Worst Contract of Summer 2019: Revisited

[mouser]

Skinner and Hayes are definitely my top 2. I think Karlsson will be okay. Not sure how to grade Bobrovsky, I lean towards him being a top 10 goaltender throughout the contract, which would be acceptable even if overpaid. If Bob’s performance declines it will be ugly.

 

[MoreMogilny]

Marner’s market value on the 6-year term was estimated at around $8.8M-$9.5M by most objective sources I could find. That puts him in the range of 15-25% above market, which sounds about right to me.

For Hayes, a comparable overpayment would’ve been his contract if his market value was $5-6M. For Skinner, if his market value was $7-8M.

So, you either need to believe that Marner’s market value was higher than $8.8-9.5M, or that Hayes and Skinner’s market values were lower than the figures I posted above. Or some combination of both.

For reference, here is where Evolving Hockey had each of them:

Hayes - $6.6M
Skinner - $8.3M
Marner - $8.9M

Hayes and Skinner both went about 8% above their projected figure, while Marner went 22% above his. That is just one projection, but I think it’s pretty close to what their market values would be on those terms.

While I appreciate the breakdown of projected figures for contracts, I don’t subscribe to the notion that the contracts of Hayes and Skinner are more appropriate relative to what they bring to the ice than Marner.

Essentially what it boils down to is this:

Would you really take Hayes and his contract over Marner and his for the duration of their contracts? Same question for Skinner. All things considered - contract, age, potential, etc.

Hayes just had his best ever season, at 26 years old, and it wasn’t as good as a single one of Marner’s 3 seasons. He was just outscored by 40 points.

Skinner, who makes only 1.8M less than Marner, also just had his best season, but it was still 31 points less than Marner just scored.

Now obviously there is the UFA vs RFA difference here - but then there’s also the reasonable assumption that for the next 6 years, Marner is the most likely to improve and provide an increased impact to his team.

Dont get me wrong. Marner isn’t signed to a great deal. But of the contracts signed this summer, I simply can’t get on board with the idea that his is the worst.

 

[mouser]

Marner’s market value on the 6-year term was estimated at around $8.8M-$9.5M by most objective sources I could find. That puts him in the range of 15-25% above market, which sounds about right to me.

For Hayes, a comparable overpayment would’ve been his contract if his market value was $5-6M. For Skinner, if his market value was $7-8M.

So, you either need to believe that Marner’s market value was higher than $8.8-9.5M, or that Hayes and Skinner’s market values were lower than the figures I posted above. Or some combination of both.

For reference, here is where Evolving Hockey had each of them:

Hayes - $6.6M
Skinner - $8.3M
Marner - $8.9M

Hayes and Skinner both went about 8% above their projected figure, while Marner went 22% above his. That is just one projection, but I think it’s pretty close to what their market values would be on those terms.

Without defending or attacking any of these players I think it’s important to consider how well players will play over the entire term of the contract.

Marner will likely be a high level producer throughout his contract, even if overpaid. Skinner and Hayes both have a high risk of being cap albatrosses in the final few years of their deals.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

While I appreciate the breakdown of projected figures for contracts, I don’t subscribe to the notion that the contracts of Hayes and Skinner are more appropriate relative to what they bring to the ice than Marner.

Essentially what it boils down to is this:

Would you really take Hayes and his contract over Marner and his for the duration of their contracts? Same question for Skinner. All things considered - contract, age, potential, etc.

Hayes just had his best ever season, at 26 years old, and it wasn’t as good as a single one of Marner’s 3 seasons. He was just outscored by 40 points.

Skinner, who makes only 1.8M less than Marner, also just had his best season, but it was still 31 points less than Marner just scored.

Now obviously there is the UFA vs RFA difference here - but then there’s also the reasonable assumption that for the next 6 years, Marner is the most likely to improve and provide an increased impact to his team.

Dont get me wrong. Marner isn’t signed to a great deal. But of the contracts signed this summer, I simply can’t get on board with the idea that his is the worst.

Without defending or attacking any of these players I think it’s important to consider how well players will play over the entire term of the contract.

Marner will likely be a high level producer throughout his contract, even if overpaid. Skinner and Hayes both have a high probability of being cap albatrosses in the final few years of their deals.

For all 3 players, I’m talking strictly about their value relative to the market and how it has historically paid players in their position. RFAs generally tend to get squeezed pretty hard. Look at what Point just got in Tampa.

I feel very confident in saying that over the course of their contracts, Marner will provide significantly more value relative to his cap hit than either of the other two. He is the best player at the moment and aging curves will only stretch that gap as the contracts age. Of these contracts listed, Marner is one of the first that I would actually want to add to my team if I had the choice; I prefer only Panarin and Karlsson to his.

Also, Hayes and Skinner are both very good top-6 forwards even if you don’t love them or their contracts. I think they get too much hate. I suspect Tanev, Myers, and Bobrovsky will provide worse value than those guys and Tanev was definitely worse relative to the market.

 

[mouser]

We have literally a dozen threads of evidence of fans claiming Marner is the Leafs best player and should get the same or more than Matthews.

And then he gets less than Matthews and overnight suddenly it's a terrible contract.

Did you consider the possibility they’re both bad contracts?

 

[MoreMogilny]

For all 3 players, I’m talking strictly about their value relative to the market and how it has historically paid players in their position. RFAs generally tend to get squeezed pretty hard. Look at what Point just got in Tampa.

I feel very confident in saying that over the course of their contracts, Marner will provide significantly more value relative to his cap hit than either of the other two. He is the best player at the moment and aging curves will only stretch that gap as the contracts age. Of these contracts listed, Marner is one of the first that I would actually want to add to my team if I had the choice; I prefer only Panarin and Karlsson to his.

Also, Hayes and Skinner are both very good top-6 forwards even if you don’t love them or their contracts. I think they get too much hate. I suspect Tanev, Myers, and Bobrovsky will provide worse value than those guys and Tanev was definitely worse relative to the market.

The bold text right there, isn’t that the key to determining how good or bad a contract is?

How could Marner be the worst contract signed this summer if you project him to provide more value relative to his contract than the two guys we’re talking about, as well as the three others you brought up?

Marner breaks the bank when you look at RFAs historically, but that in and of itself doesn’t make his contract the worst when he’s assumed to provide more value to his franchise vs some other players in the poll.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Tanev. I can see why teams like the Panthers and the Predators overpaid for Bobrovsky and Duchene, respectfully. However, there is no reason to even slightly overpay a, what, 4th liner (maybe a 3rd liner on a good day) for 6(!) years. Now, the Pens might have to part with Bjugstad or Rust (both decent players) to fix their cap situation. This is AFTER Rutherford signed Johnson last summer and Hunwick (since traded) the summer before that.

Tanev is pretty inarguably a 3rd liner, the performance he put up last year is firmly a 3rd liner. He got way too long of a deal, but his cap hit isn't unreasonable for a 3rd line UFA player that brings a unique element.

 

[DaJackal]

For me it was really difficult to decide between Skinner, Bob and Hayes.

Finally went with Skinner, because, you know, Buffalo.

 

[LaMasquerade]

Going a bit against the popular vote, but had to pick $11.5M man that has scored combined 12 goals in last 2 seasons.. with -19 as defender.

 

[bobholly39]

For all 3 players, I’m talking strictly about their value relative to the market and how it has historically paid players in their position. RFAs generally tend to get squeezed pretty hard. Look at what Point just got in Tampa.

I feel very confident in saying that over the course of their contracts, Marner will provide significantly more value relative to his cap hit than either of the other two. He is the best player at the moment and aging curves will only stretch that gap as the contracts age. Of these contracts listed, Marner is one of the first that I would actually want to add to my team if I had the choice; I prefer only Panarin and Karlsson to his.

Also, Hayes and Skinner are both very good top-6 forwards even if you don’t love them or their contracts. I think they get too much hate. I suspect Tanev, Myers, and Bobrovsky will provide worse value than those guys and Tanev was definitely worse relative to the market.

Yeah you're looking at it wrong.

You seem to be looking at it by "what did the hockey market say these players should be worth today". Instead - you should be looking at it as "who will provide best value vs their contract for the duration of contract".

Example - if the market said that Bob was worth ~9.5, but if you're convinced that the last 4 years of his contract he won't be a legitimate #1 starter anymore - it doesn't matter if he only got overpaid by 0.5M$ - by virtue of you thinking he won't be a legitimate #1 for 4 seasons it would make him a much worst contract.

Going back to Marner - he got paid a lot, but so long as you believe he's going to perform very well in the next 6 years vs $$ paid, and so long as you believe that some players on this list won't - he's not the worst contract.

Lucic wasn't the worst UFA contract signed in his year because he was given slightly more than what the market expected - he ended up being the worst contract because of the horrible value he provided the Oilers during duration of his contract.

 

[Isaac Nootin]

Hayes or Skinner.