MacKinnon's Next Contract

[trip trancid]

You don't give a contract based just on potential.

Or do you think Tarasenko's ceiling is 7.5M?

Sure you do. It happens all the time. Do you remember Klinsmanns comments about Kobe being overpaid because it's for past performance? Well, this is the invese of that.

 

[tigervixxxen]

When guys get long term contracts out of ELCs, that's exactly what you are doing.

 

[AvalancheFan19]

If Mackinnon gets 70+ points I have no problem with 7-7.5. Too much of his contract depends on this season to be honest. I'm not worried about Mack but anything under 60 points this season would disappoint me.

 

[Freudian]

I'd be fine with $7M/year for 8 years. It's somewhat of a gamble since we don't know where he will end up offensively, but for the player type you get all the prime years.

If it would take $8M/year, I'd rather wait until next summer and see what he does this year. No reason to overpay on potential right now.

 

[cgf]

If Mackinnon gets 70+ points I have no problem with 7-7.5. Too much of his contract depends on this season to be honest. I'm not worried about Mack but anything under 60 points this season would disappoint me.

After Mack breaks 70, getting him signed at 7-7.5 may no longer be an option.

 

[AslanRH]

If he's signed in the next month, I'd say $6.75m over 7 or 8 years. If it's after this season, I think it'll be $7.5m.

I think like you do except I think MacK may end up only at 6.5 for a max term deal.

 

[nanzenkills]

If I'm being as objective as I can, I think he should be around $6 million for a long term deal if we are signing him right now. He hasn't proven himself to be any better than the likes of Landeskog, Duchene, Hall, Seguin, etc yet. He may have a little bit of a higher ceiling than the rest of them but I think even that's debatable at this point from what I've seen. I'd have to think he costs a little bit more than those guys simply due to inflation, but that's about it for me.

Of course, if he has a monster season this year, then that changes everything, but let's see if that actually happens first. If he has another crappy season like last year we might be able to get him long term for $5.5 million or less.

 

[trip trancid]

If I'm being as objective as I can, I think he should be around $6 million for a long term deal if we are signing him right now. He hasn't proven himself to be any better than the likes of Landeskog, Duchene, Hall, Seguin, etc yet. He may have a little bit of a higher ceiling than the rest of them but I think even that's debatable at this point from what I've seen. I'd have to think he costs a little bit more than those guys simply due to inflation, but that's about it for me.

Of course, if he has a monster season this year, then that changes everything, but let's see if that actually happens first. If he has another crappy season like last year we might be able to get him long term for $5.5 million or less.

This isn't being objective.

I get it that people don't want to pay for what he hasn't delivered yet. But what is continually gnawingly frustrating is this accompanying failure to accept the flip side that comes with that. If he does have that monster year, are you then prepared to pay him 9-10 million a year?

I keep seeing references to Duchene and what Duchene did his first two years. But over e past two years, one could argue that MacKinnon has been as good or better but without making anywhere close to what Duchene has been making. Henchman (I think it was him) mentioned paying him 8 million now to get in front of MacKinnons price skyrocketing with a big year. People predictably bristled at this. But if you're going to use Duchene as a benchmark, you could also look at it settlement for being in arrears. Whether you agree that MacKinnon has been Duchenes equal or not, if Duchene's play has been worth 6 million, MacKinnon's has been worth five. And that's being conservative. So, in part, you could also rationalize the 8 as compensation for past underpayment in addition to getting out in fron of his price skyrocketing.

Sorry if this upsets people. I'm just being honest. There's validity in many outlooks on this except where it pretends risk can somehow be avoided. I also understand it's hard to grasp paying someone as young as MacKinnon big money when they just let Stastny and OReilly go. I'm not sure they're good benchmarks. Im not sure if there are any good benchmarks on the roster as far as that goes.

 

[nanzenkills]

This isn't being objective.

I get it that people don't want to pay for what he hasn't delivered yet. But what is continually gnawingly frustrating is this accompanying failure to accept the flip side that comes with that. If he does have that monster year, are you then prepared to pay him 9-10 million a year?

I keep seeing references to Duchene and what Duchene did his first two years. But over e past two years, one could argue that MacKinnon has been as good or better but without making anywhere close to what Duchene has been making. Henchman (I think it was him) mentioned paying him 8 million now to get in front of MacKinnons price skyrocketing with a big year. People predictably bristled at this. But if you're going to use Duchene as a benchmark, you could also look at it settlement for being in arrears. Whether you agree that MacKinnon has been Duchenes equal or not, if Duchene's play has been worth 6 million, MacKinnon's has been worth five. And that's being conservative. So, in part, you could also rationalize the 8 as compensation for past underpayment in addition to getting out in fron of his price skyrocketing.

Sorry if this upsets people. I'm just being honest. There's validity in many outlooks on this except where it pretends risk can somehow be avoided. I also understand it's hard to grasp paying someone as young as MacKinnon big money when they just let Stastny and OReilly go. I'm not sure they're good benchmarks. Im not sure if there are any good benchmarks on the roster as far as that goes.

I think I just don't see quite as much upside in MacKinnon as many fellow Avs fans do. He's faster and has a better shot than recent top end picks, but I think his hockey sense is worse than a lot of those guys.

Then again, I didn't think very highly of Duchene's hockey sense his first 3 years in the league, and I'm fine with it now, so MacKinnon could easily prove me wrong.

An what I meant by being objective is that MacKinnon is probably my favorite player on the Avs, so my natural inclination would be to want to pay him more than I otherwise might think he's worth. The above estimate was made taking that inclination away.

 

[tigervixxxen]

When they paid Landy long term after only two years and one of them wasn't that good some people said he hadn't earned it yet and look at that contract now. I'm not sure MacK ends up a 80-90+ point guy but I'm sure I want him on this team for the next 10+ years. I'm sure about him as a player, a franchise player. It would be wise to lock him up. I'm not saying don't negotiate at all and just throw 8M at him but anything in the 6-7 range when it's all said and done is good for the Avs.

 

[Iceberg]

This isn't being objective.

I get it that people don't want to pay for what he hasn't delivered yet. But what is continually gnawingly frustrating is this accompanying failure to accept the flip side that comes with that. If he does have that monster year, are you then prepared to pay him 9-10 million a year?

I keep seeing references to Duchene and what Duchene did his first two years. But over e past two years, one could argue that MacKinnon has been as good or better but without making anywhere close to what Duchene has been making. Henchman (I think it was him) mentioned paying him 8 million now to get in front of MacKinnons price skyrocketing with a big year. People predictably bristled at this. But if you're going to use Duchene as a benchmark, you could also look at it settlement for being in arrears. Whether you agree that MacKinnon has been Duchenes equal or not, if Duchene's play has been worth 6 million, MacKinnon's has been worth five. And that's being conservative. So, in part, you could also rationalize the 8 as compensation for past underpayment in addition to getting out in fron of his price skyrocketing.

Sorry if this upsets people. I'm just being honest. There's validity in many outlooks on this except where it pretends risk can somehow be avoided. I also understand it's hard to grasp paying someone as young as MacKinnon big money when they just let Stastny and OReilly go. I'm not sure they're good benchmarks. Im not sure if there are any good benchmarks on the roster as far as that goes.

For him to get to that 9-10 million range he would need a 90+ point season and/or to lead this team deep in the playoffs, and even them, considering that he would be a RFA it may not take that much.

Right now, i think we have a pretty good reference in Tarasenko's contract, therefore, giving him that same contract is a mistake, much less pay him 8M.

Anything between 6 and 6.5 is a good deal for both sides, 7 would be too good for MacKinnon.

I could see MacKinnon not wanting a long term deal at 6M right now, and wanting to bet on himself having a great season and taking a better deal next year, and if i'm Joe Sakic i'm OK with it. Let him try. Let him earn the 7 - 7.5M deal.

For him to get to that 8M range he would need an 80+ point season along with 35+ goals, imo. And while he has the potential to get there, i think the odds are that he doesn't.

 

[bohlmeister]

My guess is 4 years at 5 mill per. That puts him in between Duchene and Landy for renewals. If they go long term, they try and fit him in between 5 and 6. Possibly 6.

 

[Nzap]

My guess is 4 years at 5 mill per. That puts him in between Duchene and Landy for renewals. If they go long term, they try and fit him in between 5 and 6. Possibly 6.

I highly doubt Sakic and Roy will put him straight to UFA.
Although I suggested that earlier as well

 

[InjuredChoker]

go 2/3 or 8. don't like going between.

 

[RoyIsALegend]

MacKinnon isn't EJ or Landy; two awesome players, but debatable on whether they should break the Duchene ceiling. MacK is the real deal. His next contract will be the MacK Ceiling. We're not winning a Stanley Cup with the $6m ceiling. MacK is going to be the best player on our team by some distance soon.

I'll say he has a great year and gets something like $56-$60m over 8 years.

 

[trip trancid]

For him to get to that 9-10 million range he would need a 90+ point season and/or to lead this team deep in the playoffs, and even them, considering that he would be a RFA it may not take that much.

Right now, i think we have a pretty good reference in Tarasenko's contract, therefore, giving him that same contract is a mistake, much less pay him 8M.

Anything between 6 and 6.5 is a good deal for both sides, 7 would be too good for MacKinnon.

I could see MacKinnon not wanting a long term deal at 6M right now, and wanting to bet on himself having a great season and taking a better deal next year, and if i'm Joe Sakic i'm OK with it. Let him try. Let him earn the 7 - 7.5M deal.

For him to get to that 8M range he would need an 80+ point season along with 35+ goals, imo. And while he has the potential to get there, i think the odds are that he doesn't.

What you're describing is the same scenario where an aged Kobe Bryant makes 24 million a year for what he did 5-10 years ago. Teams prefer to pay for the productive years and not past years. You're talking about it like its some rigid threshold.

 

[cgf]

MacK will be worth 7.5-8M+ unless he has failed season. No point threshold, no goal-scored minimum.

 

[Iceberg]

MacK will be worth 7.5-8M+ unless he has failed season. No point threshold, no goal-scored minimum.

And what would configure a "failed season" for MacKinnon?

 

[Iceberg]

What you're describing is the same scenario where an aged Kobe Bryant makes 24 million a year for what he did 5-10 years ago. Teams prefer to pay for the productive years and not past years. You're talking about it like its some rigid threshold.

Sure, it's the same thing.

 

[trip trancid]

Sure, it's the same thing.

Using emojis doesn't help you.

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

I would easily sign Mack to an 8x8 contract right now and call it a day. It probably doesn't happen because of the contracts Duchene, Landy, EJ, and Varly are all on right now, but I would do it if it were possible.


Sure Mack isn't worth the 8M right now, but he absolutely will be worth the 8M and more in a couple of years from now.

As someone said earlier Mack is going to be an 85-90 point player in his prime years. Players who produce like that are going to start getting paid 10-12M in free agency, its already started with the Kane and Toews contracts and will continue with Stamkos' next contract.


Mack at 8M would be one of the best contracts in the league by year 2 of the deal.

 

[Avsboy]

Mackinnon right now doesn't even deserve $6 million. You gotta pay based on past performance, combined with age (and thus likelihood of decline or growth). Mackinnon is young and talented, so he obviously has growth potential, but the more important factor is the points he has put up and so far it's far from $8 million worthy.

I like where the Mack scenario is, though. Either he gets paid soon and we get a dicsount on what will likely be the prime years of a monstrous career, or he plays another season and does really well and gets what he deserves. Combine with with a belief of mine that he's not seeking to gouge the Avs, and we have a good situation.

 

[AslanRH]

Just for fun:
He wants a 3 yr bridge @ 3.87m AAV in my FHM2 season.

Barrie wants a 1 year deal

 

[Iceberg]

I would easily sign Mack to an 8x8 contract right now and call it a day. It probably doesn't happen because of the contracts Duchene, Landy, EJ, and Varly are all on right now, but I would do it if it were possible.


Sure Mack isn't worth the 8M right now, but he absolutely will be worth the 8M and more in a couple of years from now.

As someone said earlier Mack is going to be an 85-90 point player in his prime years. Players who produce like that are going to start getting paid 10-12M in free agency, its already started with the Kane and Toews contracts and will continue with Stamkos' next contract.


Mack at 8M would be one of the best contracts in the league by year 2 of the deal.

All those guys, that are making 8M or more got those contracts AFTER they proved themselves.

Giving MacKinnon that kind of a deal (8x8) right now would be terrible business by Sakic.

Give me ONE example of a guy that signed an extension, one year before his ELC expired, that is making more than 6M per year... just ONE example, please. I can't remember one but i'm sure there might be at least one.

I can understand the agent of the player using that "Oh, but i believe he'll score 90 points in the NHL one day" argument to get a deal done, but it's not reason enough for a GM to give that kind of a contract at this point.

I don't believe a deal will get done this year, because i think MacKinnon will try to enhance his value, same for Barrie.

 

[McMetal]

It's 100% dependant on how his actual season goes. Everything we could say now is speculation until we see whether he produces on the ice, because that's all that matters. That said, I'm optimistic that he's going to have a big bounceback year. I think questions about his durability are overblown considering that he played 89 games his rookie year, and nobody questions his raw talent. I think he needed to get used to being the guy everybody targets last year and he'll meet or beat his rookie numbers next year.