Contracts for the Big-3

[sickbeast]

For anyone new to this thread, just read this page and you'll get the summary of the last 15 pages

You really can't fault either side for not budging. Toronto is trying to afford this group of young players. Nylander is trying to get paid what he's worth. It's the right of both parties to do whatever the heck they want.

There should be some middle ground though.  I agree with Nik's point in the Dubas thread about how this summer, with respect to contract negotiations for the big three, can't really be seen as a success. 

To me the problem is that there is an insistence on a long term deal.  At this point, if there isn't a fit on a long term deal, then go shorter.  Then it becomes a two or three year problem to solve.

If I were running the team I would want all three of those guys locked up for as long as possible.  I would sign them to the longest contract they would agree to with me.  Players like that don't grow on trees.  All three are elite.  I would cut the payroll in other areas if I had to.  And really you could get a haul of prospects for any of those guys if you were ever forced to trade them.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

For anyone new to this thread, just read this page and you'll get the summary of the last 15 pages

You really can't fault either side for not budging. Toronto is trying to afford this group of young players. Nylander is trying to get paid what he's worth. It's the right of both parties to do whatever the heck they want.

There should be some middle ground though.  I agree with Nik's point in the Dubas thread about how this summer, with respect to contract negotiations for the big three, can't really be seen as a success. 

To me the problem is that there is an insistence on a long term deal.  At this point, if there isn't a fit on a long term deal, then go shorter.  Then it becomes a two or three year problem to solve.

We'd all like to thnk there'd be some middle ground. Or at least hope for it. We also know that it's rarely the case. Both sides are playing a waiting game. It'll come down to which side caves first.

That being said, perhaps one side is willing to compromise a little right now and the other side is holding firm. Can't really be sure.

 

[Kin]

I get the impression that Dubas doesn't like to put things off. Sure he could push the problem to 2 years down the road with a bridge but he wants to get long term cost certainty now

I don't think anyone doubts why Dubas would want what he apparently wants but not having flexibility on either dollars or term is probably the main cause of why there's an impasse.

And I really think that a bridge deal isn't just delaying the problem. With cap growth, contracts coming off the books and potentially new wrinkles post-CBA negotiations it might be a fairly creative way of actually dealing with the problem.

 

[Hobbes]

Reading an interview that Jonas Seigel did with Kyle Dubas that was posted a couple days ago in The Athletic...

I don't want to quote too much of it but of significant interest is (added emphasis is mine):

Seigel: Speaking of some of those younger players. Isn?t it a risk to wait on extensions for Auston and Mitch given their potential this year?

Dubas: ...It?s everybody?s ambition to continue to work towards deals that will keep them here, we hope, for their entire careers. That remains our ambition, what we?re working towards...We have to make it all fit. The players have all pledged that they want to make it all fit. Now it?s just working towards something that is fair...it?s been a good process with all of them, with their families, with their representatives, and we?ll just continue to work towards it during the season...

Seigel: When you make the complexity of it ? and this is something I?ve wondered about ? how do you hit on the exact number that makes sense for the Leafs while projecting long-term? How do you decide X is good?

Dubas: ...We try to project everybody out ? the players, the salary cap, what our team structure is going to be ? and then it?s up to us to continue to work with our group of players and show, ?We can make this work. We absolutely know we can make it work. Here?s how we have to make it work. Here?s what we need everybody to do.? We want all the players to be treated fairly, but we also know that they all want to be here and play together and that was a process we went through before we started the recruitment of John, and the meeting with John. We just have to continue to stay at it, and continue to work with their representatives. Our goal, and theirs, are stated as everyone wants to be here for a long time so eventually we?ll get to that point.

Seigel: So did you communicate with that group before John, that we?re gonna try to do this and doing this means we kinda need to everybody to work together a little bit and think big picture?

Dubas: Our way of approaching was that we wanted the players ? I always view it, especially when there?s a salary cap, every decision that you make impacts all of the players...Our tact was, before we even went and met with John, to be in touch with our own players and say, ?This is something we?re thinking of doing. Don?t answer right now. How do you feel about it?? And they were all unanimously on side with wanting us to push and add him. Some people might not like that we would have those discussions, but I think when you have such a collection of young, talented players, and their pay is only going to continue to go up, you need to be able to have that relationship with them where you can say, ?Here?s what we?re thinking of doing. What do you think about it?? Because as John has said a number of times, ?I didn?t want to come to a team and have them have to subtract two or three guys. Kind of defeats the purpose.? So that was our entire ambition before we approached John was to make sure that everyone internally was on-side and then we rolled from there.

(the entire interview is worth reading)

So assuming Dubas is telling the truth, it would seem that before they even considered making a pitch to Tavares they made sure the big three were all on board with taking a bit of a pay cut to be able to stay together long term. Obviously there can be some disagreement about just how much of one is necessary for each, but if the $8m ask from Nylander is accurate that doesn't seem to be much (any) of a concession.

I can't help but wonder how much of this delay on Nylander's contract is the agent trying to squeeze full value out of the Leafs, and Dubas pushing back with "except Willie agreed to a more team-friendly number back before our Tavares pitch" and neither side is budging.

If that's what is happening I can't help but feel a bit annoyed at Nylander. He absolutely has every right to try to get every dollar he can squeeze out of the team, but in that case he should have made sure the team as aware of that before they went out to make the pitch to John. I really hope that's not the case.

 

[Kin]

(the entire interview is worth reading)

So assuming Dubas is telling the truth, it would seem that before they even considered making a pitch to Tavares they made sure the big three were all on board with taking a bit of a pay cut to be able to stay together long term. Obviously there can be some disagreement about just how much of one is necessary for each, but if the $8m ask from Nylander is accurate that doesn't seem to be much (any) of a concession.

I can't help but wonder how much of this delay on Nylander's contract is the agent trying to squeeze full value out of the Leafs, and Dubas pushing back with "except Willie agreed to a more team-friendly number back before our Tavares pitch" and neither side is budging.

If that's what is happening I can't help but feel a bit annoyed at Nylander. He absolutely has every right to try to get every dollar he can squeeze out of the team, but in that case he should have made sure the team as aware of that before they went out to make the pitch to John. I really hope that's not the case.

I don't really see how that follows. More to the point, it raises a pretty obvious question. If Nylander did agree to some team friendly rate prior to the Leafs pursuing Tavares, why wouldn't you sign Nylander to that rate before pursuing Tavares? Even if Nylander had just agreed to a discount in principle, why not pursue it?

It seems unlikely to pin it to the contingency of Tavares signing because that cap space is still valuable. It seems pretty unlikely that Nylander et. al would agree to a reduced rate in order to land Tavares but not care as much about the competitiveness of the team in his absence.

On a slightly side note, I'm really puzzled by the contrast in ways people seem to be viewing Nylander and the way they're viewing Tavares. I get that Tavares was a UFA and so people are less likely to view him as Leafs' property than Nylander but Tavares at 11 million dollars is not a team friendly contract regardless of what other teams offered him. Tavares could have taken a deal more in line with what Stamkos took from Tampa which is a deal that really helps his team by genuinely representing a discount in terms of player's ability vs. his place in the league's salary structure.

Tavares didn't do that. Tavares, who's never cracked 90 points or won a major trophy, is getting the second highest cap hit in the league. Even if Nylander gets 8 million a year, it seems far less likely that Tavares' performance will be in line with his salary than Nylander's will be with his.

The idea that Tavares took a discount is only true in the sense that he took less than his market rate. That doesn't make it particularly conducive to keeping the team together.

 

[Bill_Berg]

If my company wants to hire some slick sales guy to drive revenue up, I'm going to be on board with that, knowing that if the company does well, I'll get a bigger bonus at the end of the year. But if they come to me and say I need to not get a raise for the next 8 years to afford that sales guy, I'm not sure I'm going to be as on board with that.

Nylander wants the team to win, Tavares helps with that. Nylander wants to make money, I don't really see how Tavares has anything to do with that, outside of a Stanley Cup bonus.

 

[Coco-puffs]

(the entire interview is worth reading)

So assuming Dubas is telling the truth, it would seem that before they even considered making a pitch to Tavares they made sure the big three were all on board with taking a bit of a pay cut to be able to stay together long term. Obviously there can be some disagreement about just how much of one is necessary for each, but if the $8m ask from Nylander is accurate that doesn't seem to be much (any) of a concession.

I can't help but wonder how much of this delay on Nylander's contract is the agent trying to squeeze full value out of the Leafs, and Dubas pushing back with "except Willie agreed to a more team-friendly number back before our Tavares pitch" and neither side is budging.

If that's what is happening I can't help but feel a bit annoyed at Nylander. He absolutely has every right to try to get every dollar he can squeeze out of the team, but in that case he should have made sure the team as aware of that before they went out to make the pitch to John. I really hope that's not the case.

I don't really see how that follows. More to the point, it raises a pretty obvious question. If Nylander did agree to some team friendly rate prior to the Leafs pursuing Tavares, why wouldn't you sign Nylander to that rate before pursuing Tavares? Even if Nylander had just agreed to a discount in principle, why not pursue it?

It seems unlikely to pin it to the contingency of Tavares signing because that cap space is still valuable. It seems pretty unlikely that Nylander et. al would agree to a reduced rate in order to land Tavares but not care as much about the competitiveness of the team in his absence.

On a slightly side note, I'm really puzzled by the contrast in ways people seem to be viewing Nylander and the way they're viewing Tavares. I get that Tavares was a UFA and so people are less likely to view him as Leafs' property than Nylander but Tavares at 11 million dollars is not a team friendly contract regardless of what other teams offered him. Tavares could have taken a deal more in line with what Stamkos took from Tampa which is a deal that really helps his team by genuinely representing a discount in terms of player's ability vs. his place in the league's salary structure.

Tavares didn't do that. Tavares, who's never cracked 90 points or won a major trophy, is getting the second highest cap hit in the league. Even if Nylander gets 8 million a year, it seems far less likely that Tavares' performance will be in line with his salary than Nylander's will be with his.

The idea that Tavares took a discount is only true in the sense that he took less than his market rate. That doesn't make it particularly conducive to keeping the team together.

Man, you really do work for Nylander's agency don't you.

Here's my take:  I don't doubt for a second that Nylander agreed that he'd be willing to take a bit of a haircut on his contract to bring JT on board.  That doesn't mean they agreed to a number for him or how much that haircut would be.

On the haircut, I'd guess Nylander is saying 4M total (or 500k per year) and Leafs are saying 8M total (or 1M per year).

However, the sticking point is agreeing to his contract value BEFORE the haircut.  Nylander camp is probably saying Draisatl and Leaf camp is probably saying Pastrnak, with two "expensive" years tacked on (ie, lets say for simplicity we are only considering 8 yr deal... Pasta's contract plus two years at 10M works out to 7.5M per year pre-haircut). 

Add in the haircuts the team vs Nylander are hoping for and you end up at 8M ask from Nylander- which he would consider team friendly compared to Draisatl- and 6.5M ask from Leafs.

Regarding the comparison to Tavares... yes, I agree as much as the discount that Tavares took to come to the Leafs compared to his other offers is nice, it doesn't make it team friendly. 

In the same vien... 8M ask from Nylander woudn't be team friendly IMO, and since he's coming from a place with much less leverage, I don't see why we shouldn't expect a number in the middle of those two positions.  ie 8 x 7.25M would probably still be considered a "discount" to some, but it doesn't mean its team friendly either.

Furthermore, if all you look at is points there is no doubt that Nylander will have an easier time "living up to his contract" vs Tavares.  But that ignores a few factors- its typically much harder to live up to a UFA contract than it is to a RFA contract.  And that is why I doubt the Leafs will dip into the UFA market very much moving forward.  And there are things that Tavares brings to the table that aren't measured in points and that factors into their value, as much as the spreadsheet types prefer to ignore them when assessing if the player lived up to his contract.

 

[Kin]

In the same vien... 8M ask from Nylander woudn't be team friendly IMO, and since he's coming from a place with much less leverage, I don't see why we shouldn't expect a number in the middle of those two positions.

I don't think any player, Tavares or Nylander or elsewise, has an obligation to sign a team friendly contract.

My point isn't that Nylander is being team friendly, it's that both guys are looking to sign market rate deals but one is being called a greedy so and so and the other is a few pigeon-befriendings away from canonization.

And there are things that Tavares brings to the table that aren't measured in points and that factors into their value, as much as the spreadsheet types prefer to ignore them when assessing if the player lived up to his contract.

Whether or not this is true about Tavares, I don't think it's necessarily untrue about Nylander. Or, if it is, it will continue to be untrue over the 8 years of the deal. I think Nylander has potential for growth in all facets of the game, spreadsheet entries and beyond.

 

[Coco-puffs]

In the same vien... 8M ask from Nylander woudn't be team friendly IMO, and since he's coming from a place with much less leverage, I don't see why we shouldn't expect a number in the middle of those two positions.

I don't think any player, Tavares or Nylander or elsewise, has an obligation to sign a team friendly contract.

My point isn't that Nylander is being team friendly, it's that both guys are looking to sign market rate deals but one is being called a greedy so and so and the other is a few pigeon-befriendings away from canonization.

And there are things that Tavares brings to the table that aren't measured in points and that factors into their value, as much as the spreadsheet types prefer to ignore them when assessing if the player lived up to his contract.

Whether or not this is true about Tavares, I don't think it's necessarily untrue about Nylander. Or, if it is, it will continue to be untrue over the 8 years of the deal. I think Nylander has potential for growth in all facets of the game, spreadsheet entries and beyond.

Well, nobody will call Tavares greedy when its well known he was being offered over 14M more (total) from other teams and then he signed with the Leafs.  At the end of the day, the other offers were overpayments and that happens in the UFA market.  I agree his contract isn't "team friendly" in the context of what his value is.  Also, he's under contract and playing tonight.  Hard to call a guy greedy in that case.

As for Nylander, he ISN'T playing tonight because he hasn't agreed to a contract.  So some people will look at his situation and say he is being greedy because they really want him to come in at a team friendly cap hit.  I don't agree with those people and don't like the tweets I see people sending his way because he hasn't signed.  Its despicable actually, but what else do you expect on Twitter really?


Regarding the last quote:  Agree that Nylander has the potential to provide those other aspects-  he hasn't done it yet and typically when you sign a contract its based on your past not your potential.  From that perspective, its way more likely that Nylander "lives up to his contract" because his potential is better than what he's provided in the past.  Thats the nature of UFA vs RFA deals.  And I know you hate that its that way- its been clear in your posts on this topic that you aren't a fan of the way RFA's get the short-end of the stick etc- but that's the world we live in.

 

[Kin]

Well, nobody will call Tavares greedy when its well known he was being offered over 14M more (total) from other teams and then he signed with the Leafs.  At the end of the day, the other offers were overpayments and that happens in the UFA market.  I agree his contract isn't "team friendly" in the context of what his value is.  Also, he's under contract and playing tonight.  Hard to call a guy greedy in that case.

As for Nylander, he ISN'T playing tonight because he hasn't agreed to a contract.  So some people will look at his situation and say he is being greedy because they really want him to come in at a team friendly cap hit.  I don't agree with those people and don't like the tweets I see people sending his way because he hasn't signed.  Its despicable actually, but what else do you expect on Twitter really?

Not much. I do occasionally expect more from people on this board but life is always about tempering expectations.

Regardless, it seems like we agree. Neither guy is being greedy, just looking after their own interests. So, again, I'm a little puzzled by the reaction. Well, no, not puzzled. But I will point out the double standard all the same.

Regarding the last quote:  Agree that Nylander has the potential to provide those other aspects-  he hasn't done it yet and typically when you sign a contract its based on your past not your potential.

I don't agree. We don't know what he may provide to the team in terms of intangible dressing room chemistry stuff and I don't think he's been a one-dimensional player on the ice.

And I know you hate that its that way- its been clear in your posts on this topic that you aren't a fan of the way RFA's get the short-end of the stick etc- but that's the world we live in.

I don't think you need to educate me on the realities of the current CBA, I'm just never going to be of the belief that a bad system justifies itself. If and when a player decides to not agree to constrain himself by it, I'm going to say he's right to do so because he is right. The system sucks, I believe it's bad for the game and for fans and I'm going to applaud anyone challenging it, even if it's only for personal gain.

But more to the point, my own personal feelings here above and beyond what I think is right is that Nylander is a 22 year old kid who's about to make what will probably be the most important financial decision of his life and no matter how much you want the team you arbitrarily root for to win their games, criticizing him for making that decision with his own financial interests at the fore is deeply messed up.

 

[Bender]

Is there a risk that he sits out playing for the Leafs and plays in the interim in Sweden?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

https://twitter.com/jonassiegel/status/1047547402276630529

Not sure bringing up his past with Detroit is relevant in any way since it was pre-cap and the Illich's pretty much printed money, but Shanny double-downs on the idea that they're expecting the big-3 to take less than market value here.

 

[cabber24]

https://twitter.com/jonassiegel/status/1047547402276630529

Not sure bringing up his past with Detroit is relevant in any way since it was pre-cap and the Illich's pretty much printed money, but Shanny double-downs on the idea that they're expecting the big-3 to take less than market value here.

He's on record claiming he personally took less for the betterment of the team. It would be amazing if Nylander bought into the taking less thing and the rest followed. I hope it happens and certainly appreciate the sell Shanahan is doing.

Just picture it. 30 years from now in a Leafs luxury box with Matty, Marns, Tavares, and Reilly. Looking up  at your 5 Stanley cup banners and retired numbers remising about those winning years thanking each other for taking less.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I think a big problem with these negotiations is that there's no guarantee the same principles will apply to Matthews and Marner's talks. And the fact that everybody won't shut up about how expensive those two are going to be probably doesn't help. If Nylander takes one for the team and signs long-term for $6mil how is is going to feel when Marner gets $9-10mil and Matthews $11-12mil next summer?

 

[cabber24]

I think a big problem with these negotiations is that there's no guarantee the same principles will apply to Matthews and Marner's talks. And the fact that everybody won't shut up about how expensive those two are going to be probably doesn't help. If Nylander takes one for the team and signs long-term for $6mil how is is going to feel when Marner gets $9-10mil and Matthews $11-12mil next summer?

They would owe it to Nylander not to do that... right?

 

[Kin]

I think a big problem with these negotiations is that there's no guarantee the same principles will apply to Matthews and Marner's talks. And the fact that everybody won't shut up about how expensive those two are going to be probably doesn't help. If Nylander takes one for the team and signs long-term for $6mil how is is going to feel when Marner gets $9-10mil and Matthews $11-12mil next summer?

They would owe it to Nylander not to do that... right?

No?

 

[Coco-puffs]

I think a big problem with these negotiations is that there's no guarantee the same principles will apply to Matthews and Marner's talks. And the fact that everybody won't shut up about how expensive those two are going to be probably doesn't help. If Nylander takes one for the team and signs long-term for $6mil how is is going to feel when Marner gets $9-10mil and Matthews $11-12mil next summer?

Well, #1 he shouldn't compare himself to Matthews.  He can wonder if Matthews took enough of a discount, but the salary disparity between the two is already justified. 

#2.  If Marner was signing his contract today, there would be very little separating the two of them so if Marner's contract came in at that today, he would have every right to wonder WTF.  However, Marner could play out this season before signing and put up 90 pts this year.  After that, they are no longer comparable at the time of the contract signing.  Again, it is no longer about the actual salary itself, but the perceived discount.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Well, #1 he shouldn't compare himself to Matthews.  He can wonder if Matthews took enough of a discount, but the salary disparity between the two is already justified.

I mean obviously anybody with half a brain knows Matthews is going to get paid a lot more than Nylander... but should he get paid twice as much? If Matthews takes $11-12mil is he really giving the team a break there? I think somewhere between McDavid and Eichel is pretty much where everyone agrees his market value is.

#2.  If Marner was signing his contract today, there would be very little separating the two of them so if Marner's contract came in at that today, he would have every right to wonder WTF.  However, Marner could play out this season before signing and put up 90 pts this year.  After that, they are no longer comparable at the time of the contract signing.  Again, it is no longer about the actual salary itself, but the perceived discount.

How fair is it for Nylander though to get something like $20mil less over the life of a contract than Marner simply because he had to sign his long-term deal a year before Marner's? Can you really not see why that would frustrate him a little bit?

And again, I think I went pretty high on my contract numbers there. If Marner signs for $9.5mil next do you really think he's giving the Leafs any sort of discount there?

 

[Coco-puffs]

And just to clarify:

I hope these guys all take a small discount.  They don't have to if they don't want to and I totally understand the arguments against them doing it based on history of teams:

a)  Trading guys (its a business after all)
b)  Using the saved money on overpriced UFA's

But I still hope they all do it.  In the same vien, I have the same HOPE that the organization treats them as they should be treated after doing such a thing... not using their below market contract as a trade chip and not spending the extra money on players who don't help.

If they don't take a discount, I'm fine with it as well.  I think the team can fit them all in, they'll just have to sacrifice a little bit more around the edges (ie, moving out guys like Hyman/Brown/Kapanen) for ELC players.  I just hope we don't have to do that.

 

[Coco-puffs]

Well, #1 he shouldn't compare himself to Matthews.  He can wonder if Matthews took enough of a discount, but the salary disparity between the two is already justified.

I mean obviously anybody with half a brain knows Matthews is going to get paid a lot more than Nylander... but should he get paid twice as much? If Matthews takes $11-12mil is he really giving the team a break there? I think somewhere between McDavid and Eichel is pretty much where everyone agrees his market value is.

#2.  If Marner was signing his contract today, there would be very little separating the two of them so if Marner's contract came in at that today, he would have every right to wonder WTF.  However, Marner could play out this season before signing and put up 90 pts this year.  After that, they are no longer comparable at the time of the contract signing.  Again, it is no longer about the actual salary itself, but the perceived discount.

How fair is it for Nylander though to get something like $20mil less over the life of a contract than Marner simply because he had to sign his long-term deal a year before Marner's? Can you really not see why that would frustrate him a little bit?

And again, I think I went pretty high on my contract numbers there. If Marner signs for $9.5mil next do you really think he's giving the Leafs any sort of discount there?

Where do I think his Matthews market value is today?  Probably 11.5-12M.  So if he signs for 11M, yes that is the small discount I'd hope for. 

On the Marner having a huge year and getting 20M more over the next 8 because of it:  He may be frustrated by it but that is life.  You have a huge contract year you get paid more.  And yes, its as FAIR as Matthews expecting a larger salary than Nylander today.  Body of work at the time of signing the contract is what matters.

No, even after a 90 pt season 9.5M for Marner is probably not a discount.  If there is one guy I hope to take a discount the most its Marner too.  And the Leafs would have PPG Gaudreau as a contract comparable to say even PPG players don't get 8 figures.