Look at Pastrnak..how much did he miss out on? He plays with 2x Auston Matthews.
But what is his value now..9, 10+ probably more
- senstroll

Sure. Some outplay their contracts. Some don’t.

You don’t pay players based on what they could be. He scored 20 and 22 goals as a 21 year old. That’s his resume and nothing more.

that's why a 3 yr bridge deal would work imo.
- zazzle

Dubas has to be willing to do that and offer it

Dubas has to be willing to do that and offer it
- senstroll

Rumor is he wants 6 mil on a three year deal

Idk if any of this is true...if so he’s being very unfair.

Sure. Some outplay their contracts. Some don’t.

You don’t pay players based on what they could be. He scored 20 and 22 goals as a 21 year old. That’s his resume and nothing more.
- Santo_44

you are really downplaying his impact and value.

you are really downplaying his impact and value.
- senstroll

I’m not at all...I’m stating his resume. Facts.

You are stating what he “could” do.

Sure. Some outplay their contracts. Some don’t.

You don’t pay players based on what they could be. He scored 20 and 22 goals as a 21 year old. That’s his resume and nothing more.
- Santo_44

Exactly.

Dubas has got to think along these same lines. Similarly, with Marner and Matthews.

Nylander shouldn't get more than $6.5-$7M per year.

I’m not at all...I’m stating his resume. Facts.

You are stating what he “could” do.
- Santo_44

you have to project out what a player will do, you are technically paying him for what he does in the future not what he already did., You have already paid him for those 2 seasons.

you have to project out what a player will do, you are technically paying him for what he does in the future not what he already did., You have already paid him for those 2 seasons.
- senstroll

I think it's somewhere in between....

You are willing to give the player more money on a long term deal than what his current production would normally give him, in the hope that he'll end up progressing and become a bargain deal at some point during his contract. It's the risk you take to eventually save money.

If you don't do this, you give him short term deals so he needs to prove himself.... you end up paying him exactly what he's worth.... for better or for worse. (Habs handled Subban that way, instead of giving him around 6.5M on a long term contract, they bridged him and ended up paying him 9M 2 years later.

you have to project out what a player will do, you are technically paying him for what he does in the future not what he already did., You have already paid him for those 2 seasons.
- senstroll

Agree to disagree. Nylander's play determines the value of the future contract, not what he might do. If that was the case, I think a lot more players would be overpaid.

Yes, you scored 20 goals last season, but we think you might score 30 one year in the future.

With that said, if Nylander signs a deal in the $6.5M per season range, I can see him outperforming that contract in a few years.

I think it's somewhere in between....

You are willing to give the player more money on a long term deal than what his current production would normally give him, in the hope that he'll end up progressing and become a bargain deal at some point during his contract. It's the risk you take to eventually save money.

If you don't do this, you give him short term deals so he needs to prove himself.... you end up paying him exactly what he's worth.... for better or for worse. (Habs handled Subban that way, instead of giving him around 6.5M on a long term contract, they bridged him and ended up paying him 9M 2 years later.
- Scabeh

You sign the player based on what their value is now. Not for what it might be. Nick Ritchie might score 25 goals one year, but you're paying him for what he's done so far.

You sign the player based on what their value is now. Not for what it might be. Nick Ritchie might score 25 goals one year, but you're paying him for what he's done so far.
- PatC80

Put yourself in the player's shoes Pat.

If you just scored 20 and 21 goals and your team is offering you... let's say 5.5M on a long term contract.

But you're convinced that you'll be able to score 30 sooner than later.

You end up wanting a shorter contract so you'll get an even bigger payday once that happens. Sure you give up security and it has to be taken into account... but it's probably worth it in the end.

I might also be completely wrong about this since I've never been part of these negociations.

Look at Pastrnak..how much did he miss out on? He plays with 2x Auston Matthews.
But what is his value now..9, 10+ probably more
- senstroll

In his RFA years?

Put yourself in the player's shoes Pat.

If you just scored 20 and 21 goals and your team is offering you... let's say 5.5M on a long term contract.

But you're convinced that you'll be able to score 30 sooner than later.

You end up wanting a shorter contract so you'll get an even bigger payday once that happens. Sure you give up security and it has to be taken into account... but it's probably worth it in the end.

I might also be completely wrong about this since I've never been part of these negociations.
- Scabeh

Sure, if Nylander wanted a short-term "prove myself" deal, that's fine with me. But all reports are saying that he wants a long term deal at what he perceives his value to be.

All it would take is one more LTIR trip, not even shoulder related, hell it could be one more concussion and all of sudden that becomes an issue.

A potentially 12-13m$ issue
- AngryWhiteMale

Leafs have money coming out of everywhere. They pay Horton to not play for them. They'd be okay.

Sure, if Nylander wanted a short-term "prove myself" deal, that's fine with me. But all reports are saying that he wants a long term deal at what he perceives his value to be.
- PatC80

Nylander is banking in the fact that he is going to end up as a 70-80 point player so of course he is going to feel like he is worth more then 6 after the first couple of years on his deal.....problem is he has exactly 2 seasons of work on his resume and nothing more....it’s not like signing JT to his deal....he has the long and proven track record....your gm is almost damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t

Exactly.

Dubas has got to think along these same lines. Similarly, with Marner and Matthews.

Nylander shouldn't get more than $6.5-$7M per year.
- PatC80

I hope Dubas sticks to his guns like this with Marner and Matthews. I'd like Matthews at 8 x 11 and marner at 8 x 8

Nylander is banking in the fact that he is going to end up as a 70-80 point player so of course he is going to feel like he is worth more then 6 after the first couple of years on his deal.....problem is he has exactly 2 seasons of work on his resume and nothing more....it’s not like signing JT to his deal....he has the long and proven track record....your gm is almost damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t
- RatedR80

that pretty much sums it up;

Dubas can either over pay Nylander in the hopes that he can become a 70-80 point guy and not just our 5th/6th more important player or he can trade him and risk losing a potential trade, or stay the course and wait until Nylander realizes he is not as good as he thinks he is.

Neither of these options are favourable.

I hope Dubas sticks to his guns like this with Marner and Matthews. I'd like Matthews at 8 x 11 and marner at 8 x 8
- Aaron_85

Me too;
Would rather Matthews @$10M, but I can understand the $11M

Stan Lee died

Stan Lee died
- LeafGuy89

Dude.

that pretty much sums it up;

Dubas can either over pay Nylander in the hopes that he can become a 70-80 point guy and not just our 5th/6th more important player or he can trade him and risk losing a potential trade, or stay the course and wait until Nylander realizes he is not as good as he thinks he is.

Neither of these options are favourable.
- PatC80

It seems to me that JT Matthews and Marner are the Leafs big three to speak of and that’s nothing against Nylander at all that’s just how it is so they are saving their money for Matthews and Marner....if Nylander wanted to play ball and sign for what the Leafs want then obviously they would love to keep him too but he won’t so now he will be traded.....how different this whole thing would be if it was reversed and Matthews and Marner were up first

better to trade Nylander for a similar forward - the young d-men might be a much more risky plus leafs still need a LW to play with Matthews.

Stan Lee died
- LeafGuy89

(frank)ing Nylander. What a Richard.

Stan Lee died
- LeafGuy89

Poor guy.

I wonder if he has the record for the most speaking cameos in movies.

It seems to me that JT Matthews and Marner are the Leafs big three to speak of and that’s nothing against Nylander at all that’s just how it is so they are saving their money for Matthews and Marner....if Nylander wanted to play ball and sign for what the Leafs want then obviously they would love to keep him too but he won’t so now he will be traded.....how different this whole thing would be if it was reversed and Matthews and Marner were up first
- RatedR80

In order of importance to the team he is way down the list:

Matthews
Tavares
Marner
Rielly
Kadri
Andersen
Gardiner
Nylander

Arguably gardiner could be lower and the other are in no particular order but Nylander isn't in the top 5 of importance to this team.