Dylan Larkin's Contract

[Winger98]

Question: If we signed Larkin to a bridge of 3.5-4.5 Mil. Who thinks Larkin is worth 7-8 Million in 3-4 years??

Because if he isnt worth that much... where are these "savings" from an 8 year deal?

A lot depends on the cap. Right now there are 23 forwards who make $7+m and they are a pretty good group. If Larkin goes out and is a consistent 50+ point center who holds down 20 minutes a night against other top6 forwards, though, being worth something in that $7m range isn't as crazy as it seems.

I think it also depends where we see this team in three years. If we think guys like Mantha, Rasmussen, Cholo, whoever we pick this year, etc., are going to be a good team that's in the playoffs and playing into the second and third rounds, then saving a bit later to have some extra cap room to add that last piece or two could be pretty appealing.

It's not a deal I would hate off the bat, and could at least see the reasoning behind.

 

[BinCookin]

It's not a deal I would hate off the bat, and could at least see the reasoning behind.

If Larkin did sign an 8- year deal how would that look??

8 years x 5 mil?

 

[Winger98]

If Larkin did sign an 8- year deal how would that look??

8 years x 5 mil?

I'd peg it at around $5m a season, maybe up to $6m if he breaks out and has a really good season (~60 points?). There's risk to it, but I like that risk far more than what we've done with Gator and Nielsen. Which is really the flipside of it, where you pay the guy later.

If I thought our GM could walk from a guy who had been with the team for 10 years and was still pretty decent, I'd be even more for it. Holland, though...I'd have a bad feeling the "Wings Way" would just dictate another, more expensive contract.

 

[Redder Winger]

Question: If we signed Larkin to a bridge of 3.5-4.5 Mil. Who thinks Larkin is worth 7-8 Million in 3-4 years??

Because if he isnt worth that much... where are these "savings" from an 8 year deal?

That's the grand question.
Is Larkin that kind of player? A franchise or near franchise type?

Here are the forward making $8M
Kane
Toews
Kopitar
Ovechkin
Malkin
Crosby
Perry
Stamkos
Giroux
Getzlaf
Voracek
Kessel

That's it.
You telling me it's a lock that Larkin turns into that kind of name?

That's a HUGE gamble.

Because what if he's not that guy. What if you sign him to a huge deal but you're wrong, and Mantha, Athanasiou and Rasmussen and Hronek turn out to be that guy.

And 4 years now, you're still paying Abdelkader and Nielsen etc

Pay a man what he's worth.

It's reasonable to expect a young guy to grow into a contract a little bit.

But it's not reasonable to expect a 32-point -28 sophomore to turn into a franchise player after 10 regular season games.

 

[Redder Winger]

I'd peg it at around $5m a season, maybe up to $6m if he breaks out and has a really good season (~60 points?). There's risk to it, but I like that risk far more than what we've done with Gator and Nielsen. Which is really the flipside of it, where you pay the guy later.

If I thought our GM could walk from a guy who had been with the team for 10 years and was still pretty decent, I'd be even more for it. Holland, though...I'd have a bad feeling the "Wings Way" would just dictate another, more expensive contract.

I just don't see enough upside for the long-term deal to risk it.

There's a good chance Larkin settles into a 15-30-45 type center.
Is there any need to overextend and gamble on that?

 

[BinCookin]

I think Edmonton made a bad mistake paying RNH and Eberle what they did. Salaries based all on promise.
I think its a very unwise way to run your contracts.

Also RNH was a 1st OA pick, same with Hall. As mentioned Earlier Scheifele was a very early pick as well.

15th overall and 18th OA picks do not get this treatment. Larkin and Mantha are not in this category of 6-8 year deals.
I know they are the best guys we have.... but their stats IMO at the end of this season should look a lot more like Nyquist / tatar than like Zetterberg Datsyuk stats.... and i most definitely do not want to sign anyone to big money without at least 2 seasons of elite (65+) point production

I expect 3 year bridge deals for both players....
could be 5 year deals.

Considering McDavid/Eichel however... the rules on salaries may be changing... Or maybe that is just superstars?

I would think the salary range if Mantha and Larkin hit 55 points... should be 4.25-5.25M?

Oh and btw if Mantha and Larkin "only become" 55 pt players... that is still good guys. the hope is one of them or svech or rasmussen... or 2018/2019/2020 picks become superstars.


What is a 50 pt 2nd line player worth now-a-days???

 

[Claypool]

What is a 50 pt 2nd line player worth now-a-days???

If Larkin hits 20 goals/50+ points he'll probably demand a contract similar to Bo Horvat. Six years, $33 million. For the team's future captain I suspect they'll pay it.

 

[Winger98]

I just don't see enough upside for the long-term deal to risk it.

There's a good chance Larkin settles into a 15-30-45 type center.
Is there any need to overextend and gamble on that?

I'm not sure I see the big gamble in giving that guy $5m a season. We wouldn't be getting a steal, but I don't think we're overpaying, either. I think the bigger hurdle with Larkin is that if you're looking at a six year deal, you may as well go eight because the shorter deal doesn't eat at his UFA years.

I think the shorter, cheaper bridge deal is more likely if for no other reason than it's something more easily slid into the Wings cap. The chance of him being more than a 45 point center is the gamble, though. A lot just comes down to where you think his production is going to go, where the cap is going to go, and the benefit of him locked in versus being able to renegotiate in a few years.

I'm not sure there's a right or wrong answer to it. As I said, though, I prefer the gamble on the kid than rewarding a guy like Gator with what is essentially a retirement contract.

 

[Dotter]

I don't want Larkin to be team captain. I know he's young, but I don't think he has the character for it.

 

[Frk It]

Does Mantha having a Sept birthday mean that he would hit UFA 2 years from next summer, or 3 years from next summer?

Trying to work out the numbers for a bridge vs long term deal, but obviously when he hits UFA is critical for that.

A bridge for Larkin is probably fine. I don't really ever see him being more than a 6 million dollar guy, so going long term or short term is probably pretty negligible.

I don't think a bridge for Mantha is the right move. I'd much rather do an 7-8 year deal where it's 50/50 UFA/RFA, than do a bridge and be looking at a contract that is going to be ~80% UFA years where Mantha is say 26 years old.

 

[Redder Winger]

I'm not sure I see the big gamble in giving that guy $5m a season. We wouldn't be getting a steal, but I don't think we're overpaying, either. I think the bigger hurdle with Larkin is that if you're looking at a six year deal, you may as well go eight because the shorter deal doesn't eat at his UFA years.

I think the shorter, cheaper bridge deal is more likely if for no other reason than it's something more easily slid into the Wings cap. The chance of him being more than a 45 point center is the gamble, though. A lot just comes down to where you think his production is going to go, where the cap is going to go, and the benefit of him locked in versus being able to renegotiate in a few years.

I'm not sure there's a right or wrong answer to it. As I said, though, I prefer the gamble on the kid than rewarding a guy like Gator with what is essentially a retirement contract.

I agree I prefer it to Abdelkader's contract.

I prefer having a tetanus shot in my nuts to the Abdelkader contract.

But what's the upside to the Red Wings? Where's the win.
Because right now, Larkin is not a $5M/year guy.

I know he's got some points early in the season, but I think he's actually played that well. He has a bunch of fortunate assists on broken plays and rebounds. I don't see the production holding up.
I still see a guy who doesn't score. I don't see a lot of great passing (he did have a nice pass to Frk the other night).

He is gaining the line for possessions - something very important for this team.

Based on last year's numbers, what's he worth for a 1 or 2 year deal?
1 year, $1.4M?
2 years, $2M?

I'm not for pissing $3M out the window on a $5M/Y contract because I don't see Larkin demonstrating he's going to be a $7/8M guy at the end of it.

Now, hit me up in March, when the season is almost done.
Maybe Larkin posts a hardnosed 18G-30A season. Maybe he continues to prove he's a good faceooff guy. Maybe he's a plus player on a minus team.

But he's gotta show it.
Holland can't risk another long-term mistake.

I'd prefer to make long-term mistakes on a young guy than an old guy.

 

[Frk It]

I agree I prefer it to Abdelkader's contract.

I prefer having a tetanus shot in my nuts to the Abdelkader contract.

But what's the upside to the Red Wings? Where's the win.
Because right now, Larkin is not a $5M/year guy.

I know he's got some points early in the season, but I think he's actually played that well. He has a bunch of fortunate assists on broken plays and rebounds. I don't see the production holding up.
I still see a guy who doesn't score. I don't see a lot of great passing (he did have a nice pass to Frk the other night).

He is gaining the line for possessions - something very important for this team.

Based on last year's numbers, what's he worth for a 1 or 2 year deal?
1 year, $1.4M?
2 years, $2M?

I'm not for pissing $3M out the window on a $5M/Y contract because I don't see Larkin demonstrating he's going to be a $7/8M guy at the end of it.

Now, hit me up in March, when the season is almost done.
Maybe Larkin posts a hardnosed 18G-30A season. Maybe he continues to prove he's a good faceooff guy. Maybe he's a plus player on a minus team.

But he's gotta show it.
Holland can't risk another long-term mistake.

I'd prefer to make long-term mistakes on a young guy than an old guy.

Good news is we have the entire season and then all of next summer to negotiate a deal with Larkin. So we will have a better sample size to go off of.

Kucherov got 4.7 million x 3 years after a 30-36 season last October. Can't see Larkin getting more than that on a bridge. Something in the 3.5-4.5 range seems about right. Galchenyuk's contract didn't really help us, though.

 

[Pavels Dog]

That's the grand question.
Is Larkin that kind of player? A franchise or near franchise type?

Here are the forward making $8M
Kane
Toews
Kopitar
Ovechkin
Malkin
Crosby
Perry
Stamkos
Giroux
Getzlaf
Voracek
Kessel

That's it.
You telling me it's a lock that Larkin turns into that kind of name?

That's a HUGE gamble.

Because what if he's not that guy. What if you sign him to a huge deal but you're wrong, and Mantha, Athanasiou and Rasmussen and Hronek turn out to be that guy.

And 4 years now, you're still paying Abdelkader and Nielsen etc

Pay a man what he's worth.

It's reasonable to expect a young guy to grow into a contract a little bit.

But it's not reasonable to expect a 32-point -28 sophomore to turn into a franchise player after 10 regular season games.

In 3 years he absolutely could be an 8 million player. Most of those contracts are old, a new bar is being set with things like the McDavid contract. Give him 5-6 million long term right now. Slight overpayment now, most likely steal in the later years.

 

[Redder Winger]

In 3 years he absolutely could be an 8 million player. Most of those contracts are old, a new bar is being set with things like the McDavid contract. Give him 5-6 million long term right now. Slight overpayment now, most likely steal in the later years.

McDavid is a generational player.

Take a look at Wennberg's contract for a 59 point season.
6 years, $4.9M.

Get Larkin somewhere near 55 points and we'll talk.

Until then, he's done nothing to warrant that kind of commitment.

 

[ShelbyZ]

Does Mantha having a Sept birthday mean that he would hit UFA 2 years from next summer, or 3 years from next summer?

Trying to work out the numbers for a bridge vs long term deal, but obviously when he hits UFA is critical for that.

A bridge for Larkin is probably fine. I don't really ever see him being more than a 6 million dollar guy, so going long term or short term is probably pretty negligible.

I don't think a bridge for Mantha is the right move. I'd much rather do an 7-8 year deal where it's 50/50 UFA/RFA, than do a bridge and be looking at a contract that is going to be ~80% UFA years where Mantha is say 26 years old.

Unless they played in the NHL before 20YO, a player is eligible for UFA status starting on the July 1st AFTER they turn 27. So in Mantha's case, a contract ending on 7/1/2020 would make him eligible to become an RFA, and a contract ending any time from 7/1/2021 and beyond would make him a UFA.

 

[Frk It]

Unless they played in the NHL before 20YO, a player is eligible for UFA status starting on the July 1st AFTER they turn 27. So in Mantha's case, a contract ending on 7/1/2020 would make him eligible to become an RFA, and a contract ending any time from 7/1/2021 and beyond would make him a UFA.

So next summer we could only offer him a 2 year bridge, as a 3 year contract would take him to UFA?

 

[ShelbyZ]

So next summer we could only offer him a 2 year bridge, as a 3 year contract would take him to UFA?

I mathed wrong... it should be 2022.... He'll still be 26 on 7/1/21... So a 3 year bridge would still make him an RFA in at the end of 20/21.

 

[sully6one]

These bridge deals are killing us. If we gave Tatar and Nyquist long term deals instead of bridge deals first, they'd be making close to $4.5m each which would save us $1m. How's $4.5m sound for those guys instead of Nyquist who'll make $5.5m on his next contract at least.

 

[Goalie guy]

Are you guys crazy? More KH bad contracts!! What has he done to make any one think he is a 8 mill player? Bridge deal 3.5 and see what he turns out to be, and I think you are all in for a shock with him. I see a higher end roll player not a top end leader guy.

 

[Frk It]

These bridge deals are killing us. If we gave Tatar and Nyquist long term deals instead of bridge deals first, they'd be making close to $4.5m each which would save us $1m. How's $4.5m sound for those guys instead of Nyquist who'll make $5.5m on his next contract at least.

When guys don’t make it to the NHL until 23 or 24, it’s harder to take advantage of their RFA years.

 

[Winger98]

Good news is we have the entire season and then all of next summer to negotiate a deal with Larkin. So we will have a better sample size to go off of.

Kucherov got 4.7 million x 3 years after a 30-36 season last October. Can't see Larkin getting more than that on a bridge. Something in the 3.5-4.5 range seems about right. Galchenyuk's contract didn't really help us, though.

Yeah, maybe I've been off in left field a bit but I've been working under the assumption that we're talking about signing him when his deal is actually (or very close to being) up. If we're looking at $4m for three years, I'm definitely throwing $5m for seven years out there and seeing if he bites. If he looks like he's going to be worth that for a short term deal, it's not a huge leap that he's worth that extra million per year after that.

edit: agree with the bit about guys making it to the NHL at 23/24 limiting contract options, too.

 

[jkutswings]

When guys don’t make it to the NHL until 23 or 24, it’s harder to take advantage of their RFA years.

Which underscores that the perpetual over ripening of "we like our team" isn't compatible with fiscal responsibility for long.

 

[MTU hockey]

I would just like to point a few things out since some keep posting about certain issues.

1. Obviously if Larkin & Mantha fall short of 50 points this season then trying to tie them up to 6+ years would be extremely risky unless you could get them for under 5 Mil, pretty unlikely. A lot of these contract options are going to become more clear once the season ends, nobody is saying to throw 5 +mil at them RIGHT NOW!

2. I encourage some of you to look around the league at players salary's in today's league. 40-50 point forwards are making anywhere from 4-6 mil per season, players scoring 50-60 points are making closer to 7 mil . Yeah, there are some bargain contracts out there but for the most part the average salary of a top six forward is a lot more today than a few years ago.

Say Larkin & Mantha top 50+ points this year while looking like quality NHLers. The advantage to locking them up long term (6+ years) is you may be overpaying for the first season or two but for the rest of the contract you get better than market value. You also keep the player for their best years (instead of massively overpaying them when they've reached UFA status) as players typically plateau and begin to decline after 30, but before that age you typically get their best point totals, consistency, and defensive game. There is certainly risk, but there is also risk for bridge deals too.

To everyone complaining about all the bad long term deals on the team already, all those deals are buying UFA years. Which is what happens when you pay market value or underpay players during there RFA years. Also handing out 5 + years to 22/23 year olds is much different than handing out to someone who's 26+

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

I don't want Larkin to be team captain. I know he's young, but I don't think he has the character for it.

I think you should start preparing to be disappointed. I really see no way that Larkin isn't the captain when Z walks out the door.

I mean I guess it could be Abdelkader, that will really please the masses.

Dylan Larkin's leadership has been lauded by a ton of people, it is very much a part of his makeup and character.

 

[ricky0034]

I think you should start preparing to be disappointed. I really see no way that Larkin isn't the captain when Z walks out the door.

I mean I guess it could be Abdelkader, that will really please the masses.

Dylan Larkin's leadership has been lauded by a ton of people, it is very much a part of his makeup and character.

could also always end up being some as of yet undrafted high draft pick I suppose,Zetterberg's certainly capable of playing out his contract if he wants to which would have him around for a few more years


but yeah most likely gonna be Larkin