Confirmed with Link: Maple Leafs re-sign Andreas Johnsson to 1 year, $787k two-way contract

[Prince N]

Too much term

 

[Darcy Tucker]

Every team can put together a legit top 6 (except the Habs) . Its the rest of the roster and injury replacements that determine how long your playoff run will be. We found a gem in Johnsson.

 

[diceman934]

Why was it a two-way then if they risk losing him on the way down - seems odd?

It is standard on qualifying offers

 

[diceman934]

Guess the Leafs are losing one or more of those players then. Marleau has a NMC for a reason. Bottom line is that Lou made some bad deals and there are consequences for bad deals.

Marleau is not playing for a 1.5m in his last year. His contract will be moved to a team needing to reach the floor. The NMC will be waived by him as he will be home. So how are we going to lose players as a result of this contract.

 

[OddyOh]

Marleau is not playing for a 1.5m in his last year.

He will if he's got a chance at winning a Cup though?

 

[aingefan]

Fair gamble by AJ.
Term woulda been fine.
Still see him on the 4th line to start the year and jumping up as opportunities arise.

 

[crump]

So what's the best case scenario for Johnsson in his view. He's betting on a good year. Brown had 20 goals and got 2.1 AAV for 3 years right? As a third liner with some PP time, I can't see him topping that. Maybe he gets moved up to a top line if Marleau starts a steep decline, injuries or Hyman gets into the Dog House. But it seems like a risk on his part.

 

[Stand Witness]

Johnsson clearly making the right move for himself. Him accepting his QO makes it obvious the Leafs were trying to get 2-3 years out of him for dirt cheap $s.

Basically a win-win. It will be great if Johnsson lights it up next season but it will cost us. Then again, if he only does mediocre we might be able to get some term at cheap dollars.

Or he becomes a valuable trade chip and someone else fills his role at some point.

 

[Buzzman17]

I said this on the main board thread too, but Dubas should have signed Johnsson for 5 million, one year, and then sign Nylander 11 million for one year (assuming we have 16 million in cap.

Then sign them long term Jan 1, at a discount, on account of paying them way above market value for a single year.

Instead of paying Johnsson 2.5 over 5 years, you pay him 1.5 x 5, instead of paying Nylander 8 years x 7 or 7.5 you pay him 8 years x 6.5

 

[Walshy7]

I said this on the main board thread too, but Dubas should have signed Johnsson for 5 million, one year, and then sign Nylander 11 million for one year (assuming we have 16 million in cap.

Then sign them long term Jan 1, at a discount, on account of paying them way above market value for a single year.

Instead of paying Johnsson 2.5 over 5 years, you pay him 1.5 x 5, instead of paying Nylander 8 years x 7 or 7.5 you pay him 8 years x 6.5

what if half way through the next season Nylander has say 60 points in 40 games? on pace for 120 points, his market value is way more than $7/7.5 its closer to $9M so then a discount is $8/8.5

 

[DarkKnight]

Too much term

Agreed, Leafs will regret the last couple months of this deal.

 

[Buzzman17]

what if half way through the next season Nylander has say 60 points in 40 games? on pace for 120 points, his market value is way more than $7/7.5 its closer to $9M so then a discount is $8/8.5

That's not a realistic scenario in my mind. But if that did happen, we still have control as rfa and he would have excellent trade bait for a dman on a 120 point pace. It's no different that if he signed a bridge K.

 

[Dayjobdave]

I said this on the main board thread too, but Dubas should have signed Johnsson for 5 million, one year, and then sign Nylander 11 million for one year (assuming we have 16 million in cap.

Then sign them long term Jan 1, at a discount, on account of paying them way above market value for a single year.

Instead of paying Johnsson 2.5 over 5 years, you pay him 1.5 x 5, instead of paying Nylander 8 years x 7 or 7.5 you pay him 8 years x 6.5

As sweet as this might seem, it is cap circumvention so they can’t do it.

I really like Johnsson’s game - the reality is that the deeper the organization gets, the more often we will have really good players who can’t make the team and have to be moved at some point. This is truly a high class problem.

 

[diceman934]

He will if he's got a chance at winning a Cup though?

Time will tell but I say he is not planning on it.

 

[Buzzman17]

Is it only cap circumvention of they agree in advance to sign the second contract? I don't see cap circumvention. I see a team simply utilizing its cap space.

 

[ULF_55]

Kind of hoped for a 8 year 1 million per year deal.

 

[suprvilce]

Honestly it kinda worries me. I figured he'd want a short term deal but he shold have been able to get one from dubas that is a bit more than this. What this tells me (maybe i'm wrong, maybe not) is that agent and management couldn't reach a deal and Johnsson just took the 1y deal he had on the table (QO) and plans to boost his value over the season.

 

[justafan22]

Honestly it kinda worries me. I figured he'd want a short term deal but he shold have been able to get one from dubas that is a bit more than this. What this tells me (maybe i'm wrong, maybe not) is that agent and management couldn't reach a deal and Johnsson just took the 1y deal he had on the table (QO) and plans to boost his value over the season.

They're probably going to have to get rid of a forward with term next offseason.

Either Brown or Marleau.

 

[IBeL34f]

Is it only cap circumvention of they agree in advance to sign the second contract? I don't see cap circumvention. I see a team simply utilizing its cap space.

They would be unable to discuss a contract negotiation until January 1st at that point - If they did, that would be cap circumvention.

Those contracts would also create ridiculous qualifying offers for them the following year, which is our biggest cap crunch in our foreseeable future - That might not be the biggest deal when you're looking at Nylander (who you could argue might possibly rather make $52M over 8 years than $12.1M over 1 year - though that $6.5M price tag isn't all that much worse, long-term, than a $7.5M one, so why we would even risk this with Willy in the first place is beyond me) but why would Johnsson then agree to a 5-year deal worth $7.5M total when his 1-year qualifying offer would already automatically be well over half that at $5.5M?

Those moves also wouldn't allow us to keep Horton off the LTIR this year, which wouldn't allow us to accommodate our ELC bonus penalties this year, which would push them to next year, which we can't afford.

This scenario is both unrealistic, and short-sighted to the point of being potentially crippling to our short- and long-term cap structure.

 

[Buzzman17]

They would be unable to discuss a contract negotiation until January 1st at that point - If they did, that would be cap circumvention.

Those contracts would also create ridiculous qualifying offers for them the following year, which is our biggest cap crunch in our foreseeable future - That might not be the biggest deal when you're looking at Nylander (who you could argue might possibly rather make $52M over 8 years than $12.1M over 1 year - though that $6.5M price tag isn't all that much worse, long-term, than a $7.5M one, so why we would even risk this with Willy in the first place is beyond me) but why would Johnsson then agree to a 5-year deal worth $7.5M total when his 1-year qualifying offer would already automatically be well over half that at $5.5M?

Those moves also wouldn't allow us to keep Horton off the LTIR this year, which wouldn't allow us to accommodate our ELC bonus penalties this year, which would push them to next year, which we can't afford.

This scenario is both unrealistic, and short-sighted to the point of being potentially crippling to our short- and long-term cap structure.

I don't know the cap, but it makes sense from a lay perspective to use cap when you have it. when you sit down with the two agents and the players in January, you offer them a reasonable extension at a discount equal to the overpay. The numbers i used can certainly be adjusted.

 

[IBeL34f]

Honestly it kinda worries me. I figured he'd want a short term deal but he shold have been able to get one from dubas that is a bit more than this. What this tells me (maybe i'm wrong, maybe not) is that agent and management couldn't reach a deal and Johnsson just took the 1y deal he had on the table (QO) and plans to boost his value over the season.

All it really tells us is that he's hungry to prove himself, and that's how I want every single one of our players to feel. Of course he plans to boost his value over the season - I'd be concerned if he didn't. While I obviously would've loved a 5-year, $1-1.5M contract, he's an exciting, NHL-ready prospect who currently has a great opportunity to show what he's really capable of. We have no idea how future contracts, or even his performance over the upcoming season, are going to go - I suppose the potential is there for him to explode onto the scene and suddenly command $3-5M a year, but I would say at this point that it's best to just keep an open mind and not sweat what can't yet be known.

They're probably going to have to get rid of a forward with term next offseason.

Either Brown or Marleau.

If we bridge Willy for a couple years, we likely won't have to. Considering we should be pretty much cemented among the Cup Favourites by 2019/20, I'm expecting Dubas to try to continue to add to our roster, not strip away from it. And while you risk paying Nylander more long-term, we should actually be in a really good position, both short- and long-term (between Marleau's contract coming off the books, and any additional rise in the cap), to successfully manage that increase.

 

[justafan22]

All it really tells us is that he's hungry to prove himself, and that's how I want every single one of our players to feel. Of course he plans to boost his value over the season - I'd be concerned if he didn't. While I obviously would've loved a 5-year, $1-1.5M contract, he's an exciting, NHL-ready prospect who currently has a great opportunity to show what he's really capable of. We have no idea how future contracts, or even his performance over the upcoming season, are going to go - I suppose the potential is there for him to explode onto the scene and suddenly command $3-5M a year, but I would say at this point that it's best to just keep an open mind and not sweat what can't yet be known.

If we bridge Willy for a couple years, we likely won't have to. Considering we should be pretty much cemented among the Cup Favourites by 2019/20, I'm expecting Dubas to try to continue to add to our roster, not strip away from it. And while you risk paying Nylander more long-term, we should actually be in a really good position, both short- and long-term (between Marleau's contract coming off the books, and any additional rise in the cap), to successfully manage that increase.

Good teams get rid of players who aren't core pieces when they have value. No one outside of 34/91/29/16/44 should be untouchable. That's all.

 

[Morbo]

No matter what line he's on, Johnsson will have a 30 goal centreman to play with this season.

I think he's going to be a legit 2-way top 6 winger, myself. a more than capable net replacement for JVR.

 

[IBeL34f]

I don't know the cap, but it makes sense from a lay perspective to use cap when you have it. when you sit down with the two agents and the players in January, you offer them a reasonable extension at a discount equal to the overpay. The numbers i used can certainly be adjusted.

Fair enough. Even if you're not a layperson, I think you can still find logic in using cap space when you have it, especially in the short-term when you're looking to be competitive. However, there are some nuances to the cap that will cause (potentially serious) issues with the kinds of moves you are proposing, and - on a more basic level - there are also almost definitely several smarter ways to utilize that short-term cap space.

(I also don't believe the "Take a cut now to earn a raise later" philosophy works in reverse, and think that players and agents, when discussing a new contract, will always (deservedly) be looking to get as close to possible the full value that they believe they've earned. "Hometown discounts" certainly exist, but I think that's about as far as player/agent charity likely goes.)

 

[IBeL34f]

Good teams get rid of players who aren't core pieces when they have value. No one outside of 34/91/29/16/44 should be untouchable. That's all.

Oh, ok. I didn't get that sentiment at all from what you said in the post I was replying to - It sounded like you were saying we wouldn't be able to afford everyone in 2019/20, which is (at this point, at least) technically untrue.