Simple Asset Management Chart for Baffled GMs

[Nihiliste]

Wouldn't this chart indicate that a team full of 22-24 year olds would dominate the league?

Meanwhile we know such teams rarely have success.

More to building teams than "WAR".

That’s really missing the point, this trend is relative to the players intrinsic ability. A younger team is likely to be a rebuilding team and so even though they have a hunch of young players they’re not necessarily good young players. The point of this chart is that if you’re going to pay money or assets to acquire or keep a player, you should be cognizant of their realistic age curve and shouldn’t be handing out 8x8 deals to near-30 year old players or trading the farm for a guy pending UFA when he’s just finished giving his best years to another team

 

[Pavels Dog]

That’s really missing the point, this trend is relative to the players intrinsic ability. A younger team is likely to be a rebuilding team and so even though they have a hunch of young players they’re not necessarily good young players. The point of this chart is that if you’re going to pay money or assets to acquire or keep a player, you should be cognizant of their realistic age curve and shouldn’t be handing out 8x8 deals to near-30 year old players or trading the farm for a guy pending UFA when he’s just finished giving his best years to another team

I have zero belief in any of these models' ability to account for usage, responsibilities and overall toughness of assignments, for example.
Don't think anyone has ever thought it's been a great idea to give out 8 year contracts to ~30 year olds, but GMs don't do that because they're unaware of the risks, it's all about how the UFA market works and GMs focusing on getting the player they want rather than obsessing about whether a contract could look bad in years 6 or 7.

 

[Kranix]

28-29 year olds are the ones available. I'm sure the NHLPA would love to have Ufa set at 23 years old

 

[alphahelix]

Edmonton better find a way to dump McDavid for any picks they can get. He's gonna be on the downswing of his WAR according to this chart. Bring in some 18 year old kids to take the team over

It’s true that he will soon be exiting his prime. But when you are the best WAR player in the NHL, and you lose .10 , you’ll still be the best WAR player in the NHL. The smartest move would be to trade him to the Leafs for a kings ransom in the final year of his contract. He’ll still be near the top of the league but he won’t be at his peak. A

 

[SwedishFire]

Edmonton better find a way to dump McDavid for any picks they can get. He's gonna be on the downswing of his WAR according to this chart. Bring in some 18 year old kids to take the team over

Statistics is what they are. G
Thwy are a tool to prove athesis, find data and measures frl. A context, data testwd and used for the same usage. ANalyze past data to useage for a short timespan forward.

Not a truth, nor the othrr way around, that it would be a usage for picking out data from another context it was made for.
Asn Dalla Eakins, Chayk or Tallon.

 

[Nihiliste]

I have zero belief in any of these models' ability to account for usage, responsibilities and overall toughness of assignments, for example.
Don't think anyone has ever thought it's been a great idea to give out 8 year contracts to ~30 year olds, but GMs don't do that because they're unaware of the risks, it's all about how the UFA market works and GMs focusing on getting the player they want rather than obsessing about whether a contract could look bad in years 6 or 7.

If GMs made rational assessments of future player value, then the UFA market wouldn't be so hotly contested and prices wouldn't be pushed up so high. The biggest barrier to efficient UFA markets is GM stupidity

 

[Pavels Dog]

If GMs made rational assessments of future player value, then the UFA market wouldn't be so hotly contested and prices wouldn't be pushed up so high. The biggest barrier to efficient UFA markets is GM stupidity

As we've seen time and time again, big long-term contracts can be dumped or gotten rid of. It's not always pretty but it rarely hurts teams as much as fans on hockey forums think it will. There are exceptions but you can't always worry too much about what will things look like 6-7-8 years down the road.

 

[Nihiliste]

As we've seen time and time again, big long-term contracts can be dumped or gotten rid of. It's not always pretty but it rarely hurts teams as much as fans on hockey forums think it will. There are exceptions but you can't always worry too much about what will things look like 6-7-8 years down the road.

I disagree and think the league is already moving slowly in the direction advocated for by the OP, with more money going to players coming off of ELCs and less being left over for UFA vets.

 

[PromisedLand]

pretty simplistic analysis that doesnt necessarily take various changing variables/factors into account.

30 year old Ovi/Crosby/Malkin etc... is not the same as 30 year old 4th line fodder

- usage, QoT, divisional competitiveness, agility, skating ability, etc....

all factor into it.

In general, it is tru that signing a 29 yr old to a 6x6 deal may not be ideal; however, it is only bad majority of the years are bad.

i.e. if the said 29 yr old player does not produce 4 yrs out of a 6 yr deal it is a bad deal; however if they produce 4 yrs out of a 6 yr deal; it is not a bad deal; with cap (under normal cirsumtances) going up and also dependent on where teh team is at.

if the team is a contending team and require the skillset of a 29 yr old then it is not a bad deal to make if the said player can contribute the 6AAV production (offensively/defensively/grit etc...) for even 3 yrs out of 6 yrs if probability of getting a cup out of it is high

 

[ZJuice]

Old guys can help the young guys elevate by providing them with constant streams of knowledgeable feedback and tips. They are usually better defensively due to sound positioning and practiced patience.
they also are allowed to commit blatant infractions during playoffs

they also act as team psychologists as they have “been through it” and can help young NHLers navigate the life of being a millionaire and dealing with puck bunnies and stress

 

[biturbo19]

I don't exactly think it's a big "secret" that ideally, you'd like to build your team around ~20-28 year olds. Particularly skewed toward the earlier end of that range if you can. But the problem is, getting top performing young players is very hard. They come at an absolute premium, because everybody realizes that is what you want to build around. But as a GM...you have to patch together a roster around those optimum age range players, and due to the relative scarcity and high demand for those prime aged players, building a team typically means either finding older players who are able to defy the downward slope of age for a while, or very young players who you're gambling on hitting that upswing.

The other big factor that goes well beyond the "duh" thing, is that in order to get those "prime aged" players under contract for those prime years, you often have to commit to undesirable years under contract. Because players and agents also understand this reality of age-performance, and know that those prime years are where they have the most leverage to cash in and make their big money.

GMs aren't operating in an "ideal conditions" scenario. They have to work in reality, where it's not nearly as simple as just, "doing the obvious", because everybody is simultaneously trying to do the obvious. And everyone trying to do the same thing at the same time, means fierce competition, and leads you to trying to gain a slight edge somewhere else in a different segment.

 

[3074326]

I can’t be the only one who read this thread title as “…Asset Management…Buffalo GM”?

I expected a chart showing a recent history of Buffalo's asset management. I was like what the f*** is going on here.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

If the longevity of GMs in their jobs was charted, I think we could easily recognize the motivation of GMs to try to retain their jobs by handing out lucrative contracts to already diminishing assets. The GMs can hope to ride the first few years of the term into a new contract for themselves and they are not around 8 or 13 years later to see the mayhem the contract they signed reaped on the franchise.

For those who think that GMs have the discipline to walk away rather than provide money and term to still serviceable players past the inflection point, I think we need to make an All-Star team of GMs who are transgressors:

Starting with Chuck Fletcher of Parise/Suter's 13-year contracts and David Poile signing Johansen's 8-year deal and Duchene's 7-year deal.

They crippled their former franchises for the foreseeable future because they or the owners of their franchise, didn't heed the simple rules in the WAR chart.

And, I don't think other GMs are not going to fix their problems unless they give up copious assets like the Islanders gave Arizona for Ladd x5: But then there was a flat cap-Ouch.

There is also Dubas, Gilis/Benning and Adams/Housley/Botterill and the list keeps growing.

We will see new examples as soon as free agency hits: Which GM will become an emerging All-Star.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Solution: never sign any player beyond his RFA years. Rebuild nonstop with rookies, forever. Sit back and your cap-floor dynasty.

 

[Price is Wright]

Should we trade a 1st round draft choice for a 28-year-old?

The Florida Panthers just offered me Huberdeau for my 27th overall pick in a weak draft but golly this post is telling me I probably shouldn't trade a 1st round pick for a 28-year-old so I'm gonna have to say no.

 

[digger1188]

Ovechkin could play into his 40’s easily with his shot alone. The guy is going to guarantee you 20 plus goals a year for the next five years. Other aging players don’t really have that luxury. Once their speed goes, they tend to become overpaid very quickly.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

Solution: never sign any player beyond his RFA years. Rebuild nonstop with rookies, forever. Sit back and your cap-floor dynasty.

Yes, I consider the approach is a solution but there are others that are more workable.

For example, I think that the bridge deal for a Superstar is very dangerous as it is the prelude to an 8-year deal that is likely to be inflated because it covers years of the UFA years.

However, if a deal starts when the player is 22, like in the case of Heiskanen, then the player is employed until they are 30 and only a few years past the average inflection point. Inserting a bridge contract before the long-term contract places the end of the second, long-term contract at age 33-35. So several years into the predicted performance decline.

Miro Heiskanen Contract, Cap Hit, Salary and Stats - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Since presumably, the Owner is the only quasi-permanent gatekeeper of these contracts, it is their responsibility to ensure these contracts terms don't leak into years of decline and years after the current Hockey Ops Execs are long gone.

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

It would be interesting to overlay team playoff performance by average age.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

The Florida Panthers just offered me Huberdeau for my 27th overall pick in a weak draft but golly this post is telling me I probably shouldn't trade a 1st round pick for a 28-year-old so I'm gonna have to say no.

It depends on how much decline you as the GM, can tolerate during the duration of his contract compared to the chances the draft choice achieves the same performance of that achieved by Huberdeau during his inevitable decline. It also depends on the cost of the contract during Huberdeau's decline versus the cost of the contract of the draft choice.

The key point is that the draft choice doesn't have to achieve what Huberdeau did in his prime, they have to be equal to Huberdeau performance during his decline and hopefully be cheaper.

 

[Price is Wright]

It depends on how much decline you as the GM, can tolerate during the duration of his contract compared to the chances the draft choice achieves the same performance of that achieved by Huberdeau during his inevitable decline. It also depends on the cost of the contract during Huberdeau's decline versus the cost of the contract of the draft choice.

The key point is that the draft choice doesn't have to achieve what Huberdeau did in his prime, they have to be equal to Huberdeau performance during his decline and hopefully be cheaper.

The draft choice has to make the NHL.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

The draft choice has to make the NHL.

or Huberdeau might not play out his contract and go on LTIR and his contract may not be insured.