[Signing] Canucks re-sign Tanner Pearson

[Bad_BOI_pete]

23 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Lets put it this way. And yes, I have thought about it before posting since I have worked directly with hundreds of very similar situations before.

 

In a contract negotiation, dollars, term, trade protection, and - this year anyway expansion protection, all have a certain amount of value attached to them for the player.

 

Keeping the cap hit lower, acceptable term in the team structure, and more flexibility to trade or expose that player if necessary have a certain amount of value for the team.

 

When a contract gives all of the consideration to one party, its not generally a good negotiation for the other one.

 

 

go paruse this and tell me hes overpaid, for every one contract you give me i'll give you 2 that shows he isn't.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/active/2021/caphit/all/forwards?signing-status=ufa&stats-season=2021&display=heightcm&limits=age-27-46,caphit-1500000-5500000,toi-9-18,length-2-15,pointspergame-0.1-1

[wallstreetamigo]

7 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

i'm not perfect, but usually I don't make these mistakes.

 

pearson in the last 3 years for over 200 games has averaged 0.46ppg over his career 0.46ppg. his last contract where he made  3.75 million he was averaging less than 0.46ppg

 

this ties into your age argument, because technically he is playing his best years right now. players go through slumps, looks like pearson broke out of his with 4 points in his last 5 games.

 

the cap will go up the year after next, and besides why would it matter even if it didn't. the cap is still 81.5m it did not go down, so why would the players salaries go down? I get last year why they went down, everyone was losing money and they would be cap broke. BUT the NHL is expanding, technically there is going to be a raise in the pool of 3%. its very possible the owners profit next year and every year after till the next disaster.

 

https://cdn.nhlpa.com/img/assets/file/NHLPA_NHL_MOU.pdf

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/193468/total-league-revenue-of-the-nhl-since-2006/

 

Of course cherry picking statistics over a specific period and averaging them will look different than breaking it down individually.

 

Here's the thing though, looking at the year by year in that time frame paints a very different consistency picture.

 

80 gp, 26 pts .325 ppg

69 gp, 45 pts .652 ppg

35 gp, 13 pts .371 ppg

 

84 pts in 184 games. 2 plus years of which he was getting full time top 6 and a lot of pp time.

 

So, a very bad year offensively for a supposed top 6 guy, a career year, and now the makings of another below his career average year.

 

This is my point. Paying him based on last year will end up fine if it wasnt the anomoly. Unfortunately over the time period you chose, it was kind of the the anomoly. 

 

I give major kudos to Pearson and his agent for getting a deal done mid season so the Canucks would not be using this year as his contract year. Most gm's would have factored it into discussions though.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Of course cherry picking statistics over a specific period and averaging them will look different than breaking it down individually.

 

Here's the thing though, looking at the year by year in that time frame paints a very different consistency picture.

 

80 gp, 26 pts .325 ppg

69 gp, 45 pts .652 ppg

35 gp, 13 pts .371 ppg

 

84 pts in 184 games. 2 plus years of which he was getting full time top 6 and a lot of pp time.

 

So, a very bad year offensively for a supposed top 6 guy, a career year, and now the makings of another below his career average year.

 

This is my point. Paying him based on last year will end up fine if it wasnt the anomoly. Unfortunately over the time period you chose, it was kind of the the anomoly. 

 

I give major kudos to Pearson and his agent for getting a deal done mid season so the Canucks would not be using this year as his contract year. Most gm's would have factored it into discussions though.

ifwe were paying him on last year hed be making 5

 

if i was cherry picking I would have said pearson since the start of 2019 scored at 0.55ppg. so quit your lying

 

also i took into factor his playoff numbers

Edited April 22, 2021 by Petey_BOI

[coryberg]

5 hours ago, gurn said:

' It was reported"

 

By who? Lot's of people saying he has a verbal deal, nobody seems to know who it was first "reported" by.

Drance.

 

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/2150026

[wallstreetamigo]

8 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

go paruse this and tell me hes overpaid, for every one contract you give me i'll give you 2 that shows he isn't.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/active/2021/caphit/all/forwards?signing-status=ufa&stats-season=2021&display=heightcm&limits=age-27-46,caphit-1500000-5500000,toi-9-18,length-2-15,pointspergame-0.1-1

Anything signed pre covid and flat cap is an apples to oranges comparison though. The financial realities have significantly changed. 

 

 

[wallstreetamigo]

3 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

ifwe were paying him on last year hed be making 5

Benning probably would but no other GM would.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

Just now, wallstreetamigo said:

Benning probably would but no other GM would.

 

 

heres your second chance to stop looking foolish, go ahead look.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/active/2021/caphit/all/forwards?signing-status=ufa&stats-season=2021&display=heightcm&limits=age-27-46,caphit-1500000-5500000,toi-9-18,length-2-15,pointspergame-0.1-1

[wallstreetamigo]

2 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

 

 

heres your second chance to stop looking foolish, go ahead look.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/active/2021/caphit/all/forwards?signing-status=ufa&stats-season=2021&display=heightcm&limits=age-27-46,caphit-1500000-5500000,toi-9-18,length-2-15,pointspergame-0.1-1

Like I said, you regularly compare apples to oranges. 

 

As far as looking foolish, I at least did know he had a ntc in his contract and the specifics of it. Doesnt exactly inspire confidence in your research skills.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Like I said, you regularly compare apples to oranges. 

 

As far as looking foolish, I at least did know he had a ntc in his contract and the specifics of it. Doesnt exactly inspire confidence in your research skills.

how is every single ufa signing that is aged between 27 and over, how is this not relevant? of course i dropped out the scrubs and the first liners but everyone else is in there.    

 

this is literally the only way to compare, the only way. there's no other way. if you did it any other way you would just be a media zombie believing what your told.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

5 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Like I said, you regularly compare apples to oranges. 

 

As far as looking foolish, I at least did know he had a ntc in his contract and the specifics of it. Doesnt exactly inspire confidence in your research skills.

go on play with the numbers and try to make it look like pearson is overpaid?

 

here is a fresh page, that doesn't have my "bias"

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/active

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, Petey_BOI said:

go on play with the numbers and try to make it look like pearson is overpaid?

 

here is a fresh page, that doesn't have my "bias"

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/active

So which of your links is all those players that have re-signed since the start of this season?

[wallstreetamigo]

2 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

go on play with the numbers and try to make it look like pearson is overpaid?

 

here is a fresh page, that doesn't have my "bias"

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/active

Pre covid signings are irrelevent. And context matters a lot more than you pretend. So are any where its not an actual reasonably comparable player in a reasonably comparable situation. Aka a bottom feeding, cap strapped team making the signing. That includes looking at dollars, term, trade protection clauses, and the rest of that teams cap structure to see just how many of these cumulative overpriced contracts they have.

 

Actual realistic comparisons are far more complicated than just looking at the cap hit.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

3 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

So which of your links is all those players that have re-signed since the start of this season?

https://www.capfriendly.com/signings/all/all/forwards/2-15/1500000-5500000

 

i refuse to take into consideration 1 year deals, so don't expect me to not  tear apart your theory if you do.

 

but if you do what i think your about to do and only consider last years contracts your introducing a very narrow bias.

[wallstreetamigo]

The problem with fan hockey "comparisons" is that its pretty easy to find and manipulate the data to support any pre-conceived conclusion you have about a player. Its far harder to actually be objective and look much deeper than just superficially A vs B, which is what you do. 

 

As an example, I have seen Iaffallo trotted out as a close comparison because he signed for 4 yrs, 4 mil. He is a year and a half younger, he plays 4 min more per game on average, is top 2 in forward pk time on their team, plays on the 1st line, has increased his point titals every year he has played, and has no ntc in his contract. He also plays for a team that may be a bottom feeder but is not operating at the max salary cap while being one.

 

This is why A vs B comparisons are significantly harder than people suggest. Context matters. And value to a team is not easily compared from team to team.

 

Do I think Pearson could be effectively replaced in the Canucks lineup much easier than Iaffallo in LA's? Yep.

 

Whether you like Pearsons contract or not really comes down to the value you see in him as a regular on the Canucks for the nect 3 years. Everyone has the right to have a different opinion on that. 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

10 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Pre covid signings are irrelevent. And context matters a lot more than you pretend. So are any where its not an actual reasonably comparable player in a reasonably comparable situation. Aka a bottom feeding, cap strapped team making the signing. That includes looking at dollars, term, trade protection clauses, and the rest of that teams cap structure to see just how many of these cumulative overpriced contracts they have.

 

Actual realistic comparisons are far more complicated than just looking at the cap hit.

you are just refusing the task because your going to look bad, once i give you two contracts for every one of yours

[Bad_BOI_pete]

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

The problem with fan hockey "comparisons" is that its pretty easy to find and manipulate the data to support any pre-conceived conclusion you have about a player. Its far harder to actually be objective and look much deeper than just superficially A vs B, which is what you do. 

 

As an example, I have seen Iaffallo trotted out as a close comparison because he signed for 4 yrs, 4 mil. He is a year and a half younger, he plays 4 min more per game on average, is top 2 in forward pk time on their team, plays on the 1st line, has increased his point titals every year he has played, and has no ntc in his contract. He also plays for a team that may be a bottom feeder but is not operating at the max salary cap while being one.

 

This is why A vs B comparisons are significantly harder than people suggest. Context matters. And value to a team is not easily compared from team to team.

 

Do I think Pearson could be effectively replaced in the Canucks lineup much easier than Iaffallo in LA's? Yep.

 

Whether you like Pearsons contract or not really comes down to the value you see in him as a regular on the Canucks for the nect 3 years. Everyone has the right to have a different opinion on that. 

my friend here  your chance to look like a  GM.  go on prove me wrong, I got all night.

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, Petey_BOI said:

you are just refusing the task because your going to look bad, once i give you two contracts for every one of yours

As I said, context matters.

 

You mentioned you dont consider 1 year deals relevant. Why is that though? Why would you include 2 year deals, or 3, or 4, or 5? Why specifically not one year deals?

[wallstreetamigo]

Just now, Petey_BOI said:

my friend here  your chance to look like a  GM.  go on prove me wrong, I got all night.

I dont need to prove anyone wrong. I dont give my opinion to do so. I give it because its my opinion and thats the whole point of this forum. You have just as much right to yours.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

2 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

As I said, context matters.

 

You mentioned you dont consider 1 year deals relevant. Why is that though? Why would you include 2 year deals, or 3, or 4, or 5? Why specifically not one year deals?

because they are the true covid contracts, the prove me contracts. IT would also be illogical to look at RFA signings, and goalies. listen man you really stink at proving anything, im just about done. put up or i'm out

[wallstreetamigo]

4 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

because they are the true covid contracts, the prove me contracts. IT would also be illogical to look at RFA signings, and goalies. listen man you really stink at proving anything, im just about done. put up or i'm out

1 year deals are just as relevant as any other though. Any contract signed in the covid reality reflect the covid reality. Like I said, its easy to manipulate the data to prove your pre conceived opinion.

 

Comparing RFA to UFA or goalies I agree is not reasonable at all. RFA contracts that buy UFA years would have varying degrees of relevance though.

 

 

Edited April 22, 2021 by wallstreetamigo