Salary Cap: Marner contract discussion XVI (continued)

[ajp4to]

It’s a tough and almost impossible thing to predict. How good a 21-22 year old will be in 4-8 years.

It’s all a gamble.

Some are less of a risk... McDavid. Some are more of a risk... Zaitsev. And some turned out to be major losses... Daigle.

In the end, no one knows until we have the benefit of history.

Adding Arbitration rights for teams and players for ELC expiry contracts would help both sides move to as reasonable a position as you can before going that route.

The way it is set up now, players have significant leverage. Particularly the good ones. They either get what they want or force a trade.

We can say what we want about sitting out or playing in the KHL but a GM that sits out a great player and misses or exits the playoffs.... that’s not much job security.

To force a trade your demands have to be reasonable and the team acquiring you has to get value. Don't believe there is any team willing to pay Marner more than what the leafs are already offering. Teams have their own salary structures and players to consider. He can sit out and hope Dubas gives in, there is a precedent for that happening.

 

[thewave]

Labour markets and economic concepts could be considered complicated, but I wouldn't consider them magical

Hockey should be based on results period. It's a sport where literal luck plays a role in winning quite often. You understand if you understand advanced stats you can be a corsi god and crappy hockey player. There are a lot of players now studying how to work it because contracts.

Literal crap players with nice stats and lackluster production. Them stats though.

 

[zeke]

@zeke,

Good post above and I appreciate the work and effort you put into it.

Why did you average the ELC years? This makes no sense to me, and I hope Dubas is smarter than taking this approach.

What a player did in their 1st ELC year as a teenager should have little bearing on their next contract IMO. These are all guys that developed significantly different rates. Let’s take this extreme example...:

Player A:
ELC yr 1: Low QC and mod. TOI: 15G 35P
ELC yr 2: Mod QC and mod. TOI: 25G 55P
ELC yr 3: High QC and high TOI: 30G 90P

Player B:
ELC yr 1: Low QC and mod TOI: 20G 60P
ELC yr 2: Mod QC and mod TOI: 25G 60P
ELC yr 3: High QC and high TOI: 25G 60P

Player C:
ELC yr 1: Low QC and mod TOI: 30G 80P
ELC yr 2: Mod QC and mod TOI: 25G 60P
ELC yr 3: High QC and high TOI: 15G 40P


Are you suggesting these players should be treated similarly???

1. I don't think you can afford to ignore any of the data when looking at a player's first real contract.
2. Sure, I would prefer to weight the years differently, with the most recent year being worth more. But that is a lot of work.
3. I appreciate you were just making a point but I think it would be hard to find the kind of differences in real-world examples that you illustrated with your hypothetical examples - I.e. your hypothetical problem there is much bigger the what we find in the actual examples.

 

[nuck]

Honestly I can see why Marner might be a little cheesed. Matthews contract was almost certainly based on the idea that he could expect a 13x7 ish contract via offersheet, and Dubas accepted that valuation and scaled down with term to get to something we can afford.

Now Marner is up, and reportedly looking at offers in the 12x7 range. Less, but still putting him at 10.5 x 5+ if you use the same value scale. The difference is that Dubas seems to be rejecting that value scale and saying "No, this is where we have you, you can choose between being a Leaf and being paid at that level." He knows Marner wants to be a Leaf, both for personal and financial reasons and is using that.

To keep the relationship intact I think the reasoning has to be kept budgetary rather than hammering MM with the fact they value AM differently. "You're last, you wanted to be last, it's nothing personal and we love you but we had to put the team together and this is how much we can afford"

Coming down from 12 x 7 at the same per year rate as it takes from to go from 13 x 7 to Matthews contract it would leave us at 9.27 x 3. If you set Matthews RFA value at 13.5 x 7 and apply the scale it would be 8.3 x 3 to Marner

Matthews contract was based on a 46g 99pt pace at signing while playing with Kapanen. Mitch's will be an actual 26g 94 pt pace playing with Tavares. Thats a huge, obvious difference. Yes Matthews did not finish with those numbers but had Mitch signed mid season he would have been using incomplete stats as an argument as well, and if he had missed 20 games Ferris would have been banging the ppg drum just the same way, as would any agent. With the homer glasses off I don't think Mitch has shown anything more than his fellow super RFAs, or at least not enough to show there is separation between them but I think he will be the best compensated. I still don't believe a 12 x 7 OS when Panarin got less as a UFA.

 

[4thline]

Hockey should be based on results period. It's a sport where literal luck plays a role in winning quite often. You understand if you understand advanced stats you can be a corsi god and crappy hockey player. There are a lot of players now studying how to work it because contracts.

Literal crap players with nice stats and lackluster production. Them stats though.

Nothing in my post has anything to do with advanced stats. Just bargaining positions, leverage, and opportunity cost. While certainly not standard, at it's core the NHL labour market is still a labour market. Contracts formed by the product of teams' willingness to pay and a players willingness to pursue money.

 

[81Leafs50]

Brayden Point has 51 points on your chart for 2018-2019. His goals weren't added to his point total. It looks like his PPG should be higher as well.

Edit: and he didn't play 82 games.

ok will review it and repost.

 

[zeke]

From a previous post of yours, I believe you think (and I agree) is how the player trended in his first 3 years should be taken into account.

While weighting is a good idea, I'm not actually sure looking at a so called "trend" in the 3yrs is better than just looking at all the years. I.e. just because a player was great in year 3 doesn't mean he won't fall back in year 4, or vice versa.

At the very least, a player that performs at a certain level in all 3 years has to be worth more than a guy that only does it in one.

 

[4thline]

I still don't believe a 12 x 7 OS when Panarin got less as a UFA.

Rumoured to have been offered more. It's hard tell without being able to see behind all the curtains, but contracts signed are not necessarily indicative of max market worth.

 

[zeke]

It's always magical justification.... Agents use advanced stats and every metric going. Fans fall in love with players. Look, you just fashioned a narrative where there is a 13m offersheet. Truth of the matter is the best GMs don't pay for stats, they pay for production because production wins games. You don't produce, you probably don't win. Does the player produce at a higher level in the PO? That is something you can pay for as well. Sure being a 2 way player is nice and a power forward or C may come at a bit of premium but once you fall down the rabbit hole of advanced stats, it's a slippery slope into murky waters that does not increase your odds of winning, but most certainly, increases your odds of paying more out on contracts.

It reminds of little children arguing and inventing greater and more epic super powers to get the final say in who is better.

Production is stats.

 

[ToDavid]

Speaking of which, if Dermott is open to an extension, I'd love to lock him up for long term while his value is likely as low as it'll be. He will be a fixture in our top 4 for years to come

I think he probably recognizes that a spot in the top 4 will open up for him soon. I would love to get him locked up longer-term but I wouldn't be surprised if he pushes for a 2-year bridge.

 

[thewave]

While weighting is a good idea, I'm not actually sure looking at a so called "trend" in the 3yrs is better than just looking at all the years. I.e. just because a player was great in year 3 doesn't mean he won't fall back in year 4, or vice versa.

At the very least, a player that performs at a certain level in all 3 years has to be worth more than a guy that only does it in one.

The big 3 are and will be overpaid because of the advanced statistics rabbit hole created by Dubas and his adoption of them. They have not got past a round but will be paid like Champions, Toews and Kane. They are RFA without discount. They have cocky and greedy without accomplishment, they are entitled and the new Muskoka 5 is being crafted by the hands of the smooth talking snake oil salesman, KD.

Produce to get paid is the only way to give contracts in sport. Lines, luck variables out the ass but the statistas work OT to show their own reality and sell that. No results though. Not saying adv stats are useless but anyone who wants to know should know from even video games there are ways to exploit stats or pad them, in hockey as well.

 

[zeke]

And again, you can choose to disagree with Dubas' opinion on which numbers are most valuable, but you simply cannot argue the fact that based on the number he does think are valuable, all the contracts he has signed have been very good value.


By the numbers: Grading every team's contract efficiency

By the numbers: Grading every team’s contract efficiency

Today, we rank (almost) every contract on every team in the league based on the same methodology in an attempt to figure out which teams are the most efficient with the money they spend.

The contracts included in the exercise are every healthy, non-ELC skater that my model has a projection for, as well as any dead money a team has on their cap via buyouts, salary retention and cap recapture penalties. That means no RFAs without a deal, no players on an entry-level deal, no players without a significant NHL sample, no players on LTIR and no goalies. My model doesn’t currently spit out future win projections for goaltenders or expected contract value either, so they were unfortunately omitted. Unused cap space is also not considered as there’s no knowing how that space would be used. This is about the value of each contract currently on the books.

Teams will be graded empirically based on the surplus value they bring in per player contract (all dead money counts as one) as well as the average probability those deals will provide positive value. Both are based on a player’s age-adjusted projected win output according to GSVA and the uncertainty in that projection for future seasons, along with the cost of a win on the open market. How much each team spends to obtain those wins will also be graded.

What’s being assessed is the future value of the remainder of each contract, meaning what a player has already done holds no merit here. Future value means age is crucial in terms of grading each contract, with players peaking between the ages of 22-26 and declining afterward.

Surplus value will depend on term, where more seasons give more opportunity to compound value. Positive value probability depends on the certainty of a player’s projection which depends on how much variance there has been in the player’s past numbers. Longer term means that uncertainty increases.

Each contract will be graded based on where their combined surplus value and positive value probability fall on the following percentile scale. All contract and roster data is as of July 15.....

#3

Toronto ranking so high may come as a surprise, but that’s mostly because the local media juggernaut tends to blow everything out of proportion in the centre of the hockey universe.

The Auston Matthews deal looks pricey compared to McDavid’s, but that’s an unfair bar to be compared to as both players will be vastly underpaid for their services given their current projected value and trajectory. Matthews is one of the most efficient players in hockey and projects to be the league’s second most valuable player during the life of his contract. The William Nylander deal is far from a problem – assuming he can bounce back with a proper training camp. Signing John Tavares, an obviously elite player, to a very fair deal is not the reason the team has cap issues. The grass is always greener on the other side. Spending to the cap is what contenders have to do.

What the Leafs have going for them is their youth. They’re one of the youngest teams in the league and their core will only get better, meaning surplus value only grows in the coming seasons. The chance that they provide positive value collectively as a result is high. The average 65 percent rate is the second-highest in the league behind Carolina. That they have five forwards locked into positive value deals for four more seasons is a big plus, as is having Rielly on one of the league’s best contracts for three. Those deals will only look better going forward.

The team wouldn’t be here though without the efforts of the front office this summer, clearing most of the team’s bad money off the books in dropping Patrick Marleau and exchanging seven years of a terrible defenceman for one. The Leafs are one of six teams in the league without a contract in the D-range and should see 83 percent of their deals provide positive value. That’s the second-highest in the league. They also saved space where necessary by downgrading on Kadri, but gaining a capable right shot defenceman on a cheap deal, as well as allocating fourth-line resources to league minimum veterans rather than an expensive Connor Brown.

Disagree with him on the why if you want, but don't think for a second that Dubas thinks he overpaid for anyone.

 

[thewave]

Production is stats.

Adv. stats Zeke.

 

[zeke]

The big 3 are and will be overpaid because of the advanced statistics rabbit hole created by Dubas and his adoption of them. They have not got past a round but will be paid like Champions, Toews and Kane. They are RFA without discount. They have cocky and greedy without accomplishment, they are entitled and the new Muskoka 5 is being crafted by the hands of the smooth talking snake oil salesman, KD.

Produce to get paid is the only way to give contracts in sport. Lines, luck variables out the ass but the statistas work OT to show their own reality and sell that. No results though. Not saying adv stats are useless but anyone who wants to know should know from even video games there are ways to exploit stats or pad them, in hockey as well.

Both cup finalists were built on players with supernelite advanced stats, and less than elite pure production numbers.

You're allowed your opinion, but I would recommend questioning why exactly you would want the GM of our team making $100m decisions based on a simple ranking of 100yr old stats with no context.

 

[thewave]

Both cup finalists were built on players with supernelite advanced stats, and less than elite pure production numbers.

You're allowed your opinion, but I would recommend questioning why exactly you would want the GM of our team making $100m decisions based on a simple ranking of 100yr old stats with no context.

They were built on damn good contract efficiency. You want an advanced stat, rank GMs and teams on that. Who gets the most bang for the buck as a GM. BTW that Boston team got pushed along by refs and I don't care what anyone says. Our Guru Dubas dumped a quarter off this team because his statty guys blew it and had 50% PK. Some brainiac, sheesh. Now we have a rental Dcore and contract woes.

 

[Marshy]

The sky is falling!

 

[Sypher04]

I know I left out Matthews missing games... that was the point if you read it. I said it's disingenuous without context IE:Missing games

I did wonder about that. I felt like there were a couple ways to interpret your post. All good, my mistake.

 

[zeke]

They were built on damn good contract efficiency. You want an advanced stat, rank GMs and teams on that. Who gets the most bang for the buck as a GM. BTW that Boston team got pushed along by refs and I don't care what anyone says. Our Guru Dubas dumped a quarter off this team because his statty guys blew it and had 50% PK. Some brainiac, sheesh. Now we have a rental Dcore and contract woes.

Done and done: Salary Cap: - Marner contract discussion XVI (continued)

 

[thewave]

The sky is falling!

Too late, it's covering your body as we speak. I hope Dubas can up his game though and get some better team friendly deals like good GMs manage.

 

[Marshy]

Too late, it's covering your body as we speak. I hope Dubas can up his game though and get some better team friendly deals like good GMs manage.

Enjoy the games bro. Life is short.

 

[thewave]

Done and done: Salary Cap: - Marner contract discussion XVI (continued)

And the net result is 1st round exit x3. Sweet baby Jesus we are so fortunate.

 

[zeke]

And the net result is 1st round exit x3. Sweet baby Jesus we are so fortunate.

I thought you wanted to grade him on contract efficiency.

 

[thewave]

Enjoy the games bro. Life is short.

I already did that, the decades though, 50 years, The Raps did it before the Leafs... That's strange.

 

[JayfromNB1219]

Guys, Marner is a great playmaker and Tavares is a great finisher, so playing together makes them both better. It's not ****in' rocket science.

Thank you G-d somebody here has a little common sense...I think you and I have spoken about this before no?

 

[Marshy]

I already did that, the decades though, 50 years, The Raps did it before the Leafs... That's strange.

You sticking around? Gonna be a wild party. I'm 50 next year I gotta beLeaf. The kool-aid isn't so bad. Give it a try