The Matthews Extension

[Frank E]

Like I said, I'm not saying that MLSE can't afford to spend to the cap.

I'm no fancy businessman or anything but I think when you're dealing with this kind of money operating cash wouldn't be paid out of pocket. I'm guessing that if Rogers and Bell calls up whoever does their banking and says "We need 60 million on July 1st instead of spread out over the year" then they can probably swing that credit without a big hassle.

I'd guess they've got enough retained earnings in that company to cover anything like this.  I don't know for sure how much they dividend out, but I'd guess they've got a healthy balance sheet that wouldn't necessitate borrowing to cover bonuses like these.

 

[Kin]

I'd guess they've got enough retained earnings in that company to cover anything like this.  I don't know for sure how much they dividend out, but I'd guess they've got a healthy balance sheet that wouldn't necessitate borrowing to cover bonuses like these.

I'm sure that's right but I guess my confusion is how a company like MLSE, who isn't publicly traded, works in that capacity. Again, excuse my ignorance but I would have figured that whatever money comes in just gets filtered up into ownership while the day to day financial operations aren't done out of some big jointly held MLSE bank account.

But again, I'm no fancy businessman.

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

I like to imagine Larry Tanenbaum moseying down to the local MoneyMart asking for a cash advance. 

 

[Zee]

I like to imagine Larry Tanenbaum moseying down to the local MoneyMart asking for a cash advance.

"How would you like that Mr Tanenbaum? In 100 dollar bills or 20s?"

"Well it's hard to break 100s let's make it 20s"

 

[Kin]

I hear you but I don't think the Leafs would try to mess around with squeezing Matthews due to sheer numbers being down because of injury. They know he's the golden goose and will pay him accordingly. I don't think it'll be a difficult negotiation at all. He'll be more than Eichel, less than McDavid.

Thing is, you may be coming at that from the perspective of a Leafs fan who wants a relatively team friendly deal. I can absolutely see how Toronto would make the argument that 11 or 11.5 is the "right" place for Matthews in the league's salary structure.

Thing is, I can also see how Matthews' representation might make the argument that the "right" place for Matthews in the league's salary structure might be more like 12.5 or 13 million a year. Especially if he goes out and has a Richard winning season.

 

[Zee]

I hear you but I don't think the Leafs would try to mess around with squeezing Matthews due to sheer numbers being down because of injury. They know he's the golden goose and will pay him accordingly. I don't think it'll be a difficult negotiation at all. He'll be more than Eichel, less than McDavid.

Thing is, you may be coming at that from the perspective of a Leafs fan who wants a relatively team friendly deal. I can absolutely see how Toronto would make the argument that 11 or 11.5 is the "right" place for Matthews in the league's salary structure.

Thing is, I can also see how Matthews' representation might make the argument that the "right" place for Matthews in the league's salary structure might be more like 12.5 or 13 million a year. Especially if he goes out and has a Richard winning season.

I don't see what basis they can claim he should make more than McDavid.  Hart trophy, Art Ross trophy, Ted Lindsay trophy.  All Matthews has is the Calder.  McDavid has led the NHL in scoring the past 2 seasons so I can't see how he's a comparable.

Eichel comparison you can clearly see that Matthews is ahead, that's why I suggested more than Eichel but less than McDavid.

 

[Kin]

I don't see what basis they can claim he should make more than McDavid.  Hart trophy, Art Ross trophy, Ted Lindsay trophy.  All Matthews has is the Calder.  McDavid has led the NHL in scoring the past 2 seasons so I can't see how he's a comparable.

Well, first of all like I said that's why they may prefer to have this conversation after Matthews has another healthy year and he potentially adds some hardware to his resume as well.

But even then, the argument you're making isn't "Matthews deserves to make more than McDavid" but rather "What is Auston Matthews worth?" or, maybe even more importantly, "What is Auston Matthews worth to the Toronto Maple Leafs?". If I'm negotiating a contract for Matthews on his behalf then McDavid signing an under-market contract in Edmonton might be a positive reflection on who McDavid is as a person but it's not going to be the definitive issue in answering that question.

 

[Zee]

I don't see what basis they can claim he should make more than McDavid.  Hart trophy, Art Ross trophy, Ted Lindsay trophy.  All Matthews has is the Calder.  McDavid has led the NHL in scoring the past 2 seasons so I can't see how he's a comparable.

Well, first of all like I said that's why they may prefer to have this conversation after Matthews has another healthy year and he potentially adds some hardware to his resume as well.

But even then, the argument you're making isn't "Matthews deserves to make more than McDavid" but rather "What is Auston Matthews worth?" or, maybe even more importantly, "What is Auston Matthews worth to the Toronto Maple Leafs?". If I'm negotiating a contract for Matthews on his behalf then McDavid signing an under-market contract in Edmonton might be a positive reflection on who McDavid is as a person but it's not going to be the definitive issue in answering that question.

But I thought when these types of contracts are worked out it's all about comparables around the league.  If you look at McDavid's first 2 seasons and Matthews first 2 seasons, both players missed games due to injury, McDavid played 45 in one season, Matthews 62 in one of his.  McDavid was always over a point a game player, Matthews has never been.

Matthews to Eichel is a good comparison as they both played almost the exact number of games after 2 seasons, Eichel played 142, Matthews 144 and Auston was ahead of Eichel in points production over that time.

For your question "What is Auston Matthews worth to the Toronto Maple Leafs?", he's not worth so much that he forces the Leafs to not be able to field a competitive team around him.  Is he worth enough to the Leafs to be the highest paid Leaf?  I say yes, so now that means anything over $11M. 

If he demands to be the highest paid player in the league, there's no way the Leafs would be able to keep this current roster together, and that would be to the detriment of both Matthews and the Leafs.  I think both parties will realize this.  They'll pay him as the highest salary, but it'll probably be in the $11.5M range which I think is more than fair.

 

[Kin]

But I thought when these types of contracts are worked out it's all about comparables around the league.  If you look at McDavid's first 2 seasons and Matthews first 2 seasons, both players missed games due to injury, McDavid played 45 in one season, Matthews 62 in one of his.  McDavid was always over a point a game player, Matthews has never been.

Matthews was a point per game player last year.

And do comparables sometimes inform these contracts? Yes, but they're not the be all and end all. Is John Tavares better than Sidney Crosby? No. Did the Leafs just agree to pay Tavares more than Sidney Crosby? Yes.

But if McDavid has chosen to be very nice to Edmonton and signed for 9 million a year, does that mean all other high value RFA's are obligated to follow that structure? Pretty clearly not. 

For your question "What is Auston Matthews worth to the Toronto Maple Leafs?", he's not worth so much that he forces the Leafs to not be able to field a competitive team around him.  Is he worth enough to the Leafs to be the highest paid Leaf?  I say yes, so now that means anything over $11M.

I don't think the difference between Matthews at 11.5 million and Matthews at 13 million is the difference between "being able to field a competitive team" and not. Basically it's the difference between the team as it currently stands and replacing Brown or Hyman with a minimum salary player. That's not a massive difference in how good the team will be. 

If he demands to be the highest paid player in the league, there's no way the Leafs would be able to keep this current roster together, and that would be to the detriment of both Matthews and the Leafs.  I think both parties will realize this.  They'll pay him as the highest salary, but it'll probably be in the $11.5M range which I think is more than fair.

I certainly hope so. But if Matthews comes in and says his fair value is closer to the higher end of things then I think he's still right and I think the Leafs would still probably give it to him.

 

[Zee]

But I thought when these types of contracts are worked out it's all about comparables around the league.  If you look at McDavid's first 2 seasons and Matthews first 2 seasons, both players missed games due to injury, McDavid played 45 in one season, Matthews 62 in one of his.  McDavid was always over a point a game player, Matthews has never been.

Matthews was a point per game player last year.

And do comparables sometimes inform these contracts? Yes, but they're not the be all and end all. Is John Tavares better than Sidney Crosby? No. Did the Leafs just agree to pay Tavares more than Sidney Crosby? Yes.

But if McDavid has chosen to be very nice to Edmonton and signed for 9 million a year, does that mean all other high value RFA's are obligated to follow that structure? Pretty clearly not. 

For your question "What is Auston Matthews worth to the Toronto Maple Leafs?", he's not worth so much that he forces the Leafs to not be able to field a competitive team around him.  Is he worth enough to the Leafs to be the highest paid Leaf?  I say yes, so now that means anything over $11M.

I don't think the difference between Matthews at 11.5 million and Matthews at 13 million is the difference between "being able to field a competitive team" and not. Basically it's the difference between the team as it currently stands and replacing Brown or Hyman with a minimum salary player. That's not a massive difference in how good the team will be. 

If he demands to be the highest paid player in the league, there's no way the Leafs would be able to keep this current roster together, and that would be to the detriment of both Matthews and the Leafs.  I think both parties will realize this.  They'll pay him as the highest salary, but it'll probably be in the $11.5M range which I think is more than fair.

I certainly hope so. But if Matthews comes in and says his fair value is closer to the higher end of things then I think he's still right and I think the Leafs would still probably give it to him.

Are you serious with the Crosby / Tavares comparison?  Crosby signed a 12 year contract back in 2012, pre-lockout.  This is 6 years later when the cap has gone up, and player salaries all have gone up as well.  His salary doesn't indicate that the Leafs think he's "better" than Crosby, only that salaries have gone up, and Tavares is being paid close to what current market value is.  Also, Crosby took that "team discount" because they were able to spread it over 12 years, so his salaries in the first few years was really high, and then tailed off as he gets into his late 30s which was able to bring the cap hit down to his magical "8.7" number.

McDavid and Eichel signed their extensions last season, so it's far easier to compare the 3 players, and what the fair market value should be for each.

In the end you hope that there are reasonable people during the negotiations, Matthews camp has a strong case to say he should be the highest paid Leaf player, but still has to stay within the overall team cap structure.  Taking a higher salary which forces the Leafs to replace a Brown or Hyman with a minimum salary player as you suggested isn't good for the team, and you would hope that the Matthews camp realizes this. 

Not paying Matthews over $12M isn't a slight against the player at all, it's just an acknowledgement of the salary cap structure and how best to build a winning team within that structure.

 

[Kin]

Are you serious with the Crosby / Tavares comparison?  Crosby signed a 12 year contract back in 2012, pre-lockout.  This is 6 years later when the cap has gone up, and player salaries all have gone up as well.  His salary doesn't indicate that the Leafs think he's "better" than Crosby, only that salaries have gone up, and Tavares is being paid close to what current market value is.  Also, Crosby took that "team discount" because they were able to spread it over 12 years, so his salaries in the first few years was really high, and then tailed off as he gets into his late 30s which was able to bring the cap hit down to his magical "8.7" number.

I think you might be missing the larger point. If that one doesn't work for you, try Stamkos. Is Tavares significantly better than Stamkos? No. Is he getting significantly more than him? Yes. The larger point here is that one player taking a discount, and as much as you may not want to think it that's what McDavid did, doesn't obligate another one to. It's certainly not the sole determining factor in what a player is worth.

McDavid and Eichel signed their extensions last season, so it's far easier to compare the 3 players, and what the fair market value should be for each.

Sure but, again, "fair market value" doesn't mean "this is what McDavid signed for". One guy who should set the market taking a discount doesn't solely determine the market. McDavid could have gotten the max if he'd really wanted it. He negotiated his own salary down.

Not paying Matthews over $12M isn't a slight against the player at all, it's just an acknowledgement of the salary cap structure and how best to build a winning team within that structure.

We can all hope that Matthews signs the team friendliest deal possible. Which we do. But trying to say that if he wants something closer to his market value would make him "unreasonable" doesn't really wash.

As to whether or not that market is 13 million or more, ask yourself this, if Matthews goes out and just has the same sort of year he had last year but is healthy all the way through he'd had 45 goals and 84 points or thereabouts.

Now, we know that Tavares got offered 13 million. Do you really doubt that if Matthews wanted to field RFA offers he wouldn't get at least the same? Do you really think that a team like San Jose or the Islanders would hesitate for a second to surrender 4 1st round picks to sign Matthews at that rate, at 22 years old, coming off that kind of season if they thought there was a chance in hell the Leafs wouldn't just immediately match it?

Like it or not there's a very real chance that if Matthews wants to he could be making 13 million next year. He could get that while still playing for a competitive team. I think the Leafs sort of have to negotiate with him on that basis.

 

[Zee]

Are you serious with the Crosby / Tavares comparison?  Crosby signed a 12 year contract back in 2012, pre-lockout.  This is 6 years later when the cap has gone up, and player salaries all have gone up as well.  His salary doesn't indicate that the Leafs think he's "better" than Crosby, only that salaries have gone up, and Tavares is being paid close to what current market value is.  Also, Crosby took that "team discount" because they were able to spread it over 12 years, so his salaries in the first few years was really high, and then tailed off as he gets into his late 30s which was able to bring the cap hit down to his magical "8.7" number.

I think you might be missing the larger point. If that one doesn't work for you, try Stamkos. Is Tavares significantly better than Stamkos? No. Is he getting significantly more than him? Yes. The larger point here is that one player taking a discount, and as much as you may not want to think it that's what McDavid did, doesn't obligate another one to. It's certainly not the sole determining factor in what a player is worth.

McDavid and Eichel signed their extensions last season, so it's far easier to compare the 3 players, and what the fair market value should be for each.

Sure but, again, "fair market value" doesn't mean "this is what McDavid signed for". One guy who should set the market taking a discount doesn't solely determine the market. McDavid could have gotten the max if he'd really wanted it. He negotiated his own salary down.

Not paying Matthews over $12M isn't a slight against the player at all, it's just an acknowledgement of the salary cap structure and how best to build a winning team within that structure.

We can all hope that Matthews signs the team friendliest deal possible. Which we do. But trying to say that if he wants something closer to his market value would make him "unreasonable" doesn't really wash.

As to whether or not that market is 13 million or more, ask yourself this, if Matthews goes out and just has the same sort of year he had last year but is healthy all the way through he'd had 45 goals and 84 points or thereabouts.

Now, we know that Tavares got offered 13 million. Do you really doubt that if Matthews wanted to field RFA offers he wouldn't get at least the same? Do you really think that a team like San Jose or the Islanders would hesitate for a second to surrender 4 1st round picks to sign Matthews at that rate, at 22 years old, coming off that kind of season if they thought there was a chance in hell the Leafs wouldn't just immediately match it?

Like it or not there's a very real chance that if Matthews wants to he could be making 13 million next year. He could get that while still playing for a competitive team. I think the Leafs sort of have to negotiate with him on that basis.

They're all the same agents that negotiate these deals and they all know how the game is played.  I have to believe that reasonable people will make a reasonable deal with the player involved.  If Matthews suddenly becomes the highest paid player in the league he's added extra pressure on himself to prove he's better than everyone else, McDavid included.  Does he want that?  Maybe, I guess time will tell.

 

[Kin]

They're all the same agents that negotiate these deals and they all know how the game is played.  I have to believe that reasonable people will make a reasonable deal with the player involved.  If Matthews suddenly becomes the highest paid player in the league he's added extra pressure on himself to prove he's better than everyone else, McDavid included.  Does he want that?  Maybe, I guess time will tell.

I genuinely don't think it works that way. I don't think Tavares, after signing his new deal, is going to think "Well, now I have to be better than Anze Kopitar".

I know the owners want players to buy into this but at some point we have to realize that the market doesn't justify itself. The owners still don't share revenue evenly so just from a strict nuts and bolts point of view Matthews probably is more valuable to the Leafs given what the Leafs charge for tickets and get in local TV money than McDavid is for the Oilers. If he wants a comparable cut of that money, it's going to be bigger than McDavid's regardless of how good the two are at hockey. That's not unreasonable. It's just not buying into a system that wants to pressure star players into sacrificing what they're worth so that the grinders are multi-millionaires also.

 

[KadriFan]

My guess:

Matthews 10.5X8
Marner 9X8
Nylander gets a bridge deal

 

[Zee]

They're all the same agents that negotiate these deals and they all know how the game is played.  I have to believe that reasonable people will make a reasonable deal with the player involved.  If Matthews suddenly becomes the highest paid player in the league he's added extra pressure on himself to prove he's better than everyone else, McDavid included.  Does he want that?  Maybe, I guess time will tell.

I genuinely don't think it works that way. I don't think Tavares, after signing his new deal, is going to think "Well, now I have to be better than Anze Kopitar".

I know the owners want players to buy into this but at some point we have to realize that the market doesn't justify itself. The owners still don't share revenue evenly so just from a strict nuts and bolts point of view Matthews probably is more valuable to the Leafs given what the Leafs charge for tickets and get in local TV money than McDavid is for the Oilers. If he wants a comparable cut of that money, it's going to be bigger than McDavid's regardless of how good the two are at hockey. That's not unreasonable. It's just not buying into a system that wants to pressure star players into sacrificing what they're worth so that the grinders are multi-millionaires also.

We have human nature at play here.  When McDavid "took less" with the Oilers he came out and said he was uncomfortable with such a high cap number, and it was believed he bought into the theory that the Oilers would suffer if he took such a high percentage of the cap which would force the Oilers to have budget options at other positions. 

The owners not sharing money evenly with the players isn't something that the Matthews camp can fix with their contract by demanding he get a max deal for 8 years.  That's a collective bargaining issue that the owners and players have to resolve.  The current system is what it is, and if Matthews wants to handcuff the team by getting 20% of the cap for himself, he'll have many detractors both inside and outside the team.  Is it unfair pressure that he has to "fall in line" like other players have done?  Probably it is unfair, but all the players know this and so far, they all seem to understand it and abide by it.  He'll not be lacking in money making opportunities even if his cap hit isn't the highest in the league.

 

[Kin]

The owners not sharing money evenly with the players isn't something that the Matthews camp can fix with their contract by demanding he get a max deal for 8 years.  That's a collective bargaining issue that the owners and players have to resolve.  The current system is what it is, and if Matthews wants to handcuff the team by getting 20% of the cap for himself, he'll have many detractors both inside and outside the team.  Is it unfair pressure that he has to "fall in line" like other players have done?  Probably it is unfair, but all the players know this and so far, they all seem to understand it and abide by it.  He'll not be lacking in money making opportunities even if his cap hit isn't the highest in the league.

I didn't say anything about owners sharing money evenly with players. I said they don't share it evenly with each other. The disparity of value in a true sense between players in different markets still exist and I'm not entirely sure that more revenue sharing among teams is something that needs to be collectively bargained.

That said the difference between 11.5 and 13 from a cap management standpoint is still pretty minor. It's the difference of roughly 2% of the cap. It wouldn't seriously impact a team's ability to be competitive, even the Leafs, even if you want to say that losing a relatively minor contributor like Hyman or Brown for a minimum salary guy is a net negative it's not a big one.

And there are lots of players who go out and, damn everyone else, get the most money they can. The thing is we've just created this ridiculous system where guys like McDavid or Matthews, guys who really might be worth what they're getting, get criticized for it but if guys like John Carlsson or Milan Lucic do it then we're all "Well, that's free agency for you".

Like I said though, I don't even think Matthews getting 13 would even break the established norms of the system. Not only do I think it's not a serious impediment to competitive hockey, I think it's what he'd get offered in this current system. The fact that it's a crazy unfair system is still true but Matthews going for 13 wouldn't even really be taking a hammer to it. It'd just be coming down on the high side of the parameters this dumb market has established. 

 

[Bullfrog]

My guess:

Matthews 10.5X8
Marner 9X8
Nylander gets a bridge deal

I think it's extremely unlikely Matthews is coming in less than $11M. Here's hoping, but I doubt it.

 

[princedpw]

im puzzling over whether the numbers are reasonable (though I understand they are ballpark to give us the idea)

10.5/year for 7 (73.5)
11.5/year for 8 (92)

The fact that 1 extra year gives him 18.5 million more doesn?t really seem to make sense (to me).  At least, if I?m Matthews, I definitely take the 92 and if I?m the leafs, I definitely offer only 7 for 73.5.

Perhaps the first AAV needs to be a little higher, or the second a little lower?

Right, so my thinking on this was maybe that Matthews would prefer the slightly shorter term so that maybe he could hit UFA while still in his 20's(technically after an 8 year deal he'd still be 29 but would turn 30 before the season started).

So basically it would be a trade-off. The slightly shorter term Matthews wants but at a more team friendly rate or the term the team wants and a AAV Matthews is happier with.

As to the actual numbers I don't think it's that big a discrepancy. If you assume, and I think it's safe to, that regardless of whether Matthews signs a 7 or 8 year deal we'd still want him on the team 8 years from now then it works out pretty fairly.

If we assume a 5% annual cap growth then in year one of his new deal 11.5 amounts to roughly 12.5% of the cap. In year 8 though, when the cap could be as high as 117.5 million a similar % of the cap would amount to 15 million or so(14.7 I think).

So my thinking is that how much Matthews would get over the next 8 years would either be:

10.5, 10.5, 10.5, 10.5, 10.5, 10.5, 10.5, 15

Or just 8 years of 11.5. The difference, money wise, is only 3.5 million. And, again, that's assuming he doesn't want an increased % of the cap on his 3rd deal(which seems unlikely, Tavares' cap % went from 8.5 on his 2nd deal to 13.8 on his 3rd).

So, to my mind, the difference in how much the Leafs would actually pay him over the course of 8 years is pretty small. You're effectively giving him a bonus of a couple million dollars for buying an extra free agent year at the lower rate.

That makes sense ... I think I?d go 7 years if I were the leafs management.  The extra million per year could help with the cap squeeze early in the contract.

 

[Bates]

Tweet below is from Gino Reda. I can't figure out if Orr is saying Matthews wants to play in Toronto like Tavares or go home like Tavares??



Bobby Orr on Auston Matthews negotiation.- ?I don?t think it?s (about) money. It?s like John Tavares? free agency. He wants to play in Toronto and if it doesn?t happen this year before the season starts, he still has a year left to fulfill his contract and we?ll see what happens?

 

[Frank E]

Tweet below is from Gino Reda. I can't figure out if Orr is saying Matthews wants to play in Toronto like Tavares or go home like Tavares??



Bobby Orr on Auston Matthews negotiation.- ?I don?t think it?s (about) money. It?s like John Tavares? free agency. He wants to play in Toronto and if it doesn?t happen this year before the season starts, he still has a year left to fulfill his contract and we?ll see what happens?

There was an interview on TSN where Orr said that Matthews is very happy that Tavares is on the team, and Matthews wants to win a Cup, and that talk of any unhappiness on Matthews' part is silly and untrue.  He also dismissed the captaincy as being an issue.

So, I would say that Orr's suggesting that there are no issues with Matthews and the Leafs at all.