Dylan Larkin's Contract

[WingedWheel1987]

The entire purpose of Larkin getting an eight year deal is to get maximum value during the last 2-3 years of his contract when the Wings will theoretically be contending again. Long term bridge deals are basically how you get around the salary cap in today's NHL. A team simply can't afford to give their best young player a 4-5 year deal because their next contract will be absolutely massive which will shorten a team's window to contend. The Wings would be shooting themselves in the foot if they only ended up locking up Larkin for 4-5 years. Only a shortsighted and terrible GM would ever consider doing that.

 

[Pavels Dog]

The upside likely hits at year 3 on any deal and lasts until he hits UFA. Dollar amount doesn't actually tell us much about what the player's actual cost its the percentage of the cap. Any contract taken after this deal will be significantly higher as a dollar amount, though it may not be a difference in percentage. If Detroit can get 5 years at a diminishing cap hit percentage that overtakes more of his prime, and overall playing years, the more of a deal it is. If they give him a 5x6.5 at the end of contract he will account for 7.2% of cap. He will also be a UFA. This will mean he can get a better contract, likely in excess of 10% of the cap in 2023. So over those 8 years his mean cap hit will north of the 8.2% that a larger, but longer deal now would ensure. Basically, with even a modest increase of cap, the percentage of the cap he gets, even with a large contract today, would mean more years of him being underpaid even if his total production doesn't change, because while dollar total doesn't change, the percentage of the cap those dollars encompass drops over the life of the contract. This is the benefit of signing a guy in their early 20s to a long contract, the player assumes the diminishing returns in pay, not the team in performance.

But isn’t the only contract he’ll sign. Gotta wonder what kind of contract he would want as a 29 year old UFA who’s been underpaid for years. Another 8 year deal at a high salary?

 

[obey86]

The entire purpose of Larkin getting an eight year deal is to get maximum value during the last 2-3 years of his contract when the Wings will theoretically be contending again. Long term bridge deals are basically how you get around the salary cap in today's NHL. A team simply can't afford to give their best young player a 4-5 year deal because their next contract will be absolutely massive which will shorten a team's window to contend. The Wings would be shooting themselves in the foot if they only ended up locking up Larkin for 4-5 years. Only a shortsighted and terrible GM would ever consider doing that.

100% disagree. If he plays out a 5 year contract at a lower salary and during that contract proves he is a much better player than what he has been getting paid and deserves more money at age 27, i'll gladly pay him a much higher salary on an 8 year term.

Here are their 2 options the way I see it:

Option A: 5 year deal with a lower cap hit - If he regresses, he's overpaid but the cap hit isn't super high so it's workable. If he stays at the same level of player he is right now, he will earn his contract. If he continues improving, you will have a bargain deal and in 5 years i'll be happy to resign him to max term contract with a bigger cap hit (after he's shown he's earned it) after his 5 year deal expires. This would take him to age 33/34, basically the end of his prime years.

Option B: 8 year deal with a higher cap hit - If he regresses, he's significantly overpaid and becomes a drain on the cap for 8 seasons. If he stays at the same level of player he is right now, he's overpaid but it's workable. If he continues improving, he has a market deal for 8 years. The problem with that is, he would be 29-30 at the end of the deal. If he's as good as we think he can be at that age he's going to be able to demand a long term and expensive contract. I don't want to let him walk but considering his age I don't want to sign him to another 8 year deal either. That's a conundrum for me.

Significantly more risk to the team and cap structure with option B IMO.

 

[Frk It]

But isn’t the only contract he’ll sign. Gotta wonder what kind of contract he would want as a 29 year old UFA who’s been underpaid for years. Another 8 year deal at a high salary?

Unless he becomes a star he’s not going to be underpaid that badly. Not more underpaid than Kucherov, Scheifele, or a host of other guys who signed during RFA years. (RFA is designed to be cost-controlled)

His next contract will be 100% UFA years, he’s going to get paid regardless.

 

[njx9]

If Dylan Larkin regresses, it doesn't matter how much we're paying him, because we won't be competitive, and we'll have had to restart the rebuild. Without a top C and without a real top pairing on defense, this team won't be going anywhere, anyway.

I'd rather they bank on him continuing to develop than hold back because the front office doesn't want to bet on its own ability to develop players.

Lastly, I'm not concerned about his contract being due for a re-up at 29. There will be another labor deal, and the contract situation will, almost inevitably, change (given the blatant abuse of the LTIR rules, and contracts like Weber's). I'll figure out the next step when we get there. And if the *worst case* is that he's a dominant player and wants another 8 years, I give it to him without hesitation. Ideally by then we'll have stopped giving mediocre-to-outright-bad players lifetime contracts and NMCs and it won't be as big a deal.

 

[Henkka]

Now, 21-year old, then 29-year old if signs for 8 years.
If signs for 8 years, then 29-year old, and possiblity to sign for 37-year old with 8-year rule. Of course possibility to make shorter them.

Now, 21-year old, then 27-year old if signs for 6 years.
If signs for 6 years, then 27-year old, and possibility to sign for 35-year old with 8-year rule.

I think that 27-35 aged in-prime contract works better than delaying it with 2 years.

It's a 2 season difference with a ~6M salary vs. ~10M salary (estimated next contract). Larkin will cost more during seasons 2024-25 and 2025-26, if they'll do a 6 year deal instead of 8 year.

Don't think NHL has any incentive to change Term-rules in the next CBA. This 8-year limit is working well.

 

[BinCookin]

Now, 21-year old, then 29-year old if signs for 8 years.
If signs for 8 years, then 29-year old, and possiblity to sign for 37-year old with 8-year rule. Of course possibility to make shorter them.

Now, 21-year old, then 27-year old if signs for 6 years.
If signs for 6 years, then 27-year old, and possibility to sign for 35-year old with 8-year rule.

I think that 27-35 aged in-prime contract works better than delaying it with 2 years.

It's a 2 season difference with a ~6M salary vs. ~10M salary (estimated next contract). Larkin will cost more during seasons 2024-25 and 2025-26, if they'll do a 6 year deal instead of 8 year.

Don't think NHL has any incentive to change Term-rules in the next CBA. This 8-year limit is working well.

I seriously doubt Larkin will ever be a 10Million dollar player.
And anyone pondering an 8 year deal to maybe save some money on our "10M" player, needs to just say "if hes worth 10, lets pay him 10..." But i highly doubt he becomes that good.

I would much rather sign all our players to 3-4 year deals... pay them what they are worth.
If we have a very good team, we can spread the minutes of all our players.. roll lines more... kinda make sure no one player plays so many minutes that they can put up the numbers to get overpaid.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I seriously doubt Larkin will ever be a 10Million dollar player.
And anyone pondering an 8 year deal to maybe save some money on our "10M" player, needs to just say "if hes worth 10, lets pay him 10..." But i highly doubt he becomes that good.

I would much rather sign all our players to 3-4 year deals... pay them what they are worth.
If we have a very good team, we can spread the minutes of all our players.. roll lines more... kinda make sure no one player plays so many minutes that they can put up the numbers to get overpaid.

That's essentially what I was trying to say. Larkin probably caps out at the equivalent of a 9M player today... and that's his wild upside. More likely,he stays a 65-70 point C who will be okay as a 1C or exceptional as a 2C. Kinda like Ryan Kesler but less physical.

A better player in Kuznetsov at age 25 just got 8x7.8.

Lastly, if I'm rebuilding and sacking away years to get lottery picks... I'm sorry but I want my best players to be better than Larkin. If you're asking me to be okay with sucking for 3-5 years to build up talent... Larkin better end up as my 2C behind a Jack Hughes level guy at most or as a deadly wing on a line with him.

 

[Pavels Dog]

If Dylan Larkin regresses, it doesn't matter how much we're paying him, because we won't be competitive, and we'll have had to restart the rebuild. Without a top C and without a real top pairing on defense, this team won't be going anywhere, anyway.

Yes because we’ll never draft anyone ever again. If we roll Hughes-Rasmussen-Larkin down the middle our rebuild will need to restart!

 

[njx9]

Yes because we’ll never draft anyone ever again. If we roll Hughes-Rasmussen-Larkin down the middle our rebuild will need to restart!

Rasmussen, the guy every report has as a likely wing. Hughes, also a more likely wing than C. Sounds like a great start.

Right now, the team has Veleno and Larkin as likely Cs, and Veleno in no way looks like a 1C.

But hey, if you want to hang your hat on pipe dreams and outliers, you do you.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Rasmussen, the guy every report has as a likely wing. Hughes, also a more likely wing than C. Sounds like a great start.

Right now, the team has Veleno and Larkin as likely Cs, and Veleno in no way looks like a 1C.

But hey, if you want to hang your hat on pipe dreams and outliers, you do you.

Not hanging my hat on anything, just think the way this roster looks could change drastically in the next 2-3 years.

 

[Henkka]

I seriously doubt Larkin will ever be a 10Million dollar player.
And anyone pondering an 8 year deal to maybe save some money on our "10M" player, needs to just say "if hes worth 10, lets pay him 10..." But i highly doubt he becomes that good.

He doesn't have to become significantly better. Cap inflation will make him a 10M player under +100M cap, even if he slightly develops under his next contract. That second contract after 2024 or so could be made against +102M cap with the 4.3% yearly growth.

"Connor McDavids" on year 2024 will be getting 16 million per year etc...

 

[Frk It]

Rasmussen, the guy every report has as a likely wing. Hughes, also a more likely wing than C. Sounds like a great start.

Right now, the team has Veleno and Larkin as likely Cs, and Veleno in no way looks like a 1C.

But hey, if you want to hang your hat on pipe dreams and outliers, you do you.

Rasmussen will START as a winger. Long term he should be able to play center no problem. He will have the flexibility to play both-- depending on match-ups, injuries, chemistry, etc.

Do agree that Hughes may end up a winger, though. But the remainder of the top 10 next year should be mostly center prospects after Hughes, more than likely.

 

[Shaman464]

Rasmussen will START as a winger. Long term he should be able to play center no problem. He will have the flexibility to play both-- depending on match-ups, injuries, chemistry, etc.

Do agree that Hughes may end up a winger, though. But the remainder of the top 10 next year should be mostly center prospects after Hughes, more than likely.

The problem with Ras as a center is he’s shown no ability to play the position at a high level in the CHL. The only time he’s put up numbers that would correspond to his draft position was as a winger. With the drafting of Veleno, and the next draft being insanely deep at center I see no reason to not convert him to wing and let him anchor one of the top lines as a net front guy.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

He doesn't have to become significantly better. Cap inflation will make him a 10M player under +100M cap, even if he slightly develops under his next contract. That second contract after 2024 or so could be made against +102M cap with the 4.3% yearly growth.

"Connor McDavids" on year 2024 will be getting 16 million per year etc...

Given the following assumptions

5x6 is a deal they could sign him for now.
8x7.5 is the deal they would sign him for with a max deal (because he and his agent don't want 8 years.

In his age 22-26 seasons, you are paying him 1.5M less than the long term deal.
At age 27, he renegotiates and let's say he gets 8/80. That contract runs to 35 and for age 27, 28, and 29, you're paying him 10M instead of 7.5M.

If you sign him max now, you have him till 29 and you're paying 1.5M more for the first five years and getting a 2.5M break in years 6-8. At 29, he's a UFA. You could go 8x80 for him then and then you've got potentially a 37 year old Dylan Larkin getting 10M per.

I just think it's crazy to bank so heavily on him continuing to develop to make the contract a deal when your cap savings are likely going to max out at around 2.5M a year when he's in his 27, 28, and 29 year old seasons.

Nevermind the fact you'd have to get Larkin to sign the 8 year deal which his agent is not remotely pursuing and contracts for other, similar, more proven and more talented players have ended up at 8/7.8

 

[Frk It]

The problem with Ras as a center is he’s shown no ability to play the position at a high level in the CHL. The only time he’s put up numbers that would correspond to his draft position was as a winger. With the drafting of Veleno, and the next draft being insanely deep at center I see no reason to not convert him to wing and let him anchor one of the top lines as a net front guy.

I try not to change my opinion on players or prospects based on small sample sizes. Most of why you think he is so much more impactful as a winger is because a small sample size that skewed his numbers where there was more going on than him just going from center to wing. He's not some drastically better player as a winger, I don't really buy that. At least not yet. That PPG uptick had a lot to do with him getting healthy, the emergence of Morgan Geekie, and probably some newfound chemistry and just riding a wave.

As for your last point, it's possible. But there are a lot of unknowns there. Have to see how Veleno develops, and future drafts play out.

 

[Ezekial]

The problem with Ras as a center is he’s shown no ability to play the position at a high level in the CHL. The only time he’s put up numbers that would correspond to his draft position was as a winger. With the drafting of Veleno, and the next draft being insanely deep at center I see no reason to not convert him to wing and let him anchor one of the top lines as a net front guy.

When he was fully healthy last year he was playing winger


Broken record, meet broken record.

 

[Shaman464]

When he was fully healthy last year he was playing winger


Broken record, meet broken record.

Even the year before, when was still one of the biggest players in the league he wasn't setting the world on fire at center. Its not meant to be a knock on him, having a guy who can do what Franzen did and do it for a decade will go a long way towards fixing the powerplay and solidifying Detroit's top 6. And if you think I am bad, you should go to the prospect boards, because most people talking about him that aren't Detroit fans are skeptical he's a top 6 player at any position.

 

[Henkka]

Given the following assumptions

5x6 is a deal they could sign him for now.
8x7.5 is the deal they would sign him for with a max deal (because he and his agent don't want 8 years.

Adding years does not push the caphit anywhere near of 7.5M.

Vs. 6-year deal, one year added probably raises the caphit by 250k per year.

 

[Ezekial]

Even the year before, when was still one of the biggest players in the league he wasn't setting the world on fire at center. Its not meant to be a knock on him, having a guy who can do what Franzen did and do it for a decade will go a long way towards fixing the powerplay and solidifying Detroit's top 6. And if you think I am bad, you should go to the prospect boards, because most people talking about him that aren't Detroit fans are skeptical he's a top 6 player at any position.

Just saying, you really dig that line... But correlation doesn't equal causation especially with such a huge factor coinciding with it.

Trymakin isn't a wings fan he thinks he a 1B center, how about we don't point at the prospects thread. I don't expect most neutral fans to have enough of an interest in Rasmussen to watch him play a lot and not just parrot the shit they read in the past.
I mean for Christ's sake they still shit on his ES production from time to time in that thread. Not exactly a bastion of knowledge.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Adding years does not push the caphit anywhere near of 7.5M.

Vs. 6-year deal, one year added probably raises the caphit by 250k per year.

If it was 5x6 or 8x6.5, you really don't think that the Wings would push it up 500k for three more years? Larkin's team doesn't want 8 years. He clearly wants to have the leverage of being a UFA as soon as he can (not to leave, but to have negotiating power). For Larkin and his team to give up said power, you have to give them something more than 500k. I was using 8x7.5 per Shaman's example that "if you could sign him for 8x7.5 right now you need to".

 

[Ezekial]

If it was 5x6 or 8x6.5, you really don't think that the Wings would push it up 500k for three more years? Larkin's team doesn't want 8 years. He clearly wants to have the leverage of being a UFA as soon as he can (not to leave, but to have negotiating power). For Larkin and his team to give up said power, you have to give them something more than 500k. I was using 8x7.5 per Shaman's example that "if you could sign him for 8x7.5 right now you need to".

The way the actual money looks on paper 8x7.5 is pretty asinine, imo.

 

[Shaman464]

If it was 5x6 or 8x6.5, you really don't think that the Wings would push it up 500k for three more years? Larkin's team doesn't want 8 years. He clearly wants to have the leverage of being a UFA as soon as he can (not to leave, but to have negotiating power). For Larkin and his team to give up said power, you have to give them something more than 500k. I was using 8x7.5 per Shaman's example that "if you could sign him for 8x7.5 right now you need to".

If Holland would leave 3 years on the table for the cost of 500k he would need to be fired on the spot. It would be the deal of the century that he passed up.

 

[njx9]

I think $2.5m is a significant amount of money, if we're in the middle of trying to keep a competitive team together.

 

[Shaman464]

I think $2.5m is a significant amount of money, if we're in the middle of trying to keep a competitive team together.

But every year that 2.5 million becomes less and less of an impact. The team won't be competitive for at least 3 more years, and Holland with cap money is like a fat man at an all you can eat buffet, we all know there's a self-control issue.