WhatIfGodWasALeaf
Active member
A funny post from over at reddit:
UserGlengarryGlencross said:Shanahan to Lou:
Matthews or BUST
- Thread starter ZBBM
- Start date
Misty
New member
Mountain out of a mole hill...
The poor kid had a full season overseas, then followed that up with a tournament as part of Team USA, then there was the insane lead-up to the draft where it's bombarded with interviews and "fun" events, then the draft itself, then a billion interviews in the week post-draft, and then the Leafs' prospect camp week. I thought he said in one of those LeafsTV interviews that after camp he was going back to Arizona to put his feet up for a week or two of R&R before returning to Toronto to begin working with the Leafs' training staff to begin ramping up for what's going to be a ridiculously busy run-up to the season with the kids' team for the World Cup, then Leafs camp...
As Zee said, Lou's response to the question in the presser was "there was never any doubt...he's earned it...the entire 'negotiation' took ten minutes." Maybe this was just the first time Matthews has had the energy to lift a pen to sign his John Hancock.
Pure media silliness. Just "need some calamity to report on so let's fabricate one to get website hits" without any actual factual basis. Pretty blatant foolishness.
The poor kid had a full season overseas, then followed that up with a tournament as part of Team USA, then there was the insane lead-up to the draft where it's bombarded with interviews and "fun" events, then the draft itself, then a billion interviews in the week post-draft, and then the Leafs' prospect camp week. I thought he said in one of those LeafsTV interviews that after camp he was going back to Arizona to put his feet up for a week or two of R&R before returning to Toronto to begin working with the Leafs' training staff to begin ramping up for what's going to be a ridiculously busy run-up to the season with the kids' team for the World Cup, then Leafs camp...
As Zee said, Lou's response to the question in the presser was "there was never any doubt...he's earned it...the entire 'negotiation' took ten minutes." Maybe this was just the first time Matthews has had the energy to lift a pen to sign his John Hancock.
Pure media silliness. Just "need some calamity to report on so let's fabricate one to get website hits" without any actual factual basis. Pretty blatant foolishness.
It?s true, Leafs general manager Lou Lamoriello isn?t a fan of the individual clauses that can be included in entry-level contracts, but he didn?t have any choice with Matthews. That?s why the ?negotiations? with agent Pat Brisson of CAA hockey began and ended with a 15-minute conversation earlier this week.
?He?s earned this,? Lamoriello said Thursday of Matthews. ?He deserves what he?s getting. ? He deserves the max that could be given.?
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/lou-lamoriellos-new-jersey-way-absent-matthews-signing/
?He?s earned this,? Lamoriello said Thursday of Matthews. ?He deserves what he?s getting. ? He deserves the max that could be given.?
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/lou-lamoriellos-new-jersey-way-absent-matthews-signing/
Heroic Shrimp
Active member
I think it would be kind of cool if this thread stays alive for many years until the end of Matthews' career and it can be looked back on as a sort of chronicle of his professional career.
Nik the Trik said:
It seems that it was regurgitated speculation based on comments made 5 years ago and it ignored the fact that since Larsson, at least 7 ELCs that were signed under Lamoriello have had performance bonuses. His only quotes were vague and from people who had nothing to do with the negotiations. And now there are reports that it was very quick process.
IMO, everything that has transpired indicates that performance bonuses were never an issue with Matthews. He was signed earlier than any of the Leafs last 4 first rounders and earlier 4 of the last 9 first overalls picks.
I know you dislike Lou's policies and I'm with you some of the other ones, but I see no evidence that he has a "no performance bonus" policy with ELCs, just speculation that isn't supported by what has actually happened.
Kin
New member
Deebo said:
There's a middle ground between thinking Lamoriello has a no performance bonus policy and was holding firm to it and thinking that he gave Matthews the max in 15 minutes.
The people quoted in the article don't say they thought Lamoriello didn't want to include any bonuses, just that he didn't want to give the same deal Eichel/McDavid got.
Misty
New member
Except that in this case absolutely nobody who would have any knowledge at all of the "negotiations" with Matthews has said anything other than that it was a quick, easy, no-questions sort of thing. Lou stated it several times in yesterday's presser. Brisson stated it. Matthews stated it. Shannahan, although not directly addressing it, made a comment to that effect a couple of weeks ago.Nik the Trik said:
The only ones who "reported" on there being any sort of hold-up or sticking point or potential ill-will about the process are the press, none of whom (I assume) were invited to those meetings or were on the line during any phone calls between Lou and Brisson. Their "fact-checking" extended to going back to some quotes Lou made half a decade ago and selectively pointing to a few older cases where he'd held the line while completely ignoring more a handful of Lou's m,ore recent contracts which were far more in keeping with the NHL norm for higher draft picks' signings. It's very hard to think of this as anything other than media fabricating hype and angst where there wasn't/isn't any. There has not been a single reliable "in the know" source to support a single word of the supposed controversy in Matthews' signing...only selective old-news reporting.
(And when I mentioned Zee in my previous post, I clearly said it was his "Lou said it took 10 minutes to do the contract" comment so I'm a little confused about your response. I didn't refer to any article that Zee had linked, nor can I see any post of his that links something when I scan back a few pages...perhaps I'm missing something?)
Zee
Active member
I don't know what to believe now. Knowing how this Leafs team does business now, that is no information gets "leaked" by anyone inside the Leafs organization, I have to err on the side that the media was making a mountain out of a molehill here. Re-reading my article from Wednesday's Star, the author's only "sources" are people that have no connection with the entire situation. Example:
As a fan, in the absence of any other information we try to grasp onto anything we hear. So someone in a newspaper that quotes "NHL people" sounds legit to us right? Of course that presupposes that people around the NHL have any more "inside info" into the Leafs organization that we do, and I think that's clearly not the case here. Lou is adamant about doing business quietly, and he doesn't want information getting out about their negotiations.
Again another example above, a quote from 'an executive with a rival club'. The executive "hopes" Lou's not holding his breath, which reads as "I have no clue what they're doing, but I hope he knows what it is".
More and more, the early reports of contract stalemates between the Leafs and Matthews camp seem ridiculous now in light of what happened. If we're to take those reports as accurate that would mean that either:
1) Lou got pressure from Shanahan/ownership to sign the deal because of growing media coverage
2) Lou caved on his own and gave max bonuses
3) A mixture of 1&2?
It seems unlikely to me that any of those scenarios played out. Lou's built Cup winners from the ground up, he knows the value of star players for your team and he's smart enough to know you take care of your stars. As it's been pointed out by other posters, the Matthews ELC was in line with the time frame for other Leafs first round picks, and is even earlier signed then some notable high draft picks in the past like Ekblad and Stamkos.
I feel annoyed having been duped once again by the Toronto media looking to create a story where none existed. This reminds me of the Simmons article on Kessel eating a daily hotdog, where he quoted sources that nobody was able to verify later on.
Anyway, it's in the past, Matthews is signed and the future is bright.
As a fan, in the absence of any other information we try to grasp onto anything we hear. So someone in a newspaper that quotes "NHL people" sounds legit to us right? Of course that presupposes that people around the NHL have any more "inside info" into the Leafs organization that we do, and I think that's clearly not the case here. Lou is adamant about doing business quietly, and he doesn't want information getting out about their negotiations.
Again another example above, a quote from 'an executive with a rival club'. The executive "hopes" Lou's not holding his breath, which reads as "I have no clue what they're doing, but I hope he knows what it is".
More and more, the early reports of contract stalemates between the Leafs and Matthews camp seem ridiculous now in light of what happened. If we're to take those reports as accurate that would mean that either:
1) Lou got pressure from Shanahan/ownership to sign the deal because of growing media coverage
2) Lou caved on his own and gave max bonuses
3) A mixture of 1&2?
It seems unlikely to me that any of those scenarios played out. Lou's built Cup winners from the ground up, he knows the value of star players for your team and he's smart enough to know you take care of your stars. As it's been pointed out by other posters, the Matthews ELC was in line with the time frame for other Leafs first round picks, and is even earlier signed then some notable high draft picks in the past like Ekblad and Stamkos.
I feel annoyed having been duped once again by the Toronto media looking to create a story where none existed. This reminds me of the Simmons article on Kessel eating a daily hotdog, where he quoted sources that nobody was able to verify later on.
Anyway, it's in the past, Matthews is signed and the future is bright.
Zee
Active member
Another article by the same author, he continues to stick to his guns about "contract issues". Here's a choice quote.
https://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2016/07/21/auston-matthews-signs-with-maple-leafs.html
Wow, every one has received the max starting with Crosby? Man they must have signed Crosby just days after the draft!
Oh, Crosby was signed 1 month after the draft (draft was July 30?31, 2005). Looking at that chart above, what is so "off" above the timeline of Matthews signing? There are only 5 guys on that list who signed earlier than Matthews, and three of them are Oilers, not exactly the model franchise to be emulating.
https://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2016/07/21/auston-matthews-signs-with-maple-leafs.html
Wow, every one has received the max starting with Crosby? Man they must have signed Crosby just days after the draft!
Oh, Crosby was signed 1 month after the draft (draft was July 30?31, 2005). Looking at that chart above, what is so "off" above the timeline of Matthews signing? There are only 5 guys on that list who signed earlier than Matthews, and three of them are Oilers, not exactly the model franchise to be emulating.
Kin
New member
Zee said:
Right and I'm saying that not all of those situations are necessarily equal. Not all teams run rookie camps, some teams are super busy in free agency/the trade market and will back burner signing draft picks(especially in a case like Johnson's where he planned on playing College). Especially in 2005, the situations were just fundamentally different. It made all the sense in the world to prioritize figuring out a fairly complicated salary structure over signing a draft pick when there was no dispute about what the pick would eventually get.
What was reported on specifically was that there were negotiations that were slow, that's not the same thing as there not being negotiations because guys are at the cottage and signing a contract makes no tangible difference.
Again, if you want to believe that was entirely fabricated that's your call but I don't.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Nik the Trik said:
Well the evidence sure points to it being mostly if not completely fabricated. The parties involved say it was quick and no issues. The article in question has no comments or sources from anyone claiming to be involved in the contract discussions. The team has been pretty tight-lipped about leaking things in the past couple of seasons with even huge trades not leaking out until just before happening or even by the Leafs own twitter accounts. Kevin McGran ain't Bob McKenzie.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/maple-leafs-sign-no-1-pick-auston-matthews-to-entry-level-deal/article31050579/
I mean, if the bonuses were a sticking point, and I'm not even saying that they are, do you really think that Brisson would have gone to the media and said "I had to fight tooth and nail to get this 1st overall pick the contract that he deserves because Lou is a dinosaur"?
Most of the posters here who firmly believe that this was completely fabricated are the ones saying "don't believe everything you read in the paper".
Most of the posters here who firmly believe that this was completely fabricated are the ones saying "don't believe everything you read in the paper".
Yeah, obviously McGran was onto something per this PPP investigative report:
How close was Matthews to signing with the KHL?
Disclaimer: Yes this is a satire piece.
How close was Matthews to signing with the KHL?
Disclaimer: Yes this is a satire piece.