Why would the players strike? Has anybody suggested the players will strike?
There hasn't been a players strike in NA pro sports since 1994. The players make way too much now, they would never strike.
You are aware that all of the NHL's recent labor stoppages have been lock-outs, right? That each time the CBA has come up for renegotiation (under Gary Bettman's leadership) the owners have decided that it no longer works for them and so they shut down the league, of their own volition, in order to obtain a CBA that they feel is more favourable to their interests as owners.
They will have another lockout once this CBA expires and RFA contracts will be "the hill we will die on", just like last lockout when 5 year max contract lengths was "the hill we will die on"....until it wasn't.
I do feel for Leaf fans. They went through a lot of tough years to be a fan, and the organization finally did things the right way. You develop a great young core and not one of them is giving the franchise any wiggle room. I understand the importance of a cap, but it is frustrating to see teams have to decide whether they can even afford to keep their own homegrown players or not.
I do feel for Leaf fans. They went through a lot of tough years to be a fan, and the organization finally did things the right way. You develop a great young core and not one of them is giving the franchise any wiggle room. I understand the importance of a cap, but it is frustrating to see teams have to decide whether they can even afford to keep their own homegrown players or not.
What I find frustrating is fans from other teams that come into threads like this and seem delighted to see the Maple Leafs in this situation.
They don't seem to understand that Dubas handing out poor contracts affects everybody, it's not just something that affects the Maple Leafs in vacuum.
If this team ends up paying three forwards over $11 million a season every agent will be salivating and the trickle down affect will hurt every single team in the league, not just the Maple Leafs.
Someone please make it stop already, holy crap this thread is painful to read. You've made your opinion on this matter more than clear; we get it. Just accept that not everyone is going to agree with you and move on instead of repeating the same thing over and over again to everyone.
1.) kovalchuk wasnt 14. He was 16.54. And he played 12 more games than Matthews. And still had less goals and same points.
2.)!It doesnt make sense that multiple legal comparables are all “unique situations”.
But then you add in an illegal contract.
But either way.
Ya I’m still pretty confident in the Matthews numbers compared to kopitar and Tavares. Even though they actually signed a year early Cap friendly provided the dates. You know that right?
Even ignoring that.....
About 30 more goals in 30 less games is pretty huge. Matthews is unquestionably a top 3 goal scorer in the league. Tavares and kopitar were no where near that.
Backstroms contract would be illegal now.....I’m also pretty sure it would take him to 33. I would prefer to be able to sign Matthews to an 11 year deal yes. But it’s not a possibility.
See to me Marner I don’t know. Mostly because he is a top 10 pt getter over his elc. Who is looking to sign for 3 years. Who else can say that?
I have said that for a 5 year deal... probably around 11-12 percent?
But for a 3 year deal. Where are the comparables?
Kucherov signed tax free 4.77.
Panarin signed 6 x 2 I think in a lower cap.
The problem is that his best comparables haven’t signed yet.
From what I recall Marner is up a bit on aho. Rantanen. Etc. So a little more than them. But not much
I think this is the test for Dubas and I have said this for a while. Nylander ended up exactly where he should. Just 2 months late
Matthews ended up pretty much where he should. Especially when they were negotiating on a 83-85 cap. It ended up being lower. But 14.28 percent is about right for the best goal scoring C in the world. Who hasn’t won a major award.
The contract value was fine. I think the term with Willy and JT was dumb. Until proven otherwise.
Marner is the tiebreaker. I personally had him slotted in at about 10.5 x 6 as a reasonable guess. But I wanted to see how the rest compared.
I would have said.
8.5’ x 3
9.0 x 4
10. x 5
10.5 x 6
11.5 x 8.
Something like that. As a first guess but we will have to see where they all end up.
Among the 13 players who signed for 14% or more between 2008 and now, 5 of them signed as RFAs. Malkin, Ovechkin, McDavid, Matthews, and Staal. I think Matthews is pretty clearly an outlier in that group, but Staal is as well. But you have to consider that Staal initially took a pretty nice bridge deal, was more accomplished, and his contract was for 7 years and bought 6 UFA years. The UFAs there who got paid 14% either had Stanley Cups where they won the Smythe or led the playoffs in scoring, or had been voted best at their position at least once, with the exception of Panarin. And most would argue Panarin was overpaid (although they would argue Karlsson, Price, Kopitar, Toews, and Kane were overpaid as well.)
To me, when I look at that list of players getting 14% of the cap in the past few years, Matthews is a clear outlier. All the other guys were far more accomplished, and had far more leverage or signed for more UFA years. The only other one that took 5 years as an RFA and bought only 1 UFA year was Malkin, who had literally just been voted best center in the league.
Now, going back to 2007, you have inferior players like Vanek/Gomez/Drury with comparable accomplishments, and even guys like Kimmo Timonen getting paid 14% of the cap. (Though Kimmo was below 13% when his contract actually took effect.) Look back further for example at Kovalchuk’s contract, yeah he signed for 16.54%. But then right after, Brad Richards signed for 20%! And these were both RFAs signing for 5 year terms. So, I really think 14% means a lot more than it used to. And I don’t really agree with your evaluation of 14% to such a degree that Patrik Laine would get a 14% contract, even if he didn’t have his back issues and gaming addiction. In the post-Vanek world, 14% seems to be reserved for players who had accomplished far more.
And yes, I was aware that those players signed a year early. (And that Matthews signed half a year early.) You were using full ELC production to make the comparison, so I brought up some other recent players that disproved the idea that Matthews’ ELC performance was “super elite.”
Among the 13 players who signed for 14% or more between 2008 and now, 5 of them signed as RFAs. Malkin, Ovechkin, McDavid, Matthews, and Staal. I think Matthews is pretty clearly an outlier in that group, but Staal is as well. But you have to consider that Staal initially took a pretty nice bridge deal, was more accomplished, and his contract was for 7 years and bought 6 UFA years. The UFAs there who got paid 14% either had Stanley Cups where they won the Smythe or led the playoffs in scoring, or had been voted best at their position at least once, with the exception of Panarin. And most would argue Panarin was overpaid (although they would argue Karlsson, Price, Kopitar, Toews, and Kane were overpaid as well.)
To me, when I look at that list of players getting 14% of the cap in the past few years, Matthews is a clear outlier. All the other guys were far more accomplished, and had far more leverage or signed for more UFA years. The only other one that took 5 years as an RFA and bought only 1 UFA year was Malkin, who had literally just been voted best center in the league.
Now, going back to 2007, you have inferior players like Vanek/Gomez/Drury with comparable accomplishments, and even guys like Kimmo Timonen getting paid 14% of the cap. (Though Kimmo was below 13% when his contract actually took effect.) Look back further for example at Kovalchuk’s contract, yeah he signed for 16.54%. But then right after, Brad Richards signed for 20%! And these were both RFAs signing for 5 year terms. So, I really think 14% means a lot more than it used to. And I don’t really agree with your evaluation of 14% to such a degree that Patrik Laine would get a 14% contract, even if he didn’t have his back issues and gaming addiction. In the post-Vanek world, 14% seems to be reserved for players who had accomplished far more.
And yes, I was aware that those players signed a year early. (And that Matthews signed half a year early.) You were using full ELC production to make the comparison, so I brought up some other recent players that disproved the idea that Matthews’ ELC performance was “super elite.”
By using 5-year deals, I think you limit your range to players like Nash and Kovalchuk who signed those 5-year deals when they were far more common.
If you include only 5-year deals and deals that bought more UFA term than Matthews, he is nowhere near underpaid.
I hear he turned down another 3 offers.
getting real sick of Mitch Marner. He hasnt proven anything
at this point I couldnt care if he returned to us at all.
If you want to get into semantics, then the statement "the Leafs are one of the most talented teams in the league" is actually a fact and cannot be disputed.
1.) saying 14 percent or more as equal is ridiculous. Yes. Compared to mcdavid. Crosby ovy etc. He is an outlier. They also took significantly more. None of them are 14 Percent. If he got paid 17.5 like Crosby. He would be overpaid.
But he didn’t. So comparing Matthews to them
Makes no sense. Other than. Not as good player gets paid not as much.
2.) of your 14 percent or more. Matthews is paid fairly comparable to the players in the 14-15 range. He is not as good as some of the players in the 16-17. He is as good or better than some. Ie kovalchuk. But he gets paid less
How many of those players are legitimately predicted to be as good? 28-35 karlson on 1 leg?
Drury... Gomez. Staal. Gaborik. Kopitar.
I feel pretty good about Matthews on that list
3.) we can compare “at the time they signed” if you prefer. Matthews signed with 2.75 ELC production.
Comparing Tavares after 2 years when we didn’t even know the next cap really isn’t the same as negotiating from an official cap prediction
I hear he turned down another 3 offers.
getting real sick of Mitch Marner. He hasnt proven anything
at this point I couldnt care if he returned to us at all.
Why would the players strike? Has anybody suggested the players will strike?
There hasn't been a players strike in NA pro sports since 1994. The players make way too much now, they would never strike.
You are aware that all of the NHL's recent labor stoppages have been lock-outs, right? That each time the CBA has come up for renegotiation (under Gary Bettman's leadership) the owners have decided that it no longer works for them and so they shut down the league, of their own volition, in order to obtain a CBA that they feel is more favourable to their interests as owners.
They will have another lockout once this CBA expires and RFA contracts will be "the hill we will die on", just like last lockout when 5 year max contract lengths was "the hill we will die on"....until it wasn't.
The NHL offered the last Olympics to the NHLPA in exchange for an extension of the current CBA and the players turned down the offer, that tells me that the owners are reasonably happy with the current CBA.
Matthews has the second highest cap hit in the nhl. He deserve the second highest cap hit base on what? That money is around generational level, he is not a generational player. A player that just got a little bit over ppg shouldn't be making that money. He was like 20th something ppg in the last few seasons and Leafs decided to make him the second highest player. Not sure how that Math adds up
I see Matthews more of an 80 to 90 point center instead of a 100 point center
Why would the players strike? Has anybody suggested the players will strike?
There hasn't been a players strike in NA pro sports since 1994. The players make way too much now, they would never strike.
You are aware that all of the NHL's recent labor stoppages have been lock-outs, right? That each time the CBA has come up for renegotiation (under Gary Bettman's leadership) the owners have decided that it no longer works for them and so they shut down the league, of their own volition, in order to obtain a CBA that they feel is more favourable to their interests as owners.
They will have another lockout once this CBA expires and RFA contracts will be "the hill we will die on", just like last lockout when 5 year max contract lengths was "the hill we will die on"....until it wasn't.
The owners get 50% of revenue no matter what. Why would they care how the players divvy up the other 50%? Rfa’s get a bigger piece of the 50% pie now. So what? Why would the owners care?
If anything, it’s the PLAYERS who would be upset at this new star rfa trend. It’s the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
Matthews has the second highest cap hit in the nhl. He deserve the second highest cap hit base on what? That money is around generational level, he is not a generational player. A player that just got a little bit over ppg shouldn't be making that money. He was like 20th something ppg in the last few seasons and Leafs decided to make him the second highest player. Not sure how that Math adds up
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
