The Fate of Dubas

[Americanadian]

Yep they had a wee bit of a burp the first 20gms of that first season of his contract. Elite ever since, by every measure. (Cue: lol regular season!)

And the last 30 games of that season where they put up 34 points!

 

[zeke]

And the last 30 games of that season where they put up 34 points!

You're still going to try this argument after what happened the next two seasons? Really?

Since the coaching change they're 2nd in pts%, 5th in goal diff, 1st in expected goal diff. Elite.

 

[Legion34]

I factored 1% because it was contracts out of ELC. I would say it's quite rare for a player to win a league-wide award during their ELC but out of all of his comparables you listed 5/6 of them did. As a UFA I am not sure if that applies.

I used platform year because that seems to be the year players are paid off of based on your comparables. Do you think Tampa took paid Stamkos based off his 46 point rookie season or do you think he was paid based off his back to back 90+ point seasons with a Rocket in his back pocket and a 3 round playoff run?

Tax is such an arbitrary way to judge contracts. There's state tax in Colorado but they continue to get deals below perceived market value (Rantanen, Makar), likewise in Boston or Winnipeg where Ehlers/Pastrnak were both paid less than Nylander. Gaudreau just took <10M in Columbus after a 115 point season.

I would expect Matthews to sign whatever contract MacKinnon signs. That will be his comprarable when goes to sign. Add on 1% for better goal totals.

1.) absolutely full history gets taken into account. Was cheecho worth 50 goals? The math was done. Total goals points repeat history is a more predictive of future contracts. You will see it with kadri. Marchment etc.

You can personally decide whatever you want is fair in your own hypothetical model. I can decide that blocked shots are worth more than goals. That doesn’t mean it has any bearing on reality. Historical comparables show

2.) there is no evidence that 1% extra for a major award in ELC is somehow credible and 4 as a ufa is not worth anything in ufa seems to be a cop out.

The idea that you think matthews and mackinnon have remotely comparable totals or contract projections makes no sense.

Matthews goals points career highs are way better.
Way more awards.

The math doesn’t add up

 

[Americanadian]

You're still going to try this argument after what happened the next two seasons? Really?

Since the coaching change they're 2nd in pts%, 5th in goal diff, 1st in expected goal diff. Elite.

Seems like we're moving goal posts now. I thought this was about the Matthews post-ELC era. We can't just cut out 23 games because he didn't like his coach? I could maybe look past that if he had actual success (playoff wins) with his new coach.

1.) absolutely full history gets taken into account. Was cheecho worth 50 goals? The math was done. Total goals points repeat history is a more predictive of future contracts. You will see it with kadri. Marchment etc.

You can personally decide whatever you want is fair in your own hypothetical model. I can decide that blocked shots are worth more than goals. That doesn’t mean it has any bearing on reality. Historical comparables show

2.) there is no evidence that 1% extra for a major award in ELC is somehow credible and 4 as a ufa is not worth anything in ufa seems to be a cop out.

The idea that you think matthews and mackinnon have remotely comparable totals or contract projections makes no sense.

Matthews goals points career highs are way better.
Way more awards.

The math doesn’t add up

MacKinnon has what actually matters which is a cup. He's also 0.48 P/G higher in the playoffs throughout his career. What is the end goal here? Individual trophies or team trophies?

 

[zeke]

Seems like we're moving goal posts now. I thought this was about the Matthews post-ELC era. We can't just cut out 23 games because he didn't like his coach? I could maybe look past that if he had actual success (playoff wins) with his new coach.

The last 2 seasons the leafs have been elite top 5 by every measure.

The 1st season of matthews' deal, you are correct, they were not elite. Your theory is because those contracts made the roster not good enough, whereas i havw a different theory.

But anyways, theyve been elite the last 2yrs, so if you want to argue that that 1st non-elite post-elc year still proves your point, have at it.

 

[Americanadian]

The last 2 seasons the leafs have been elite top 5 by every measure.

The 1st season of matthews' deal, you are correct, they were not elite. Your theory is because those contracts made the roster not good enough, whereas i havw a different theory.

But anyways, theyve been elite the last 2yrs, so if you want to argue that that 1st non-elite post-elc year still proves your point, have at it.

Can't disagree with what you're saying here. Can't lose sight of what the actual goal is though.

 

[Legion34]

Seems like we're moving goal posts now. I thought this was about the Matthews post-ELC era. We can't just cut out 23 games because he didn't like his coach? I could maybe look past that if he had actual success (playoff wins) with his new coach.


MacKinnon has what actually matters which is a cup. He's also 0.48 P/G higher in the playoffs throughout his career. What is the end goal here? Individual trophies or team trophies?

????? The question is not what we want. The question is about salary and contracts based on worth.

There is no evidence at all that your “model” is based on anything remotely close to reality

“Cup win” does not have historical bearing on contract negotiations in comparison to points and hardware.

You can decide what you think players should be paid all you want. But it has nothing to do with reality and playerd
And GMs can not be expected to make contracts based on your personal valuations instead of actual historical comparisons

 

[Dekes For Days]

And, like I've shown, if a player signs a year early it skews things.

It doesn't skew anything. Contracts are based on the cap at time of signing. They are not signed based on a cap that doesn't exist, which is what you're attempting to argue. In fact, manipulating contracts in the way you are is how we'd end up with a wildly skewed list that makes zero sense. Crosby's post-ELC valuation was 17.30% x 5 years. That is the highest post-ELC valuation ever.

Pittsburgh did benefit from signing Crosby earlier and then not having an unexpected stagnant cap due to a global pandemic, but that's entirely unrelated to their post-ELC valuation. If a player is comfortable and has been given a fair opportunity to show what they can do, they may be willing to sign earlier - locking in life-changing financial security and removing the risk of a downturn or injury in the 3rd year in exchange for signing under a slightly lesser cap. Unfortunately, we instead had Lou and Babcock screwing over our star players.

That seems like a terrible and subjective way to evaluate contracts.

It's the only way to evaluate contracts. A terrible way to evaluate contracts would be claiming they're signed based on a cap that doesn't exist.

the statement you are quoting is correct. Matthews did come in 1% less than Crosby.

The statement was incorrect. There was not a 1% difference in the cap hit percentages they signed for. Matthews signed for around 3% less of the cap, which was consistent with the discrepancy between the players, and consistent with the entire history of post-ELC contracts.

 

[Americanadian]

????? The question is not what we want. The question is about salary and contracts based on worth.

There is no evidence at all that your “model” is based on anything remotely close to reality

“Cup win” does not have historical bearing on contract negotiations in comparison to points and hardware.

You can decide what you think players should be paid all you want. But it has nothing to do with reality and playerd
And GMs can not be expected to make contracts based on your personal valuations instead of actual historical comparisons

That's fair.

Explain to me your model, the same way I explained mine, that explains why Matthews is paid what he is paid on his current contract.

 

[ACC1224]

1.) it doesn’t really work that way. You would also have to consider factors like agent fees/mortgage right offs
Etc.

2.) even IF you wanted to consider COL in us and exchange. It is such a small percentage of that has anything to do with actual money.

Like how much more do you think rent is? Toronto playerd
Lose like a million dollars. You think living in Toronto 8 months a year is worth that? I can afford it on way less

3.) you also can choose to rent drive take the subway own property etc. you can’t choose what taxes to pay

Justify it however you like Canadian players still earn an extra 30%, give or take.

 

[Americanadian]

The statement was incorrect. There was not a 1% difference in the cap hit percentages they signed for. Matthews signed for around 3% less of the cap, which was consistent with the discrepancy between the players, and consistent with the entire history of post-ELC contracts.

Which year was it that Crosby was paid 17.3% of the cap?

 

[Legion34]

That's fair.

Explain to me your model, the same way I explained mine, that explains why Matthews is paid what he is paid on his current contract.

I don’t have a “model” that I think is worth X. What I value doesn’t matter. What matters is what GMs have paid for in the past and present. I looked at the historical Comparables and found that

Looking at RFAs on 5 year deals
And 6 years
If you look at total goals. Assists. Points. Points per game at the time of signing the contract. Matthews contract works out right where it should be.

Nylander is the same

Marner had less comps but he should have come
In closer to rants



Platform years don’t seem to be as predictive of contracts (cheecho).

When looking at star platers for ufa confezcr


If you look at stars but not superstars in the league they get 14% of the cap (13.5-15%) tavares. Doughty panarin etc… people can complain about tavares
But he was 2nd in the league in scoring and a 2 x hart finalist.

Tax free markets get better discounts (11.5-12.5%). Point. Seguin

If you compare
They all work out pretty reasonable. Marner is about 1 million overpaid.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Which year was it that Crosby was paid 17.3% of the cap?

Crosby received a contract that was 17.30% of the cap at time of signing, for a 5 year term.

 

[Americanadian]

Crosby received a contract that was 17.30% of the cap at time of signing, for a 5 year term.

So he has never earned 17.3% of the cap? Not sure if you actually did the research but the cap went up 12.7% between when Crosby signed and when his contract kicked in which was fairly consistent although the lowest rise since the cap was implemented.

I don’t have a “model” that I think is worth X. What I value doesn’t matter. What matters is what GMs have paid for in the past and present. I looked at the historical Comparables and found that

Looking at RFAs on 5 year deals
And 6 years
If you look at total goals. Assists. Points. Points per game at the time of signing the contract. Matthews contract works out right where it should be.

Nylander is the same

Marner had less comps but he should have come
In closer to rants



Platform years don’t seem to be as predictive of contracts (cheecho).

When looking at star platers for ufa confezcr


If you look at stars but not superstars in the league they get 14% of the cap (13.5-15%) tavares. Doughty panarin etc… people can complain about tavares
But he was 2nd in the league in scoring and a 2 x hart finalist.

Tax free markets get better discounts (11.5-12.5%). Point. Seguin

If you compare
They all work out pretty reasonable. Marner is about 1 million overpaid.

Please explain the bolded using data, similar to what I did for you.

 

[zeke]

So he has never earned 17.3% of the cap? Not sure if you actually did the research but the cap went up 12.7% between when Crosby signed and when his contract kicked in which was fairly consistent although the lowest rise since the cap was implemented.


Please explain the bolded using data, similar to what I did for you.

first thing you need to do is adjust your offensive numbers for ice time and ice time per game situation.

Like I said, Matthews was already the best goalscorer in the league on his ELC, regardless of whether he won Rockets or not.

 

[Legion34]

So he has never earned 17.3% of the cap? Not sure if you actually did the research but the cap went up 12.7% between when Crosby signed and when his contract kicked in which was fairly consistent although the lowest rise since the cap was implemented.


Please explain the bolded using data, similar to what I did for you.

I’ve done this so many times. The waffles guy has been making things up for years. It was easy with hockey reference. You but now you have to pay.

You have to go back and actually figure out games played. Contracts sign and actual production.

I’m not doing all that again. But when you ooom at actual goals points etc Matthews was

2nd in actual goals /tier for second in gpg and top 10 in points and ppg over since 1996.

Feel free to take it or leave it.

 

[Americanadian]

first thing you need to do is adjust your offensive numbers for ice time and ice time per game situation.

Like I said, Matthews was already the best goalscorer in the league on his ELC, regardless of whether he won Rockets or not.

If he wasn't a defensive liability during his ELC maybe he would have earned more ice time. Is there a large precedent for players being paid based off goals/60 and points/60? I was unaware of this.

 

[zeke]

If he wasn't a defensive liability during his ELC maybe he'd earn the ice time. Is there a large precedent for players being paid based off goals/60 and points/60? I was unaware of this.

Other stars received much more ice time, particularly on the PP. Matthews received it as soon as the coach was fired, to great success, and somehow became instantly good defensively at the same time. It had nothing to do with earning anything.

And yes, nobody involved in the negotiation was stupid enough to try and blame Matthews for Babcock's ice time decisions.

 

[Americanadian]

I’ve done this so many times. The waffles guy has been making things up for years. It was easy with hockey reference. You but now you have to pay.

You have to go back and actually figure out games played. Contracts sign and actual production.

I’m not doing all that again. But when you ooom at actual goals points etc Matthews was

2nd in actual goals /tier for second in gpg and top 10 in points and ppg over since 1996.

Feel free to take it or leave it.

I will leave it. I provided my data which was only contracts signed in the cap era which should be the only comparables.

Other stars received much more ice time, particularly on the PP. Matthews received it as soon as the coach was fired, to great success. It had nothing to do with earning anything.

And yes, nobody involved in the negotiation was stupid enough to try and blame Matthews for Babcock's ice time decisions.

3 years later and multiple pieces overboard it's easy to argue that Dubas looks stupid then and now. It's a shame the other teams got to use points and goals per game and Dubas got stuck with per 60 rates.

 

[Dekes For Days]

So he has never earned 17.3% of the cap?

What percentage of the cap that Crosby took up in each year of his contract is an entirely different discussion, and I've already addressed the potential benefits of signing young players earlier and not having your contract unexpectedly run through a global pandemic-induced stagnant cap. What's relevant to his contract signing is the cap at time of signing, not a cap that didn't exist. Crosby received a contract worth 17.30% of the cap, for a 5 year term. That is the highest post-ELC contract valuation ever. Which he probably deserved, just like Matthews deserved his contract.

 

[zeke]

I will leave it. I provided my data which was only contracts signed in the cap era which should be the only comparables.


3 years later and multiple pieces overboard it's easy to argue that Dubas looks stupid then and now. It's a shame the other teams got to use points and goals per game and Dubas got stuck with per 60 rates.

3 years later and the team has done nothing but improve, easily replacing the overpaid complementary pieces for cheap while leafs nation screamed for them to trade away core pieces instead.

 

[Jumptheshark]

Only gets sacked if matthews does sign another contract

 

[Legion34]

I will leave it. I provided my data which was only contracts signed in the cap era which should be the only comparables.


3 years later and multiple pieces overboard it's easy to argue that Dubas looks stupid then and now. It's a shame the other teams got to use points and goals per game and Dubas got stuck with per 60 rates.

Yes. Those are the comparables. And they say what I said. He was paid fairly.

You have interpreted the comparables Incorrectly by

1.) subjectively adding 1% for trophy …. Which apparently don’t matter for ufa

2.) adding in years after the contract were signed.
3.) deciding platform years were more important
4.) ignoring actual totals in favour of purely per game
….. actual results actually beat pace
5.) looked at the cap hit for the following year. Which was unknown at the time of signing. When the cap is fluctuating widely
6.) ignored 2 players for no reason

these are all your opinion and have no bearing on the actual contracts that actually happened If you just used goals points and per game you woud see Matthews performed quite well and right in line.

You also didn’t explain why actual totals and trophies don’t matter for ufa.

I mean you can think whatever. Just know that it’s based on what you think it should be. Not what the actual market suggests

 

[Americanadian]

3 years later and the team has done nothing but improve, easily replacing the overpaid complementary pieces for cheap while leafs nation screamed for them to trade away core pieces instead.

The Leafs have seen all of Hyman, Brown, Kadri, Johnsson, Kapanen, Andersen go out the door since the Matthews/Marner deals kicked in and the only meaningful contributors they picked up up front were Bunting, Kampf, Kerfoot, Mikheyev, Campbell. Swapping the Zaitsev/Gardiner contracts for Brodie/Muzzin is good business and a relative wash of cap space. Mikheyev is gone now and Kerfoot is the first person everyone wants out the door (myself included) because of his cap hit. The only reason the Leafs are getting better is because the top players been better. If they were paid based off their production at the time rather than projection the Leafs would be looking at another 3-4M in cap space. With that money they could have either kept some of their players or taken advantage of the current market and acquired better players for cheap. Look at Bjorkstrand, Niederreiter, Pacioretty, etc.

 

[Americanadian]

Yes. Those are the comparables. And they say what I said. He was paid fairly.

You have interpreted the comparables Incorrectly by

1.) subjectively adding 1% for trophy …. Which apparently don’t matter for ufa

2.) adding in years after the contract were signed.
3.) deciding platform years were more important
4.) ignoring actual totals in favour of purely per game
….. actual results actually beat pace
5.) looked at the cap hit for the following year. Which was unknown at the time of signing. When the cap is fluctuating widely
6.) ignored 2 players for no reason

these are all your opinion and have no bearing on the actual contracts that actually happened If you just used goals points and per game you woud see Matthews performed quite well and right in line.

You also didn’t explain why actual totals and trophies don’t matter for ufa.

I mean you can think whatever. Just know that it’s based on what you think it should be. Not what the actual market suggests

1. Winning league-wide trophies on a first contract is incredibly rare and 5/6 of the players did, exemplifying they are among the very best in the league. Matthews and Kane did not. Being the best in the league is worth something on a contract you would think?
2. I never added the years after the contracts were signed as I previously mentioned to you.
3. This is purely subjective on both of our parts.
4. Out of all the players judged, Matthews had the lowest amount of games played through his first 2 years so I don't understand this gripe.
5. Using cap hit for the actual year the contract signed vs signing year only pertains to Kane, Malkin and Crosby. For all three of those contracts the cap rose at a historically low rates the year their contracts kicked in. Crosby: 2008-09 lowest rise in the history of the salary cap. Malkin 2009-10: lowest rise in the history of the salary cap. Kane 2010-11: 2nd lowest rise in the history of the salary cap. You could make the argument all day long based off the trend of the cap that the teams anticipated these contracts having a lesser CH% when they kicked in.
6. I didn't ignore Kovy and Nash - I provided data with and without them. I think it's naive to use contracts that were signed before a single game was played with a salary cap.

Look at the largest UFA contract's ever signed: Panarin and Tavares. Did either of those players ever have better point totals than Gaudreau? Did either of those players ever win a league-wide trophy?

Once you figure out the answer to that question you may realize that UFA is all about desperation. If a team is desperate enough for high end talent they will pay whatever it takes. It is much more difficult to predict UFA contracts than it is to predict RFA.