Contracts for the Big-3
- Thread starter Coco-puffs
- Start date
- Status
Kucherov, being Russian , has a real trump card. Actually he has two as he is his team's best forward. And he signed a deal he has earned
I suspect if Nylander was willing to sign the one he gas earned it would already be done. If reports are correct Nylander is asking for a contract far above what he has earned. No idea how you could think they are the same??
I suspect if Nylander was willing to sign the one he gas earned it would already be done. If reports are correct Nylander is asking for a contract far above what he has earned. No idea how you could think they are the same??
Nik the Trik said:
Kin
New member
Bates said:
Oh I see. So when you said over and over and over and over that RFA's had no leverage what you actually meant was that their leverage is actually dependant on things like their other options, how good they are, how amenable their teams would be to losing them and things of that nature.
Huh, I guess we did agree after all.
No they still don't have any leverage, if the team isn't willing to meet their demand there is little they can do about it. It just so happens that sometimes teams agree on their worth and pay them, sometimes teams are wrong and pay them too much, and sometimes teams don't agree and won't pay too much as the Leafs are currently holding strong on. I support Dubas
Nik the Trik said:
Kin
New member
Bates said:
Now that you've agreed with me about leverage, we can get back to the heart of the matter. All this really is is a dispute about how much Nylander is worth in the place of the established NHL salary structure.
As I said to Zee, I think Nylander is in a pretty reasonable place. If you take the 8 million as a negotiating position rather than some sort of hard and fast indisputable truth about what he wants then I think he's very much in a reasonable place.
Which of course brings me back to where I was a while ago. I really don't think the two sides are that far apart and because signing Nylander is ultimately beneficial to both parties, I remain very confident that a deal will get done before too long.
No agreement on leverage. The Leafs can play this season without signing Nylander. Nylander will make little or nothing this season unless he signs with the Leafs. It's obvious to everyone on earth but you that the Leafs have the leverage in this case. All other players in the NHL are irrelevant in this discussion.
Nik the Trik said:
Kin
New member
Anyways, with one issue amicably resolved we can get back to simply talking about Nylander's place in the salary structure.
But even there I think you're misrepresenting things. So long as you dismiss every comparable you don't like as being a result of teams being stupid or lacking in confidence or whatever you're going to paint a very different picture of the salary structure than the one that actually exists and the Leafs have to negotiate against.
Take Logan Couture as an example. Prior to signing his second deal his career high in points was 65. He signed at 9% of the cap. A comparable Nylander deal would be 7.15 per. I don't think the Sharks are a badly run team. Or, again, take Tomas Hertl. He got 5.625 despite never hitting 50 points. That kind of hurts a 6m argument for Nylander.
The NHL salary landscape is pretty complex. Thankfully, I think this one will get settled in a way that comfortably fits into it.
But even there I think you're misrepresenting things. So long as you dismiss every comparable you don't like as being a result of teams being stupid or lacking in confidence or whatever you're going to paint a very different picture of the salary structure than the one that actually exists and the Leafs have to negotiate against.
Take Logan Couture as an example. Prior to signing his second deal his career high in points was 65. He signed at 9% of the cap. A comparable Nylander deal would be 7.15 per. I don't think the Sharks are a badly run team. Or, again, take Tomas Hertl. He got 5.625 despite never hitting 50 points. That kind of hurts a 6m argument for Nylander.
The NHL salary landscape is pretty complex. Thankfully, I think this one will get settled in a way that comfortably fits into it.
Kin
New member
Also, I really think we should broaden the discussion re: term. It really wouldn't surprise me if Dubas was trying to get Nylander to sign a longer term deal than he wanted despite having a general agreement on the parameters of salary.
I think this is more important than it might seem at first glance as it can be a case of contradictory impulses. The team can say they think Nylander has only "earned" 6 or 6.5 or whatever it is but if they say that at the same time as wanting him to sign for the maximum allowable length is does kind of betray that they know they're getting him at below market value. Those are tricky waters to navigate.
I think this is more important than it might seem at first glance as it can be a case of contradictory impulses. The team can say they think Nylander has only "earned" 6 or 6.5 or whatever it is but if they say that at the same time as wanting him to sign for the maximum allowable length is does kind of betray that they know they're getting him at below market value. Those are tricky waters to navigate.
azzurri63
Active member
What gets me in all of this is Dubas' comments a while back about discussing the acquisition of Tavares with the big 3 prior to signing John. Sounded like Tavares signed for less in TO and that keeping the club intact would take a similar approach from the big 3. If that was the case you think we wouldn't be in this situation the Leafs are in now. Believe what you want as far as what Nylander's group is asking but were Dubas' comments just hogwash? If Tavares signed for less in TO cause 1) the direction the team is headed, 2) the young talented group we have and 3) the chances of hoisting a cup then the big 3 should be the same. Dubas was right when he said it wouldn't be fair to John to trade away one of the big 3. If Nylander can't be signed for 6.5 per year or less then I say send him off. I can see the team having the same issues with M & M as well. If all this was talked about and Dubas assuring Leaf fans he was going to be able to sign all 3 then why are we a day or two from training camp and Nylander isn't signed. Personally I think if Nylander is playing hardball let him sit and if worse comes to worse trade him for some D that everyone says we are lacking. I think we have some good young forwards to fill the spots and if Willy doesn't want to co-operate then say goodbye.
It seems clear that both parties have ?some? leverage. If the players had none then they all sign for the minimum salary; if the teams had none, the players would sign for the max available.
In this case, I?d say the leafs have a little more than usual because they have a lot of great forwards, seem like a desirable place for willie to play, and wont actually miss him that much due to their RW depth. Most analyses Ive sen suggest ~7 is fair for a long term deal, based on comparables. I expect slightly less.
In this case, I?d say the leafs have a little more than usual because they have a lot of great forwards, seem like a desirable place for willie to play, and wont actually miss him that much due to their RW depth. Most analyses Ive sen suggest ~7 is fair for a long term deal, based on comparables. I expect slightly less.
Kin
New member
princedpw said:
I agree with that more or less. The one thing I'd say is kind of a mitigating factor in Nylander's favour in terms of the push and pull is the situation in Toronto. Both with regards to what I'm sure is an internal feeling that they're a contender and the increased media scrutiny.
But yeah. I'm still in the 6.5-7.5 camp.
azzurri63
Active member
Nik the Trik said:
Dubas made the comment which to me sounded like he was going to be able to sign the 3 and my belief to a slight team discount. That to keep the core together for years to come. If he's not able to sign him for 6.5 per which is what I feel Nylander should be in line for compared to others ie Pastarnak, Ehlers etc. If they can't sign him for that then I say let him sit or trade him for some D.
Zee
Active member
herman said:
Stolen cap hit percentages from Reddit so don't yell at me if they're not 100% correct. But these are the percentages of cap hits for *similar* Nylander players when they signed their deals and what that would translate to Nylander today under the current $79.5M cap
Draisaitl 11.33% ($9M for Nylander)
Gaudreau 10.27% ($8.16M for Nylander)
Pastrnak 9.25% ($7.35M for Nylander)
MacKinnon 8.89% ($7.06M for Nylander)
Forsberg 8.63% ($6.86M for Nylander)
Ehlers 8% ($6.36M for Nylander)
Benn 8.16% ($6.48M for Nylander)
Obviously from this list I'm sure Nylander and his agent would want to be at the very top although $9M is ridiculous, but the bottom end of $6.36 if probably where the Leafs want the number to be. I say 8.5% of the cap should be fair on both sides so $6.75M
Coco-puffs
New member
Zee said:
I'm with Nik on this one. 6.9M per. Then Mitch says "NICE. I'll have that too"
Frank E
Active member
Nik the Trik said:
We're getting caught up in hypotheticals here. Here's where I'm at...
1. Negotiations, in general, move along better when both parties feel that negotiations are being carried out in good faith, and that each side is being reasonable. Unreasonable asks usually damage the good faith.
2. An ask is reasonable if you can provide convincing rationale/evidence. But just going in high, or low, for no other reason than to try and drive the price up or down usually gets dismissed pretty quickly if there isn't any evidence/rationale to support a position. This is to your point, in one hypothetical, that Nylander should go in at $8m so that he can settle at $7ish...unless he has reasons to support his $8, it's not likely to be taken seriously.
3. You suggest that going in at $8 wouldn't get you $8 in a negotiation. This is false. Often times, negotiations are about justifying your position vs. the other party's ability to justify theirs. And if you're a savvy negotiator, it's not just about picking numbers, you convince the other party of the value of your offer/position.
4. I don't have any opinion on how Nylander's team is negotiating this deal, because I don't know anything about the circumstances. I was pretty clear on that.
- Status