Salary Cap: Do you trust Kyle Dubas with salary negotiations? Deux

[4thline]

I see people are still latched onto the idea that the McDavid was anywhere near market value.

 

[Bomber0104]

I see people are still latched onto the idea that the McDavid was anywhere near market value.

Then I guess Crosby and Ovechkin were underpaid when they signed their deals too?

Everyone except Matthews lol

 

[Diamond Joe Quimby]

More angst in this thread than Hamlet.

 

[4thline]

Then I guess Crosby and Ovechkin were underpaid when they signed their deals too?

Everyone except Matthews lol

Nope, pretty much just McDavid. He gifted the Oilers 3 years. Any argument that says Matthews is overpaid that is based on comparing his 5 year term to McDavid's 8 makes a far stronger case that McDavid's 8 year term is underpaid relative to the precedents available at the time he was signed.

Matthews is worse than Crosby, he signed for 2.7% less cap (15.6% relative ) than him on the same term.
McDavid is equal to Crosby, he signed for .6% cap less (3.4% relative ) than him, and gave up 3 extra years.

If you use the standard wavey uses to normalize Matthews to 8 years to take Crosby to 8 years (add 1% per year):
McDavid is equal to Crosby, he signed for 3.6% less cap (17.7% relative) to what Crosby should have gotten for 8 years

Which comparison seems more out of wack?

 

[4thline]

More angst in this thread than Hamlet.

That's not the word I'd use

 

[RLF]

I see people are still latched onto the idea that the McDavid was anywhere near market value.

I get what you are saying.
How come when other teams get guys on lower than "market value"(which is speculation of what that is) it means you can't compare though? How come it is only comparable if you find someone else who got paid the max or projected "market value"? Why aren't ALL contracts considered? That team did something right to get him at that price. Since all contracts are negotiated and there is no set value on every player, why are only some results fair to use? I think what is making some mad is more...why can EDM, BOS, NASH, TBAY etc seem to get players to sign less than the max or "market value" and we couldn't?

 

[Bomber0104]

^ Pretty much.

Giving Matthews brutal contract a pass because a rival team negotiated better against the best player in the game and/or has a more selfless player doesn't make this one better.

It just means our management negotiated poorly in comparison or are dealing with a player that is completely self-interested in milking every last dollar out of us.

Which is worse I'm not sure..

 

[4thline]

I get what you are saying.
How come when other teams get guys on lower than "market value"(which is speculation of what that is) it means you can't compare though? How come it is only comparable if you find someone else who got paid the max or projected "market value"? Why aren't ALL contracts considered? That team did something right to get him at that price. Since all contracts are negotiated and there is no set value on every player, why are only some results fair to use? I think what is making some mad is more...why can EDM, BOS, NASH, TBAY etc seem to get players to sign less than the max or "market value" and we couldn't?

Comes down to player willingness, salesmanship by gm, and external factors.

Don't get me wrong. This contract is in no way a win. It's a par a best. Between it and Nylander I'd give Dubas a B- at executing market value deals, and a D on persuasiveness. He got fairish deals. Considering the leverage our guys seemed willing to use to get there money that's a fine result. But it's still frustrating that he couldn't get the buy in to create real wins.

 

[4thline]

Giving Matthews brutal contract a pass because a rival team negotiated better against the best player in the game doesn't make this one better.

Lol they did not negotiate better. If McDavid refused to sign for anything less than 14x8 he'd be making 14x8 right now. If he decided 12.5 only bought 5 years then that's what would have been signed. He and his agent's knew his worth and decided to take less.

 

[RLF]

Comes down to player willingness, salesmanship by gm, and external factors.

Don't get me wrong. This contract is in no way a win. It's a par a best. Between it and Nylander I'd give Dubas a B- at executing market value deals, and a D on persuasiveness. He got fairish deals. Considering the leverage our guys seemed willing to use to get there money that's a fine result. But it's still frustrating that he couldn't get the buy in to create real wins.

And that may cost us a good player like Kap or Johnsson or ... I think this is the real frustration of many. I would say they are both overpayments. Not Milan Lucic bad overpayment or anything like that, but you would think he could get closer to a good "Leafs" deal on at least one of the two. Instead it is a good deal for both Matthews and Nylander.

 

[RLF]

Lol they did not negotiate better. If McDavid refused to sign for anything less than 14x8 he'd be making 14x8 right now. If he decided 12.5 only bought 5 years then that's what would have been signed. He and his agent's knew his worth and decided to take less.

Man, I was with you in our convo until this. They still had to negotiate to a deal and EDM brass had to sell him on how to make it happen. That is part of negotiations. So yea, they did a better job of working with McDavid to take less in the interest of the team.

 

[4thline]

And that may cost us a good player like Kap or Johnsson or ... I think this is the real frustration of many. I would say they are both overpayments. Not Milan Lucic bad overpayment or anything like that, but you would think he could get closer to a good "Leafs" deal on at least one of the two. Instead it is a good deal for both Matthews and Nylander.

.5 too high for Willy, 1-1.4 to high for Matthews.
1.5-1.9 total overpayment, on two top liners (one who is top 5ish by position)

Looking through the lineup is see a lot of places where 1.5-1.9 million was spent less efficiently.

Like I said. By no means a win, and that sucks. But also nowhere near the market re-defining hugely anomalous loss people are spouting

 

[FraumBallard]

Basing contracts off playoffs is how you end up paying guys like Seabrook 6 million a year.

Team accomplishments shouldn’t determine the value of individual contracts

Yeah.
Team accomplishment is really the only thing that matters.

 

[Dale Gribble]

Not yet for my liking. People keep insisting the team does not need some sandpaper but I think we need at least one more gritty player. In worst case I would like them to add McQuaid. He gives you depth and could push/replace Hainsey and Z.

Yeah, I'm pretty much in the same boat. We need some sandpaper on the team as a whole, as I don't think the Leafs are too difficult to beat - they're not going to grind out a lot of wins so to speak. Defensively we still need some help too; I'd love to see Pesce brought in, but that would depend on the cost. Zaitsev and Hainsey being replaced/pushed would be a positive for the team - Hainsey's a good player to have, but not at the minutes Babcock is pushing on him - Zaitsev had a decent rookie season, but it looks like he gets lost and nervous out there at times; kind of like a crappier version of Gardiner.

 

[RLF]

.5 too high for Willy, 1-1.4 to high for Matthews.
1.5-1.9 total overpayment, on two top liners (one who is top 5ish by position)

Looking through the lineup is see a lot of places where 1.5-1.9 million was spent less efficiently.

Like I said. By no means a win, and that sucks. But also nowhere near the market re-defining hugely anomalous loss people are spouting

I'm with you on values. I had Willy $500-$750 over about the same as you for Matthews. The issue is those overpayments come at a time when we are heading into a cap crunch. We haven't won anything yet and we may lose a good asset for the cap already. Not good to have to do this before you win.

 

[FraumBallard]

Have you seen the newest TV commercial portraying a young JT about 5-6 years old sitting on his couch with his father in TO cheering on the Leafs, watching Dougie Gilmour's famous behind the net playoff wraparound goal on Cujo, with the caption "making lifelong dreams come true"?

Goes nicely with the JT posting pictures of himself as a young boy on twitter after signing, in his Leafs PJs and Leaf bedspread captioned.. "When dreams come true".

Santa Claus could have been the Leafs GM and Johnny would have come home. Making him the highest paid UFA in a NHL history in a Cap World not something that needed specialty GM skills.

The credit of luring JT should be limited to setting the table of a future potential Cup team to join and that was done mainly through previous drafts.

Hard to argue this.
Completely agree.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

No
A mil extra for the 3 amigos I know it is chump change for Leafs but it does affect the freakin CAP
But I get it you are representing mega multi-millionaires in ownership and Shanny and Babs

 

[Dale Gribble]

So if Dubas could have got Tavares for say $9-9.5 million AAV, Nylander for $5.5- 6 million AAV, Matthews for $10 AAV, and Marner for say $8 million AAV, would that be considered a big win for him ?

 

[Raym11]

Management has been embarassing around the trio signings to begin with, from Shanahan begging players to the media to take discounts, to getting fleeced by the Matthews camp, and the lil ol' Nylander saga.

Matthews didnt deserve more than Tavares(even on his "discount") and leaves a lot to be desired in his play the last 2 years, even with his goal totals. Coming from a guy who would have paid him 13m at the beginning of the year when he looked like he had "it" back.


I know it's the early stages of what looks like a massive salary hike for the entirety of NHL players, but it's pretty rough and for as little talking as our front office does, it feels like sometimes they talk too much.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

Yes it would. But it is not for him. It is for the team. It is very hard to represent rich people when you are the poor guy with rich people both above and below you. If it was me I would have used that card a lot harder. But maybe he was told to get them done.

 

[RLF]

So if Dubas could have got Tavares for say $9-9.5 million AAV, Nylander for $5.5- 6 million AAV, Matthews for $10 AAV, and Marner for say $8 million AAV, would that be considered a big win for him ?

I feel like there is a trap coming here, but what the heck.lol
If you are using the same term for each deal and Marner at 6-7 years...I would think most would call that a win on all deals.

 

[ImpartialNHLfan]

I don't think anyone figured it went like that. I think for some it feels like the worst case based on term. Same with Nylander. I think if Matthews wanted 8X$12M, most would be ok with that. The 5 year term seemed more like a $10-$10.5 deal as a fair deal. Especially when you consider only 1 year of UFA and a NMC clause that year. It seems when talking comparable, he got everything you would expect on a 7 year deal. He got huge bonuses paid out heavy front ended, a NMC in his final year and the shortest term you could think of if he was getting 10M+.

Add this to Nylander getting max money as well with all considered. Let's remember with Nylander you are only really getting about 5 1/2 years of service for the money when you take all into account. It does seem like Dubas is giving out max deals and hasn't won a negotiation yet. As I have said before, unless he is sure the cap is jumping drastically after next season, then it should be fine. If not, he needs to hit a homerun or two team side as well. So far, the players are winning.

But even if the bolded is true, wouldn't you think that's even more reason to lock them up for 8 years?

 

[57 Years No Cup]

No.

Dubas is someone who can be overly optimistic about his players, especially those he had a role in drafting/developing.

This is a dangerous quality to have when the players you're managing are grown men with big egos, demanding 8-figure salary amounts.

Someone praised Dubas' ability to negotiate from a starting point of 14*8 contract by shortening the duration. I think his agent smelled blood in the water.

Matthews who hasn't cracked the 70 point mark, is an RFA, played some ok/uninspired playoff hockey-- but has the chutzpah to start his negotiation at an amount that would make him the highest paid player in the NHL . He ended up signing a contract that made him the second highest cap hit after Mcdavid. Why? Dubas.

Some have compared this contract with Malkin's back in 2008.

Malkin got his big contract after he had already gotten the Pens to the Stanley cup finals, scored 106 points in a season, and was a nominee for the Hart. In other words, Malkin was more of a sure thing. Malkin was paid to continue past production whereas Matthews' salary is based on his potential to produce like Malkin.

Great post. Especially the first paragraph.

 

[RLF]

But even if the bolded is true, wouldn't you think that's even more reason to lock them up for 8 years?

Not if the 8 year numbers were much higher. That would kill us even more next year.

 

[Dale Gribble]

I feel like there is a trap coming here, but what the heck.lol
If you are using the same term for each deal and Marner at 6-7 years...I would think most would call that a win on all deals.

I'm just trying to figure out what would actually be good value for some. Personally I think Tavares is overpaid, maybe not today for some, but in 2-3 years when he slows down big time (not the greatest skater to begin with) that deal is going to look horrendous. Matthews I would have put at around $10.034/10.534 million AAV, but the second Tavares got $11 million AAV, I knew Matthews wouldn't except less. Marner probably could have been had for $9 million, and now I doubt he get under $10 million... Why should Marner be the only one who "sacrifices" ?