PainForShane
formerly surfshop
- Dec 24, 2019
- 2,531
- 2,958
1. You can't compare Keller's deal to deals that came previously, under different circumstances and cap numbers. All that matters is his pay rate relative to the total cap aka his % of cap taken. Someone like MacK is comically underpaid.
You're right that's why I didn't. Koneckny, Nylander, Provorov are all ~the same age / signed LT deals roughly the same time, all for less money (Konecny significantly less 5.5m). I am arguing those deals are the market and if so we overpaid, potentially significantly because I don't think Keller in particular is trending the same way as those three. Still lots of time for both to turn it around (absolutely hope they do)
$7.1m is not a spooky scary number in a world where someone like Jeff Skinner is getting paid $9M a year on the open market with way more miles and damage on his body. It's basically the same AAV Kevin Hayes got.
Keller hasn't even turned 22... the Coyotes are in no way "stuck" with this contract. The team loves his personality and work ethic behind the scenes which is why they gave him (and others like Dvo and Chych) such a deal. These deals are also the only way the Coyotes can be competitive in the long run...
Teams hand out bad contracts all the time to guys with very limited tread left on their tires. They overpay in dollars, term, and take on an incredible amount of risk in the process. See Lucic, Ladd, Backes etc...
The Skinner and Hayes deals are both terrible. If you're saying that those deals are what we should try to beat then yes, these deals look amazing. Also to your point, certainly our staff thinks Keller will meet his deal either by production or intangibles... but of course every team thinks that for every single deal they make (incl Lucic, Ladd, Backes etc). Regarding bad contracts, you can hand out a bad deal for mistaken potential (Bobby Ryan?) just as easily as you can overpay bc a player's too old.
Also, there are multiple ways to build a cup contender -- a team like Tampa offers their superstars bridge deals in hopes that they eventually sign for less money because the team is good (worked for Stamkos, Kuch, we'll see about Point) a team like Washington gives long term deals to everyone. Point is that bridge deals are a valid option depending on players
In terms of 'stuck with contract,' it depends mostly how other teams manage their cap. I'd argue regardless of cap increase, most teams will continue to spend right up to it meaning less available space to potentially absorb additional salary (esp one with term). That is what's happening right now -- at the end of this season not a single team will have 7m in cap space to absorb another contract without shuffling -- CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps for those at home
Teams should be a lot more loose with their U25 players that are essentially being signed for their entire prime. They represent less risk and the odds you recapture cap value via inflation are much, much higher.
The cap will continue to rise with a new TV deal and the addition of Seattle. Keller's contract is already good and will become great a few years from now. This is a player that can absolutely explode into a PPG+ producer in the right situation with some development. Sure beats paying Derek "BL" Stepan $6.5m.
What do you mean by risk? There is still risk -- less risk of body breaking down, but definitely risk the player won't develop. Given how some of our young players like Dylan Strome, Max Domi, Duclair etc have gone, our development risk in particular is significant. This development risk is why I view these contracts as risks (esp with term) -- if Keller / Schmaltz do become PPG players then of course their contracts are great / we will be able to trade them but then why would we want to.
That said let's put this another way. If the players produce like a legitimate first line then of course they are good deals. This is more of a 'these players are young, in the recent past we haven't really developed our players that well... and besides, these players might not be the ones we'd want to build around' but that last point is different and beyond the scope (like you said, Hall thread)
Does everyone see how this is all related though? If Keller / Schmaltz take significant strides then maybe we can become a true cup contending team, then maybe Hall signs here and we're all in a good position for the next 5 years or so. If Keller / Schmaltz don't score down the stretch, our roster is likely only average, Hall signs somewhere else and we're worse off in the medium term. So, we should do everything we can to get Keller / Schmaltz to produce by any means necessary, this year's production is more important than it ideally should be with a normal long term deal
Last edited: