Pietrangelo Watch

[Kin]

It's also worth remembering, although for the life of me I don't know why people want to bring this up again in the Pietrangelo thread, that McDavid originally negotiated a larger contract and then chose himself to come down from that a little. He wasn't interested in maxing out his leverage, Matthews was.

 

[Frank E]

It's also worth remembering, although for the life of me I don't know why people want to bring this up again in the Pietrangelo thread, that McDavid originally negotiated a larger contract and then chose himself to come down from that a little. He wasn't interested in maxing out his leverage, Matthews was.

If I recall, Matthews only accepted the ACV of $11.6m if the term was shorter.  I remember the quote was something like "find something that works"...so they landed on a 5 year deal.  It sounded like he would have sought more ACV if the term was longer.

It was Marner that was maxing out his leverage and holding out.  Matthews didn't do that.

I know this is the Pietrangelo thread and all, but I think signing Matthews to only a 5 year term might turn out to be a pretty big mistake.

 

[Guilt Trip]

I don?t know why we put ourselves through this year after year. I know it?s a message board and speculation is what we strive on, but let?s be honest with ourselves, other than Tavares, the top free agent just doesn?t come to Toronto.

Maybe I?m just getting old and grumpy, but using Toronto and negotiating leverage has just gotten tiresome for me.

Thing is, Toronto has probably done as well as anyone in my time as a hockey fan at attracting free agents. The thing of it is though is that people way oversell the "he's a local guy, so he's going to sign here" thing.

I agree it's annoying when every media report has the Leafs involved and I think the "he's a local guy so he's dying to play here" thing is overblown but guys like Cujo, Mogilny, Gary Roberts, Clarkson(who sucked but was a highly sought after free agent), heck, even Gretzky did agree to come here.

Too bad Dubas cant use any leverage on cap hits.  He pays top AAV, for less term, and gives massive signing bonuses so they get all their money up front.  I love Matthews...but in no universe should he be paid 865k less than Connor Mcdavid...for LESS term.  Its baffling really. 

Up until this season comparing dollars for dollars of contracts is a recipe for misunderstanding. You need to be comparing their relative "% of cap in the year they sign" to get any sort of meaningful indication. Nobody expected a multi-year flat cap situation when any of those contracts were signed, either. It's going to be really interesting to see how that affects the upcoming free-agency.

McDavid: 16.7% of cap when he signed
Matthews: 14.63%

If McDavid had signed the same year as Matthews his would have been about $13.28 AAV (1.5M more than Matthews). I don't think that's nearly as out of line as you're suggesting.

I think that's pretty fair actually. I also think the Nylander contract is looking more and more like a bargain every day. Where we have a problem I think is with Mitch and the fact that we signed Tavares. Once you signed Tavares I think that forced out one of Marner or Nylander and I think we'll see that happening - you can't win without depth. Ultimately we need to keep rolling our roster and start trading players and get value back as we've dug a pretty sizable hole with Marleau/Zaitsev and not recouping assets on expiring contracts.

I still don't see Dubas moving Willy or Mitch this year. Maybe down the road but not yet. I heard on Overdrive an interesting take on the AP front yesterday with having to move players etc. They said if  you have to move say Nylander, or similar money, in order to get AP do you do it? All said of course you do because AP puts you closer to winning the cup then Nylander does. Also said, much like Zee has, you can't worry about 7 years down the road. The window is 4 more years with Matthews. Have to take advantage now. AP will have a huge impact on the D core. Holl who really is a low 4/5 guy will be on the 2nd pairing which should help his game a lot. Either way though the Leafs need a #1 RD whether it's AP or someone else and you're going to be paying 5+ mill to get one so like I said earlier, probably one of Kerfoot or Johnsson will have to go anyway.

 

[Guilt Trip]

I know this is the Pietrangelo thread and all, but I think signing Matthews to only a 5 year term might turn out to be a pretty big mistake.

Why? Toews, Kane, Crosby, Malkin, Stamkos, Getzlaf, Perry, Benn to name a few, all signed 5 year deals on their 2nd contracts. Worried that he'll want more money next contract, or that he'll leave via UFA?

 

[Bender]

I don?t know why we put ourselves through this year after year. I know it?s a message board and speculation is what we strive on, but let?s be honest with ourselves, other than Tavares, the top free agent just doesn?t come to Toronto.

Maybe I?m just getting old and grumpy, but using Toronto and negotiating leverage has just gotten tiresome for me.

Thing is, Toronto has probably done as well as anyone in my time as a hockey fan at attracting free agents. The thing of it is though is that people way oversell the "he's a local guy, so he's going to sign here" thing.

I agree it's annoying when every media report has the Leafs involved and I think the "he's a local guy so he's dying to play here" thing is overblown but guys like Cujo, Mogilny, Gary Roberts, Clarkson(who sucked but was a highly sought after free agent), heck, even Gretzky did agree to come here.

Too bad Dubas cant use any leverage on cap hits.  He pays top AAV, for less term, and gives massive signing bonuses so they get all their money up front.  I love Matthews...but in no universe should he be paid 865k less than Connor Mcdavid...for LESS term.  Its baffling really. 

Up until this season comparing dollars for dollars of contracts is a recipe for misunderstanding. You need to be comparing their relative "% of cap in the year they sign" to get any sort of meaningful indication. Nobody expected a multi-year flat cap situation when any of those contracts were signed, either. It's going to be really interesting to see how that affects the upcoming free-agency.

McDavid: 16.7% of cap when he signed
Matthews: 14.63%

If McDavid had signed the same year as Matthews his would have been about $13.28 AAV (1.5M more than Matthews). I don't think that's nearly as out of line as you're suggesting.

I think that's pretty fair actually. I also think the Nylander contract is looking more and more like a bargain every day. Where we have a problem I think is with Mitch and the fact that we signed Tavares. Once you signed Tavares I think that forced out one of Marner or Nylander and I think we'll see that happening - you can't win without depth. Ultimately we need to keep rolling our roster and start trading players and get value back as we've dug a pretty sizable hole with Marleau/Zaitsev and not recouping assets on expiring contracts.

I still don't see Dubas moving Willy or Mitch this year. Maybe down the road but not yet. I heard on Overdrive an interesting take on the AP front yesterday with having to move players etc. They said if  you have to move say Nylander, or similar money, in order to get AP do you do it? All said of course you do because AP puts you closer to winning the cup then Nylander does. Also said, much like Zee has, you can't worry about 7 years down the road. The window is 4 more years with Matthews. Have to take advantage now. AP will have a huge impact on the D core. Holl who really is a low 4/5 guy will be on the 2nd pairing which should help his game a lot. Either way though the Leafs need a #1 RD whether it's AP or someone else and you're going to be paying 5+ mill to get one so like I said earlier, probably one of Kerfoot or Johnsson will have to go anyway.

The window isn't closed just because you have to give Matthews another contract, you do have to think short term and long term. If overreaching now means you get a few kicks at the can now but completely screws up your long term ability to compete then is that really progress?

As a counterpoint listening to Leafs Lunch they brought in a guy from Sportlogiq that said the only 4 players making $7m or less who scored 30 goals last year and he is on the longest contract length of his deal, so from a value perspective does subtracting Nylander, which teams are undervaluing in a trade even though he's got a pretty good contract, make sense? I mean, at least maximize assets coming back and trading Nylander probably doesn't do that. I don't know how willing I am to rob from Peter to pay Paul, so I think I'm still on the mindset that we need depth above all else if we're jumping into free agency and I don't think trading Nylander to get AP (who is going to be 31 once next season starts by the way) is the best way to do that.

 

[Redleaf]

I mean, at least maximize assets coming back and trading Nylander probably doesn't do that. I don't know how willing I am to rob from Peter to pay Paul, so I think I'm still on the mindset that we need depth above all else if we're jumping into free agency and I don't think trading Nylander to get AP (who is going to be 31 once next season starts by the way) is the best way to do that.


Trading Nylander to make room for PA...PLUS (and this is a big 'if') you can also get someone like Jamie Drysdale (or a similar promising young RH D-man) in a return, you not robbing Peter to pay Paul. You're robbing  William to pay Alex and Jamie.

 

[Frank E]

The window isn't closed just because you have to give Matthews another contract, you do have to think short term and long term. If overreaching now means you get a few kicks at the can now but completely screws up your long term ability to compete then is that really progress?

It might.  But please define "long term" in the current NHL.

As a counterpoint listening to Leafs Lunch they brought in a guy from Sportlogiq that said the only 4 players making $7m or less who scored 30 goals last year and he is on the longest contract length of his deal, so from a value perspective does subtracting Nylander, which teams are undervaluing in a trade even though he's got a pretty good contract, make sense? I mean, at least maximize assets coming back and trading Nylander probably doesn't do that. I don't know how willing I am to rob from Peter to pay Paul, so I think I'm still on the mindset that we need depth above all else if we're jumping into free agency and I don't think trading Nylander to get AP (who is going to be 31 once next season starts by the way) is the best way to do that.

This is all over the place.  We don't know if teams undervalue Nylander.  Cap space is fixed, so if you want, or in the Leafs' case, NEED to spend some money on the defense, then indeed you'll have to give up some of your offense cap dollars.  As of today, Justin Holl is their only returning RHD under contract.

They may very well have to go in a more Brodie direction, but for an extra $3m in cap space, you can have a guy that just finished fourth in Norris voting.  And in terms of his age, Hedman, and Josi, and Carlsson are all around that same age...you got a problem with their deals as well?

They've been screwing around with the defense for years now, and not seemingly able to the right price/performance out of the right side.  If Pietrangelo lands in their laps for zero talent cost, you find a way to make him fit.

 

[Kin]

If I recall, Matthews only accepted the ACV of $11.6m if the term was shorter.  I remember the quote was something like "find something that works"...so they landed on a 5 year deal.  It sounded like he would have sought more ACV if the term was longer.

It was Marner that was maxing out his leverage and holding out.  Matthews didn't do that.

Matthews got the deal he wanted, by most accounts, because the Leafs were effectively willing to give him what he was looking for. Holding out, sort of by default, is an indication that a player has less leverage because a team is willing to fight it out with them in a way they typically don't with superstars.

So the contrast with McDavid, who again basically got whatever he wanted from the Oilers and negotiated his own salary down, is the issue here.

 

[bustaheims]

Trading Nylander to make room for PA...PLUS (and this is a big 'if') you can also get someone like Jamie Drysdale (or a similar promising young RH D-man) in a return, you not robbing Peter to pay Paul. You're robbing  William to pay Alex and Jamie.

It's more than just a big if. It's absolutely not going to happen. It's so beyond the realm of realistic possibilities that, quite frankly, it shouldn't even be brought or considered.

 

[Kin]

It's more than just a big if. It's absolutely not going to happen. It's so beyond the realm of realistic possibilities that, quite frankly, it shouldn't even be brought or considered.

Yeah, this is what I meant about people being specific about their supposed Nylander trades. RedLeaf did that, and fair play to him for that, but it underscores that so many of these "Trade Nylander, sign AP and we all have a merry Christmas" scenarios are based on pretty hard to fathom trades taking place.

Teams with very high draft picks want to keep them and hopefully draft a franchise-cornerstone sort of piece. Teams without them(or similarly high value prospects) can't offer good value.

 

[Bender]

The window isn't closed just because you have to give Matthews another contract, you do have to think short term and long term. If overreaching now means you get a few kicks at the can now but completely screws up your long term ability to compete then is that really progress?

It might.  But please define "long term" in the current NHL.

As a counterpoint listening to Leafs Lunch they brought in a guy from Sportlogiq that said the only 4 players making $7m or less who scored 30 goals last year and he is on the longest contract length of his deal, so from a value perspective does subtracting Nylander, which teams are undervaluing in a trade even though he's got a pretty good contract, make sense? I mean, at least maximize assets coming back and trading Nylander probably doesn't do that. I don't know how willing I am to rob from Peter to pay Paul, so I think I'm still on the mindset that we need depth above all else if we're jumping into free agency and I don't think trading Nylander to get AP (who is going to be 31 once next season starts by the way) is the best way to do that.

This is all over the place.  We don't know if teams undervalue Nylander.  Cap space is fixed, so if you want, or in the Leafs' case, NEED to spend some money on the defense, then indeed you'll have to give up some of your offense cap dollars.  As of today, Justin Holl is their only returning RHD under contract.

They may very well have to go in a more Brodie direction, but for an extra $3m in cap space, you can have a guy that just finished fourth in Norris voting.  And in terms of his age, Hedman, and Josi, and Carlsson are all around that same age...you got a problem with their deals as well?

They've been screwing around with the defense for years now, and not seemingly able to the right price/performance out of the right side.  If Pietrangelo lands in their laps for zero talent cost, you find a way to make him fit.

I don't get how valuing someone internally more than what the market will bear is "all over the place." We've heard it time and time again that the offers for Nylander are underwhelming, and if that's the case then selling low on him makes no sense, even for AP. AP is going to be 31. I don't really want to trade a 24y.o. 30 goal scorer for a 31 y.o. dman that we might not regret signing on day 1 but may regret signing in 3-4 years.

Maybe I'm getting flashbacks of the Dion Phaneuf deal but long term is in 5 years or more. I think someone just brought up Ovechkin needing 13 kicks at the can before winning. Basically I don't want them to blow it so thoroughly that the team can't compete because they've destroyed all their draft capital & prospect pool before they actually have the ability to make it meaningfully in the playoffs. I don't think adding AP pushes the team in any meaningful direction. If AP goes down your depth is gone and we're already thin at C, where Nylander can play in a pinch if we get injuries. It just doesn't make sense to me vs. defense by committee in a Brodie/Gudas tandem. If everyone is capable you're less beholden to one guy and you still have some depth when injuries hit, which they inevitably will.

 

[wnc096]

I don?t know why we put ourselves through this year after year. I know it?s a message board and speculation is what we strive on, but let?s be honest with ourselves, other than Tavares, the top free agent just doesn?t come to Toronto.

Maybe I?m just getting old and grumpy, but using Toronto and negotiating leverage has just gotten tiresome for me.

Thing is, Toronto has probably done as well as anyone in my time as a hockey fan at attracting free agents. The thing of it is though is that people way oversell the "he's a local guy, so he's going to sign here" thing.

I agree it's annoying when every media report has the Leafs involved and I think the "he's a local guy so he's dying to play here" thing is overblown but guys like Cujo, Mogilny, Gary Roberts, Clarkson(who sucked but was a highly sought after free agent), heck, even Gretzky did agree to come here.

Too bad Dubas cant use any leverage on cap hits.  He pays top AAV, for less term, and gives massive signing bonuses so they get all their money up front.  I love Matthews...but in no universe should he be paid 865k less than Connor Mcdavid...for LESS term.  Its baffling really. 

Up until this season comparing dollars for dollars of contracts is a recipe for misunderstanding. You need to be comparing their relative "% of cap in the year they sign" to get any sort of meaningful indication. Nobody expected a multi-year flat cap situation when any of those contracts were signed, either. It's going to be really interesting to see how that affects the upcoming free-agency.

McDavid: 16.7% of cap when he signed
Matthews: 14.63%

If McDavid had signed the same year as Matthews his would have been about $13.28 AAV (1.5M more than Matthews). I don't think that's nearly as out of line as you're suggesting.

Yeah but Mcdavid signed for 3 more years than Matthews.  To me that is worth at least 1M more a year.  so the difference probably less that 500K.  On an 8 year term Dubas would have paid him more than 12.6M ill bet

 

[wnc096]

I know this is the Pietrangelo thread and all, but I think signing Matthews to only a 5 year term might turn out to be a pretty big mistake.

Why? Toews, Kane, Crosby, Malkin, Stamkos, Getzlaf, Perry, Benn to name a few, all signed 5 year deals on their 2nd contracts. Worried that he'll want more money next contract, or that he'll leave via UFA?

My gut feeling is that he will walk after the 5th year

 

[Guilt Trip]

I know this is the Pietrangelo thread and all, but I think signing Matthews to only a 5 year term might turn out to be a pretty big mistake.

Why? Toews, Kane, Crosby, Malkin, Stamkos, Getzlaf, Perry, Benn to name a few, all signed 5 year deals on their 2nd contracts. Worried that he'll want more money next contract, or that he'll leave via UFA?

My gut feeling is that he will walk after the 5th year

And how many superstar UFA's left their original teams after 8 years?
If he walks after playing 8 years here, I would have no issue with that.

 

[Guilt Trip]

Apparently AP asked Cola what it's like playing in Toronto and his experience was like here.

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/dirtbag_daddi/status/1309689698781212673

 

[dappleganger]

I don?t know why we put ourselves through this year after year. I know it?s a message board and speculation is what we strive on, but let?s be honest with ourselves, other than Tavares, the top free agent just doesn?t come to Toronto.

Maybe I?m just getting old and grumpy, but using Toronto and negotiating leverage has just gotten tiresome for me.

Thing is, Toronto has probably done as well as anyone in my time as a hockey fan at attracting free agents. The thing of it is though is that people way oversell the "he's a local guy, so he's going to sign here" thing.

I agree it's annoying when every media report has the Leafs involved and I think the "he's a local guy so he's dying to play here" thing is overblown but guys like Cujo, Mogilny, Gary Roberts, Clarkson(who sucked but was a highly sought after free agent), heck, even Gretzky did agree to come here.

Too bad Dubas cant use any leverage on cap hits.  He pays top AAV, for less term, and gives massive signing bonuses so they get all their money up front.  I love Matthews...but in no universe should he be paid 865k less than Connor Mcdavid...for LESS term.  Its baffling really. 

Up until this season comparing dollars for dollars of contracts is a recipe for misunderstanding. You need to be comparing their relative "% of cap in the year they sign" to get any sort of meaningful indication. Nobody expected a multi-year flat cap situation when any of those contracts were signed, either. It's going to be really interesting to see how that affects the upcoming free-agency.

McDavid: 16.7% of cap when he signed
Matthews: 14.63%

If McDavid had signed the same year as Matthews his would have been about $13.28 AAV (1.5M more than Matthews). I don't think that's nearly as out of line as you're suggesting.

I think that's pretty fair actually. I also think the Nylander contract is looking more and more like a bargain every day. Where we have a problem I think is with Mitch and the fact that we signed Tavares. Once you signed Tavares I think that forced out one of Marner or Nylander and I think we'll see that happening - you can't win without depth. Ultimately we need to keep rolling our roster and start trading players and get value back as we've dug a pretty sizable hole with Marleau/Zaitsev and not recouping assets on expiring contracts.

I still don't see Dubas moving Willy or Mitch this year. Maybe down the road but not yet. I heard on Overdrive an interesting take on the AP front yesterday with having to move players etc. They said if  you have to move say Nylander, or similar money, in order to get AP do you do it? All said of course you do because AP puts you closer to winning the cup then Nylander does. Also said, much like Zee has, you can't worry about 7 years down the road. The window is 4 more years with Matthews. Have to take advantage now. AP will have a huge impact on the D core. Holl who really is a low 4/5 guy will be on the 2nd pairing which should help his game a lot. Either way though the Leafs need a #1 RD whether it's AP or someone else and you're going to be paying 5+ mill to get one so like I said earlier, probably one of Kerfoot or Johnsson will have to go anyway.

The window isn't closed just because you have to give Matthews another contract, you do have to think short term and long term. If overreaching now means you get a few kicks at the can now but completely screws up your long term ability to compete then is that really progress?

As a counterpoint listening to Leafs Lunch they brought in a guy from Sportlogiq that said the only 4 players making $7m or less who scored 30 goals last year and he is on the longest contract length of his deal, so from a value perspective does subtracting Nylander, which teams are undervaluing in a trade even though he's got a pretty good contract, make sense? I mean, at least maximize assets coming back and trading Nylander probably doesn't do that. I don't know how willing I am to rob from Peter to pay Paul, so I think I'm still on the mindset that we need depth above all else if we're jumping into free agency and I don't think trading Nylander to get AP (who is going to be 31 once next season starts by the way) is the best way to do that.

6 guys did it, not 4, making under $7m: David Pastrnak, Mika Zibanejad, Nathan MacKinnon, Patrice Bergeron, William Nylander, Dominik Kubalik.

 

[Redleaf]

Trading Nylander to make room for PA...PLUS (and this is a big 'if') you can also get someone like Jamie Drysdale (or a similar promising young RH D-man) in a return, you not robbing Peter to pay Paul. You're robbing  William to pay Alex and Jamie.

It's more than just a big if. It's absolutely not going to happen. It's so beyond the realm of realistic possibilities that, quite frankly, it shouldn't even be brought or considered.

What exactly is not going to happen? Jamie Drysdale or a similar promising d-man? It was a pretty vague statement . If you?re saying the Leafs can?t get a 1st round pick that they could select a defenceman with for William Nylander than I?m going to call you out here. Lol . What?s he worth in your mind, a second rounder?

 

[Frank E]

Trading Nylander to make room for PA...PLUS (and this is a big 'if') you can also get someone like Jamie Drysdale (or a similar promising young RH D-man) in a return, you not robbing Peter to pay Paul. You're robbing  William to pay Alex and Jamie.

It's more than just a big if. It's absolutely not going to happen. It's so beyond the realm of realistic possibilities that, quite frankly, it shouldn't even be brought or considered.

What exactly is not going to happen? Jamie Drysdale or a similar promising d-man? It was a pretty vague statement . If you?re saying the Leafs can?t get a 1st round pick that they could select a defenceman with for William Nylander than I?m going to call you out here. Lol . What?s he worth in your mind, a second rounder?

I think busta was referring to some conversations a few pages ago where we surmised that the top-5 pickers in this year's draft are all in rebuild mode, and wouldn't need or want a Nylander/$7m forward.  They all need to draft a core player and get the ELC savings, and suck for a couple of more years.

Picks 6+ may be on the table, given some of those teams could use a Nylander to so some degree or another...but even then, a lot of them need to suck a little while longer as well.

 

[Redleaf]

Trading Nylander to make room for PA...PLUS (and this is a big 'if') you can also get someone like Jamie Drysdale (or a similar promising young RH D-man) in a return, you not robbing Peter to pay Paul. You're robbing  William to pay Alex and Jamie.

It's more than just a big if. It's absolutely not going to happen. It's so beyond the realm of realistic possibilities that, quite frankly, it shouldn't even be brought or considered.

What exactly is not going to happen? Jamie Drysdale or a similar promising d-man? It was a pretty vague statement . If you?re saying the Leafs can?t get a 1st round pick that they could select a defenceman with for William Nylander than I?m going to call you out here. Lol . What?s he worth in your mind, a second rounder?

I think busta was referring to some conversations a few pages ago where we surmised that the top-5 pickers in this year's draft are all in rebuild mode, and wouldn't need or want a Nylander/$7m forward.  They all need to draft a core player and get the ELC savings, and suck for a couple of more years.

Picks 6+ may be on the table, given some of those teams could use a Nylander to so some degree or another...but even then, a lot of them need to suck a little while longer as well.

Right but I came off that mark and did say ...or a promising young d man. Obviously targeting the highest rated defenceman is preferable but it doesn?t mean I?d stop there if there wasn?t a trade available. From what I?ve read the consensus is there isn?t a ton difference from Drysdale and the next 3-4 d-man in the draft. The idea hasn?t changed. You should be able to flip Nylander for a good promising 1st round prospect. Even if that pick is for next years draft.