Speculation: 2 years away. Do you think Matthews accepts a slight raise OR takes us to the cleaners next contract?

[notbias]

Anyone that is saying max has no clue what they are talking about, and should have to spend a week browsing CapFriendly before returning. He will probably take around 15-16%.

 

[kk87]

Anyone that is saying max has no clue what they are talking about, and should have to spend a week browsing CapFriendly before returning. He will probably take around 15-16%.

I know there's no precedent for it, and it likely won't happen, but he has all the leverage. Once he's able to negotiate on July 1st of next year, if his camp (theoretically) were to say "we won't take a penny less than max value, or else we'll walk to free agency and sign in LA, NY, AZ, or anywhere else that would offer max (there would definitely be takers), what is management supposed to say? Risk letting the best Leaf of all time walk in his prime?

Obviously, I hope his camp approaches the negotiation with more grace than that, but there's nothing stopping them from doing that. And if that's how it played out, I would give him a blank cheque and let him fill out his number ten times out of ten.

 

[notbias]

I know there's no precedent for it, and it likely won't happen, but he has all the leverage. Once he's able to negotiate on July 1st of next year, if his camp (theoretically) were to say "we won't take a penny less than max value, or else we'll walk to free agency and sign in LA, NY, AZ, or anywhere else that would offer max (there would definitely be takers), what is management supposed to say? Risk letting the best Leaf of all time walk in his prime?

Obviously, I hope his camp approaches the negotiation with more grace than that, but there's nothing stopping them from doing that. And if that's how it played out, I would give him a blank cheque and let him fill out his number ten times out of ten.

Every big-name UFA could say that, it doesn't mean it will happen.

Not sure why we think Matthews will be the first.

I'd let him walk for max, it isn't a player who wants to win.

His contract is fair now, and I bet his next will be too.

This fanbase is so dramatic.

 

[Notsince67]

The difference between Mack and Matthews, is that Mack earned a cup so deserves the raise, just like when Kane and Toews time came up.

I honestly believe he's seen what these huge contracts have done to the team, and he will sign a more team friendly deal than what he is capable of signing, but he's still going to get paid, he'll just leave some on the table to better position us for success.

Also i don't think he does 8 years, it'll be a bit less with less money because these new figures for the cap see us gaining 10 million in about 4-6 years.

Yup. 60 goals isn't enough to get a raise if they don't win a cup. He will need to step up to 100 goals to get the leafs over the hump, thereby meriting mack parity

 

[LeafEgo]

Yup. 60 goals isn't enough to get a raise if they don't win a cup. He will need to step up to 100 goals to get the leafs over the hump, thereby meriting mack parity

We took the unusual route of already paying him as if he were a 60 goal scorer before he was.

Unless we win a cup, or at the very least he tears up the playoffs Mack style, his bump should simply match inflation of the cap.

So 12-12.5M for five years, or 13.5-14M for eight years. Unless he applies a discount like Mack did.

 

[thewave]

it's gonna be a spicy meatball. Any idea that is a number we've seen to date can be safely parked.



the Coyotes and their 3000 seat arena aren't at the big boy table for this one.

Are you so sure? Gary would probably create some subsidy for the team to make it happen. They want to grow American markets at all costs and Matthews will no doubt be lured back to the US at the end of this contract. I think it's far more likely Matthews leaves us.

 

[Sundinisagod]

I was just looking at cap hit percentages on capfriendly.

I noticed that Ovechkin signed a 13 year contract that was 18.96% of the cap at the time. He did win a cup under said contract.

If Matthews were to win a 3rd consecutive Richard, would he be out of line in asking for the same percentage on a 8 year deal? Keep in mind that he’s a strong 2 way centre on top of being a similar level goal scorer to Ovechkin. Also, the cap will be going up a year or two into his contract so whatever percentage he takes is going to account for that, it will look high at first but will normalize when the cap does increase. The current 5 year deal he signed with a 14.64% cap hit is starting to look like a bargain now.

 

[LeafEgo]

I was just looking at cap hit percentages on capfriendly.

I noticed that Ovechkin signed a 13 year contract that was 18.96% of the cap at the time. He did win a cup under said contract.

If Matthews were to win a 3rd consecutive Richard, would he be out of line in asking for the same percentage on a 8 year deal? Keep in mind that he’s a strong 2 way centre on top of being a similar level goal scorer to Ovechkin. Also, the cap will be going up a year or two into his contract so whatever percentage he takes is going to account for that, it will look high at first but will normalize when the cap does increase. The current 5 year deal he signed with a 14.64% cap hit is starting to look like a bargain now.

Mattys cap hit percentage on an eight year deal would have been over 16% (year one), and that was an rfa contract so not quite a bargain. McDavids was 15.7%.

That Ovi contract is concerning, but I would hope market rates have changed since 2008, especially when you have direct competitors signing Mack at 15%.

 

[tmlms13]

Don't care as long as it's 8 years. That's what pissed me off about the last one. It wasn't 8 years.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

Mattys cap hit percentage on an eight year deal would have been over 16% (year one), and that was an rfa contract so not quite a bargain. McDavids was 15.7%.

That Ovi contract is concerning, but I would hope market rates have changed since 2008, especially when you have direct competitors signing Mack at 15%.

McDavids was 16.7%.

That is why Matthews wanted 16%.

And that is absolutely fair.

 

[Sundinisagod]

Mattys cap hit percentage on an eight year deal would have been over 16% (year one), and that was an rfa contract so not quite a bargain. McDavids was 15.7%.

That Ovi contract is concerning, but I would hope market rates have changed since 2008, especially when you have direct competitors signing Mack at 15%.

I think McDavid is at 16.67% and that’s after a rumoured discount of 750k per.

Personally, I think he’s above Nate Mack. Closer to the Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, McDavid tier.

 

[LeafEgo]

McDavids was 16.7%.

That is why Matthews wanted 16%.

And that is absolutely fair.

I was using year one caps. At the time of signing Mattys would have been 16.5 for eight years if you add 500k per term year. Nothing to get excited about, but seemed a touch high to me.

I think McDavid is at 16.67% and that’s after a rumoured discount of 750k per.

Personally, I think he’s above Nate Mack. Closer to the Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, McDavid tier.

You will find people on both sides of that one. They are both widely considered the best players after McD. Mack might be the best playoff performer of the cap era coming off a cup win. I see it about even...for now.

 

[IPS]

Are you so sure? Gary would probably create some subsidy for the team to make it happen. They want to grow American markets at all costs and Matthews will no doubt be lured back to the US at the end of this contract. I think it's far more likely Matthews leaves us.

Create a subsidy? What the hell does that even mean?

So not only is it not enough that big market teams (like the Leafs) have to do the revenue sharing BS to keep teams like Arizona afloat, but now they have to pay into some kind of subsidy so they can potentially take away their franchise players? That would be a fantastic way to cause a riot in Leafs nation and put the entire NHL in jeopardy. Nothing like that would ever happen.

 

[Ciao]

8 x 15 sounds about right.

Matthews isn't taking a haircut, but I don't think he would command a full 20% of the salary cap either.

There won't be any hometown discount here.

 

[SmoggyTwinkles]

Is there an option to close this thread until closer to july 2023 when everyone is more informed?

There is. You can ignore threads.

And yet I'm not going to do that, because we have Matthews for 2 more seasons.

If we're not making a deep playoff run, at least we get to watch this guy.

And then you hand him a blank cheque, because a couple other teams will if he goes UFA.

Let's just enjoy him for now. But man there is going to be so much pre-mature talk about him staying. It does no good for your personal enjoyment to even think about it. Auston Matthews is a Toronto Maple Leaf, and he blows our minds on a regular basis, and actually has some personality too.

If he bolts for the US, and he might, well........thanks for the regular season good times.

 

[SmoggyTwinkles]

Every big-name UFA could say that, it doesn't mean it will happen.

Not sure why we think Matthews will be the first.

I'd let him walk for max, it isn't a player who wants to win.

His contract is fair now, and I bet his next will be too.

This fanbase is so dramatic.

Well no, you don't let him walk......

You do a sign and trade and get something at the very least.

Let's say NYR, LA, Coyotes all want him, Leafs can give him 8 years and get something back.

 

[Notsince67]

We took the unusual route of already paying him as if he were a 60 goal scorer before he was.

Unless we win a cup, or at the very least he tears up the playoffs Mack style, his bump should simply match inflation of the cap.

So 12-12.5M for five years, or 13.5-14M for eight years. Unless he applies a discount like Mack did.

He is going to back up a brinks truck and the leafs will ask what denominations of cash he would prefer as well as his requested amount. This ain't going to go the way you fantasize.

 

[Willchel Marlynder]

McDavids was 16.7%.

That is why Matthews wanted 16%.

And that is absolutely fair.

It's only looks fair because at the time, McDavid took a discount. At the time McDavid was significantly better than Matthews. Maybe Matthews at 16% was fair overall, but McDavid could have gotten more and instead left money on the table Matthews wanted every penny. Not blaming Matthews, I'm just staring facts.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

It's only looks fair because at the time, McDavid took a discount. At the time McDavid was significantly better than Matthews. Maybe Matthews at 16% was fair overall, but McDavid could have gotten more and instead left money on the table Matthews wanted every penny. Not blaming Matthews, I'm just staring facts.

I didn't say it was a steal or a discount. He didn't take every penny either.

He signed for the amount he should have made for a 5 year term and did not cause any drama. We have used that cap space efficiently.

McDavid certainly could have received more, and considering how poorly Edmonton manages their cap, he probably wishes he did not take that discount.

 

[Racer88]

he wanted to before, what changed?

I would be interested to hear proof of that

 

[The Iceman]

Matthews is a top 4 asset in the NHL.
Unfortunately and fortunately if he decides to test the market he will be Matthew Tkachuk'd out of town.

 

[WTFMAN99]

8 years 15M seems bananas to me because you know Marner is gonna want what Matthews gets like last time except this time he can actually walk

So 30M for 2 forwards in an 86-88M cap environment, we're screwed.

13.5M would make him the highest paid forward while still allowing us to remain competitive, if Marner got similar, it's still 3M better than 15M for both, Dubas has scooped some bargains for far less.

Do they wanna win or just make money? Both is an option if they leave some $$ to round out the roster.

 

[kb]

8 years 15M seems bananas to me because you know Marner is gonna want what Matthews gets like last time except this time he can actually walk

So 30M for 2 forwards in an 86-88M cap environment, we're screwed.

13.5M would make him the highest paid forward while still allowing us to remain competitive, if Marner got similar, it's still 3M better than 15M for both, Dubas has scooped some bargains for far less.

Do they wanna win or just make money? Both is an option if they leave some $$ to round out the roster.

All I read is that the rising cap will cover their raises. Perfect. $22.5 million in an $81.5 cap vs $29 million in an $88 million cap.

Regardless, you have Muzzin, Murray, and Brodie coming off the books if you need a bit more for Matthews. Then JT comes off when Mitch needs his new deal.

Why posters want to punish players for being exceptional and calling them greedy if they don't take a discount is truly bizarre.

 

[Hellcat]

Id be pretty happy is he signs anything under $13m lol.

im more concerned about Marners contract. dude better not get any substantial raise

Why?

8 years 15M seems bananas to me because you know Marner is gonna want what Matthews gets like last time except this time he can actually walk

So 30M for 2 forwards in an 86-88M cap environment, we're screwed.

13.5M would make him the highest paid forward while still allowing us to remain competitive, if Marner got similar, it's still 3M better than 15M for both, Dubas has scooped some bargains for far less.

Do they wanna win or just make money? Both is an option if they leave some $$ to round out the roster.

Tavaras contract will be done in a few years, he wont get the same stupid contact, that opens cap for Willie, Mitch and AM. I'm banking on Knies replacing Tavares's offence.

 

[MAB1]

Not that hard, you re-sign Matthews to whatever deal he's asking for over 8 years. When Marner comes up for FA, his contract and Tavares comes off the books. They'll have enough for Marner or if they really want to play it right, if McDavid hasn't signed yet and is also a UFA they can use the Marner + Tavares $ on him. Tavares can probably be retained on a cheap vet deal but Marner would be tasked with taking whatever is left after McDavid comes here or walks in UFA. Sure it means Marner wouldn't be back most likely but if I'm tying up around $30 million in 2 players, I'd rather it be Matthews + McDavid than Matthews + Marner.