Quote:
Originally Posted by Matata
$8.25M cap hit based on a 67 point season, the rest of his careet he's sat at ~0.6ppg. Using Tkachuk math, Matt is due $12.8M.
|
Yeah this is what's missing in the Ottawa vs Calgary comparisons the last couple days.
Flames players all had career seasons coming off their ELC. PPG and 30 goal plus for both Gaudreau and Tkachuk. So tougher to "overpay" for potential and get guys locked in when they are already starts.
Ottawa has been able to overpay these guys to get term locked up because their players (Norris, Tkachuk, etc) have had good but not great seasons - so easier to lock them up for the full 8 years based on potential.
And they still overpaid to do it.
Brady Tkachuk signed his deal before last season where he got 67 points - when he signed he had seasons of 45 points in 71 games, 44 points in 71 games, and 36 points in 56 games. $8.25M was a huge overpayment for what he had produced to that point of his career. It was 10.07% of the cap hit when signed.
Compare that to Matthew who had 34 goals, 77 points in 80 games coming off his ELC.
His 3 year x $7M contract was 8.59% of the cap when he had signed. Even just the equivalent contract to Brady would have needed to be 7 years at $8.2M for Tkachuk.
Brady was a 0.6 PPG player for his career when he signed. Matthew was a 0.78 PPG at that poing of his career. That's 25% more production at that stage of their careers. So if you adjust for performance at that point of their careers it would have needed to be more like 7 years x $10.25M for Tkachuk to lock him up like the Sens locked up Brady.
Which checks out considering the Leafs gave Marner 6 x $10.9M coming off his 94 point season that same year. It might end up costing the Flames 2 years of Tkachuk but really at the time saving $3M in cap hit was probably the right call since the team was coming off a division winning season and needed the space.