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

[Dough72]

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.

no need for petty insults especially when guy's logic is just fine. If he wants a 3 or 4 year contract like the poster said, the Leafs will be stuck giving him his 8 year until he is 37 or 38. If he signs it now they only pay until he is 34. Obviously the latter situation is better for the Leafs so logically that would mean bigger offer just like poster said

 

[Stephen]

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.

He's got the theory right in some ways but not the details.

Leafs should be motivated to buy up to his 32-33 aged seasons, which is about a 6 year deal. That's a conventional prime/peak age window.

That's a good amortization runway if the cap goes up again as the NHL promises over the next 2 years. Having to do the same song and dance over again doesn't make sense, since he'll still be in prime and then tied to a new % cap hit.

 

[Mess]

McDavid took 8 years @$12.5 mil = $100 mil total.
Breakdown 4 X RFA cost controllable years @ $10 mil per + 4 X UFA years at $15 mil (on average) = $100 / 8 years = $12.5 mil AAV

Matthews at 8 years @ $11.634 mil AAV = $93 mil total.
Breakdown: 4 X RFA cost controllable years @ $9 mil per + 4 X UFA years at $14.25 mil (on average) = $93 mil / 8 years = $11.634 mil AAV

Eichel took 8 years @ $10 mil AAV = $80 mil total.
Breakdown: 4 X RFA cost controllable years @ $8 mil per + 4 X UFA years @ $12 mil (on average) = $80 mil / 8 years = $10 mil AAV

Even a bind Trucker could have driven a Semi truck into the gap of those 2 contracts as comparables and come up with that.
Only Leafs GM Dubas the clueless could be convinced that Matthews >> McDavid and come up with this current Matthews contract.

Actual: Matthews at 5 years @ $11.634 = $58,195,000 mil total.
Breakdown: 4 X RFA cost controllable years @ $9 mil per + 1 X UFA year @ $22.195 mil = $58.195 mil / 5 years = $11.634 mil AAV
S/B based on above model (buying only 1 year of UFA status instead of 4).
Breakdown: 4 X RFA cost controllable years @ $9 mil per + 1 X UFA year @ $14.25 mil = $50.25 mil / 5 years = $10.05 mil AAV

This is how bad the current Matthews contract actually is, where Leafs should either have gotten 8 years at $11.634 mil or 5 years at $10.05 mil AAV.

If Matthews next contract was coming up from $10.05 mil AAV then going up to 8 years at ~$12.6 now would be completely in line with MacKinnon new deal.

Note: Matthews offered Leafs 3 years at $9 mil setting the price for his RFA years. (splitting the difference between McDavid at $10 mil and Eichel at $8 mil for RFA years).

 

[Stephen]

View attachment 716766

Hindsight being what it is, Matthews making $9 million over 3 years would have worked out well for the player and the team.

Would have taken a couple of million out of Marner's pocket, for a combined give or take $5 million in savings up till the end of 2022.

Could have survived the Marleau contract crisis and retained the Seth Jarvis pick and then added a credible defenseman, or kept Hyman.

The deal would have expired after the Hart Trophy season, so Matthews might be at $12+ million by now.

Probably would have had more success.

 

[Boxscore]

Hindsight being what it is, Matthews making $9 million over 3 years would have worked out well for the player and the team.

It would have. And the trickle down would have helped the Leafs overall. Plus, even with his next raise, I believe Matthews would have been more inclined to lock-in to a hefty $12 x 8 long-term after the 3 years were up. Now we're likely looking at $13.5 - $14 and x 5 again, plus larger increases for Marner and Nylander. That is a whole lot of scratch that could have been (and could still) be used to surround these kids with much better depth and complementary personalities.

Ultimately, it could be the difference between being the most memorable underachieving team in Leafs history or the most beloved team in Leafs history. In a cap world, that 5-7 mil of flexibility each year is crucial.

 

[Sypher04]

no need for petty insults especially when guy's logic is just fine. If he wants a 3 or 4 year contract like the poster said, the Leafs will be stuck giving him his 8 year until he is 37 or 38. If he signs it now they only pay until he is 34. Obviously the latter situation is better for the Leafs so logically that would mean bigger offer just like poster said

I didn’t insult anyone. All I did was express my disdain for the circular discussion this thread has been mired in for basically a week

And no, his logic doesn’t really work. If you’re fine paying him 13M for 8 years it’s nonsensical to have an issue with the same for 4 or 5 years when the value years are all front loaded.

The leafs aren’t forced to do anything at around 32 when a mid term deal comes up again. It’s great opportunity to re-evaluate where the franchise and the player are at and if you choose to give him a retirement contract at that point you do so understanding completely what you’ve signed up for and there’s no reason that final deal needs to be 8 years.

If people want to talk about preferring it to be 8 years fine, I can follow the thinking, I don’t even entirely disagree, but to suggest the AAV of 13 is acceptable at 8 years and not 3-5 doesn’t make sense based on the factors I’ve laid out.

That line in the sand being drawn doesn’t add up.

 

[Menzinger]

A 4-5 year extension really seems like the sweet spot. Gives the player the opportunity to sign again before his mid 30s.

Imo it's pointless to draw a red line on a capit for guy like him, make the strong pitch for a fair contracts that keeps the team competitive and hope for the best. Make adjustments down the lineup depending on what happens

 

[Mess]

Hindsight being what it is, Matthews making $9 million over 3 years would have worked out well for the player and the team.

Would have taken a couple of million out of Marner's pocket, for a combined give or take $5 million in savings up till the end of 2022.

Could have survived the Marleau contract crisis and retained the Seth Jarvis pick and then added a credible defenseman, or kept Hyman.

The deal would have expired after the Hart Trophy season, so Matthews might be at $12+ million by now.

Probably would have had more success.

Yup can't argue with any of that because we would have had so much more cap flexibility.

Also having Matthews and Marner on bridge deals of 3 years would allow them to EARN their current contracts.

Matthews @ approx $12 mil even if it were just for 5 years now would have gotten the Leafs the full 8 prime years coming out of the ELC of both players and also Matthews deal would be inline with MacKinnon new $12.6 year deal and be at market prices.

There would be NO NMC issues to deal with now, likely forcing manaements hands to double down on more overpriced contracts coming up.

Even with JT added at $11 mil + Matthews (3 years at $9 mil) + Marner (3 years @ $8 mil) + Nylander 6 years at $7 mil = $35 mil cap vs. $40.5 mil core 4 = +$5.5 per season extra cap space.

Leafs had all this young cheap talent coming out of their ELC contracts and jumped them right to their 3rd NHL deals and lost all those Cup competitiveness by too much cap on too few players (all forwards).

When Pittsburgh and LA and Chicago all won multiple Cups each just check where their stars were at $$$ either on their ELC or 2nd cheaper bridge deals and then got paid for winning.

 

[Mess]

A 4-5 year extension really seems like the sweet spot. Gives the player the opportunity to sign again before his mid 30s.

Imo it's pointless to draw a red line on a capit for guy like him, make the strong pitch for a fair contracts that keeps the team competitive and hope for the best. Make adjustments down the lineup depending on what happens

You would make a good player agent.

This is exactly the Matthews strategy that Jake Moldover Auston's agent is attempting to deploy against the Leafs to get his client maximum earning potential in his career by coming up to the re-sign window often and scoring big each time, while raising the market ceiling for others which the NHLPA would love also. It already worked once on Leafs last GM and now they're about to try it again on the next one.

Paying Matthews anything he wants with no red line might be great for HIM, but what about the Leafs team?

Each time he re-signs he increases his C.H% and his AAV and reduces the amount of cap space for others and as such lowers Cup competitiveness for the Leafs team in the process by eating up a bigger slice of the salary cap pie.. What is the good of having star players if financially it prevents the team from winning?

There is a direct correlation between Leafs having no red line and having 3 of the 7 highest AAV contracts and also Leafs as a franchise having the worst playoff record and least success due to those spending habits.

 

[JKG33]

Why do we even want him back?

He's chased money at every stage of his career. He's been a playoff disappointment at every stage of his career. I wouldn't even bring him back at his current cap hit. Let him go worry about money somewhere else.

 

[Menzinger]

You would make a good player agent.

This is exactly the Matthews strategy that Jake Moldover Auston's agent is attempting to deploy against the Leafs to get his client maximum earning potential in his career by coming up to the re-sign window often and scoring big each time, while raising the market ceiling for others which the NHLPA would love also. It already worked once on Leafs last GM and now they're about to try it again on the next one.

Paying Matthews anything he wants with no red line might be great for HIM, but what about the Leafs team?

Each time he re-signs he increases his C.H% and his AAV and reduces the amount of cap space for others and as such lowers Cup competitiveness for the Leafs team in the process by eating up a bigger slice of the salary cap pie.. What is the good of having star players if financially it prevents the team from winning?

There is a direct correlation between Leafs having no red line and having 3 of the 7 highest AAV contracts and also Leafs as a franchise having the worst playoff record and least success due to those spending habits.

How do you make the team more competitive by subtracting a centre at his level? Capspace doesn't score goals or win games either.

Like I mentioned, if it leads to other players on the team getting moved so the team can have a more balanced cap structure, so be it. Centres are a position that needs to be prioritized.

 

[Eternal Leaf]

I didn’t insult anyone. All I did was express my disdain for the circular discussion this thread has been mired in for basically a week

And no, his logic doesn’t really work. If you’re fine paying him 13M for 8 years it’s nonsensical to have an issue with the same for 4 or 5 years when the value years are all front loaded.

The leafs aren’t forced to do anything at around 32 when a mid term deal comes up again. It’s great opportunity to re-evaluate where the franchise and the player are at and if you choose to give him a retirement contract at that point you do so understanding completely what you’ve signed up for and there’s no reason that final deal needs to be 8 years.

If people want to talk about preferring it to be 8 years fine, I can follow the thinking, I don’t even entirely disagree, but to suggest the AAV of 13 is acceptable at 8 years and not 3-5 doesn’t make sense based on the factors I’ve laid out.

That line in the sand being drawn doesn’t add up.

The longer term is important if you wish to keep the player.

If by "reevaluate" you mean the Leafs 100% let him go then it's fine to have a shorter term. Otherwise, they will get wrecked by the shorter term and I will explain why.

13 x 3 = contract runs out at 30 (extension can be signed at 29)

13 x 4 = contract runs out at 31 (extension can be signed at 30)

13 x 5 = contract runs out at 32 (extension can be signed at 31)

13 x 8 = contract runs out 35 (extension can be signed at 34)

With the 3 or 4-year terms, Matthews has full leverage at the time he can sign an extension. He will still be in his prime and GMs panic in such situations as has been proven for generations. This means he will use that leverage to get an 8-year deal on a higher cap hit. It's almost guaranteed (assuming he matches his current stats) and that's what his agent will tell him. Otherwise, why would he even bother with a shorter term?

The 5-year term is a middle point and I don't think Matthews will sign it. He will be just out of his prime by that point and it doesn't make sense for him to do that. It also doesn't make sense for the Leafs cause he could have a dominant 31-year-old season, use that to sign at worst a similar cap hit for 8 years, and then drop by 20-30% as soon as the extension kicks in.

The 8-year term is good for the Leafs as they get all of his prime seasons without having to worry about another increase if they wish to re-sign him. Yes, it might hurt during the last two seasons but that's a much better risk to take than to get carved apart in the next negotiations.

The best deal for the Leafs is 7-8 years.

 

[Moonman]

If we sign Matthews long term, the organization is setting us up for long term pain. Well never win anything with him.

 

[Stephen]

How do you make the team more competitive by subtracting a centre at his level? Capspace doesn't score goals or win games either.

Like I mentioned, if it leads to other players on the team getting moved so the team can have a more balanced cap structure, so be it. Centres are a position that needs to be prioritized.

I am okay with paying Matthews the higher AAV in a post Tavares world, and they would need a serious rethink on whether they can run a Batman-Batman duo of Matthews and Marner.

The $22 million we pay Tavares and Marner should ideally be invested into 3x players making an average of $7 million.

 

[34]

If we sign Matthews long term, the organization is setting us up for long term pain. Well never win anything with him.

Really? He is the best player on the team.

 

[Stephen]

Why do we even want him back?

He's chased money at every stage of his career. He's been a playoff disappointment at every stage of his career. I wouldn't even bring him back at his current cap hit. Let him go worry about money somewhere else.

What would be your cut off number?

Matthews is less than $1 million raise away from setting the all time record for AAVs in the league, so safe to say the money is already locked in. If he wants $13 million, the delta on that dollar amount and what he makes now is Connor Timmins. So the astronomical AAVs being reported aren't considering the incremental raise is fairly small.

Put it another way, do we walk away from Matthews over a few hundred K and have a mandate trade when we still have two years of John Tavares on the team? By 2025, that guy could be making $11 million scoring in the low 60s. There's no way I'm blowing up the franchise out of some notion of fiscal conservativism when you have something like that on the books. After JT, we're free and clear.

 

[JKG33]

What would be your cut off number?

Matthews is less than $1 million raise away from setting the all time record for AAVs in the league, so safe to say the money is already locked in. If he wants $13 million, the delta on that dollar amount and what he makes now is Connor Timmins. So the astronomical AAVs being reported aren't considering the incremental raise is fairly small.

Put it another way, do we walk away from Matthews over a few hundred K and have a mandate trade when we still have two years of John Tavares on the team? By 2025, that guy could be making $11 million scoring in the low 60s. There's no way I'm blowing up the franchise out of some notion of fiscal conservativism when you have something like that on the books. After JT, we're free and clear.

Look at it this way. Are you winning a cup with Matthews as your teams best player? Cause he's about to be paid like the top player in the league, and he already has been for the past 5 years and failed to live up to it in the playoffs. Hell he wasn't even worth it this regular season.

We're finally at the point in this league where $10m players can win cups, either Eichel or Bob will. But those two players are also the Conn Smythe favorites. Do you see a future where Matthews can win the Conn Smythe? If you do, pay him. But I sure don't. He's done nothing to indicate that thus far.

I'm moving him and re-doing how this team is built

 

[Stephen]

Look at it this way. Are you winning a cup with Matthews as your teams best player? Cause he's about to be paid like the top player in the league, and he already has been for the past 5 years and failed to live up to it in the playoffs. Hell he wasn't even worth it this regular season.

We're finally at the point in this league where $10m players can win cups, either Eichel or Bob will. But those two players are also the Conn Smythe favorites. Do you see a future where Matthews can win the Conn Smythe? If you do, pay him. But I sure don't. He's done nothing to indicate that thus far.

I'm moving him and re-doing how this team is built

I'll put in another way for you. Are we closer to winning a cup without Matthews while we still have unmovable Tavares on the books until 2025? Or are you only targeting Matthews because there's the possibility of movement?

I think it's the latter and that's a horrible piece of business. Matthews will still be a prime age player after 2025.

If you're resetting the franchise and getting rid of Tavares, Marner and Nylander as well, that's just a different animal and takes us completely out of the cup conversation for a number of years anyway.

 

[Menzinger]

The best free agency centre to sign with any team in the cap era was Tavares - who is now considered by many to be overpaid/worst contract on the team, ect.

Keep that in mind when thinking about a post -Matthews Leafs

 

[ACC1224]

It goes to character

Yours or his?
Looks like your making a lot of judgements of his character with very little info.

 

[MCR74]

Really? He is the best player on the team.

Where was he in the second round?

 

[pcruz]

Matthews was runner up for the Hart and Lindsay trophy two years in a row and scored 60 goals in 73 games, stretch of 51 goals in 50 games all while being a well above average defensive center. In the real world that counts for something and he's going to be getting anywhere between 13 and 14.5 million. 13 would be nice but I still think he signs for 14 million whether we like it or not.

Matthews has not been above average defensively.

If he were given pk minutes, he would consistently be top 5 Selke the last 3 seasons based on his takeaways, blocked shots and overwhelming advanced stats for shot suppression.

Whether people like it or not, a player who is as strong defensively and can score 60 goals comes along once in a few decades.

Doug Gilmour immediately comes to mind with a Selke and 128 point season.

The closest 2 way players in the league are Barkov, Kopitar and Stone. None of them have the same offensive ability of Matthews, not even close.


Would it be good to sign him to 8 years and 13 million? Yes.

Is it likely to happen?
No.

Same as Draisaitl and McDavid won't sign for under 13 either...

And Matthews has been a better player than Draisaitl, without relying on McDavid to get him 30 power play goals a season.

 

[authentic]

Matthews has not been above average defensively.

If he were given pk minutes, he would consistently be top 5 Selke the last 3 seasons based on his takeaways, blocked shots and overwhelming advanced stats for shot suppression.

Whether people like it or not, a player who is as strong defensively and can score 60 goals comes along once in a few decades.

Doug Gilmour immediately comes to mind with a Selke and 128 point season.

The closest 2 way players in the league are Barkov, Kopitar and Stone. None of them have the same offensive ability of Matthews, not even close.


Would it be good to sign him to 8 years and 13 million? Yes.

Is it likely to happen?
No.

Same as Draisaitl and McDavid won't sign for under 13 either...

And Matthews has been a better player than Draisaitl, without relying on McDavid to get him 30 power play goals a season.

I agree with you that's why I said "well" above average. This just adds to the lunacy of wanting him off the team, no other player within his realm of offensive talent has anywhere close to his defensive prowess

Where was he in the second round?

Hurt. Had a point in 12 straight playoff games until he got hit in the hand with a flying puck in game 3 and went scoreless after that. Funny how that works.

 

[Dekes For Days]

McDavid took 8 years @$12.5 mil = $100 mil total.
Breakdown 4 X RFA cost controllable years @ $10 mil per + 4 X UFA years at $15 mil (on average) = $100 / 8 years = $12.5 mil AAV

Matthews at 8 years @ $11.634 mil AAV = $93 mil total.
Breakdown: 4 X RFA cost controllable years @ $9 mil per + 4 X UFA years at $14.25 mil (on average) = $93 mil / 8 years = $11.634 mil AAV

Eichel took 8 years @ $10 mil AAV = $80 mil total.
Breakdown: 4 X RFA cost controllable years @ $8 mil per + 4 X UFA years @ $12 mil (on average) = $80 mil / 8 years = $10 mil AAV

Even a bind Trucker could have driven a Semi truck into the gap of those 2 contracts as comparables and come up with that.
Only Leafs GM Dubas the clueless could be convinced that Matthews >> McDavid and come up with this current Matthews contract.

That trucker would know that's not how contracts are formed. That there isn't one static RFA and UFA value, especially with such a massive discrepancy. That you pulled those arbitrary numbers out of nowhere. That those players signed at different times, raw numbers aren't appropriate, and cap percentages should be used.
That trucker would also know that the contract Matthews has doesn't suggest that he's >> McDavid at all, but it does correctly acknowledge that both Matthews and McDavid were on an entirely different planet of quality from Eichel.
Matthews' current contract is consistent with the history of post-ELC contracts.

 

[Kiwi]

Here's the thing people

Matthews seems to be looking to maximize the amount of money he's going to make over his career

So I think we can predict he's going to want something short now then another long contract afterwards with another high AAV

I see a ton of people on here saying give him the short deal then let him go and don't sign him to the long deal

What has this team done since Matthews has been here that suggests they won't do exactly what he wants even if it's to the teams detriment? We haven't done anything to suggest we can make a cold calculated decision when it comes to any of our top end players

This is all wonderful in theory but until management can show some willingness to behave in a more business like manner I've got a really bad feeling about how this ends for the team