Robby Fabbri Extended

[Akakabuto 1,744]

18 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

You can call it whatever you want. Doesn't change that face that he tore his ACL twice.

No it wouldn't when you consider that he's never been able to contribute at that level consistently. If asking to prove he can stay healthy and contribute at that level, after years of inactivity, is offensive then he probably doesn't need to be on the team anyway.

He's played 216 out of a possible 410 games in which he's been on an NHL roster. If you think the average player misses roughly 50% of their 5 year careers with injuries I don't know what to tell you.

I don't agree that Mantha is a "good comparable". He's just good for your argument. At the time that Mantha signed his current deal he was coming off two consistent .6 ppg seasons and had no long term injury history. Fabbri, on the other hand, scored .6 ppg this year and missed most of the previous 3 years with a VERY significant injury. And even before THAT injury Fabbri has never played a full season. So really the ONLY thing comparable is that .6 ppg figure. Since then Mantha has been injured more often, but if you wanna compare broken hands and ribs and a punctured lung (all of which can heal to 100%) with two blown out ACLs (which can never be as structurally sound as they used to be) then ok.

As I have stated before; I would have prefered a one year deal because in a small part of his previous injury and mainly because this carries him into UFA. The injury history doesn't post a threat to our economy anyways since the deal is still short.

What I'm arguing is that the money is about right* and your proposal is way off in regards to that.

Again: What the absolutely highest AAV you would be okey with?

*edit: in terms of production

Edited August 28, 2020 by Akakabuto

[kipwinger 8,492]

Just now, Akakabuto said:

As I have stated before; I would have prefered a one year deal because in a small part of his previous injury and mainly because this carries him into UFA. The injury history doesn't post a threat to our economy anyways since the deal is still short.

What I'm arguing is that the money is about right and your proposal is way off in regards to that.

Again: What the absolutely highest AAV you would be okey with?

I never said the deal "threatened" anything. I just said it was too high. I'm very aware of the Red Wings cap situation and dont think this deal is a problem in that respect.

The money WOULD be right if Fabbri were comparable to the average. But he's not, because he's basically been injured for five f*cking seasons. He's an outlier, at the low end because there's not much to suggest he can stay healthy.

I would have been fine with 1.75-1.8 at the upper limit but think the 1.5 AAV is fair considering how little he has played and the red flags that raises for me.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2.5 AAV = fair
- 0.5K for RFA control
- 0.5K for Injury History
+ 1.45 mil for cup level character

C'mon kip. Do the Math. It's a solid deal.

[Akakabuto 1,744]

2 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I never said the deal "threatened" anything. I just said it was too high. I'm very aware of the Red Wings cap situation and dont think this deal is a problem in that respect.

The money WOULD be right if Fabbri were comparable to the average. But he's not, because he's basically been injured for five f*cking seasons. He's an outlier, at the low end because there's not much to suggest he can stay healthy.

I would have been fine with 1.75-1.8 at the upper limit but think the 1.5 AAV is fair considering how little he has played and the red flags that raises for me.

But even if he gets whats on the low end of comparable players that would still be over 2 million.

Dogs*** players sign their third contract for 1,5 m. Despite injury Fabbri doesn't deserve a dogs*** deal. Way to much talent in him. You gotta pay for that too. 

I think a fair deal for both parts would have been 2,5 m for one year. Gives him the dollars that represents what kind of player he is and gives Detroit the advantage of RFA status at the end of it. 

[Akakabuto 1,744]

Here's an interesting thought:

Capfriendly first reported the deal as Fabbri being RFA at the end of it before they changed it to UFA. Apparently there was some unclearness about the wether the season he missed completely should count into the seven years that makes it UFA after.

Is it possible that management made a mistake and negotiated the deal in faith of it making him a RFA at the end of it?

[kipwinger 8,492]

1 minute ago, Akakabuto said:

But even if he gets whats on the low end of comparable players that would still be over 2 million.

Dogs*** players sign their third contract for 1,5 m. Despite injury Fabbri doesn't deserve a dogs*** deal. Way to much talent in him. You gotta pay for that too. 

I think a fair deal for both parts would have been 2,5 m for one year. Gives him the dollars that represents what kind of player he is and gives Detroit the advantage of RFA status at the end of it. 

You're allowed to think whatever you want. Unlike some on here I don't really care, and I'm certainly not going to attack you for it.

TBH normally I might agree with you on a lot of this too. If a player had the pedigree and had shown a couple years with of growth, then I might be willing to pay a bit for potential. But Fabbri is a different story. To the extent that you can read into his production history (which isn't much considering his injuries and small sample sizes) he looks like he could be a Tatar-esque producer if all goes well (aside from that fact that his defensive metrics and possession metrics are abysmal and Tatar's are really really good). But the nature of his injury is incredibly serious. Blow your ACL out ONCE and you wear a knee brace for the rest of your career. Twice and who knows? But even before that he wasn't healthy.

Dogsh*t players who are limited but generally healthy DO sign for 1.5 AAV. You know who else does? Inconsistent players and guys who are injured all the time. Because here's the thing, despite Fabbri's ppg average, his inability to stay in the lineup means you don't have any good idea how many points you're ACTUALLY going to get out of him. This is almost the exact same issue we had with Mike Green on his first contract, and why he wasn't worth the 6 mil AAV he was getting. His ppg average was actually pretty good, but he could never stay in the lineup long enough for that to move the needle.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

6 minutes ago, Akakabuto said:

Here's an interesting thought:

Capfriendly first reported the deal as Fabbri being RFA at the end of it before they changed it to UFA. Apparently there was some unclearness about the wether the season he missed completely should count into the seven years that makes it UFA after.

Is it possible that management made a mistake and negotiated the deal in faith of it making him a RFA at the end of it?

If Yzerman seriously Fed that up good lord

[kipwinger 8,492]

7 minutes ago, Akakabuto said:

Here's an interesting thought:

Capfriendly first reported the deal as Fabbri being RFA at the end of it before they changed it to UFA. Apparently there was some unclearness about the wether the season he missed completely should count into the seven years that makes it UFA after.

Is it possible that management made a mistake and negotiated the deal in faith of it making him a RFA at the end of it?

Anything's possible, thought likely not probable. If that happened then everyone involved in the negotiation should be fired immediately for being horrible at their jobs.

More likely the dude who updates the website got it wrong, and then corrected it.

[Akakabuto 1,744]

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

You're allowed to think whatever you want. Unlike some on here I don't really care, and I'm certainly not going to attack you for it.

I don't care what you or someone else think either. I mean, aren't we all here quarreling on an anonymous Red Wings forum for entertainment? I'm certainly not on a mission to convince some guy I don't know on the other side of the planet what I believe on this issue or anything else. And it was never my intent for you to feel attacked.

Anyways, we both agree on that one year would be better and we are closer together on the money than we was at the beginning. You see this more of a special case than I do. Sums it up pretty good.

Peace, brother!

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

Anything's possible, thought likely not probable. If that happened then everyone involved in the negotiation should be fired immediately for being horrible at their jobs.

More likely the dude who updates the website got it wrong, and then corrected it.

I certainly hope so.

I'm just curious how it works, though. If management and the players representatives both believed the deal would end in RFA and came into agreement and sent in the papers to the league offices and later found out that the league judged it so that Fabbri was entering UFA after it. Could the Red WIngs demand an annulment or to get the contract backtracked somehow?

Its all very unlikely of course but in a scenario they both agreed maybe nobody bothered to pick up the phone and ask the league or PA what they thought. There sure seems to be room for a lot of interpetations in the CBA.

Edited August 28, 2020 by Akakabuto

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, Akakabuto said:

I don't care what you or someone else think either.

I do

1 minute ago, Akakabuto said:

I'm certainly not on a mission to convince some guy I don't know on the other side of the planet what I believe on this issue or anything else.

I am

2 minutes ago, Akakabuto said:

And it was never my intent for you to feel attacked.

It was mine

2 minutes ago, Akakabuto said:

Anyways, we both agree on that one year would be better and we are closer together on the money than we was at the beginning. You see this more of a special case than I do. Sums it up pretty good.

The common ground seems to be the one year. This is where it appears Yzerman truly fuked up TBH. Regardless of cap hit we are going into the next contract with him having full UFA rights. So we're gonna either have to trade him or let him walk possibly or be in a worse position to negotiate. Would have been much smarter on Yzerman's part to give him 3.5 at one year (we all agree we don't need the savings right now), even if it's an over-payment.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

I can't believe there's so much animosity over a mediocre player extension. Definitely the offseason.

[mackel 674]

On 8/27/2020 at 2:26 PM, The 91 of Ryans said:

 

You guys are exhausting. 

All they're doing is repeating the valid points you disagree with, just relax.

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

1 hour ago, mackel said:

All they're doing is repeating the valid points you disagree with, just relax.

Something something Zadina. 

[chaps80 1,591]

It's really not a big deal, at all. I've seen worse contracts get way more leeway on these boards. lol

[mackel 674]

1 hour ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

Something something Zadina. 

Yea I think Zadina is trash... and that we made a "Hughes" error in that draft...  how that is remotely relevant to this conversation is beyond me!

I'd suggest making a relevant counterpoint (if you can) or shutting your whiney ass up.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

On 8/28/2020 at 1:50 PM, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Why am I the assistant???

You're clearly a beta.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

On 8/29/2020 at 2:10 PM, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

You're clearly a beta.

You'll regret your words when the beta male uprising begins...

[kipwinger 8,492]

If Fabbri only scores around 30 points then it will be an absolute failure of a season for him. Throughout his (limited) NHL career he's scored at a .48 ppg rate. 30 points would mean he only played about 60 games. Meaning YET AGAIN he was hurt and missed significant amounts of time. Either that or he played a full season and scored WAY below his production averages.

Either case would correctly be viewed as a failure by just about any objective observer.

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

5 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

If Fabbri only scores around 30 points then it will be an absolute failure of a season for him. Throughout his (limited) NHL career he's scored at a .48 ppg rate. 30 points would mean he only played about 60 games. Meaning YET AGAIN he was hurt and missed significant amounts of time. Either that or he played a full season and scored WAY below his production averages.

Either case would correctly be viewed as a failure by just about any objective observer.

3M is the going rate for 30 pts no? 

[kipwinger 8,492]

5 minutes ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

3M is the going rate for 30 pts no? 

I don't agree with that. Madison Bowey just scored at a 27 point pace last season and I think everybody would be (rightly) pissed off if that landed him a 2.5-3 million dollar contract. And it's HARDER for a defenseman to score like that. 30 points is nothing in today's NHL.

Edit: Also, there's WAY too many variables at play to distill valuation down to dollars per points. Did a guy score 30 goals or have 30 secondary assists? Did he score 30 off the fourth line or the second? Were those 30 powerplay points or 5on5 points? Does the player do anything else well, or just chip in 30 points but cost you more with his bad defensive play (Athanasiou)? 

Edited September 1, 2020 by kipwinger

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

7 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I don't agree with that. Madison Bowey just scored at a 27 point pace last season and I think everybody would be (rightly) pissed off if that landed him a 2.5-3 million dollar contract. And it's HARDER for a defenseman to score like that. 30 points is nothing in today's NHL.

Well then I'd like to see your breakdown tiers of points vs $. Generally speaking. I know players like O'Reilly,for example, have value well beyond point totals. 

[kipwinger 8,492]

2 minutes ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

Well then I'd like to see your breakdown tiers of points vs $. Generally speaking. I know players like O'Reilly,for example, have value well beyond point totals. 

See my edit above. Those are the types of questions I'd be asking myself if I were a GM and I was trying to figure out a players value while taking points into account.

Another issue with the 1 million per 10 points scale is that it doesn't take into account RFA vs. UFA differences in pay vs. production. In general it may be that over the life of their careers a player will earn roughly 1 million per ten points, on average. But they're certainly not going to make that while they're an RFA (if they're any good), and they're certainly not going to be worth that toward the end of their careers. I obviously haven't done the math, but I presume that while players are under team control they make less than that, and then it averages out after they sign their UFA contracts (where they'll basically all get overpaid). For example, Connor McDavid ain't dropping 125 points a season for the next 7 years.

In short, it's just too simplistic a benchmark to have any real use in determining value as far as I'm concerned. If I were a GM I'd probably do what Stan Bowman basically does. Squeeze value out of RFA contracts and then trade the good players before they become UFA's to keep your cupboard stocked so that you've always got more quality RFA's coming.

[krsmith17 7,191]

10 points per $1M is more of a tool for fans to gauge whether or not a player has performed up to his contract, not for a general manager to determine how much a player should get paid... Of course there are exceptions to the rule, and you have to take other factors into consideration (strength of team / linemates, defensive ability, etc.), but overall, I think it's a fairly accurate rule for forwards.

In saying that, there's no reason to think that Fabbri won't exceed that mark over the next two seasons. That is why most of us think this is, and will be a good contract.

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

For example, Connor McDavid ain't dropping 125 points a season for the next 7 years.

Why not? He's the most dynamic offensive player in the league, and was on pace for 124 points this season. I think over the next 7 years, he will average right around that 125 point mark, if not, pretty damn close.

[kipwinger 8,492]

59 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

10 points per $1M is more of a tool for fans to gauge whether or not a player has performed up to his contract, not for a general manager to determine how much a player should get paid... Of course there are exceptions to the rule, and you have to take other factors into consideration (strength of team / linemates, defensive ability, etc.), but overall, I think it's a fairly accurate rule for forwards.

In saying that, there's no reason to think that Fabbri won't exceed that mark over the next two seasons. That is why most of us think this is, and will be a good contract.

Why not? He's the most dynamic offensive player in the league, and was on pace for 124 points this season. I think over the next 7 years, he will average right around that 125 point mark, if not, pretty damn close.

For one, that level is production is insanely rare. Crosby did it ONCE. To do it six or seven years in a row would be nearly impossible. Secondly, as McDavid develops a more refined two-way game I'd expect his point totals to go down slightly, not up. Same thing people always said about Datsyuk, he could have scored another 30 points a season if he wasn't so committed to being good defensively.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Alright we've established that no one cares about his injury history or his dollar value. Cool.

The problem is the term. Yzerman should be bonked on the head for handing him a 2 year. We lose RFA control at the end of this contract. Which means a number of things. Most of which are not good for the Red Wings. Someone please explain to me what Yzerman is thinking not limiting this to a 1 year. Anyway I look at it it's not a smart move. Hell I would have been more okay with $4 million 1 year deal. We have the money and space.