Around the League 2019-2025 Edition

[leaffan2005]

You can add guys like Rantanen, Giroux, Hedman to that list.

League is littered with players taking a bit less than market value while subsequently giving their team more cap flexibility to remain competitive.

Strange that this doesn't ever happen with these collection of players.

 

[Preston]

Matthews and McDavid might be underpaid really considering the impact they bring. Nylander is market value, maybe even cheap too considering on-ice impacts. Would it have been nice to get them both well under market value at 500k-1m cheaper? Sure, but that's not cap killing. Cap killing would be signing league min quality players to mid-tier contracts. Almost every team has those except the leafs really.

I do think there was a bit of a misstep to not get marner around 1.5-2 milly cheaper, though from the sounds of it he was never signing for less. So it is what it is. You can't change what players want or feel they're worth. At the end of the day these contracts won't kill a team. If you feel the contracts are the reason the team lacks success you need to look elsewhere.

In a very best case, dream scenario they save maybe 2-3m per year on the three deals. Really hard to say they can't be competitive because of 2-3m less cap space. If they continue to lack success and JT starts declining maybe you look at that deal and wonder where they'd be without that thing on the books. But it's too early to even say that tbh.

 

[leaffan2005]

Matthews and McDavid might be underpaid really considering the impact they bring. Nylander is market value, maybe even cheap too considering on-ice impacts. Would it have been nice to get them both well under market value at 500k-1m cheaper? Sure, but that's not cap killing. Cap killing would be signing league min quality players to mid-tier contracts. Almost every team has those, except the leafs really.

I do think there was a bit of a misstep to not get marner around 1.5-2 milly cheaper, though from the sounds of it he was never signing for less. So it is what it is. You can't change what players want or feel they're worth. At the end of the day these contracts won't kill a team. If you feel the contracts are the reason the team lacks success you need to look elsewhere.

In a very best case, dream scenario they save maybe 2-3m per year on the three deals. Really hard to say they can't be competitive because of 2-3m less cap space. If they continue to lack success and JT starts declining maybe you look at that deal and wonder where they'd be without that thing on the books. But it's too early to even say that tbh.

$2-3 million more to play with for a cap team is hella significant. What's insignificant is the difference 500k per year (after taxes) makes to these players who supposedly are only interested in winning. It happens all around the league, except here.

I agree that these contracts tend to be less debilitating in the long term compared to paying mid tier players too much, but the point stands that our top guys tend to be built a bit differently than other stars around the league who may care a bit more about team success instead of squeezing our every last dollar from their team. And that may play a not so insignificant part in the on-ice performance we have seen over the years with this group.

 

[Volcanologist]

Or imagine they all took a bit less to not hamstring their team and GM and give themselves the best chance to win.

I mean...another 2 or 3 million would make us not hamstrung?

what are you getting for that money, exactly?

 

[Preston]

$2-3 million more to play with for a cap team is hella significant. What's insignificant is the difference 500k per year (after taxes) makes to these players who supposedly are only interested in winning. It happens all around the league, except here.

I agree that these contracts tend to be less debilitating in the long term compared to paying mid tier players too much, but the point stands that our top guys tend to be built a bit differently than other stars around the league who may care a bit more about team success instead of squeezing our every last dollar from their team. And that may play a not so insignificant part in the on-ice performance we have seen over the years with this group.

Sure, the extra space would help but my point is that 2-3m is not going to hold a team back very much. If they continue to disappoint it won't be because they didn't have an extra 2-3 million dollars to spend. I get the questions about being so top heavy and wondering if it'll work, but it has little, if anything, to do with them taking more than market value. It's just how the roster is constructed and the same questions would apply even if they took 2-3m less combined. I don't think there's a reason why it wouldn't work if you don't have any poor contracts but that's the question you should be asking, not about whether they took a couple million less.

And honestly it all stems from the Tavares contract which is when they went all in on the top heavy roster/cap construction. If that's not signed all of a sudden cap space isn't even remotely an issue. But they're also a much worse team.

 

[GEEMAN]

Imagine if guys like Ovechkin, Crosby, Pastrnak, Bergeron, Point, etc. all took "market value". Their teams would be a lot less competitive and a lot less likely to be perennial cup contenders.

But priorities are priorities I guess.

Point is the only one who took significantly less but on a short term TB style deal

 

[leaffan2005]

I mean...another 2 or 3 million would make us not hamstrung?

what are you getting for that money, exactly?

It isn't adding 1 player for that money that makes a difference. It's the difference between upgrading at backup goalie and not having to play ECHL goalies when Freddy is hurt/needs a break. It's the difference between having to settle for a guy like Brodie instead of paying an extra $2-3 million for a guy like AP.

 

[Preston]

It isn't adding 1 player for that money that makes a difference. It's the difference between upgrading at backup goalie and not having to play ECHL goalies when Freddy is hurt/needs a break. It's the difference between having to settle for a guy like Brodie instead of paying an extra $2-3 million for a guy like AP.

If they're a backup goalie away from winning the cup then we really shouldn't be complaining about much! Sounds like an awesome team. Looks like they may have found the solution there this off-season too!

As for brodie vs AP... I think they're far better off with brodes so I've got no issues there.

 

[leaffan2005]

Sure, the extra space would help but my point is that 2-3m is not going to hold a team back very much. If they continue to disappoint it won't be because they didn't have an extra 2-3 million dollars to spend. I get the questions about being so top heavy and wondering if it'll work, but it has little, if anything, to do with them taking more than market value. It's just how the roster is constructed and the same questions would apply even if they took 2-3m less combined. I don't think there's a reason why it wouldn't work if you don't have any poor contracts but that's the question you should be asking, not about whether they took a couple million less.

And honestly it all stems from the Tavares contract which is when they went all in on the top heavy roster/cap construction. If that's not signed all of a sudden cap space isn't even remotely an issue. But they're also a much worse team.

Have we improved as a team with Tavares?

 

[Preston]

Have we improved as a team with Tavares?

As I said I've got no issues for anyone who complains about that deal. It's absolutely by far the highest risk contract they have. I was speaking more about the deals for the younger folks.

I'd be a little uncomfortable with a soon expiring Kadri as a 2c though. Finding another solution there wouldn't be that easy. Would it be better than paying JT? Maybe, I don't know. But it's not like they'd be a better team without him.

 

[leaffan2005]

As I said I've got no issues for anyone who complains about that deal. It's absolutely by far the highest risk contract they have. I was speaking more about the deals for the younger folks.

I hear you, but him signing preceded the contracts for any of the big guys. Obviously saving where you can becomes even more important after taking the plunge on a guy like Tavares. Which is why I discount the narrative that $2-3 million doesn't make an difference.

Part of that is on Dubas for his shitty negotiation skills, but a part is also on the players to realize the situation and decide what is more important to them. An extra 250-500k or a chance to make the team more competitive actually win something. This far their decision is quite apparent. And it's one of the reasons I am not sold on this core doing anything of significance in the future.

 

[MindzEye]

Very few of the players I've seen named took less than full market value at the time of their contract signing.

Ovechkin signed for 9.5 million, 12 fucking years ago. Crosby signed a 12 year deal at 8.7 million immediately after 3 straight conky/whiplash fucked seasons of 41, 22, and 36 games played. Bergeron's long term deal came after conky issues as well.

 

[leaffan2005]

Very few of the players I've seen named took less than full market value at the time of their contract signing.

Ovechkin signed for 9.5 million, 12 fucking years ago. Crosby signed a 12 year deal at 8.7 million immediately after 3 straight conky/whiplash fucked seasons of 41, 22, and 36 games played. Bergeron's long term deal came after conky issues as well.

All of those guys took less money than they could have, and you know that, irrespective of the injury concerns you mentioned. All were lauded as bargain contracts even during their time.

 

[Deckie007]

Ovechkin's deal made him the second highest paid player in the league (after Heatley lol), not exactly a bargain. The amazing part is it's only worth 10.7M in today's dollars, but that is more due to salary stagnation in the NHL than anything.

 

[Volcanologist]

It isn't adding 1 player for that money that makes a difference. It's the difference between upgrading at backup goalie and not having to play ECHL goalies when Freddy is hurt/needs a break. It's the difference between having to settle for a guy like Brodie instead of paying an extra $2-3 million for a guy like AP.

1) As we found out in the end, AP never wanted to come here. Vegas was where he wanted to go.
2) we already upgraded at backup goalie, and could have before -- that much is on Dubas. It wasn't cap dependent.

 

[Preston]

(Matthews could have gotten more too)

 

[leaffan2005]

1) As we found out in the end, AP never wanted to come here. Vegas was where he wanted to go.
2) we already upgraded at backup goalie, and could have before -- that much is on Dubas. It wasn't cap dependent.

1) Source?
2) We were right up against the cap - to say this doesn't limit your options in trade/free agency is disingenuous. At the very least it forces Dubas to have to rely on unproven minor leaguers in hopes of hitting lightning in a bottle whereas better options could have been acquired with some cap flexibility. This cost the team dearly as per our putrid record whenever we had to play anybody not named Anderson over the past 2 years. Has a big impact on playoff seeding, ability to rest your starter and preserve him for the playoffs, etc.

 

[mbow30]

I mean...another 2 or 3 million would make us not hamstrung?

what are you getting for that money, exactly?

more money to overpay middle 6ers.

an extra few million spent up top isn't the problem here. you sink or swim with your elite talent. maybe the current group continues to fall apart in the playoffs, but having been able to keep johnsson and kapanen around wouldn't change this team's fortunes.

 

[JackBurton]

Matt Barzal not at camp. But Lou would not have allowed Nylander to sit-out..

 

[MindzEye]

All of those guys took less money than they could have, and you know that, irrespective of the injury concerns you mentioned. All were lauded as bargain contracts even during their time.

Matthews and Nylander also would have gotten more money on the open market than they took to be in Toronto beyond their earliest UFA year.

Marner I won't comment on, but the other two are 100% worth more on the open market.