[dom luszczyszyn] Alex Tuch est très bon. Mais est-il assez grand pour justifier un accord de 10 millions de dollars en agence libre ? Une plongée approfondie dans sa valeur actuelle et sa trajectoire dans le cadre d’un accord à long terme.
—
seeldoger47
7 Comments
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7339910/2026/06/08/alex-tuch-nhl-free-agency-contract/?source=user_shared_article&unlocked_article_code=1.olA._TGY.6WWK_t-gMs2P
>Whether a team will pay Tuch $10 million and whether a team should are completely different considerations, though, both of which depend on the team in question.
>The teams that can probably afford to give Tuch that deal are also unlikely to be teams that can extract $10 million of value out of Tuch; they’d be paying him to be a driver when he’s probably more of an elite sidekick. On the other hand, the teams that can extract $10 million of value out of Tuch by slotting him appropriately (Edmonton comes to mind here) probably don’t have the space to fit what would be a luxury deal. Finding the equilibrium between those two thoughts for the perfect fit isn’t easy.
>just because teams can doesn’t mean they should. Talent acquisition is going to become a much bigger priority than cap efficiency in a cap growth era, but it’s the teams strongest on the books that will be able to take advantage of that most. Just because there’s more money to play with doesn’t mean team-building via UFA will suddenly become a sound strategy. If a team is paying Tuch to be its No. 2 forward, it is going to be in trouble.
>The other problem is age. Tuch just turned 30 and hopefully by now you don’t need me to tell you his best years are likely behind him. Anyone who signs Tuch is paying a premium for past performance.
>When people say “don’t worry, the cap is going up,” they often forget “the age curve points down.” And it’s not at the same velocity, not for a player that just turned 30; the age curve usually drops faster than the cap can keep up with. In Tuch’s case, he’s pretty close to a $9 million player right now and it’s an easy sell to overpay him by a million bucks to secure his services for next year. He’s a team’s best chance at acquiring a true top-line difference-maker.
>But in four or five years the math starts changing, and the end probably won’t be pretty. Right now, $10 million is the cost for a strong top-line forward, and at some point over the next seven years that will change to the cost of a strong second-line forward. Tuch’s potential drop to that level — and lower — likely comes much faster than the cap grows.
>Limit Tuch to a four-year deal and it’s all good. Limit Tuch to $9 million and that’s an easy pill to swallow too. But max term and max price is a bit tougher to stomach at what AFP is projecting. (And for those wondering, the total amount of UFA dollars they’re projecting is roughly equal to what I’m projecting for the same players; it’s not the model underselling this year’s UFA crop).
Are the future market values adjusted for projected increases of the salary cap? Looking at this it appears the answer is no but I wanted to ask
tuch seems like a nice guy, but come on. dude is 30 years old. dude isn’t close to being worth 10M a year for 8 more years.
If he were 3-4 years younger, I’d be all for it. His age makes the decision a coin flip for me. I love him and the vibes he brings, but I’m emotionally prepared for him to walk
On a team with no young talent whose desperate for a difference maker? Absolutely makes sense.
Sabres are not that. They have bills coming up that need to be paid.
We have too many exciting young players that are gonna need to get paid. Good luck Tuch, appreciate the many memorable games. The guy does randomly disappear once and a while which you cannot do if you make what he’s looking to make
9.5 x 6 is something I could get behind but someone is gonna give him 10 x 7 and regret it in 3 years