Should teams stop overpaying in UFA for defensemen?

[MMC]

Based on players like Karlsson, Vlasic, Doughty, and Subban have played after signing their extensions, will teams ever decide giving defensemen these contracts just isn't worth it?

Click to read more...

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

teams should stop overpaying for any UFA, any position

 

[Regal]

teams should stop overpaying for any UFA, any position

Pretty much. Ideally the trend in RFA contracts getting their worth, we see a market shift away from the huge UFA deals that everyone knows are going to end badly.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Should some people smoke less crack? Probably. Doesn't mean that's what happens.

 

[MMC]

Reason I focus on defensemen is because big UFA contracts to top forwards seem to have worked out pretty well lately compared to D and G (Tavares, Panarin, etc.)

 

[JPeeper]

Brouwer, Neal, Okposo, Ladd, Lucic, Eriksson, in the future Hayes.

Panarin and Taveres are the exception, not the norm.

Teams should stop overpaying middle level talent like their top talent, Taveres and Panarin were top tier talent and are among the leagues best, the guys I mentioned to start were all complimentary pieces who because their the best of their class get massive deals, all of which looked terrible the year they were signed.

Of all the guys this Free Agency, only Hall and Pietrangelo I give big money too, everyone else sucks.

 

[MMC]

Brouwer, Neal, Okposo, Ladd, Lucic, Eriksson, in the future Hayes.

Panarin and Taveres are the exception, not the norm.

Teams should stop overpaying middle level talent like their top talent, Taveres and Panarin were top tier talent and are among the leagues best, the guys I mentioned to start were all complimentary pieces who because their the best of their class get massive deals, all of which looked terrible the year they were signed.

Of all the guys this Free Agency, only Hall and Pietrangelo I give big money too, everyone else sucks.

I agree with pretty much everything you're saying, I don't believe you should ever overpay for middling players (which most UFAs are), but I do believe teams should be in on players like Tavares and Panarin. I made this thread because I'm wondering if it's even worth it to try and sign the D equivalents to the Tavareses and Panarins, judging by how poorly big contract extensions for top tier defensemen have gone for teams.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Teams should stop overpaying middle level talent like their top talent

It's a problem of basic supply and demand. The demand for talent, any talent, is high. GMs are desperate. The supply of legitimately available talent, is usually on the low end. The middle level talent is what's usually out there to get.

The really good young guys aren't available. They're either on ELC's, or in the first years of their 2nd contracts, when production still has a really good chance of being equivalent to cap hit. The older players who might still be good, those guys will tend to have NMC's, or the team is still trying to win. Top level guys rarely hit free agency, since teams will overpay to keep their own guys.

So you end up with the middle to low level out there in July. There will be enough teams that haven't used all their cap space yet, who are trying to take advantage of some situation(be it a lot of ELC's, or a rising cap which negates some of the big contracts signed years and years ago, etc), that will hand out 6 year contracts to pretty much anyone, fully knowing that the contract won't age well, if it buys them 1 or 2 years of even decent production. Years 4, 5 and 6 are there because some other desperate GM is willing to be just as dumb.

Of course if GMs don't do that, if GMs were smart and held their ground, it would be almost guaranteed that the PA/agents would start complaining about collusion. They did it in baseball a few years ago, no reason it wouldn't happen here. GMs are almost forced to spend stupid money. If every player was a total free agent every year, we'd get closer to market value for every player. However, the PA would hate that. Even in a hard cap system, the majority of the 50% of revenue would go to the top level guys, if they could keep up production year to year. Not that the majority of revenue doesn't currently go to the top level guys, but it's a little more spread out with the long term contracts.

 

[KingsFan7824]

I agree with pretty much everything you're saying, I don't believe you should ever overpay for middling players (which most UFAs are), but I do believe teams should be in on players like Tavares and Panarin. I made this thread because I'm wondering if it's even worth it to try and sign the D equivalents to the Tavareses and Panarins, judging by how poorly big contract extensions for top tier defensemen have gone for teams.

Tavares and Panarin aren't quite as old as the D equivalents, but they're inching toward that 30 mark. It's not a guarantee, but it's likely those two won't be worth their contracts sooner rather than later too. Tavares has already made the Leafs have to scramble to find depth, although that's because they're also paying two other guys 8 figures. Not Tavares's fault, but the wall gets closer as each day goes by.

 

[yurnxt]

From a GM point of view, the goal with these contracts should be that they are worth the huge cap hit the first half or so of the contract and that they age gracefully enough that as cap hits rise every year, contract cap hit becomes a smaller percentage of the cap so the contract never truly becomes an albatross.

That is how I would attempt to handle these situations if I was GM for a day. Covid potentially changes that idea a bit though if the cap does stay flatish for years.

 

[Henkka]

teams should stop overpaying for any UFA, any position

Teams should stop paying!

Let's lockout!

 

[MXD]

I'd distinguish PK Subban from the three other players, as Subban signed his big (and, as it happens, current) deal two seasons before becoming eligible for unrestricted free agency. He was also reasonably delivering on his deal up to (and including) 2017-2018.

 

[Kairi Zaide]

teams should stop overpaying for UFA based on past accomplishments in general, as most of them are past their primes, and pay RFAs more as they're the one who bring more value*

*exceptions exist

 

[Perfect_Drug]

Buying years over 30+ is an extreme gamble that seldom pays off.

I predict Tavares will start to fall off a cliff in the next year or 2. (There's no way he's worth that money the entire duration of that contract).

 

[chethejet]

Good to very good players with good existing contracts are always in demand. But the cost to sign a UFA has zero development costs and is simply about a willingness to pay for such services. That is one reason teams lock up talent to have some stability in the roster and cap. The mistakes are generally overpaying for past experience ala Blackhawks. In a cap landscape, a couple bad decisions can really impede things. Buffalo has a couple really bad contracts that they should have never taken on. But that is why one overpays for elite talent. What is also true is almost all bad contracts can be moved. Pens moved Kessel for Zucker and a first.

 

[The Macho King]

Stop giving big contracts that will mostly exist on the wrong side of 30.

 

[Peat]

Based on players like Karlsson, Vlasic, Doughty, and Subban have played after signing their extensions, will teams ever decide giving defensemen these contracts just isn't worth it?

They should but what's the alternative in the here and now for teams incapable of replacing such talent internally? I think everyone knows most big UFA contracts end up mistakes but in how many cases were teams capable of picking a better course at that very moment?

 

[JT Kreider]

teams should stop overpaying for UFA based on past accomplishments in general, as most of them are past their primes, and pay RFAs more as they're the one who bring more value*

*exceptions exist

Yes the idea of UFA is now ass backwards as the league shifts towards getting younger and younger.

You are essentially investing in another teams past, not your own future.

There are a few players that are worthy of this exception and it is surprising to see guys like Panarin, Tavares and now potentially Hall and Pietrangelo make it all the way to UFA.

 

[Voight]

Tavares, Niedermayer, Chara and Panarin are pretty much the only UFA's (who got massive deals) since 2005 to have lived up to them.

 

[BlackFrancis]

Tavares, Niedermayer and Panarin are pretty much the only UFA's (who got massive deals) since 2005 to have lived up to them.

You are leaving out Chara, whose UFA signing might have been the Bruins best idea in two decades.

 

[Warden of the North]

teams should stop overpaying for any UFA, any position

Yup

 

[Voight]

You are leaving out Chara, whose UFA signing might have been the Bruins best idea in two decades.

Lolz Mondays..... knew I was forgetting someone

 

[Perfect_Drug]

Tavares, Niedermayer and Panarin are pretty much the only UFA's (who got massive deals) since 2005 to have lived up to them.

Jury is still out on Tavares and Panarin. They're only 28 & 29.

Gotta wait and judge them during Years 4-5 of their contract, and you tell me if you think they're sustaining their play into their mid-30's.


By the time the Rags are ready to compete, Panarin will be an unmovable albatross that costs his team games.

 

[Kent Nilsson]

The “bad years” of a UFA contract is basically the cost of acquiring a free player asset-wise. If a team is in a position to win now I say go for it. But those teams are usually already cap f***ed anyway.

Players are too old when they get to UFA. NHLPA should have been fighting over this much harder ever since they accepted a cap. The leverage RFAs have is a joke... last summer RFA contracts such as Werenski McAvoy etc were huge steals. If one day GMs pull a MLB move on UFAs these guys will end up leaving a lot of money on the table.

 

[Sanchise90]

The issue is always the term with UFA contracts and GMs thinking more short term re: the acquisitions . Why teams sign UFAs for 8-10 years when they're already near their decline years at age 30 is beyond me. Especially because the odds in a physical sport of a player 35+ living up to said contract are slim to none. This isn't baseball where the signings can be mitigated because there's no cap, each dollar spent is money you can't spend elsewhere.