Confirmed with Link: Penguins avoid arbitration with Dumoulin for another 6 years AAV $4.1million

[Empoleon8771]

Radapex already provided why this is a fair contract for Dumoulin. If you think this contract is bad, you're just ignoring what literally every other similar defenseman to Dumoulin gets. It's a completely fair deal, it's this high because it eats up 4 UFA years. At 2 years, I think it would fall closer to what people would think would be "fair", but then he'd shoot up to above $4.5 million as a UFA.

 

[Riptide]

1) Not saying this is the deal but if you start not caring of 500k overpayments here and there you could end up being forced to trade someone that could otherwise stay because of cap. Cap math says that in order to have better team than others you have to get more value per AAV than others.

2) I remember that before free agency everyone was going with 11-12 mil. for Schultz, Dumoulin, Sheary trio. Then Schultz got 5.5M. I think it was 500k over typical estimates on this forum (they were in 4M-5M range and I can't remember one that was over 5M) but you wouldn't let him go for 500k, right? Now Dumoulin signed for 4.1M (and again estimates on this forum were at 3-3.5M with occasional 4M as top). If Sheary goes for 4M+ (and he can easily go for that amount) you are suddenly at 13.6M+ for that trio instead of that 11-12M expectation.

3) One thing that bothers me with this contract is that you are "overpaying" in first 2 years to get "discount" on next 4 years. Usually that's perfectly fine. The problem is that in my opinion PIT best window is in next 2-3 years (after that they run out of those great deals and I don't expect them to find others). Which coincides with that overpaying part of that contract and not that discount part. So I would rather see something like 4x3.5M to create that extra cap space in those next 2-3 years.

4) To end up on positive note. This doesn't mean that the solution should be to let them go (now that would be dumb). Or even that those contracts wouldn't prove to be sweet deals in long run. I think the team can manage with 500k overpayments if they limit them to 2 or 3. Just be careful about it.

Several things.
1) For key players at key positions (top 3/4D, 1-3C, #1G) I'm not worried about overpaying slightly for the right guy. I'm not going to overpay for depth D, #4C, or depth wingers. There's a very select group of wingers I would overpay for, but only to a certain extent.

2) a) Schultz. I posted many times about how 5m would be the lowest he'd go, and that I could have easily seen him getting more. The highest I had was 5.5m, with most posts/comments coming in at 5.25m. The 5.5m number didn't surprise or phase me in the least. I always said the 4-4.5m numbers were absurd.
b) Dumoulin. 4.1m is higher than most had him (I had him at 3-3.75m depending on the term). But then I didn't expect him to sign a 6 yr deal.
c) 11-12m for all 3. That was always an optimistic number that mostly relied on Dumoulin and/or Sheary taking short term deals. Dumo taking 350-650k more than most expected on a 6 yr deal blew any chance of that happening out of the water.

3) I actually think there's several different windows over the next 5-6 years. Obviously the next 2 years with Guentzel on his ELC will be the best one. Year 3 when we still have some cheap players and MM is on his cheap deal will be another tier. Year 4-6 when our core is still effective and we likely still have some of our current group playing on manageable contracts will be on a 3rd tier (we should also have some new young guys stepping up here - ZAR/Sprong, etc). After that I think our window as a true contender is pretty much toast unless we get some amazing contributions from someone (in the way SJ got it from Couture in 15/16). This deal covers the rest of our windowed years. Sure it doesn't maximize our short term window, but neither does it sacrifice our longer term options either. Overall this is a good thing.

4) Agreed. Which is why I've always said I'd overpay for certain players at key positions, but not for every Tom Dick and Harry.

 

[radapex]

At least most were smart enough to vary the NTC for the latter years. Daley's NTC is also very interesting. Full NTC up until a week before the TD of the 2nd (3rd?) year. Gives him the stability he wants, and the team the options a team needs for a player of his abilities, age and cap hit.

Yup. The flip side is that those clauses carry the implication that the players could've got more, as they're often offered/agreed upon in return for reduced salary/AAV.

 

[Pick87your71Poison]

Yup. The flip side is that those clauses carry the implication that the players could've got more, as they're often offered/agreed upon in return for reduced salary/AAV.

Yeah that just doesn't seem to be the case for all of them though (Russell comes to mind). He signed a 1 yr deal for $3.1mm last year in October I think and then somehow got 4 years with a $4.0mm AAV. Was he really that good to deserve that raise at all, let alone a NTC? Seems like he was the same as always and the contract was more than enough in its own. I can't imagine how much more he gets without the clause.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

The nature of arbitration--which goes by facts, figures and precedents--makes that sort of argument difficult.

Famously, the NHL's lawyer tried what you're suggesting with Steve Rucchin (who was, at the time, centering Kariya and Selanne) and the arbiter laughed at the argument (which had something to do with a mouse riding an elephant) and gave Rucchin exactly what he asked for, saying his numbers dictate that's what he should make and that nothing else matters.

With Sheary, unfortunately for JR, his numbers are practically indistinguishable from Tyler Johnson's at the same point in his career. He might lose a couple dollars because he's a wing, but I think his arb award's gonna be higher than we want by kind of a lot.


Edit: Now that I think about it, it may have been Brendan Morrison between Bertuzzi and Naslund, not Steve Rucchin between Kariya and Selanne. Either way, the details were the same.

Edit #2: It was Morrison, and the Canucks got smoked in arbitration. https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/547156

Ah, thanks for the context. Didn't realize that had been argued and rebuffed before.

The sample size of just 3/4 of a season still seems relevant though. Morrison had 4 seasons of quality production by the time of his arbitration in '02.

 

[Riptide]

Yeah that just doesn't seem to be the case for all of them though (Russell comes to mind). He signed a 1 yr deal for $3.1mm last year in October I think and then somehow got 4 years with a $4.0mm AAV. Was he really that good to deserve that raise at all, let alone a NTC? Seems like he was the same as always and the contract was more than enough in its own. I can't imagine how much more he gets without the clause.

Russell is a very underrated player. He's kind of a mix between Dumoulin and Maatta. He's a fantastic skater, can move the puck semi decently (no better/worse then BD/OM) and isn't bad defensively. But he's undersized (5-10, 170) and isn't physical at all. The issue is he can't carry a parring at all. Despite his ability to move the puck, he'll get hemmed in fairly easily. It's rather odd. His SAT numbers have been brutal. The only time they weren't, was his brief stay in Dallas.

Is 4x4m a little high for him? Perhaps, but if so, it wouldn't be by much. Based on TOI he's their #3/4D (3rd in RS in TOI ahead of Larsson and 4th in PO). If Maatta wasn't here (or somehow magically disappeared), I would have been fine signing Russell to that 4x4m deal to fill that hole.

 

[Riptide]

Ah, thanks for the context. Didn't realize that had been argued and rebuffed before.

The sample size of just 3/4 of a season still seems relevant though. Morrison had 4 seasons of quality production by the time of his arbitration in '02.

It will be the only thing that lowers his award. It's the reason Hoffman only received a 2m award 2 years ago after basically a 29g/47pts rookie season - because there was no history to draw on so the arbitrator was giving out something based solely on 1 season. He too was 25. By the time most players are 25 they usually have a couple seasons under their belt and you can get some sort of idea as to what sort of NHL player they'll be going forward. That wasn't the case with Hoffman and it's not the case with Sheary.

 

[Mrs Crosby's Dryer]

Solid deal with a longer term than expected. Glad that we avoided arbitration too. If he continues to mature and develop at the same pace that he has been, this is a steal now and even more so a few years down the line.

 

[Darth Vitale]

I think the term makes it a pretty reasonable deal. Short term it would've been a little much but no reason to think he won't continue to round his game. Given that and escalating salaries I think it's pretty solid. No complaints.

 

[EightyOne]

Lol. I wonder, is there a player forum where they can say "man Joe Poster makes $4.50/hr too much for answering phones at the city utilities office. We could just sign a teenager for less or something. This really affects if we they can have donuts every Friday or not..."

 

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

With that AAV, I would have gone to arbitration with him. This is (likely) a good long term deal and (definitely) a bad short term deal, but the Pens are obviously a short-term team.

Then again, I didn't like last offseason and they won the Cup, so what the **** do I know?

 

[WayneSid9987]

With that AAV, I would have gone to arbitration with him. This is (likely) a good long term deal and (definitely) a bad short term deal, but the Pens are obviously a short-term team.

Then again, I didn't like last offseason and they won the Cup, so what the **** do I know?

All that matters is that theres alot of moveable $ on the roster and you don't end up with anchors like the Scuderi's or Girardi's etc..

Keep things flexible, which they are, and you can entertain any move to improve your roster in the short and/or long term.

 

[PittPen]

1) Not saying this is the deal but if you start not caring of 500k overpayments here and there you could end up being forced to trade someone that could otherwise stay because of cap. Cap math says that in order to have better team than others you have to get more value per AAV than others.

2) I remember that before free agency everyone was going with 11-12 mil. for Schultz, Dumoulin, Sheary trio. Then Schultz got 5.5M. I think it was 500k over typical estimates on this forum (they were in 4M-5M range and I can't remember one that was over 5M) but you wouldn't let him go for 500k, right? Now Dumoulin signed for 4.1M (and again estimates on this forum were at 3-3.5M with occasional 4M as top). If Sheary goes for 4M+ (and he can easily go for that amount) you are suddenly at 13.6M+ for that trio instead of that 11-12M expectation.

3) One thing that bothers me with this contract is that you are "overpaying" in first 2 years to get "discount" on next 4 years. Usually that's perfectly fine. The problem is that in my opinion PIT best window is in next 2-3 years (after that they run out of those great deals and I don't expect them to find others). Which coincides with that overpaying part of that contract and not that discount part. So I would rather see something like 4x3.5M to create that extra cap space in those next 2-3 years.

4) To end up on positive note. This doesn't mean that the solution should be to let them go (now that would be dumb). Or even that those contracts wouldn't prove to be sweet deals in long run. I think the team can manage with 500k overpayments if they limit them to 2 or 3. Just be careful about it.

The thing is, the arguments out there in favor a shorter term deal to get a lower cap hit are assuming he'd re-sign here as a UFA. Pretty good chance this team would get outbid for him in UFA. So you're basically gambling on losing him for nothing in 2-3 years to save an extra 500k or so.

If there's any player you want to slightly overpay for, its a defenseman of his caliber and age. And it's still a very trade-able contract.

 

[Slabber Chops]

I really like this deal.

I've seen a lot of commentary in this thread about the cap hit being a $0.25-$0.4m too high and I've also seen commentary in this thread arguing that the extended term should have reduced the cap hit. I want to argue against both of those points here.

The cap hit's too high
In 17/18, Dumo's cap hit is equivalent to 5.5% of the team's overall cap. Assuming a 21 player roster then you average player accounts for 4.8% of the team's overall cap. Then if you assume annualised increases of 3% to each team's cap, Dumo's %age of the overall cap hit drops from 5.5% to 4.7%, which brings him back to about average which is really what you want. The shorter the term, the less advantage in player mix that you can get.

The term should have reduced the cap hit
If you factor in risk then it becomes even more favourable. Dumo's the type of player whose peaks and troughs (seasons, not games) are never going to be too far away from his median performance. For a defenseman, throw in some offensive flair and the cap goes up a treat. The greater the reliance upon offensive flair however, the greater the risk as (all thing being equal) the troughs bring the practical utility back to Dumo's trough while the peaks are obviously what you're paying for. You need these guys but there's great risk to throw in with the great reward. Dumoulin is low risk but sound reward so when you look at the longer term cap hit, it's a very low risk signing over term.

Now all of this being said, I'm not arguing against signing the Schultz's of this world. What I'm saying is that these good value, low risk signings with term (such as Dumoulin) really help with the cap over the medium term. Loving this signing and length of term.

 

[CanadianPensFan1]

I'm too lazy to read through the whole thread.

There's an article on tsn about dumo. Saying how he broke his hand in game 5 against cbj .. then re-broke it several times throughout the playoffs.

****ing. Ouch.

 

[Clare2904]

Yep, that was tweeted out after the deal was announced. Crazy

 

[CanadianPensFan1]

Yep, that was tweeted out after the deal was announced. Crazy

Right? I have a mild muscle strain in my arm and i haven't gone to the gym in 4 days.

#notdumotough

 

[SHOOTANDSCORE]

I wonder if that is in addition to hurting his back or if that was disinformation.

 

[Peat]

I've gotta say, I did initially expect and hope for a cheaper and shorter deal (shorter because hard to justify a cheap price when taking up lots of UFA years). Seemed to make more sense. But I don't think it's going to cause problems this year and right now I'd forecast it not doing so next, at which point why not?

 

[AjaxTelamon]

I've gotta say, I did initially expect and hope for a cheaper and shorter deal (shorter because hard to justify a cheap price when taking up lots of UFA years). Seemed to make more sense. But I don't think it's going to cause problems this year and right now I'd forecast it not doing so next, at which point why not?

That's the thing, why not get the cap hit down in years 3-6 if we shouldn't have a crunch this year or next? I was initially hoping for lower and shorter too, but this has plenty of advantages, considering we're still going to want to win in years 3-6.

 

[Coastal Kev]

Q for you. How do you rank Cole to Dumoulin? Because while I think Cole is better at most aspects of his game... for whatever reason Cole can't seem to play 22+ minutes on a consistent basis without a plethora of mistakes. Dumoulin can. And honestly, it's really the only thing that separates them between one being a 4/5D and the other being a 3/4D.

It's this same thing that would separate Dumoulin and someone like Gravel (or whomever else around his skillset). Dumoulin is basically a bigger younger cheaper version of Paul Martin. Doesn't move the puck quite as well, but at almost 1m less and half a decade younger, I'm okay with that.

I think Cole and Dumo are about equal in my eyes but they bring slightly different skill-sets.

I love that you use Paul Martin as an example though, I hated his signing and it was a big reason why I joined the boards to trash Shero

 

[The GM]

I wonder if that is in addition to hurting his back or if that was disinformation.

His back injury was real, it was a result of carrying hainsey all playoffs

 

[Blynasty]

Feels good to have 5 of the 6 defenders signed for the next 3 years. Finally some consistency to a revolving door of defensemen. Hopefully Pouliot can break through this year and earn Cole's potential opening. As much as I like Cole, he is going to be a due for a hefty pay raise unless things really go downhill for him next year.

 

[Richard]

IF Sheary gets more than 3M in arb walk away from it. He's a very limited player with a very limited skillset.

He has good offensive skill but below average hockey sense. He's small and he can't play a lick of defense.

Go play somewhere else for 4-5M. He won't find a taker.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

IF Sheary gets more than 3M in arb walk away from it. He's a very limited player with a very limited skillset.

He has good offensive skill but below average hockey sense. He's small and he can't play a lick of defense.

Go play somewhere else for 4-5M. He won't find a taker.

I don't want to use the Tommy Lee meme more than once in a thread, but if I did, this would be the time.