Author Topic: The Matthews Extension  (Read 4073 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline herman

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 11601
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #60 on: July 11, 2018, 08:10:56 AM »
16-18 5v5AgeG60P160P60
McDavid20-211.162.303.04
Matthews19-201.582.222.48
Marner19-200.821.522.06
Eichel20-210.841.501.90
Kadri26-270.951.471.93
Nylander20-210.631.462.04
Tavares26-270.851.441.93

Just box stat rates from 2016-17 and 2017-18 at 5v5 for some choice comparables via Corsica.

Offline princedpw

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1764
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #61 on: July 11, 2018, 09:32:02 AM »
16-18 5v5AgeG60P160P60
McDavid20-211.162.303.04
Matthews19-201.582.222.48
Marner19-200.821.522.06
Eichel20-210.841.501.90
Kadri26-270.951.471.93
Nylander20-210.631.462.04
Tavares26-270.851.441.93

Just box stat rates from 2016-17 and 2017-18 at 5v5 for some choice comparables via Corsica.

Are you trying to argue that Tavares is a 3rd liner?

Offline Frank E

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 3982
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #62 on: July 11, 2018, 09:35:07 AM »
Again, is the issue "deserving" or is the issue what his market value is. Because the RFA market exists and it is the leverage he can use. Even if it's just based on future potential, I'm pretty confident someone out there would have given Eichel that on a market if they thought Buffalo wouldn't just match it.

Yes, I understand what you mean by market value, and I'm using the term "deserving" based on the market value of similar players.

But you're kind of contradicting yourself here. On one hand, you're saying that no one would have been enticed to offer sheet Eichel given that Buffalo would simply match...on the other hand you're suggesting there's a threat there that drives up the salaries.  Which one is it, is it a real threat or not?

So in their extension years Draisaitl scored 29 goals and 77 points playing the vast majority of his time with Connor McDavid and Patrick Maroon. Eichel, in his extension year, scored at a 32 goal, 76 point pace playing with guys like Sam Reinhart, Marcus Foligno and Evander Kane.

Which A) looks pretty good for Eichel and B) raises the question of whether or not Draisaitl was actually playing C.

Right, but pretty damn close, and Draisaitl actually scored 29, not just a pacing number.

Draisaitl had just come through a playoffs where he scored 16 points in 13 games, 6 of them goals.  A near PPG guy, picked 3rd overall, and everyone thought Edmonton had lost their mind at $8.5m given Barkov and Scheifele, Huberdeau, and others.

I'm pretty sure that many people thought the market value was indeed NOT $10m X 8 for Eichel, but I stand by my initial statement which was they really wanted to make a commitment to him so that he'd be a happy Sabre...no one else seems to be a happy Sabre, and they certainly needed some stability.  Signing their top player to too much money to make him happy was likely a good move, in light of all the other shit that was going on.

Offline cabber24

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1302
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #63 on: July 11, 2018, 10:53:33 AM »
Again, is the issue "deserving" or is the issue what his market value is. Because the RFA market exists and it is the leverage he can use. Even if it's just based on future potential, I'm pretty confident someone out there would have given Eichel that on a market if they thought Buffalo wouldn't just match it.

Yes, I understand what you mean by market value, and I'm using the term "deserving" based on the market value of similar players.

But you're kind of contradicting yourself here. On one hand, you're saying that no one would have been enticed to offer sheet Eichel given that Buffalo would simply match...on the other hand you're suggesting there's a threat there that drives up the salaries.  Which one is it, is it a real threat or not?

So in their extension years Draisaitl scored 29 goals and 77 points playing the vast majority of his time with Connor McDavid and Patrick Maroon. Eichel, in his extension year, scored at a 32 goal, 76 point pace playing with guys like Sam Reinhart, Marcus Foligno and Evander Kane.

Which A) looks pretty good for Eichel and B) raises the question of whether or not Draisaitl was actually playing C.

Right, but pretty damn close, and Draisaitl actually scored 29, not just a pacing number.

Draisaitl had just come through a playoffs where he scored 16 points in 13 games, 6 of them goals.  A near PPG guy, picked 3rd overall, and everyone thought Edmonton had lost their mind at $8.5m given Barkov and Scheifele, Huberdeau, and others.

I'm pretty sure that many people thought the market value was indeed NOT $10m X 8 for Eichel, but I stand by my initial statement which was they really wanted to make a commitment to him so that he'd be a happy Sabre...no one else seems to be a happy Sabre, and they certainly needed some stability.  Signing their top player to too much money to make him happy was likely a good move, in light of all the other shit that was going on.
I agree about Eichel, overpaid at the time of signing. Although not a "mistake" an understood over payment does set a new standard. It's not a Gomez contract but Eichel got more then others have been getting.
Upon the wicked He will rain Jerseys; blue and white and burning waffles will be the portion of their cup.

Offline Nik the Trik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 23433
  • Some Guy On a Message Board
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #64 on: July 11, 2018, 03:04:24 PM »
Yes, I understand what you mean by market value, and I'm using the term "deserving" based on the market value of similar players.

Well, what you're actually doing is looking at some guys who signed below market deals and saying "Why didn't Eichel do that too?". Well, that and comparing his point totals to Connor McDavid's wingman.

But you're kind of contradicting yourself here. On one hand, you're saying that no one would have been enticed to offer sheet Eichel given that Buffalo would simply match...on the other hand you're suggesting there's a threat there that drives up the salaries.  Which one is it, is it a real threat or not?

There's a threat of an offer sheet if Buffalo isn't willing to pay Eichel what he'd fetch on the RFA market. But being as Eichel's market value is clearly well within what Buffalo paid him, there's no realistic chance of one. That threat exists, and it gives RFAs leverage in negotiations, regardless of whether or not they use it to its full capacity.

Again, it seems like a fairly simple equation. Let's say negotiations with Matthews don't go well and he signs an offer sheet for 13 million per. Would you, as GM of the Leafs, take 4 1st round picks and let him walk? I wouldn't. Even if I was just matching to trade him eventually. It's that willingness to match that makes the offersheet pointless outside of hurting my team but if I wasn't willing to match, that's still out there.

Give a man the reputation of an early riser and he can sleep 'til noon
-Mark Twain

Offline Frank E

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 3982
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #65 on: July 11, 2018, 03:33:52 PM »
Well, what you're actually doing is looking at some guys who signed below market deals and saying "Why didn't Eichel do that too?". Well, that and comparing his point totals to Connor McDavid's wingman.

What I did do was find some signings in and around the same time of guys who were in the same point production area, and still RFA.  Let me know which ones I missed, if you think I'm missing the "market". 

The other thing I'd add is that Draisaitl is a really good hockey player, and contributed to McDavid's totals as well.  Here's a quote from the article on oilersnation below, talking about the Oilers needing to find wingers for Draisaitl, and he still scored 70 points in 78 last season:

Hes spent a good amount of time with players like Drake Caggiula, Pontus Aberg, and Mike Cammalleri and when hes been on the ice with them, theyve all seen their goals for percentage increase. He makes the players around him better, and now its time for the team to simply give him better wingers.

https://oilersnation.com/2018/04/01/finding-a-winger-for-leon-draisaitl/


There's a threat of an offer sheet if Buffalo isn't willing to pay Eichel what he'd fetch on the RFA market. But being as Eichel's market value is clearly well within what Buffalo paid him, there's no realistic chance of one. That threat exists, and it gives RFAs leverage in negotiations, regardless of whether or not they use it to its full capacity.

Again, it seems like a fairly simple equation. Let's say negotiations with Matthews don't go well and he signs an offer sheet for 13 million per. Would you, as GM of the Leafs, take 4 1st round picks and let him walk? I wouldn't. Even if I was just matching to trade him eventually. It's that willingness to match that makes the offersheet pointless outside of hurting my team but if I wasn't willing to match, that's still out there.

I probably would match, but I'd give it some thought.  You were arguing a few days back that big time players with big fat cap hits don't get traded for good value.  So if I intended to trade the asset (let's assume there's bad blood there or something), I guess I'd have to weigh the market against the 4 first rounders.

But I think the original point was why go to all the trouble of negotiating with a player to finally agree on an offer sheet when it's super likely that his current team will simply match...then you also have some egg on your face with your current fanbase/team.

Anyways, I still stand by my argument that Eichel got more than what should have been coming to him, but the "Buffalo Effect" may have forced them to pay him higher than what I think he "deserved"...I don't blame him or the team, you'd have to pay me a premium to work in Buffalo as well, especially with what a shitshow that franchise has been for a while.

Offline Nik the Trik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 23433
  • Some Guy On a Message Board
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #66 on: July 11, 2018, 05:02:00 PM »
What I did do was find some signings in and around the same time of guys who were in the same point production area, and still RFA.  Let me know which ones I missed, if you think I'm missing the "market".

But what you did was try to determine market value by finding a bunch of guys who never actually tested the market to find the upper limit of their value. Eichel wasn't obligated to follow suit there and the question is, what would the market determine to be Eichel's cost.

Because that's the difference between "value" and "market value". When you're saying Eichel got more than his market value, you're not really saying anything about Barkov or Scheifele or whoever, you're really saying something about the Red Wings or Rangers or Bruins or whatever other team and what they'd be willing to spend for a 21 year old who may have been the most hyped American prospect of all time who was already producing like a number one centre.

The other thing I'd add is that Draisaitl is a really good hockey player, and contributed to McDavid's totals as well.

I agree he's really good. It's why he got 8.5 million dollars while largely being used as a winger on McDavid's line without even testing the market for his services.

I probably would match, but I'd give it some thought.  You were arguing a few days back that big time players with big fat cap hits don't get traded for good value.  So if I intended to trade the asset (let's assume there's bad blood there or something), I guess I'd have to weigh the market against the 4 first rounders.

Well, what I was arguing was that players at UFA age don't tend to get traded for great returns because typically the teams trading them are under the gun to trade them(otherwise, they wouldn't trade them). Likewise, teams aren't going to give up players just as good, but younger, for an older model version.

Matthews, or any similar 21 year old, would be fairly different in as much as you're effectively trading the most valuable asset there is in the game. Being as you'd have no choice as to who signed Matthews to an offer sheet you'd have absolutely no control over where those picks might end up. Weigh those four all you want, I wouldn't trade Matthews for fifty unplaced first rounders.

But I think the original point was why go to all the trouble of negotiating with a player to finally agree on an offer sheet when it's super likely that his current team will simply match...then you also have some egg on your face with your current fanbase/team.

Exactly. The reason teams don't offer sheet is the likelihood they're matched, not the prohibitive cost in money/picks. Those things don't weigh the value down so therefore the reasoning that the RFA market should depress salaries doesn't wash. Otherwise, you're effectively arguing that the NHL's system should be one where the more valuable assets get paid less.
Give a man the reputation of an early riser and he can sleep 'til noon
-Mark Twain

Offline Bill_Berg

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 865
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #67 on: July 11, 2018, 07:07:47 PM »
I wonder how often a team offers and an RFA a contract that the player doesn't sign, but then uses in his negotiations with the original team. Maybe Nylander is talking to 5 teams, telling the Leafs the offer a and if the Leafs say we're not matching, only them does he actually sign the offer sheet. So the teams have a chance to match verbally before the offer sheet is signed. Then offer sheets are only players trying to call their team's bluff.

Offline Zee

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 9091
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #68 on: July 11, 2018, 08:13:39 PM »
I wonder how often a team offers and an RFA a contract that the player doesn't sign, but then uses in his negotiations with the original team. Maybe Nylander is talking to 5 teams, telling the Leafs the offer a and if the Leafs say we're not matching, only them does he actually sign the offer sheet. So the teams have a chance to match verbally before the offer sheet is signed. Then offer sheets are only players trying to call their team's bluff.

I think the GM would have to look long and hard at which team has offer sheeted your player.  If it's a contender, then the likelyhood of a draft pick being top 10 or top 5 is low, but if it's a bottom feeder team that offer sheets him, you have to consider the possibility of that team missing the playoffs and potentially giving you a lottery pick, especially when a guy like Jack Hughes comes around.  Just a thought.

Offline Bill_Berg

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 865
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #69 on: July 11, 2018, 09:03:27 PM »
I meant unsigned offer sheets. Teams can still spitball dollars. I wonder if rfas use those numbers in negotiations.

Offline bustaheims

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 20158
  • 56!
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #70 on: July 12, 2018, 08:47:38 AM »
I meant unsigned offer sheets. Teams can still spitball dollars. I wonder if rfas use those numbers in negotiations.

I'd be surprised if agents didn't talk to other teams to get a sense of what they might be willing to offer if things with the the team that owns their rights doesn't go well - and, that serves Nik's points. Even if there's never going to be an actual offer sheet, the fact that RFAs are free to negotiate with other teams drives up the value of their contracts - the threat of an offer sheet, no matter how unlikely, is leverage for the player.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Offline Zee

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 9091
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #71 on: July 12, 2018, 08:56:39 AM »
I meant unsigned offer sheets. Teams can still spitball dollars. I wonder if rfas use those numbers in negotiations.

Yeah I know.  I wonder if offer sheets are more common than we think but you don't hear about it because player X doesn't ever accept it.  Let's say Vancouver comes to Nylander and presents an offer sheet and Nylander says "no thanks" and never signs it, would we even hear about it? 

Offline CarltonTheBear

  • Global Moderator
  • Sittler Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 21535
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #72 on: July 12, 2018, 09:08:23 AM »
I meant unsigned offer sheets. Teams can still spitball dollars. I wonder if rfas use those numbers in negotiations.

Yeah I know.  I wonder if offer sheets are more common than we think but you don't hear about it because player X doesn't ever accept it.  Let's say Vancouver comes to Nylander and presents an offer sheet and Nylander says "no thanks" and never signs it, would we even hear about it? 

I'd be pretty surprised if any kind of offer sheet talk or RFAs talking to other teams was common in any way. If it was we'd have heard of instances where it happened at least a few times. That stuff gets out.

Offline bustaheims

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 20158
  • 56!
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #73 on: July 12, 2018, 09:47:13 AM »
I'd be pretty surprised if any kind of offer sheet talk or RFAs talking to other teams was common in any way. If it was we'd have heard of instances where it happened at least a few times. That stuff gets out.

There may not be much in terms of serious negotiations or agreements being close, but I'd be very surprised if conversations didn't happen. Any agent doing his job properly would talk to other teams about what they might be willing to offer, should the situation arise where they'd be open to seriously negotiating with someone else.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Offline CarltonTheBear

  • Global Moderator
  • Sittler Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 21535
    • View Profile
Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #74 on: July 12, 2018, 10:00:55 AM »
There may not be much in terms of serious negotiations or agreements being close, but I'd be very surprised if conversations didn't happen. Any agent doing his job properly would talk to other teams about what they might be willing to offer, should the situation arise where they'd be open to seriously negotiating with someone else.

I'd argue that agents already aren't doing their jobs properly by not utilizing offer sheets in general, so no it wouldn't surprise me if they're essentially ignoring it completely.

The "retaliation" between GMs that makes offer sheets non-existent in the league would definitely apply between GM/agent relationships too.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 10:02:39 AM by CarltonTheBear »

TMLfans.ca

Re: The Matthews Extension
« Reply #74 on: July 12, 2018, 10:00:55 AM »