Confirmed Signing with Link: [NYI] Mathew Barzal signs extension (3 years, $7M AAV)

[Strait2thecup]

Nope, no good GM would've signed him to that albatros contract. In a league where there's multiple 100 point scorers a year, 95 points isn't worth 11m+ and the leafs have 2 of those horrible contracts. If 95 points is worth 11.6m then I guess Marner is underpaid by your logic, good job.

keep in mind that his highest point total was 73 when he signed that deal, not 95, nor did he pace for close to 95 (88 point pace after year 3)

 

[SI90]

Rangers fan chiming in.

Im happy the Isles were able to bring sign him. Happy that they were able to retain their best player. This is a good hockey club. Lots of key pieces in the right places. Will he stay after 3 years is up? If they win, maybe? If they fail to put it together and be a real threat...then its likely. Lets see how it unfolds.

The first 2 years of Lou and Trotz have been pretty successful. Add in the new state of the art arena next year and other contracts coming off the books I’d say the isles are heading in the right direction. Obviously things can change in a few years but Barzal will still be an RFA so he can’t exactly just walk away.

 

[CREW99AW]

Patriots always brought back good locker room guys and special teamers. Martin is a huge piece to the best 4th line in hockey that outworked top lines last postseason. Komarov is cheap and a UFA in two years. Good soldier and Trotz loves him. Teams hate playing against him.

Isles fans got too attached to Toews. Understandable to a point but one full season in his career yet was commanding $4 mil a season? Screw that. Dobson will be just as good if not better and cheaper. I wouldn’t worry about that team. They will contend.

Lou is shopping Komarov and his $3m caphit, two yrs after signing him to a 4 yr deal. I am disagree that he is cheap and since Lou will have to attach a sweetener to dump him,I am gonna disagree his 4 yr deal was a good signing by Lou

As for Toews and getting attached, fans should get attached to prospects who develop well and produce at the nhl look level.

 

[PromisedLand]

Barzal is a tremendous player, the AAV is a good deal. Not sure how the QO will work at the end, I'm not knowledgeable enough about that. But for the next 3 years value is definitely there!

Barzal will get a 10AAV QO after 3 yrs; if he doesnt then he is automatically UFA

 

[Chardo]

Barzal will get a 10AAV QO after 3 yrs; if he doesnt then he is automatically UFA

8.4 million

 

[Beacon Isles]

Barzal will get a 10AAV QO after 3 yrs; if he doesnt then he is automatically UFA

QO now only has to be 120% of the AAV, or $8.4M. That’s a no brainer, and most likely they work out a long term extension.

 

[PromisedLand]

QO now only has to be 120% of the AAV, or $8.4M. That’s a no brainer, and most likely they work out a long term extension.

they changed the rule? i thought it was supposed to be the last years salary.

 

[Kaynen Ouch Chhay]

If marner produces the same amount of points at around the same pace whats the difference? I think goals being worth more is somewhat faulty logic. People will say 'you need the goal' but in the end its how many goals your line created.
If a player gets 90+ points every year with different players he is creating 90 + goals

Two different teams...If goals against and goals for are identicle, shots for shots against, goaltender save % all identicle top lines have the same ice time but one team has a guy with 90 goals and one team has a guy with 90 assits the teams will have the same record i see no extra benifit for the team with the goal scorer

It's just how it is in the nhl and all sports with assist stats. Goals are a premium and always has been. Also you are looking at lines and I'm talking about individual. It may be equal but an individual could get half of that 90 points by secondary assist.

It's not a faulty logic when it's used by everyone involved in the game. Its a pretty well known thing in hockey. It's why many models put goals at 1.5 in their personal calculations.

It's why we have the rocket, 50 in 50 and why we talk about goal scoring record and not assists. It's why goals is usually the diciding factor for the hart when 2 players are close in points.

Is it fair no but it is what it is. Mitch Marner would need to be in the 105/110 points if his goal scoring stays the same to gain full value. For me a 30g 75a season is where Marner is worth his contract as how scoring sits.

 

[Pure Slaughter Value]

they changed the rule? i thought it was supposed to be the last years salary.

Yes, changed when they extended the CBA

Aav+ 20% or last year salary, whichever is lower

Barzal’s 7m aav + 20% = 8.4 < Last year salary of 10m, therefore 8.4 is the QO

 

[Kaynen Ouch Chhay]

keep in mind that his highest point total was 73 when he signed that deal, not 95, nor did he pace for close to 95 (88 point pace after year 3)

Yes and that's where you pay for projection and potential. It's the same thing AVs did with Mack who was coming off 53 points and what the islanders would of done with Barzel if they could of made it work. They look at his first 3 years body of work and saw it wasn't much of risk to pay him that. Last season Mathews showed them they were right to make that investment. It's what teams do every year for their high profile guys coming off elc or second contracts.

Also you guys keep bringing up points when AM higher salary is mostly based on his goals and goal scoring potential. Plus 88 is pretty close to 95 in most peoples eyes. I can safely predict a 88 point guy improving at that age coming off elc with his resume quite easily. Again 88 to 95 is close and it's the goals he paced at last season that earn his contract and will so moving forward.

 

[Strait2thecup]

Yes and that's where you pay for projection and potential. It's the same thing AVs did with Mack who was coming off 53 points and what the islanders would of done with Barzel if they could of made it work. They look at his first 3 years body of work and saw it wasn't much of risk to pay him that. Last season Mathews showed them they were right to make that investment. It's what teams do every year for their high profile guys coming off elc or second contracts.

Also you guys keep bringing up points when AM higher salary is mostly based on his goals and goal scoring potential. Plus 88 is pretty close to 95 in most peoples eyes. I can safely predict a 88 point guy improving at that age coming off elc with his resume quite easily. Again 88 to 95 is close and it's the goals he paced at last season that earn his contract and will so moving forward.

It’s... it’s a bad contract. Closest comparable is eichel where Buffalo locked him in for 3 UFA years at 10 per. We wouldn’t be having this discussion if your teams fans didn’t get salty in a barzal thread.

lou>dubas ainec. Your loss.

 

[Kaynen Ouch Chhay]

It’s... it’s a bad contract. Closest comparable is eichel where Buffalo locked him in for 3 UFA years at 10 per. We wouldn’t be having this discussion if your teams fans didn’t get salty in a barzal thread.

lou>dubas ainec. Your loss.

I don't give af about Lou or dubus I ain't a fanboy who gives a shit about hockey other then the game and players themselves. You must be loss man cuz I didnt say shit about barzel anywhere here or anywhere ever. I don't give af about any other team in the league.. Also why would anyone ever be salty about barzel contract when it's whats expected. It's was either 7 bridged or 10 longterm, nothing changed there.

I came into this thread cuz the one dude said it's an awful contract for Auston and I showed that he has earned it and here you are spitting the same nonsense and talking about barzel and Lou.

Show your work, how is it an awful contract if the player earns it? For real if they earn thier pay every year, what difference does it make on how long it is or how much. Bro I don't care what jack makes as long as AM and Mitch earn theirs. I'm not one of them dudes who hate on players for making as much money as they can. They should be making more no question.

If it were up to me Auston, Connor, Mack, kuch, drai, sid, Malkin, etc would all be making max % just like the nba top guys does. I don't care what their paid they deserve what ever is given, its up to the gm to make it work.

 

[TKalltheTime]

Pretty cheap deal, good for them.

 

[Fatass]

Its this kind of signing (saving millions on the cap with a superstar player’s second contract) that allows Lou Lam to build a better supporting cast, and win GM of the year awards, and Stanley Cups.

 

[supsens]

It's just how it is in the nhl and all sports with assist stats. Goals are a premium and always has been. Also you are looking at lines and I'm talking about individual. It may be equal but an individual could get half of that 90 points by secondary assist.

It's not a faulty logic when it's used by everyone involved in the game. Its a pretty well known thing in hockey. It's why many models put goals at 1.5 in their personal calculations.

It's why we have the rocket, 50 in 50 and why we talk about goal scoring record and not assists. It's why goals is usually the diciding factor for the hart when 2 players are close in points.

Is it fair no but it is what it is. Mitch Marner would need to be in the 105/110 points if his goal scoring stays the same to gain full value. For me a 30g 75a season is where Marner is worth his contract as how scoring sits.

It is faulty logic if I produce 90 points a year every year I am good for 90 goals, thinking goals are worth more does not make them actually worth more. If one guy gets 70 goals with zero assists and one gets 90 assists no goals same ice time the goals are not helping more.
Mathews got UFA dollars as a RFA and gave up no UFA years it was a “bad” contract

 

[Kaynen Ouch Chhay]

It is faulty logic if I produce 90 points a year every year I am good for 90 goals, thinking goals are worth more does not make them actually worth more. If one guy gets 70 goals with zero assists and one gets 90 assists no goals same ice time the goals are not helping more.
Mathews got UFA dollars as a RFA and gave up no UFA years it was a “bad” contract

Bro aint worth arguing if that's your stance.. you do you... If you really believe 90 assist is worth 90 goals then you lost and I can't help ya.(and yes 70 goals is worth more then 90 assist how is that even a thing) Next time there a Q&A on reddit or elswhere with a gm etc give it a shot and see if you don't sound a lil lost.

Mathew got paid on future revenues and cap projections that was seen as certain as recent as January. The cap was heading towards 90/95 mil after tv deal and expansion and that's what Mathews team used as their basis for a long term contract. 14.63 % of what they projected the cap to be would of been 13.3 to 13.8 using a 90/95 salary cap. Again I'm a guy who wants players to get paid as much as they can so ain't no problem to me. It's why we have gm and cap specialists, up to them to make it all work.

Like I wrote above his UFA ask was in the 13.5 million for 8 years based on 14.6 at 90/95 ceiling. Dubas couldn't fit that in and that's how it ended up at 11.6 for 5. Mathews and his team believed with cap projection going up that his value would be at a top 3 player the last few years.

They saw it as lost earnings if he had signed for 11*8 because they believed he will still be worth top 3 money when it does hit 95. For them 11.6 would put him behind many other players not as valuable as him by then. Which is fine by me ask for what you think your worth and accept only that. So far in his first year imo he has earned it.

Had there been no covid and salary cap went up to what was projected in 3/4 years all the top guys that took bridges and guys like Mack, drai etc would be looking at salary anywhere between 11 and 14 mil by then. That's what Mathews and his teams was trying to protect themselves from(lost future earning) and Dubas and shanny agreed which is why he got what he got.

Again a bad contract is one that has neg value, his is not a bad contract as its still holds value and would of gain extra value if covid didn't hit and everything had played out as expected. It's not the most optimal contract given but it's not an awful one or a bad one and I don't expect it to ever be a bad one because he will only get better through out it. Just to add, 99% of leaf fans are happy with him at that price.. That should tell you something.

 

[supsens]

Bro aint worth arguing if that's your stance.. you do you... If you really believe 90 assist is worth 90 goals then you lost and I can't help ya.(and yes 70 goals is worth more then 90 assist how is that even a thing) Next time there a Q&A on reddit or elswhere with a gm etc give it a shot and see if you don't sound a lil lost.

Mathew got paid on future revenues and cap projections that was seen as certain as recent as January. The cap was heading towards 90/95 mil after tv deal and expansion and that's what Mathews team used as their basis for a long term contract. 14.63 % of what they projected the cap to be would of been 13.3 to 13.8 using a 90/95 salary cap. Again I'm a guy who wants players to get paid as much as they can so ain't no problem to me. It's why we have gm and cap specialists, up to them to make it all work.

Like I wrote above his UFA ask was in the 13.5 million for 8 years based on 14.6 at 90/95 ceiling. Dubas couldn't fit that in and that's how it ended up at 11.6 for 5. Mathews and his team believed with cap projection going up that his value would be at a top 3 player the last few years.

They saw it as lost earnings if he had signed for 11*8 because they believed he will still be worth top 3 money when it does hit 95. For them 11.6 would put him behind many other players not as valuable as him by then. Which is fine by me ask for what you think your worth and accept only that. So far in his first year imo he has earned it.

Had there been no covid and salary cap went up to what was projected in 3/4 years all the top guys that took bridges and guys like Mack, drai etc would be looking at salary anywhere between 11 and 14 mil by then. That's what Mathews and his teams was trying to protect themselves from(lost future earning) and Dubas and shanny agreed which is why he got what he got.

Again a bad contract is one that has neg value, his is not a bad contract as its still holds value and would of gain extra value if covid didn't hit and everything had played out as expected. It's not the most optimal contract given but it's not an awful one or a bad one and I don't expect it to ever be a bad one because he will only get better through out it.

Sorry but if five guys play one game team Marner vrs team Mathews and Mathews scores all the goals for his team 70 and Marner gets an assist on every goal 90 assists who won the game? Who had more value?
The logic of goals are worth more is an idea but does not hold up

 

[Kaynen Ouch Chhay]

Sorry but if five guys play one game team Marner vrs team Mathews and Mathews scores all the goals for his team 70 and Marner gets an assist on every goal 90 assists who won the game? Who had more value?
The logic of goals are worth more is an idea but does not hold up

Lmao Mathews would when it comes contract time and their would be no debate about it hahah...
In that sentence alone I can only come to the conclusion that Mathews is more valuable based on him scoring all his teams goals. While Marner had more points we don't know how he got them... Half of them could of been him drop passing, tap passing at center ice to earn the secondary assist. Also his 90 assist could be to the guy who scored all 90 goals which makes that guy more valuable aswell. An assist man also needs a good triggerman to get the most out of his passing while a guy like Mathews can put up his goals with almost anyone.

Here a question for you... Who had the better season
Player A: 65g 55a 120 points
Player b: 35 85a 120 points
Who wins the hart?
I know who I and most hockey people would pick..

 

[supsens]

Lmao Mathews would when it comes contract time and their would be no debate about it hahah...
In that sentence alone I can only come to the conclusion that Mathews is more valuable based on him scoring all his teams goals. While Marner had more points we don't know how he got them... Half of them could of been him drop passing, tap passing at center ice to earn the secondary assist. Also his 90 assist could be to the guy who scored all 90 goals which makes that guy more valuable aswell. An assist man also needs a good triggerman to get the most out of his passing while a guy like Mathews can put up his goals with almost anyone.

There would be a debate, If one guy produces 2.0 points per 60 basically every year with different line mates mostly goals and one guy produces 2.2 points per 60 with different line mates but mostly assists saying goals are worth more isn’t logical.
If Mathews scores 50 goals and gets 30 assists and is replaced with Mcdavid all other players are the same but Mcdavid produces 30 goals and 60 assists he had more value.

All the new advanced stats are created with the assumption goals have more value and I personally believe it’s a flaw
It’s like saying home runs matter more than being able to get on base and drive in runs. It sounds logical but the math doesn’t add up

 

[periferal]

Lou is forsure a mixed bag.

Your RFA's are gonna be well handeled and drafting should be solid, but at the same time trading and UFA is where Lou struggles a lot. He'd be a top 5 GM if he wasn't bad at those two parts of roster acquisitions

Amen here. Wish Lou would just be team president and hire a more complete GM.

 

[Kaynen Ouch Chhay]

There would be a debate, If one guy produces 2.0 points per 60 basically every year with different line mates mostly goals and one guy produces 2.2 points per 60 with different line mates but mostly assists saying goals are worth more isn’t logical.
If Mathews scores 50 goals and gets 30 assists and is replaced with Mcdavid all other players are the same but Mcdavid produces 30 goals and 60 assists he had more value.

In that scenario Mathews is more valuable cuz agian we don't see the context to the assist. That's how I feel and from what I've read and heard over the years, it's a generally accepted practice. The way I see it in most case 20 goals more then make up the difference for 10 assist lead in points.

I get what you're trying to infer I'm just sayin that's not how it's seen in the stat community. In most anaylitics I've read since advanced stats became popular goals tend to have more value. Also from what I've seen in interviews from current and ex players, GMs etc goals and goal scoring atrrivutes is tend to be held as the highest premium. It's also why they use goals instead of assist as the tie breaker for the art Ross.

Again not tryin to change anyones mind just explaining why I believe and id say many other aswell that a 55g 40a guy like Mathews etc holds more value then a 25g 70a guy like Marner etc. That is also not mentioning the position they play. Gonna leave at that and say gonna have to agree to disagree.

 

[Kaynen Ouch Chhay]

There would be a debate, If one guy produces 2.0 points per 60 basically every year with different line mates mostly goals and one guy produces 2.2 points per 60 with different line mates but mostly assists saying goals are worth more isn’t logical.
If Mathews scores 50 goals and gets 30 assists and is replaced with Mcdavid all other players are the same but Mcdavid produces 30 goals and 60 assists he had more value.

All the new advanced stats are created with the assumption goals have more value and I personally believe it’s a flaw
It’s like saying home runs matter more than being able to get on base and drive in runs. It sounds logical but the math doesn’t add up

Well yes a homerun is worth more then getting on base it's why those guys are alway getting jobs, just take a look at swarber. As to why it's more valuable we'll when a player hits a solo homerun he earns a run for his team. When a player gets a hit/gets on base he can end up being left on base with no runs scored. That 1 solo hr run can lead to a win.

Anothe example is when a player hits a single with the baseloaded it will most likely score 2, while a hr will drive in 4. Again 4 is better 2 and could lead to a team win. Do you not see how your anology is faulty and confirms what I'm sayin then it does yours. Why do you think they always mention the game can change with one swing of the bat.

A homerun can be a game changer, a hit can only lead to a momentum starter. So yes in your anology here a hr is worth more then getting a hit or gettin on base to drive in run. Again 2 man on, 1st and second, the non hr guy can only bring in 2 runs while the hr guy can bring in three with one swing. Game cam end 3 to 2 a win for the team with the hr guy. Pretty simple to me on what is more valuable in this case.

Also here is an article that explains what I'm trying to say about a player like Mathews and his value to a team. Those are opinion of nhl personal and how highly regarded Mathews is within the nhl circle of players and Manegment.
Top 100 NHL players: The Athletic's Player Tiers — from Connor McDavid to Jamie Benn

 

[supsens]

Well yes a homerun is worth more then getting on base it's why those guys are alway getting jobs, just take a look at swarber. As to why it's more valuable we'll when a player hits a solo homerun he earns a run for his team. When a player gets a hit/gets on base he can end up being left on base with no runs scored. That 1 solo hr run can lead to a win.

Anothe example is when a player hits a single with the baseloaded it will most likely score 2, while a hr will drive in 4. Again 4 is better 2 and could lead to a team win. Do you not see how your anology is faulty and confirms what I'm sayin then it does yours. Why do you think they always mention the game can change with one swing of the bat.

A homerun can be a game changer, a hit can only lead to a momentum starter. So yes in your anology here a hr is worth more then getting a hit or gettin on base to drive in run. Again 2 man on, 1st and second, the non hr guy can only bring in 2 runs while the hr guy can bring in three with one swing. Game cam end 3 to 2 a win for the team with the hr guy. Pretty simple to me on what is more valuable in this case.

Also here is an article that explains what I'm trying to say about a player like Mathews and his value to a team. Those are opinion of nhl personal and how highly regarded Mathews is within the nhl circle of players and Manegment.
Top 100 NHL players: The Athletic's Player Tiers — from Connor McDavid to Jamie Benn

Yes but 2o home runs and the worst batting average in history doesn’t have a lot of value for wins does it?
Does it have more value than anyone with less than 20 home runs?
If a guy batts 400 and has many many doubles and triples but only ten home runs do you really think the guy with 20 home runs and a billion strike outs has more value?
You can’t see the Forrest through the trees

 

[MikeyMike01]

The Islanders are happy with this contract. Barzal is happy with this contract. Islander fans are happy with this contract.

Everyone else can shove it.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

they changed the rule? i thought it was supposed to be the last years salary.

I posted that last page. They tweaked it last summer. It's now the lower of either the final year of the contract or 120% of the AAV. In Barzal's case, it's $8.4 million, which is 120% of the AAV.