Sabres Announce a 7 Year 30 Million Contract Extension for Mattias Samuelsson

[kas23]

I wonder if this signing is more about Dahlin than Mule. Not saying he’s bad, but he gives Dahlin stability and reassurance that he can go out, get creative, and be the generational talent we drafted him to be. Unleash him now. 

I wonder if this signing is more about Dahlin than Mule. Not saying he’s bad, but he gives Dahlin stability and reassurance that he can go out, get creative, and be the generational talent we drafted him to be. Unleash him now. 

[Thorny]

What an absolutely wild deal.

Incredibly risky. As far as I know we haven’t seen anything like this in the NHL, could be precedent setting if it DOES work out. 

Should have extended Dahlin when we had the chance  

[Lanny]

7 minutes ago, Thorny said:

What an absolutely wild deal.

Incredibly risky. As far as I know we haven’t seen anything like this in the NHL, could be precedent setting if it DOES work out. 

Should have extended Dahlin when we had the chance  

I saw John Klingberg's contract referenced a couple of times as a comparable, signed after his first season of 65 games. 7 yrs, $29.75M in 2015.

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/john-klingberg

 

Edited October 12, 2022 by Lanny

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Weave said:

How much does a guy who doesn’t get points see his value go up usually?

I don’t see this extension being a get him signed before he blows up scenario.

Yeah, I hear this.  I’m not sure really.

Cernak just signed for $5.2M x 8, and that’s in Tampa with the No tax and contender price reducers.

Samuelsson isn’t going to blow up in terms of points, but proving that you are a 1st pair/top-4 quality shutdown D definitely has value around the league.  Right now has only done that for a small sample of games.  Doing it well for a whole season would definitely increase his value, I’m not entirely sure how much though.

Waiting 1 year wouldn’t have been a terrible move, but I’m really glad that they didn’t bridge him.  Gotta get some of these contracts in before the cap spikes.

Its probably going up just $1M again next offseason, but it looks like after that things could get really crazy.  Like an increase of over $10M combined between the 2024 and 2025 off seasons.

I think part of it is also just to get some of these guys signed before next offseason, when Cozens and Asplund definitely need to be signed, but Okposo, Girgensons, Olofsson, Mittelstadt, Krebs, Jokiharju, Dahlin, and Power are all eligible for extensions.  If Adams is thinking that he wants to negotiate hugely important extensions with all of Cozens, Dahlin, Power next offseason, in addition to anyone else breaks out, maybe it makes sense to get some of the work done now.

Edited October 12, 2022 by Curt

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, Lanny said:

I saw John Klingberg's contract referenced a couple of times as a comparable, signed after his first season of 65 games. 7 yrs, $29.75M in 2015.

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/john-klingberg

 

Klingberg had just come off a breakout season of 40 points, though. When looking at contracts, points are always what’s going to cost you. Klingberg would never again return to a point total as low as 40 over a full season, proving the logic of their initial decision.

Samuelsson is a defensive d-man which puts a significant ceiling on his potential earnings, as well, right off the cuff. He doesn’t have a career goal and had 10 points last year. We just went and paid the likely *ceiling* for what we’d ever have to pay a player of his ilk, in the next several years, and did so over an exceptionally long term for someone who had not proven themselves in the NHL yet. 

They went ahead and spotted him the deal he had a reasonable chance of earning down the line, but hasn’t yet. May very well work out fine, but those acting like anyone taking a non-positive view on this are doing so just for the sake of being contrarian (which is unbelievably being said) have lost the plot. 

 

[DarthEbriate]

$4M/year for a top-4 defenseman sounds about right. They're skipping the bridge and going right to the long-term, which is fine. And he's not likely to ever get more than 5 goals in a season, but if he plays with Dahlin for the next few years then he'll pick up plenty of assists and it will look like a bargain. It's the Cernak deal but $1M/year less. I'm thinking this is solid.

[LGR4GM]

It's a risky deal. If Muel is a top pair shutdown guy that other teams avoid (he's a physical animal) then it will be worth it. They must like what they see up to now. 

The avg seems a little high right now, we'll see. 

[shrader]

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Do you honestly believe that KA is going to tell either of these top overall picks walk ever? Dahlin was just granted an "A" and is the only member of the young core so honored.  DG was already skating 23 minutes a night in his debut last year and he was arguably the best D in camp. Furthermore both are still RFAs after next season.  

Can things change?  Of course they can and will. However, those changes likely won't include either Dahlin or Power.  

I'm not really sure what the bolded sentence means.  And who is DG?  But regardless, you just named 2 defensemen out of a group of 7, maybe 3 but I'm not really sure.  That still leaves 5 other slots that could be available to Johnson.

Edited October 12, 2022 by shrader

[That Aud Smell]

2 hours ago, Sabres Fan in NS said:

Just terrible takes most of which were deleted, but you can't run and hide your idiocy if it's quoted.

No idea what this is about - even after reading your explanation to Weave. I was just chuckling at Taro’s stringing those 3 Mikes together.

[Scottysabres]

This is a solidly good signing imho. Locks up a young d man and if it begins to sour down the road a very movable contract. Well done Adam's, well down.

[Taro T]

16 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Klingberg had just come off a breakout season of 40 points, though. When looking at contracts, points are always what’s going to cost you. Klingberg would never again return to a point total as low as 40 over a full season, proving the logic of their initial decision.

Samuelsson is a defensive d-man which puts a significant ceiling on his potential earnings, as well, right off the cuff. He doesn’t have a career goal and had 10 points last year. We just went and paid the likely *ceiling* for what we’d ever have to pay a player of his ilk, in the next several years, and did so over an exceptionally long term for someone who had not proven themselves in the NHL yet. 

They went ahead and spotted him the deal he had a reasonable chance of earning down the line, but hasn’t yet. May very well work out fine, but those acting like anyone taking a non-positive view on this are doing so just for the sake of being contrarian (which is unbelievably being said) have lost the plot. 

 

And Mike Peca got a huge deal from the Aisles because he was a Selke quality player that all teams need but is in very short supply.  He was paid for his full game, not just the offensive aspects of it.  And deservedly so.

Samuelsson will most likely be Jay McKee & has a realistic potential to be a Mike Ramsey.  The team has a ton of cap space, the cap is going up w/ at least 5 years left on his deal, & they are showing the players that they not only preach doing things the right way but will actually reward it.  Jay McKee walking was a huge part of the Sabres failure to get by the Otters the last time those teams meant in meaningful games.

Love this deal, not just for having the guy they project to being their shut down D-man for the foreseeable future locked down, but for the intangible value it'll have in the room.

This entire day was about Adams & Pegula saying bust your arse, do things the right way, do your job well, & we will take care of you.  All 3 of these announcements scream both that & we ARE a family.

[Curt]

27 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Klingberg had just come off a breakout season of 40 points, though. When looking at contracts, points are always what’s going to cost you. Klingberg would never again return to a point total as low as 40 over a full season, proving the logic of their initial decision.

Samuelsson is a defensive d-man which puts a significant ceiling on his potential earnings, as well, right off the cuff. He doesn’t have a career goal and had 10 points last year. We just went and paid the likely *ceiling* for what we’d ever have to pay a player of his ilk, in the next several years, and did so over an exceptionally long term for someone who had not proven themselves in the NHL yet. 

They went ahead and spotted him the deal he had a reasonable chance of earning down the line, but hasn’t yet. May very well work out fine, but those acting like anyone taking a non-positive view on this are doing so just for the sake of being contrarian (which is unbelievably being said) have lost the plot. 

 

Brett Pesce and to a lesser extent Jacob Slavic are somewhat similar players who signed somewhat similar contracts in somewhat similar circumstances.

I feel like analytical studies probably say that if you identify a young player as good, lock them up sooner rather than wait until they have proven themselves beyond question.

I actually don’t agree that he could not have earned more after proving himself further.

Edited October 12, 2022 by Curt

[LGR4GM]

24 minutes ago, shrader said:

I'm not really sure what the bolded sentence means.  And who is DG?  But regardless, you just named 2 defensemen out of a group of 7, maybe 3 but I'm not really sure.  That still leaves 5 other slots that could be available to Johnson.

But Johnson is a left shot. That means he other plays his off side or is a 3rd pairing defender.

[Thorny]

18 minutes ago, Taro T said:

And Mike Peca got a huge deal from the Aisles because he was a Selke quality player that all teams need but is in very short supply.  He was paid for his full game, not just the offensive aspects of it.  And deservedly so.

Samuelsson will most likely be Jay McKee & has a realistic potential to be a Mike Ramsey.  The team has a ton of cap space, the cap is going up w/ at least 5 years left on his deal, & they are showing the players that they not only preach doing things the right way but will actually reward it.  Jay McKee walking was a huge part of the Sabres failure to get by the Otters the last time those teams meant in meaningful games.

Love this deal, not just for having the guy they project to being their shut down D-man for the foreseeable future locked down, but for the intangible value it'll have in the room.

This entire day was about Adams & Pegula saying bust your arse, do things the right way, do your job well, & we will take care of you.  All 3 of these announcements scream both that & we ARE a family.

At the end of the day, they can frame it as Samuelsson being rewarded for “buying in”, but we all know that’s not what is happening. They are identifying him as a piece of their future core and paying him before he proves so, in an effort, I imagine, to find value. 

They wouldn’t pay a player without the talent, all that money, simply for exemplifying their “right way” jargon. The issue in framing the deal as a reward for that is that all it takes is one miss-talent evaluation and we have an albatross of a deal that still sets precedent for what other young players will want since it was doled out solely for buy-in, in perception, and not any kind of performance.

Regardless of what the singular Mike Peca was paid decade ago, the fact remains that it’s points that pay. The amount of value the Sabres realistically stand to gain here is negligible. Samuelsson was not going to realistically earn more than a 30 mil deal anytime soon. 

This deal is about their analytics evaluation, but they are coating it in messaging about “we will take care of you”. 

In the end, it comes to the same thing: if he’s good, the deal is fine. I personally just don’t think the small amount we might very unlikely potentially lose by waiting is worth jumping the gun to get either the value they seek or the vibes they wish to stoke. 

18 minutes ago, Curt said:

Brett Pesce and to a lesser extent Jacob Slavic are somewhat similar players who signed somewhat similar contracts in somewhat similar circumstances.

I feel like analytical studies probably say that if you identify a young player as good, lock them up sooner rather than wait until they have proven themselves beyond question.

I feel like the idea of locking up a player to a deal before they’ve truly shown you their best is a fairly common and accepted, widely known beneficial strategy. I’m not sure that’s leading to and confusion for anybody.

You are conflating two things - the idea of locking up a player before they’ve established what their prime output is, and locking up a player before committing a full NHL season to record. Perhaps it is a sliding spectrum, but there’s a fair bit of separation between the two players you listed, who both had 2 successful NHL seasons under their belt, and Samuelsson, who had .5 of one. 

As mentioned, the theory makes sense. But there are degrees of intensity here and the Sabres are certainly REALLY pushing the envelope here re: limited data 

[Thorny]

52 minutes ago, Curt said:

Brett Pesce and to a lesser extent Jacob Slavic are somewhat similar players who signed somewhat similar contracts in somewhat similar circumstances.

I feel like analytical studies probably say that if you identify a young player as good, lock them up sooner rather than wait until they have proven themselves beyond question.

I actually don’t agree that he could not have earned more after proving himself further.

But not anything close to the amount to justify the risk, imo. Likely without the raw point totals, it’s unlikely his deal increases very much. With the amount of cap space we gave, an extra mil or so isn’t much of a concern when the downside of a failed deal at this point (considering its 7 years for a player with a handful of games) is much greater.

Basically they are risking an albatross contract to potentially pinch pennies 

- - - 

On a tangent, I’m certainly more receptive to the idea of KA trying to replicate the procedures that led to Carolina finding value deals than I am with him potentially following their established strategies when it comes to finding goaltending. Hopefully KA realizes it’s importance, something Taro has touched on

Edited October 12, 2022 by Thorny

[Curt]

 

48 minutes ago, Thorny said:

But not anything close to the amount to justify the risk, imo. Likely without the raw point totals, it’s unlikely his deal increases very much. With the amount of cap space we gave, an extra mil or so isn’t much of a concern when the downside of a failed deal at this point (considering its 7 years for a player with a handful of games) is much greater.

Basically they are risking an albatross contract to potentially pinch pennies 

I agree with you, it’s a risk/reward spectrum and Buffalo appears to be way to one end on this deal.  All I can say is that they made an evaluation they are confident in, and they will be judged on the results.

They probably just feel extremely confident with everything they know about Samuelsson.  They don’t evaluate the risk the same way you do because they have more info.

I personally love the mindset to aggressively lock up “your guys”.  I’m not going to pretend to be fully impartial though, I’ve been saying for months how much I like Samuelsson for this team.

Even still, if you would have asked me, I would have projected a Samuelsson extension for a bit lower of a number.  I had him projected for $3.5M over 6 years I believe.

[mjd1001]

Most teams (except for the very bott

53 minutes ago, Thorny said:

But not anything close to the amount to justify the risk, imo. Likely without the raw point totals, it’s unlikely his deal increases very much. With the amount of cap space we gave, an extra mil or so isn’t much of a concern when the downside of a failed deal at this point (considering its 7 years for a player with a handful of games) is much greater.

Basically they are risking an albatross contract to potentially pinch pennies 

- - - 

On a tangent, I’m certainly more receptive to the idea of KA trying to replicate the procedures that led to Carolina finding value deals than I am with him potentially following their established strategies when it comes to finding goaltending. Hopefully KA realizes it’s importance, something Taro has touched on

Most teams (except for the very bottom dwellers) average their 4th best D-man taking up 3.5-4% of the cap.  Some are in the lower 3% range, some have their 4th D-man taking up 5.0-6% of the cap (Such as Brett Pesce in Carolina, Nick Leddy in St. Louis, Josh Manson in Colorado, or Travis Sanheim in Philly).  If you can have a decent 4th D-man at 3.5%-3.8% of the cap or a good one at 4%-4.5% of the cap, you are in decent shape. Obviously the teams I mentioned above can fit, or deem it appropriate to pay their 4th D-man 5-6% of the cap.

I judge a contract at what it will likely be at the mid-way point. In the 2026-2027 season, he'll be making that $4.2 million, will still be a young 26 years old, and of the few cap projections I have seen (Frank Serevilli usually updates this), the cap might be well over $90 million by then and possibly approacing $100 million a year or two after that.

If they think he is going to be a very good #4 D-man, him getting paid 4.5% of the cap is about right.  If he ends up being the 3rd best D-man on your team...at the midway point of his deal and still at the age of 26 improving...then him getting paid about 4.5% of your cap will be a bargain.

Edited October 12, 2022 by mjd1001

[Buffalonill]

I don't like the deal just reminds me of Zaitsev and Matheson which im scared of.

Hopefully he proves me wrong but they should have waited until he  Actually played 1 full season 

[Zamboni]

20 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Most teams (except for the very bott

Most teams (except for the very bottom dwellers) average their 4th best D-man taking up 3.5-4% of the cap.  Some are in the lower 3% range, some have their 4th D-man taking up 5.0-6% of the cap (Such as Brett Pesce in Carolina, Nick Leddy in St. Louis, Josh Manson in Colorado, or Travis Sanheim in Philly).  If you can have a decent 4th D-man at 3.5%-3.8% of the cap or a good one at 4%-4.5% of the cap, you are in decent shape. Obviously the teams I mentioned above can fit, or deem it appropriate to pay their 4th D-man 5-6% of the cap.

I judge a contract at what it will likely be at the mid-way point. In the 2026-2027 season, he'll be making that $4.2 million, will still be a young 26 years old, and of the few cap projections I have seen (Frank Serevilli usually updates this), the cap might be well over $90 million by then and possibly approacing $100 million a year or two after that.

If they think he is going to be a very good #4 D-man, him getting paid 4.5% of the cap is about right.  If he ends up being the 3rd best D-man on your team...at the midway point of his deal and still at the age of 26 improving...then him getting paid about 4.5% of your cap will be a bargain.

Dude, stop it. Feelings of the contract are more important than your Percenty McMath facts.

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

At the end of the day, they can frame it as Samuelsson being rewarded for “buying in”, but we all know that’s not what is happening. They are identifying him as a piece of their future core and paying him before he proves so, in an effort, I imagine, to find value. 

They wouldn’t pay a player without the talent, all that money, simply for exemplifying their “right way” jargon. The issue in framing the deal as a reward for that is that all it takes is one miss-talent evaluation and we have an albatross of a deal that still sets precedent for what other young players will want since it was doled out solely for buy-in, in perception, and not any kind of performance.

Regardless of what the singular Mike Peca was paid decade ago, the fact remains that it’s points that pay. The amount of value the Sabres realistically stand to gain here is negligible. Samuelsson was not going to realistically earn more than a 30 mil deal anytime soon. 

This deal is about their analytics evaluation, but they are coating it in messaging about “we will take care of you”. 

In the end, it comes to the same thing: if he’s good, the deal is fine. I personally just don’t think the small amount we might very unlikely potentially lose by waiting is worth jumping the gun to get either the value they seek or the vibes they wish to stoke. 

I feel like the idea of locking up a player to a deal before they’ve truly shown you their best is a fairly common and accepted, widely known beneficial strategy. I’m not sure that’s leading to and confusion for anybody.

You are conflating two things - the idea of locking up a player before they’ve established what their prime output is, and locking up a player before committing a full NHL season to record. Perhaps it is a sliding spectrum, but there’s a fair bit of separation between the two players you listed, who both had 2 successful NHL seasons under their belt, and Samuelsson, who had .5 of one. 

As mentioned, the theory makes sense. But there are degrees of intensity here and the Sabres are certainly REALLY pushing the envelope here re: limited data 

Of course he needs to perform for this to be a good deal.  Personally, expect he will.

Also, when looking at all this, while everybody is focused on $'s / points, with a defensive specialist believe the more accurate / useful metric is $'s/ minutes.  He's going to be getting 22-24 minutes regularly.   If he were only getting 16-18 minutes/game, he probably wouldn't be worth the deal he got.  But he's going to be getting a lot more ice time than that & that is huge.

And combine his minutes w/ Dahlin's 24-26 minutes an Power's 22-24 (and hopefully eventually 24-26)  that's locking down 68-74 minutes/ game.  Tack on 3 PP's / game where they'll only have 1 D-man on the ice & the other 3D-men only have to cover 40-46 minutes/ game.  14-16 minutes/game for D4-6 can be covered by guys that are fairly inexpensive in most cases.

[dudacek]

I haven’t run the numbers, but the idea of locking up a second-pairing defenceman from the time he’s 23 until he’s 30 makes as much sense to me as locking up a 1st line forward under the same circumstances. Players matching that description rarely flame out and are always in demand around the league.

The idea of paying $4 million for that player is a no-brainer.

So the only real question from the Sabres side is whether or not Mattias actually is or will be a $4 million player over the duration of that contract.

Do you believe that what we saw last year was real? If so, good contract.

***

This is sorta the Tage Thompson deal rationale all over again. If a Cozens deal is cooking as well, it is clear the Sabres have chosen to go all-in early on talent you believe in as a way to get ahead the salary cap. Sort of the same philosophy they have on roster development.

I wonder what the analytics team has learned from crunching the numbers.

Edited October 13, 2022 by dudacek

[Thorny]

40 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Most teams (except for the very bott

Most teams (except for the very bottom dwellers) average their 4th best D-man taking up 3.5-4% of the cap.  Some are in the lower 3% range, some have their 4th D-man taking up 5.0-6% of the cap (Such as Brett Pesce in Carolina, Nick Leddy in St. Louis, Josh Manson in Colorado, or Travis Sanheim in Philly).  If you can have a decent 4th D-man at 3.5%-3.8% of the cap or a good one at 4%-4.5% of the cap, you are in decent shape. Obviously the teams I mentioned above can fit, or deem it appropriate to pay their 4th D-man 5-6% of the cap.

I judge a contract at what it will likely be at the mid-way point. In the 2026-2027 season, he'll be making that $4.2 million, will still be a young 26 years old, and of the few cap projections I have seen (Frank Serevilli usually updates this), the cap might be well over $90 million by then and possibly approacing $100 million a year or two after that.

If they think he is going to be a very good #4 D-man, him getting paid 4.5% of the cap is about right.  If he ends up being the 3rd best D-man on your team...at the midway point of his deal and still at the age of 26 improving...then him getting paid about 4.5% of your cap will be a bargain.

Maybe there’s confusion - I understand the math for what a 4 dman’s contract might look like. 

I think the contention is betting on Samuelsson being that, after a negligible (to MY eye, as @Curt pointed out) NHL sample size, when they appeared to have plenty of runway in waiting. 

They certainly waited to see more with a significantly better dman in Dahlin. 

[Thorny]

22 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Dude, stop it. Feelings of the contract are more important than your Percenty McMath facts.

Can we talk about how ridiculous this post is? Seriously? 

You’ve made several posts in this thread to the tune of any sort of contention with the deal being a frivolous, agenda’d argument based solely on feelings. You make it seem like people can’t have good faith arguments to the contrary. 

This more than anything deserves the “obnoxious” designation.

[shrader]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

But Johnson is a left shot. That means he other plays his off side or is a 3rd pairing defender.

You so have to start somewhere. If the kid walks into the league thinking he’s too 4 right away, good luck to him. 

[Taro T]

12 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Maybe there’s confusion - I understand the math for what a 4 dman’s contract might look like. 

I think the contention is betting on Samuelsson being that, after a negligible (to MY eye, as @Curt pointed out) NHL sample size, when they appeared to have plenty of runway in waiting. 

They certainly waited to see more with a significantly better dman in Dahlin. 

Considering Dahlin had been trending down can see where Adams & Ras would not be on the same page for what his LT value was a year ago.  Can also see where w/ where the world (& Sabres particularly) was at in regards to the shutdowns, non-hockey related reasons for why they might've been reluctant to give him what he wanted.  Personally, had hoped they'd've given him an 8 year deal, but can see reasons why they couldn't get it done.

In order to get a deal, both sides have to find a # that works for them.  It's clear they see Dahlin as a huge part of the future.  His not getting a LT deal shouldn't IMHO get chalked up to any more than bad timing.  Had THIS been his 4th year, rather than his 5th, he certainly would have a LT deal in pocket.  Again, IMHO.

But their not getting a longer deal w/ Dahlin should NOT be a reason for not locking up Samuelsson & other young guys that have been identified as key pieces moving forward.

Edited October 12, 2022 by Taro T