HNIC: Nylander officially on the trade block

[GioforPM]

I bet the issue is term, if they are that close in dollars. It's a decent, if a little high, bridge deal. I bet it's way too low in Nylander's eyes for a longer term.

[stemit14]

They were discussing on Fan960 today how broken the system of entry level contracts has become because the young guys are getting such huge contracts so early on. It will probably be a sticking point for the next CBA.

I wonder if the NHL will look to increase the length of entry-level contracts to 5 years. The players could counter with wanting higher maximum salaries for the entry level deals and/or higher bonuses if these contracts are longer.

It would be a way for teams to cost-control players for longer. Careers are getting shorter in the NHL it seems as it’s becoming harder for lots of guys over the age of 30 to get a contract. The owners will want to extend the cost control of their draft picks into their 5th year. Plus, players by that age will have hopefully developed into what they should be for the rest of their career (usually)... top six forward, bottom six forward, top pairing defenseman, etc.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GioforPM]

You have to wonder if the Leafs would have been better off with letting Tavares go to SJ and signing Nylander long term. Tavares has 30 points - a lot, but second to Marner (and Matthews would be ahead but for his injury). How many would Nylander have had? If you have no Tavares, but sign Nylander for the max term at $7 to 7.5 you then have some more money for Matthews/Marner/Kapanen, etc.

[Jiggy]

Originally Posted by stemit14

They were discussing on Fan960 today how broken the system of entry level contracts has become because the young guys are getting such huge contracts so early on. It will probably be a sticking point for the next CBA.

I wonder if the NHL will look to increase the length of entry-level contracts to 5 years. The players could counter with wanting higher maximum salaries for the entry level deals and/or higher bonuses if these contracts are longer.

It would be a way for teams to cost-control players for longer. Careers are getting shorter in the NHL it seems as it’s becoming harder for lots of guys over the age of 30 to get a contract. The owners will want to extend the cost control of their draft picks into their 5th year. Plus, players by that age will have hopefully developed into what they should be for the rest of their career (usually)... top six forward, bottom six forward, top pairing defenseman, etc.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't mind the system the way it is. Teams are paying their young guys when they bring the most value in their career.

[GioforPM]

The union will have to decide if their priority is maximizing contracts for players in their 20s, or extending contract life for players in their 30s.

I do know they will fight extending the ELC term. I bet they will look to close the slide rules.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by stemit14

They were discussing on Fan960 today how broken the system of entry level contracts has become because the young guys are getting such huge contracts so early on. It will probably be a sticking point for the next CBA.

I wonder if the NHL will look to increase the length of entry-level contracts to 5 years. The players could counter with wanting higher maximum salaries for the entry level deals and/or higher bonuses if these contracts are longer.

It would be a way for teams to cost-control players for longer. Careers are getting shorter in the NHL it seems as it’s becoming harder for lots of guys over the age of 30 to get a contract. The owners will want to extend the cost control of their draft picks into their 5th year. Plus, players by that age will have hopefully developed into what they should be for the rest of their career (usually)... top six forward, bottom six forward, top pairing defenseman, etc.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the way it is right now is the way it should be. Sure teams are paying a lot on ELC's but they are also getting security of holding on to the player for their prime years. The real problem is that NHL GM's can't get UFA spending under control as teams aren't getting in cap trouble because of ELC's, they are getting into cap trouble because of bad UFA contracts. I think that what they should really do is reduce the amount of years a UFA can get to 5 years from seven as a starting point. No team really wants to give a 30 year old player a 7 year deal but they have to if they want that player because if they don't another dummy desperate to keep his job will. Reduce it to 5 years and teams will be saved from themselves and guys like Hossa and Zetterberg can have dignified retirements rather than having to retire to questionable circumstances.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I think the way it is right now is the way it should be. Sure teams are paying a lot on ELC's but they are also getting security of holding on to the player for their prime years. The real problem is that NHL GM's can't get UFA spending under control as teams aren't getting in cap trouble because of ELC's, they are getting into cap trouble because of bad UFA contracts. I think that what they should really do is reduce the amount of years a UFA can get to 5 years from seven as a starting point. No team really wants to give a 30 year old player a 7 year deal but they have to if they want that player because if they don't another dummy desperate to keep his job will. Reduce it to 5 years and teams will be saved from themselves and guys like Hossa and Zetterberg can have dignified retirements rather than having to retire to questionable circumstances.

Really talented GMs can do both:

[Erick Estrada]

Really though even the good ones get stung in free agency. Treliving got burned with Brouwer and I'm not so sure how good he's feeling about the Neal contract. UFA is generally bad for business but teams with holes get so desperate for the quick fix that it drives the money and terms high for players on the decline of their career. The NFL does it right here as guys in their 30's get maybe one or two years guaranteed max and have to go contract to contract in their declining years.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by stemit14

They were discussing on Fan960 today how broken the system of entry level contracts has become because the young guys are getting such huge contracts so early on. It will probably be a sticking point for the next CBA.

The only issue is the lack of bridge contracts. But Ovechkin's second contract was 16.82% of the cap. McDavid's second contract was 16.67% of the cap.

Kane and Toew's 5 year second contract's would be worth the equivalent of 8.8M today.

Even when Kessel held out against Boston after his 60 point season he got the equivalent of a 5 year 7.6M contract.

There's really not all that much difference, except that the cap has raised. And that term limits and other rules have stopped artificially low cap hits.

[Dion]

Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman shared his opinion on the matter during an appearance on Tim and Sid.

“The one thing I do believe, no matter what happens, is that this will be William Nylander’s final season as a Toronto Maple Leaf,” Friedman said. “Whether he signs or whether he doesn’t sign, this is going to be it. And even if he does sign, I think Toronto trades him by the draft at the latest.

“One way or the other, I think this is over. I would be surprised if he plays for Toronto next season.”

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...beyond-season/

[bubbsy]

Did the Draisaitl and eichel 2nd contract change the whole model. Mcdavid's 2nd contract is one thing, but it's these 2nd tier guys (as per what they have proven till the end of their elc) that has shifted every 2nd contract.

I think ufa contracts will dwindle to non-issues (max 3 year deals for guys hitting or past 30) and the rfa contracts will be the biggest part of the next cba debate.

It's becoming a 'young mans game' and i think the economics of the league will soon catch up.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Toews and Kane's twin second contracts signed in 2009, when Toews and Kane were coming off career high 70 point seasons were 11% of the cap. They had yet to win the Stanley Cup and were not in the top 40 in scoring the previous year.

Draisaitl signed his 11% contract after finishing 8th in the NHL scoring. There's really not been much of a model broken, the cap has gone up significantly and as such contracts will go up significantly, just for a bit GM's were justifying the lower cap hits on Toews, Kane and the artificially low cap-hits because they were 47 year long. Hard to negotiate for more when they were the better players.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

Did the Draisaitl and eichel 2nd contract change the whole model. Mcdavid's 2nd contract is one thing, but it's these 2nd tier guys (as per what they have proven till the end of their elc) that has shifted every 2nd contract.

I think ufa contracts will dwindle to non-issues (max 3 year deals for guys hitting or past 30) and the rfa contracts will be the biggest part of the next cba debate.

It's becoming a 'young mans game' and i think the economics of the league will soon catch up.

Eichel > Draisaitl
One can carry a line and one cant.

I do think that draisaitls contract ruined the league though. Damn Oilers

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Toews and Kane's twin second contracts signed in 2009, when Toews and Kane were coming off career high 70 point seasons were 11% of the cap. They had yet to win the Stanley Cup and were not in the top 40 in scoring the previous year.

Draisaitl signed his 11% contract after finishing 8th in the NHL scoring. There's really not been much of a model broken, the cap has gone up significantly and as such contracts will go up significantly, just for a bit GM's were justifying the lower cap hits on Toews, Kane and the artificially low cap-hits because they were 47 year long. Hard to negotiate for more when they were the better players.

Draisaitl isn't (wasn't) the impact player that Kane and Toews were.

[Oling_Roachinen]

There's ample evidence of 'second-tier' stars getting 10%+ of the cap as RFAs in their second contract, if it wasn't a bridge deal.

Backstrom, Vanek, Kane, Toews (at the time), Getzlaf, Perry. Phaneuf's second contract was 13% of the cap, today that second contract would be worth over 10M.

The Oiler's may have ruined the salary structure, but that was with Vanek and Penner offersheets. Draisaitl should have been expected.

[PaperBagger'14]

If they try and extend ELCs or cap pay prior to UFA status, I'll be willing to bet more players will take contracts that go until their first available UFA year, which in turn would be detrimental to their teams. If you limit earning potential to UFA status, it would seem obvious more players would chase the dollar from the highest bidder and result in fewer long term franchise players.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Draisaitl isn't (wasn't) the impact player that Kane and Toews were.

Kane and Toews weren't the impact players that Kane and Toews would become. They had two complete seasons under their belts at the time of the contract.

Toews had three votes for the Selke in the 2008-2009 season, which is practically nothing.

Toews didn't even get a vote for the end of year All-Star team. Kane had two votes for the All-Star team. So did Devon Setuguchi. They finished 18th overall for right wingers alone.

He finished behind:
1 Jarome Iginla
2 Marian Hossa
3 Martin St. Louis
4 Martin Havlat
5 Corey Perry
6 Shane Doan
7 Brad Boyes
8 Rick Nash
9 Daniel Alfredsson
10 Ryan Getzlaf
10 Alex Ovechkin
10 Zach Parise
13 Alexander Semin
13 Phil Kessel
13 Henrik Zetterberg
13 Jamie Langenbrunner
13 David Backes

What they became and what they were at the signing of their contracts were significantly different. Of course the expectation was great, but so is Draisaitl's.

Had they even waited until after that season to sign it would be a different story, but Kane was not expected to be a Art Ross and Hart Winner when he signed his second contract. At least not anymore than someone like Draisaitl was.

[David Struch]

Originally Posted by getbak

Yes, Kessel was traded for 2 firsts and a second.

It was a little more than the compensation Boston would have received had Toronto given him the same contract as an RFA offer sheet, but it ensured that Boston wouldn't have the option to match the offer. It also ensured that the Leafs wouldn't need to drastically increase the offer sheet (and compensation) to disincentivize the Bruins from matching an offer sheet.

Based on what Nylander is rumoured to be asking for, a similar trade deal would likely be a first and 2 seconds or possibly 2 firsts.

A lot of eyes on this situation, this will be precedent setting for dozens of upcoming RFA's this season.

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/f...ts/all/all/rfa

[bluejays]

With all this commotion regarding Nylander, I'm sure they'll try and get a 1st from him next year, as well, I'm sure Kapanen will be gone within a year. Kapanen has looked good this year, but is doing well moreso because of how bad his division is. The Leafs, if smart, will keep playing him and will deal him to a new team before he cashes in.

[TheAlpineOracle]

I think it’s more than money with Nylander. I think he wants away from Babcock. Babcock seemed to treat him very poorly and seemed to be holding him back at the start. I told my buddy who is a huge Leafs fan this summer I don’t think Nylander would be around much longer for the Leafs. At the time I was hoping we’d move Hamilton to acquire him.

Nylander comes from a hockey family and comes from money. He ain’t going to take Babcock’s BS head games.