for 8 years. 1.4M is nothing for a difference to me
Forsberg at 6M for 6 years or 6.75-7M for 8 years?. Same deal. another 750k-1M is nothing

Because Jones on his next deal is going to jump from 5.4M to 8-10M per and Forsberg will get probably 7-8M as a floor.

Option is probably there to go to 8 years with him.