Contracts for the Big-3

[Kin]

Other teams get players to all "fall in" on a team salary structure, why should the Leafs be any different?

A few things there:

1. I think Nylander on a long term deal at 7-8 million would fall in to a team salary structure. Marner will probably get roughly the same and Matthews will get more. So if the 4 big deals the Leafs have go:

Matthews: 12 per
Tavares: 11 per
Marner: 8 per
Nylander: 7.5 per

How is that not a team structure?

2. On the other hand a lot of pretty successful teams also paid their top young players pretty fair rates. When Doughty got his second contract it was at 14% of the cap. Ovechkin and Backstrom got 16 and 11% respectively. The Toews and Kane second deals that everyone remembers as being super team friendly were still 11% of the cap. Malkin and Crosby got 15 and 17 percent respectively. 

 

[Zee]

Other teams get players to all "fall in" on a team salary structure, why should the Leafs be any different?

A few things there:

1. I think Nylander on a long term deal at 7-8 million would fall in to a team salary structure. Marner will probably get roughly the same and Matthews will get more. So if the 4 big deals the Leafs have go:

Matthews: 12 per
Tavares: 11 per
Marner: 8 per
Nylander: 7.5 per

How is that not a team structure?

2. On the other hand a lot of pretty successful teams also paid their top young players pretty fair rates. When Doughty got his second contract it was at 14% of the cap. Ovechkin and Backstrom got 16 and 11% respectively. The Toews and Kane second deals that everyone remembers as being super team friendly were still 11% of the cap. Malkin and Crosby got 15 and 17 percent respectively.

It's a question of how many guys are in that upper echelon of salary. Nylander at under 8 is probably doable but over 8 becomes problematic especially since Marner could have a big year and then ask for even more than that next year.

So say Nylander gets 8, Marner then asks for 9+, you're suddenly extremely top heavy. I'm sure the Leafs have done multiple scenarios with cap hits and cap projections and know exactly what they need to make it work. Considering the deal isn't done yet, it means to me that Nylander's camp is over whatever number Dubas and company have figured out.

 

[Kin]

Sorry but one more comparison to a mystery player just because I think it's especially illustrative.

The mystery player signed his 2nd deal coming off two seasons where he scored 121 points in 161 games. Nylander, to refresh everyone's memory, is coming off 122 points in 163 games. So virtually identical numbers.

That said, our mystery player did it while playing almost 3000 minutes in total ice time and more than 600 minutes of PP ice time. Nylander got about 2600 minutes of ice time and only 350 or so PP minutes.

Our mystery player signed a six year second deal that was frequently cited as one of the most team friendly second contracts ever signed. If Nylander signed a contract for a similar % of the cap it would be 6.8 million per.

Anyone want to take a guess at our mystery player?

 

[herman]

Sorry but one more comparison to a mystery player just because I think it's especially illustrative.

The mystery player signed his 2nd deal coming off two seasons where he scored 121 points in 161 games. Nylander, to refresh everyone's memory, is coming off 122 points in 163 games. So virtually identical numbers.

That said, our mystery player did it while playing almost 3000 minutes in total ice time and more than 600 minutes of PP ice time. Nylander got about 2600 minutes of ice time and only 350 or so PP minutes.

Our mystery player signed a six year second deal that was frequently cited as one of the most team friendly second contracts ever signed. If Nylander signed a contract for a similar % of the cap it would be 6.8 million per.

Anyone want to take a guess at our mystery player?

 

[Phileas Fogg]

Anyone want to take a guess at our mystery player?

1. Your mystery player played with linemates that were... let's just say a little less impressive than Matthews.
2. All your comparisons are based on point totals. Is there no other relevant metrics that make any difference? I can't imagine that Bergeron, for example, is valued simply for his point output.
3. I'd be just fine with Nylander at 6.8M. On what contract line do I forge his name?

 

[Kin]

1. Your mystery player played with linemates that were... let's just say a little less impressive than Matthews.

Yes. Not much less impressive than Hyman but it's a fair point. That said, almost twice as much PP time would seem to go a ways to balancing that. Anyways my point isn't necessarily that Nylander is as good as Tavares, just that Nylander is really freakin' good and even the super team friendly comparisons would have Nylander being paid more than what some people think should be the max they offer. 

2. All your comparisons are based on point totals. Is there no other relevant metrics that make any difference? I can't imagine that Bergeron, for example, is valued simply for his point output.

Of the guys I've compared Nylander to I don't think there are any Bergerons there. Unless I've missed something I don't think any of them had regular PK time or possession numbers that wildly outpaced Nylander. None of them were face-off wizards(Nylander actually compares really favourably there). We can debate line combinations, sure, but most of the guys I've mentioned did pretty well there(Hey Pastrnak) and almost all of them had significant edges in ice time.

3. I'd be just fine with Nylander at 6.8M. On what contract line do I forge his name?

I think there's a lot of Leafs fans who'd be happy with the team signing deals that only read as being super team-friendly. The extent to which that's a reasonable expectation is less certain.

 

[hockeyfan1]

As was referenced here by the link posted to The article by The Athletic on RFAs/Nylander situation, an RFA does not have leeway in contract negotiations which in part explains why many of the RFAs mentioned were "underpaid".  The longer it sits out, the better for the team and not the player.

It looks more like the Nylander situation will drag out way into the month going into next -- usually the case with other holdout RFAs as examples.

This is probably not lost on Nylander:

RFAs in their young 20s who produced around a point per game in their contract year have historically earned at least 10 per cent of the salary cap when they sign a long-term extension, with most forwards earning closer to 11 per cent.

But...

Over the past decade, every forward who scored at a 0.90 point-per-game rate in their contract year earned at least 10 per cent of the salary cap at the time of their long-term extension. The only two exceptions are Gaudreau and Pastrnak.

This works to the Leafs' advantage:

Forwards who score in the 0.60 points-per-game range tend to be worth around 6.5 per cent of the salary cap on average. With the salary cap rising to $73-million in 2016-17, that?s roughly $4.7-million, which is right around what Nazem Kadri signed for that offseason (a contract that has turned into quite the sweetheart deal for Toronto.

Many players of Nylander's age do not peak until a few years later which means the best is yet to come from Nylander in the point production category.

My conclusion:
$6.95-7.5M/6/7yrs with a ch @ 8.5% is not unreasonable.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

Just as an aside, another of the marquee RFA's in the same sort of boat as Nylander just signed a 2-year bridge deal.

Josh Morrissey 2 x $3.15

 

[Kin]

It's a question of how many guys are in that upper echelon of salary. Nylander at under 8 is probably doable but over 8 becomes problematic especially since Marner could have a big year and then ask for even more than that next year.

Ok, but that seems like a very different issue. First you were talking about guys working in a team salary structure, not just the perils of a team being relatively top heavy in their cap distribution.

Having four guys like Marner, Nylander, Matthews and Tavares was always going to present challenges from a cap management perspective. I don't think it's fair to take Dubas' decision to build the team that way as a reason to expect the guys on the team to just automatically decide that means they should want to sacrifice their own earnings in that aim and I'm not sure other teams have sold their guys on that concept.

So say Nylander gets 8, Marner then asks for 9+, you're suddenly extremely top heavy.

Sure, but I don't know if it's unworkable. If the four guys at the top, once extensions are signed, work out to 40 million in total(8 for Nylander, 9 for Marner, 11 for Tavares, 12 for Matthews) then if the cap is at 82 million next year then those 4 would represent 48.7% of the team's cap. By comparison, when Pittsburgh won the cup in 2016 their top four of Malkin, Crosby, Letang and Kessel were 45.5% of the cap.

So I think provided a certain amount of cap growth it wouldn't be too long until the Leafs big four, even at 10 million average cap hit, represented a top-heaviness that's proven successful in the past. 4 or 5 years out it might even look very reasonable.

 

[Zee]

It's a question of how many guys are in that upper echelon of salary. Nylander at under 8 is probably doable but over 8 becomes problematic especially since Marner could have a big year and then ask for even more than that next year.

Ok, but that seems like a very different issue. First you were talking about guys working in a team salary structure, not just the perils of a team being relatively top heavy in their cap distribution.

Having four guys like Marner, Nylander, Matthews and Tavares was always going to present challenges from a cap management perspective. I don't think it's fair to take Dubas' decision to build the team that way as a reason to expect the guys on the team to just automatically decide that means they should want to sacrifice their own earnings in that aim and I'm not sure other teams have sold their guys on that concept.

So say Nylander gets 8, Marner then asks for 9+, you're suddenly extremely top heavy.

Sure, but I don't know if it's unworkable. If the four guys at the top, once extensions are signed, work out to 40 million in total(8 for Nylander, 9 for Marner, 11 for Tavares, 12 for Matthews) then if the cap is at 82 million next year then those 4 would represent 48.7% of the team's cap. By comparison, when Pittsburgh won the cup in 2016 their top four of Malkin, Crosby, Letang and Kessel were 45.5% of the cap.

So I think provided a certain amount of cap growth it wouldn't be too long until the Leafs big four, even at 10 million average cap hit, represented a top-heaviness that's proven successful in the past. 4 or 5 years out it might even look very reasonable.

I mean cause it worked for the Pens with 4 guys making that % doesn't mean it has to be emulated, you'd like to give yourself cap flexibility going forward as much as you can. What if, as you suggest the top 4 combine for $40M and the cap for next season stays flat and is only $80M? That's 50% of the cap on 4 players. You can't assume the cap will just go up a certain amount.

 

[Kin]

I mean cause it worked for the Pens with 4 guys making that % doesn't mean it has to be emulated, you'd like to give yourself cap flexibility going forward as much as you can.

It certainly doesn't have to be emulated but the decision to emulate in a practical sense isn't being made by Nylander or Marner or Matthews wanting to get paid a reasonable market rate, the decision to emulate that structure was effectively made by Dubas when he went out and gave one of the richest contracts in the league to Tavares while knowing what the team already had and who he had to sign.

What if, as you suggest the top 4 combine for $40M and the cap for next season stays flat and is only $80M? That's 50% of the cap on 4 players. You can't assume the cap will just go up a certain amount.

I feel like it's a pretty reasonable assumption given that the cap has increased in just about every single year of its existence but even if it doesn't then, yeah, you're left with a fairly top heavy salary structure(although I still don't think it's unworkable) but, again, that was always the risk in bringing in Tavares.

Dubas has made the choice to have 4 highly paid forwards on the roster. I think it's an interesting and exciting gamble on his part but I don't think the guys on the roster have an obligation to make his job easy for him.

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

Good players are hard to find, as we have witnessed being Leaf fans.  I don't think nickel and diming your star, elite players is the right way to do it.  Pay your top players, fill in the rest of the roster with cheap talent on entry level deals, find some fill in cheap free agents, keep drafting well and keeping your picks and the pipeline stocked. 

Again, not sure what Nylander is asking for, and not sure what the Leafs are offering.  Being reasonable fans most of us wouldn't flinch if Nylander was signed for $8x8.  Very curious to know how big the divide is, and who is being unreasonable. 

 

[rdowdall]

Good players are hard to find, as we have witnessed being Leaf fans.  I don't think nickel and diming your star, elite players is the right way to do it.  Pay your top players, fill in the rest of the roster with cheap talent on entry level deals, find some fill in cheap free agents, keep drafting well and keeping your picks and the pipeline stocked. 

Again, not sure what Nylander is asking for, and not sure what the Leafs are offering.  Being reasonable fans most of us wouldn't flinch if Nylander was signed for $8x8.  Very curious to know how big the divide is, and who is being unreasonable.

I don't think it necessarily has to be a case of someone being unreasonable.  There are a lot of moving parts to this deal in the sense that it has an impact on what happens with Marner and Matthews, and it is hard to predict just what type of player Nylander is going to be moving forward.  If the deals had come up in the order of Matthews, Marner and then Nylander, then the negotiations for this deal probably go smoother

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

Good players are hard to find, as we have witnessed being Leaf fans.  I don't think nickel and diming your star, elite players is the right way to do it.  Pay your top players, fill in the rest of the roster with cheap talent on entry level deals, find some fill in cheap free agents, keep drafting well and keeping your picks and the pipeline stocked. 

Again, not sure what Nylander is asking for, and not sure what the Leafs are offering.  Being reasonable fans most of us wouldn't flinch if Nylander was signed for $8x8.  Very curious to know how big the divide is, and who is being unreasonable.

I don't think it necessarily has to be a case of someone being unreasonable.  There are a lot of moving parts to this deal in the sense that it has an impact on what happens with Marner and Matthews, and it is hard to predict just what type of player Nylander is going to be moving forward.  If the deals had come up in the order of Matthews, Marner and then Nylander, then the negotiations for this deal probably go smoother

Unreasonable in the sense that they don't have a deal yet.  If Leafs are offering sub $7m and Nylander is asking for north of $8m, then that's a pretty big divide.  Then we have the issue of term.  My feeling is the Leafs want to do a cheap bridge deal for a year or two and let the Marleau and Horton contracts expire. 

 

[Zee]

Good players are hard to find, as we have witnessed being Leaf fans.  I don't think nickel and diming your star, elite players is the right way to do it.  Pay your top players, fill in the rest of the roster with cheap talent on entry level deals, find some fill in cheap free agents, keep drafting well and keeping your picks and the pipeline stocked. 

Again, not sure what Nylander is asking for, and not sure what the Leafs are offering.  Being reasonable fans most of us wouldn't flinch if Nylander was signed for $8x8.  Very curious to know how big the divide is, and who is being unreasonable.

I don't think it necessarily has to be a case of someone being unreasonable.  There are a lot of moving parts to this deal in the sense that it has an impact on what happens with Marner and Matthews, and it is hard to predict just what type of player Nylander is going to be moving forward.  If the deals had come up in the order of Matthews, Marner and then Nylander, then the negotiations for this deal probably go smoother

Unreasonable in the sense that they don't have a deal yet.  If Leafs are offering sub $7m and Nylander is asking for north of $8m, then that's a pretty big divide.  Then we have the issue of term.  My feeling is the Leafs want to do a cheap bridge deal for a year or two and let the Marleau and Horton contracts expire.

Meh, worst comes to worst they bridge him like the Jets did to Morrisey. 2 years, $8M total. Then like you said Marleau and Horton off the books (as well as others), the Leafs have certainty of what the cap is in 2 years AND they know if Nylander truly becomes an elite, point a game player. If that's the case he can cash in and the Leafs work around it as they'll have the other 2 already signed.

 

[princedpw]

The contracts I keep coming back to as comps are the Scheifele, Mackinnon and Monahan deals and I think when you dig at them they actually support some of what we're hearing about Nylander's ask if a 7-8 year deal is really on the table.

Scheifele signed his 8 year extension at 8.39% of the cap. In today's dollars that's about 6.67 per. Mackinnon(7 years) at 8.63% which is 6.86 per.  Monahan(also 7 years) signed his at 8.73%, or 6.94 per. Sort of interestingly, I think it sorts out nicely as by production over their first three years it's the same order:

Scheifele: 144 points
Mackinnon: 153 points
Monahan: 159 points

Nylander, if you pro-rate his first year out, would have clocked 170 points over his first three seasons.

Anyways, so that means that, per point Monahan got roughly .055% of the cap on his extension, Mackinnon got .056% and Scheifele, who was the only one who signed an 8 as opposed to a 7 year deal, did the best at .058. 

So by using these comps what would Nylander figure to get? Well, at the Monahan rate it's 9.26% of the cap or 7.26 million, use Mackinnon's rate it's 7.52 million and use Scheifele's and it's 7.84 million.


This is a simplification of things but I really think that if Dubas is pushing an 8 year deal than just going by that Scheifele comp the 8 million dollar a year ask probably came from this kind of thinking as opposed to just trying to pin it to the Draisaitl deal. Either way, I think it's tough to look at his first three years and not see that 7-8 million is at the very least a justifiable ask when really looking at the comps.

I think it?s been mentioned, but the Mirtle has an analysis that is backed by a bit more data:

https://theathletic.com/371189/2018/05/29/mirtle-breaking-down-what-william-nylanders-second-contract-should-look-like-for-the-leafs/

It doesn?t include Schiefele but it does have Monahan and MacKinnon.

Mirtle comes out at an average of 7.07 million/year and an average length of 6.6 years with respect to the comparables.

There do seem to be a lot of dimensions to these comparables and no doubt that is a major factor when it comes to the leafs and Nylander settling on a number.  I can?t say I agree completely with Mirtle?s analysis as he includes salaries of different lengths and too many different players.

But he does makes some useful points and provides a selection of players to compare with so one can make up one?s own mind. I note that rather than taking the # of points on the whole ELC, Mirtle suggests more emphasis be placed on the contract year. That makes sense to me as these young players improve in leaps and bounds.  For that reason, one might also quibble with MacKinnon as a comparable as he was roughly 2 years younger than Nylander on his ELC.  In addition, pro-rating Nylander?s first half-season in the NHL (when he was honing his skills in the AHL, perhaps because he would have been less effective than in the NHL) also seems to give him a significant benefit of the doubt.

And of course there are line mates and power play time.

$7 x 6
$8 x 8 ... this feels high

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

$8 x 8 ... this feels high

It does, and would be for the first couple years.  Later in the contract I think it would an absolute steal. 

 

[Hobbes]

Anyone want to take a guess at our mystery player?

The problem there is the price of apples only has partial impact on the price of oranges. The player's position does have a real impact on the salary, and a top-flight center definitely commands more than a roughly-equivalent center. Nylander might have a future at some point as a 2C but hasn't become one yet, and seems likely to be slotted as a 1a/b winger for the foreseeable future.

I'm hoping he'll settle for something like
$6.5 x 6
$7 x 7
$7.5 x 8

Would be a "team friendly" deal to me if he shaved 250k-500k off any of the above.

 

[Kin]

But he does makes some useful points and provides a selection of players to compare with so one can make up one?s own mind. I note that rather than taking the # of points on the whole ELC, Mirtle suggests more emphasis be placed on the contract year. That makes sense to me as these young players improve in leaps and bounds.  For that reason, one might also quibble with MacKinnon as a comparable as he was roughly 2 years younger than Nylander on his ELC.  In addition, pro-rating Nylander?s first half-season in the NHL (when he was honing his skills in the AHL, perhaps because he would have been less effective than in the NHL) also seems to give him a significant benefit of the doubt.

Or, conversely, it's giving Nylander credit for some of the experience he missed out on because the team held him out of the NHL despite him being ready as they tanked.

Look, I'm not going to read the article but I'm sure Mirtle knows his stuff. He's a professional nerd while I'm just a dedicated amateur. My point has always been that the idea of a "reasonable" ask is pretty varied as there's a lot of data and lots of ways to interpret it. I think you can make a reasonable case for all manner of numbers here. Nylander's making his, which I'm sure he's got a decent argument for, and Dubas is making his. Hopefully they meet somewhere amicably.

 

[Kin]

The problem there is the price of apples only has partial impact on the price of oranges. The player's position does have a real impact on the salary, and a top-flight center definitely commands more...

I don't think comparing two different C's is apples and oranges. At best it's apple and a different, slightly better kind of apple.

Moreover, I don't think that line of argument would carry a lot of weight.

Imagine you're fresh out of university and you have some fancy credential. You're a lawyer or a CPA and you get a job with a big firm as such. You go to work and they say "Bad news. We hired way too many Lawyers. So for now we're going to need you in the IT department". Maybe you're a little upset but it's still a good job and you know your way around a router and you live in some bizarre world where you can't just choose to work for a different company as a lawyer. So you work for a few years and do a really good job and there's some talk of moving you into the legal department because you still think of yourself as a lawyer but you're really good in IT and happy enough there.

Then, it's time to renegotiate your salary and you ask for a salary roughly equivalent to a 3rd year associate and your boss goes "woah, woah, woah...that's what we pay Lawyers...you're just in IT".

I mean...they're free to try that and again, in this weird world where you can't just quit and go be a lawyer at a competing firm they've got more juice than they should have, but I think the whole "We're not paying you for what you're qualified for but the job we've decided to give you out of our own interest" would have some problems sticking.

The Leafs are certainly free to try that but Nylander is also free to not think that the Leafs choosing to play him at wing instead of at C should dictate his pay.