On Tuesday, Paul Pidutti shared his findings on how UFA contracts age in the NHL. He acknowledged that most of us already know the answer is “poorly” but did an excellent job of filling in some additional blanks on the topic. While I’d recommend giving the article a full read, I’ll parrot back his headers to take a look at the state of the Maple Leafs:
Takeaway 1: The aging curve is sharp and cruel. (This is highlighted by the fact that after age 28 there is already a decline in production and by age 32 it becomes even more substantial.)
Takeaway 2: By Year 4 of a long-term UFA deal, the average player misses nearly half the schedule
Takeaway 3: Expect both significant absences and underperformance
Takeaway 4: Offensive forwards and defensive defensemen were among the better outcomes
Takeaway 5: Physical forwards, players leaving better teammates behind, and those already in decline were among the worst outcomes
A lot of that is what we should expect, but Paul has provided the evidence to back it up. Not only is aging cruel but each additional year of playing a season of hockey takes its toll on a player’s body. It’s not surprising that after getting some financial security players are more willing to take the time to recover as well.
The underperformance is closely linked to the health aspect too but the fact that offensive forwards are one of the stronger options for a longer career shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise. This is survivorship and more than any archetype this is what success in the NHL is measured by. It’s also the players who have more skill to start with and seemingly have a bit more time before their drop off is apparent.
On the other side of that is defensive defencemen who typically have never been relied on for high end skill and a career of knowing sound positional defensive hockey and willingness to still block shots is going to be embraced in a depth capacity.
As for physical forwards, I don’t know what to say here. David Clarkson confirms a lot of those takeaways.
Making this relevant to the Leafs
It seems like there are a few obvious jumping off points here, and if I don’t start with John Tavares you would be surprised, so we’ll go there first. John Tavares’ contract was always going to age poorly and was always a high price to pay up front. That said, he’s outproduced the aging curve both on points and health. As much as no one wants to hear it, Tavares was a free agency success story, or at least a reasonable move. Patrick Marleau obviously wasn’t.
John Tavares has things going for him, like a strong commitment to health and the fact that he doesn’t rely on speed to execute his game. Footspeed is the most noticeable thing to decline and the impact hasn’t been felt there for Tavares.
Now if the Leafs renew Tavares for any length of time the next contract will have a lot more risk even if the contract isn’t nearly as costly. Beyond a season or two it seems unrealistic to consider Tavares as a potential top six player any longer, at least at centre. Players like Vinny Lecavalier, Mike Modano, and Steve Yzerman all hit a wall where the production fell off and either had to adapt to a lesser bottom six or role or if they couldn’t, exit the league. Yzerman had the benefit of his aging curve happening pre-salary cap and the idea of keeping a veteran around didn’t come with as much of a risk, but both Modano and Lecavalier had to face some harsher realities. Tavares might as well or the Leafs will have to make a tough call on their current captain.
The signing of Chris Tanev to a long-term contract also comes into consideration here and perhaps the silver lining is that Paul’s research shows that defensive defencemen do a bit better than the rest. Tanev’s simple but effective game doesn’t rely on speed and like Tavares that will buy him sometime. Tanev’s injury history earlier in his career will always raise the question of health, as does his tendency to aggressively block shots, but the Leafs seem to know what they’ve gotten into here and consciously used term to achieve the cap hit they wanted. If Chris Tanev is on the active roster beyond the 4th year of the contract there is also some hope that a $4.5M depth defenceman won’t be as much of a burden as it is in 2024.
Despite being a shorter term and cheaper contract, Oliver Ekman-Larsson’s will be the bigger concern as he is more reliant on skill to achieve his results and doesn’t have the luxury of taking as many steps back as Tanev will still remaining in the NHL.
Ryan Reaves should also get touched on when taking about aging Leafs as he fits Takeaway #5 to the letter. He’s not a fit with less skilled players and age has played a factor in his effectiveness. From a player perspective having Reaves on the Leafs with term was never a good idea but he’s always come with the asterisk of being a Leaf because of his locker room presence. If the Leafs feel they are getting that and aren’t concerned about the fact Reaves will only play half the schedule, they’re fine.
The Nylander contract
So much of what Paul Pidutti looked at was related to external UFA signings, but the Leafs have a doozy of an internal one with committing to William Nylander for 8 years at $11.5M AAV. Nylander will be 36 when he hits free agency and even if cap skyrockets that entire time the Leafs would be committing over 9% of their salary cap towards Nylander at the end of his deal. That’s a big risk and as a point of reference, Michael Nylander had 33 points in 72 games at the age of 36, his final year in the NHL.
As much as Nylander is clearly the right short term option for the Leafs, there are only so many of this longer term deals that can be handed out to the Leafs stars. Not to be too controversial but Auston Matthews will still probably be worth the risk when his contract comes up at age 30, but some consideration needs to be given about when the Leafs can afford to have Mitch Marner as part of the long term cap commitments as well.
The average age on the Maple Leafs is over 29 years old. With a limited prospect pool and the rarity of trades in the NHL there has been a heavy reliance on unrestricted free agency to address gaps but ultimately this is the Leafs pushing themselves out of a competitive window. There has been a move away from players with upside and repeatable results towards bringing in players that are on established declines and hoping the decline won’t be too steep.
Finding the balance between maintaining a competitive window and looking to the future isn’t easy, but that needs to be what is asked of the Maple Leafs. Moving towards bringing in players who weren’t qualified in restricted free agency is a positive start. Finding more opportunities for youth in the bottom six and not having the opportunity for NHL experience blocked by David Kampf, Calle Jarnkrok, and Ryan Reaves would also be beneficial. Becoming less risk averse to making trades would be another improvement, and at some point moving veteran players for youth and accepting there might be a short term setback that comes with that could also benefit the Leafs.
As for the aging curves and mitigating risk, there’s definitely a bit of survivorship bias that comes with it that needs to be taken with a grain of salt, but there is also something to identifying who these outliers could be and knowing who has the best shot at a longer career. Who does take better care of themselves, been fortunate with injuries, and puts in the work. Who has an adaptable style that gives room for a more graceful decline.
