Matthews signs 5 year contract, $11.634mil AAV

[Guilt Trip]

I don't understand. What's the worry here? That Matthews will just walk away when this deal expires?

Worry about that in 5 years. We have one of the game's best players locked up for 5. 8 including his first 3 years. Many others have done it and resigned with the same team. Toews, Crosby, Kane, Malkin, Stamkos to name a few.
Hey who knows, maybe we won't want him or Mitch in 5 years and then you could be stuck with a brutal contract(s).

 

[CarltonTheBear]

In the offseason, I thought Willy at $6.5m, Marner at $7.5m, and Matthews at $10.5m.

Totally agree with you. Exactly my thoughts. I wouldn't have gone higher than that with any 3 of them.

So... what? You would have traded all 3 players?

 

[dappleganger]

In the offseason, I thought Willy at $6.5m, Marner at $7.5m, and Matthews at $10.5m.

I think the explanation for the difference there and what it's going to end up being boils down to three things:

1. We misread the market, either as a product of wishful thinking or whatever.

2. We misread Marner and what he might think of himself.

3. We didn't see the scoring rate increase and what that might do to demands.

I don't buy that "Failing" to get it done in the summer mattered or, at the very least, that Dubas could have "succeeded" there unilaterally. Not getting it done in the summer at the prices we wanted is an indication that we were wrong about the market, not that Dubas did his job badly.

Would you say Dubas has done a good job signing his big ticket RFA's?

The market in the summer for a RFA coming off a 100 point season was $9.5m/year for 8 years.

The only way Dubas "wins" by waiting until the upcoming offseason to sign his pending RFA's is if the RFA's have a disappointing year. Please explain how waiting would won't increase salary demands? Salaries increase with each passing year in the NHL.   

 

[LuncheonMeat]

In the offseason, I thought Willy at $6.5m, Marner at $7.5m, and Matthews at $10.5m.

Totally agree with you. Exactly my thoughts. I wouldn't have gone higher than that with any 3 of them.

So... what? You would have traded all 3 players?

Just trade them all for picks (and cap space). Then you can package them with some of our prospects for really good, expensive players. Hey, wait a minute....

 

[Kin]

Would you say Dubas has done a good job signing his big ticket RFA's?

Tough to say before he's done all three but I'm fine with the AAV for the first two. 

The market in the summer for a RFA coming off a 100 point season was $9.5m/year for 8 years.

"The Market" is not determined by any one signing. Especially not a guy signing a below market deal to stay where he doesn't have to pay state income tax.

The only way Dubas "wins" by waiting until the upcoming offseason to sign his pending RFA's is if the RFA's have a disappointing year. Please explain how waiting would won't increase salary demands? Salaries increase with each passing year in the NHL. 

Please explain how Dubas can force players to sign if they want to wait.

 

[azzurri63]

So rumors had it Leafs were offering under 6 one report I heard said 5.

Wow, so you're basing your opinion on "rumours" you think you heard somewhere? My mistake then. I really should consider this a very serious and well thought out position.

This is what was reported. TSN Sportsnet panel etc. Is it actually what is being negotiated? Who knows but no different than reportedly Nylander was asking for 8. We can only go by what is reported or rumoured.

 

[Bender]

All 3 could and should have been signed for 24 million tops.

You need to cut back on what you're smoking.

Not smoking anything. Nylander overpaid. Marner I know had to sign and wanted to wait but they should have pushed it long ago. Now looking at 10 million which is crazy. Matthews love the kid. Exceptional talent but his compete level nowhere near Marners and the injuries are a definite concern. I don?t think the kid will play a whole season.

I know it takes two to tango but I would from the Leafs standpoint pushed the envelope to try and got these guys signed long ago.

They would have saved some cash and allowed to keep more of the team intact. Nylander signing was a joke. Kid sat 2 months and still got what he wanted. Dubas mistake. I would of traded him. All it did was bumped up the contracts for the next two.

See where we are in 2-3 years.

This is you.

 

[Deebo]

In the offseason, I thought Willy at $6.5m, Marner at $7.5m, and Matthews at $10.5m.

Totally agree with you. Exactly my thoughts. I wouldn't have gone higher than that with any 3 of them.

So... what? You would have traded all 3 players?

I for one, would have just signed them for less. EASY!

 

[princedpw]

as a side note...i still hate the salary cap....

Me too. And the playoff format. And the stupid rule about an offside being reviewable.

I like the players but I am disappointed that Toronto is at a significant economic disadvantage against Tampa because they are paying their players way more money.

 

[Kin]

This is what was reported. TSN Sportsnet panel etc. Is it actually what is being negotiated? Who knows but no different than reportedly Nylander was asking for 8. We can only go by what is reported or rumoured.

So it's rumoured Nylander was asking 8, Toronto offered 6, he signed for 6.9...and that adds up to Nylander getting what he wanted.

Yeah dude, stop digging.

 

[Highlander]

as a side note...i still hate the salary cap....

Me too. And the playoff format. And the stupid rule about an offside being reviewable.

I like the players but I am disappointed that Toronto is at a significant economic disadvantage against Tampa because they are paying their players way more money.

To bad they just can't give them equity instead of treating them like indentured zombies.  Ya I'll take 5,000 MLSE stock now which will be worth a zillion when I retire.

 

[ZBBM]

FWIW I mostly agree with Zee.  If management thinks Matthews is the best player on the team (which IMO, at the moment anyway, he isn't) then he should be signed for as long as possible. 

To me the real conundrum here is not term, it's what this means for Marner's contract.  I totally do not get the argument that this contract means Marner's will be under 10.  Right now, you can make a very good argument that Marner is the best player, night in and night out, among the big 4.  Not by a huge margin (over AM  & JT at least), but simply looking at their on-ice performance, there is no way Marner deserves nearly $2M less than either Matthews or Tavares.

There's an old saying: just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean people aren't out to get me.  Paul Marner may be a hockeydad, but that doesn't mean he's wrong about what Marner deserves on his contract.

 

[Kin]

FWIW I mostly agree with Zee.  If management thinks Matthews is the best player on the team (which IMO, at the moment anyway, he isn't) then he should be signed for as long as possible. 

They signed him for as long as possible at this AAV. If you really think that this deal mainly speaks to what Marner will want/get then signing Matthews for more money and more years would similarly spike Marner's ask and that would lead to an almost entirely untenable cap situation over the next few years.

 

[jdh1]

  Good deal
  8 years is a long time for both parties.

 

[Zee]

FWIW I mostly agree with Zee.  If management thinks Matthews is the best player on the team (which IMO, at the moment anyway, he isn't) then he should be signed for as long as possible. 

To me the real conundrum here is not term, it's what this means for Marner's contract.  I totally do not get the argument that this contract means Marner's will be under 10.  Right now, you can make a very good argument that Marner is the best player, night in and night out, among the big 4.  Not by a huge margin (over AM  & JT at least), but simply looking at their on-ice performance, there is no way Marner deserves nearly $2M less than either Matthews or Tavares.

There's an old saying: just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean people aren't out to get me.  Paul Marner may be a hockeydad, but that doesn't mean he's wrong about what Marner deserves on his contract.

I can see Marner coming in on a 3 year bridge cause they can't make the number fit with him at 11.6 as well.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

In Friedman's 31 Thoughts he says the number for Matthews on an 8 year deal was "probably close to $14 million".

Call that crazy all you want, but virtually every hockey "insider" has said it would have been $13.5-14mil now.

 

[ZBBM]

FWIW I mostly agree with Zee.  If management thinks Matthews is the best player on the team (which IMO, at the moment anyway, he isn't) then he should be signed for as long as possible. 

They signed him for as long as possible at this AAV. If you really think that this deal mainly speaks to what Marner will want/get then signing Matthews for more money and more years would similarly spike Marner's ask and that would lead to an almost entirely untenable cap situation over the next few years.

Well, as I said I don't think Matthews is the best player on the team right now so I'm not saying this is a terrible deal.  (I don't think it's a slam-dunk winner either, though.)  Maybe management agrees with me; if that's their behind-closed-doors logic, then perhaps they are setting the table for an $11ishx8 contract for Marner.

But I'll be very surprised if they can get Marner for 10 or a bit under.  I think that's a fantasy.

One more point about Matthews.  Azzurri gets a lot of grief on here but the fact is that Matthews has missed significant time with injuries, and maybe those injuries were not entirely random events but instead a byproduct of the style he has to play to be most effective.  If that's the case, then his value is not as high as it would otherwise be.  He looked poised to play at an even higher level to start the season, maybe up towards McDavid territory ... but since the injury, not quite so much.

 

[Zee]

In Friedman's 31 Thoughts he says the number for Matthews on an 8 year deal was "probably close to $14 million".

Call that crazy all you want, but virtually every hockey "insider" has said it would have been $13.5-14mil now.

It is crazy. On what comparables does he deserve to be the highest paid player in the league? I thought contracts were all about comparables? Yeah he's pro rated for 50 goals 100 points this year. Point is, he's not getting that since he's not playing 82 games nor did he play 82 last season, and that's not even the most points in the league if he got there. Hell it might not even be top on the team, yet he deserves to he highest paid in the league? How?

 

[ZBBM]

In Friedman's 31 Thoughts he says the number for Matthews on an 8 year deal was "probably close to $14 million".

Call that crazy all you want, but virtually every hockey "insider" has said it would have been $13.5-14mil now.

I call it punditry.  Maybe right, but maybe not.

 

[Kin]

Someone square this circle for me:

How can the market for Marner be simultaneously inextricably linked to both what Kucherov got and what Matthews got?