I think Matthews needs to give the Leafs a handshake agreement to say that he will sign on July 1. If he does not, as others have said, he holds all the power in the negotiations. It can be a Johnny Gaudreau/John Tavares situation where he walks away and the team gets nothing or the team gets screwed capwise by capitulating to his demands. If I were Trevling, I would actually set a deadline on June 27, just before this year's draft. That way, the Leafs would be able to get an additional draft pick as part of any package for Matthews.
News Article: Auston Matthews - August 1st., Contract Crickets
- Thread starter willmma
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
nuck
Schrodingers Cat
- Aug 18, 2005
- 11,656
- 2,693
I am not seeing the big ticket return. Byfield scored 3 goals this season so his upside is more than a bit iffy, plus Anderson is another lefty. I suspect they can do a lot better than that.
The only problem is that this isn't playoff scoring,
Matthews ranks 43 in pts/60 in the playoffs of active players and 19th in goals/60. This is the guy who deserves to be the most expensive player in the league? Basically he's a top 30 guy overall, come playoff time (the only important time in the league)
Heres Marner Mitch ranks 196th in goals/60 in the playoffs and 28th in pts/60.
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 82,535
- 61,031
Bomber0104
Registered User
Or LA just takes their chances that Matthews reaches UFA and they give up zero assets...
If I was them that's what I'd do considering they don't know Matthews just won't do the same thing to them as he is going to do to Toronto July 1st.
Jmo89
Registered User
- Mar 21, 2010
- 4,648
- 4,330
I said I don't know alot about those players. You're welcome to fill me in since you know more?
Matthews isn't the player I'd trade and I've already speculated he will get extended whether it's an overpayment or not.
Top talent almost never gets proper value. It's usually quantity for quality, which usually creates too many holes for the team giving quantity and results in a downgrade for the team giving up the quality.
ToneDog
56 years and counting. #FireTheShanaClan!
Maybe but Kyper and Colby Armstrong targeted L.A. Any trade including Byfield is a gamble that he turns into a #1C. If they don't think he can be a #1 or #2C, you might go for Velardi or move on to another team as you suggested. What you can't ignore is that Matty will choose where he wants to go or we won't get full value.
I'm guessing if we want him at 8 years he'd want the full $16.7 million max - Maybe he'd give us the a discount at 16.34 lol.
nuck
Schrodingers Cat
- Aug 18, 2005
- 11,656
- 2,693
I'm not sure about the bolded. I hope I might be wrong but I think Matthews agent wants to wait to the last possible minute before dropping the short term proposal. He doesn't want to give the club time to pursue and mull over offers. The Leafs either grab it desperately and overpay or they move into the walk year and basically risk getting into a bidding war (assuming he actually even wants to stay).
What Team 34 doesn't want is to let the club explore destinations where he might want to go to which would maximize the clubs return but he would lose the Leafs running up the bidding for his services. As a UFA he would get to go on a royal tour of the facilities around the league and get massaged by all the suitors. That's gets him the absolute maximum financial return, or at the very least helps him drive up the cost to his new landing spot of choice. Even if he would re-up in LA, SJ, or NY it costs him leverage over the new club if he were to admit that so I don't see him indicating a choice now. The win for him will be the short term deal at an AAV he wouldn't get for a long term commitment and he has financial security coming of an injury year where he might not fully bounce back.
If he gets dealt its not unreasonable that he might be dropping the same short term big dollar offer on the new club so he loses his next season UFA status but likely gains a crazy 3 year overpay, if the club was a place he would want to stay.. There is no scenario where the Leafs get "full value" with that pending NM.
You notice I am assuming the offer from Moldaver will be a stunner, because if not, why wait? Nothing is going to change between now and July 1 except the club would have more time to make a plan.
keonsbitterness
Registered User
ToneDog
56 years and counting. #FireTheShanaClan!
Problem is unless he is willing to sign with a club at what the club is willing to pay, nobody will give you a fair return. Tkachuk is a good example. Wanted out, was willing to sign with Florida at a number that was acceptable to Florida and Calgary got something back. If Matty says, yeah I'll go to LA for $15m, LA will tell the Leafs and Matty to GTFO.
Interestingly, when McDavid his deal, his AAV was 16.67% of the cap at that time -- it was 15.72% of the cap for the year it kicked in.
If Matthews signs for $13.5 AAV this summer, that would be 16.16% of the expected $83.5M cap (assuming no agreement with the NHLPA to bump it further) and assuming a 23-24 of $88M, it would 15.34% of cap for the year it kicks in.
If he signs for $13M AAV, those numbers drop to 15.56% of the 22-23 cap and 14.77% of the 23-24 cap.
McKinnon's $12.6M AAV puts him at 15.27% of the 22-23 cap and 15.09% of the 23-24 cap.
A $12.8M AAV for Matthews would put him at 15.33% of the 22-23 cap and 14.54% of the 23-24 cap..
Incidentally Matthews current $11,640,250 AAV was 14.64% of the 18-19 cap and 14.28% of the 19-20 cap.
If you assume Matthews is around the same tier of player as MacKinnon, then a $12.8 AAV sounds reasonable to me.
It's arguable that the 23-24 cap number could be higher than $88M and that the 23-24 number could be higher than $83.5, which change both percentages for Matthews and the 23-24 percentage for MacKinnon. That could make a $13-$13.5M deal for Matthews more reasonable to me.
Incidentally, I use the two percentages (cap when signed and cap when kicked in) because while CapFriendly uses the first, the second is really more meaningful.
If Matthews signs for $13.5 AAV this summer, that would be 16.16% of the expected $83.5M cap (assuming no agreement with the NHLPA to bump it further) and assuming a 23-24 of $88M, it would 15.34% of cap for the year it kicks in.
If he signs for $13M AAV, those numbers drop to 15.56% of the 22-23 cap and 14.77% of the 23-24 cap.
McKinnon's $12.6M AAV puts him at 15.27% of the 22-23 cap and 15.09% of the 23-24 cap.
A $12.8M AAV for Matthews would put him at 15.33% of the 22-23 cap and 14.54% of the 23-24 cap..
Incidentally Matthews current $11,640,250 AAV was 14.64% of the 18-19 cap and 14.28% of the 19-20 cap.
If you assume Matthews is around the same tier of player as MacKinnon, then a $12.8 AAV sounds reasonable to me.
It's arguable that the 23-24 cap number could be higher than $88M and that the 23-24 number could be higher than $83.5, which change both percentages for Matthews and the 23-24 percentage for MacKinnon. That could make a $13-$13.5M deal for Matthews more reasonable to me.
Incidentally, I use the two percentages (cap when signed and cap when kicked in) because while CapFriendly uses the first, the second is really more meaningful.
Last edited:
thewave
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2011
- 43,177
- 13,633
12.8m x 3 is good enough for me. We just need to retain the player and have some term.
Yes!
I don’t understand why the media doesn’t talk about this.
If he has a chronic wrist injury and what we saw this year is what he is, then he’s no longer a superstar.
A very good player,yes, hut not worth 12 mil.
nuck
Schrodingers Cat
- Aug 18, 2005
- 11,656
- 2,693
Thats not much term. A modified NT in the last year then so if he or the club are not getting anywhere they can get something back for their #1c and he can test drive a new organization of his choosing.
WTFMAN99
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2009
- 34,414
- 12,572
Pass, it's such an easy pass for me at that number and term.
Try to set the table for a McDavid arrival and liquidate the rest.
Menzinger
Kessel4LadyByng
Though there's no way if the media is going to know if it's chronic or not.
I don't see the term anywhere on this
The cold had fact is Matthews got an extremely high percentage of the cap and extremely favorable term when you take both into account
McDavid signed for 8 years, not 5 and McKinnon played under an extremely team friendly deal before this new deal kicked in
All your math only works if Matthews gets 8 years as well and I'm extremely sceptical that's going to be the case
If he wants McDavid or McKinnon money with a slight bump for cap inflation fair enough but if he wants that with a 3-5 year term he can go and get bent as far as I'm concerned
Fair enough. There's zero guarantee we have a guy like Matthews again for years though.
McDavid would be amazing but let's not get ahead of ourselves. Still pretty far out.
Martin Skoula
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 12,387
- 17,452
Why do you want his 33-35 years at a huge cap hit so badly? 3-5 years are going to be the only ones where he can actually provide 12+ mil worth of value if he’s healthy, everything beyond that is going to be the same as what Kane and Towes have been the last two years.
- Jan 22, 2007
- 14,719
- 7,854
For arguments sake, we can say Matthews and MacKinnon are similar, except come playoff time. The Leafs and Matthews should agree on a $12.75 x 6 deal and get it over with.
This will still make him the highest paid player in the NHL and it will set the tone for when Marner and Nylander are ready.
This is the type of commitment we need to see from Matthews -- proving he's not just a spoiled kid who doesn't have a Stanley Cup at the top of his priorities list.
Agreed 100%. The crazier part is he will likely want more money than McDavid and MacKinnon with less term. Even more absurd is that he didn't earn it -- he'd just be leveraging the Leafs because he can, which would tell us everything we need to know about him.
WillNy29
Registered User
- Jun 20, 2018
- 1,195
- 1,433
completely fair;
Byfield is a recent second overall pick and has tools but he doesn't seem to have the toolbox or be able to put it together; seems like LA fans want the Kings to move on from him.
the package doesn't move the needle for the leafs because they lose a superstar and don't get much back.
The only years we would have any financial flexibility is if the cap rises and he's getting a lower percentage of the cap so his early 30's on
We've seen Matthews getting massive money on medium term, we can't win like that
Doing the same **** and expecting a different result isn't great planning
I'd rather trade him than continue doing the same stupid crap year after year
- Status
