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

[Mess]

So far Matthews has made 60 million.
13 x 5 = 65
14 x 5 = 70

So 70 + 60 = 130 million.
Only 1 contract left after that to make the difference to achieve 200 million NHL earnings.

If that’s the reported goal.
Crosby is currently the highest earner at 149 million.

If I'm Treliving I'm showing Matthews the Crosby contract no question.

Sidney Crosby is a loyalty to his team contract. Coming out of his 5 year bridge deal he signed for 12 years and 14.5 C.H.%

At those rates Crosby was able to deliver multiple Stanley Cups by being competitive at that CH%.

PS. Crosby is likely one of the top 10 players in NHL history or close to it,

 

[Nineteen67]

But unless he is lying. There is no choice
It has to go up. It’s the CBA



No he didn’t?
He scored his 55th in dallas

Or they’ll miss the revenue projection.

 

[Dekes For Days]

If I'm Treliving I'm showing Matthews the Crosby contract no question.

You mean the now illegal contract?

 

[Stephen]

Hmmm ok.

I listened to the DFO rundown, and seravalli was the one who said this.

So maybe he is mistaken? Or I misunderstood his interpretation. But he was very clear that based on what bettman said the cap would be 93 million in 2024

Those are his words almost verbatim. Feel free to listen

The cap increase is always just around the corner with Bettman. If they have $93 million cap earmarked for 2024, why not just loosen the cap a bit more than a million in the meantime to help player movement a little bit to improve the entertainment product?

 

[Sypher04]

It's not necessarily just the money though, I can live with a 13M AAV, but then he supposedly only wants 3-4 years? Can't have it both ways getting the highest AAV and also chincing on the term.

This has been explained here countless times already the last 4-5 days, but sure let’s do it again.

The most expensive years left of Matthews’ remaining career post this contact will be his 27-32 seasons. He is likely to decline thereafter. Shortening the term doesn’t have any positive impact on what his AAV should be. This idea that he cannot be the top paid player on a 4 year deal but can be on an 8 year makes no sense. Term into mid 30s should not increase the AAV.

Your logic only really works for 1st deals post ELC.

Beyond that other issues include:
- true or not, no one who isn’t speculating has indicated Matthews only wants 3-4 years
- no one who isn’t speculating has indicated Matthews seeks being top paid in the nhl, though this is logical assumption based on his league status
- 4-6 years is very arguably preferable to the team.

You mean the now illegal contract?

It’s hilarious to me that people think Crosby’s contract, which was:

- signed a decade ago
- effectively cap circumvention and now illegal
- a clear discount to get his number (8.7)

Is in any way comparable to what Matthews should be expected to do today

 

[Buds17]

If I'm Treliving I'm showing Matthews the Crosby contract no question.

Sidney Crosby is a loyalty to his team contract. Coming out of his 5 year bridge deal he signed for 12 years and 14.5 C.H.%

At those rates Crosby was able to deliver multiple Stanley Cups by being competitive at that CH%.

View attachment 716733

PS. Crosby is likely one of the top 10 players in NHL history or close to it,

I'd feel great about Matthews signing a 13.05M x 8 yr. contract.

 

[Mess]

The cap increase is always just around the corner with Bettman. If they have $93 million cap earmarked for 2024, why not just loosen the cap a bit more than a million in the meantime to help player movement a little bit to improve the entertainment product?

Its why we see GM not re-signing players a year early and waiting until you see what the actual salary cap is when signing big contracts.

Leafs could do that more freely with Auston if not for that NMC or the trade deadline of 2024 would be the real pressure point.

 

[Sypher04]

The cap increase is always just around the corner with Bettman. If they have $93 million cap earmarked for 2024, why not just loosen the cap a bit more than a million in the meantime to help player movement a little bit to improve the entertainment product?

Because it would increase escrow significantly and the players hate escrow

 

[Sypher04]

I'd feel great about Matthews signing a 13.05M x 8 yr. contract.

I’d be very happy with that too. I’d also be totally fine with the same number at 5 years

A mid term (5 or 6 years) favours the team and with the wrist injuries predominately an 8 year term should be favoured by the Matthew camp.

AAV is likely similar in either case

 

[Dekes For Days]

The cap increase is always just around the corner with Bettman.

Not really. The cap consistently rose for pretty much its entire existence until the cap froze due to the pandemic, and then its been artificially lowered to pay off the debt, which is what they said from the start.

It’s hilarious to me that people think Crosby’s contract, which was:

- signed a decade ago
- effectively cap circumvention and now illegal
- a clear discount to get his number (8.7)

Is in any way comparable to what Matthews should be expected to do today

Not to mention that it was signed in the middle of him experiencing a career threatening neck injury that limited him to just 22 games in his signing season, after missing half the prior one.

 

[Sypher04]

Not really. The cap consistently rose for pretty much its entire existence until the cap froze due to the pandemic, and then its been artificially lowered to pay off the debt, which is what they said from the start.

Not to mention that it was signed in the middle of him experiencing a career threatening neck injury that limited him to just 22 games in his signing season, after missing half the prior one.

Also true. I would say Crosby left at least 10%, maybe even 15%, on the table on AAV based on his only real comparable at the time

 

[Stephen]

This has been explained here countless times already the last 4-5 days, but sure let’s do it again.

The most expensive years left of Matthews’ remaining career post this contact will be his 27-32 seasons. He is likely to decline thereafter. Shortening the term doesn’t have any positive impact on what his AAV should be. This idea that he cannot be the top paid player on a 4 year deal but can be on an 8 year makes no sense. Term into mid 30s should not increase the AAV.

Your logic only really works for 1st deals post ELC.

Beyond that other issues include:
- true or not, no one who isn’t speculating has indicated Matthews only wants 3-4 years
- no one who isn’t speculating has indicated Matthews seeks being top paid in the nhl, though this is logical assumption based on his league status
- 4-6 years is very arguably preferable to the team.

I agree with this breakdown 100%.

The benefit of an 8x year deal post ELC contract with a star player like Matthews is you get a players' 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29 aged seasons in one one time package, which represents most of their prime and peak seasons assuming a guy starts declining around 32-33, leaving 2-3 years of prime hockey on the UFA market, which need to be bundled with declining years. That's the Tavares effect.

What we are looking at now with Matthews is 3x year ELC, 5x year second contract that takes us up to 8 years. Add 5x-6x years, this takes us right up to age 32-33 which is a perfect time for the team to re-assess. It doesn't actually benefit the team to go even higher AAV to secure even more term.

If we want to go into a retirement contract at that point, it can definitely be done. But there's a clean separation between the peak years and the mid 30s years. Those numbers can be worked out with more clarity on the cap.

 

[Dekes For Days]

For the record...
With post-ELC contracts, the general rule is the longer the term, the higher the AAV, because you're adding in the player's best years.
With UFA contracts, the general rule is the longer the term, the lower the AAV, because you're adding in the player's worst years.

 

[Legion34]

If I'm Treliving I'm showing Matthews the Crosby contract no question.

Sidney Crosby is a loyalty to his team contract. Coming out of his 5 year bridge deal he signed for 12 years and 14.5 C.H.%

At those rates Crosby was able to deliver multiple Stanley Cups by being competitive at that CH%.

View attachment 716733

PS. Crosby is likely one of the top 10 players in NHL history or close to it,

Crosby took 100 million in gauranteed money on an illegal deal when he just got back from 2 major neck/head issues and got a concussion in the playoffs.

His resurgence and health has been remarkable. But the idea that he was likely to keep playing is kinda silly.

He got a 9 year 95 million dollar deal with years on the end to avoid circumvention penalties.

He had a 17.5% salary in legal years

 

[Stephen]

Because it would increase escrow significantly and the players hate escrow

The entire accounting of the NHL is artificial. The fact that hockey fans who pay to watch hockey have to watch the sausage making of their whole financial system and turn on star players due to their AAV cap hits is dysfunctional to begin with.

 

[Sypher04]

The entire accounting of the NHL is artificial. The fact that hockey fans who pay to watch hockey have to watch the sausage making of their whole financial system and turn on star players due to their AAV cap hits is dysfunctional to begin with.

No disagreement there

 

[Stephen]

Not really. The cap consistently rose for pretty much its entire existence until the cap froze due to the pandemic, and then its been artificially lowered to pay off the debt, which is what they said from the start.

I meant since the pandemic... but if we want to quibble, someone should have realized the cap rising every year might have had something to do with the quantitative easing post 2008 and not a sign of infinite growth...

 

[Buds17]

I’d be very happy with that too. I’d also be totally fine with the same number at 5 years

A mid term (5 or 6 years) favours the team and with the wrist injuries predominately an 8 year term should be favoured by the Matthew camp.

AAV is likely similar in either case

Tough to be unhappy with the modern day equivalent of that Crosby contract.

Even though I believe a case can be made for the team being just as happy as Matthews would be with a max term contract, I can absolutely understand your viewpoint on that as well.

 

[hockeywiz542]

Kevin McGran: Leafs mailbag: Why a short-term contract for Auston Matthews is also a team-friendly one

In this Maple Leafs mailbag, readers ask about Brad Treliving’s cap space, Matt Murray’s future, post-season officiating and more.

www.thestar.com

One thing Maple Leafs fans should probably get their head around is the idea that Auston Matthews could — and probably should — re-sign with the team with a short-term contract.

It will sound to some like some sort of slap in the face, especially in a sport where teams lock up their core pieces on long-term deals.

Matthews is in a slightly different position than most other players because he’s largely irreplaceable and he can make himself an unrestricted free agent at just 25, a year from now.

A short-term deal for Matthews — say three years — would be a favour to the Leafs. The shorter the deal — at this stage of Matthews’ career — the lower the average annual value of the deal (a.k.a. cap hit).

Let’s say it’s three years, $39 million (U.S.). An AAV of $13 million makes him the highest-paid player in that category and gets him to free agency again when he’s just 28.

(Nathan MacKinnon will have the highest AAV next season at $12.6 million when his extension kicks in. He’ll be 28 in September.)

A $13 million AAV would represent about 16 per cent of an $83.5 million cap. Down the road, the salary cap will be close to $100 million and he’d still get 16 per cent, or $16 million. So he can sign for a lot more, and probably would be in the market for a seven- or eight-year deal then.

If you want him to sign a long-term deal now — with some of best years still ahead of him — the Leafs would have to buy those prime years of free agency from him. So his AAV would rise to, say, $14.5 million or $15 million on a six- or seven-year deal.

So for Matthews to take a short-term deal at a lower AAV is a team-friendly approach. And a three-year deal will make Matthews a Leaf for 11 seasons.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I meant since the pandemic... but if we want to quibble, someone should have realized the cap rising every year might have had something to do with the quantitative easing post 2008 and not a sign of infinite growth...

They've had this pandemic cap plan since basically the start of the pandemic. The cap would have continued to rise every year if it wasn't for the pandemic.

 

[Sypher04]

Tough to be unhappy with the modern day equivalent of that Crosby contract.

Even though I believe a case can be made for the team being just as happy as Matthews would be with a max term contract, I can absolutely understand your viewpoint on that as well.

I think the Leafs would be open and happy to ink him to either one, but theres some clear advantages going a bit shorter than max

Kevin McGran: Leafs mailbag: Why a short-term contract for Auston Matthews is also a team-friendly one

In this Maple Leafs mailbag, readers ask about Brad Treliving’s cap space, Matt Murray’s future, post-season officiating and more.

www.thestar.com

One thing Maple Leafs fans should probably get their head around is the idea that Auston Matthews could — and probably should — re-sign with the team with a short-term contract.

It will sound to some like some sort of slap in the face, especially in a sport where teams lock up their core pieces on long-term deals.

Matthews is in a slightly different position than most other players because he’s largely irreplaceable and he can make himself an unrestricted free agent at just 25, a year from now.

A short-term deal for Matthews — say three years — would be a favour to the Leafs. The shorter the deal — at this stage of Matthews’ career — the lower the average annual value of the deal (a.k.a. cap hit).

Let’s say it’s three years, $39 million (U.S.). An AAV of $13 million makes him the highest-paid player in that category and gets him to free agency again when he’s just 28.

(Nathan MacKinnon will have the highest AAV next season at $12.6 million when his extension kicks in. He’ll be 28 in September.)

A $13 million AAV would represent about 16 per cent of an $83.5 million cap. Down the road, the salary cap will be close to $100 million and he’d still get 16 per cent, or $16 million. So he can sign for a lot more, and probably would be in the market for a seven- or eight-year deal then.

If you want him to sign a long-term deal now — with some of best years still ahead of him — the Leafs would have to buy those prime years of free agency from him. So his AAV would rise to, say, $14.5 million or $15 million on a six- or seven-year deal.

So for Matthews to take a short-term deal at a lower AAV is a team-friendly approach. And a three-year deal will make Matthews a Leaf for 11 seasons.

Rather hilarious that this person writes for the Toronto Star and doesn’t understand contracts seemingly at all

 

[Martin Skoula]

I meant since the pandemic... but if we want to quibble, someone should have realized the cap rising every year might have had something to do with the quantitative easing post 2008 and not a sign of infinite growth...

It’s going to have to somewhat keep up with inflation at least even in a QT environment.

The biggest quantitative easing period in history was over the pandemic where the cap remained flat, it’s not necessarily a 1 to 1 correlation.

 

[keonsbitterness]

Thats why this team is so disjointed & lacks chemistry. The 3 or 4 Amigos make it all & the rest are like cannon fodder because the lack of cap to fill in the gaps properly. I'd blow it up & start anew.

There's no indication Shanahan/ownership has any interest in a rebuild. The only Leafs executive who publicly said they'd even consider trading a core piece just got fired.

Mackinnon signed for 15.2% of the cap after an 88 Pt season
You can’t use the year AFTER signing as the benchmark for the signing that’s silly'

If my math is right, 15.2% of the expected 23-24 cap is $12.7M.

 

[Boxscore]

If I'm Treliving I'm showing Matthews the Crosby contract no question.

Sidney Crosby is a loyalty to his team contract. Coming out of his 5 year bridge deal he signed for 12 years and 14.5 C.H.%

At those rates Crosby was able to deliver multiple Stanley Cups by being competitive at that CH%.

View attachment 716733

PS. Crosby is likely one of the top 10 players in NHL history or close to it,

Correct. Matthews doesn't deserve to be paid like Sid. Full stop.

 

[Stephen]

It’s going to have to somewhat keep up with inflation at least even in a QT environment.

The biggest quantitative easing period in history was over the pandemic where the cap remained flat, it’s not necessarily a 1 to 1 correlation.

Yeah, at the end of the day these larger economic trends are going to have an impact on the toy economy of the hockey world, so all I'm saying is you'd think the NHL would have an internal dialog at the sophistication level of internet chatter, retail investors and homebuyers out in the real world. Not "oh look, the cap goes up always, forever."