Athletic Has Leafs as 3rd best in contract Values
- Thread starter NoTeeth
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
This is the 4th year they are doing these so its fun to look back too.
2019 top 10:
1. Canes
2. Knights
3. Leafs
4. Blues
5. Bruins
6. Bolts
7. Pens
8. Wild
9. Preds
10. Jets
2020 top 10:
1. Bruins
2. Avs
3. Pens
4. Jackets
5. Leafs
6. Bolts
7. Knights
8. Panthers
9. Oilers
10. Flames
2021 top 10:
1. Avs
2. Panthers
3. Leafs
4. Bruins
5. Knights
6. Bolts
7. Canes
8. Kraken
9. Pens
10. Islanders
2022 top 10:
1. Panthers
2. Avs
3. Leafs
4. Wild
5. Bruins
6. Flames
7. Canes
8. Pens
9. Knights
10. Caps
NHL team rankings (points %) over the last 4 seasons:
1. Bolts
2. Bruins
3. Avs
4. Canes
5. Leafs
6. Caps
7. Pens
8. Panthers
9. Blues
10. Knights
Since the rankings don't include goalkeeping or playoff results, all of this seems pretty straightforward. The Kraken making the list and then not gelling at all as a team also shows how chemistry, coaching, goaltending and other things are hugely important for actual success no matter how good your contracts are.
2019 top 10:
1. Canes
2. Knights
3. Leafs
4. Blues
5. Bruins
6. Bolts
7. Pens
8. Wild
9. Preds
10. Jets
2020 top 10:
1. Bruins
2. Avs
3. Pens
4. Jackets
5. Leafs
6. Bolts
7. Knights
8. Panthers
9. Oilers
10. Flames
2021 top 10:
1. Avs
2. Panthers
3. Leafs
4. Bruins
5. Knights
6. Bolts
7. Canes
8. Kraken
9. Pens
10. Islanders
2022 top 10:
1. Panthers
2. Avs
3. Leafs
4. Wild
5. Bruins
6. Flames
7. Canes
8. Pens
9. Knights
10. Caps
NHL team rankings (points %) over the last 4 seasons:
1. Bolts
2. Bruins
3. Avs
4. Canes
5. Leafs
6. Caps
7. Pens
8. Panthers
9. Blues
10. Knights
Since the rankings don't include goalkeeping or playoff results, all of this seems pretty straightforward. The Kraken making the list and then not gelling at all as a team also shows how chemistry, coaching, goaltending and other things are hugely important for actual success no matter how good your contracts are.
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 28,399
- 15,189
100% it is , it’s written by a journalist (loosely) there is no facts. Its about whatever Dom determines is relevant to his model. He creates the model and determinate so the parameters.
An article in which the writer expresses their personal opinion, typically one which is controversial or provocative, about a particular issue or item of news.
What makes you think it’s not?
Besides he’s proven over the years how useless his takes are. Opinion piece is being nice to him on his articles.
...but the problem is that he is attributing things that are universally agreed upon as important for good contracts right?
Goals
Assists
Points
5v5 Offensive and Defensive numbers.
Whats wrong with making this the bedrock of an analysis of what makes a good contract? Do you have a better way?
Gary Nylund
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2013
- 31,703
- 25,544
It sounds like you're saying that he made the model criteria with the goal of making the Leafs look good. That's possible I guess, but sounds a bit paranoid to me.
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 28,399
- 15,189
Gary Nylund
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2013
- 31,703
- 25,544
Even if that's true, not sure how that makes this an opinion piece. It sounds like the only opinion he's expressing is that his model has some value but you could say that for anyone using a model of any kind so ...
Hey, Last years model had the Stanley cup Champs first and the President trophy winners 2nd. 7 of the listed top 10 teams eventually finished in the top 10 in the league.
Considering every model out there got the Isles and Kraken wrong and the Knights were decimated by injury, thats OK isnt it?
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 28,399
- 15,189
Yep that’s ok, his opinion got 7 out of 10, others opinions got less or more. It’s still an opinion, it’s not like it’s facts.
Its not facts, only a prediction but its not an "opinion" piece either in that he's trying to create a model that predicts which teams are getting the most bank for their buck without bias.
Dom is generally near the top end of these predictive models so I'm not sure why you think he is more wrong than right......but even he had to acknowledge just how bad his (and every model to some degree) is in the playoffs as they tend to lean heavily on better records from the regular season and the record between the two teams.....which is completely useless for some reason.
He even jokes about in in his season review:
"Ah the playoffs, my old nemesis.
As has been the case for a while, the model stumbled when it mattered most. It really is the Leafs of models."
It makes perfect sense though that a model that accurately predicts good regular season teams would falter in the playoffs.....its that unpredictable in the post-season the last few years. The best regular season team of a generation getting swept in the 1st round?....and then winning two cups?.....the Habs making the finals!.... etc. etc.
Rants Mulliniks
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2008
- 23,171
- 6,219
It's ultimately as simple as sample size. His models would probably be fine for playoffs if it wasn't a sprint.
Yea, analytics and even plain stats seem to lose their meaning in the playoffs.
Just look at a few of Toronto's rankings in the playoffs over the last 3 years:
xGF% ranking:
5th out of 25 teams
Goal differential:
6th out of 25 teams
Shot differential:
8th out of 25 teams
Scoring Chance Differential:
5th out of 25 teams
High Danger Chance Differential:
3rd out of 25 teams
Team save%:
9th out of 25 teams
The Pens are the other team with this curious playoff pattern the last while. Great stats but losing close series again and again. Methinks clutch goaltending might be it.....
Just because I'm unwilling to blame him for other's mistakes, or not making bad decisions that would hurt the team, it doesn't mean I'm unwilling to be critical of moves he's made when they actually deserve criticism.
Yes, making 35 picks over 5 years (which is 7 each draft) when you've been in a competitive phase the entire time is pretty good, especially when it results in a significant improvement of the prospect pool.
No, but he's had a decent number of picks in the upper part of the draft. And really, where you pick doesn't really matter as long as you're getting good prospects. He has been.
No, a top tier goalie was not traded. A prospect who hadn't even played a single game in the NHL was traded 15 years ago. That's not the same thing.
That's kind of misleading when you're only looking at the exceptions. They're pretty much the only top tier goalies to come out of the 1st round in the entire cap era. If you look at some of the top goalies in the league... Shesterkin? 4th round. Saros? 4th round. Hellebuyck? 5th round. Sorokin? 3rd round.
Even if we had taken a goalie in the 1st round (one of the 4 total in the past 5 years, that were all drafted before we would have picked), they wouldn't have helped us through the seasons you were discussing anyway.
There's a balance. ELCs and keeping a healthy supply of prospects is important, and you don't want to be throwing them away like candy, but you also don't want to throw away opportunities to win or improve your team in a competitive phase. Also, the objective of drafting is to improve your prospect pool, so the better you are at drafting outside of the 1st round, the more leeway you can have trading a 1st. Also, draft picks tend to get the most attention, but what often gets lost in these discussions is the fact that we've held on to our top prospects. Our prospect pool is healthy.
Colorado was a rebuilding or wild card team for the majority of that time, and they traded everything except their 6th and 7th round picks in the year they won, so I'm not sure that helps your argument. And outside of their top-10 picks, they haven't really gotten much out of those 1sts. Stanley Cup Finalist Tampa traded their 2023 and 2024 1st at the deadline this year. Tampa traded their 2021 1st when they won in 2021. They traded two 2020 1sts and their 2019 1st round prospect the year before that when they won.
Racer88
Registered User
- Sep 29, 2020
- 13,184
- 13,335
If contracts do not result in success how can they be considered 3rd best in the league.
The stats you just listed may relate to an individual contract but taken in the context that combined the prohibit the team from assembling a winning team around them.
The Leafs biggest problem is goaltending. This model excludes goaltending. Leafs goaltending doesnt outplay the other side in elimination games despite the Leafs outplaying them.
Petrus
Registered User
If I may join the discussion ….
Contracts are determined by individual play and ones individual production. That’s how contracts have been determined in all sports.
While Winning is the ultimate goal of each hockey team, winning does not determine value in a cap world because most teams will spend near the cap successful or not. In then end there is only one team that got their money’s worth and it’s the Stanley Cup champs and nobody else.
Winning vs money spent would be a better measure in baseball where there is no cap to artificially limit cost.
The fact the Leafs spent most of their cap on forwards does not mean the Leafs do not have value contracts. What they have (most will agree) is an imbalance in the way they allocated their cap. The Leafs don’t have a true top end 1D instead of Tavares. But he is still productive and the young players are producing very well relative to their contracts. Forward heavy but still good value.
It would be a disaster if the Leafs are paying a Skinner type player who is getting paid a tonne without any production whatsoever.
Contracts are determined by individual play and ones individual production. That’s how contracts have been determined in all sports.
While Winning is the ultimate goal of each hockey team, winning does not determine value in a cap world because most teams will spend near the cap successful or not. In then end there is only one team that got their money’s worth and it’s the Stanley Cup champs and nobody else.
Winning vs money spent would be a better measure in baseball where there is no cap to artificially limit cost.
The fact the Leafs spent most of their cap on forwards does not mean the Leafs do not have value contracts. What they have (most will agree) is an imbalance in the way they allocated their cap. The Leafs don’t have a true top end 1D instead of Tavares. But he is still productive and the young players are producing very well relative to their contracts. Forward heavy but still good value.
It would be a disaster if the Leafs are paying a Skinner type player who is getting paid a tonne without any production whatsoever.
The thing is our big contract players all deserve big money and marner and Tavares got overpaid. Marners is almost worse then Tavares because he was a Rfa.
Racer88
Registered User
- Sep 29, 2020
- 13,184
- 13,335
That makes a little more sense
I agree with this 100%. It’s that balance that is the issue, not the individual contracts
Your point of view would actually work perfectly if the Leafs didnt get screwed so hard on the covid cap.
Not only did they sign all of their big contracts right before it happened (and so paid more than they would have if they had some foresight as the rising cap is baked into every contract) but it left them flailing to fill the holes that would have been filled with revenues booming and the cap projected as high as 88 million for 2020.
Just take a look at this season. Let's say you want a #1D and even better goaltending. With most people in agreement the cap would be around 10 million+ higher than it is now, let's take away the money spent on goaltending and a clear replacement in, say, Muzzin.
Muzzin + Murray + Samsonov + keeping the number at 10 is 22 million+ to spend on goaltending, and number one D and resigning Sandin. I think thats more than enough to meet those needs. (its still hard to find those things of course but we would have a ton of flexibility)
The Leafs were never in any cap trouble really and covid completely screwed every cap team and no team harder than the Leafs. Just loading up on forwards wasnt the master plan and the D is still somehow well above average too.
Bomber0104
Registered User
The Leafs biggest problem is goaltending.
Let's run with that idea.
So the solution is..., let's pick up the worst goaltending tandem the team has ever seen since the Matthews era began in Toronto!!
We once had Freddie/McBackup remember...
Even if you if diagnosed the problem (which I don't think you are), the solution seems more than a little haphazard.
And if that's our biggest problem, I'm amazed we didn't actually prioritize it with more of an effort than this garbage we just saw this off-season.
I forget, were you the guy that made a huge main board post using "advanced stats" saying that Mrazek was a better goalie than Freddie?
Last edited:
Bomber0104
Registered User
How did Covid "screw" the Leafs over any different than any other team in the league spending to the cap?!
Why do you believe this disproportionately affected ONE team in the entire NHL?!
The Leafs do not exist in a bubble.
There's another 31 teams in case you haven't checked.
This is some of the worst propaganda you can possibly ever read.
"The Leafs were the only team that needed the Cap to go up!"
Its not rocket science.
The Leafs literally signed all their big contracts right before covid hit.....and all contracts take into account a rising cap.
Tkachuk, Nurse, Huberdeau, etc would all be making more if covid never happened right. If you have a 90 million pool vs an 80 million, contracts will be smaller......
Bomber0104
Registered User
No team was ever going to sign 3 forwards to 10.9M+ contracts.
That was a uniquely Dubas experience that has never been proven to result in anything more than 4 consecutive first round playoff / play-in losses.
Covid didn't change that because none of those most-current contracts have even played a game yet.
All of those losses happened already.
It failed.
It wasnt advanced stats, it was all stats.
I dont think Murray has had a year as bad as Andersens last one with the Leafs. Andersen got easily outplayed by both Campbell and Hutch! Both guys playing .30 above him behind the same D. Andersen was just awful. It was more injury related than most of us thought (and he lost last year to injuries again) but Mrazek was certainly better than him the previous season. Its not really a comparison. Mrazek got hurt in the first game with us and never got on track with repeated injuries issues and awful play.....he was still better his final year with the Canes than Andersen had been the last 2 seasons with us though.
Ive said I love the Murray gamble but there are signs of hope there though.
Have to give him a chance...much like the Canes did with Andersen (even if it didnt work out in the end)
Bomber0104
Registered User
I fail to see what Tkachuk signed for this year has to do with the Leafs losing to the Columbus Blue Jackets in a play-in series?
Maybe my advance stats are sharpened enough?
Using the same stats you used comparing Mrazek to Andersen last year (you said Mrazek was better)..
What do those same stats say about Campbell to Murray?
Curious..
Kind of hoping they praise / tilt towards Campbell this go-around
Mrazek had to be traded for a 1st round pick and Andresen got Vezina nominations remember..
Imagine using this kind of analysis and being that wrong about the goalies...
The consequences are huge.
Maybe my advance stats are sharpened enough?
Using the same stats you used comparing Mrazek to Andersen last year (you said Mrazek was better)..
What do those same stats say about Campbell to Murray?
Curious..
Kind of hoping they praise / tilt towards Campbell this go-around
Mrazek had to be traded for a 1st round pick and Andresen got Vezina nominations remember..
Imagine using this kind of analysis and being that wrong about the goalies...
The consequences are huge.
