Contracts for the Big-3

[Deebo]

I don't where that definition of holdout came from but I hear sports radio guys say the same thing. That it isn't a hold out if you don't have a contract. I would call failing to report when you are under contract a breach of contract, not a hold out.

The dictionary definition of holdout seems to describe what Nylander is doing:

http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/holdout

1 : a person who refuses to reach an agreement until certain terms are met

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/holdout

someone that does not agree or consent, usually because they are attempting to gain concessions or a better deal

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/holdout

1. An act of resisting something or refusing to accept what is offered.

Right, so in this situation you could either go with common usage or you could go with a dictionary definition of holdout that would technically apply to both Nylander and Dubas and also probably Marner or Matthews(who I assume were offered deals and turned them down) or any UFA with a contract offer from anyone.

Personally, it feels like the former is more useful but I am always happy to have a discussion about the evolution of language.

In my experience, I haven't seen your definition used more commonly. I see holdout used very commonly to describe this situation and every now and then I'll see someone "correct" this usage of the word to say that to be holdout, a player must be under contract. I've only started seeing that in the last few years. In the past I've always seen and used "holdout" be used to describe an unsigned RFA after camp starts.

 

[Zee]

Kadri signed the day before training camp began with the Leafs so he missed nothing.  We're well beyond that point with Nylander.

We're 12 days beyond that point.

But Kadri missed no days of training camp and no exhibition games. It seems more and more likely that Nylander will miss all of pre-season so it's quite different than Kadri was my point. Nylander isn't doing himself any favors by missing time.

 

[Kin]

In my experience, I haven't seen your definition used more commonly.

At issue then might be the extent to which you follow football. A contract holdout in the NFL is almost always a situation where a player  under contract is refusing to report in the hopes of getting a new contract:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/football/nfl/report-rams-aaron-donald-agree-135m-extension/

Le'veon Bell's Holdout

Again, I think the idea of using "holdout" to refer to something specific rather than using a term that could equally apply to any lack of agreed contract between two parties without contractual obligations to each other(again, by your definition this is just as much Dubas' as it is Nylander's "holdout") makes for a clearer picture. Especially if it's being used erroneously, as it is so frequently, to portray the situation as Nylander failing to live up to obligations.

 

[Kin]

Nylander isn't doing himself any favors by missing time.

I don't think the current situation helps anyone. Personally, I think the Leafs here are hurting, rather than helping, their chances of getting any one of their big three RFA's to agree to the sort of long-term team friendly deals they'd like and, if I'm right, that will probably have more ramifications for the team ultimately than any number of missed camp days.

Beyond that, the Leafs maybe should start swinging that hammer you think they have.

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

Well, Zee and I are clearly upset with this entire situation, so the Leafs and Nylander need to take our feelings into account and get the damn contract signed already. 

 

[Frank E]

Nylander isn't doing himself any favors by missing time.

I don't think the current situation helps anyone. Personally, I think the Leafs here are hurting, rather than helping, their chances of getting any one of their big three RFA's to agree to the sort of long-term team friendly deals they'd like and, if I'm right, that will probably have more ramifications for the team ultimately than any number of missed camp days.

Beyond that, the Leafs maybe should start swinging that hammer you think they have.

Trade him to Edmonton hammer?

 

[Kin]

Well, Zee and I are clearly upset with this entire situation, so the Leafs and Nylander need to take our feelings into account and get the damn contract signed already.

Bob doesn't care for your feelings:

https://twitter.com/TSNBobMcKenzie/status/1044351277466103809

 

[Kin]

Trade him to Edmonton hammer?

Adam Larsson and a 2nd. 

 

[Phileas Fogg]

There's going to be a loooooot of pages added to this thread when Arizona offer sheets Matthews next summer. 

 

[Zee]

Nylander isn't doing himself any favors by missing time.

I don't think the current situation helps anyone. Personally, I think the Leafs here are hurting, rather than helping, their chances of getting any one of their big three RFA's to agree to the sort of long-term team friendly deals they'd like and, if I'm right, that will probably have more ramifications for the team ultimately than any number of missed camp days.

Beyond that, the Leafs maybe should start swinging that hammer you think they have.

Yes so the Leafs should just give him 8.5 million and then hope they can fit the other 2 in at a later date.

Other teams go through this and are able to sign players at team friendly deals, why should the Leafs be any different? They've amassed quite a bit of young talent and players ultimately want to win so the Leafs are as good an option as anyone right now.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

In my experience, I haven't seen your definition used more commonly.

At issue then might be the extent to which you follow football. A contract holdout in the NFL is almost always a situation where a player  under contract is refusing to report in the hopes of getting a new contract:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/football/nfl/report-rams-aaron-donald-agree-135m-extension/

Le'veon Bell's Holdout

Again, I think the idea of using "holdout" to refer to something specific rather than using a term that could equally apply to any lack of agreed contract between two parties without contractual obligations to each other(again, by your definition this is just as much Dubas' as it is Nylander's "holdout") makes for a clearer picture. Especially if it's being used erroneously, as it is so frequently, to portray the situation as Nylander failing to live up to obligations.

Regardless, Kaberle's "not signing a contract because he was holding out for a better deal" is the last time I remember a Leaf of significance going through training camp without a contract unless we consider Cody Franson significant.

 

[Kin]

Other teams go through this and are able to sign players at team friendly deals, why should the Leafs be any different? They've amassed quite a bit of young talent and players ultimately want to win so the Leafs are as good an option as anyone right now.

I feel like I've already gone into why the Leafs might have a tougher sell on getting guys to buy into team-friendly, and let's be real when we say that what we really mean is under-market, deals. The idea that market size/team wealth should play no factor in what constitutes a "fair" price for a player is effectively just buying what NHL owners want us to think about these things uncritically. If the Leafs didn't want their wealth and the actual revenue generated by their players to be a consideration when it came time to negotiate contracts, they should have fought the idea of a cap harder. Short of that, expecting individual players to negotiate from the playbook you wrote for your own benefit strikes me as a tough sell when you're dealing with smart and experienced agents. Especially when the media pressure that could be focused on the team if they start poorly or have a disappointing season is much greater here than elsewhere.

And I wouldn't just necessarily buy the narrative that Nylander wants 8.5 and isn't willing to budge on that number. But that's me.

 

[Zee]

Other teams go through this and are able to sign players at team friendly deals, why should the Leafs be any different? They've amassed quite a bit of young talent and players ultimately want to win so the Leafs are as good an option as anyone right now.

I feel like I've already gone into why the Leafs might have a tougher sell on getting guys to buy into team-friendly, and let's be real when we say that what we really mean is under-market, deals. The idea that market size/team wealth should play no factor in what constitutes a "fair" price for a player is effectively just buying what NHL owners want us to think about these things uncritically. If the Leafs didn't want their wealth and the actual revenue generated by their players to be a consideration when it came time to negotiate contracts, they should have fought the idea of a cap harder. Short of that, expecting individual players to negotiate from the playbook you wrote for your own benefit strikes me as a tough sell when you're dealing with smart and experienced agents. Especially when the media pressure that could be focused on the team if they start poorly or have a disappointing season is much greater here than elsewhere.

And I wouldn't just necessarily buy the narrative that Nylander wants 8.5 and isn't willing to budge on that number. But that's me.

The players realize the grass isn't greener on the other side. Sure maybe Nylander could get more with another team, but will that other team also be able to pay Matthews and Marner all they want as well? Nope. So he's basically stuck where he either takes a salary that fits within a good team structure and has a chance to win for a few years or he asks to be traded where he can be paid allot more but has fewer stars to play with. It's like this on every team, like I said early on, the system is what it is, and there's no changing it now.  Do I care? Not really, I just want the Leafs to win in whatever way they can.

 

[Frank E]

Well, Zee and I are clearly upset with this entire situation, so the Leafs and Nylander need to take our feelings into account and get the damn contract signed already.

Nik eluded to this the other day, but this is Shanahan and Dubas' first big free agent test, and they haven't been very successful yet, given the bluster from Dubas this summer. 

They basked in the glory of the Tavares signing all summer, but now I've noticed far less fawning.  It was Lou that signed Rielly and Kadri, even Andersen, and to a much lesser extent, Zaitsev...but Hyman and Brown, and Marleau.  The Hainsey deal looks fine too.  Carrick got a $1.3m one year deal from Dubas that none of us felt was of good value, and at this point, it looks as though he'll be a press box guy..and the Johnsson deal was not what the Leafs should want.

They've got Gardiner to go along with Marner and Matthews this year.  Even Kapanen is due for a deal, but we'll see how his year goes. 

I think this Nylander situation is going to be very interesting for the agents of these other guys coming up.

 

[herman]

Yeah Lou would be so much better for where this team is! Lol.

 

[Frank E]

The players realize the grass isn't greener on the other side. Sure maybe Nylander could get more with another team, but will that other team also be able to pay Matthews and Marner all they want as well? Nope. So he's basically stuck where he either takes a salary that fits within a good team structure and has a chance to win for a few years or he asks to be traded where he can be paid allot more but has fewer stars to play with. It's like this on every team, like I said early on, the system is what it is, and there's no changing it now.  Do I care? Not really, I just want the Leafs to win in whatever way they can.

I actually don't think the players realize the grass isn't greener.

We're talking about millions of dollars here, and I don't think it's incumbent on any player to take less than what he feels he should get.

These guys are mercenaries.  You want them to buy into a narrative that they may not give a damn about.  And that's OK with me.  But as a fan of the team, I'd sure prefer he did buy into it. 

 

[Kin]

The players realize the grass isn't greener on the other side. Sure maybe Nylander could get more with another team, but will that other team also be able to pay Matthews and Marner all they want as well?

No, but that team might have other good players that they already have signed and would provide a competitive team all the same. There are lots of pretty good teams with cap room. Vegas, New Jersey, etc

It's like this on every team, like I said early on, the system is what it is, and there's no changing it now.

Thing is, the "system" hasn't really been tested like this before. None of the super profitable teams have really had to deal with elite young players signing new contracts. The Rangers haven't, the Leafs haven't really and except for Subban(where he got the highest AAV for any defenseman/3rd highest overall/13% of the cap) the Habs haven't either.

The system, as it exists, says that Teams are limited in how much they can pay players. It doesn't say anything about how that limited amount gets distributed outside of not being able to pay players past a maximum. Beyond that, it's just arguments. And there's nothing inherently wrong for a player like Nylander to reject one of those arguments in favour of thinking that he shouldn't be constrained by what a guy in Winnipeg thinks is fair for his situation.

Of course, that might not be Nylander's thinking and he just wants a certain amount of scratch so he can buy as many Koenigseggs as he wants but for all the talk about the "leverage" teams may or may not have we're kind of glossing over that it's coming from teams using the RFA mechanism to try and get players to sign under-market deals, rather than to just let them retain players through fair market deals.

That may be something they're broadly allowed to do under the CBA but by that same token Nylander or any other RFA is equally free to say, "Nah, that doesn't work for me" and negotiate on that basis.

Again, if the Leafs wanted to make signing their players easy they shouldn't have signed onto a system that said they should have to care about revenues in Winnipeg.

 

[Zee]

Well, Zee and I are clearly upset with this entire situation, so the Leafs and Nylander need to take our feelings into account and get the damn contract signed already.

Nik eluded to this the other day, but this is Shanahan and Dubas' first big free agent test, and they haven't been very successful yet, given the bluster from Dubas this summer. 

They basked in the glory of the Tavares signing all summer, but now I've noticed far less fawning.  It was Lou that signed Rielly and Kadri, even Andersen, and to a much lesser extent, Zaitsev...but Hyman and Brown, and Marleau.  The Hainsey deal looks fine too.  Carrick got a $1.3m one year deal from Dubas that none of us felt was of good value, and at this point, it looks as though he'll be a press box guy..and the Johnsson deal was not what the Leafs should want.

They've got Gardiner to go along with Marner and Matthews this year.  Even Kapanen is due for a deal, but we'll see how his year goes. 

I think this Nylander situation is going to be very interesting for the agents of these other guys coming up.

I don't dispute the contracts for Rielly, Kadri and Andersen are good signings, but those players were in a far different situation than Nylander is right now. Andersen wasn't even proven as a starter, Kadri had off ice issues and didn't score at the rate he has the last 2 seasons and Rielly didn't exactly set the league on fire in his first 3 seasons but the Leafs gave him a very good contract based on where the cap was at the time. They could also afford to do that since the team was garbage and didn't have many high cap hits. It gets far more difficult when you accumulate more and more talent.

We'll see how the 3 contracts go before you can pass judgement on Dubas and Shanahan.

One other thing I forgot. The 3rd year on that Marleau contract is hurting the Leafs here. If they had that extra $6M they could give Nylander a bit more now and not worry about it for next year with M&M coming up. That Marleau contract is actually a strike against Lou.

 

[slapshot]

Switching things up a bit. Most of the pundits think Ennis automatically drops back to 4th line left wing once Nylander signs. I am thinking something else.

Babcock has been keeping Kapanen and Johnsson on the flanks of Lindholm the whole training camp. I don't think he's been super impressed with their effort, so he not going to hand them 3rd line duties over a well-rounded player, with more experience, like Connor Brown, or ahead of a veteran, with skill, working his tail off like Ennis.

I think if Nylander gets back during pre-season or later, Ennis ends up playing left wing 3rd line with Kadri and Brown, making Leivo odd man out again.

Johnsson and Kapanen will have to play better to earn their way up the lineup, that's my take.

 

[Zee]

Switching things up a bit. Most of the pundits think Ennis automatically drops back to 4th line left wing once Nylander signs. I am thinking something else.

Babcock has been keeping Kapanen and Johnsson on the flanks of Lindholm the whole training camp. I don't think he's been super impressed with their effort, so he not going to hand them 3rd line duties over a well-rounded player, with more experience, like Connor Brown, or ahead of a veteran, with skill, working his tail off like Ennis.

I think if Nylander gets back during pre-season or later, Ennis ends up playing left wing 3rd line with Kadri and Brown, making Leivo odd man out again.

Johnsson and Kapanen will have to play better to earn their way up the lineup, that's my take.

I wouldn't disagree with Babcock based on pre-season. Johnsson and Kapanen have both been underwhelming. We know they can play better cause we've seen it so don't know what's up with those 2 right now. That said, having them on the 4th line might give the Leafs some nice scoring punch there if they get going like we know they can.