Player Discussion Tim Stützle - (C) - Part VI

[thinkwild]

no you just like to act like a know it all and never consider the fallibility of some your weak ass arguments like this one.

Stuzle could have used ALL of J. Hughes contract + Brady, Chabot and Norris to get him a higher contract than he got but he didn't care enough about money to do it. like he HIMSELF said.

I guess that's a possibility that Stu didnt care enough about money. We dont really have a way to know that for sure even he said that in the press, but it is a charitable interpretation. But i think Bert's point that he is signing to mitigate risk is the more standard reason the majority of players would do that and certainly the way his agent would have advised him about it. I dont think any less of him if he did do it for that reason. In fact if he did admit to your interpretation i would think he is not playing the business game right.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Ya I'm siding with Bert on that one. If Stutzle wanted more, he could have, but he would have had to wait a year. If his goal was to get the contract done when they did, it's a very fair deal.

 

[BondraTime]

Ya I'm siding with Bert on that one. If Stutzle wanted more, he could have, but he would have had to wait a year. If his goal was to get the contract done when they did, it's a very fair deal.

Absolutely.

It was 65 million guaranteed, or a shot (which would have been a good one) at more/less a year later. There’s the risk of injury, poor season, etc.

8.35 was the going rate, even higher, for a guy in his position.

All it takes is a good or bad season and then people are saying a guy robbed the team or a guy took a discount.

Chabot did the same. Signed with a year remaining on his ELC after 55 points. Team paid for what they thought he could be, and what his agent agreed upon.

He hasn’t looked like an 8 million dollar guy since, but the Sens never overpaid for him. That’s the going rate when you’re signing a guy to a deal based upon future possibilities that hasn’t happened yet. Many don’t live up to them, that’s the inherent risk understood by both teams.

What happens in seasons after doesn’t mean a guy took a discount, or robbed a team blind, it means that they either lived up to, failed to live up to, or exceeded, the agreed upon compensation a guaranteed contract offered.

You give up your extra year of bargaining power for a guaranteed payday. There is an agreed upon principal from both team and agent that the player could be underpaid or overpaid, that’s the risk both sides take.

Sens won their risk, big time. Stuetzle is more than fine losing that risk, as he got 65 million for it.

 

[Beech]

I guess that's a possibility that Stu didnt care enough about money. We dont really have a way to know that for sure even he said that in the press, but it is a charitable interpretation. But i think Bert's point that he is signing to mitigate risk is the more standard reason the majority of players would do that and certainly the way his agent would have advised him about it. I dont think any less of him if he did do it for that reason. In fact if he did admit to your interpretation i would think he is not playing the business game right.

Chyrl Pounder (sorry about the spelling) was on the TSN desk on Free Agency Frenzy.

She made a comment that caught my attention.

She suggested (In a round about way). Agents were driving the 8 x Y contracts that they where pushing clients.. A way to get their money upfront..

You get your % and for the 8 years.. Even if you are fired, you get the full cut..

the entire panel, kind of agreed.. Again, its not like they debated it long and hard..

I got a real strong sense, that pre 2023, agents may have been a real hard driving force behind the 8 x Y contracts.

we will see, if anger rises among players and agents start getting fired.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

I guess that's a possibility that Stu didnt care enough about money. We dont really have a way to know that for sure even he said that in the press, but it is a charitable interpretation. But i think Bert's point that he is signing to mitigate risk is the more standard reason the majority of players would do that and certainly the way his agent would have advised him about it. I dont think any less of him if he did do it for that reason. In fact if he did admit to your interpretation i would think he is not playing the business game right.

I don't think he doesn't care about the money just that they were throwing a shit load of money at him and he said that's good.

My argument is that he could have very easily asked for more and gotten more if he cared about the money

All he had to do was wait 1 month into the season and he would be PPG it would be even more evident that he is the best player on the roster and worth much more than the other players. Or if he really really cared about the money he would have sat out some games.

Obviously the peace of mind is a factor not only for him but for why he got a lower contract. But it worked because he wasn't money hungry and just wanted to retire his parents and focus on the hockey.

its why we basically signed him at the floor of his contract range.

And yes my opinion is that he didn't care much about playing the business game right or at all. Just that he knew he was getting enough money that he wouldn't ever have to worry about it again.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Think it was safe to assume over the next 9 years Stutzle’s deal would turn out be a great one, especially when the cap would be over 100 million before it expired, and the player was only 20 at the time of signing. One of the best value signings in the league.

 

[Beech]

Absolutely.

It was 65 million guaranteed, or a shot (which would have been a good one) at more/less a year later. There’s the risk of injury, poor season, etc.

8.35 was the going rate, even higher, for a guy in his position.

All it takes is a good or bad season and then people are saying a guy robbed the team or a guy took a discount.

Chabot did the same. Signed with a year remaining on his ELC after 55 points. Team paid for what they thought he could be, and what his agent agreed upon.

He hasn’t looked like an 8 million dollar guy since, but the Sens never overpaid for him. That’s the going rate when you’re signing a guy to a deal based upon future possibilities that hasn’t happened yet. Many don’t live up to them, that’s the inherent risk understood by both teams.

What happens in seasons after doesn’t mean a guy took a discount, or robbed a team blind, it means that they either lived up to, failed to live up to, or exceeded, the agreed upon compensation a guaranteed contract offered.

You give up your extra year of bargaining power for a guaranteed payday. There is an agreed upon principal from both team and agent that the player could be underpaid or overpaid, that’s the risk both sides take.

Sens won their risk, big time. Stuetzle is more than fine losing that risk, as he got 65 million for it.

words of wisdom. and you are 100% right..

Except, I continue to struggle with the last line. Will he be fine in 2025/2026 if he is at 100 points (and possibly more) and new signees at the 100 point mark (Hello Pettersson) is at 12-15 M?

and in 2027/2028 when a 100 point man is at 13-16 M.

and 2029/2030 when a 100 point man is at 14-17 M.

YUP, he willingly signed. I hope he is still happy when he is at almost 50% of the going rate in 2030/2031.

And in 2031 when he is 29/30 (for the 2031/2032 season)and hopes to recoup some of his money.. No one touches him with an 8 x 17 M contract.

His risk may be:
2 M in 2023/2024
2.5 M in 2024/2025
3 M
3.5 M
4 M
4.5M
5 M
5.5 M in 2030/2031

a grand total of 24 M... f*** I hope he is okay.. 65 M, could have been 89 M...

As for the Sens wining, what if his anger gets to him and demands a trade, or plays poorly?

read post 779

 

[Beech]

Think it was safe to assume over the next 9 years Stutzle’s deal would turn out be a great one, especially when the cap would be over 100 million before it expired, and the player was only 20 at the time of signing.

if you are the Sens, you are doing somersaults.

Assuming, Stuzzle gets no regrets.

He and Jack Hughes will be the two greatest contracts a club has ever given out.

When these contracts end, the cap and the standard for 100 point players will be 15-17 M. They are at 1/2 that.

I want to see from the players end...

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Absolutely.

It was 65 million guaranteed, or a shot (which would have been a good one) at more/less a year later. There’s the risk of injury, poor season, etc.

8.35 was the going rate, even higher, for a guy in his position.

All it takes is a good or bad season and then people are saying a guy robbed the team or a guy took a discount.

Chabot did the same. Signed with a year remaining on his ELC after 55 points. Team paid for what they thought he could be, and what his agent agreed upon.

He hasn’t looked like an 8 million dollar guy since, but the Sens never overpaid for him. That’s the going rate when you’re signing a guy to a deal based upon future possibilities that hasn’t happened yet. Many don’t live up to them, that’s the inherent risk understood by both teams.

What happens in seasons after doesn’t mean a guy took a discount, or robbed a team blind, it means that they either lived up to, failed to live up to, or exceeded, the agreed upon compensation a guaranteed contract offered.

You give up your extra year of bargaining power for a guaranteed payday. There is an agreed upon principal from both team and agent that the player could be underpaid or overpaid, that’s the risk both sides take.

Sens won their risk, big time. Stuetzle is more than fine losing that risk, as he got 65 million for it.

Well put. Of course the argument is there that he left money on the table by not waiting, but that's the argument, not that he could/should have squeezed more when he did sign. And like you say, we've seen it go the other way many times too. Stu took the gauranteed pay day over trying to maximize it.

It's like life for all of us. We all have different risk tolerances. Some would take the deal and security, and some would bet on themselves. If I were faced with 65 mil or waiting to try to get say 90 mil, I'd be taking the 65 without batting an eye or having any regrets, but that's easy to say from my seat of normal joe where no matter the number, it's inconceivable wealth.

 

[dumbdick]

I feel like the money thing is always a bit overblown.

How much does an extra mil or two really matter when you're making $64M over 8 years? i doubt people are losing much sleep over it. These guys hit the lottery and I'm not sure how much they really care about the incremental salary.

Other than guys like Matt Tkachuk, of course, who seems to just like hardball negotiating for the fun of it.

That's why I feel stuff like playing in NYC, proximity to family, etc., probably matters a bit more for the elite stars.

Guys might legit leave millions on the table for that if they already make more than they know what to do with.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

I feel like the money thing is always a bit overblown.

How much does an extra mil or two really matter when you're making $64M over 8 years? i doubt people are losing much sleep over it. These guys hit the lottery and I'm not sure how much they really care about the incremental salary.

Other than guys like Matt Tkachuk, of course, who seems to just like hardball negotiating for the fun of it.

That's why I feel stuff like playing in NYC, proximity to family, etc., probably matters a bit more for the elite stars.

Guys might legit leave millions on the table for that if they already make more than they know what to do with.

Seems like we're in an era of either pay market value or guys bounce. There's exceptions, like the Tkachuk example, where it's clear that maximizing take home earnings were a huge priority over other factors, or guys that take a little less to be where they want, but across the board, they seem to expect to get what the market dictates. Home town discounts are mostly dead.

 

[dumbdick]

Seems like we're in an era of either pay market value or guys bounce. There's exceptions, like the Tkachuk example, where it's clear that maximizing take home earnings were a huge priority over other factors, or guys that take a little less to be where they want, but across the board, they seem to expect to get what the market dictates. Home town discounts are mostly dead.

You still see stuff where guys like Spezza sign in Toronto because of the roots there (Or Giroux here).

Nobody is accepting insulting deals, but I think the money matters less for players relative to other factors once you've already made bank.

That said, the agents definitely care (both for their cut and the optics to other clients if they accept a bad deal). And they're the ones actually doing the work.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

You still see stuff where guys like Spezza sign in Toronto because of the roots there (Or Giroux here).

Nobody is accepting insulting deals, but I think the money matters less for players relative to other factors once you've already made bank.

That said, the agents definitely care (both for their cut and the optics to other clients if they accept a bad deal). And they're the ones actually doing the work.

Ya I'd agree, that's about the extent of it. Leaving maybe 500k to a mil a year on the table or taking less term, but can't expect much more than that from them. Giroux's deal looks even better because he proved to still have even more game than initially thought. That was up there as one of his best seasons ever, and was his highest goal total ever, let alone still holding it down as a 35 year old.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

The moment that Stutzle contract was signed it was a steal and one of the best contracts in the league. How is that a fair rate than? Clearly he was okay signing for a discount rate.

and if we're going to talk about risk, what are the chances a player in his physical and health prime gets so badly injured that they never play again or never get a contract. Its a risk but that risk is miniscule, and like Beech mentioned he might have left 15+mill on table.

So those 20 or 40 games of playing risk could have cost 10-15 mill. That is not good risk assessment but Stutzle didn't care because he didn't care about the risk or the money.

Just that he have enough money that his parents never have to work again. Which are his words.

 

[Hale The Villain]

The moment that Stutzle contract was signed it was a steal and one of the best contracts in the league. How is that a fair rate than? Clearly he was okay signing for a discount rate.

and if we're going to talk about risk, what are the chances a player in his physical and health prime gets so badly injured that they never play again or never get a contract. Its a risk but that risk is miniscule, and like Beech mentioned he might have left 15+mill on table.

So those 20 or 40 games of playing risk could have cost 10-15 mill. That is not good risk assessment but Stutzle didn't care because he didn't care about the risk or the money.

Just that he have enough money that his parents never have to work again. Which are his words.

It wasn't a steal when he signed it. A 58 point player typically doesn't get 67M over 8 years.

It's turned into a steal because Stutzle exploded offensively. Turned out he should have gambled on himself, but it's not exactly easy to pass up 67M.

 

[Golden_Jet]

It wasn't a steal when he signed it. A 58 point player typically doesn't get 67M over 8 years.

It's turned into a steal because Stutzle exploded offensively. Turned out he should have gambled on himself, but it's not exactly easy to pass up 67M.

I thought it was a steal at the time, not sure why one wouldn’t expect him to improve over 58 points, When he got that at 19/20 years old. Seemed obvious he would earn that deal and more, over the next 9 years, especially with where the cap will go over that time.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

It wasn't a steal when he signed it. A 58 point player typically doesn't get 67M over 8 years.

It's turned into a steal because Stutzle exploded offensively. Turned out he should have gambled on himself, but it's not exactly easy to pass up 67M.

He was being sandbagged with some of the worst linemates we have given a top liner since Spezza. And he still went ppg in the 2nd half of that year.

He was also standout in both his WJCs, had produced in the NHL, had good size, was an elite skater, ridiculous hands, top tier hockey sense, grit and physical play, high work ethic, simply very few weaknesses if any, he even has captain level character.

It was a steal the moment it was signed.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

It was a steal because we were all extremely confident, with basically no doubt in our minds, in what he would live up to, but we were still paying based more on what was to come than what had already happened. If Tim wanted to be paid more than he got, he had to wait. That's the only distinction. He didn't have the leverage at the time to demand more. Luckily for us, he didn't wait and they got it done.

 

[Sun God Nika]

Crazy thing is Stützle will be 29 at the end of this deal. He can absolutely cash in on another 8 year deal in Free Agency. He will be motivated throughout this contract.

 

[Wallet Inspector]

One freak accident and you may never play hockey again.

I made way more sense for Stutzle to take the 67 million than risk losing everything over trying to squeeze out another 1mil/yr.

 

[JD1]

if you are the Sens, you are doing somersaults.

Assuming, Stuzzle gets no regrets.

He and Jack Hughes will be the two greatest contracts a club has ever given out.

When these contracts end, the cap and the standard for 100 point players will be 15-17 M. They are at 1/2 that.

I want to see from the players end...

Nate McKinnon doesn't seem too disgruntled and that's basically his situation. Signed for double. He has a cup to show for the team being in a good cap situation because of his cap hit

 

[Micklebot]

if you are the Sens, you are doing somersaults.

Assuming, Stuzzle gets no regrets.

He and Jack Hughes will be the two greatest contracts a club has ever given out.

When these contracts end, the cap and the standard for 100 point players will be 15-17 M. They are at 1/2 that.

I want to see from the players end...

Keith was a Norris contender for years at 5.5 cap, hit, that was before the contract term limit came in, but that deal was amazing.

 

[bicboi64]

It wasn't a steal when he signed it. A 58 point player typically doesn't get 67M over 8 years.

It's turned into a steal because Stutzle exploded offensively. Turned out he should have gambled on himself, but it's not exactly easy to pass up 67M.

I agree.

If Stu made progress in his development and finished the season with 65-75 points, he'd be overpaid for a year of the deal, but still potentially be worth it because we'd gamble on him hitting his prime within the 8 years. He happened to explode offensively in one of the higher scoring years in the last decade or so and the contract now looks like a bargain.

 

[BondraTime]

Keith was a Norris contender for years at 5.5 cap, hit, that was before the contract term limit came in, but that deal was amazing.

I mean, Mackinnon was signed for 7 years at 6.3 and was nominated for the Hart 3 times over the duration.

Marchand signed a year early prior to his breakout, 6.1 million in 2016 after putting up a career high of 61 points and having 289 points in 454 games, and since then has gotten 573 points in 490 games.

Guys signing off their ELC's, or signing prior to breaking out, have deals that are unbelievable all the time, it's what happens when you pay for potential without the tangible results yet. You take less than what your perceived ceiling is for a guarentee.

Tage Thomson just did the same thing as Stu, signed with a year left on his contract, because he was given a huge guarantee of 50 million, only 7.1 a year. He never helped out the Sabres by taking less, he just took the guarenteed money prior to his huge breakout.

 

[Beech]

Nate McKinnon doesn't seem too disgruntled and that's basically his situation. Signed for double. He has a cup to show for the team being in a good cap situation because of his cap hit

he recouped at age 27.. still plenty of fuel in the tank. First year was 27/28 on a new deal.

Tim will be 29.. Play his first season as a 29/30 on any new contract.... Let's hope someone out there gives him an 8 x 15-17 to make up..