News Article: Auston Matthews - August 1st., Contract Crickets

[ZEBROA]

Season cant start fast enough

 

[Dekes For Days]

MacKinnon has displayed a level of professionalism, dedication, intensity, leadership, and selflessness that Matthews simply hasn't.

That's simply not true.

2. MacKinnon clearly could have leveraged more out of the Avs, which you admit yourself. But he didn't. Why is that? Because he realizes doing so would likely ruin his chances of ever winning a Cup again due to the Avs being forced to move other contributors because of a strict and rather stagnant cap. MacKinnon is the same guy who took less than he could before, and publicly went on record as saying he would again. And he backed up his words with his actions.

Mackinnon never "took less than he could before". He in fact got well compensated for what he was when he signed his post-ELC contract. Improving after you sign is not "taking less". And both Mackinnon and Matthews could have used their leverage to get more on their UFA contracts than they got/will get.

This is just my opinion but I do think MacKinnon actually would have "settled" on 12.25 x 8 on this deal but didn't want to deal with the "you're hurting the rest of the players" nonsense from the PA... so he pulled a Switzerland.

So now we're crediting Mackinnon for something there's absolutely no evidence of?

4. Auston Matthews does not deserve the benefit of the doubt here considering, by all indications, this is going to be the second short-term deal he's signed for massive money with the Leafs... something that is mostly unheard of with the top megastars in the NHL.

There's nothing "unheard of" or even abnormal about a top megastar getting a 5 year post-ELC contract. It's actually the most that common term for top end post-ELC contracts. What is unheard of is the league-wide cap situation we have now, that complicates the term decision way more than ever before.

But, if you insist on comparing NHL players in a hard cap league to every day workers, let's do this...

You are the top salesperson in your company. You bust it, working 55 hours a week. You make 240k and you're due for a raise. Your company informs you that, because of industry policy, the most your industry can legally spend on payroll is 500k. And, since you are their ace, they give you the ultimatum: Take a raise and be paid 300k, but in order to do that, they will need to fire your assistant and two paid interns who each spend 40 hours a week making it much easier for you to do your job. They are willing to pay you the extra 60k but you will now need to work an extra 20 hours a week, making your own proposals, presentations, and doing your own grunt work. You'll make more but lose all the benefits of added support while incurring a ton more stress and risk of failure.

A more accurate comparison would be...

You are the top salesperson in the most profitable company in your industry, and one of the best salespeople that the industry has seen in decades. You spent decades improving your sales skills, and work massive hours. The industry rakes in record profits, but they've colluded to cap each company's payroll at an amount that is supposed to increase with inflation, but hasn't for years. You singlehandedly bring in 20+% of the company's revenues, and you're due for a raise from 14-15% of the company's payroll to about 15%-16% of the company's payroll; consistent with how other top salespeople are paid in your industry. Revenues and company payroll are set to skyrocket in the coming years, that will more than cover your raise on its own, and every other company in the industry would be happy to pay you that amount, but the company tells you that they're not going to give you that raise that you've earned, and instead expect you to give up the money you earned so that they can overpay interchangeable salespeople that are much less beneficial to the company. They say that unless you agree to this, they'll call you a greedy pig and harass and berate you for the next half decade.

I know I'd be leaving that company, first chance I got.

I'd like to have you as my lawyer if I ever needed one. I don't see how someone can not see the points you are making as both valid and factual.

It's certainly very lawyerly to pick criteria, metrics, and a timeframe (that includes irrelevant post-signing data) that is exclusively beneficial to one side and lacking context, but it doesn't lead to a particularly factual conclusion.

 

[Racer88]

That's simply not true.

Mackinnon never "took less than he could before". He in fact got well compensated for what he was when he signed his post-ELC contract. Improving after you sign is not "taking less". And both Mackinnon and Matthews could have used their leverage to get more on their UFA contracts than they got/will get.

So now we're crediting Mackinnon for something there's absolutely no evidence of?

There's nothing "unheard of" or even abnormal about a top megastar getting a 5 year post-ELC contract. It's actually the most that common term for top end post-ELC contracts. What is unheard of is the league-wide cap situation we have now, that complicates the term decision way more than ever before.

A more accurate comparison would be...

You are the top salesperson in the most profitable company in your industry, and one of the best salespeople that the industry has seen in decades. You spent decades improving your sales skills, and work massive hours. The industry rakes in record profits, but they've colluded to cap each company's payroll at an amount that is supposed to increase with inflation, but hasn't for years. You singlehandedly bring in 20+% of the company's revenues, and you're due for a raise from 14-15% of the company's payroll to about 15%-16% of the company's payroll; consistent with how other top salespeople are paid in your industry. Revenues and company payroll are set to skyrocket in the coming years, that will more than cover your raise on its own, and every other company in the industry would be happy to pay you that amount, but the company tells you that they're not going to give you that raise that you've earned, and instead expect you to give up the money you earned so that they can overpay interchangeable salespeople that are much less beneficial to the company. They say that unless you agree to this, they'll call you a greedy pig and harass and berate you for the next half decade.

I know I'd be leaving that company, first chance I got.

It's certainly very lawyerly to pick criteria, metrics, and a timeframe (that includes irrelevant post-signing data) that is exclusively beneficial to one side and lacking context, but it doesn't lead to a particularly factual conclusion.

This was a funny read. My take away is that Tavares, Marner and soon to be Willy are the interchangeable sales people and yes that is a problem When you structure your sales force that way. Thanks for confirming that

 

[geo25]

View attachment 735831

No wonder Matthews needs more money.

Those jackets look expensive. I wonder what the "L" stands for anyway. Not Leafs, I can tell you that much.

Not winner either.

I can think of only one thing an "L" like that stands for. Either he doesn't see the irony. Or Matthews is literally advertising the fact that he's a loser.

Good Lord, what is this world coming to?

Matthews is a loser and he knows it. But the Leafs are gonna be forced to pay him like a winner. Because even if they don't win with him, they're guaranteed not to win without him.

So they better pay this fashionista whatever he wants.

You know, if Matthews really wanted to appeal to the fan base, he'd be posing with a gun while wearing a hunters outfit. Nothing screams manly man more than covering yourself in deer piss and shooting Bambi. A bullet for Thumper too while you're at it.

Post the pictures on social media after so the whole world knows who not to mess with.

L could stand for leaving....as in see you later...

 

[Dekes For Days]

My take away is that Tavares, Marner and soon to be Willy are the interchangeable sales people

Tavares, Marner, and Nylander are not the interchangeable salespeople. They are other top salespeople in the company that should also be prioritized.
The interchangeable salespeople are the bottom of the lineup players that some people want to sacrifice their best salespeople in order to overpay for no reason.

 

[TMLBlueandWhite]

L could stand for leaving....as in see you later...

It probably stands for "La Moneda", which means money in Spanish.



It's when I see things like this I have to question where Matthews priorities really lay.

Matthews is all about Matthews. I think he's going for the Michael Jackson "Bad" look in this one. Would be nice if he brought that "tough guy" persona to the ice.

Instead of just the negotiating table.

 

[Apex Predator]

How any poster can come in here and say Matthews gave the leafs a fair deal on his last contract is beyond me. Matthews has every right to get as much money as he wants. I don’t like it but that’s his right and it is what it is.

 

[Mess]

How any poster can come in here and say Matthews gave the leafs a fair deal on his last contract is beyond me. Matthews has every right to get as much money as he wants. I don’t like it but that’s his right and it is what it is.

The people that say that must not understand the difference between RFA cost controllable years by the team, and UFA years where the market sets the price, A greenhorn GM in Toronto gave players like Matthews and Marner contracts at UFA prices instead of RFA ones, because the majority of their 2nd contracts were 4 X Restrictive Free Agency years included in their short term deals which should have driven down their cost.

Clever player agents played Leafs GM for a fool and now and going forward the Leafs organization will never get any value on those contracts and always asked to make them among the highest paid in the game, which only hurts team competitiveness when there is less cap space to build a contender around them in Toronto.

Leafs Nation fans simply have to have accept that Leafs star players are mercenary players now, they hold the Leafs organization hostage, because money and wealth is their #1 priority. Matthews 5 year current deal only included 1 year of unrestricted free agency which makes it ridiculously overpriced on term, and that was so Matthews could line up now and double down on his over-payment, and he wants another short-term deal so that in a few years when the Cap ceiling rises he can step up and sign another deal always trying to maximize his earnings.

While other franchise players lock in for 8 years, sadly Leafs players do not. So I appreciate that Leafs new GM Brad Treliving is holding the line, and trying to get as much term as possible this time in order to try and extract some value on this contract for the Leafs even on an overpriced AAV , but because Matthews holds all the cards with a full NMC air tight contract its inevitable and only a matter of time before his next contract breaks through the NHL individual players salary glass ceiling setting new upper limits.

 

[Boxscore]

Tavares, Marner, and Nylander are not the interchangeable salespeople. They are other top salespeople in the company that should also be prioritized.
The interchangeable salespeople are the bottom of the lineup players that some people want to sacrifice their best salespeople in order to overpay for no reason.

You can't possibly believe what you are saying considering the Leafs won 1 round in 7 years while employing this exact "Our core is all that matters and the rest of the team is just interchangeable filler... bargain bin flotsam and jetsam in order to ice a complete team" mentality. Vegas doesn't win a Cup this year without players like Marchessault and Barbashev. And they wouldn't have those players if they had Eichel, Pietrangelo, Stone, and Theordore making 13.5 mil, 12.5 mil, 11 mil, and 10 mil, lmao. Your quasi-agent love fest for your favorite players is coming out again. Newsflash: Hard cap exists in the NHL. And the large majority of superstars either:

A. Give their teams discounts

And / or

B. Sign long-term so their high AAV turn into team-friendly deals midway through the contract

Except for the spoiled, greedy divas on the Leafs... no matter how much you try to convince us otherwise lol.

 

[Niagara Bill]

Is it possible that TML believe they need the publicity of announcing AM signing at the beginning of the season and deal is already agreed.
If they have agreed is it possible to keep that quiet, even from Nylanders agent.

 

[Boxscore]

The people that say that must not understand the difference between RFA cost controllable years by the team, and UFA years where the market sets the price, A greenhorn GM in Toronto gave players like Matthews and Marner contracts at UFA prices instead of RFA ones, because the majority of their 2nd contracts were 4 X Restrictive Free Agency years included in their short term deals which should have driven down their cost.

Clever player agents played Leafs GM for a fool and now and going forward the Leafs organization will never get any value on those contracts and always asked to make them among the highest paid in the game, which only hurts team competitiveness when there is less cap space to build a contender around them in Toronto.

Leafs Nation fans simply have to have accept that Leafs star players are mercenary players now, they hold the Leafs organization hostage, because money and wealth is their #1 priority. Matthews 5 year current deal only included 1 year of unrestricted free agency which makes it ridiculously overpriced on term, and that was so Matthews could line up now and double down on his over-payment, and he wants another short-term deal so that in a few years when the Cap ceiling rises he can step up and sign another deal always trying to maximize his earnings.

While other franchise players lock in for 8 years, sadly Leafs players do not. So I appreciate that Leafs new GM Brad Treliving is holding the line, and trying to get as much term as possible this time in order to try and extract some value on this contract for the Leafs even on an overpriced AAV , but because Matthews holds all the cards with a full NMC air tight contract its inevitable and only a matter of time before his next contract breaks through the NHL individual players salary glass ceiling setting new upper limits.

This is 100% clear as day and cannot be refuted.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

There's way too much praise going on for MacKinnon and his contract going on in this thread. The fact is, he's never (seriously) been considered to be the best player in the league at any point in his career. He's never won a Hart, Selke, Rocket or Conn Smythe.

Still ended up with the highest paid contract in cap history in terms of aav. The same arguments used against Matthews should apply to him. His deal absolutely was not team friendly, no matter how one wants to look at it.

The three years prior to Mack signing: 1.35ppg

The three years prior to Matthews signing: 1.29ppg

If you do 4 years it's even worse for Matthews. If you do 2 years it's FAR worse for Matthews. If you do 1 year it's unfathomably worse for Matthews.

Matthews has topped 90 points once, Mack 5 times

I was told in all the Marner vs Rantanen and Nylander vs Pastrnak threads that goals are NOT more valuable than points. And i DEMAND consistency on that.

It just so happens that Matthews best year was a season that other super star players had a bit of a down year. Hence the Hart.

Add in a freaking cup and 8 series wins compared to ONE series win.

Matthews deserves less than MacKinnon. But most of us acknowledge that rookie Dubas destroyed the culture of this team and we have to overpay everybody to keep them. I just accept that at this point. So I am perfectly fine with overpaying Matthews by giving him the Mack cap percentage x 8. Anything more than that is a sign that these players have been morally corrupted.

 

[Rob Brown]

View attachment 735831

No wonder Matthews needs more money.

Those jackets look expensive. I wonder what the "L" stands for anyway. Not Leafs, I can tell you that much.

Not winner either.

I can think of only one thing an "L" like that stands for. Either he doesn't see the irony. Or Matthews is literally advertising the fact that he's a loser.

Good Lord, what is this world coming to?

Matthews is a loser and he knows it. But the Leafs are gonna be forced to pay him like a winner. Because even if they don't win with him, they're guaranteed not to win without him.

So they better pay this fashionista whatever he wants.

You know, if Matthews really wanted to appeal to the fan base, he'd be posing with a gun while wearing a hunters outfit. Nothing screams manly man more than covering yourself in deer piss and shooting Bambi. A bullet for Thumper too while you're at it.

Post the pictures on social media after so the whole world knows who not to mess with.

 

[Strangle]

Fantastic post and very well articulated. Unfortunately there’s some folks who will never grasp your point or even care to entertain your viewpoint for a multitude of reasons- ego, bias, common sense etc.

People keep missing the point. Throw "fair deal" out the window when it comes to a hard cap. The days of being fair, or cut-and-dry, were thrown out the window the day the NHL instituted a hard cap.

How is it fair that Connor McDavid doesn't have a fluid lock on being the highest paid player in the NHL (by a lot) each year? How is it fair that Matt Tkachuk signed for 9.5 million x 8 years, scoring back-to-back 40+ goal, 104 and 109 point seasons in addition to 34 points in 32 playoff games while Mitch Marner is being paid 10.9 million on a shorter deal that he signed years ago?

There is no such thing as total fairness or worth in the NHL these days -- a lot goes into determining that, such as market, team cache and desirability, opportunity to win, a GM/team's desperation to sell tickets, a player prioritizing winning over dollars, etc.

Saying "13.5 million is fair for Auston Matthews" doesn't make sense to me. What is that fairness based on exactly? If it's comparable contracts, Matthews shouldn't make anything more than MacKinnon's 12.6 x 8. That would be fair based on comparing deals. Why does Matthews deserve a million more than MacKinnon, especially on lesser term? He doesn't. So paying him that could be considered unfair to the Leafs.

Are we basing fairness on the same (flawed) John Tavares UFA argument, which is: "Other teams would gladly pay Matthews 13.5 so it's only fair the Leafs do"? That line of thinking is broken on many levels. Sure, there are some teams who would pay Matthews even more than 13.5 a year because they can't draw a crowd, are struggling for popularity in their market, or flat out stink. But that doesn't mean the Leafs should be held hostage by this premise considering they are a great market, with great players, great fans, are considered hockey royalty, and should be able to offer Matthews annual chances to compete for a Cup if he does his part.

The only fair thing that both Matthews and the Leafs can do in a hard cap NHL is cordially agree to a win-win deal that:

1. Pays Matthews extremely well and on par with, or above, 99% of other great superstars.

2. Is long-term in nature so both the club and the player equally commit to the end goal of winning Cups.

3. Takes into consideration the Leafs other stars that need a cut so Matthews isn't on an island shouldering all the burden. Any deal signed must still leave enough left over for the betterment of both Matthews' and the team's success.

That ^ is the only criteria that should define "fair" in this particular case. Anything else (including 13.5 x 4) is completely one-sided in Matthews' favor. He's getting everything without concession and the Leafs are being bent over. This is not fair unless you're only interested in cheerleading for Matthews.

This is why I still firmly believe that the only win-win outcome should be matching MacKinnon's 12.6 x 8.

Matthews joins MacKinnon as the highest paid in history and will end up making about 200 million in salary if he remains healthy after this deal. The Leafs can then likely manage to squeeze in both Nylander + Marner and have more money down the line (as the cap increases) to surround Matthews & co. with even more support to help them win Cups.

It's not difficult. Unless the player doesn't care about winning Cups and only wants every dollar. In that case, it's fair for the Leafs to trade him because that type of player is beyond selfish and will never prioritize team success.

Award this man the thread. This is the post right here

 

[Dekes For Days]

You can't possibly believe what you are saying considering the Leafs won 1 round in 7 years while employing this exact "Our core is all that matters and the rest of the team is just interchangeable filler... bargain bin flotsam and jetsam in order to ice a complete team" mentality.

1. Nobody said the core is all that matters. But cores matter the most. That's why they are cores. They are the best players that provide the most impact, and that's why they justifiably get paid more.
2. We haven't had this allocation for 7 years.
3. That's a horribly ineffective method of determining the viability of a strategy.
4. Having a core of more expensive players and some cheap supplementary players is how pretty much all teams, including cup winners, work.

Vegas doesn't win a Cup this year without players like Marchessault and Barbashev.

1. More accurately, Vegas doesn't win the cup without circumventing the cap to afford players like Marchessault and Barbashev.
2. We have had players making 5m and 2.25m. These are not unattainable players for our cap configuration.
3. There is no cap hit qualification for a player performing massively beyond their normal pace for a stretch in the playoffs. This can happen for any player making any amount.

And the large majority of superstars either:
A. Give their teams discounts
And / or
B. Sign long-term so their high AAV turn into team-friendly deals midway through the contract

The large majority of superstars do give discounts on their actual worth, just like somebody like Matthews would be doing at rumoured amounts, because superstars in the NHL are underpaid. However, the overwhelming majority of superstars do not give the type of "discounts" you're suggesting. Those are extremely, extremely rare. Matthews' contract is working by the same standards as everybody else - aside from him reportedly not looking for an increased AAV, like a lesser UFA term would normally mean.

The majority of top tier players do not sign long-term on their post-ELC contracts. A lot (though not all) of superstars sign for long-term on their UFA contracts (and pretty much everybody except Matthews is reportedly looking to do so on our team), but the overwhelming majority of superstars signed long-term because in almost all situations except the one we're in right now, doing so is pretty player friendly too, and most of those players got to sign under a 50% or higher cap, and not a cap artificially suppressed below 50% that was about to skyrocket.

It's unfortunate timing, and I'd prefer the 8 years, but far from the end of the world to have one of the best players in the league for longer, even if it's not guaranteed to be for as long as your ideal.

 

[Strangle]

Not sure if you guys have been reading these recently, but someone has compiled a list of the top 40 players this past season for shooting and passing.

Whoever JfreshHockey is...

Turns out, Maythews, Marner, Nylander, and Tavares are 4 of the best even strength players at what we want them to do: create goals.

And despite having Avery down season, Matthews finishes 1st in the shooting list and 4th in combination shooting and passing list.....

Nylander, after playing the year with Matthews for the most part, shoots up the ranking as well.

Must be a coincidence that Nylander becomes a much better offensive player riding shot gun with 34 for a year after a couple of good, but not great seasons playing with JT.


View attachment 732352View attachment 732353View attachment 732354


I don't know who JFreshHockey, or UnpopularOpinionJake are (maybe same person), or what AllThreeZones is.

Just wanted to add to the data about Matthews, Marner, Nylander, and Tavares.

The 4 of them get a ton of shit from this idiot fanbase, but they have generally done what should have been expected of them over the last 7 seasons.

It's the entirety of the supporting cast that has shit the bed too much and too often (especially the goaltending and defenders 3-8).

So you have to look and see if spreading the cap hit out across the roster leads to better team results.

It sounds like you’re saying the top end $40m of the roster is performing to standard, but the bottom end $40m of the roster is not.

Maybe you need $30m top end and $50m to invest into bottom 6, goalie, defense? Or a $25m/$55m split?

 

[keonsbitterness]

Is it possible that TML believe they need the publicity of announcing AM signing at the beginning of the season and deal is already agreed.
If they have agreed is it possible to keep that quiet, even from Nylanders agent.

Very possible that a deal is done. Announcing a major re-signing during camp makes more sense than in August when the NHL is basically shut down.

 

[Stephen]

View attachment 735831

No wonder Matthews needs more money.

Those jackets look expensive. I wonder what the "L" stands for anyway. Not Leafs, I can tell you that much.

Not winner either.

I can think of only one thing an "L" like that stands for. Either he doesn't see the irony. Or Matthews is literally advertising the fact that he's a loser.

Good Lord, what is this world coming to?

Matthews is a loser and he knows it. But the Leafs are gonna be forced to pay him like a winner. Because even if they don't win with him, they're guaranteed not to win without him.

So they better pay this fashionista whatever he wants.

You know, if Matthews really wanted to appeal to the fan base, he'd be posing with a gun while wearing a hunters outfit. Nothing screams manly man more than covering yourself in deer piss and shooting Bambi. A bullet for Thumper too while you're at it.

Post the pictures on social media after so the whole world knows who not to mess with.

Being interested in non hockey things like fashion has nothing to do with winning and losing. So let’s keep it on topic.

https://i.redd.it/7o22wnt4fzd61.jpg

 

[andora]

That's simply not true.

Mackinnon never "took less than he could before". He in fact got well compensated for what he was when he signed his post-ELC contract. Improving after you sign is not "taking less". And both Mackinnon and Matthews could have used their leverage to get more on their UFA contracts than they got/will get.

So now we're crediting Mackinnon for something there's absolutely no evidence of?

There's nothing "unheard of" or even abnormal about a top megastar getting a 5 year post-ELC contract. It's actually the most that common term for top end post-ELC contracts. What is unheard of is the league-wide cap situation we have now, that complicates the term decision way more than ever before.

A more accurate comparison would be...

You are the top salesperson in the most profitable company in your industry, and one of the best salespeople that the industry has seen in decades. You spent decades improving your sales skills, and work massive hours. The industry rakes in record profits, but they've colluded to cap each company's payroll at an amount that is supposed to increase with inflation, but hasn't for years. You singlehandedly bring in 20+% of the company's revenues, and you're due for a raise from 14-15% of the company's payroll to about 15%-16% of the company's payroll; consistent with how other top salespeople are paid in your industry. Revenues and company payroll are set to skyrocket in the coming years, that will more than cover your raise on its own, and every other company in the industry would be happy to pay you that amount, but the company tells you that they're not going to give you that raise that you've earned, and instead expect you to give up the money you earned so that they can overpay interchangeable salespeople that are much less beneficial to the company. They say that unless you agree to this, they'll call you a greedy pig and harass and berate you for the next half decade.

I know I'd be leaving that company, first chance I got.

It's certainly very lawyerly to pick criteria, metrics, and a timeframe (that includes irrelevant post-signing data) that is exclusively beneficial to one side and lacking context, but it doesn't lead to a particularly factual conclusion.

Anyone else dizzy?

 

[keonsbitterness]

Anyone else dizzy?

Which one is Biff?

 

[Canadian Finn]

Is it possible that TML believe they need the publicity of announcing AM signing at the beginning of the season and deal is already agreed.
If they have agreed is it possible to keep that quiet, even from Nylanders agent.

nah, I heard something about waiting until marner's wedding or something.

that's where we are at in the fanbase. suggesting marner's wedding dictates announcing, lol.

in reality, they'll announce it when they get the deal done.

Being interested in non hockey things like fashion has nothing to do with winning and losing. So let’s keep it on topic.

https://i.redd.it/7o22wnt4fzd61.jpg

actually interests and hobbies do indeed have to do with being a winner (or a loser).

but it's not correct these days to suggest it.

 

[Zur En Arrh]

I'll bet you Draisaitl takes less than Matthews.

And I bet mcd leaves and Drai's points plummet...

 

[AvroArrow]

Honestly, if the Leafs pay Matthews 13.5 x 3, they deserve to fail miserably until Matthews, along with Shanahan and Treliving, are booed out of the city. I do agree that Marner will want his but I think he'll be the one traded... unless Matthews gets paid so much they can't possibly afford Nylander even with a hometown discount... and he gets jettisoned first. Then Marner the mercenary will certainly be asking for Matthews money here or someplace else.

Why can't our guys commit to the team and team success ? With every passing day it seems (I hate to admit it) Babcock was right about the core. Why can't our guys put the team and team success first? I think Auston is a top 3 player in the league, I truly believe that. But with this mentality, you can't ever win.

 

[BayStBullies]

So at this point, is it safe to say Nylander walks for nothing or gets traded for scraps to a limited few teams and Matthews signs nearly a year from now for max? I don't know how it's not being seen as a giant failure on Shanny.

 

[Rob Brown]

So at this point, is it safe to say Nylander walks for nothing or gets traded for scraps to a limited few teams and Matthews signs nearly a year from now for max? I don't know how it's not being seen as a giant failure on Shanny.

If he walks for nothing then yeah it's a massive failure, but we're not there yet at all. I don't think it's safe to say that is going to happen.