Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Signing] Kings re-sign Alex Iafallo


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Its not my subjective feels though bud.

 

Its 20+ years of working with actual professional hockey, baseball, basketball, etc. players, executives, agents, and media and analyzing all sorts of financial data including contracts and financial trends and results in various professional sports. That isn't to say my opinion is automatically more valid than yours or anyone else's but it also doesn't play to your theory that I am somehow uninformed simply because you don't agree.

 

No one contract is alone on an island and its pretty simplistic to frame that it is. The cumulative effect of all moves is what determines the actual value in a cap environment. So one team signing a comparable player doesnt mean much. Only superficial analysts looking for a justification of a pre determined conclusion would see it that way. Think of it as an easy to follow logic chain that allows people to avoid actually being objective on a deeper level.

 

Maybe they have more cap. Maybe they have less overpriced veteran contracts pressuring their cap situation overall. Maybe they have less options to replace what the player brings. There are all sorts of factors that make direct player to player contract value comparisons far more complex than you are insinuating. Contract dollars and term are A factor, not THE ONLY factor to determine the contracts value. Like you said yoursrlf, direct player to player comparisons are not an exact science or even simple to do.

 

As an aside, not that it matters, but I am now retired under age 50 so I am pretty comfortable my "subjective feels" have served me pretty well haha. It gives me more time to piss everyone off on CDC apparently. I still value other people's opinions even when I disagree. You have made some good points as have others that have made me consider another perspective. I appreciate the conversation. So go ahead, flame away.

Maybe you should have used some of that so called experience to better effect. You're opinion on the Pearson deal is clearly, entirely off base with nothing to back it up and mounting evidence to the contrary. But you keep on keeping on...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Maybe you should have used some of that so called experience to better effect. You're opinion on the Pearson deal is clearly, entirely off base with nothing to back it up and mounting evidence to the contrary. But you keep on keeping on...

I am pretty comfortable with my opinion. We have 3+ years to see how it turns out. Nothing can be done about it now other than wait. So I can agree to disagree bud.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

Except Pearson has less than half the point production.

This year. Last year and other years? All I'm saying is it's all in the same ballpark. Hardly worth losing a persons shat over the Pearson signing like people have. 

  • Vintage 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Except Pearson has less than half the point production.

Pearson has 226 points at 28 years old

Lafallo has 127 points at 27 years old

 

Are you a time traveler and know that lafallo is going to score 326 points next season so that he has more than double the production or do you smoke meth out of a light bulb?

 

Or do you think that Pearson's career .46 ppg is less than half of Laffalo's career .47 ppg?

 

Pick your poison.

  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

And Iaffallo is a 1st line winger and better, more necessary player. But lets not confuse the Benning people here.

Yeah laffalo is a 1st line 40 point winger but Pearson is a marginal 3rd line 40 point winger who got a 1 year NTC!!!! 

 

Am I doing it right?

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

As soon as i saw this signing i laughed thinking about a few posters stubbornly attacking Pearson's contract although there is dozens of comps available and several ways to look at the deal that frames the deal as a covid flat deal.   First off UFA contract for blue chip players of any type - top six, middle six and bottom six, is supposed to be the legacy deal, the last big pay cheque before the player retires or if good enough, continues on smaller term/money deals until he does.   Pearson took 500k less for a relatively short term deal.    Seemed fair given the cap isn't going up and he's not that good either. 

 

Asked for examples of guys around his age, playing a similar role, who's getting paid less.   Of course none were given.   

 

One thing that for sure is valid, is whether JB should have made this deal or not,  I was against the idea felt we needed the cap.   And that we need an eventual upgrade when the money is available in two years IF Podz doesn't work out or Lind or whomever.   

 

In the same role there isn't much reason to think Pearson can't keep up his .5-.7 production with Horvat, he's not washed up, and has a good chance to keep playing once the deal is done.    He's 40th in LW scoring not including his first 19 games with us which would bump him up a little more, with us, ahead of Bertuzzi, Saad, Magnipine, Zucker, Foligno, Bevillier, and a couple points behind Jamie Benn,  Anders Lee, Parise, Bratt etc...all for the gigantic price of 3.25 x 3 lol.   

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

And Iaffallo is a 1st line winger and better, more necessary player. But lets not confuse the Benning people here.

Is he though?   Not on a good team.   Wonder how Pearson would do in the same role....but you should already know that given your career choice.    How many times have we seen career middle six guys get a chance at a top line and PP minutes have great seasons?   It's happened recently to us with JT Miller.   I remember 15 years ago Stephan Weiss going from the middle six to top line minutes in Florida and getting a healthy 20 point boost ... but he was still a middle six player really on a good team...Detroit didn't get what they expected when he returned to that role.    It happens all the time.    Play Pearson 20 minutes a game and give him a permanent spot on the first PP unit and maybe he could score 60 points too.  

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

And Iaffallo is a 1st line winger and better, more necessary player. But lets not confuse the Benning people here.

its not that hard for him to do that in LA tho. 

 

Is Pearson 3/4 the value of Iafollo? yes if he's back to last years form. Not sure why that has to be controversial. 

  • Hydration 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

its not that hard for him to do that in LA tho. 

 

Is Pearson 3/4 the value of Iafollo? yes if he's back to last years form. Not sure why that has to be controversial. 

Thats a big if though. The reality at the moment is that he isnt and hasnt been. So my point iswhy was that ignored in negotiating this contract?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Thats a big if though. The reality at the moment is that he isnt and hasnt been. So my point iswhy was that ignored in negotiating this contract?

they clearly think this year is an anomaly. Not unjustified, given how many good players are having down years - are they all crap too?

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

they clearly think this year is an anomaly. Not unjustified, given how many good players are having down years - are they all crap too?

I have never said he is crap. He is a decent player who excels at nothing. Which is fine. He had a career year last year but is terrible this year producing in that same role. His ice time and opportunity has not changed much, other than iirc he was moved to the top PP unit when EP went out. 

 

Bennings long history of thinking bad years, declining production, bad advanced stats, etc. are an anomoly and ignoring them to focus on paying best case scenario deals with above market value, term, and trade protection has not exactly given anyone a lot of confidence in his ability to make that kind of assessment accurately. The landscape is littered with contracts that would only make sense if all the stars align to the best case scenario for the player and team coming to fruition.

 

Pearson this year might just be Pearson declining. That should have also factored into signing any mid season deal with him. 

 

As soon as next season there could be a young player like Podz who could fit better in that role. If Pearson gets pushed to the 3rd line or loses his prime pp time (which he is doing next to nothing with anyway), what are the chances he lives up to that contract?

 

In a lost year like this one, why not trade Pearson for a couple of assets and try to pump Gaudette or Virtanens trade value by giving them consistent top 6 minutes before trading them? I mean, you could always circle back and sign Pearson if you think he is a must have player. No other GM would likely have given him that deal as a UFA and if they did, oh well he is pretty replaceable.

 

Pearsons contract barely makes sense at all with him being gifted 2nd line and pp minutes. It makes zero sense on the 3rd line which honestly is what the team should be trying to achieve with him to get to contender status.

 

The Canucks have had pretty sketchy pro scouting for a long time but at least previous regimes used every dip in production, etc. in contract negotiations to get some concessions from the player. Benning or whoever he has structuring contracts gets absolutely rolled by agents.

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IBatch said:

Is he though?   Not on a good team.   Wonder how Pearson would do in the same role....but you should already know that given your career choice.    How many times have we seen career middle six guys get a chance at a top line and PP minutes have great seasons?   It's happened recently to us with JT Miller.   I remember 15 years ago Stephan Weiss going from the middle six to top line minutes in Florida and getting a healthy 20 point boost ... but he was still a middle six player really on a good team...Detroit didn't get what they expected when he returned to that role.    It happens all the time.    Play Pearson 20 minutes a game and give him a permanent spot on the first PP unit and maybe he could score 60 points too.  

Thats kind of my point though. 

 

The difference with Iaffallo is that he has actually improved THIS year and LA does not have anyone currently that could reasonably be expected to replace him. They arent relying on last year to sign that deal with him this year despite his performance like the Canucks did with Pearson. 

 

IIRC, Pearson got moved to the top PP unit when EP went down. He has been on the 2nd unit consistently prior to that. He has 1 ppg and 1 ppa all season despite that. He has not been the value add in an offensive role that his contract extension would suggest.

 

Even last year, he scored a lot of empty net goals. He was a decent wingman with Horvat but is not really a play driver. He is pretty slow, not particularly physical, not a great playmaker, an average shooter, etc. 

 

For the Canucks to become true contenders, they need a much better bottom 6 that can take on some of the matchup role that Horvat, Pearson, etc have been responsible for. And they need a better LW for Horvat as well. To me, Pearson on a 3rd line with a solid defensive center and physical winger would be the sweet spot for him. Unfortunately his new contract makes it so unless he is producing in a top 6 role it is a cap waste.

 

I dont hate Pearson as a player or on the team. Quite the opposite. As a two way guy helping anchor an actual reliable 3rd line he would be great to hang onto. But for at least the next 3 years its 2nd line status quo which imo is a shame.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I have never said he is crap. He is a decent player who excels at nothing. Which is fine. He had a career year last year but is terrible this year producing in that same role. His ice time and opportunity has not changed much, other than iirc he was moved to the top PP unit when EP went out. 

 

Bennings long history of thinking bad years, declining production, bad advanced stats, etc. are an anomoly and ignoring them to focus on paying best case scenario deals with above market value, term, and trade protection has not exactly given anyone a lot of confidence in his ability to make that kind of assessment accurately. The landscape is littered with contracts that would only make sense if all the stars align to the best case scenario for the player and team coming to fruition.

 

Pearson this year might just be Pearson declining. That should have also factored into signing any mid season deal with him. 

 

As soon as next season there could be a young player like Podz who could fit better in that role. If Pearson gets pushed to the 3rd line or loses his prime pp time (which he is doing next to nothing with anyway), what are the chances he lives up to that contract?

 

In a lost year like this one, why not trade Pearson for a couple of assets and try to pump Gaudette or Virtanens trade value by giving them consistent top 6 minutes before trading them? I mean, you could always circle back and sign Pearson if you think he is a must have player. No other GM would likely have given him that deal as a UFA and if they did, oh well he is pretty replaceable.

 

Pearsons contract barely makes sense at all with him being gifted 2nd line and pp minutes. It makes zero sense on the 3rd line which honestly is what the team should be trying to achieve with him to get to contender status.

 

The Canucks have had pretty sketchy pro scouting for a long time but at least previous regimes used every dip in production, etc. in contract negotiations to get some concessions from the player. Benning or whoever he has structuring contracts gets absolutely rolled by agents.

Just for the record my preference was to trade him and swing back around to him in free agency. But the deal isnt the hair on fire moment many are claiming. Its not good but not that bad.

 

As we can see from other deals its in the ballpark of what hed get as a free agent

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Just for the record my preference was to trade him and swing back around to him in free agency. But the deal isnt the hair on fire moment many are claiming. Its not good but not that bad.

 

As we can see from other deals its in the ballpark of what hed get as a free agent

 

Its not hair on fire as a stand alone deal. Its the cumulative effect that is the problem for me. Overspending on a few guys is fine (usually when you are actually a true contender and need a specific few guys to fit around your established core to compete). Serial overspending on a half dozen or more non core guys year after year with too much term is cumulatively very costly to their cap situation.

 

Benning has very little margin for error with the cap unless he recognizes past mistakes and stops signing these kind of deals for average players.

 

It seems like Benning and Green might both fear losing their jobs and as such can't look realistically past this season to preparing for what an improved lineup should look like next season. Several players should be getting tried in various roles now that this season is a write off. Pearson should not even still be here soaking up 2nd line and pp minutes imo.

 

Pearson being signed now to this deal is a scared GM move imo. At best. At worst it is a GM totally unable to distinguish and identify the type of roster that wins cups. Pearson would not be in the top 6 on any contending team unless it is as a rental filling in for an injury. So if the goal is to get the Canucks there and Pearson wants the security to stay until when they are, he should be contracted like the 3rd liner they will need him to be.

 

He would have value there. Just not the value his contract suggests he has.

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Its not hair on fire as a stand alone deal. Its the cumulative effect that is the problem for me. Overspending on a few guys is fine (usually when you are actually a true contender and need a specific few guys to fit around your established core to compete). Serial overspending on a half dozen or more non core guys year after year with too much term is cumulatively very costly to their cap situation.

I think this is where its important to recognize that this isn't a 7 year rebuild plan, because we're kind of getting into 6 degrees of Sbisa territory here. Not every new deal is linked to the past decisions by this GM.

 

18 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

 

Benning has very little margin for error with the cap unless he recognizes past mistakes and stops signing these kind of deals for average players.

So how far is Pearsons deal from 'average' for a capable middle 6 winger.... 250k? 500k? 

 

 

18 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

 

It seems like Benning and Green might both fear losing their jobs and as such can't look realistically past this season to preparing for what an improved lineup should look like next season. Several players should be getting tried in various roles now that this season is a write off. Pearson should not even still be here soaking up 2nd line and pp minutes imo.

 

Pearson being signed now to this deal is a scared GM move imo. At best. At worst it is a GM totally unable to distinguish and identify the type of roster that wins cups. Pearson would not be in the top 6 on any contending team unless it is as a rental filling in for an injury. So if the goal is to get the Canucks there and Pearson wants the security to stay until when they are, he should be contracted like the 3rd liner they will need him to be.

 

He would have value there. Just not the value his contract suggests he has.

dunno, I don't know them or are in their heads. I don't think we need to go to fear to explain it, I think they like the fit with Horvat.

 

If the plan is to see if Podkolzin can be a regular starting next season, wouldn't it be a good idea to shelter him with two veterans line mates like Bo and Pearson? isn't that reasonable? 

 

 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I have never said he is crap. He is a decent player who excels at nothing. Which is fine. He had a career year last year but is terrible this year producing in that same role. His ice time and opportunity has not changed much, other than iirc he was moved to the top PP unit when EP went out. 

 

Bennings long history of thinking bad years, declining production, bad advanced stats, etc. are an anomoly and ignoring them to focus on paying best case scenario deals with above market value, term, and trade protection has not exactly given anyone a lot of confidence in his ability to make that kind of assessment accurately. The landscape is littered with contracts that would only make sense if all the stars align to the best case scenario for the player and team coming to fruition.

 

Pearson this year might just be Pearson declining. That should have also factored into signing any mid season deal with him. 

 

As soon as next season there could be a young player like Podz who could fit better in that role. If Pearson gets pushed to the 3rd line or loses his prime pp time (which he is doing next to nothing with anyway), what are the chances he lives up to that contract?

 

In a lost year like this one, why not trade Pearson for a couple of assets and try to pump Gaudette or Virtanens trade value by giving them consistent top 6 minutes before trading them? I mean, you could always circle back and sign Pearson if you think he is a must have player. No other GM would likely have given him that deal as a UFA and if they did, oh well he is pretty replaceable.

 

Pearsons contract barely makes sense at all with him being gifted 2nd line and pp minutes. It makes zero sense on the 3rd line which honestly is what the team should be trying to achieve with him to get to contender status.

 

The Canucks have had pretty sketchy pro scouting for a long time but at least previous regimes used every dip in production, etc. in contract negotiations to get some concessions from the player. Benning or whoever he has structuring contracts gets absolutely rolled by agents.

Other GMs did inquire about Pearson.   So they are interested (Dubas).   I get that it's fun to be right, and maybe you will be, but there is zero evidence you've used to justify your stance.   I asked right way to show me a comparable who's getting 2 million in this league (a UFA who's 28-29 winger who's produced at a similar rate).   Couldn't find any right?    Again this is totally debatable from a should JB have done this cap wise.   But no way he wouldn't have found a home on a team with limited LW depth for much less.   And debatably more.   The only UFAs JB not done well with is LE.   He's a waste of cap space no doubt, the rest are fair or a little bit of a waste.    I'm surprised given your reported background that you aren't more aware of what other players going into free agency for the first time usually get.   Pearson is a proven middle six commodity.   In his prime.   Or do you buy into this idea that all players are washed up from 28-32?)...Beagle ... meh, great face off guy and and always the first guy into the crowd after a whistle ... Not the end of the world at all.   AR meh ... Any GM can blow 2 million on cap easily with their RFAs or UFAs - and they constantly do it.   Which is the combined waste with AR and Beagle, Sutter is a different story all together and don't be surprised if he's back too.   Stastny and his cap hit was Vegas 3/4 line center last year wasn't he?

 

For me at least - JB sh!t the bed on when he thought this core was ready by one year.   It's a double edged sword because its really a great problem to have.  Detroit is our closest comp as a team.   Look at them already selling their first rebuild core guys (Mantha), because they've realized it's not enough.    I won't start complaining about JB unless he can't fix this.   We don't have a LW of significance behind Miller.   The absolute best case scenario is Podz comes in and takes his spot.   Means Pearson gets 12-14 minutes a game on the third line.   We can't ice a team of prospects all at once. 

 

Plus Pearson has one year after that he's a TDL deal waiting to happen.   He's a more established  winger then AG and JV.  

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Detroit is our closest comp as a team.   Look at them already selling their first rebuild core guys (Mantha), because they've realized it's not enough.  

They got a ton of picks in 2021.  Multiple 1st, 2nd, 3rd,4th and even 5th round picks that year.  Will be interesting to see if that stockpiling/acquiring of so many picks works.

 

Course as the Oilers have shown, even several 1st overall picks doesn't guarantee success.  You need to surround such players with decent NHL vets.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Other GMs did inquire about Pearson.   So they are interested (Dubas).   I get that it's fun to be right, and maybe you will be, but there is zero evidence you've used to justify your stance.   I asked right way to show me a comparable who's getting 2 million in this league (a UFA who's 28-29 winger who's produced at a similar rate).   Couldn't find any right?    Again this is totally debatable from a should JB have done this cap wise.   But no way he wouldn't have found a home on a team with limited LW depth for much less.   And debatably more.   The only UFAs JB not done well with is LE.   He's a waste of cap space no doubt, the rest are fair or a little bit of a waste.    I'm surprised given your reported background that you aren't more aware of what other players going into free agency for the first time usually get.   Pearson is a proven middle six commodity.   In his prime.   Or do you buy into this idea that all players are washed up from 28-32?)...Beagle ... meh, great face off guy and and always the first guy into the crowd after a whistle ... Not the end of the world at all.   AR meh ... Any GM can blow 2 million on cap easily with their RFAs or UFAs - and they constantly do it.   Which is the combined waste with AR and Beagle, Sutter is a different story all together and don't be surprised if he's back too.   Stastny and his cap hit was Vegas 3/4 line center last year wasn't he?

 

For me at least - JB sh!t the bed on when he thought this core was ready by one year.   It's a double edged sword because its really a great problem to have.  Detroit is our closest comp as a team.   Look at them already selling their first rebuild core guys (Mantha), because they've realized it's not enough.    I won't start complaining about JB unless he can't fix this.   We don't have a LW of significance behind Miller.   The absolute best case scenario is Podz comes in and takes his spot.   Means Pearson gets 12-14 minutes a game on the third line.   We can't ice a team of prospects all at once. 

 

Plus Pearson has one year after that he's a TDL deal waiting to happen.   He's a more established  winger then AG and JV.  

Any comparable UFA signing to gauge this deal will be made in the summer though. Last offseasons signings are irrelevent due to the changing financial dynamics in the league. 

 

The comparables that people have brought up were either already signed previously before covid or are younger, better players who were re-signed recently and who are actually having good seasons this year, unlike Pearson who was re-signed in the midst of a serious decline of a season. Those aren't appes to apples comparisons.

 

We will see in the summer how many GM's are willing to sign average .3 ppg players for that type of money, term,trade protection, and expansion protection. Some probably will. But I expect the trend to be more of those players signing short term deals. We will see if the financial reality outweighs GM's typical UFA stupidity. Its going to be interesting thats for sure.

 

I think a lot of people severely underestimate just what the new financial reality is for many sports franchises.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...