GDT: Free agency madness, brought to you by the letter G - PART 2

[bicboi64]

What's the sample size, though? A year and a half? Playing against 2nd best competition after Kaprizov's line takes the harder pairing and matchups?

Before this season, Fiala's highest point total was 54 points (yes I am aware he paced for about 65-70), while never hitting 30 goals before.

DeBrincat on the other hand? 2 years younger and already hit 40 once while on pace for a whooping 50 last year.

Yes, one played with Kane, but AD was a phenom in CHL too and everywhere he played; guy is much more of a safer bet to continue to succeed anywhere he goes.

I'm not saying Fiala is better than DeBrincat, but he has always produced at a top 6 ppg, and scored 85 points playing next to Gaudreau and Boldy, neither of whom are as good as Fiala. Fiala carried that line hard.

I love the idea of DeBrincat scoring 50g on Stu's wing, but if i'm being honest, I'd rather Fiala at the contract he has with LA over the notion of paying DeBrincat $9 million (just a number i'm throwing out there because that's his salary this year). Really hope DeBrincat doesn't ask for more than $8 millino long term

We can only have so many guys making $8 million+ and if DeBrincat gets $9 million for what'd be about 10-15 more goals more than Fiala, it'd hinder our ability to address other holes in the line up.

 

[TheNewEra]

Jacob Chychrun
Travis Boyd

In exchange for;

‘23 1st
‘25 1st (top 3 protected)
‘24 2nd (Ottawa)
Roby Jarventie
Levi Merleinen
Nikita Zaitsev

I think if we drop the protection on ‘23 and severely reduce it on ‘25 we can keep Kleven, Sogaard, Grieg and Pinto. Risk vs. Reward

It’s essentially 2 trades. Chychrun for two 1sts and Jarventie and Boyd for Zaitsev, Merleinen and a 2nd

Thats a hell of a price to pay for boyd

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Jacob Chychrun
Travis Boyd

In exchange for;

‘23 1st
‘25 1st (top 3 protected)
‘24 2nd (Ottawa)
Roby Jarventie
Levi Merleinen
Nikita Zaitsev

I think if we drop the protection on ‘23 and severely reduce it on ‘25 we can keep Kleven, Sogaard, Grieg and Pinto. Risk vs. Reward

It’s essentially 2 trades. Chychrun for two 1sts and Jarventie and Boyd for Zaitsev, Merleinen and a 2nd

Way too much.

If what they say in the trade forum is true, and Chychrun demanded a trade out, then his value should be lower.

 

[SlapJack]

Indeed, but among the last 3 years, you counted for DeBrincat's lowest career total at 22 years old. Your point still stands that Fiala broke out a little while ago, but still at not a big enough sample size I feel comfortable locking him up longterm as "the saviour" on the wing position for Stutzle vs a legitimate proven 3* time 40 goal scorer at only 24.

Last 2 years: DeBrincat (24 years old) 73 goals 134 points in 134 games.
Fiala (26 years old): 53 goals 125 points in 132 games.

One played with Kane. One played with lesser talent. One was on bottom feeder, the other a contender.

With age, history, and even past 2 seasons, very hard to not consider DeBrincat a the easy better player between the two.

I'd still take Debrincat but it's not an easy choice and there's only a year age difference

 

[Do Make Say Think]

For Stuetzle to get $8+ million, he needs to perform better than guys like;
-Norris, 8 year $7.9 million aav, (beating 35 goals isn't easy, but maybe overall points will be in Stu's favour)
-Jack Hughes, 8 year $8 million aav deal after a break out season at 1.14ppg pace
-Suzuki 8 year $7.8 million who is better defensively, but can still point up decent numbers against top pairing defenders

Timmy is going to be better than all three of them. Everybody knows it.

He needs to actually do it though.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Fiala broke out 3 years ago when he had 54 points in 64 games. Had 40 points in 50 games 2 years ago and then 85 points in 82 games last year.

That's 179 points in 196 games, which is an average of 75 points over a full 82 game season.

As a comparison DeBrincat over the last 3 years had the same amount of points (179) in more games (204).

One can make the argument that DeBrincat's higher goal totals make him the better player, but I think that's more than off-set by the vastly superior linemates DeBrincat has played with. He's been playing with one of the best playmakers in the league the last 3 years and Fiala has not.

The fact that Fiala was able to produce 85 points playing with Frederick Gaudreau and a rookie Matthew Boldy, mostly at even strength, is astounding.

There's not much to suggest DeBrincat is the superior player, let alone worth far more than Fiala.

Did we give up “far more” than Kings gave up?

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Thats a hell of a price to pay for boyd

It’s getting rid of Zaitsev thats taking that price.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Did we give up “far more” than Kings gave up?

No, we gave up about the same in value.

The "far more" refers to his comment about being willing to pay DeBrincat 9M "easy" while not being willing to pay Fiala's 7.85M salary.

 

[JD1]

My guess is that the plan changed when Eugene died and when Brady & Thomas complained about not wanting to wait for the team to get better.

I think the plan could be more short term in nature.

My theory is also that if the current owners can improve fan attendance, hence top line revenue numbers, that would improve the sell price. I'm guessing there's quite a lot of debt, so improving attendance and (top line) revenue numbers is easier and faster than reducing debt.

I think there was always a plan and it was delayed because of covid. We need the gate revenue and obviously weren't getting it. We might have seen better quality acquusitions

Regardless, here we are. I will say that I think we got a little lucky in so far as it looks like things are going to return to normal and DeBrincat and Giroux were available. If the pandemic was dragging on with on and off lockdowns and mask mandates, I doubt we'd have been in a position to have the off season we have had

 

[JD1]

Hughes signed Nov 2021 subsequent to a 31pts in 56 game season (0.55 ppg) before a breakout in 2021-2022 where he went 56 pts in 49 games.

Adjusted for cap increases and projections, Stutzle should easily command 8 x 8 with a rookie season of 29pts in 53 games (0.55 ppg) and then surpassed that with a 0.73 ppg pace his sophomore year whiech eclipses what Hischier had achieved by the time he signed.

If Stutzle goes ppg this season he'll likely be asking at Marner (94 pts in 82 games), Tkachuk (104 in 82 games), Point (48 pts in 56 games), and Rantanen (87 pts in 54 games) for appropriate comparables at 9.5M.

Only way I see less than 9M happening (regardless of production between 0.7-1.0 ppg) is if it's a short-mid term deal like Aho's 8.5M x 5 years which was 10.4% of the salary cap after he scored 83pts in 82 games. Otherwise, we'd have to go the Hischier route and extend him before American thanksgiving at maybe 8.5M x 8.

You can try and poke a hole in any of those contracts handed out (Marner overpaid, Tkachuk contract dispute, Point more track record, Rantanen 1.5PPG) to justify why you'd think Stutzle won't get more than 9M without ppg production but that's not what recent and past signing show.

Laine 8.7M x short term for ppg, likely ~9.5-10.5 if it were 8 years (like Eichel). Kaprizov 9M x short term for 1.33 ppg, likely 10.5-11.5M if it were 8 years (Eichel after 5 years inflation, or 13.33% of salary cap).

Petersson got that 7.3M x 3 years contract after 153 pts in 165 games (0.93 ppg) through his ELC for 9% of total salary cap. Stutzle so far has 87 pts in 132 games (0.66 ppg). If he scores at a 70 pt pace, which is probably conservative, that gives him 157 pts in 214 games (0.83 ppg) through his ELC. At 8% total salary cap in case he doesn't produce as well, he would be due 6.7M x 3 years. Add 0.5M AAV per year of contract length, and that's 9.2M x 8 years if Stutzle has an average year.

And we know no one on this board except me wants to sign Stutzle to a short bridge even at that paltry AAV because of cases like Mark Stone or Matt Tkachuk.

I'm not going to dispute your comparables and contract math. I get what you're saying.

But here's what I think is a definite possibility. Stu is the tail end of the core. The youngster. And by all accounts that young core is very tight. I hope he signs for a few bucks less just to get in line with the core. He lived with Tkachuk and Norris. They're the elder statesmen. I don't get the sense he's the type to upset the apple cart. I think there's a chance he signs long term for an aav that is less than what he otherwise warrants.

All those guys you listed were all the first stars coming off ELCs. They got big bucks and they're the shiny bulbs.

I think Stu will slide in line with our core financially. I hope so.

 

[DJB]

No, we gave up about the same in value.

The "far more" refers to his comment about being willing to pay DeBrincat 9M "easy" while not being willing to pay Fiala's 7.85M salary.

Push aside the future DeBrincat negotiations and contract etc.

What is your straight up opinion on what Dorion paid to acquire him. I just want to know what you think of the price we paid to get him. That’s it

 

[bert]

Indeed, but among the last 3 years, you counted for DeBrincat's lowest career total at 22 years old. Your point still stands that Fiala broke out a little while ago, but still at not a big enough sample size I feel comfortable locking him up longterm as "the saviour" on the wing position for Stutzle vs a legitimate proven 3* time 40 goal scorer at only 24.

Last 2 years: DeBrincat (24 years old) 73 goals 134 points in 134 games.
Fiala (26 years old): 53 goals 125 points in 132 games.

One played with Kane. One played with lesser talent. One was on bottom feeder, the other a contender.

With age, history, and even past 2 seasons, very hard to not consider DeBrincat a the easy better player between the two.

Debrincat is definitely the player I prefer. Plays way harder both ways and scores goals in dirty areas. Fiala doesnt score greasy ones, doesnt like the middle of the ice as much. He is a way better fit with Stutzle too. Lefty Righty and doesn't need the puck to be effective.

I'd still take Debrincat but it's not an easy choice and there's only a year age difference

It's an easy choice for me. Fiala had easier matchups too. Lastly Fiala wouldn't sign an extension here so it doesn't matter. The sens got Debrincat who has scored more and is younger and currently makes less.

 

[playasRus]

I'm not going to dispute your comparables and contract math. I get what you're saying.

But here's what I think is a definite possibility. Stu is the tail end of the core. The youngster. And by all accounts that young core is very tight. I hope he signs for a few bucks less just to get in line with the core. He lived with Tkachuk and Norris. They're the elder statesmen. I don't get the sense he's the type to upset the apple cart. I think there's a chance he signs long term for an aav that is less than what he otherwise warrants.

All those guys you listed were all the first stars coming off ELCs. They got big bucks and they're the shiny bulbs.

I think Stu will slide in line with our core financially. I hope so.

Becomes impossible to factor in sentimental value in contract negotiations, but I think that's what agents are for - to avoid having teenagers making multi-million dollar mistakes by "taking one for the team."

Not sure why anyone would be upset by Timmy going for his payday when they all did it. Tkachuk wasn't the shiny new bulb either, Chabot was the first wave. Then Norris really was behind Chabot, White, Batherson, and Tkachuk and he still didn't take a paycut. Team bond might help with a bit of a home town discount but the only team we see multiple guys sign under market value has been Tampa - and I think that had more to do with winning culture as they're perenial winners that they can sell the players on...and also the tax/weather things don't hurt.

Historically, Alfie's been the only one to take pay cuts with the Senators and we know the history of how that unravelled for the player.

I get wishful thinking and optimism that we'll be able to keep all our young players though - I'm hoping for it too.

One scenario I see Stutzle signing for a low AAV is in fact the Petersson route - signs bonus heavy 6.5M x 2 years by his agent's advice to go for that predicted cap increase in 2025 to ~$90M and then signs 10M x 8 for 93M total.

 

[UglyPuckling]

Yea, Fiala and DeBrincat completely diff scenarios.

I personally did not want Fiala at anything close to 8. However, I would give 9 million to DeBrincat easy.

One just broke out and still has struggled to perform in playoffs thus far in his career. The other has 2 40 goals in his belt, 1 50 goal pace, and basically 2 other 30 goal seasons as just a 24 year old with a good playoff showing.

Short of a catastrophe, and potentially not meshing well with Stutzle at all this season, there is just no way we are not locking him up longterm. Maybe even at the expense of Batherson in the future.

Guys like DeBrincat are gold. 8th best goalscorer last 4 years, yeah, we did not just get him for a year.

Absolutely worst case scenario, we got a 40 goal winger to accelerate the development of Stutzle for a couple years, and probably easily recoup similar assets to what we lost for him.

I'm sure we'd all like to have as many good players as possible, including Debrincat. Here is an example of the 2023-24 cap structure with Debrincat extending at $9 m AAV. I just like to play with the numbers and the math to see how it turns out.

Notice that the total cap hit is $79.3 m, which is between $3.3 to $5.3 m over what is thought to be our current self-imposed cap limit.

Its a 22-player roster. It has 6 ELCs/league minimum salaries. Three (3) of those ELCs are on defense, and 1 is in goal. Chychrun is not included. All salaries for the 4th line are below $1m.

You could subtract Batherson as you have suggested and add Chychrun for a saving of $375 k. But that saving would be short lived if the plan was to extend Chychrun when his current contract expires (2024-25). You do have the concept correct though. You can't keep adding expensive players without eventually having to subtract a higher contract. The other thing of note with this roster is Stutzle is signing a team friendly $8.25 m AAV contract.

Tkachuk 8.205
Norris 7.950
Batherson 4.975
Total Line 1: $21.13 m

Debrincat 9.0 (resigned & estimate)
Stutzle 8.25 (signs new max term contract)
Giroux 6.5
Total Line 2: $23.75 m

Joesph 2.95
Pinto 1.65 (resigned)
Formenton 2.0 (resigned to short term contract)
Total Line 3: $6.6 m

Kelly .763
Gambrell/replacement .950
XXX .800
Total Line 4 $2.513 m

Chabot 8.0
Zub 4.5 (new contract)
1st pair total $12.5 m

Sanderson .925
JBD .925
2nd pair total $1.850

Thomson .863
Brannstrom 1.4 (signed to short term contract)
3rd pair total: $2.263 m

Forsberg 2.75
Sogaard .925
Goalie total: $3.674 m

Murray retained 1.562
Buyout:
B Ryan 1.833
C. White .875
MDZ .750
Total retained/buyouts $5.02 m

Forward #13 .800
Defender #7 .800

TOTAL $79.3 M

NOTES:
22 player roster
Signing bonuses NOT included

 

[Bevans]

Becomes impossible to factor in sentimental value in contract negotiations, but I think that's what agents are for - to avoid having teenagers making multi-million dollar mistakes by "taking one for the team."

Not sure why anyone would be upset by Timmy going for his payday when they all did it. Tkachuk wasn't the shiny new bulb either, Chabot was the first wave. Then Norris really was behind Chabot, White, Batherson, and Tkachuk and he still didn't take a paycut. Team bond might help with a bit of a home town discount but the only team we see multiple guys sign under market value has been Tampa - and I think that had more to do with winning culture as they're perenial winners that they can sell the players on...and also the tax/weather things don't hurt.

Historically, Alfie's been the only one to take pay cuts with the Senators and we know the history of how that unravelled for the player.

I get wishful thinking and optimism that we'll be able to keep all our young players though - I'm hoping for it too.

One scenario I see Stutzle signing for a low AAV is in fact the Petersson route - signs bonus heavy 6.5M x 2 years by his agent's advice to go for that predicted cap increase in 2025 to ~$90M and then signs 10M x 8 for 93M total.

I don't want stutzle to give up money for the team.

I want him to be a superstar and secure the bag.

Superstars eat first. If that means the team needs to make hard decisions later, then that's a good thing, especially compared to the alternative of nickel and diming or bridging your stars.

 

[UglyPuckling]

Becomes impossible to factor in sentimental value in contract negotiations, but I think that's what agents are for - to avoid having teenagers making multi-million dollar mistakes by "taking one for the team."

Not sure why anyone would be upset by Timmy going for his payday when they all did it. Tkachuk wasn't the shiny new bulb either, Chabot was the first wave. Then Norris really was behind Chabot, White, Batherson, and Tkachuk and he still didn't take a paycut. Team bond might help with a bit of a home town discount but the only team we see multiple guys sign under market value has been Tampa - and I think that had more to do with winning culture as they're perenial winners that they can sell the players on...and also the tax/weather things don't hurt.

Historically, Alfie's been the only one to take pay cuts with the Senators and we know the history of how that unravelled for the player.

I get wishful thinking and optimism that we'll be able to keep all our young players though - I'm hoping for it too.

One scenario I see Stutzle signing for a low AAV is in fact the Petersson route - signs bonus heavy 6.5M x 2 years by his agent's advice to go for that predicted cap increase in 2025 to ~$90M and then signs 10M x 8 for 93M total.

IF the goal was to sign Debrincat at $9 m, then I'd doubt even more that Stutzle would sign at $8 m unless maybe Stutzle signs his contract before Debrincat does. Regardless, it's pretty optimistic to think that both players will sign at $8 m. Hope I'm wrong.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

I don't want stutzle to give up money for the team.

I want him to be a superstar and secure the bag.

Superstars eat first. If that means the team needs to make hard decisions later, then that's a good thing, especially compared to the alternative of nickel and diming or bridging your stars.

This is strange lol. Kids should absolutely take care of themselves. But what *I* want. Yeah I want everyone to take a discount so that all the players can stay lol.

Still yet to be a team to win with a player making more than 10.

These guys will have to realize if they want to all stay together some sacrifices will need to be made. Tkatchuk and norris certainly didn’t make any sacrifices tho

 

[Cosmix]

Only one team can win each year. 31 plans fail.

Some teams don't plan and invest to win. They pay lower salaries near the cap floor.

 

[Cosmix]

No offense but that's silly. Unless it gets in the way of getting another D there's no downside to taking Byron for a year.

We do not need Byron. We need to acquire a top 4D and trade Zaitsev. No half measures.

 

[Loach]

Becomes impossible to factor in sentimental value in contract negotiations, but I think that's what agents are for - to avoid having teenagers making multi-million dollar mistakes by "taking one for the team."

Not sure why anyone would be upset by Timmy going for his payday when they all did it. Tkachuk wasn't the shiny new bulb either, Chabot was the first wave. Then Norris really was behind Chabot, White, Batherson, and Tkachuk and he still didn't take a paycut. Team bond might help with a bit of a home town discount but the only team we see multiple guys sign under market value has been Tampa - and I think that had more to do with winning culture as they're perenial winners that they can sell the players on...and also the tax/weather things don't hurt.

Historically, Alfie's been the only one to take pay cuts with the Senators and we know the history of how that unravelled for the player.

I get wishful thinking and optimism that we'll be able to keep all our young players though - I'm hoping for it too.

One scenario I see Stutzle signing for a low AAV is in fact the Petersson route - signs bonus heavy 6.5M x 2 years by his agent's advice to go for that predicted cap increase in 2025 to ~$90M and then signs 10M x 8 for 93M total.

Ian talked about the tax thing in his weekly mail bag. He suggested that it is not as big a deal as some think because they get paid in american dollars and their expanses are in canadian dollars.

 

[Loach]

Becomes impossible to factor in sentimental value in contract negotiations, but I think that's what agents are for - to avoid having teenagers making multi-million dollar mistakes by "taking one for the team."

Not sure why anyone would be upset by Timmy going for his payday when they all did it. Tkachuk wasn't the shiny new bulb either, Chabot was the first wave. Then Norris really was behind Chabot, White, Batherson, and Tkachuk and he still didn't take a paycut. Team bond might help with a bit of a home town discount but the only team we see multiple guys sign under market value has been Tampa - and I think that had more to do with winning culture as they're perenial winners that they can sell the players on...and also the tax/weather things don't hurt.

Historically, Alfie's been the only one to take pay cuts with the Senators and we know the history of how that unravelled for the player.

I get wishful thinking and optimism that we'll be able to keep all our young players though - I'm hoping for it too.

One scenario I see Stutzle signing for a low AAV is in fact the Petersson route - signs bonus heavy 6.5M x 2 years by his agent's advice to go for that predicted cap increase in 2025 to ~$90M and then signs 10M x 8 for 93M total.

Here is a bit.

 

[playasRus]

Here is a bit.

I see what they're trying to say, that the 900k is offset by the fact that your dollar is worth 1.30 to 1.00.

Except merchandise and services aren't 1:1 from our side of the border to the next.

E.g. for a base Ford F150:

Same car. Different MSRP. This is painfully obvious when buying a book and the USD is always about 75% of the Canadian price. Even buying clothes in the US mall when you go on trips to Syracuse ends up being a bit of a deal when you go to outlets.

The one area where you might get a differenc is, buying a house in Kanata probably costs less than a house in Tampa. Although I don't know this for a fact...but that 900k can probably go into that housing cost difference.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Push aside the future DeBrincat negotiations and contract etc.

What is your straight up opinion on what Dorion paid to acquire him. I just want to know what you think of the price we paid to get him. That’s it

In a normal year without an extended flat cap environment I would have expected DeBrincat to go for something like 7th + Greig + another B prospect or decent young player.

In this environment where almost every team is lacking cap room and top 6 forwards like Pacioretty, Bjorkstrand and Brown are practically given away, the 7th OVR + 39th OVR was about what should have been expected. Similar value to what LA gave up for Fiala, except he came with an extension.

Even if DeBrincat doesn't want to re-sign I'm not too worried about the value given up, as we could almost certainly deal him this summer for another decently high 1st + more, provided he isn't hell bent on going to a single location like his hometown Detroit.

 

[Cosmix]

Ian talked about the tax thing in his weekly mail bag. He suggested that it is not as big a deal as some think because they get paid in american dollars and their expanses are in canadian dollars.

My "expanses" are around the waist!

 

[DJB]

In a normal year without an extended flat cap environment I would have expected DeBrincat to go for something like 7th + Greig + another B prospect or decent young player.

In this environment where almost every team is lacking cap room and top 6 forwards like Pacioretty, Bjorkstrand and Brown are practically given away, the 7th OVR + 39th OVR was about what should have been expected. Similar value to what LA gave up for Fiala, except he came with an extension.

Even if DeBrincat doesn't want to re-sign I'm not too worried about the value given up, as we could almost certainly deal him this summer for another decently high 1st + more, provided he isn't hell bent on going to a single location like his hometown Detroit.

Regardless if we sign DeBrincat or not who won the deal in terms of value?

Would you rather have 7 + 39 or DeBrincat for your team?