Trades and Free Agency Discussion - The Dog Days of Summer

[Fogelhund]

The reactions to this signing will be fascinating to read.

I predict a ton of disagreement.

Just so it's in writing, I'm pretty happy with giving him what he has now. 14.64%, or $12.8 mil, on an $88 mil expected salary cap. In the $13's, I think is an overpay, and will make it difficult to build a team. Marner will want the same, Nylander will want $10. If we can keep Matthews in the $12 range... Nylander will do $9, and Marner $12 as well. WE can build a team with these guys at $33-34 mil. It's going to be tough at $37 mil combined.

 

[SprDaVE]

The reactions to this signing will be fascinating to read.

I predict a ton of disagreement.

It's just hard to be in agreement with something that there is no precedence for. It's pretty rare a player his caliber signs for short-term with the highest AAV in the league in the moment. Leafs are kinda stuck with whatever Matthews wants because now he can walk in a years time.

Sounds like it's gonna happen and I really hope the bare minimum is that it will be 5 years. Anything less is less than ideal.

 

[baton elevated]

MLSE has no interest in building a team to compete for a cup. They have their marketable players and are content with that.

Tree has his walking papers. Sign all the top end guys at all costs and we will fill in the roster with plugs. Your mandate is not to win a cup but to keep selling jerseys and filling the building.

 

[kb]

MacKinnon is on an 8 year deal.

Matthews has been dogged by wrist/shoulder issues 2 of the past 3 seasons.

There's just as good a chance he doesn't get more next contract when he's on the wrong side of 30.

There is a lot of risk mitigation here for the Leafs too.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Matthews has been dogged by wrist/shoulder issues 2 of the past 3 seasons.

There's just as good a chance he doesn't get more next contract when he's on the wrong side of 30.

There is a lot of risk mitigation here for the Leafs too.

I’m sure Chicago was thrilled they signed Kane and Towes to 8 x 10.5. If they signed them for 5 x 10.5, they would have been able to trade them for absolute hauls as 31 year old PPG+ elite forwards instead of getting a grand total of a 2nd round pick for the two of them at 35.

 

[613Leafer]

Matthews has been dogged by wrist/shoulder issues 2 of the past 3 seasons.

There's just as good a chance he doesn't get more next contract when he's on the wrong side of 30.

There is a lot of risk mitigation here for the Leafs too.

So in your opinion, the Leafs would prefer Matthews at 5 X 13.5M to 8 X 13.5M when he'll be 27 in the first year of the new deal?

I don't think that's at all likely.

 

[LeafSteel]

Honestly at this point, right after money and term, I'm just hoping that none of the the new contracts come with NTC/NMC's.

Those have been absolute back-breakers and have had Treliving handcuffed. Dubas gave them out like candy, along with all the other perks he bent over on.

Anyone who doesn't want to be here needs to be able to be moved for what is in the Leafs best interests, not just the players.

What a novel concept, right?

 

[VanW27]

There is a simple solution. Allow teams to exempt 1 player from the cap from each team. The caveat would be it has to be a drafted home grown player not a free agent signing. Therefore JT would not qualify but AM ,MM, Rielly, Willy would.
Teams pressed to get to the floor can just do nothing. This is such a broke league.

The fundamental concept behind the cap is the 50% HRR share. You can't exempt players, even one, as it's almost certainly going to be a high paid one unless you also lower the cap accordingly. It would also give big market teams a big advantage, Leafs could give Matthews 30 million a year if they wanted, no other team could do even half that if they have to fit it under the cap. And we know how much Gary loves to prop up the bottom feeders - he's not gonna go for that.

 

[LaPlante94]

Honestly at this point, right after money and term, I'm just hoping that none of the the new contracts come with NTC/NMC's.

Those have been absolute back-breakers and have had Treliving handcuffed. Dubas gave them out like candy, along with all the other perks he bent over on.

Anyone who doesn't want to be here needs to be able to be moved for what is in the Leafs best interests, not just the players.

What a novel concept, right?

I don't think any top player is signing without those. It's basically a must have for star players now.

 

[VanW27]

Honestly at this point, right after money and term, I'm just hoping that none of the the new contracts come with NTC/NMC's.

Those have been absolute back-breakers and have had Treliving handcuffed. Dubas gave them out like candy, along with all the other perks he bent over on.

Anyone who doesn't want to be here needs to be able to be moved for what is in the Leafs best interests, not just the players.

What a novel concept, right?

Yep, it's not just the AAV, you can at least make an argument for the AAVs even if they are "high" but we also gave the extreme front loading and NTC/NMCs.

The front loading should have saved us on the AAV, the trade protections should have saved us on AAV, but instead we paid a premium and gave out all the perks at the same time.

 

[LeafSteel]

I don't think any top player is signing without those. It's basically a must have for star players now.

Completely out of control in the NHL. No other major professional sports league has nearly as many given out.

10 Team no trade lists are really the extent that these things should be.

 

[LaPlante94]

Completely out of control in the NHL. No other major professional sports league has nearly as many given out.

10 Team no trade lists are really the extent that these things should be.

Other leagues are different though. NBA you only have 5 starters and probably 1 or 2 guys max you'd want to give them to when you finally land a franchise player to build around. MLB I think they are pretty common but at the same time those players get like 30-40 million a year and up to 400 million over the duration of the contract so a NMC isn't really a huge concern after they get that big of a contract. NFL is the same pretty much where mostly QBs I feel like get them and they make so much money they don't care. They also have the ability to restructure the contracts to make cap space unlike the NHL so NMC aren't a big deal because of that. I also don't know how buyouts are in all the other leagues but I don't know if they stay against the cap or not like they do the NHL.

 

[LeafSteel]

Other leagues are different though. NBA you only have 5 starters and probably 1 or 2 guys max you'd want to give them to when you finally land a franchise player to build around. MLB I think they are pretty common but at the same time those players get like 30-40 million a year and up to 400 million over the duration of the contract so a NMC isn't really a huge concern after they get that big of a contract. NFL is the same pretty much where mostly QBs I feel like get them and they make so much money they don't care. They also have the ability to restructure the contracts to make cap space unlike the NHL so NMC aren't a big deal because of that. I also don't know how buyouts are in all the other leagues but I don't know if they stay against the cap or not like they do the NHL.

In the MLB, they have a rule called the “10 and 5 rule” where a player that has 10 years of experience and at least 5 years on their current team automatically gets the ability to veto trades, which leads to many players not getting explicit no-trade clauses in their contracts. Following that, none of Matthews, Marner or Nylander would have been eligible (as RFA's, for frackin' fracks sake........)

 

[Clark4Ever]

The reactions to this signing will be fascinating to read.

I predict a ton of disagreement.

To be honest, I think that it's Treliving that should be pushing for a shorter term deal, and for a couple of reasons.

1. A shorter term will keep the AAV lower.

2. I'm not convinced that Matthews will be durable enough to provide an adequate return on investment over a 7-8 year deal.

 

[Menzinger]

I don't know how you getaway with LTIRetiring Murray

You need to convince both Murray to get on board and the league to believe its legit.

For Murray this is a career death sentence while still being in his 20's . He probably still has the professional athletes mentality that he can defy odds and still play in the league a while and this is a contract year for that.

For the league there is pressure if Toronto tries to flex their financial muscles by spending over the cap. Murray is not ever dealing with the same injury and there isn't a injury called being fragile. So what injury will the leafs bring to the LTIR table when justifying it?

Buyout is the easiest course.


sidenote i am a sens fan so I have been watching this situation for a bit because we need the space lol so i definitely have a horse in the race here.

It might not be any more complicated than he simply can't fully pass a medical review. His injury history is exceptionally long. He's not super old, but he's not a spring chicken. An athlete in his late 20s has undergone considerable wear and tear and sometimes the body just gives out

 

[Ziggdiezan]

To be honest, I think that it's Treliving that should be pushing for a shorter term deal, and for a couple of reasons.

1. A shorter term will keep the AAV lower.

2. I'm not convinced that Matthews will be durable enough to provide an adequate return on investment over a 7-8 year deal.

It doesn't seem like the shorter term has historically keep the AAV lower with Matthews so i wouldn't count on it. Seems like he/his agent want max AAV now, sign for like 3 or 4 years then get a new contract after the big cap rise.

 

[baton elevated]

The fundamental concept behind the cap is the 50% HRR share. You can't exempt players, even one, as it's almost certainly going to be a high paid one unless you also lower the cap accordingly. It would also give big market teams a big advantage, Leafs could give Matthews 30 million a year if they wanted, no other team could do even half that if they have to fit it under the cap. And we know how much Gary loves to prop up the bottom feeders - he's not gonna go for that.

Of course he won't go for that. The bottom feeders are dictating to the rest of the league when we all know they have no right being there in the first place. The top 5 power teams should be pushing the agenda for the marquee cities but they don't so I guess owners don't care enough. It's a bush league since Mario declared it so.

 

[ACC1224]

It might not be any more complicated than he simply can't fully pass a medical review. His injury history is exceptionally long. He's not super old, but he's not a spring chicken. An athlete in his late 20s has undergone considerable wear and tear and sometimes the body just gives out

Don’t they do exit physicals? I’m sure we would have heard had he failed that.

 

[kb]

Don’t they do exit physicals? I’m sure we would have heard had he failed that.

I know they do exit interviews, but I can't recall anything about exit physicals....

 

[Legion34]

At this point wouldn’t Murray stay on LTIR?

Option a. Stay home. Recover. Get 8 million dollars
Option b. Force a buyout. Lose 2.64 million dollars

No team is giving him money in august right? Say he got a 1 million dollar deal. He’s losing 1.64 million and will get hurt again.

To me I think he is LTIR bound. I would stay home to collect 8 million by April 2024 vs 5.36 by 2025 plus whatever league min he is making.

He would be taking a 1.5-2.6 million cut

 

[Eternal Leaf]

To be honest, I think that it's Treliving that should be pushing for a shorter term deal, and for a couple of reasons.

1. A shorter term will keep the AAV lower.

2. I'm not convinced that Matthews will be durable enough to provide an adequate return on investment over a 7-8 year deal.

Let's be realistic, he will get his way on the next deal too and Injuries won't matter unless they're career-ending.

3-year deal = extension can be signed at 29.

5-year deal = extension can be signed at 31.

Even if he stays at the same cap %, he will see a major increase in his cap hit. I can't imagine any realistic scenario where the Leafs won't try to re-sign him after the next contract.

When that's the case, you are better off with the longer-term deal.

Right now, Matthews gets his desired cap hit and his desired term. It's pretty embarrassing but that's the way it is in Toronto. The real fun will start when Marner does the same during his turn.

No one wants to say or believe it but the Leafs are at a point where it looks like the next 2 seasons are gone with the potential of the next 5-6 seasons being gone if Marner and Nylander are re-signed to massive cap hits.

 

[Menzinger]

Don’t they do exit physicals? I’m sure we would have heard had he failed that.

I've never heard of such a thing (though that's not to say they don't exist).

Either way, a lot can happen over a couple monts. Injuries/pain can reappear during offseason training ect.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Let's be realistic, he will get his way on the next deal too and Injuries won't matter unless they're career-ending.

3-year deal = extension can be signed at 29.

5-year deal = extension can be signed at 31.

Even if he stays at the same cap %, he will see a major increase in his cap hit. I can't imagine any realistic scenario where the Leafs won't try to re-sign him after the next contract.

When that's the case, you are better off with the longer-term deal.

Right now, Matthews gets his desired cap hit and his desired term. It's pretty embarrassing but that's the way it is in Toronto. The real fun will start when Marner does the same during his turn.

No one wants to say or believe it but the Leafs are at a point where it looks like the next 2 seasons are gone with the potential of the next 5-6 seasons being gone if Marner and Nylander are re-signed to massive cap hits.

Why? In 6 years he’s 32, Marner is 33 and Nylander is 34. Rielly is still making 7.5 with NMC at 36. We’ve likely had very few picks throughout that timeframe so the farm is struggling.

If we haven’t won in 5 years why wouldn’t we be looking at trading the core while they still have significant value? Is signing them to long high paid retirement deals a good idea at that point?

 

[Stephen]

I've never heard of such a thing (though that's not to say they don't exist).

Either way, a lot can happen over a couple monts. Injuries/pain can reappear during offseason training ect.

Shea Weber played up until the Habs lost the cup to Tampa. Never played again.

 

[Eternal Leaf]

Why? In 6 years he’s 32, Marner is 33 and Nylander is 34. Rielly is still making 7.5 with NMC at 36. We’ve likely had very few picks throughout that timeframe so the farm is struggling.

If we haven’t won in 5 years why wouldn’t we be looking at trading the core while they still have significant value? Is signing them to long high paid retirement deals a good idea at that point?

I will explain why.

Let's assume Matthews signs a 3-year extension as is being reported. Why do you think he wants this? There's a reason for it. It's not from the goodness of his heart.

The logic is, he can re-sign a year before that contract runs out. This means he will be 29 and negotiating again with the Leafs. Matthews will still be a #1 franchise center at 29 years old (unless something crazy happens) and is going to get whatever he wants. This includes a higher cap hit (even if he stays at the same cap %) + a longer-term deal.

You are worried about giving him 8 years now. How will you feel when they give it to him at 29 years old to keep the franchise center in-house? They will get rid of everyone else before they ever trade him.

The only way a shorter term works is if you are certain you will get rid of him at that age. Otherwise, you're going to get hosed. Matthews is not going to sign a third short-term deal because he will know that the next contract is his last big payday and he will milk it all the way to the bank.

The Leafs ideal term is a 6-7 year deal with Matthews at a reasonable cap hit. Anything in the 3-5 year range and he will destroy them again on the next contract.