What are they worth?

[Dappleganger]

Which makes the Matthews situation interesting.  You have to think that he has some sort of plan in his head.

3 years x $13.5m followed by 8 years x $16m.

[Significantly Insignificant]

Which makes the Matthews situation interesting.  You have to think that he has some sort of plan in his head.

3 years x $13.5m followed by 8 years x $16m.

See at 30 I think that is a tough sell, but maybe I am wrong.  Cap is supposed to go up so maybe it isn't all that outrageous.  Still I think most GMs are going to look at that and say that it's a bad deal all around.

[azzurri63]

Sign him for 2 more years and then when his contract is up he can walk and we'll take McDavid who has 3 more years left. Problem solved.

[OldTimeHockey]

Or, maybe Matthews(or sub in Nylander here) feels he has the right to explore free agency and if you want him to stay away from it, you have to pay for him to give up that right regardless of the length of the contract he's willing to negotiate.

[IJustLurkHere]

It's an interesting thought exercise.  I think longer term deals can be advantageous to certain players at certain times.  However, how much could certain superstars make if they were re-upping every two years? If Crosby, McDavid, Ovechkin, MacKinnon were going to renegotiate every couple of years up until they hit their 30's.  Subban's situation was the demise of the bridge deal being used with younger players because he went out and won a Norris.

I think hockey players in the cap era have sort of consistently established that they are, for the most part, pretty conservative and that the outright maximizing of their earning potential isn't as important to them as getting long-term guarantees. Even if the odds are against it, I bet they all know at least one guy from their careers who got a bad injury and was never the same after it so they want to insulate themselves against that within reason. There is also going to be some varying degree of not wanting to put their team in a bad cap situation.

But as I've said before NHL players deciding to that, even in large numbers, still doesn't really set the market. The Market, even an artificially constrained by the cap market, is still the market. And it's one where our own John Tavares was offered an AAV that, if he'd accepted, would have still made him the highest paid player in the NHL.

Actually, when I do the math, I am not sure why Matthews wants a short term deal.  Lets say he does 3 years at 15 per.  That's 45 million.  Then he does 5 at 12, which is another 60 million, that's 105 million.  However if he signs an 8 year deal at 13 million, then he gets 104.  A million dollars over the lifetime of the deal isn't great.

The only way this makes sense is if he thinks his next deal will be longer than 5 years, and/or worth more than 12.  I'm not sure what the market would be for Auston Matthews at 30 years old on an 8 year deal. Or maybe he is waiting for McDavid to sign his next deal to set the market cap.   

Anyways, I'm sure he has his reasons for wanting to go shorter term.  I'm okay with it either way, because short term does still do good things for the team. 

I think the flaw in your estimates above may be the expectation that Matthews salary goes down on the 8 year deal. If he's looking at the Tavares deal, he could be expecting an offer more in the 15-16+ (depending on cap) even at 30 years... it just might mean moving teams (even if that means 7 years). Watching the way these deals seem to be playing out, I'd be suspecting that at some point around 30, Matthews is going to have to test the open market if he's trying to maximise earnings.

This is not an approach without risk for Matthews. He's already had injuries in his career which have impacted his play, so who is to say that he gets to the end of a 3 year extension without significant concerns. But to Nik's point, that equally says that a 3 year deal now may well be better value for the Leafs than 8.

[Significantly Insignificant]

It's an interesting thought exercise.  I think longer term deals can be advantageous to certain players at certain times.  However, how much could certain superstars make if they were re-upping every two years? If Crosby, McDavid, Ovechkin, MacKinnon were going to renegotiate every couple of years up until they hit their 30's.  Subban's situation was the demise of the bridge deal being used with younger players because he went out and won a Norris.

I think hockey players in the cap era have sort of consistently established that they are, for the most part, pretty conservative and that the outright maximizing of their earning potential isn't as important to them as getting long-term guarantees. Even if the odds are against it, I bet they all know at least one guy from their careers who got a bad injury and was never the same after it so they want to insulate themselves against that within reason. There is also going to be some varying degree of not wanting to put their team in a bad cap situation.

But as I've said before NHL players deciding to that, even in large numbers, still doesn't really set the market. The Market, even an artificially constrained by the cap market, is still the market. And it's one where our own John Tavares was offered an AAV that, if he'd accepted, would have still made him the highest paid player in the NHL.

Actually, when I do the math, I am not sure why Matthews wants a short term deal.  Lets say he does 3 years at 15 per.  That's 45 million.  Then he does 5 at 12, which is another 60 million, that's 105 million.  However if he signs an 8 year deal at 13 million, then he gets 104.  A million dollars over the lifetime of the deal isn't great.

The only way this makes sense is if he thinks his next deal will be longer than 5 years, and/or worth more than 12.  I'm not sure what the market would be for Auston Matthews at 30 years old on an 8 year deal. Or maybe he is waiting for McDavid to sign his next deal to set the market cap.   

Anyways, I'm sure he has his reasons for wanting to go shorter term.  I'm okay with it either way, because short term does still do good things for the team. 

I think the flaw in your estimates above may be the expectation that Matthews salary goes down on the 8 year deal. If he's looking at the Tavares deal, he could be expecting an offer more in the 15-16+ (depending on cap) even at 30 years... it just might mean moving teams (even if that means 7 years). Watching the way these deals seem to be playing out, I'd be suspecting that at some point around 30, Matthews is going to have to test the open market if he's trying to maximise earnings.

This is not an approach without risk for Matthews. He's already had injuries in his career which have impacted his play, so who is to say that he gets to the end of a 3 year extension without significant concerns. But to Nik's point, that equally says that a 3 year deal now may well be better value for the Leafs than 8.

That might be what Matthews is expecting, but this speaks to Nik's point.  Matthews is absorbing the risk that someone is going to give him that deal and that money.  So he may get a massive pay at age 30, or many teams may decide to back away due to his age, injury history, lack of winning, what have you.  In that respect, shorter term deals to work in the favor of the team. 

[Dappleganger]

Which makes the Matthews situation interesting.  You have to think that he has some sort of plan in his head.

3 years x $13.5m followed by 8 years x $16m.

See at 30 I think that is a tough sell, but maybe I am wrong.  Cap is supposed to go up so maybe it isn't all that outrageous.  Still I think most GMs are going to look at that and say that it's a bad deal all around.

I think the $16m a season in a few years time will come in at a similar percent of the cap as $13.5m will be now.

[Nik]

That might be what Matthews is expecting, but this speaks to Nik's point.  Matthews is absorbing the risk that someone is going to give him that deal and that money.  So he may get a massive pay at age 30, or many teams may decide to back away due to his age, injury history, lack of winning, what have you.  In that respect, shorter term deals to work in the favor of the team. 

If there's one thing to take away from my position on Nylander or the Leafs free agents in general it would be that if your premise starts with "Well, no team in Free Agency will do something that stupid..." then you may want to re-evaluate.

[Significantly Insignificant]

Which makes the Matthews situation interesting.  You have to think that he has some sort of plan in his head.

3 years x $13.5m followed by 8 years x $16m.

See at 30 I think that is a tough sell, but maybe I am wrong.  Cap is supposed to go up so maybe it isn't all that outrageous.  Still I think most GMs are going to look at that and say that it's a bad deal all around.

I think the $16m a season in a few years time will come in at a similar percent of the cap as $13.5m will be now.

In order for that to happen, the cap has to rise to 100 million in 3 years time, which is like 8 million a year.  I think that's a gamble on Matthews part and not the teams.  Yes the pay day is immense if it shakes out that way, because the contract structure you are putting out is about 168 million.  Whereas an 8 year deal at 13.5 followed by 3 years at say 6 million is 134 million.

Sorry, not 8 million a year. 5.5.   

Ah never mind.  I give up. I forgot the extra year.  Contracts are hard.  No wonder there are so many bad ones.

[Significantly Insignificant]

That might be what Matthews is expecting, but this speaks to Nik's point.  Matthews is absorbing the risk that someone is going to give him that deal and that money.  So he may get a massive pay at age 30, or many teams may decide to back away due to his age, injury history, lack of winning, what have you.  In that respect, shorter term deals to work in the favor of the team. 

If there's one thing to take away from my position on Nylander or the Leafs free agents in general it would be that if your premise starts with "Well, no team in Free Agency will do something that stupid..." then you may want to re-evaluate.

Fair enough.  For me, as a fan, I would not be happy with Matthews signed at 16 million for 8 years at age 30.  I would be okay with the Leafs walking away at that point and going in a different direction.

[Dappleganger]

In order for that to happen, the cap has to rise to 100 million in 3 years time, which is like 8 million a year.  I think that's a gamble on Matthews part and not the teams.  Yes the pay day is immense if it shakes out that way, because the contract structure you are putting out is about 168 million.  Whereas an 8 year deal at 13.5 followed by 3 years at say 6 million is 134 million.

Sorry, not 8 million a year. 5.33.   

*4 years time* as a Matthews extension won't kick in until after the upcoming season. This upcoming season at his current rate, then 3 more.

Fair enough.  For me, as a fan, I would not be happy with Matthews signed at 16 million for 8 years at age 30.  I would be okay with the Leafs walking away at that point and going in a different direction.

I'm fine with giving Matthews whatever he wants. Best player in team history (Sorry, Babe Dye). Let him retire a Leaf. Hopefully a cup is part of this.
 
 

[Significantly Insignificant]

In order for that to happen, the cap has to rise to 100 million in 3 years time, which is like 8 million a year.  I think that's a gamble on Matthews part and not the teams.  Yes the pay day is immense if it shakes out that way, because the contract structure you are putting out is about 168 million.  Whereas an 8 year deal at 13.5 followed by 3 years at say 6 million is 134 million.

Sorry, not 8 million a year. 5.33.   

*4 years time* as a Matthews extension won't kick in until after the upcoming season. This upcoming season at his current rate, then 3 more.

 

See my addendum.  I give up. Whatever happens happens.  I wish nothing but the best for Matthews in his contract negotiations.

[Significantly Insignificant]

Fair enough.  For me, as a fan, I would not be happy with Matthews signed at 16 million for 8 years at age 30.  I would be okay with the Leafs walking away at that point and going in a different direction.

I'm fine with giving Matthews whatever he wants. Best player in team history (Sorry, Babe Dye). Let him retire a Leaf. Hopefully a cup is part of this.
 
 

The last three years of that sort of a deal have the potential to be rough.  I do like the comparison of one of the most feared scorers of the 1920's to one of the most feared scorers of the 2020's though. 

[Peter D.]

Count me as one who would prefer seeing the top talents signing for max term.  I'd rather not think of them potentially being in another uniform.  Especially sooner rather than later, and definitely not when they're entering a bulk of their prime years.

If the concern is they are going to decline that they don't live up to the big money over the course of the contract, then slide scale it.  Give them a high cap number, but lessen the amount of real dollars that need to be paid out in the back end of it.  You can surely find a team willing to take on a big contract to meet the cap floor but have to dish out less money as a result.

All that being said, I wish more were just like Rielly.  Likely left money on the table by not hitting UFA, yet still signed max term to stay with the team long term.

[Nik]

If the concern is they are going to decline that they don't live up to the big money over the course of the contract, then slide scale it.  Give them a high cap number, but lessen the amount of real dollars that need to be paid out in the back end of it.  You can surely find a team willing to take on a big contract to meet the cap floor but have to dish out less money as a result.

Rather than hoping you'll be able to find a team willing to do that the Leafs would be in a better position to sign them to a 5 year deal and then re-sign them after the five years to a more team-friendly deal afterwards much in the way Tavares probaby would right now if he still wasn't under contract.

We've seen it with Marleau and we're seeing it with Murray now. You can't always depend on another team wanting to bail you out of your cap issues without extracting a real price in terms of a pick or whatever. Especially given the likelihood that the Coyotes might not be around in 5-6 years time.