• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Core 4 No More: The Motherfucking Off-Season Thread

LeafOfFaith said:
Vegas would wipe its ass with us on a deal like that. It would make the Hyman loss look like a perfectly fine move.
Click to expand...
stop making shit up.

Rcfv3av.jpeg


ho9oeZt.jpeg
 
The Woll contract is simple and no one "didn't understand it." It's an attempt to save 2-2.5m over 2025-2028. Because if he has a great year this year he could get up to 6m on a 3 year deal. My position is that, to justify the risk, the potential savings should ideally be a bit more than that.

Of course if he bombs out he may be worth 1-2m so you're potentially overpaying by 2-3m in those 3 years. Not a nightmare but I just don't this as a huge win.
 
MyNameIsJonas said:
Fucking incredible you think you can pick and choose which cases of injury proneness are fluky and which are detrimental towards a players career.

Its simple, you dont want to trade Marner, so Theodore is injury prone.

You really like Woll and dont want to spend big dollars on a goalie, which helps justifying you keeping your robot bitch and his 11M on the roster, so it's flukey
Click to expand...
Theodore is injury prone because he’s missed half the season two seasons in a row.

I like Woll because he’s good and cheap, and the injuries don’t mean anything with one year left on his deal and a platoon role ahead regardless. Now that he’s a $4m guy, things are different.

And in any event, he isn’t a rumored trade target for Marner. Theodore is. Context is key. And you, as usual, just babble bullshit.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
Theodore is injury prone because he’s missed half the season two seasons in a row.

I like Woll because he’s good and cheap, and the injuries don’t mean anything with one year left on his deal and a platoon role ahead regardless. Now that he’s a $4m guy, things are different.

And in any event, he isn’t a rumored trade target for Marner. Theodore is. Context is key. And you, as usual, just babble bullshit.
Click to expand...
I"m tired
 
Preston said:
The Woll contract is simple and no one "didn't understand it." It's an attempt to save 2-2.5m over 2025-2028. Because if he has a great year this year he could get up to 6m on a 3 year deal. My position is that, to justify the risk, the potential savings should ideally be a bit more than that.

Of course if he bombs out he may be worth 1-2m so you're potentially overpaying by 2-3m in those 3 years. Not a nightmare but I just don't this as a huge win.
Click to expand...
If he is getting 3.5x3 and a good season gets him 6... wouldn't that be a 7.5MM savings over 25-28?
 
MindzEye said:
Then let him. Recent goalie arby awards for seasons much better than the one Woll just had has been less money than it sounds like the Leafs are about to give him.

If he's coming off of a bad, injury filled season, his case in arby is pretty shit and we're getting him for 1.5-2 million instead of ~3.75
Click to expand...
arb awards are only for 1 or 2 years (woll's would be 1 only) and going to arb strains the relationship between player and management, it's best all parties involved avoid that process

if he is coming off a bad season he wouldn't even go to arb, players go to arb if they've had good seasons; he's also our best goalie by a wide margin, it makes sense to lock him up asap
 
Preston said:
Has anyone here ever complicated a Dubas goalie decision? I'm serious. I don't think I've seen it. Maybe the Campbell trade?

I think it's just projection. If Dubas signed Woll to this contract rent free would be shitting on him.
Click to expand...
i wouldn't, this is a good contract regardless of who signed it.
 
trujaysfan said:
If he is getting 3.5x3 and a good season gets him 6... wouldn't that be a 7.5MM savings over 25-28?
Click to expand...
Meant per year. But the kicker is that if he has a great year and it costs 6m to retain him, I simply wouldn't do it. I get that there's upside. Everyone does. But usually on these deals where you're projecting future value you'd hope for a bit more value. It's not terrible. I think somewhere around 3x3 would have been fair. So if it's 3.5 that's fine. Just not a great deal. Tre is just as shit at negotiating as Kyle it seems.
 
Preston said:
Because if he has a great year this year he could get up to 6m on a 3 year deal
Click to expand...

This is probably a faulty premise though. Swayman has been one of the best in the league over the last 3 seasons combined and he's probably not looking far north of 6M on this extension they're working on right now, and it's probably an 8 yr.

If Woll gave us a .915 or something next season, his RFA deal is probably in that 5% range. The only RFA guys to sign north of 5% the last bunch of years are Demko, Shesty, Saros, Vasy, Spencer Knight (1st rounder coming off of a .908 as a 20 yr old)
 
Preston said:
The Woll contract is simple and no one "didn't understand it." It's an attempt to save 2-2.5m over 2025-2028. Because if he has a great year this year he could get up to 6m on a 3 year deal. My position is that, to justify the risk, the potential savings should ideally be a bit more than that.

Of course if he bombs out he may be worth 1-2m so you're potentially overpaying by 2-3m in those 3 years. Not a nightmare but I just don't this as a huge win.
Click to expand...
if he bombs, then they have a goalie who makes at most $4 million for 3 years, which isn't a horrible situation to be in since the cap will be rising quite nicely over the upcoming seasons. $4 mil in a $92-$100 mil cap environment is not bad at all
 
MindzEye said:
This is probably a faulty premise though. Swayman has been one of the best in the league over the last 3 seasons combined and he's probably not looking far north of 6M on this extension they're working on right now, and it's probably an 8 yr.

If Woll gave us a .915 or something next season, his RFA deal is probably in that 5% range. The only RFA guys to sign north of 5% the last bunch of years are Demko, Shesty, Saros, Vasy, Spencer Knight (1st rounder coming off of a .908 as a 20 yr old)
Click to expand...
well ofc he wouldn't be looking for far north of $6 million, that is a high, unrealistic bar and he isn't a franchise-level goalie. he's a very good one, imo a tier below franchise level. he will be looking for a lot of money though
 
rent free said:
arb awards are only for 1 or 2 years (woll's would be 1 only) and going to arb strains the relationship between player and management, it's best all parties involved avoid that process
Click to expand...

If the cost to sign a guy with his lack of experience and durability is this type of contract, let's strain that relationship.

rent free said:
if he is coming off a bad season he wouldn't even go to arb, players go to arb if they've had good seasons; he's also our best goalie by a wide margin, it makes sense to lock him up asap
Click to expand...

He can be your best goalie without being a good goalie.

It doesn't make any sense to lock into term on an entirely unproven goalie when you had runway to assess him with. Play out the season, see how he does and re assess next summer. If he gives you a good 35-40 games of .910+ this season then you can start looking at comparable RFA multi year deals that have been given out. Feel free to take a look on capfriendly. The going rate for that kind of guy is about 5% of cap. So at even a 92 million dollar cap you're in at 4.5ish x 3-4 years. I would much rather sign that deal next summer, than this ~3.75x3 deal now. You get to mitigate a whole pile of risk by just being patient for a year.
 
MindzEye said:
This is probably a faulty premise though. Swayman has been one of the best in the league over the last 3 seasons combined and he's probably not looking far north of 6M on this extension they're working on right now, and it's probably an 8 yr.

If Woll gave us a .915 or something next season, his RFA deal is probably in that 5% range. The only RFA guys to sign north of 5% the last bunch of years are Demko, Shesty, Saros, Vasy, Spencer Knight (1st rounder coming off of a .908 as a 20 yr old)
Click to expand...
Whatever the case, I'm not seeing enough upside in this deal to call it a "good one." No one is committing suicide over it. It's not David Clarkson. But I see assymetric risk-reward and not in the good way.
 
rent free said:
well ofc he wouldn't be looking for far north of $6 million, that is a high, unrealistic bar and he isn't a franchise-level goalie. he's a very good one, imo a tier below franchise level. he will be looking for a lot of money though
Click to expand...

~4.5 x 4 would be about the deal he'd be looking at after a successful 24/25. We're taking on a bunch of risk to save less than a millie and 1 yr in term.
 
Preston said:
Whatever the case, I'm not seeing enough upside in this deal to call it a "good one." No one is committing suicide over it. It's not David Clarkson. But I see assymetric risk-reward and not in the good way.
Click to expand...

Yup. There's no benefit for us here unless he breaks out into stud territory. Any sort of reasonable career progression from him just lands him in the type of place where his next deal will be slightly richer than this one we're apparently giving him after 25 slightly above average games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top