Forums/NHL Signings

New Jersey Devils signed Jonas Siegenthaler (5 Years / $3,400,000 AAV)

Was this a good signing?
The chart has been hidden

Poll Options


Jul. 26 at 10:23 p.m.
#26
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2022
Posts: 511
Likes: 332
Quoting: CSStrowbridge
Yes, he's great on defence, but he's got nearly zero offensive upside.

It's s good contract, but it isn't a steal like some are saying.


Pretty much any top 4 blueliner, and a good amount of 3rd pair guys, gets $4 million per year. Getting a top pair defender who is just entering his prime below that AAV is a good deal.

Imagine getting Brodin, Slavin, or even Ekholm on that deal? It's definitely a steal and balances out perfectly with Hamilton, on the ice and against the cap
Jul. 26 at 10:24 p.m.
#27
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2022
Posts: 511
Likes: 332
Quoting: Random2152
You have some very out of date ideas on what a players prime is


What is (your) version of current players prime?
Jul. 26 at 11:06 p.m.
#28
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 6,682
Likes: 3,921
Edited Jul. 26 at 11:12 p.m.
Quoting: HockeyScotty
What is (your) version of current players prime?


Not mine. A ton of research has been done on it, one of the main guys who pioneered it a decade ago is currently the agm of the Hurricanes in Eric Tulsky.

Anyway a players prime years tends to be between 23 and 26 (inclusive) which is obviously way younger than was previously thought, hence why I said his ideas were outdated.

The NHL is a young man's league now
Jul. 27 at 4:03 a.m.
#29
mmm... Bratt
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 2,567
Likes: 2,167
Quoting: Random2152
a players prime years tends to be between 23 and 26 (inclusive) which is obviously way younger than was previously thought


Isn’t that in regards to forwards only? I’m under the impression that Ds and GKs peak ~2 years later…
HockeyScotty and Saskleaf liked this.
Jul. 27 at 5:36 a.m.
#30
Watches no games
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2017
Posts: 3,267
Likes: 973
Quoting: CSStrowbridge
Yes, he's great on defence, but he's got nearly zero offensive upside.

It's s good contract, but it isn't a steal like some are saying.


This is hilarious, because offense-only defensemen easily get 7-9m on the market. 3.4 is nothing for this type of player
Jul. 27 at 9:42 a.m.
#31
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2018
Posts: 291
Likes: 210
Quoting: CSStrowbridge
Yes, he's great on defence, but he's got nearly zero offensive upside.

It's s good contract, but it isn't a steal like some are saying.


Seems like the definition of solid value. Maybe a skewed a little by market value of big defensemen how are labeled as "Big, stay at home, defensemen", who can have middling results and get way too much money (Chiarot, Gudbranson, Manson), so coming in considerably less expensive than that group, buying his prime years, and being actually elite defensively, makes it look like a steal, but reality is, with no offensive upside, he will have a hard time turning out to be the value contract that some are suggesting. He probably is worth more than he got, but he was an RFA, so it's very in line with his skill set. Not overpaying for this type of defender is definitely a win, but it's not like he would actually turn out to be worth $7M or something that will turn this into one of the best value contracts in the NHL.
CSStrowbridge liked this.
Jul. 27 at 10:17 a.m.
#32
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2022
Posts: 511
Likes: 332
Quoting: Random2152
Not mine. A ton of research has been done on it, one of the main guys who pioneered it a decade ago is currently the agm of the Hurricanes in Eric Tulsky.

Anyway a players prime years tends to be between 23 and 26 (inclusive) which is obviously way younger than was previously thought, hence why I said his ideas were outdated.

The NHL is a young man's league now


Quoting: Tintin
Isn’t that in regards to forwards only? I’m under the impression that Ds and GKs peak ~2 years later…


I thought the same (D & G have a delayed career arch). Can't remember qhere I read that as it's been awhile.

It certainly feels that way at least.
Jul. 27 at 1:22 p.m.
#33
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2017
Posts: 64
Likes: 31
Quoting: Bruins1054_gmb
This does not look like a contract that will age well.


Congrats for being the single person in the entire universe to have this opinion.
Jul. 27 at 3:53 p.m.
#34
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 6,682
Likes: 3,921
Edited Jul. 27 at 4:02 p.m.. Reason: I had issues getting the link to work so I edited like 30 times lol
Quoting: Tintin
Isn’t that in regards to forwards only? I’m under the impression that Ds and GKs peak ~2 years later…


Quoting: HockeyScotty
I thought the same (D & G have a delayed career arch). Can't remember qhere I read that as it's been awhile.

It certainly feels that way at least.


No. That was another busted mis-conception. Here is a very long write up if you're interested where I got this image from:



evo-war-graph.png?w=615
war-basic-chart.png?w=615
HockeyScotty liked this.
Jul. 27 at 4:07 p.m.
#35
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 905
Likes: 337
Quoting: holtzer
Congrats for being the single person in the entire universe to have this opinion.


Lmao did my comment hurt your feelings? Shouldn't NJ continue to sell pieces like this so they can keep "rebuilding"?
Jul. 28 at 12:39 a.m.
#36
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2020
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 650
Quoting: EsoYeezus69
For some reason I saw this as “bye bye eso” when I scrolled by quickly the first time I looked 😂.


For seem reason I found this ridiculously funny
Jul. 28 at 7:54 a.m.
#37
aydawg
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2022
Posts: 42
Likes: 9
Quoting: Random2152
No. That was another busted mis-conception. Here is a very long write up if you're interested where I got this image from:



evo-war-graph.png?w=615
war-basic-chart.png?w=615



hey listen im stupid but why is the highest point 0? a different question is this the avg of every player played ever?
Jul. 28 at 8:00 a.m.
#38
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 6,682
Likes: 3,921
Quoting: adawg
hey listen im stupid but why is the highest point 0? a different question is this the avg of every player played ever?


Highest point is zero because it's measuring the delta (or change) from their peak play, so everything would therefore be worse (or negative) in comparison to it.

Not every player ever. Player tracking began in 2007-08 so its everyone from then on. This chart starts in 2008 (year ending) and goes until 2016 (year ending).

It's also not an average. It's a player compared to themselves and then averaged. Important distinction as that means the curve fits all player types more closely, rather than just the average player

Happy to help smile
Jul. 28 at 10:46 a.m.
#39
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2022
Posts: 511
Likes: 332
Quoting: Random2152
Highest point is zero because it's measuring the delta (or change) from their peak play, so everything would therefore be worse (or negative) in comparison to it.

Not every player ever. Player tracking began in 2007-08 so its everyone from then on. This chart starts in 2008 (year ending) and goes until 2016 (year ending).

It's also not an average. It's a player compared to themselves and then averaged. Important distinction as that means the curve fits all player types more closely, rather than just the average player

Happy to help smile


Curious to see how the average NHL player "lifespan" affects the curve. Not sure how one would separate groups; but if this was weighted by Avg TOI or something. I know it's not your data just thinking out loud.
Thanks for posting!
Jul. 28 at 3:05 p.m.
#40
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 6,682
Likes: 3,921
Quoting: HockeyScotty
Curious to see how the average NHL player "lifespan" affects the curve. Not sure how one would separate groups; but if this was weighted by Avg TOI or something. I know it's not your data just thinking out loud.
Thanks for posting!


No muckery here outside of what is constituted in a normal WAR calculation (which in a round about way does factor in toi as its a counting stat).

Anyway the point is this is a pretty good average to apply to everyone, regardless of whether they are a star or a scrub.

If your prime years you put up 3rd liner results, you will have less space to fall before being out of the nhl (so there is a little survivorship bias on the extremes) but the overall data is good for them regardless because of how the calc works, which accurately portrays their career if you just 'zoom in' on the relevant data for lack of a better term
HockeyScotty liked this.
Jul. 29 at 12:26 a.m.
#41
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2021
Posts: 439
Likes: 279
Quoting: HockeyScotty
Pretty much any top 4 blueliner, and a good amount of 3rd pair guys, gets $4 million per year. Getting a top pair defender who is just entering his prime below that AAV is a good deal.

Imagine getting Brodin, Slavin, or even Ekholm on that deal? It's definitely a steal and balances out perfectly with Hamilton, on the ice and against the cap


Any team paying a 3rd pair D-man $3 to $4 million is in trouble. Unless there's no real difference in skill between their 1st and 3rd pairs, it means they are overpaying the bottom pair and they will have tyo sacrifice elsewhere.
Jul. 29 at 12:27 a.m.
#42
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2021
Posts: 439
Likes: 279
Quoting: MelonVK
This is hilarious, because offense-only defensemen easily get 7-9m on the market. 3.4 is nothing for this type of player


Name three offence-one D-men who get paid $7 million to $9 million WHO PLAY ON WINNING TEAMS. Yes, you can find examples of players who are overpaid and therefore hurt their team, but that's not the same as saying that's what they are worth.
Jul. 29 at 10:04 a.m.
#43
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2022
Posts: 511
Likes: 332
Quoting: CSStrowbridge
Any team paying a 3rd pair D-man $3 to $4 million is in trouble. Unless there's no real difference in skill between their 1st and 3rd pairs, it means they are overpaying the bottom pair and they will have tyo sacrifice elsewhere.


Generally, yes your 3rd pair should be a $1 to $2.5 million; but there are situations where it works. Many playoff teams are deep enough on the blueline to make it work:

Tampa recently had Sergachev on the 3rd pair at $4.8 million but make up for up having an imbalance Left vs Right side defense; Right side being a rotation of lower paid guys.

Calgary has 5 blueliners with $3 million or more; so by default one of them has to be on the 3rd pair. They are in good shape though because none of them make more than $5 million.

Colorado has Erik Johnson with $6 million as "3rd pair" at least for 1 more year. They chose to invest in defense over "premium" goaltending

Boston also has a $3 million 3rd pair. Hard to predict what will happen with them since Bergeron/Krejci is still unresolved.

St. Louis and Edmonton did so also with Scandella and Barrie but those are both situations that they got overlapped by better cheaper players and the team wants to move their cap hit out. Florida and Montour should be in that situation too but their defense is impossible to understand right now.
Jul. 29 at 11:47 a.m.
#44
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 22,384
Likes: 9,591
Quoting: CSStrowbridge
Any team paying a 3rd pair D-man $3 to $4 million is in trouble. Unless there's no real difference in skill between their 1st and 3rd pairs, it means they are overpaying the bottom pair and they will have tyo sacrifice elsewhere.


The Devils 3LD is Brendan Smith, $1.1 million. Siegenthaler is our 1LD. Or are you talking about Marino?

Siegenthaler - Severson
Graves - Hamilton
Smith - Marino

Is probably how we are entering the season. But Graves and Severson are both UFAs in 2023, so the amount of $$ allocated to blueline probably isn’t much of an issue right now (could be if they extend those two).
Jul. 29 at 6:00 p.m.
#45
Watches no games
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2017
Posts: 3,267
Likes: 973
Quoting: CSStrowbridge
Name three offence-one D-men who get paid $7 million to $9 million WHO PLAY ON WINNING TEAMS. Yes, you can find examples of players who are overpaid and therefore hurt their team, but that's not the same as saying that's what they are worth.


What? Part of my point is that 3.4m is still very good for a specialist. 7-9m isn't.

Morgan Rielly, Darnell Nurse, Roman Josi, are a few heavily offensively leaning defensemen making 7-9m on winning teams.
Jul. 31 at 1:28 p.m.
#46
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2017
Posts: 64
Likes: 31
Quoting: Bruins1054_gmb
Lmao did my comment hurt your feelings? Shouldn't NJ continue to sell pieces like this so they can keep "rebuilding"?


Bold statement coming from a fan who's team will probably be rebuilding within the next 3-4 years while NJ is on the rise.

Tell me, how are those Pastrnak contract negotiations going?
Jul. 31 at 1:50 p.m.
#47
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 905
Likes: 337
Quoting: holtzer
Bold statement coming from a fan who's team will probably be rebuilding within the next 3-4 years while NJ is on the rise.

Tell me, how are those Pastrnak contract negotiations going?


The Bruins don't rebuild because it's not a winning formula. Ask Buffalo how permarebuild is going for them. As for Jersey, I've been hearing they're on the rise for at least 5 years now. Nothing good has come of it.
Jul. 31 at 10:16 p.m.
#48
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2017
Posts: 64
Likes: 31
Quoting: Bruins1054_gmb
The Bruins don't rebuild because it's not a winning formula. Ask Buffalo how permarebuild is going for them. As for Jersey, I've been hearing they're on the rise for at least 5 years now. Nothing good has come of it.


Yes choose the one failed experiment to try and prove a point while completely ignoring the ones that were successful. The point of a rebuild is scout, draft, and develop your core to move forward with. Then you fill in the holes with free agent signings, or trades using the expendable assets you've acquired over the course of your rebuild. The last 5 different Cup winner's cores were largely built through the draft, so idk how tf you can confidently say it's not a winning formula.

Colorado: MacKinnon, Rantanen, Landeskog, Makar, Newhook, Byram

Tampa: Stamkos, Kucherov, Point, Killorn, Hedman, Palat, Vasilevsky, Colton, Foote, CIrelli

St Louis: Tarasenko, Perron (returned), Pietrangelo, Schwartz, Dunn, Thomas, Parayko, Steen, Barbashev, Binnington.

Washington: Ovechkin, Kuznetsov, Backstrom, Carlson, Wilson, Orlov, Vrana, Burakovsky, Holtby, Grubauer

Pittsburgh: Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Guentzel, Fleury, Murray, J Staal and Orpik (2009).

But hey, I guess you would know about Boston more than I do. Have fun continuing to do this little purgatory thing you got going where you don't fail but yet are never seen as a true contender. Your one single championship in the last 30 years really appreciates it. Can't wait to see what you think when your core of Marchand, Bergeron, Krejci, and Pastrnak are all gone in the next couple of years and you try to build a team through your non-existant prospect pool.
Saskleaf liked this.
Aug. 1 at 12:24 a.m.
#49
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2021
Posts: 439
Likes: 279
Quoting: MelonVK
Morgan Rielly, Darnell Nurse, Roman Josi, are a few heavily offensively leaning defensemen making 7-9m on winning teams.


There's a difference between offensive leaning and offensive only. In fact, if you are offensive leaning, you likely are an asset defensively, because as long as you have the puck, you opponent can't score.

Siegenthaler is defensive only. He has no offensive upside, meaning as long as he is on the ice, you are likely no scoring either. This is good if you are on the PK, up by a goal late, etc., but neutral most of the time.
Aug. 1 at 9:56 a.m.
#50
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 905
Likes: 337
Quoting: holtzer
Yes choose the one failed experiment to try and prove a point while completely ignoring the ones that were successful. The point of a rebuild is scout, draft, and develop your core to move forward with. Then you fill in the holes with free agent signings, or trades using the expendable assets you've acquired over the course of your rebuild. The last 5 different Cup winner's cores were largely built through the draft, so idk how tf you can confidently say it's not a winning formula.

Colorado: MacKinnon, Rantanen, Landeskog, Makar, Newhook, Byram

Tampa: Stamkos, Kucherov, Point, Killorn, Hedman, Palat, Vasilevsky, Colton, Foote, CIrelli

St Louis: Tarasenko, Perron (returned), Pietrangelo, Schwartz, Dunn, Thomas, Parayko, Steen, Barbashev, Binnington.

Washington: Ovechkin, Kuznetsov, Backstrom, Carlson, Wilson, Orlov, Vrana, Burakovsky, Holtby, Grubauer

Pittsburgh: Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Guentzel, Fleury, Murray, J Staal and Orpik (2009).

But hey, I guess you would know about Boston more than I do. Have fun continuing to do this little purgatory thing you got going where you don't fail but yet are never seen as a true contender. Your one single championship in the last 30 years really appreciates it. Can't wait to see what you think when your core of Marchand, Bergeron, Krejci, and Pastrnak are all gone in the next couple of years and you try to build a team through your non-existant prospect pool.


I've never said you don't have to draft well. All you did was list players that were drafted by their team. Plus, three of the five teams you listed also have only one cup "in the last 30 years." The Bruins have been to three cups in the past 11 years. If you want to diss them for not winning a second one, that's fine but they've been there and have been a model for other teams in the league to build. Look at the Bruins drafted talent: Bergeron, Marchand, Pastrnak, McAvoy, Swayman, Carlo, Grzelcyk, Krejci, DeBrusk. None of those picks were made with a rebuilding team.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Loading animation
Submit Poll Edit