Salary Cap: Marner contract discussion XVI (continued)

[zeke]

Most efficient rosters with a rental D core that hasn't won a round and traded a 1st for cap?

Most efficient roster in terms of contracts vs projected value.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

This whole discussion you've replied to was started by the TheWave suggesting that we missed the mark by not trading Gardiner for asset management purposes.

I definitely think they knew what they were signing up for when they landed Tavares. I don't think they're surprised by their cap complications. I DO think they are maybe a bit surprised by how much RFA asks have ballooned and how little regard players have for using their actual comparables. Even then though, I don't think they are shocked by any means.

As for your last query. I'd say, easy, Tavares. Tavares is an accelerant. The timeline changed the day we signed him. You can argue whether that's for better or worse, but you don't skip out on getting a player of his calibre for nothing but money.

Ya, I wasn't trying to weigh in a specific posters debate.

And I was quite careful to state that I don't think signing Tavares was a bad idea. What I was stating is that management (hopefully & likely) would have to understand the implications of this signing. In fact, you could say that the implications were (or should have been) predictable.

Where I differ a bit is on the timeline of the change of team philosophy/strategy. We could have moved JVR for assets 2 years before he hit free agency. I say this because supposedly it was known he was not considered part of the core, and we were still talking & thinking about a rebuild at that time.

So, to me, that indicates that the 'accelerant' as you called it happened (end of rebuild is another way of putting it) before we acquired Tavares.

 

[ajp4to]

This is a terrific post I agree.
I think you can sign him somewhere around 8.5M/3 years and it can work very well for both sides.
From the Leafs side you get Marner signed, to a number you can build around for the next 3 years and you retain control of him at the end of contract as he'd still be an RFA.
From Marner's side, he gets shorter term so he's not locked in as the cap rises too high, he gets to go out continue to put up huge numbers and solify his case to be paid big and then he's the first of the three to come back to the table for contract #3

It's not perfect, but I think it's about as good as we can expect. There is a lot of uncertainty in the cap over the next 4-5 years, I don't blame Marner for maybe not wanting to go 8 years.

If I'm Marner (a small fragile winger) I'm signing an 8x10 deal every day over a 3x8.5. But his agent is still looking for someone stupid enough to offer Marner more than Leafs have already offered.

 

[zeke]

To deny luck is akin to denial of reality Gary.

The advanced stats which you hate are based entirely on acknowledging how much luck plays a part in goals scored in hockey.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

They don't adjust for qoc unfortunately.

They adjust for score, zone deployment (not just zone starts), and venue.

Ah that makes more sense but I'm still surprised at how little they adjust considering some pretty polar zone deployment between a guy like Hainsey (always on for last 5 min when holding a lead) vs a guy like Dermott.

 

[Notsince67]

If I'm Marner (a small fragile winger) I'm signing an 8x10 deal every day over a 3x8.5. But his agent is still looking for someone stupid enough to offer Marner more than Leafs have already offered.

As a newbie poster who clearly hasn't watch much of Marner, I was wondering whether you thought Panarin and Kane were also fragile.

 

[ajp4to]

What is your alternative... we traded what is most likely going to be a late 1st, not garaunteed to be an NHLer, to allow us to keep both Johnsson and Kapanen, clearly NHL players. Does it suck having to move that pick? Sure, every single one of us would rather have it. But losing either one of Johnsson or Kapanen, let alone both, to keep Marleau and his abysmal play last year that'd be seriously questionable management. We solved 2 significant problems with that move.

Late first is the question. This team was 2 points away from missing the playoffs last year with a full roster and few injuries. Are they better this year?

 

[Sypher04]

Ya, I wasn't trying to weigh in a specific posters debate.

And I was quite careful to state that I don't think signing Tavares was a bad idea. What I was stating is that management (hopefully & likely) would have to understand the implications of this signing. In fact, you could say that the implications were (or should have been) predictable.

Where I differ a bit is on the timeline of the change of team philosophy/strategy. We could have moved JVR for assets 2 years before he hit free agency. I say this because supposedly it was known he was not considered part of the core, and we were still talking & thinking about a rebuild at that time.

So, to me, that indicates that the 'accelerant' as you called it happened (end of rebuild is another way of putting it) before we acquired Tavares.

I see the thought process, and I suppose I don't entirely disagree, but at the same time I think there's a clear difference between adding a piece like a Tavares to put yourself vs opting to not remove a quality existing veteran who helps you compete while your young guys get their feet wet. I mean, look no further than Buffalo or Edmonton. They seemingly cast off every quality non-youth on their team and have really struggled to gain any traction. The results kinda speak for themselves. You look at the internal improvement of our young guys (mostly) and the team's improvement from 30th to two consecutive 100+ point seasons and three consecutive post seasons. I don't know you can put a draft pick/prospect price tag on the experience our guys have gained playing meaningful games down the stretch as well as measuring themselves up against teams like Boston and Washington in the playoffs.

 

[CDN24]

You're entitled to that opinion for sure.

But I would highly, highly recommend that you ask yourself why you think a simple PPG ranking is the best way to evaluate player value.

We are both entitled to our opinion and we have to realize that both are opinions there is no right answer. PPG ranking is not the only or best way to evaluate player value. however when the player is a one dimensional offensive threat it is the one that will probably favor him most.

I also look at a players usage, Who other teams match up against him. Those 31 other coaches are way smarter than I, does his coach trust him against other teams top players, does he kill penalties? Thing is a player like Matthews so far has been pretty much a one dimensional offensive player so far. His coach does not use him on the PK, his coach does not try to match him up against the opposite teams top players.

I look at how well they play against other teams top players. I look at rate of goals for vs goals against 5-5 per 60 compared to players on other teams with similar usage.

The opposition tends to not put their best defensive players against him, they put them out against Tavares line. The opposing coaches think Tavares is more dangerous.

 

[Duffman955]

Those stats already have zone usage and score effects factored in.

I could add in qoc for you if you want:

5v5 adj xGF% (qoc)

1. Nylander 56.8 (C-)
2. Hyman 55.1 (A+)
3. Tavares 53.8 (A+)
4. Matthews 53.4 (B+)
5. Ozhiganov 53.0 (D)
6. Gardiner 52.9 (B)
7. Dermott 52.4 (D+)
8. Marner 52.3 (A+)
9. Muzzin 51.9 (B)
10. Kapanen 51.6 (B)
11. Rielly 51.2 (A)
12. Johnsson 51.1 (C+)
13. Zaitsev 51.0 (B)
14. Kadri 50.8 (C)
15. Ennis 50.8 (F)
16. Hainsey 50.2 (A)
17. Gauthier 48.9 (F)
18. Lindholm 48.1 (D)
19. Marleau 47.9 (B-)
20. Brown 46.9 (C-)

Doesn't change all that much for the guys at the bottom - makes them look even worse for the most part. The one guy we'd bump up a bit due to qoc would be Hainsey, but probably not too much higher up.

I think QOC is a huge factor.

Nylander, Dermott and Ozhiganov would move far down the list

Rielly, Hainsey and Marner should move up

 

[57 Years No Cup]

To deny luck is akin to denial of reality Gary.

When your shot hits the post and bounces wide is it bad luck or bad aim?

 

[zeke]

Ah that makes more sense but I'm still surprised at how little they adjust considering some pretty polar zone deployment between a guy like Hainsey (always on for last 5 min when holding a lead) vs a guy like Dermott.

This is a bit out of date now as Manny has combined and refined these adjustments now but this is the base from which he started: Adjustments Explained | Corsica

And note that Corsica eliminates empty net situations completely from its numbers, so hainsey doesn't get hurt by being out there when the other team pulls theirs and Rielly doesn't benefit from being out there when we pull ours.

 

[ToneDog]

both lol...we always have something to talk about...though I am willing to bet we have lost posters to heart attacks or something of the sort lol

Being a Leaf fan means having to manage high blood pressure. Those that cannot end up in cardiac arrest.

 

[Notsince67]

Late first is the question. This team was 2 points away from missing the playoffs last year with a full roster and few injuries. Are they better this year?

Did you manage to miss both Dermott and Gardiner's injuries when you weren't watching?

 

[Sypher04]

Did you manage to miss both Dermott and Gardiner's injuries when you weren't watching?

Add to that our next 2 best depth options in Rosen/Borgman got injured as well like the day after the trade deadline.

 

[zeke]

We are both entitled to our opinion and we have to realize that both are opinions there is no right answer.

There probably is a right answer, actually.

PPG ranking is not the only or best way to evaluate player value. however when the player is a one dimensional offensive threat it is the one that will probably favor him most.

I also look at a players usage, Who other teams match up against him. Those 31 other coaches are way smarter than I, does his coach trust him against other teams top players, does he kill penalties? Thing is a player like Matthews so far has been pretty much a one dimensional offensive player so far. His coach does not use him on the PK, his coach does not try to match him up against the opposite teams top players.

I look at how well they play against other teams top players. I look at rate of goals for vs goals against 5-5 per 60 compared to players on other teams with similar usage.

The opposition tends to not put their best defensive players against him, they put them out against Tavares line. The opposing coaches think Tavares is more dangerous.

This is all false.

Matthews has faced tougher qoc than Marner so far I their careers, and it was MUCH tougher the first two years, while Marner faced tougher comp for the first time last year.

 

[Suntouchable13]

I simply don't think the leafs can compete if they're paying 70 point players the way other teams pay their 110 point players.

And I mean the real points that add up on the scoreboard that lead to actual real wins and losses.

No matter how much sillyness you use, 110 REAL points is far more valuable (when it comes to actual wins and losses) than 70 points.

Matthews had THREE seasons to show what he can do. And the most he got was 73 points.

If you want to blame this on coaching and usage. Fine. I don't care.

I don't CARE what the excuses are. I just want them addressed.

Players making Matthews money NEED to be putting up 100 point seasons, or it's a complete waste. It's either the coach wasting TALENT or the gm wasting MONEY. I don't care which it is. But FIX it.

Oh man, I couldn’t agree more. Well said!

 

[Sypher04]

I think QOC is a huge factor.

Nylander, Dermott and Ozhiganov would move far down the list

Rielly, Hainsey and Marner should move up

I read it was a generally accepted truth that quality of teammates is a bigger factor that quality of competition. Neither Nylander or Dermott are well served in the teammate regard.

Someone more in tune with advanced stats feel free to set me straight on this one if I'm in fact misinformed.

 

[zeke]

I think QOC is a huge factor.

Nylander, Dermott and Ozhiganov would move far down the list

Rielly, Hainsey and Marner should move up

I agree.

 

[zeke]

Is it a generally accepted truth that quality of teammates is a bigger factor that quality of competition. Neither Nylander or Dermott are well served in the teammate regard.

Personally I believe this argument is based on a misunderstanding of the stats - mostly because it doesn't make sense to use opponent's possession as a qoc indicator, as that just assumes it's conclusion. Using possession to judge qot does make plenty of sense, though, hence the disconnect.

I'm pretty comfortable saying that the (public) stats community's biggest mistake is eliminating qoc as a significant variable.

 

[Notsince67]

Add to that our next 2 best depth options in Rosen/Borgman got injured as well like the day after the trade deadline.

True. I can't think of a more catastrophic situation for a defense that wasn't deep to begin with

 

[zeke]

Late first is the question. This team was 2 points away from missing the playoffs last year with a full roster and few injuries. Are they better this year?

They weren't 2pts from missing the playoffs, and they had plenty of injuries.

They did, however, have the 7th most points, the 4th most regulation wins, and the 4th best goal differential, and yes, they've improved significantly this off-season.

 

[IPS]

1. You guys may entertain the thought that the Dubes didn't get where he is today by ranking players based on points or points per game. (and you might want to ask yourself why you'd want a guy in charge of $50m decisions ranking players based on a 100yr old stat that has no context and arbitrarily decided that 2nd assists are worth the same as goals).

2. In your professional expertise you may think Dubas is a dummy for not just ranking players on points or PPG, and you are welcome do disagree, but you have to accept that he doesn't. These aren't the exact stats Dubas looks at, but they're certainly closer to the kind of thing he looks at, and it illustrates perfectly how each leaf has been valued:


Here is the ELC performance of all $5+m (or expected $5+m) forwards, in the last 3 years (including this one), sorted into approximate order and approximate groupings:

C McDavid (22, 12.5): 222gms, ES 16:13 (A+ qoc), 2.93p/60, 2.27p1/60, +3.5cfrel, +7.5xgfrel ---- PP 2:57, 5.85p/60, 3.20p1/60 -- PK 0:56
C Matthews (22, 11.6): 232gms, ES 15:13 (A qoc), 2.60p/60, 2.29p1/60, +0.8cfrel, +2.2xgfrel --- PP 2:22, 6.31p/60, 4.90p1/60 -- PK 0:01

W Marner (22, ????): 261gms, ES 14:19 (A qoc), 2.33p/60, 1.90p1/60, -0.5cfrel, -0.0xgfrel ------ PP 2:21, 7.02p/60, 4.59p1/60 -- PK 0:30
C Point (23, ????): 250gms, ES 14:59 (A qoc), 2.20p/60, 1.77p1/60, +0.4cfrel, +0.8xgfrel -------- PP 2:39, 5.79p/60, 3.44p1/60 -- PK 0:48
W Pastrnak (21, 6.7): 178gms, ES 13:46 (B+ qoc), 2.20p/60, 1.74p1/60, +3.9cfrel, +4.1xgfrel --- PP 1:45, 5.76p/60, 4.22p1/60 --- PK 0:01

W Rantanen (23, ???): 246gms, ES 15:07 (A+ qoc), 1.98p/60, 1.44p1/60, +1.7cfrel, -1.0xgfrel -- PP 3:29, 5.67p/60, 4.20p1/60 -- PK 0:01
C/W Aho (22, 8.5): 256gms, ES 14:40 (A qoc), 2.00p/60, 1.52p1/60, +2.1cfrel, +1.4xgfrel ------ PP 2:38, 5.07p/60, 3.47p1/60 -- PK 0:32
C/W Drai (22, 8.5): 204gms, ES 14:08 (A qoc), 2.04p/60, 1.50p1/60, +2.1cfrel, +3.2xgfrel ------ PP 2:34, 5.04p/60, 4.00p1/60 -- PK 0:12
C/W Nylander (22, 7.0): 198gms, ES 13:45 (B+ qoc), 2.09p/60, 1.54p1/60, +2.4cfrel, +2.0xgfrel - PP 2:14, 5.71p/60, 4.62p1/60 -- PK 0:01
W Ehlers (22, 6.0): 251gms, ES 13:52 (B+ qoc), 2.00p/60, 1.60p1/60, +2.1cfrel, +0.2xgfrel ----- PP 2:15, 3.73p/60, 2.77p1/60 --- PK 0:01
W Connor (23, ???): 201gms, ES 14:09 (A qoc), 2.00p/60, 1.60p1/60, -2.1cfrel, -2.6xgfrel ----- PP 2:44, 3.71p/60, 2.73p1/60 --- PK 0:20

C Eichel (22, 10.0): 209gms, ES 15:19 (B+ qoc), 1.88p/60, 1.44p1/60, -0.1cfrel, +0.1xgfrel ----- PP 3:10, 5.69p/60, 3.79p1/60 --- PK 0:28
C Larkin (22, 6.1): 246gms, ES 14:18 (B+ qoc), 1.86p/60, 1.43p1/60, +0.9cfrel, -2.1xgfrel ------ PP 1:58, 2.34p/60, 1.72p1/60 --- PK 0:46
W Meier (23, 6.0): 228gms, ES 13:20 (B+ qoc), 1.92p/60, 1.48p1/60, +3.2cfrel, +4.3xgfrel ----- PP 1:21, 3.49p/60, 3.29p1/60 --- PK 0:21
W Laine (21, ????): 260gms, ES 13:40 (B qoc), 1.86p/60, 1.57p1/60, -3.4cfrel, -6.6xgfrel ------ PP 3:03, 5.31p/60, 4.40p1/60 --- PK 0:01
C Schmaltz (23, 5.9): 183gms, ES 13:15 (B qoc), 1.86p/60, 1.41p1/60, -2.5cfrel, -3.0xgfrel ---- PP 2:09, 3.37p/60, 1.99p1/60 --- PK 0:38


1) There are two clear outliers on this list by these numbers, which I would probably just throw out when it comes to comparables:

• Pastrnak seems to be well underpaid, and probably should have a caphit a couple mil higher. There is something to be said, though, about him possibly padding some numbers thanks to being on one of the most dominant lines in hockey. But he was even younger than most of these guys when he signed so this one just looks like a steal to me.
• Eichel seems to be well overpaid. He is probably a couple mil overpaid. It could be argued that the Sabres kinda had to overpay him to make sure he stayed, though. Still, though, this shows the importance of being a true center.

2) Neither of the Leafs already signed are overpaid in the least. Their caphit slots in perfectly with their performance:

• Matthews' performance is simply far, far better than anyone there other than McDavid. It's not even a close call - he's just been at a level his entire ELC that the others have only touched on.
• Nylander performed at a very similar level as Drai and Aho on their ELC's. Drai and Aho, though, have a better case to make that they are legit centers, and as we know, centers get more than wingers, so their 1.5m higher caphit makes sense. Willy is just a bit more impressive than Ehlers there, and has more C potential, so the slightly higher caphit there also makes sense.

3) How do the current RFA slot in here?

• Laine really shouldn't be paid more than $6m, in my opinion, but I'm sure he's asking for much more. He's one of the few 21yr olds here so that's a boost, but even his offensive numbers aren't as good as most of the guys here, and his possession metrics are horrific.
• Connor as well I think the Jets really want to keep under Ehler's number. Their production is identical, but even though connor's qoc is tougher, it's still too huge a gap in possession numbers for my tastes. Also, Connor is a year older, making those numbers a bit less impressive. I'm sure the Jets really, really want to keep these guys under $6m and IMO they're right on both of them.
• Rantanen is a really tough call. First thing to notice is that he's one of the "old" guys on this list, having no teenager years included in those numbers. But, on the other hand, he has played a legit topline role against topline competition consistently, unlike many of the others. BUT, more importantly for me, and probably surprising to some, is that his offensive productivity isn't as good as you'd think it was just looking at his standard numbers. And given that he's strictly a winger, I really wouldn't want to give him as much as Aho and Drai got. Heck I'd have a hard time giving him much more than Willy got.
• Point is really damn good, though again he's one of the "old" guys with no teenage years counted in these numbers. Still, his production is a clear step up here from the bulk of the guys, and he playes legit topline C minutes against top compeition, and holds his own possession wise. 8.5 would have to be the floor here based on comparables I think, but I think 9.5 would probably be deserved.
• Marner is awesome. His production is a clear step above everyone here not named McDavid or Matthews. He's also not one of the old guys, and (kinda) holds his own possession wise against top competition. Also, he's a pure winger, not a center. And, of course, he is a clear and large step down from Matthews productivity wise. Marner has only come close to matthews-level productivity in one of the three years, and that's the one he spent fulltime with Tavares. Looking at where he sits on this list, you can see why Dubas places his value at around $9.5m. And I'm sure, to get a deal done, Dubas would be willing to go to $10m or even a tick over and still feel ok with the deal, based on these comparables.

So while you may, in your professional experience, disagree with the kind of numbers Dubas values, and would prefer that the guy in charge of our billion dollar franchise would just sort players based on points already, you still should make yourself aware of the kind of numbers he has earned his way into the top job in the hockey world based on, and see how they perfectly explain Matthews' contract, Willy's contract, and the $10.4m in capsapce he has left himself to sign Marner.

Call Dubas an idiot if you'd like for not understanding that all he should be looking at is POINTS and nothing else when making $50m decisions for our team, but understand that the valuations make perfect sense from the data he values.


As for Marner, there's no reason to get all pissy and hate him for trying to bargain for more money. He has every right to do that, and no other big RFA has signed a deal yet, so there's nothing to criticize. That being said, I highly doubt that Marner will in the end refuse to accept being the 2nd highest paid winger in hockey, and the highest winger 2nd contract ever, and the 3rd highest 2nd contract ever behind only McDavid and Matthews. He'll sign for about $10m which will still be a bit of an overpay but should be fine.

Remarkable. We have the 2 of the 3 best players on that list and Nylander performs at a similar level to Draisaitl and Aho and we still can't get past the Boston Bruins in the playoffs.

 

[Sypher04]

Remarkable. We have the 2 of the 3 best players on that list and Nylander performs at a similar level to Draisaitl and Aho and we still can't get past the Boston Bruins in the playoffs.

Well, experience is still worth something, as are Marchand/Bergeron/Rask who don't get represented in this list obviously, but further beyond that we had Nylander in situation where he honestly had no real chance to succeed. I'd say thaaaanks Kadri, but it's seems like beating a dead horse, especially since he's gone anyway. Nevermind that the series was still essentially a toss up.

 

[ajp4to]

Add to that our next 2 best depth options in Rosen/Borgman got injured as well like the day after the trade deadline.

Well there you have it, if only they had Rosen/Borgman they may have done what?!? Not make the playoffs? Made the playoffs by an extra point? Oh, and they did have both in the playoffs, why didn't they play?