2023 Non-Penguins Related Thread

[Pruezy11881]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Capfriendly lists that he has a NMC.

[Puck-Lurker]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Capfriendly lists that he has a NMC.

Bad deal then

[FLPensFan]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Capfriendly lists that he has a NMC.

Bad deal then

Matthews is 25. I don't think a 4 year deal with a full NMC makes much difference. If he was a bit older and this was a 6-8 year deal, with full NMC every year, yeah, I wouldn't like it.

But with his age and only a 4 year deal, I don't think there's any issues there.

EDIT: Also, Matthews has a NMC in the last year of his current deal...this season. As of yet, it is not known if he has an NMC on the new deal. The new deal on CapFriendly DOES NOT list an NMC yet.

[Ericf]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Capfriendly lists that he has a NMC.

Bad deal then

Matthews is 25. I don't think a 4 year deal with a full NMC makes much difference. If he was a bit older and this was a 6-8 year deal, with full NMC every year, yeah, I wouldn't like it.

But with his age and only a 4 year deal, I don't think there's any issues there.

EDIT: Also, Matthews has a NMC in the last year of his current deal...this season. As of yet, it is not known if he has an NMC on the new deal. The new deal on CapFriendly DOES NOT list an NMC yet.

Sportsnet reported full NMC in this article discussing the structure of the contract

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/re ... g-bonuses/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[FLPensFan]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Capfriendly lists that he has a NMC.

Bad deal then

Matthews is 25. I don't think a 4 year deal with a full NMC makes much difference. If he was a bit older and this was a 6-8 year deal, with full NMC every year, yeah, I wouldn't like it.

But with his age and only a 4 year deal, I don't think there's any issues there.

EDIT: Also, Matthews has a NMC in the last year of his current deal...this season. As of yet, it is not known if he has an NMC on the new deal. The new deal on CapFriendly DOES NOT list an NMC yet.

Sportsnet reported full NMC in this article discussing the structure of the contract

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/re ... g-bonuses/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Pitts]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Capfriendly lists that he has a NMC.

Bad deal then

LOL! How? It's Matthews! For only 4 years? How could that possibly be bad?

[Puck-Lurker]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Capfriendly lists that he has a NMC.

Bad deal then

LOL! How? It's Matthews! For only 4 years? How could that possibly be bad?

You actually need 19-22 other players is why, but I suppose no one cares these days

[Pitts]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Capfriendly lists that he has a NMC.

Bad deal then

LOL! How? It's Matthews! For only 4 years? How could that possibly be bad?

You actually need 19-22 other players is why, but I suppose no one cares these days

Well, the market is what the market is. He's currently considered a top 5 player in the league. Not to mention the cap supposed to rise pretty significantly next year.

[Three Stars]

At 5 on 5 and in general, nobody scores more goals per unit time than Matthews.

[Sams_Dog]

Since it's the dog days, what are some things you would change if you were in Bettman's shoes?
Here's some of mine.

[*] Max. 5 pre-season games, 2 away, 2 home and 1 neutral site.
[*] The regular season would begin no later than Oct. 5th
[*] Reduce the amount of regular season games from 82 to 80. (Ideally, this would lead to the Cup being awarded well before the NBA finishes their playoffs)
[*] Return to having home teams wear their whites/dark on the road. (Limit the use of wearing alternate jerseys to 5 times per season and not in the playoffs)
[*] Return the all-star game to the classic east vs. west.
[*] Make 2 minute minor penalties go the full two minutes, whether a goal is scored or not.
[*] Incorporate a rapidly escalating scale for any player causing head-related injuries. 3 strikes and they're suspended 20+ games.
[*] Bring back the 80's rule that if a high stick to the neck/head draws blood, the offending player is disqualified for the rest of that game with an auto 5 min. major penalty.
[*] Incorporate a softer cap ceiling that can go over by $250,000 or so just to ensure teams don't have to scramble and do something silly just to get under the limit. (like the 14-15 Penguins) Of course, there's a soft penalty that could be paid out into the NHLPA pension fund by offending teams.
[*] Every season, a team has the option of choosing 1 player whose cap hit will not count against the cap—just for that season.

Just some ideas. Feel free to suggest your own.

- If I'm Bettman I step down and take Bill Daly with me. Honestly, they've been around too long, the fans, players and union don't trust/like them, and the game needs new leadership.
- Definitely overhaul the DOPS system for suspensions and fines. I like FLAPensFan's ideas for accidental and targeted head shots. The game needs CLEANED UP.
- Reduce the schedule. The season is too long and players are getting hurt because of it. I don't care if the Pens play every team. Not important.
- Get rid of the trapezoid behind the net. Not necessary.
- MOVE the Phoenix Coyotes someplace better for God's sakes

[murphydump55]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Capfriendly lists that he has a NMC.

Bad deal then

LOL! How? It's Matthews! For only 4 years? How could that possibly be bad?

You actually need 19-22 other players is why, but I suppose no one cares these days

Not a bad deal at all.

[Puck-Lurker]

Capfriendly lists that he has a NMC.

Bad deal then

LOL! How? It's Matthews! For only 4 years? How could that possibly be bad?

You actually need 19-22 other players is why, but I suppose no one cares these days

Not a bad deal at all.

That's some next level reasoning right there lol

[murphydump55]

All one needs to do is look at the numbers to see that Matthews is doing incredible things with regards to goal scoring, rates, expected goals, scoring chances, efficiency, etc. He’s had goal scoring seasons at a higher rate than any of Ovy’s, and he’s damn good defensively.

Contract isn’t bad at all.

[Sigwolf]

Bad deal then

LOL! How? It's Matthews! For only 4 years? How could that possibly be bad?

You actually need 19-22 other players is why, but I suppose no one cares these days

Not a bad deal at all.

That's some next level reasoning right there lol

Dude, you're the one that said the same contract without a NMC is "not that bad". But a NMC for a four year contract on a 25 year old star player suddenly makes it a "bad deal then"?

*That* is some "next level reasoning".

[Puck-Lurker]

Too large a slice of the pie for one player for my blood, which I said already. The reply to that was less thought out than 'nuh uh' but go right ahead, that's brilliant.

[Sigwolf]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Your own words. You still have offered no reasoning on how a the presence of a NMC for a 25 year old proven player on a merely four year contract takes it from "not that bad" to a "bad deal". But you do manage to go on the attack on anyone that questioned you on it.

The contract takes the same percentage of the team cap regardless of the NMC. It is also astronomically unlikely Toronto, or any other team in the league, would have any interest in moving a player of Matthews caliber before he turns 29, so the NMC is actually pretty immaterial in this case.

[Puck-Lurker]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Your own words. You still have offered no reasoning on how a the presence of a NMC for a 25 year old proven player on a merely four year contract takes it from "not that bad" to a "bad deal". But you do manage to go on the attack on anyone that questioned you on it.

The contract takes the same percentage of the team cap regardless of the NMC. It is also astronomically unlikely Toronto, or any other team in the league, would have any interest in moving a player of Matthews caliber before he turns 29, so the NMC is actually pretty immaterial in this case.

Three things.

1. Opinions are like toilet paper. I don't expect anyone to appreciate the smell of mine. Leafs are apparently happy to lock up >50% of their salary in four players, I can understand how others like it, it's just I don't. I guess that's not allowed.

2. "You actually need 19-22 other players is why, but I suppose no one cares these days". You seemed to have missed that part. If you don't agree, fine, I can get that. But if I didn't say that, we live in different universes?

3. Attacking? Yeah, that's what I do. I attack people. I do all the time. Mhm. Totally. I'll add it to the list LOL

[Sigwolf]

The deflecting and mental gymnastics you go through to avoid a simple question is amazing.

How do any of those three things address the question asked...

How was the deal not that bad if it doesn't have a NTC or NMC, but bad with one?

[Puck-Lurker]

The deflecting and mental gymnastics you go through to avoid a simple question is amazing.

How do any of those three things address the question asked...

How was the deal not that bad if it doesn't have a NTC or NMC, but bad with one?

And I'm the one attacking? Okay then.

1. Leafs are apparently happy to lock up (NMC) >50% of their salary in four players, I can understand how others like it, it's just I don't.

You disagree. Okay? And I do acknowledge the four year term and his age are fair points. Had the Leafs been set up differently, say with just the one, maybe even two >10M contracts, I think it's fine. They don't and I don't think we'd agree on any of that too. I'll be happy to agree to disagree and move on, rather than me having to defend my salary structure preferences for other teams. Alright?

[Daniel]

The deflecting and mental gymnastics you go through to avoid a simple question is amazing.

How do any of those three things address the question asked...

How was the deal not that bad if it doesn't have a NTC or NMC, but bad with one?

And I'm the one attacking? Okay then.

1. Leafs are apparently happy to lock up (NMC) >50% of their salary in four players, I can understand how others like it, it's just I don't.

You disagree. Okay? And I do acknowledge the four year term and his age are fair points. Had the Leafs been set up differently, say with just the one, maybe even two >10M contracts, I think it's fine. They don't and I don't think we'd agree on any of that too. I'll be happy to agree to disagree and move on, rather than me having to defend my salary structure preferences for other teams. Alright?

I think the confusion is how it’s an okay deal except for the NMC. I think a lot of people would agree that it’s too much of a percentage of the cap, but I think we’re at a wait and see moment in the history of the NHL and the salary cap. If it goes up lets say $5M than it’s a great contract, if it stay stagnant, probably not as good. Only time will tell. I’m always of the opinion that you need most of the bottom six/bottom D pairing with ELC contracts or sub $1M contracts. Matthews contract is only bad if you pay McGinn $3M per season or Tanev what $4M per season (or whatever, pick a bad contract). I think that’s a waste of about $5M in cap space.

The NMC is really immaterial unless the Maple Leafs really suck over the next few years and want to sell off players. If that happens, Matthews would certainly waive it to play for a winner. Either way, the NMC is irrelevant.

[Sigwolf]

You have to be doing this on purpose. The whole point is that Toronto was not going to be interested in moving Matthews before he turned 29 anyway. I'm pretty sure Treliving didn't even hesitate with that part of the contract, nor should he. The NMC is pretty immaterial *in this case*.

I don't know any fans that like NMC's for any reason, but they exist we don't have a say in the matter. There are plenty of contracts on Toronto, and many other teams, where the wisdom of a NMC can be questioned. This does not seem like the one that is the problem. No one has come out and said they disagree Toronto has too much money tied up in a few players, but what are they going to do... not sign Matthews because they have a lot of money tied up in Tavares, Marner, & Rielly? Of that group, I don't think there is any situation where Matthews is the one they are looking move.

I simply don't think a NMC for a young superstar on a relatively short term contract has any bearing on whether it is a good or bad deal. This is not like a NMC on an 8 year contract for some 30+ year old player. (Or a NMC on a 2 year contract for a 37 year old... thanks Hextall).

Could they have signed him for around a million less to let them sign one more player? Maybe, but the salary is not far out of line with his peers. They have some top talent on that team, some times you have to pay for that dearly. We'll see how they deal with it.

[FLPensFan]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Your own words. You still have offered no reasoning on how a the presence of a NMC for a 25 year old proven player on a merely four year contract takes it from "not that bad" to a "bad deal". But you do manage to go on the attack on anyone that questioned you on it.

The contract takes the same percentage of the team cap regardless of the NMC. It is also astronomically unlikely Toronto, or any other team in the league, would have any interest in moving a player of Matthews caliber before he turns 29, so the NMC is actually pretty immaterial in this case.

Three things.

1. Opinions are like toilet paper. I don't expect anyone to appreciate the smell of mine. Leafs are apparently happy to lock up >50% of their salary in four players, I can understand how others like it, it's just I don't. I guess that's not allowed.

2. "You actually need 19-22 other players is why, but I suppose no one cares these days". You seemed to have missed that part. If you don't agree, fine, I can get that. But if I didn't say that, we live in different universes?

3. Attacking? Yeah, that's what I do. I attack people. I do all the time. Mhm. Totally. I'll add it to the list LOL

I understand your points, but, let me offer some counter-data:

1. In 2014-2015, the salary cap was 69M. Sid, Geno, and Letang made a combined 25.45M. Add in Fleury (or Paul Martin), and that's 30.45M for 4 players. That was 44.1% of the cap. Toronto has Matthes, Marner, Tavares, and Reilly making 41.043M, which is 49.1% of the cap. 5% more than the Penguins spent on their 4 highest players in 2014-2015. If they feel this is their core, then just like the Penguins, they are going to spend the money on those players.

2. Going into next season, they have 12 players committed and roughly 33.3M in cap space (figuring a 4M increase in the cap next year). Their farm system today is only a few spots ahead of ours, but, they do have Nylander, Bertuzzi, Domi, Brodie, Klingberg, and Samsonov all on expiring deals. They won't be able to sign them all and fill out a roster. My hunch is, if Bertuzzi fits the team well, you could see Toronto try and get Bertuzzi under contract somewhere in the 6-7M range for next season, essentially replacing Nylander's cap hit. Toronto can then move Nylander at the trade deadline. That's just a hunch, but it seems like Toronto doesn't want to pay Nylander. They have some options to trade away good players and get younger, cheaper labor.

It's never easy, and Toronto has been like Tampa the last few years...skirting the cap and having to use creative loopholes like LTIR to field their team. They will have some trouble keeping a good team together even with a rising cap, but, if they believe in this core, then, I can't fault them for trying. The money they have tied up in their main 4 players is really close to how much the Penguins spent on their 4 core players 10 years ago.

I think the Matthews contract is good value, and the NMC isn't a concern. The Leafs are more likely to move Nylander, not re-sign Bertuzzi or Klingberg, and have Tavares take a significant paycut after next season.

[Puck-Lurker]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Your own words. You still have offered no reasoning on how a the presence of a NMC for a 25 year old proven player on a merely four year contract takes it from "not that bad" to a "bad deal". But you do manage to go on the attack on anyone that questioned you on it.

The contract takes the same percentage of the team cap regardless of the NMC. It is also astronomically unlikely Toronto, or any other team in the league, would have any interest in moving a player of Matthews caliber before he turns 29, so the NMC is actually pretty immaterial in this case.

Three things.

1. Opinions are like toilet paper. I don't expect anyone to appreciate the smell of mine. Leafs are apparently happy to lock up >50% of their salary in four players, I can understand how others like it, it's just I don't. I guess that's not allowed.

2. "You actually need 19-22 other players is why, but I suppose no one cares these days". You seemed to have missed that part. If you don't agree, fine, I can get that. But if I didn't say that, we live in different universes?

3. Attacking? Yeah, that's what I do. I attack people. I do all the time. Mhm. Totally. I'll add it to the list LOL

I understand your points, but, let me offer some counter-data:

1. In 2014-2015, the salary cap was 69M. Sid, Geno, and Letang made a combined 25.45M. Add in Fleury (or Paul Martin), and that's 30.45M for 4 players. That was 44.1% of the cap. Toronto has Matthes, Marner, Tavares, and Reilly making 41.043M, which is 49.1% of the cap. 5% more than the Penguins spent on their 4 highest players in 2014-2015. If they feel this is their core, then just like the Penguins, they are going to spend the money on those players.

2. Going into next season, they have 12 players committed and roughly 33.3M in cap space (figuring a 4M increase in the cap next year). Their farm system today is only a few spots ahead of ours, but, they do have Nylander, Bertuzzi, Domi, Brodie, Klingberg, and Samsonov all on expiring deals. They won't be able to sign them all and fill out a roster. My hunch is, if Bertuzzi fits the team well, you could see Toronto try and get Bertuzzi under contract somewhere in the 6-7M range for next season, essentially replacing Nylander's cap hit. Toronto can then move Nylander at the trade deadline. That's just a hunch, but it seems like Toronto doesn't want to pay Nylander. They have some options to trade away good players and get younger, cheaper labor.

It's never easy, and Toronto has been like Tampa the last few years...skirting the cap and having to use creative loopholes like LTIR to field their team. They will have some trouble keeping a good team together even with a rising cap, but, if they believe in this core, then, I can't fault them for trying. The money they have tied up in their main 4 players is really close to how much the Penguins spent on their 4 core players 10 years ago.

I think the Matthews contract is good value, and the NMC isn't a concern. The Leafs are more likely to move Nylander, not re-sign Bertuzzi or Klingberg, and have Tavares take a significant paycut after next season.

Hrm yeah.. I need to reevaluate my thinking on that contract.

I don't know why I wasn't figuring in the increasing cap, no excuse there. And it didn't occur to me they'd move on from Nylander. Guess I have a mental block from the Pens keeping the band together or something. Mea culpa. I must have seemed a bit obstinate.

[FLPensFan]

13.25Mx4 for Matthews... But I haven't seen any talk of clauses. If he doesn't have a NTC or NMC it's not that bad.

Your own words. You still have offered no reasoning on how a the presence of a NMC for a 25 year old proven player on a merely four year contract takes it from "not that bad" to a "bad deal". But you do manage to go on the attack on anyone that questioned you on it.

The contract takes the same percentage of the team cap regardless of the NMC. It is also astronomically unlikely Toronto, or any other team in the league, would have any interest in moving a player of Matthews caliber before he turns 29, so the NMC is actually pretty immaterial in this case.

Three things.

1. Opinions are like toilet paper. I don't expect anyone to appreciate the smell of mine. Leafs are apparently happy to lock up >50% of their salary in four players, I can understand how others like it, it's just I don't. I guess that's not allowed.

2. "You actually need 19-22 other players is why, but I suppose no one cares these days". You seemed to have missed that part. If you don't agree, fine, I can get that. But if I didn't say that, we live in different universes?

3. Attacking? Yeah, that's what I do. I attack people. I do all the time. Mhm. Totally. I'll add it to the list LOL

I understand your points, but, let me offer some counter-data:

1. In 2014-2015, the salary cap was 69M. Sid, Geno, and Letang made a combined 25.45M. Add in Fleury (or Paul Martin), and that's 30.45M for 4 players. That was 44.1% of the cap. Toronto has Matthes, Marner, Tavares, and Reilly making 41.043M, which is 49.1% of the cap. 5% more than the Penguins spent on their 4 highest players in 2014-2015. If they feel this is their core, then just like the Penguins, they are going to spend the money on those players.

2. Going into next season, they have 12 players committed and roughly 33.3M in cap space (figuring a 4M increase in the cap next year). Their farm system today is only a few spots ahead of ours, but, they do have Nylander, Bertuzzi, Domi, Brodie, Klingberg, and Samsonov all on expiring deals. They won't be able to sign them all and fill out a roster. My hunch is, if Bertuzzi fits the team well, you could see Toronto try and get Bertuzzi under contract somewhere in the 6-7M range for next season, essentially replacing Nylander's cap hit. Toronto can then move Nylander at the trade deadline. That's just a hunch, but it seems like Toronto doesn't want to pay Nylander. They have some options to trade away good players and get younger, cheaper labor.

It's never easy, and Toronto has been like Tampa the last few years...skirting the cap and having to use creative loopholes like LTIR to field their team. They will have some trouble keeping a good team together even with a rising cap, but, if they believe in this core, then, I can't fault them for trying. The money they have tied up in their main 4 players is really close to how much the Penguins spent on their 4 core players 10 years ago.

I think the Matthews contract is good value, and the NMC isn't a concern. The Leafs are more likely to move Nylander, not re-sign Bertuzzi or Klingberg, and have Tavares take a significant paycut after next season.

Hrm yeah.. I need to reevaluate my thinking on that contract.

I don't know why I wasn't figuring in the increasing cap, no excuse there. And it didn't occur to me they'd move on from Nylander. Guess I have a mental block from the Pens keeping the band together or something. Mea culpa. I must have seemed a bit obstinate.

No worries. Everyone can have an opinion. I just wanted to present some data that may change your mind. I think in general, the problem with NTC and NMC clauses are when they are given out to 2nd tier level players, or are given on long contracts for players in their 30s. Matthews fits neither of those. He's a superstar in the league and still relatively young.

Flip on over to the Penguins, and Carter and Acciari have no business having trade protection, I probably wouldn't have given protection to BOTH Pettersson and Graves on defense. Up front, there is no reason for Rust to have a full NMC (although it is only for 50% of the years), and for Rakell and Smith to have NTCs for all years of their contracts.

[murphydump55]

5v5 goals in the past five seasons:

Matthews - 145
McDavid - 117
Pastrnak - 115
Ovechkin - 112
Draisaitl - 106

5v5 goals per 60 in the past five seasons:

Matthews - 1.62
Pastrnak - 1.44
Ovechkin - 1.34
Skinner - 1.2
McDavid - 1.17

He's also fantastic defensively. Nothing wrong with the contract.