Danny12357

Member Since
Jul 12, 2018
Favourite Team
Toronto Maple Leafs
2nd Favourite Team
Washington Capitals
Forum Posts
110
Posts per Day
0.22
Forum Threads
2
Forum: NHL SigningsOct 4 at 11:59
Thread: St. Louis Blues signed Brayden Schenn (8 Years / $6,500,000 AAV)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CN10</b></div><div>Term is the price they paid to keep the cap hit down. My guess is a 6 year term would have costed $1M AAV more. Without a NTC/NMC, if his play does fall off a cliff they can move him to a cap floor team towards the end of the deal as he makes $4M the last couple years. A buyout of the last two years is also only about $2M AAV on the cap. There will likely be a cap spike after the new TV deal and Seattle, so even the back side of the contract won't cripple them if he can maintain at least middle six caliber play for the last half of the contract. Overall, I'd say it's a fair deal.</div></div>

The buyout would cost just over $3.5M in year one, $3.8M in year two then just under $1.4M a year for two years. His salary dips, but it will cost assets to move if his play falls off completely. More and more teams are pressing toward the ceiling each year, with fewer teams having big amounts of cap space, assuming it will be easy to offload him later shouldn't be something that makes the deal seem reasonable.

Also, I am not sure why so many people feel this AAV is such a steal. What would be his fair market value on a reasonable term? $7M x 4 years? I am not saying there wouldn't be a GM that lost his mind and did more than that, but it doesn't make the player worth it. If this is the cost for this player, the Blues should have let him walk.
Forum: NHL SigningsOct 4 at 11:45
Thread: St. Louis Blues signed Brayden Schenn (8 Years / $6,500,000 AAV)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Icegirl</b></div><div>The $$ is actually a steal. The length, not so much.</div></div>

Personally I don't think the money is much of a steal either. Not that it's bad, on a 3 or 4 year deal I would say they managed to retain a UFA without overpaying, which is hard to do, but I still wouldn't be calling a steal, just good work getting a UFA for roughly fair value.

I know people will hate this comparison, but Brayden Schenn isn't signficantly better than Kevin Hayes. He's better, but they are both above average middle 6 wingers, neither is elite. Getting a slightly better above average middle six winger doesn't make your team significantly better, and the difference between them isn't worth a lot of cap space.

Kevin Hayes deal is bad, Schenn's deal is considerably worse. Hayes deal is 7 years, and buys the years between 27-34. Schenn's deal is 8 years and buys the years between 29-37. That is not a good look. Most would argue Kevin Hayes AAV was too high for any term, so I don't think there is enough difference between the AAV or their talent to go from overpaid on any term to steal. Maybe on a 1 or 2 year deal this is undervalued, but anything over that and it's likely just fair, and as soon as you pass 5 years the AAV should be falling considerably per year.
Forum: NHL SigningsOct 4 at 10:14
Thread: Chicago Blackhawks signed Alex DeBrincat (3 Years / $6,400,000 AAV)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Brian2016</b></div><div>I don't understand why Stan couldn't get a long term deal done. Like $8M for 8 years. What's the problem with that? Why kick the can down the road w/ short term deal w/ a massive QA? This deal makes no sense right now. Still a full year left before he'd be a holdout.</div></div>

That assumes Debrincat would sign an 8 year deal for only $8M. I don't think an extra $1.6M would be enticing enough to get him on that kind of contract. Because of the QO in this deal, we essentially can assume that Debrincat would have wanted at least $7.05M to do a 4 year deal. If we assume the AAV would have to go up even more for every year of UFA status you are buying, I don't see how anything less than $9M-$9.5M gets you 8 years. Even then, that deal looks like a steal considering the years you are buying.

The problem is that the Blackhawks already have over $70M committed for next year, and need to sign a starting goalie, re-sign a few RFAs, maybe Gustaffsson, and fill out a roster. $2-$3M more on Debrincat's contract might make it even harder. They don't really have any quick and obvious guys to just ship out and make things easier either. Shaw and Saad could probably be moved in the offseason, but in any case, I think getting Debrincat on a good value contract now probably has a little more value to the organization at this point.
Forum: NHL SigningsOct 3 at 1:34
Thread: Chicago Blackhawks signed Alex DeBrincat (3 Years / $6,400,000 AAV)
I think there are three main things that people need to consider to judge an RFA contract:
1) AAV compared to peers on similar terms
2) Whether or not the player is likely to give production that will beat the cost
3) Does the salary term and structure fit the teams goals

Chicago wins on all 3. The AAV is below players Boeser, who should be the closest comparable, and his contract doesn't kick in until next year, so they also avoided inflation pushing it higher. The player is very likely to be worth more than the cap space allocated, as this is far under market value for a 35+ goal winger. And Chicago is tighter against the salary cap now then they will be in 3 years, so sacrificing the term to get the AAV down for now seems like a good bet.

Great work all around.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 30 at 9:55
Thread: Toronto Maple Leafs signed Mitchell Marner (6 Years / $10,893,000 AAV)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CoraStorm</b></div><div>this doesn't make sense n allow me to explain:

Marner earns 16 mil this year w 15.3 signing bonus... so ur saying it's applicable, that means in your opinion, come July 1st 15.3 less escrow % (if it's 15% = 13 or just over). there's no incentive of signing bonus other than time n I think u better look that up again</div></div>


Escrow does apply to signing bonus, but there are advantages to signing bonus over straight salary other than escrow. Because signing bonuses are paid in the summer, a player can end up paying significantly less tax depending on where their full time home is. Also, even if they live in the same place as they play, it's easier when getting one big amount to protect it from tax by sending it directly to an RCA, RRSP, or any other tax shelter. The time value of money is also quite significant in these scenarios as it allows players to invest very large sums of money, tax deferred, all at once. For a player like Marner, getting the nearly half of his salary paid out inside of 12 months allows for years of growth on a substantial part of his total contract value that would not have been possible if the money was more evenly distributed or back loaded.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 27 at 2:28
Thread: Winnipeg Jets signed Patrik Laine (2 Years / $6,750,000 AAV)
Deal seems fair since it seems in the middle of what his on ice value could be. I feel like Laine has to be one of the most volatile players to give a value too. He drives almost his entire value from his ability to score at higher percentages from any area than the average NHLer with a lethal wrist shot. I know that sounds like a lot of goal scorers, but I don't know if there is another player that is so elite at a stat like that, who doesn't also drive play, create more high danger chances, elevate his teammates. Laine seems like a pretty average hockey player at every facet of the game that isn't shooting, it's a strange thing to see.

This isn't to say he is bad without his shot, just not a superstar, which means anytime he is gone a little cold, you are paying star money for a guy basically providing similar value to a middle six winger.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 25 at 1:36
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 25 at 1:35
Thread: Calgary Flames signed Matthew Tkachuk (3 Years / $7,000,000 AAV)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CN10</b></div><div>If you look into my linked ACGM post, I do have the fourth RFA year at $9M (Skinner) and the first UFA year at $10.5M (Kane) plus 3 RFA years at $7.5M (which is more than he's currently getting). This gets me to the 5 year $8.4M. For a 6th year assume another $10.5M (Kane) which brings it to $8.75M AAV. Therefore, I don't think Tkachuk would get over $9M AAV on a six year deal from Treliving.

Now that his current contract is essentially equivalent to a 4 x $7.5M (assuming he just signs his $9M QO to go UFA), and applying the same $10.5M - $11.5M (Kane - Panarin) to UFA years, the 5 year AAV should be $8.1M - $8.3M and the 6 year AAV would be $8.5 - $$8.833M. These are very player friendly as I don't think Tkachuk is as good as Kane &amp; Panarin, which is why I thought they may be able to drive down the AAV a bit to the neighborhood of 6 x $8.333M, which they could have fit by moving Czarnik.

Regardless, I'm happy they have him to a good value in their Johnny + Gio window, and in 3 years time they have a decent amount of flexibility to choose a direction to go in and hopefully keep the group together if they've had some team success.</div></div>

A 5 year deal might have some chance of coming in at around the Aho number, but I have my doubts it would be that simple. I don't think using Kane's UFA number of $10.5M is a reasonable estimate at all of what Tkachuk's UFA years would be worth. Tkachuck's first UFA year will be 2024, which is 10 years after Kane's first UFA year.

Maybe Tkachuck can't get the $9M+ AAV on a 6 year deal from BT, which is why we are sitting here with a bridge deal, but I highly doubt that Calgary could have gotten term unless they offered north of $9M from Tkachuck either. Maybe he would ahve done a 5 year in the mid to high 8's, but I think it's unlikely that given this deal.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 25 at 12:48
Thread: Calgary Flames signed Matthew Tkachuk (3 Years / $7,000,000 AAV)
Also, I love how GMs are throwing this final year QO in like candy. I mean do these players or agents realize this isn't a good deal for them unless the QO is at least 45% more than the AAV? The way arbitration works I can't imagine that Tkachuk couldn't force a one year award of at least $9M even if he has 3 sub par years by his recent standards. If he did play bad enough that he couldn't get an award aroudn that mark in 3 years, there may be a legitimate chance he doesn't even get qualified.

To me it seems like players (especially American's) would be better off getting more signing bonus up front to maximize their guaranteed income unless the QO is going to give them real negotiating power (like Meier's does). Because Tkachuk is making all salary in his last year, he is going to pay the majority of the taxes (other than what goes in an RCA or 401K) in Canadian tax rates. If he got signing bonus paid on July 1, and his residency is Arizona at that time, it can greatly reduce the overall taxes paid, plus there is significant value in getting millions of dollars today rather than 2 years from now. To me, the high QO in these cases is actually very counter productive to maximizing total real earnings.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 25 at 12:34
Thread: Calgary Flames signed Matthew Tkachuk (3 Years / $7,000,000 AAV)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CN10</b></div><div>I can't believe Ryan Leslie forgot one of the most famous Flames; Iginla also made a $7M AAV from 2005 - 2012.

I think the deal is fair for both the player and the team. Their window to win is the next three years, and they have Tkachuk at a good % of cap number for that time, but now risk losing Johnny and Tkachuk in consecutive off seasons. I would have preferred paying for the 5-6 year term at around what Aho's making by simply moving out Czarnik though: <a href="https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1431655">https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1431655</a></div></div>

My thought would be that I don't think Aho money gets you 6 years if it took $7M to buy 3.

The way I would look at it the additional RFA year would have cost at least $9M or an increase in AAV of $500K, because the qualifying offer assures Tkachuk of that. If they wanted to buy UFA years, I don't see how they could be cheaper than $750K per season, but probably cost upwards of about $1M. All that considered I don't see how Tkachuk would have taken anythign that didn't start somewhere around $9M-$9.5M for a 6 year deal if it took $7M to get it done on a 3 year term.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 25 at 12:29
Thread: Calgary Flames signed Matthew Tkachuk (3 Years / $7,000,000 AAV)
I think this is the only deal that really worked for Calgary as they won't be forced to make a deal to be compliant ahead of the season opener. I am leaning toward thinking short term deals as being the best way to deal with RFAs, but we wont' know for sure until the end of these deals if it's the best strategy (versus what a 6-8 year deal would look like). I do think that a lot of RFAs seem to want something closer to what a UFA deal would look like if they were to accept considerable term (maybe not to the extent Marner got) and since UFA value represents kind of a cap for an RFA, I think the best way to save the most money may be takign the bigger discount in the short term and negotiating with the RFA almost as if he was a UFA at the end to get additional term. You still have the benefit then of not being too concerned about longer term if they want it by that point, since they are young enough that the final years of that deal are probably still good just by virtue of the cap increasing, even if the player has started their decline.

The only caveat to this is it does allow the players to walk as a UFA at year 4. There is no stopping the player from just accepting the QO or filing arbitration for one year award after the final year, so that is really the biggest risk with the 3 year bridge.

Either way you look at it, $7M is a number that Tkachuk should easily be worth for each of the 3 years, and it buys calgary some time to see how their team is progressing and which direction they want to go.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 23 at 1:28
Thread: Tampa Bay Lightning signed Brayden Point (3 Years / $6,750,000 AAV)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>linehan10</b></div><div>only Dubas got a bad deal this turn</div></div>

Marner's contract certainly creates a new ceiling that makes a lot of these contracts look fantastic, and I do think just about every RFA, including Marner, will end up producing more than their contract costs, but all of these deals are quite a bit different than previous comparables. Points deal is quite a bit more, even in terms of cap hit percentage, than Tampa had to pay Kucherov on his 3 year bridge.

I think we are seeing a shift, but teams and players are ending up all over the place as both sides are drawing different lines in the sand over what is fair, and what is in their own best interests.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 23 at 12:58
Thread: Tampa Bay Lightning signed Brayden Point (3 Years / $6,750,000 AAV)
This is a great deal for Tampa. It's hard to say what a new bridge should have looked like for this level of RFA, this is higher than Kucherov's bridge was in terms of cap hit percentage, but still feels very low compared to where people thought.

With so many RFAs seemingly pushing for full market value on longer term deals, I think going short may create the greatest amount of cap efficiency if you can still get value deals. Point will easily out produce a $6.75M cap hit for 3 years, and if you need to sign him at essentially his full value in 3 years, he's likely still worth it. This way Tampa will get massive value out of point for 6 years (3 years ELC and 3 years Bridge). It even buys them a little space where they are tightest (next two years).

I am not sure how JB got this done after basically opening the vault for Vasilevsky earlier this summer, but this deal is a pretty big win given that Tampa couldn't really afford long term, even if it was a decent discount.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 19 at 8:31
Thread: Ottawa Senators signed Thomas Chabot (8 Years / $8,000,000 AAV)
This is a good deal all around. Chabot may not have a ton of NHL experience under his belt, but he has had very significant stretches where he has looked like this level of player or better, and this contract buys all of his prime years. That seems like a very smart bet.

Ekblad got a deal that was bigger than this (in cap hit percentage), that was completely a bet on his development, he never had any stretches where he really looked like a top tier #1 D, and still hasn't. Provorov hasn't really shown as much either, and his deal is very comparable when you factor in the extra two years UFA years purchased.

The bet has some potential to not work out, but he gets another full year of development and the cap rising before this deal even kicks in, so that likely increases the chances this deal becomes worth it, even if Chabot can't live up to the potential he showed in the first half of last year.

Aside from the buying of future years, it's important to see Ottawa sending a message that they are investing dollars now into the future. Both this, and the Colin White deal cost real money now, but are extremely likely to be value deals by the time this team is competitive, allowing them to spend to supplement their stars. Obviously there is a long way to go, but after the year they had last year, it's important to show that they do have at least some vision and optimism for the future.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 19 at 1:46
Thread: Toronto Maple Leafs signed Nicholas Robertson (3 Years / $850,000 AAV)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Rayjb159</b></div><div>Simple question: umm, HOW can the Leafs keep singing players being $15mm over the cap and the season starting in 2 weeks? As a Rangers fan, I was nervous about our cap situation then I see this and my jaw in on the floor. How is Dubas gonna get under $81.5mm by Oct?!?</div></div>

He doesn't have to be. Once LTIR is activated (Leafs can use LTIR for Horton and Clarkson before the season begins), he can be up to $13.6M above the cap. Once everyone is healthy it's only $10.55M. But the Leafs have an abundance of $700k-$775K contracts that can be buried fully in the minors. Their current cap hit includes LTIR players and a 23 man roster.

So to start the season they can be as much as $13.6M over the cap, which is right about where they are after getting down to a 22 or 23 man roster (depending on who gets demoted). Once their line up is fully healthy, expect them to demote up to 5 additional players (2 to make room for Hyman and Dermott, and 3 just to create cap space), which will put them below the $92.05M ceiling they actually need to be under.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 17 at 7:03
Thread: Vancouver Canucks signed Brock Boeser (3 Years / $5,875,000 AAV)
I voted yes because there is no way to argue that Boeser won't out perform this value, he will.

This deal is high for a bridge deal based on comparables, but we are seeing a massive change in the market place, so it's hard to argue it isn't fair.

My biggest criticism is that the Canucks aren't a great team, and gave up a 1st round pick to take on a salary that didn't allow them to go longer term. They would have been better served by keeping their first, saving salary space, and trying to get a 7 or 8 year deal rather than push this out for 3 years. They now need to re-sign Boeser a year after Petterson and the same year as Hughes. The deal is good, the strategy seems flawed.

The qualifying offer stuff is getting copied from the Meier deal, but players aren't gaining anything from it. Meier's QO is a number was 167% of his AAV, which is a big increase, and guarantees him a lot of leverage going into his next contract, so it was done so he would accept a lower AAV. These other deals, the bridge seems to be for about fair value, and the qualifying offers are less than 150% of the AAV, so I don't get the point? The players would be better off getting their money sooner in signing bonus, but instead they need to get underpaid in actual dollars for 2 years, and get all salary in year 3. The crappy part from the players point of view, is that it accomplishes nothing. All of these players would be arbitration eligible when their deals expire, and if they wanted to force a one year deal I don't see any way that these guys wouldn't get arbitration awards bigger than these qualifying offers they are building. Honestly, if any of them performs poorly enough that they wouldn't get that type of award, they many not even get qualified.
Forum: NHL SigningsSep 13 at 9:18
Thread: Toronto Maple Leafs signed Mitchell Marner (6 Years / $10,893,000 AAV)
This was a close deal for me to say whether or not I liked the value of, but the pro's far outweigh the cons.

The downside, the deal itself is expensive, and is high compared to the previous market for 2nd contracts on RFA wingers, and likely going to look a little high even after his peers this year sign. For those reasons. It's hard to say how high compared to those other deals, but I have a feeling this will be the biggest AAV of any of the 2nd contracts.

The upside is that Dubas was given what most called an impossible task. There were hockey analysts that Guaranteed that Nylander would be traded because there was no way to sign all of the big 3 after the Tavares contract. Then it was assumed that young wingers like Kapanen and Johnsson would likely be sacrificed, but instead they were signed to solid deals. Most thought Toronto wouldn't be able to address their blueline or take on additional cap hit until the Marner scenario was taken care of, but instead they make a trade where they get a reasonable 3rd line center and their coveted RHD as well as move out the Marleau and Zaitsev contracts. Then it was assumed that Marner would be sitting to start the year, and that the only solution was a bridge deal, but instead Marner is signed for a term that isn't 5 years.

The reality is the Leafs are likely going into the season as a top 5-6 team in the NHL, they are at the cap but their core is locked up to considerable term, their team is young and their window should be several years, and their cap situation actually starts ease up when they are no longer riding the constant LTIR carousel and Ceci's deal comes off the books. Considering how impossible the to do list seemed, and the most people would have assumed the Leafs current depth chart wouldn't be cap compliant if it had been handed to you without salaries next to the names back when they announced the $81.5M cap, it's hard to say it's a bad deal. It's certainly not a steal, but to call it bad seems just factually incorrect considering the undertaking, and I think having it done with no missed games just puts it over the line to being positive.