Confirmed with Link: Leafs sign F Auston Matthews to extension (4 years, $13.25M AAV)

[Gallagbi]

But there's plenty here trying to defend Matthews for doing it.

Is there any possible explanation for this other than Matthews being greedier than the typical star player?

I don't think there is.

And once we accept this objective fact that Matthews is greedier than the typical star player, where do you go from there? "Yeah, I acknowledge that they're greedy and selfish. And that greed and selfishness makes the team significantly less competitive. But I still love these guys. Go leafs go." I don't understand that mentality.

I missed it, who said this was the norm?

 

[leafs in five]

it is VERY, VERY much not normal

 

[leafs in five]

But there's plenty here trying to defend Matthews for doing it.

Is there any possible explanation for this other than Matthews being greedier than the typical star player?

I don't think there is.

And once we accept this objective fact that Matthews is greedier than the typical star player, where do you go from there? "Yeah, I acknowledge that they're greedy and selfish. And that greed and selfishness makes the team significantly less competitive. But I still love these guys. Go leafs go." I don't understand that mentality.

you can always choose not to accept that this is an objective fact

 

[Ziggdiezan]

Man, I just crunched the numbers on the upfront cash, there are some clauses in the MoU that dictate how heavy a contract can be front-loaded and the difference in total salary year to year.. boy this thing is designed to the penny to put as much as possible in AM's hands as fast as possible. The fourth year total salary is exactly 60% of the first year, the max difference allowed, and that dive in salary between years 2 and 3 just barely slip under the 25% difference allowed in adjacent years.

And why not, Leaf's can afford it and AAV is all that matters for cap management, no difference to us. Well done.

It's probably common on these contracts? I might poke around tonight on the structure of some other big ones since the MoU.

Interesting find, I figured they would maximize the signing bonuses and front load as much as possible. I just didn't know that it was still allowed to this degree.

Mackninon's contract has some wild signing bonus structure too though a large base salary in year 4

 

[Throw More Waffles]

I missed it, who said this was the norm?

A few posters brought up players like Iginla and Marleau and started acting like Matthews isn't doing anything out of the ordinary. Like, if you can find two exceptions spanning the whole universe that did the same thing, it's now "ordinary".

But I ask again. Every other superstar player could have taken this path and made far more money. Pasta, Mack, and every other super star player in the history of hockey other than Iginla and Marleau. But why don't they? What possible explanation is there for Matthews doing this other than pure unadulterated greed?

 

[leafs in five]

What possible explanation is there for Matthews doing this other than pure unadulterated greed?

diluted, adulterated greed?

 

[Gallagbi]

A few posters brought up players like Iginla and Marleau and started acting like Matthews isn't doing anything out of the ordinary. Like, if you can find two exceptions spanning the whole universe that did the same thing, it's now "ordinary".

But I ask again. Every other superstar player could have taken this path and made far more money. Pasta, Mack, and every other player in the history of hockey other than Iginla and Marleau. But why don't they? What possible explanation is there for Matthews doing this other than pure unadulterated greed?

Lets stay on the first claim about posters saying this is normal, then we can move on to how contract length is a scale.

Your post was:

Of course, the usual suspects will cling to a few remote exceptions to this rule and then try to act like what Matthews is doing is normal.

But it's not normal. This level of selfishness is not normal.

So where are these posts?

 

[Dayjobdave]

A few posters brought up players like Iginla and Marleau and started acting like Matthews isn't doing anything out of the ordinary. Like, if you can find two exceptions spanning the whole universe that did the same thing, it's now "ordinary".

But I ask again. Every other superstar player could have taken this path and made far more money. Pasta, Mack, and every other player in the history of hockey other than Iginla and Marleau. But why don't they? What possible explanation is there for Matthews doing this other than pure unadulterated greed?

If you look at your statement that every other superstar player could have taken a short contract and waited to make sure the salary cap went up before factoring that increase into their AAV, and that every other star player insisted that their team take on a guaranteed 8 year term, instead of a much more team friendly 4 year term which puts the risk squarely on the player both in terms of health and performance, then you are, in effect, saying that AM34 has just, once again, sacrificed himself for the good of the franchise, where all others have instead chosen to lock in the maximum number of years, and, of course, money.

What you are saying is that they should just go ahead and build the statue now, because it's a foregone conclusion.

GLG.

 

[Byron Bitz]

He could have got more money at whatever term he wants if he went to the open market.

 

[leafs in five]

like maybe he likes it here and wants to win etc but also feels he should be paid not a penny less than he deserves, or feels that he deserves 14+ and so he is not being as greedy as he could be though, though still pretty greedy. that would be an explanation for his behaviour that is not "pure, unadulterated greed"

 

[Throw More Waffles]

Lets stay on the first claim about posters saying this is normal, then we can move on to how contract length is a scale.

Your post was:


So where are these posts?

Are you saying a few "regular" posters didn't bring up Iginla and Marleau in attempt to make this look more normal? I want to clarify that before looking it up.

On top of that, I'm adding an additional argument.

Every other star player could take this approach and make far more money at the expense of their team. Why do you think (other than 2 exceptions 15 years ago) no players do it other than Matthews? What is a possible explanation other than pure greed? I'm just looking for an answer to that question. It's very telling that it won't be addressed.

 

[Gallagbi]

Are you saying a few "regular" posters didn't bring up Iginla and Marleau in attempt to make this look more normal? I want to clarify that before looking it up.

On top of that, I'm adding an additional argument.

Every other star player could take this approach and make far more money at the expense of their team. Why do you think (other than 2 exceptions 15 years ago) no players do it other than Matthews? What is a possible explanation other than pure greed? I'm just looking for an answer to that question. It's very telling that it won't be addressed.

Im saying I havent read anyone using Iginla or Marleau as a comparable to excuse or validate this deal, which was your claim.

I did see a tweet about Iginla's 17%, in the new cap, and a few people griping about Marleau as a (money) mentor. Not much from the "usual suspects clinging to a few remote exceptions to this rule and then try to act like what Matthews is doing is normal."

So happy to be corrected on it if I'm wrong, but I would like to see it.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

If you look at your statement that every other superstar player could have taken a short contract and waited to make sure the salary cap went up before factoring that increase into their AAV, and that every other star player insisted that their team take on a guaranteed 8 year term, instead of a much more team friendly 4 year term which puts the risk squarely on the player both in terms of health and performance, then you are, in effect, saying that AM34 has just, once again, sacrificed himself for the good of the franchise, where all others have instead chosen to lock in the maximum number of years, and, of course, money.

What you are saying is that they should just go ahead and build the statue now, because it's a foregone conclusion.

GLG.

Pure rhetoric, spin, and lies.

This term structure Matthews is using will make him fare more money than the guys that keep going 8 years after elc. Matthews cap hit will much much higher throughout his career by doing it this way.

Simple lesson for you: Matthews making more money benefits Matthews. Not the team.

Matthews having a higher cap hit is bad for the leafs.

Eight year contracts aren't a risk on a 25 year old player. Far from it. It benefits the team 100%. 1000% even.

This is the argument you're currently making "Matthews making WAY more money and having a WAY higher cap hit throughout his career benefits the leafs."

Can't make this stuff up...

Im saying i havent read anyone using Iginla or Marleau as a comparable to excuse or validate this deal, which was your claim.

I did see a tweet about Iginla's 17% in the new cap and a few people griping about Marleau as a (money) mentor.

So there you go. There's two examples.

What about the rest of what I'm asking? Don't like those questions, eh?

 

[Throw More Waffles]

like maybe he likes it here and wants to win etc but also feels he should be paid not a penny less than he deserves, or feels that he deserves 14+ and so he is not being as greedy as he could be though, though still pretty greedy. that would be an explanation for his behaviour that is not "pure, unadulterated greed"

All of those arguments apply to Mack as well. And Pastrnak.

Why didn't they just do what Matthews did?

You know the answer.... you just don't want to say it.

 

[francis246]

Are you saying a few "regular" posters didn't bring up Iginla and Marleau in attempt to make this look more normal? I want to clarify that before looking it up.

On top of that, I'm adding an additional argument.

Every other star player could take this approach and make far more money at the expense of their team. Why do you think (other than 2 exceptions 15 years ago) no players do it other than Matthews? What is a possible explanation other than pure greed? I'm just looking for an answer to that question. It's very telling that it won't be addressed.

It has nothing to do with greed, it has everything to do with the system the owners and bettman created working as intended. Create a cap system that restricts the earning potential of the players and also helps keeps more teams competitive. Incremental cap raises will help limit having to pay stars absurd amounts like other sports and they are far more likely to stay with one team over the course of their career. I think they always knew there would be a few outliers but the rest would fall in line.

Unfortunately for us we have the outlier lol. Sucks! Just bad luck it seems. But again as I said from a fan perspective don’t love it for our team and our long term success. but from the player perspective it’s genius on Matthews part.

 

[notDatsyuk]

yay more individual accolades with a very good chance of zero playoff success

He only needs 30 points in his next two playoffs games to match Dougie's 77 in 52. But of course Dougie had better linemates.

 

[leafs in five]

It benefits the team 100%. 1000% even.

damn

 

[PromisedLand]

 

[ACC1224]

It's pretty entertaining watching people lose their minds over this.
As an added bonus no one has wept about Game 3 vs Florida in 2 days!

 

[francis246]

All of those arguments apply to Mack as well. And Pastrnak.

Why didn't they just do what Matthews did?

You know the answer.... you just don't want to say it.

Personally IMO they didn’t do it because they don’t want/can’t handle the scrutiny of doing it. I’d say about 40% is about keeping the team competitive, 60% is about just having a peaceful life and not having a fan base/media in an uproar. That’s hockey players in a nutshell don’t want any attention brought to them.

 

[TheGreenTBer]

He wasn’t born with that pig nose for no reason it seems.

He needs it to vacuum up every last toonie he can.

He then stores the money in his forehead, thats why it's almost as big as Peyton Manning's

 

[PromisedLand]

Marner's on full NTC.

Nylander is the one who is fully in question now. If Matthews left another ~1M on the table that might be the difference between keeping Nylander on the higher end of his asking price vs losing him altogether.

The greed is completely unpalatable.

Am 80% sure Nylander will test free agency unless leafs give him 10 AAV

 

[Gallagbi]

So there you go. There's two examples.

What about the rest of what I'm asking? Don't like those questions, eh?

This was the claim, right?

"The usual suspects will cling to a few remote exceptions to this rule and then try to act like what Matthews is doing is normal."

None of that is what i saw


Happy to answer questions, just not a fan of people stretching truths to make a point.

 

[leafs in five]

All of those arguments apply to Mack as well. And Pastrnak.

Why didn't they just do what Matthews did?

You know the answer.... you just don't want to say it.

I think the answer to your question is not pure, unadulterated greed

 

[Trapper]

Lol.
Good thing Nylander is willing to take less, right.