Dylan Larkin's Contract

[Frk It]

I don’t have a problem with a 5 year deal. That would take him through what, age 26? Signing him to a 7 year deal after that would take him to age 33, which would be a perfect time to let him walk IMO. Probably a few years past his prime but not old enough yet to be a worthless player.

If you sign him to a 8 year deal now he’s 29 at the end of the contract. I don’t want to let Larkin walk at age 29 and I don’t want to sign him to a 7
year deal at that age either, which he could surely get as an UFA if he hadn’t significantly declined.

We're going to let Larkin walk at 33? Because we sign guys like Darren Helm until they are 35, and Frans Nielsen until they are 38.

Guy is probably going to get the C, he is going to be here awhile.

 

[odin1981]

Also, Term-adjusted and vs. Total cap -adjusted (against current 79.5M cap) figures for Scheifele would be 6.8M and Monahan would be 6.9M. I would also include MacKinnon and Pastrnak in here.

Cap-adjusted figures:

Monahan, 7 years, 6.94M
Pastrnak, 7 years, 6.87M
MacKinnon, 7 years, 6.86M
Scheifele, 7 years, 6.81M
Ehlers, 7 years, 6.0M


No chance for Larkin with those better figures. That Ehlers is very near. Larkin has worse production, but plays at center and has more ice-time. That's what has some value.

I could see 8 years, 6.1M is a max for Larkin. We can't fit a higher cap number easily for next season. Everything under that is ok, both short-term and long-term.

I think we'll see one of these:

4-year-deal, 5.2M
5-year deal, 5.6M
or
8-year deal, 6.1M

Our you factoring Franzen ltir on our cap? Also if we can say sign him for 6 at 6.25-6.5 it might be a slight overpay but it might get us a bit of a discount on his ufa term. Which say he becomes a Bergeron 2 way stud that puts up 60-70 a year and is stellar on d means he is easily looking at 9+ per year in his next deal with the way top 6 and top 3 for centers get paid.

 

[njx9]

We're going to let Larkin walk at 33? Because we sign guys like Darren Helm until they are 35, and Frans Nielsen until they are 38.

It seems unlikely, given the Seattle rumors and just given time, that the guy who signed those deals will still be in charge of signing deals when Larkin is 33.

That said, either the team's window never opened, in which case they probably keep Larkin as the only part of the team worth watching, or it's still open, and you keep him and try to add to him.

 

[Henkka]

If Larkin wants 5 years, it's probably because he wants to get PAID later, right?

You might have to give a little more now to get max term then.

He will probably want to get paid later yeah, he is a smart guy.

But I don't see Larkin-type-of-player as that big problem, because I don't see him as that productive player like Datsyuk and Zettererg were. His caphits have very low risk to go out of hands at any point of his career. Imo, he will have fair value always, because he will sacrifise points for defence, Those guys are always bargain.

Bigger caphit problems could happen with Mantha or Zadina, if they get hot. Natural scorers are always expensive.

 

[Frk It]

It seems unlikely, given the Seattle rumors and just given time, that the guy who signed those deals will still be in charge of signing deals when Larkin is 33.

That said, either the team's window never opened, in which case they probably keep Larkin as the only part of the team worth watching, or it's still open, and you keep him and try to add to him.

True, guess it depends what route we go from there.

I am warming up to Draper taking over, and I could very much see him coveting loyalty to vets in a similar vein if that does happen.

He will probably want to get paid later yeah, he is a smart guy.

But I don't see Larkin-type-of-player as that big problem, because I don't see him as that productive player like Datsyuk and Zettererg were. His caphits have very low risk to go out of hands at any point of his career. Imo, he will have fair value always, because he will sacrifise points for defence, Those guys are always bargain.

Bigger caphit problems could happen with Mantha or Zadina, if they get hot. Natural scorers are always expensive.

I can agree with that. If you think Larkin stays about a ~60 pt player, whether you do 5 years now and 8 later, or vice versa, it could be kind of inconsequential.

But if you think he will take his game to another level, then you should really be hoping for a max term deal. Imagine if Winnipeg had to re-negotiate with Scheifele in 2 years instead of when he was 30, that would really hurt their cap situation and ability to contend.

 

[jkutswings]

But what other level do people expect Larkin to reach? I think 60-70 points is where he stays (and is a great place to be as a center).

21 NHL players hit 80 points last year. 9 reached 90. Only 3 scored 100 points. I can see Dylan continue to grow his game - not necessarily in ways that appear in a box score - but I don't think he's a guy who will ever challenge for an Art Ross, even if the supporting cast becomes extremely good.

It's not a knock on the kid. It just doesn't seem to be who he is (which is still a very good player).

 

[marcmadsen]

But what other level do people expect Larkin to reach? I think 60-70 points is where he stays (and is a great place to be as a center).

21 NHL players hit 80 points last year. 9 reached 90. Only 3 scored 100 points. I can see Dylan continue to grow his game - not necessarily in ways that appear in a box score - but I don't think he's a guy who will ever challenge for an Art Ross, even if the supporting cast becomes extremely good.

It's not a knock on the kid. It just doesn't seem to be who he is (which is still a very good player).

I totally agree with the notion that Larkin more than likely will never challenge for an Art Ross. But I completely disagree in thinking he has maxed out at 60-70pts/year. I think the fact that he reached that level playing with players who have themselves not yet reached their peak scoring outputs speaks volumes. I also think that his finishing abilities will improve. If I were to bet on it, I'd see Larkin hitting 80-85 pts in his career years. Something like 25-30 goals and 55-60 assists in his career year

 

[raymond23]

I don’t have a problem with a 5 year deal. That would take him through what, age 26? Signing him to a 7 year deal after that would take him to age 33, which would be a perfect time to let him walk IMO. Probably a few years past his prime but not old enough yet to be a worthless player.

If you sign him to a 8 year deal now he’s 29 at the end of the contract. I don’t want to let Larkin walk at age 29 and I don’t want to sign him to a 7
year deal at that age either, which he could surely get as an UFA if he hadn’t significantly declined.

My thoughts as well.

If you sign him to an 8 year deal now, you're setting yourself up for failure later on. But you're also going to being paying much less for those first 8 years which is really nice. But I cringe at a 29 year old getting a 7 year deal.

It all depends. Who knows what the CBA will be like by then anyways.

 

[raymond23]

I don't expect much more for point contribution from Larks. I'm hoping he sticks around high 60's or 70's, that would be great.

I do look forward to the rest of his game developing. Makes me giddy with his attitude and ability to grow.

 

[jkutswings]

I totally agree with the notion that Larkin more than likely will never challenge for an Art Ross. But I completely disagree in thinking he has maxed out at 60-70pts/year. I think the fact that he reached that level playing with players who have themselves not yet reached their peak scoring outputs speaks volumes. I also think that his finishing abilities will improve. If I were to bet on it, I'd see Larkin hitting 80-85 pts in his career years. Something like 25-30 goals and 55-60 assists in his career year

Yikes, agree to disagree, I guess. I think he could get to 20-25 goals, coupled with a slight drop to 45-50 helpers, maybe, but even 80 points seems a stretch. I dunno; we'll definitely see, since he's gonna be around for a long time, and should have some increasingly good wingers in the next few years.

 

[Claypool]

Yikes, agree to disagree, I guess. I think he could get to 20-25 goals, coupled with a slight drop to 45-50 helpers, maybe, but even 80 points seems a stretch. I dunno; we'll definitely see, since he's gonna be around for a long time, and should have some increasingly good wingers in the next few years.

So what's your argument that Larkin will average a 6.9 shooting percentage and 8 power play points a year the rest of his career? Would love to hear it. lol

 

[Henkka]

So what's your argument that Larkin will average a 6.9 shooting percentage and 8 power play points a year the rest of his career? Would love to hear it. lol

Hmm... I don't see him really as a 1st power-play player. That's why I'm banking for low point-totals, but very cost-effective 5 vs. 5 player.

Larkin isn't a point-man-forward-type, he isn't a natural playmaker, he isn't a screener, he isn't a sniper. Rasmussen was talked as a faceoff specialist, so there goes that duty too.

Larkin could do zone-entries well, so maybe he will find himself from the middle of the unit like Oshie at Capitals. That's imo, his maximum benefit for the PP. But that would push Mantha on the 2nd unit. Ain't that stupid?

Future 1st PP:

----------------------------- Rasmussen (Nef-front, faceoffs)



RhF sniper/playmaker -------------- Mantha ----------------------- Zadina



---------------------------------------- RhD pointman

 

[Claypool]

Hmm... I don't see him really as a 1st power-play player. That's why I'm banking for low point-totals, but very cost-effective 5 vs. 5 player.

Larkin isn't a point-man-forward-type, he isn't a natural playmaker, he isn't a screener, he isn't a sniper. Rasmussen was talked as a faceoff specialist, so there goes that duty too.

Larkin could do zone-entries well, so maybe he will find himself from the middle of the unit like Oshie at Capitals. That's imo, his maximum benefit for the PP. But that would push Mantha on the 2nd unit. Ain't that stupid?

Future 1st PP:

----------------------------- Rasmussen (Nef-front, faceoffs)



RhF sniper/playmaker -------------- Mantha ----------------------- Zadina



---------------------------------------- RhD pointman

There is no scenario where Larkin, the Red Wings' far and away best offensive player, won't be on the first power play unit. Unless they draft some serious generational talent, your "analysis" doesn't really hold up.

 

[Henkka]

There is no scenario where Larkin, the Red Wings' far and away best offensive player, won't be on the first power play unit. Unless they draft some serious generational talent, your "analysis" doesn't really hold up.

Maybe we trade Mantha (our far and away best offensive player) for a RhD and problem solved.

 

[jkutswings]

So what's your argument that Larkin will average a 6.9 shooting percentage and 8 power play points a year the rest of his career? Would love to hear it. lol

No, my argument is that he's not a sniper, so even with a more appropriate 10% shooting percentage, that's 23 goals from the 232 shots he took this year, which is right in line with my guess of 20-25.

Maybe you see him suddenly taking a lot more shots. I don't. As for the power play points, I think some of his goal increase happens there, but he's not a special teams wizard, either. He's a very good all around player, and I think some fans underappreciate a center who scores 60-70 points, as if they grow on trees.

There were 10 NHL centers who scored 80 points this year. It's not a crime to say Larkin is a great player to have, without expecting him to become a top 10 center in the league from a production standpoint.

 

[obey86]

We're going to let Larkin walk at 33? Because we sign guys like Darren Helm until they are 35, and Frans Nielsen until they are 38.

Guy is probably going to get the C, he is going to be here awhile.

Dude, this is like 12-13 years from now. Odds are Holland won’t even be around anymore. And if you did want to re-sign him at 33 you probably could on a shorter term deal and for less per year then it would cost to re-sign him age 28/29.

 

[Henkka]

Dylan Larkin's contract is next on the Red Wings' checklist...

 

[Claypool]

There were 10 NHL centers who scored 80 points this year. It's not a crime to say Larkin is a great player to have, without expecting him to become a top 10 center in the league from a production standpoint.

No one is expecting him to become a top 10 center right now. I think the overall sentiment is he's a very good, young player with a lot of potential left over. But when someone says, "Larkin will never be a high-production player" I take issue with that because the data from last season suggests otherwise.

 

[Dead Thing]

Just took a quick look at the CBA regarding unrestricted free agency and if I understand what I read correctly I believe this to be the case:

Larkin will become an UFA after the 21/22 season(in 4 yrs.)having played 7 years in the NHL. He will turn 26 on July 30th. 2022.

I'm hoping the contract extensions plays out in the following way:

Larkins signs a 3 yr deal this summer at $6-6.5 mil per. This takes him through 20/21, leaving 21/22 as his last yr. of restricted free agency.

At this point Larkin signs an 8 yr. deal(at the going rate for an #1 player at that time) that would take him through 28/29 and he would be 32 at the end of the contract.

Ownership and management should sit down with him and let him know that he will be the face of the franchise for the next decade and a half. He is also the next captain without question.

 

[Henkka]

I'm hoping the contract extensions plays out in the following way:

Larkins signs a 3 yr deal this summer at $6-6.5 mil per. This takes him through 20/21, leaving 21/22 as his last yr. of restricted free agency.

3-year deal would give him 5M per at maximum. Shorter the RFA deal, the cheaper it is. Look at Mantha.

 

[Ezekial]

3-year deal would give him 5M per at maximum. Shorter the RFA deal, the cheaper it is. Look at Mantha.

That is correct, the only way Larkin starts seeing 6 million is getting some UFA years eaten up.

 

[SCD]

I would be willing to pay a slight premium for a 3 year contract so the next contract is written when he is still a RFA. He will be captain at that point, and then do an 8 yr deal.

 

[newfy]

Custance just tweeted/article on the athletic where he talked to an eastern conference capologist. Basically the more money you have signed before you use LTIR means you save more cap room when you use LTIR. So the wings wont be LTIRing Mule until after Larkin get signed.

Custance basically said that its a fairly safe bet that someone like AA or Nyquist will be dealt before Larkin is signed to make up the caproom they need for his deal.

So expect trade soon is what I got out of it

 

[Flowah]

Custance basically said that its a fairly safe bet that someone like AA or Nyquist will be dealt before Larkin is signed to make up the caproom they need for his deal.

We already have 5.3M in cap space, right? So if we NEED to trade to get more room, what are we looking at here? 5.5? 6?

Hopefully this means a max term contract at least.

 

[marcmadsen]

Yikes, agree to disagree, I guess. I think he could get to 20-25 goals, coupled with a slight drop to 45-50 helpers, maybe, but even 80 points seems a stretch. I dunno; we'll definitely see, since he's gonna be around for a long time, and should have some increasingly good wingers in the next few years.

I think everyone here seems to agree that Larkin is more of a playmaking centre than a goal scoring centre. So, what I completely disagree with in your position is that although you see him upticking his goals because of his really low shooting percentage last year, somehow (in your opinion) that would coincide with a reduction in assists. That's the part I really don't get from your perspective. As time goes on, Larkin will play with better or more developed goal scoring wingers. Plus, it's rare for any player to max out on their career year (points wise) at age 21. The kid hasn't even gotten his man strength yet.

To be clear, I'm not saying Larking will become a consistent 80+ pt/yr player. But I do think his career best year will hit 80-85 pts. Sooner or later the Wings are going to have a much better offensive team than in the last several years. They won't stay this low scoring forever. When that happens, Larkin will be one of the pivotal players in that offence

No, my argument is that he's not a sniper, so even with a more appropriate 10% shooting percentage, that's 23 goals from the 232 shots he took this year, which is right in line with my guess of 20-25.

I also think it's unrealistic to expect that Larkin's shooting percentage will cap out at his rookie level of 10%. Again, I point to the fact he still doesnt have his man strength. His release and strength will improve. So I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that in his career year he shoots in the 13-15% range which would give him 25-30 goals with only 200 shots