Mitch Marner: what now?

[Guilt Trip]

Got ya, I think lol. Thx Deebo and Busta too.

 

[Deebo]

Got ya, I think lol. Thx Deebo and Busta too.

There was a lot of confusion about this because the media were talking about a big cap hit in year one followed by a discount in years 2 and beyond so much that it became a widely held belief.

Up until Nylander signed and I started looking at how it worked a little closer, I thought the same.

 

[Highlander]

So, he gets his $6.9 per year, which means he got a much higher per game amount in the first year. In other words, he got his full $6.9M but only had to play a portion of the year.

Willy's cap hit was 10.2 mill last year so wouldn't that be an issue if Marner signed after the season began? Wouldn't his cap hit be higher in year 1 then 10 mill assuming the contract is 80 mill over 8 years?

The 10.2M was pro-rated to 126/186 days of the season so his cap hit 6.96M last year.

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/mapleleafs/cap-tracker

So the Pro-Rated cap hit is for paper use only and doesn't count against the Cap?

The 10.2M/~186 days gives you the daily cap hit.

The daily cap hit X the number of days the player is on the roster is the amount the player counts for on the cap.

It's not that it doesn't count, the full year cap hit is just grossed up to the point where the daily cap hit X by the days remaining in the season make the cap hit equal in all years of the contract.

With the amount of learning we are all doing we could all end up as potential GM's one day soon. NOT

 

[Bullfrog]

So the Pro-Rated cap hit is for paper use only and doesn't count against the Cap?

The terminology that's being used most is:
Cap Number: the full average annual value (AAV) of the contract
Cap Hit: the actual hit, which is the pro-rated value based on number of days on the roster x daily cap number.

Normal contracts (signed before the season starts) will of course have the same cap number (AAV) for each year. The cap hits would only vary due to long-term injury or time in the minors, etc.

So, using those terms, Willy's Cap Number for the first year was $10M+ and for subsequent years is $6.9M. His cap hit (ignoring any potential LTIR time) will be $6.9M EACH year (pro-rated down to $6.9M for the 1st year and $6.9M for all other years.)

 

[Bullfrog]

So, he gets his $6.9 per year, which means he got a much higher per game amount in the first year. In other words, he got his full $6.9M but only had to play a portion of the year.

Willy's cap hit was 10.2 mill last year so wouldn't that be an issue if Marner signed after the season began? Wouldn't his cap hit be higher in year 1 then 10 mill assuming the contract is 80 mill over 8 years?

To answer your question, yes, it would be an issue depending on how long it takes. The main reason being that they'd have to pay somebody to play in his place while he wasn't on the team. This would be included in the team's cap number along with Marner's contract.

 

[Deebo]

So, he gets his $6.9 per year, which means he got a much higher per game amount in the first year. In other words, he got his full $6.9M but only had to play a portion of the year.

Willy's cap hit was 10.2 mill last year so wouldn't that be an issue if Marner signed after the season began? Wouldn't his cap hit be higher in year 1 then 10 mill assuming the contract is 80 mill over 8 years?

To answer your question, yes, it would be an issue depending on how long it takes. The main reason being that they'd have to pay somebody to play in his place while he wasn't on the team. This would be included in the team's cap number along with Marner's contract.

That amount is probably just under 500k at most as they wouldn't be replacing him with anyone one making much more than the minimum.

I think it was Leivo that went out when Nylander signed, and he only counted for 303k on the cap.

 

[Bullfrog]

Agreed that it's probably not a concern, but this is dependent on what moves are made. If Marleau is still on the team, every dollar will critical. With such a tight cap crunch, wasted dollars are even more impactful.

 

[ZBBM]

Skinner 8x9 (avg).  Marner's getting more than 10 methinks.

 

[Kin]

Skinner 8x9 (avg).  Marner's getting more than 10 methinks.

I mean, at the very least, you're not getting a single UFA year for anything under 10.

 

[ZBBM]

Skinner 8x9 (avg).  Marner's getting more than 10 methinks.

I mean, at the very least, you're not getting a single UFA year for anything under 10.

Yeah, I don't know how it all works out in terms of term.  I'd see if he'd go for 8 years at 10 or just a shade above.  That should be a bargain well before the end of the contract comes.  And the evolving situation with Marleau and Zaitsev opens up a bit of space in the short run.

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/earlschwartz27/status/1137337298952118272

 

[bustaheims]

Skinner 8x9 (avg).  Marner's getting more than 10 methinks.

Skinner?s contract is gonna look like a real overpay when Skinner goes back to being a ~25 goal, ~55 point winger next season, and when Panarin and other prime UFAs don?t sign for high amounts more. It?s going to be an outlier.

 

[Bullfrog]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that's a bad contract.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Skinner?s contract is gonna look like a real overpay when Skinner goes back to being a ~25 goal, ~55 point winger next season, and when Panarin and other prime UFAs don?t sign for high amounts more. It?s going to be an outlier.

I think it's high, but it should be noted this is the 2nd time in 3 years that Skinner got 40 or close (37 goals in 16/17) so I don't think this season was a complete anomaly. He is a very good goal scorer and scoring goals is the hardest thing to do. Also going from playing with centres like Derek Ryan, Victor Rask, and a pre-breakout Elias Lindholm to Jack Eichel is a pretty massive improvement for him. So I wouldn't be surprised to see him stay close to 35+ goals for the next few seasons.

The AAV is high and that coupled with max term means the 2nd half of this deal could be a pretty big problem, but this shouldn't handcuff them too much for the first few years.

 

[bustaheims]

Skinner?s contract is gonna look like a real overpay when Skinner goes back to being a ~25 goal, ~55 point winger next season, and when Panarin and other prime UFAs don?t sign for high amounts more. It?s going to be an outlier.

I think it's high, but it should be noted this is the 2nd time in 3 years that Skinner got 40 or close (37 goals in 16/17) so I don't think this season was a complete anomaly. He is a very good goal scorer and scoring goals is the hardest thing to do. Also going from playing with centres like Derek Ryan, Victor Rask, and a pre-breakout Elias Lindholm to Jack Eichel is a pretty massive improvement for him. So I wouldn't be surprised to see him stay close to 35+ goals for the next few seasons.

The AAV is high and that coupled with max term means the 2nd half of this deal could be a pretty big problem, but this shouldn't handcuff them too much for the first few years.

He was riding an unsustainable shooting percentage in the first half, and it came crashing down after the all star break. 30 goals in his first 48, 10 in the last 34. He hasn?t shown an ability to maintain that over multiple consecutive years. He?ll have a couple years where the contract seems worth it, but, it?ll mostly be him being overpaid by around $1.5M-$2M per.

 

[Kin]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that's a bad contract.

When Skinner's name was being floated as a possible Marner replacement and I was saying that any UFA would come too expensive the deal I was going to ask if people would be comfortable giving Skinner was essentially the JVR deal. I never thought he'd get this sort of money.

 

[Bullfrog]

JvR is who I thought of immediately. Very similar stats. Skinner's had a couple of higher output seasons, but they might push him up to the $7.5 range?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

He was riding an unsustainable shooting percentage in the first half, and it came crashing down after the all star break. 30 goals in his first 48, 10 in the last 34. He hasn?t shown an ability to maintain that over multiple consecutive years. He?ll have a couple years where the contract seems worth it, but, it?ll mostly be him being overpaid by around $1.5M-$2M per.

Well ok but you could also say that he was riding an unsustainably low shooting percentage in that second half, particularly in his last 25 games where he only shot 4.9%. That's kinda how shooting percentages usually go throughout a season, goal scorers have high and lows. At the end of the day he settled in at 14.9% which is a career high but it's the 4th time he's been over the 12% mark, and again it was the first time in his career pretty much where he played with an elite centre. 14.9% was also only 60th in the league in shooting percentages and was a middle of the pack shooting percentage among 30-goal scorers.

Also Skinner is 3rd in the entire league in 5-on-5 goals for the past 3 seasons. Matthews and McDavid are the only guys with more than him. He's very, very slightly ahead of Ovi and Kucherov. Like he is a legit elite goal scorer. I get his lack of point per game numbers hurt him but some of us spent a lot of time arguing that Matthews earned his cap hit largely because of his goal scoring abilities (and because he's a centre, which Skinner of course isn't). So it's hard for me to turn around from that and not recognize that Skinner is almost in his same league in that respect.

Like I said the numbers are high, sure. My problem is people saying "haha Skinner's just a 25 goal scorer". He's been one of the best 5-on-5 goal scorers in the entire league, he's not particularly old, and he's finally been matched with an elite centre for the first time in his career. For a team like Buffalo, that needs to contend soon and might have trouble attracting top flight UFA wingers (does anyone think Panarin for instance for have considered signing there even for a second?), overpaying an elite goal scorer isn't the worst idea in the world.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

And for what it's worth Evolving Wild's contract projections had him at $8.5mil for 8 years.

 

[ZBBM]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that's a bad contract.

It doesn't matter whether any of us think it's a bad contract. Mitch thinks it's a good one. I can assure you his agent thinks it's a very good one.

OTOH Paul thinks it's a gross underpayment.