Prospect Info: Prospect and Marlies Thread: 2017 - 2018 (continued) Part II

[Boutette]

Your post is one of the best. Johnsson had a good (not spectacular) year in the AHL and looked good in the call up. Brown's contract is a good comparison. Give Johnsson a reasonable contract that ends with him still being an RFA (and hopefully not entitled to arbitration). Then if he has proven himself lock him up long term.

Johnsson's AHL year has far surpassed what Brown accomplished in his AHL time. He is also arbitration eligible next year. Kind of changes the conversation, doesn't it?

 

[Mikeyg]

9 games, that's how much NHL experience he's got and giving him 2.5M for 4 years is a gigantic risk if that's your NHL sample

I wonder if the previous marlies gm has seen him play over the past few years, im sure he glanced down from the box once or twice.....

 

[JEI]

Your post is one of the best. Johnsson had a good (not spectacular) year in the AHL and looked good in the call up. Brown's contract is a good comparison. Give Johnsson a reasonable contract that ends with him still being an RFA (and hopefully not entitled to arbitration). Then if he has proven himself lock him up long term.

He was one of the top scorers in the league (before the call-up - his PPG is still among the best) in the regular season and is now destroying the post-season. His season was better than good.

 

[ULF_55]

Johnsson's AHL year has far surpassed what Brown accomplished in his AHL time. He is also arbitration eligible next year. Kind of changes the conversation, doesn't it?

Brown's last year in AHL was as a 21-22 year old.
Johnsson's is as a 23 year old.

And of course they're 2 different players and Brown's contract was as a full time NHL player.

It would be nice if they could lock Johnsson up long term, but not sure how you could get both parties to see it through ...
A 3 year deal would expire when he's 26, so he would be RFA.

 

[Boutette]

He was one of the top scorers in the league (before the call-up - his PPG is still among the best) in the regular season and is now destroying the post-season. His season was better than good.

And what many people here ignore is his progress. He had 47 points in 75 games last year. He had 54 points in 54 games this year. He has 15pts in 9 games in the playoffs. That kind of progress is spectacular.

 

[Boutette]

Brown's last year in AHL was as a 21-22 year old.
Johnsson's is as a 23 year old.

And of course they're 2 different players and Brown's contract was as a full time NHL player.

It would be nice if they could lock Johnsson up long term, but not sure how you could get both parties to see it through ...
A 3 year deal would expire when he's 26, so he would be RFA.

It doesn't make him any less arbitration eligible though, does it? Tomas Tatar got a $5.3 mil long term contract for being a consistent 40+ point winger in a pre-arbitration contract. I doubt he would have gotten any more as a UFA winger. Based on current NHL behavior Johnsson isn't going to be nickled and dimed as an arbitration eligible player any more than he would be as a UFA. I'm not against a 3 year contract, but the idea that it means he is going to be somehow cheaper arb RFA vs UFA is not supported by recent history.

 

[ULF_55]

It doesn't make him any less arbitration eligible though, does it? Tomas Tatar got a $5.3 mil long term contract for being a consistent 40+ point winger in a pre-arbitration contract. I doubt he would have gotten any more as a UFA winger. Based on current NHL behavior Johnsson isn't going to be nickled and dimed as an arbitration eligible player any more than he would be as a UFA. I'm not against a 3 year contract, but the idea that it means he is going to be somehow cheaper arb RFA vs UFA is not supported by recent history.

Isn't supported by arbitration NHL players or abitration AHL players.

Going to arbitration just brings a 3rd. party into negotiations.

Tatar's contract take UFA years into account. He'd be UFA in July if he wasn't under contract, so his contract reflects UFA status within the term. He had 3+ NHL seasons under his belt.

What Evidence Can Be Presented
The evidence that can be used in arbitration cases includes:

• The player's "overall performance" including statistics in all previous seasons
• Injuries, illnesses, and the number of games played
• The player's length of service with the team and in the NHL
• The player's "overall contribution" to the team's success or failure
• The player's "special qualities of leadership or public appeal"
• The performance and salary of any player believed to be comparable to the player in the dispute

Evidence that is not admissible includes:

 

[Boutette]

Isn't supported by arbitration NHL players or abitration AHL players.

Going to arbitration just brings a 3rd. party into negotiations.

Tatar's contract take UFA years into account. He'd be UFA in July if he wasn't under contract, so his contract reflects UFA status within the term. He had 3+ NHL seasons under his belt.

What Evidence Can Be Presented
The evidence that can be used in arbitration cases includes:

• The player's "overall performance" including statistics in all previous seasons
• Injuries, illnesses, and the number of games played
• The player's length of service with the team and in the NHL
• The player's "overall contribution" to the team's success or failure
• The player's "special qualities of leadership or public appeal"
• The performance and salary of any player believed to be comparable to the player in the dispute

Evidence that is not admissible includes:

So you think that Johnsson's next contract, made after 3 years in the NHL (as you prefer), with his last RFA year coming up by your reckoning, won't cover UFA years as Tatar's did? You seem very confused. His deal after what he signs this year will be arbitration eligible. It will either be a 1 year deal, or a multi-year one. Likely, his next deal will include UFA years. There's a choice today. Be a skinflint and try to get him as cheap as possible for as short a term as possible, or offer him a contract that suggests the Leafs think he will be an important part of their team building and are willing to put a few extra bucks where their mouths are. Both have risks associated with them. But which team would you prefer to play for and what team would you be willing to give a home-team discount when the time comes?

 

[LeafChief]

Johnsson is a good player and we should be pleased that we will likely get him on a cheap contract.

If he's not on the Leafs opening night roster next season it would be a travesty.

 

[ULF_55]

So you think that Johnsson's next contract, made after 3 years in the NHL (as you prefer), with his last RFA year coming up by your reckoning, won't cover UFA years as Tatar's did? You seem very confused. His deal after what he signs this year will be arbitration eligible. It will either be a 1 year deal, or a multi-year one. Likely, his next deal will include UFA years. There's a choice today. Be a skinflint and try to get him as cheap as possible for as short a term as possible, or offer him a contract that suggests the Leafs think he will be an important part of their team building and are willing to put a few extra bucks where their mouths are. Both have risks associated with them. But which team would you prefer to play for and what team would you be willing to give a home-team discount when the time comes?

How many players, by percentage, actually go through arbitration?
If they're going through arbitration it is likely the problem already exists.
NHL Arbitration Tracker: Results of 23 cases - Sportsnet.ca
Check out how many settle, Pre-arbitration settlement".
Why would I be confused, is everyone who doesn't 100% agree with every word you say confused? That might be a mirror thing.

 

[Boutette]

How many players, by percentage, actually go through arbitration?
If they're going through arbitration it is likely the problem already exists.
NHL Arbitration Tracker: Results of 23 cases - Sportsnet.ca
Check out how many settle, Pre-arbitration settlement".
Why would I be confused, is everyone who doesn't 100% agree with every word you say confused? That might be a mirror thing.

If you're going to try to debate me in any serious manner, don't throw data my way that I can easily use to defend my position, please?

How many RFA players eligible for arbitration get contracts that are indistinguishable to what similarly valued UFA players do? Quite a large percentage it appears. Its obvious that from the numbers, once a player is eligible for arbitration, he often becomes as expensive as a UFA to sign. You look at the list you provided and there are 40+ point players back in 2013 getting 5mil a year contracts. Given that, why be so desperate to ensure that there's one year of Arb. eligible RFA status if your going to end up paying out a UFA style contract anyways? Better to get the extra year at a lower cost while you can now, don't you think? After Johnsson has put up 2-3 40+ point years, he's going to be worth a $6 million cap in the 2020s at minimum whether he has 1 year of RFA left or is a UFA based on what's happening today and whats happened historically (at least based on the link you provided).

 

[ULF_55]

If you're going to try to debate me in any serious manner, don't throw data my way that I can easily use to defend my position, please?

How many RFA players eligible for arbitration get contracts that are indistinguishable to what similarly valued UFA players do? Quite a large percentage it appears. Its obvious that from the numbers, once a player is eligible for arbitration, he often becomes as expensive as a UFA to sign. You look at the list you provided and there are 40+ point players back in 2013 getting 5mil a year contracts. Given that, why be so desperate to ensure that there's one year of Arb. eligible RFA status if your going to end up paying out a UFA style contract anyways? Better to get the extra year at a lower cost while you can now, don't you think? After Johnsson has put up 2-3 40+ point years, he's going to be worth a $6 million cap in the 2020s at minimum whether he has 1 year of RFA left or is a UFA based on what's happening today and whats happened historically (at least based on the link you provided).

Let me summarize, Johsson will get what he deserves.

Gnashing of teeth by nobodies changes nothing.

We're both old enough to know this.

 

[Boutette]

Let me summarize, Johsson will get what he deserves.

Gnashing of teeth by nobodies changes nothing.

We're both old enough to know this.

I'm not gnashing my teeth, even if you are.

Johnsson will get what he gets, it might be more than he deserves, it might be less. We're both old enough to have seen players get each and either. But to quote Clint, "Deservin's got nothing to do with it." It will be how Dubas wants to mold his team. Chatting about what makes sense to us is what these forums are about. Otherwise we all might as well turn off the computer and go do something else while we wait.

 

[Field of Dreams]

He will be turning 25 soon. If he wins a spot I think you keep him up.

24 in November

 

[Pyromaniac]

24 in November

The discussion was about Aaltonen not Johnsson.

 

[DanM]

Regardless of what he gets, what a nice problem lol

I have not been this pumped in years to see guys like Johnsson, Grundstrom, Alto, and Engvall in the system. These guys seem like the real deals, and great late picks.

 

[Liminality]

The issue I keep going back to is that Hyman's and Brown's contracts were after their first full year in the NHL where they put up 28 and 36 points up respectively. Can you compare their contracts to Johnsson's if he hasn't had a full year in the NHL yet? Are there other comparable contracts for players who do really well in the AHL and need a new contract? I still think Johnsson gets a short bridge deal to show what he can do at a lower price.

 

[4thline]

The funny thing is, a 4 year deal takes Johnsson right to UFA upon expiry which at that point he has a lot of leverage asking for big bucks (assuming he performs well). That defeats the purpose of using RFA status to keep player contracts in check.

At most a term of 3 years should be signed so that the Leafs retain control of his rights upon expiry. And at that point a 3 year deal no more than $1.25-$1.5 would make sense because AJ hasn't had sustained success in the NHL for a long period of time.

Can't like this enough. There's a reason Brown got 3 and Hyman got 4. With the boat we're in now with Johnsson his deal needs to 3 or less, 6 or more, unless they think he tops out as as a ~35 point replaceable bit part.

 

[4thline]

The issue I keep going back to is that Hyman's and Brown's contracts were after their first full year in the NHL where they put up 28 and 36 points up respectively. Can you compare their contracts to Johnsson's if he hasn't had a full year in the NHL yet? Are there other comparable contracts for players who do really well in the AHL and need a new contract? I still think Johnsson gets a short bridge deal to show what he can do at a lower price.

The other thing is that once you go beyond the surfacest of surface levels the Brown and Hyman contracts aren't really similar. Hyman was older and got more money an term to buy up two UFA years. Brown was younger, farther from UFA and had more upside so got a deal that the team wins by keeping asset control and leverage, Brown wins by keeping his salary more elastic to his demonstrated ability banking on growth as a player

 

[StuckOutHere]

I'd give Johnsson the Jarnkrok deal in a second.

 

[LeafsOHLRangers98]

Why is the Calder Cup dragging out so long? The Marlies will have played just 4 games between May 3rd and June 2nd when the finals start...

 

[Joey Hoser]

And what many people here ignore is his progress. He had 47 points in 75 games last year. He had 54 points in 54 games this year. He has 15pts in 9 games in the playoffs. That kind of progress is spectacular.

Yeah I was pretty patient myself with Johnsson. Even last year I wasn't sure he projected to be an NHL player. At that point if you compared him to a guy like Brown, Johnsson was a year or two older while still being a year or two behind in development.

He's performance this year though, represents a drastic upward swing in development, and I'm pretty thoroughly convinced he's a top 9 NHL forward right now, nevermind someday.

 

[Duke16]

Hot take (maybe, not really):

The 4 D we picked in 2017 will each turn out to be better players than all 3 D we picked in 2016.

That is: Liljegren, Rasanen, Gordeev, O'Connell will each be better than Greenway, Middleton, Mattinen.

Making this claim regarding Liljegren and Rasanen is obvious, but I think Gordeev and O'Connell will show to have superior offensive tools compared to the 3 D picked in 2016.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

O'Connell and Gordeev both showed flashes. I just hope O'Connell's injury doesn't hold him back much in BU.

The guy is going to become an Engineer. Clearly he's smart, so we do not need to worry about him. He's a RD as well which means we have enough depth on that side, so we do not need to actively look for it this time around. We actually need LD more than RD in terms of our 97-00 range (only Greenway and Gordeev with Middleton now gone).

Gordeev needs a better team IMO. Otherwise he's just not going to be able to stand out enough, and he'll become Middleton 2.0.

 

[Stand Witness]

Why is the Calder Cup dragging out so long? The Marlies will have played just 4 games between May 3rd and June 2nd when the finals start...

Because
1) travel issues
2) Marlies swept 2 series straight