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

[Throw More Waffles]

ahahah he said Matthews was closer to McDavid than Eichel for his entry level contract?

Jack .69 .93 .96
AM .84 1.02 1.07
CM 1.07 1.22 1.32

AM Year 1 - 0.15 to Jack and -0.23 to MC
AM Year 2 - 0.09 to Jack and -0.20 to MC
AM Year 3 - 0.11 to Jack and -0.25 to MC
Total 0.35 to Jack and -0.68 to MC

Sorry, AM is closer to Jack E than he is to CM on his Entry level contract... Austin should have been signed to a 10M x 8 Year or if you say he is better than Jack and its only by a bit hes should be at 11 x 8 as he is 11% a year on average better than Jack E.

I was talking about contracts.

Sypher said that because McDavid signed a team friendly contract, the actual number amount doesn't apply when determining Matthews contract.

Yet when a player like Eichel signs what was indisputably seen as a player friendly contract a the time, it's now the new benchmark for where leaf player contracts begin.

You get that? Player friendly contracts are the new benchmark for the leafs star players. And team friendly contracts "don't count" as comparables to leaf players. Such mental gymnastics need to be played to rationalize the leafs unprecedented dramatic overpayments.

 

[notbias]

He's only 25 correct? Eight (8) years would put him at 33.

He is a month away from 26 and it would start when he is 27, so it'd be his 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 34 seasons, not terrible, but Tavares and Brodie are ancient according to some at 32/33.

5 years sounds good to me. Re-negotiate if we want for his 32-year-old season.

Should have been 8 last contract but that ship has sailed so ya 5 is the max I would give him

Just going on current circumstances, the 5 years sounds good to me.

I probably would have preferred the 8 years too (depending on the hit), but that would have probably screwed us as well based on everyone thinking the cap was skyrocketing and it stagnating.

I think we can optimize his prime with 5 years and go from there.

 

[notbias]

The Leafs would be wise to work off a cap projection of 85 million when his contact kicks in.

15.3% = 13 million for 8 yrs.

Go down from there.

maybe the hold-up is the Leafs are saying "we will sign you at 15% of the current cap" and Matthews says "15% sounds good, but let's wait until the cap is announced for next season".

I think there is a little hesitation based on how the cap has played out to make assumptions on projections, and the players probably want to wait in that scenario.

Speculation... but maybe all this worrying is over nothing and both sides are figuring out what the cap could be moving forward.

 

[Mess]

No rumoured UFA contract for Matthews pays him more than McDavid's 16.67% post-discount post-ELC contract, for the record.

You really don't understand how NHL contracts work do you and the difference in RFA and UFA years in a contract related to term and CH%?

This is perfect example of that ... Cap Hit % is calculated by players AAV / Salary Cap Ceiling. A players Cap Hit % is only accurate in the 1st year in which a contract is signed as a representation AT THAT TIME, how much of the teams total cap % that players AAV occupies of the NHL Salary Cap Max Ceiling.

So McDavid in year #1 of his 8 year deal had an initial CH% of Cap %

: 16.67 while Matthews in the 1st year of his 5 year deal had an initial of Cap %

: 14.64.

However that is why TERM is so important to a TEAM, because as the Salary Cap Ceiling increases annually the players C.H.% decreases annually in accordance with the new levels, and that player impacts the team less as it declines while the cap ceiling increases. The team begins to benefit more each year of the term from an original high CH% in year #1 by the time year #8 rolls around.

But because Matthews has able to convince a clueless greenhorn GM to sell off his 4 cheap RFA year and only 1 of his UFA expensive year in comparison to McDavid 4 X RFA and 4 X UFA years he has now positioned himself because of the difference of terms to exceed McDavid AAV and CH%. This is final year of Matthews 2nd contract and McDavid still have 3 years remaining on his 2nd contract.

So in 2023-24 upcoming season Salary Cap Ceiling = $83,500,000 ... McDavid actual CH% 14.97% = and Matthews CH% = 13.93% (ie $11,634,000 AAV / 83,500,000 Cap Ceiling).

Now Matthews new contract cuts in rumoured 3-4 years at $13.5 mil and Leafs begin paying Matthews more than McDavid at a higher CH%.

So in 2024-25 Salary Cap Ceiling increase = $ 87,500,000
McDavid CH% decreases to 14.29 % .. ($12,5 AAV / $87,500,000) while Matthews AAV and CH% increases to 15.43 % ($13.5 mil AAV / $87,500,000).

So in 2025-26 Salary Cap Ceiling increase = $ 92,000,000
McDavid CH% decreases to 13.59 % .. ($12.5 AAV / $92,000,000) while Matthews CH% 14.67 % ($13.5 mil AAV / $92,000,000).

Therefore Leafs will be paying Matthews a higher AAV and he will be consuming a higher CH% of that Cap ceiling for UFA years now than McDavid by the time his 2nd contract expires as Matthews 3rd overlaps his UFA years. If that is not bad enough Matthews wants only another short-term 3rd contract so he can double down again when the Cap Ceiling increases to maximize his earnings.

Matthews rumoured $13.5 mil AAV > McDavid $12.5 mil AAV and his 14.67% CH% > McDavid C.H.% of 13.59 %.

PS, Matthews is in a position to do his coming off a 74 games 40 goals 45 assists 85 points vs. McDavid 82 games 64 goals 89 assists 153 points because of a full NMC and his 5 year term deal.

 

[Sypher04]

But Sypher... don't you see the inconsistency here?

When a leaf comparable signs a TEAM friendly deal, its' the new benchmark for leaf players.

But when a leaf comparable player sighs a PLAYER friendly contract (McDavid), it now "doesn't count".

Do you not agree that's an unfair pro gm biased opinion?

According to who, because I’ve never stated McDavids deal doesn’t count. In fact, I’ve done nothing but repeatedly draw comparisons to it. I would say all deals count for something in drawing comparables but I would draw the line at saying player x has to take a discount from market value to meet the contract another player opted to take at a discount whenever brought forth. That’s a personal choice, and one you’d hope all players make to some extent, but end of the day they are not obligated to do so.

Sypher said that because McDavid signed a team friendly contract, the actual number amount doesn't apply when determining Matthews contract.

No I didn’t. The part about McDavid having taken less than his market value was just additional thoughts and in no way was it positioned as we should not compare against his actual deal because of it. I always compare to McDavids actual deal, and equivalent value based on signing year. The last bit was just an interesting note I added but it’s never formed any of my comparisons on the matter

 

[Stephen]

You really don't understand how NHL contracts work do you and the difference in RFA and UFA years in a contract related to term and CH%?

This is perfect example of that ... Cap Hit % is calculated by players AAV / Salary Cap Ceiling. A players Cap Hit % is only accurate in the 1st year in which a contract is signed as a representation AT THAT TIME, how much of the teams total cap % that players AAV occupies of the NHL Salary Cap Max Ceiling.

So McDavid in year #1 of his 8 year deal had an initial CH% of Cap %

: 16.67 while Matthews in the 1st year of his 5 year deal had an initial of Cap %

: 14.64.

However that is why TERM is so important to a TEAM, because as the Salary Cap Ceiling increases annually the players C.H.% decreases annually in accordance with the new levels, and that player impacts the team less as it declines while the cap ceiling increases. The team begins to benefit more each year of the term from an original high CH% in year #1 by the time year #8 rolls around.

But because Matthews has able to convince a clueless greenhorn GM to sell off his 4 cheap RFA year and only 1 of his UFA expensive year in comparison to McDavid 4 X RFA and 4 X UFA years he has now positioned himself because of the difference of terms to exceed McDavid AAV and CH%. This is final year of Matthews 2nd contract and McDavid still have 3 years remaining on his 2nd contract.

So in 2023-24 upcoming season Salary Cap Ceiling = $83,500,000 ... McDavid actual CH% 14.97% = and Matthews CH% = 13.93% (ie $11,634,000 AAV / 83,500,000 Cap Ceiling).

Now Matthews new contract cuts in rumoured 3-4 years at $13.5 mil and Leafs begin paying Matthews more than McDavid at a higher CH%.

So in 2024-25 Salary Cap Ceiling increase = $ 87,500,000
McDavid CH% decreases to 14.29 % .. ($12,5 AAV / $87,500,000) while Matthews AAV and CH% increases to 15.43 % ($13.5 mil AAV / $87,500,000).

So in 2025-26 Salary Cap Ceiling increase = $ 92,000,000
McDavid CH% decreases to 13.59 % .. ($12.5 AAV / $92,000,000) while Matthews CH% 14.67 % ($13.5 mil AAV / $92,000,000).

Therefore Leafs will be paying Matthews a higher AAV and he will be consuming a higher CH% of that Cap ceiling for UFA years now than McDavid by the time his 2nd contract expires as Matthews 3rd overlaps his UFA years. If that is not bad enough Matthews wants only another short-term 3rd contract so he can double down again when the Cap Ceiling increases to maximize his earnings.

Matthews rumoured $13.5 mil AAV > McDavid $12.5 mil AAV and his 14.67% CH% > McDavid C.H.% of 13.59 %.

PS, Matthews is in a position to do his coming off a 74 games 40 goals 45 assists 85 points vs. McDavid 82 games 64 goals 89 assists 153 points because of a full NMC and his 5 year term deal.

The other thing to consider is the McDavid Matthews contract comparison is it all depended on Matthews closing the gap between the two, building on:

-Leafs staying ahead of the Oilers (Oilers didn't even make the playoffs in 2018 and 2019).
-Maintaining a goal scoring advantage (goals vs points was always a differentiator).
-Hitting new PP production to match his 5 on 5 advantage to close the points gap.
-Building on the 2021-22 Hart, Rocket, Lindsay seasons.

2022-23 was a disaster for Matthews in every respect but contract discussions in terms of McDavid comparisons. That's a 68 point differential. To put that difference into context, Auston Matthews 85 points to Justin Holl's 18 points represents a smaller point differential. McDavid also broke Matthews single season best goal scoring totals. And yet we are still talking about the contract leap frog game.

 

[Mess]

Whew. In other words, Matty got ‘em by the short and curlies and the Leafs gone done and gotta do it eh?



I’m no Dubas basher, but neither a defender. Right in to UFA.. it’s gotta rank among best player friendly star level 2nd deals ever given.

I barely care about the AAV here, it’ll be highest in league, it won’t be ridiculously out of line. The term is the intriguing part of this. 5-6-ish sounds good. Let’s get it over with, this one you can’t move off. We’re pot committed in poker terms. If you’ve made a mistake it’s already made, can’t take it back, can only hope what you think was an mistake turns out not to be. Even if you think you’re losing there’s no sense not following through.

Bigger decisions at hand with MM and Willy.

LOL .. I was actually going to type the very same line of Matthews having the Leafs organization by the short and curlies, when I was typing my speech.

I'm also hoping since the organization is getting bent over at Matthews next AAV, but if Treliving can talk and lock Matthews into 6+ years instead of 3-4 short term the Leafs can begin to get value in the later years in terms of Cap Hit % as the Cap Ceiling continues to increase annually.

Willy might actually get traded if he doesn't come off his ask, as Leafs are not likely going to let him walk for free after what happened to Treliving in Calgary and with Marner Treliving should be able to play hardball to try and get MM next contract in line with market, despite Mitch having a NMC, because unlike Willy and Auston who are not bound by nationality to the Leafs long-term, Marner a local Ontario kid would be more hard pressed to walk away from the Leafs organization when push comes to shove on his next contract.

PS. David Pastrnak coming off a 82 game 61 goal 52 assists 113 points and just re-signing for 8 years and $11.25 mil would be Marner's max ceiling contract as a comparable and not much daylight between that and his current overpayment of $10.9 mil AAV from to negotiate his next deal.

 

[Sypher04]

The other thing to consider is the McDavid Matthews contract comparison is it all depended on Matthews closing the gap between the two, building on:

-Leafs staying ahead of the Oilers (Oilers didn't even make the playoffs in 2018 and 2019).
-Maintaining a goal scoring advantage (goals vs points was always a differentiator).
-Hitting new PP production to match his 5 on 5 advantage to close the points gap.
-Building on the 2021-22 Hart, Rocket, Lindsay seasons.

2022-23 was a disaster for Matthews in every respect but contract discussions in terms of McDavid comparisons. That's a 68 point differential. To put that difference into context, Auston Matthews 85 points to Justin Holl's 18 points represents a smaller point differential. McDavid also broke Matthews single season best goal scoring totals. And yet we are still talking about the contract leap frog game.

Not incorrect, but if McDavid were up for a new deal now he’d be making a lot more based on what he’s done the especially over the last 3 years (and cap growth since his deal was signed)

You really don't understand how NHL contracts work do you and the difference in RFA and UFA years in a contract related to term and CH%?

This is perfect example of that ... Cap Hit % is calculated by players AAV / Salary Cap Ceiling. A players Cap Hit % is only accurate in the 1st year in which a contract is signed as a representation AT THAT TIME, how much of the teams total cap % that players AAV occupies of the NHL Salary Cap Max Ceiling.

So McDavid in year #1 of his 8 year deal had an initial CH% of Cap %

: 16.67 while Matthews in the 1st year of his 5 year deal had an initial of Cap %

: 14.64.

However that is why TERM is so important to a TEAM, because as the Salary Cap Ceiling increases annually the players C.H.% decreases annually in accordance with the new levels, and that player impacts the team less as it declines while the cap ceiling increases. The team begins to benefit more each year of the term from an original high CH% in year #1 by the time year #8 rolls around.

But because Matthews has able to convince a clueless greenhorn GM to sell off his 4 cheap RFA year and only 1 of his UFA expensive year in comparison to McDavid 4 X RFA and 4 X UFA years he has now positioned himself because of the difference of terms to exceed McDavid AAV and CH%. This is final year of Matthews 2nd contract and McDavid still have 3 years remaining on his 2nd contract.

So in 2023-24 upcoming season Salary Cap Ceiling = $83,500,000 ... McDavid actual CH% 14.97% = and Matthews CH% = 13.93% (ie $11,634,000 AAV / 83,500,000 Cap Ceiling).

Now Matthews new contract cuts in rumoured 3-4 years at $13.5 mil and Leafs begin paying Matthews more than McDavid at a higher CH%.

So in 2024-25 Salary Cap Ceiling increase = $ 87,500,000
McDavid CH% decreases to 14.29 % .. ($12,5 AAV / $87,500,000) while Matthews AAV and CH% increases to 15.43 % ($13.5 mil AAV / $87,500,000).

So in 2025-26 Salary Cap Ceiling increase = $ 92,000,000
McDavid CH% decreases to 13.59 % .. ($12.5 AAV / $92,000,000) while Matthews CH% 14.67 % ($13.5 mil AAV / $92,000,000).

Therefore Leafs will be paying Matthews a higher AAV and he will be consuming a higher CH% of that Cap ceiling for UFA years now than McDavid by the time his 2nd contract expires as Matthews 3rd overlaps his UFA years. If that is not bad enough Matthews wants only another short-term 3rd contract so he can double down again when the Cap Ceiling increases to maximize his earnings.

Matthews rumoured $13.5 mil AAV > McDavid $12.5 mil AAV and his 14.67% CH% > McDavid C.H.% of 13.59 %.

PS, Matthews is in a position to do his coming off a 74 games 40 goals 45 assists 85 points vs. McDavid 82 games 64 goals 89 assists 153 points because of a full NMC and his 5 year term deal.

I mean, all you’ve really done here is make the case as to why, save for a garauntee against injury or drop off in play, 8 year deals are almost never advantageous for players. After 5 years McDavid by relative cap hit isn’t going to be the highest anymore and that should surprise no one, despite the fact that he is clearly the best player in the league.

 

[Stephen]

I mean, all you’ve really done here is make the case as to why, save for a garauntee against injury or drop off in play, 8 year deals are almost never advantageous for players. After 5 years McDavid by relative cap hit isn’t going to be the highest anymore and that should surprise no one, despite the fact that he is clearly the best player in the league.

I would make the argument that in a flat cap system the advantages and disadvantages to 8 year contracts is not as straight forward as you’d think.

Matthews is operating on the assumption that the cap will go up and up and his reputation as a premier player will as well, following a kind of LeBron James in the NBA where flexibility is king, maximize short term and hit it again. That’s the general assumption.

This doesn’t factor in the NHL cap growth is much flatter than the NBA and generally salaries can be fairly stagnant.

A lot of star players have been hovering around the $9-$10 million mark since Toews and Kane signed their deals almost 10 years ago. Jack Campbell signed a UFA starting goalie contract in Edmonton not too dissimilar to what we signed Curtis Joseph for in 1998. Jack Hughes might be happy with the Jack Eichel contract today, even though they signed their deals more than half a decade apart from one another.

Plus there is the injury factor. If you go through 8 years and are flawlessly healthy and getting better season on season, maybe you feel cheated on the AAV. But those extra years sure feel good when your game is slipping or you go through a few injury plagued seasons where you drop from 60 to 40 goals overnight. For example.

So yes Matthews has probably thought about his contract strategy along the lines of being an NBA equivalent star who is going to catch every new update of the cap, but there are risks there if the economy doesn’t reflect and if his own trajectory flat lines.

 

[Mess]

The other thing to consider is the McDavid Matthews contract comparison is it all depended on Matthews closing the gap between the two, building on:

-Leafs staying ahead of the Oilers (Oilers didn't even make the playoffs in 2018 and 2019).
-Maintaining a goal scoring advantage (goals vs points was always a differentiator).
-Hitting new PP production to match his 5 on 5 advantage to close the points gap.
-Building on the 2021-22 Hart, Rocket, Lindsay seasons.

2022-23 was a disaster for Matthews in every respect but contract discussions in terms of McDavid comparisons. That's a 68 point differential. To put that difference into context, Auston Matthews 85 points to Justin Holl's 18 points represents a smaller point differential. McDavid also broke Matthews single season best goal scoring totals. And yet we are still talking about the contract leap frog game.

Its almost ridiculous Leafs are in a position considering paying Matthews >>> McDavid and by a significant amount and talking short term,

McDavid's 5 X Art Ross Trophies (league leading scorer) & 4 X Hart Trophies (as league MVP) & 4 X Ted Lindsay (outstanding players as per NHLPA) etc etc.

First off Matthews original 2nd contract should have been for 8 years at that $11.634 mil compared to McDavid $12.5 mil to make any sense based on your realistic projections above to compare apples to apples based on RFA year & UFA price paid.

However these players are not equal comparables where McDavid is clearly the best player on the planet and even with Auston's elite goal scoring ability (among the best on planet), he should always come in below McDavid AAV and CH% and still be in the top 5 overall highest paid. IMO

Because of timing Nate MacKinnon did the right thing for the NHLPA by moving the bar up +$100k , and his team on term, but also locking in for 8 years allowing McDavid in 3 years to blow right by his new league high AV. In a real world if Auston did similar now and takes $12.7 mil moving the bar again up, and locking in for 8 years all would be right with the World.

 

[notbias]

Its almost ridiculous Leafs are in a position considering paying Matthews >>> McDavid and by a significant amount and talking short term,

McDavid's 5 X Art Ross Trophies (league leading scorer) & 4 X Hart Trophies (as league MVP) & 4 X Ted Lindsay (outstanding players as per NHLPA) etc etc.

First off Matthews original 2nd contract should have been for 8 years at that $11.634 mil compared to McDavid $12.5 mil to make any sense based on your realistic projections above to compare apples to apples based on RFA year & UFA price paid.

However these players are not equal comparables where McDavid is clearly the best player on the planet and even with Auston's elite goal scoring ability (among the best on planet), he should always come in below McDavid AAV and CH% and still be in the top 5 overall highest paid. IMO

Because of timing Nate MacKinnon did the right thing for the NHLPA by moving the bar up +$100k , and his team on term, but also locking in for 8 years allowing McDavid in 3 years to blow right by his new league high AV. In a real world if Auston did similar now and takes $12.7 mil moving the bar again up, and locking in for 8 years all would be right with the World.

AAV and CH%? Crosby was better than Matthews when he signed too, should his AAV be under his?

Matthews at 8.6 million would be great. Please, quickly call Tre and tell him we can't sign him about Crosby's AAV because Crosby was better than Matthews when he signed.

This is a rant about nothing... CH% is all that matters.

 

[WTFMAN99]

So the cap will likely be 87.5 when his contract kicks in...

12.5 million is 14.3% of the cap.

0.3% less than his current hit.

His comparable is Panarin in your opinion?

MacKinnon's contract is 15.3%.

People just look at numbers and have no clue, start looking at cap hit % if you want to start thinking like the players/agents/management.

To be fair, If he wants a 15+% cap hit, he needs to sign for a 6-8 year term.

You can't get bent over that much by a player to the point he gets to keep a higher cap percentage and shorten his contract. He can then bend you over again on the next extension making even more money while the team doesn't get to benefit from the growing cap.

Eternal Leaf covered it but a lot of times, teams don't care about cap hit %, I think it was just Matthews, Marner and Nylander's agents.

A lot of times teams will say "Well no one is making more than X on this roster" - regardless of where the cap seemed to go or was trending.

 

[notbias]

Eternal Leaf covered it but a lot of times, teams don't care about cap hit %, I think it was just Matthews, Marner and Nylander's agents.

A lot of times teams will say "Well no one is making more than X on this roster" - regardless of where the cap seemed to go or was trending.

Can you show me examples of what you are saying? CH% is virtually all that matters.

I've already addressed the 8 vs 5 year argument. I want Matthews at a high CH% for his prime, not past it, 5 years sounds great to me.

Our former GM expected the cap to go up and we saw how that turned out and how the fanbase reacted and blamed him for a stagnant cap, now the same people want us to sign these same players to deals where they hope the cap goes up... it is kind of funny.

 

[Menzinger]

Eternal Leaf covered it but a lot of times, teams don't care about cap hit %, I think it was just Matthews, Marner and Nylander's agents.

A lot of times teams will say "Well no one is making more than X on this roster" - regardless of where the cap seemed to go or was trending.

Not sure I'd agree with that. If you look at contract comparables over a wider time period cap hit % tends to line up a lot closer than aav for players of a similar level.

Otherwise star players would still only be making 6-7 million like they did back in 2012

 

[Throw More Waffles]

According to who, because I’ve never stated McDavids deal doesn’t count. In fact, I’ve done nothing but repeatedly draw comparisons to it. I would say all deals count for something in drawing comparables but I would draw the line at saying player x has to take a discount from market value to meet the contract another player opted to take at a discount whenever brought forth. That’s a personal choice, and one you’d hope all players make to some extent, but end of the day they are not obligated to do so.



No I didn’t. The part about McDavid having taken less than his market value was just additional thoughts and in no way was it positioned as we should not compare against his actual deal because of it. I always compare to McDavids actual deal, and equivalent value based on signing year. The last bit was just an interesting note I added but it’s never formed any of my comparisons on the matter

I re-read your post I responded to and... yeah... fair enough.

I see that argument so many times from other posters here that I jumped to conclusions.

I think what irks me is that Eichel was merely a proven 25 goal/65 point player when he signed that contract. Let's face it... Players with those numbers at the time made closer to 7 mil than 10 mil. Buffalo has a history of difficulty keeping players and bet on Eichel and massively overpaid him at the time in order to lock him up for 8 years.

And the very second they handed out that overpayment, it became "well if Eichel got 10 then Matthews should get..." and I think that's a broken argument from the start.

 

[Sypher04]

I re-read your post I responded to and... yeah... fair enough.

I see that argument so many times from other posters here that I jumped to conclusions.

I think what irks me is that Eichel was merely a proven 25 goal/65 point player when he signed that contract. Let's face it... Players with those numbers at the time made closer to 7 mil than 10 mil. Buffalo has a history of difficulty keeping players and bet on Eichel and massively overpaid him at the time in order to lock him up for 8 years.

And the very second they handed out that overpayment, it became "well if Eichel got 10 then Matthews should get..." and I think that's a broken argument from the start.

I agree to a point, and I think if it was just Eichel alone we could have a possibly made that argument, but McDavid set a mark 2.5M higher than even that also before Matthews extended which lent more credence to the valuation Buffalo made with Eichel.

 

[Cypruss]

In my opinion, the smart move is to not sign prior to the season unless management gets the term and dollars they want.
If/when the next Covid lockdowns, mask, vax pass begin before Christmas of this year - the season would be again in jeopardy. Cap will stay flat for the next 4 years.
Giving a contract assuming that cap will rise 2-4m in each of the next three seasons will cripple teams. With the absolute uncertainty, I suggest letting that player take that risk and lose out on the sure contract.
People seem so confident the cap will start to escalate. If the past three years has taught anything - stay very mobile and able to pivot when the unexpected occurs.
Just my take.

 

[Mess]

Not sure I'd agree with that. If you look at contract comparables over a wider time period cap hit % tends to line up a lot closer than aav for players of a similar level.

Otherwise star players would still only be making 6-7 million like they did back in 2012

AAV = total contract amount divided by term in years and that AAV (is constant) and is used by a team as its applied directly against the salary Cap ceiling. A team seeks term because then it can aveage its costly UFA years over the cheaper RFA years and bring down the average annual cost AAV.

CH% = AAV / Salary Cap ceiling, where AAV is a component of CH%, but the flaw with using it in isolation as the contract driver is that it disregards term, and it disregrds player status RFA or UFA status.

If Matthews was signed at a AAV of $11.634 mil his CH% at 5 years term is identical to 8 years (even when 4 of those 5 years were cost controllable RFA years)

CH% is only accurate in year #1 at time of signing, and each year as the Salary Cap increases a players CH% goes down so the longer the term the lower the impact becomes over time.

Cap hit % by itself without player Status and Term and AAV (all 3 that impact contract cost and impact the team most).

A player can maximize his earnings by signing the shortest contract even to 1 year contracts is CH% is all that matters, and then apply that same CH% to each year.

Example Matthews contract when signed with $11.634 mil AAV was CH % of 14.64 but declines each season the salary goes up so that had he been signed to 8 years and the cap is up for $92 mil (2024-25) then his CH% (11.634 AAV / $92 mil ceiling) = new CH% of 12.65. However Matthews keeps wanting shorter contracts so he can get his CH% now against a higher Cap Ceiling and if wanted the same CH% 14.64 on $92 mil ceiling = $13.468 AAV.

That is where Matthews 3-4 year ask at $13.5 mil is coming from because he is trying to get by keeping asking for his similar 14.64 CH% because he is milking the system and it hurts the Leafs team with a constantly increasing AAV while he tries to keep his CH% static, because Leafs need to keep trying to absorb his higher AAV (less room for others).

 

[Gilmour1996]

How can anyone except Leaf staff determine what he's worth without accurate info about his health? Last thing we need is another LTIR candidate (or worse if he still plays hurt at low production or being absent from his linemates) like Joffrey Lupul for 8 years. Scary thought. Is there a team doctor in the HF house?

 

[keglu]

Most recent pace at time of signing
McDavid - 100
Matthews - 100
Eichel - 77

You are missing part(intentionally i assume) where McDavid 100 points won him Art Ross by 11 points margin in his second season while Matthews was pacing for outside Top 10 finish in his 3rd season (actually finished outside Top 20 in PPG)
Eichel was 14th in PPG in his season(his second season)

 

[Mess]

Can you show me examples of what you are saying? CH% is virtually all that matters.

I've already addressed the 8 vs 5 year argument. I want Matthews at a high CH% for his prime, not past it, 5 years sounds great to me.

Our former GM expected the cap to go up and we saw how that turned out and how the fanbase reacted and blamed him for a stagnant cap, now the same people want us to sign these same players to deals where they hope the cap goes up... it is kind of funny.

You have that all backwards.

All GMs and everyone wants the Salary Cap to go up, because a players CH% goes down with each passing year that occurs, and that his how the team benefits in a Salary Cap World. When a player has a high CH% and the salary cap is flat that hurts a team based on available cap space.

You must think a players Cap Hit% is static throughout and the same each year which is not true. Its only accurate in year #1 of actual time of signing and decreases each year as the Salary Cap ceiling increases because its a calulated nunber based on AAV/ Cap Ceiling Amount annually.

Ie. Matthews had an original 14.64 % CH back when his $11.634 mil AAV was applied against the cap ceiling in 2019-20.

As of this upcoming season with the Cap going up to $83,500,000 Matthews and all other Leafs CH% is going down. This benefits the team because now Matthews new CH% = 13.9 %.

So the longer the term ie 8 years the more the salary cap rises the lower the CH% becomes and more team cap space created.

If Matthews had been signed to an 8 year deal to cover his prime years then by year #7 the projected cap by 2025-26 season projected as $92 mil ceiling would make Matthews CH% only 12.645 % now.

Shorter term deals that allow the players to re-up more often in hopes of keeping their CH% has high as possible only helps the player and hurts the team with less cap space each time.

So of course now that the Leafs franchise got screwed by the 5 year Matthews contract, everyone would want the Cap to go up because Matthews new AAV and readjusted CH% uses up more individual cap space again, which again hurt the teams Cup competitiveness with less cap space for others.

Why in the world would and Leaf fan want to see Matthews CH% and AAV as high as possible as that directly impacts team competitiveness because it occupies more individual cap space and leaves less cap space for the remainder of the players?

PS. All clips taken directly from Capfriendly web site.

 

[notbias]

You have that all backwards.

All GMs and everyone wants the Salary Cap to go up, because a players CH% goes down with each passing year that occurs, and that his how the team benefits in a Salary Cap World. When a player has a high CH% and the salary cap is flat that hurts a team based on available cap space.

You must think a players Cap Hit% is static throughout and the same each year which is not true. Its only accurate in year #1 of actual time of signing and decreases each year as the Salary Cap ceiling increases because its a calulated nunber based on AAV/ Cap Ceiling Amount annually.

Ie. Matthews had an original 14.64 % CH back in when his $11.634 mil AAV was applied against the cap ceiling in 2019-20

View attachment 737543

As of this upcoming season with the Cap going up to $83,500,000 Matthews and all other Leafs CH% is going down. This benefits the team because now Matthews new CH% = 13.9 %.

View attachment 737547

So the longer the term ie 8 years the more the salary cap rises the lower the CH% becomes and more team cap space created.

If Matthews had been signed to an 8 year deal to cover his prime years then by year #7 the projected cap by 2025-26 season projected as $92 mil ceiling would make Matthews CH% only 12.645 % now.

View attachment 737548

Shorter term deals that allow the players to re-up more often in hopes of keeping their CH% has high as possible only helps the player and hurts the team with less cap space each time.

So of course now that the Leafs franchise got screwed by the 5 year Matthews contract, everyone would want the Cap to go up because Matthews new AAV and readjusted CH% uses up more individual cap space again, which again hurt the teams Cup competitiveness with less cap space for others.

PS. All clips taken directly from Capfriendly web site.

If Matthews' had signed an 8 year deal, his CH% would have been higher and you'd be complaining about that.

You are advocating for doing the same thing that Dubas gets scolded for, and that is banking on the cap to go up.

 

[IPS]

You are missing part(intentionally i assume) where McDavid 100 points won him Art Ross by 11 points margin in his second season while Matthews was pacing for outside Top 10 finish in his 3rd season (actually finished outside Top 20 in PPG)
Eichel was 14th in PPG in his season(his second season)

Assuredly intentional.

 

[joepeps]

I was talking about contracts.

Sypher said that because McDavid signed a team friendly contract, the actual number amount doesn't apply when determining Matthews contract.

Yet when a player like Eichel signs what was indisputably seen as a player friendly contract a the time, it's now the new benchmark for where leaf player contracts begin.

You get that? Player friendly contracts are the new benchmark for the leafs star players. And team friendly contracts "don't count" as comparables to leaf players. Such mental gymnastics need to be played to rationalize the leafs unprecedented dramatic overpayments.

Yup totally understand.

Its like every other player on every other team doesn't follow all this BS... its only Toronto and their Stars.

 

[Boxscore]

The other thing to consider is the McDavid Matthews contract comparison is it all depended on Matthews closing the gap between the two, building on:

-Leafs staying ahead of the Oilers (Oilers didn't even make the playoffs in 2018 and 2019).
-Maintaining a goal scoring advantage (goals vs points was always a differentiator).
-Hitting new PP production to match his 5 on 5 advantage to close the points gap.
-Building on the 2021-22 Hart, Rocket, Lindsay seasons.

2022-23 was a disaster for Matthews in every respect but contract discussions in terms of McDavid comparisons. That's a 68 point differential. To put that difference into context, Auston Matthews 85 points to Justin Holl's 18 points represents a smaller point differential. McDavid also broke Matthews single season best goal scoring totals. And yet we are still talking about the contract leap frog game.

100%.