Speculation: Nylander V - The Management Strikes Back (ALL Nylander Discussion HERE)

[tmlfan98]

William Nylander (pre-negotiated extension)
Ron Hainsey
2019 lottery protected 1st (becomes a 2019 2nd if Leafs miss the playoffs)
2020 conditional 1st (if Panarin re-signs)


Artemi Panarin
David Savard
Vitaly Abramov

Edit: added Abramov, adjusted conditions on the 1st pick and added another conditional pick from the Leafs.

Click to read more...

 

[SHANNYPLAN]

Not trading Nylander with a pre negotiated ext unless we’re getting panarin with one aswell

 

[Eb]

No thx Jeff

 

[Captain Controversy]

Ugh. Toronto will say no if panarin is only a rental

 

[SHANNYPLAN]

That’s actually insanely bad asset management

Your giving a 22 year old star away for a rental

 

[DRW204]

brutal for all involved.

 

[Viqsi]

This isn't the first time we've seen what amounts to Nylander+ for Panarin and Savard. We can't do it right now because of the Jones injury, and it only makes sense for the Leafs if it becomes clear Nylander will not sign with Toronto but will sign with Columbus - which seems a bit of a stretch.

* * *​

Not trading Nylander with a pre negotiated ext unless we’re getting panarin with one aswell

A signed Panarin is considerably more valuable than that.

 

[SHANNYPLAN]

This isn't the first time we've seen what amounts to Nylander+ for Panarin and Savard. We can't do it right now because of the Jones injury, and it only makes sense for the Leafs if it becomes clear Nylander will not sign with Toronto but will sign with Columbus - which seems a bit of a stretch.

* * *​

A signed Panarin is considerably more valuable than that.

Yeah, but it wouldn’t matter to clb since he said he wouldn’t re sign with them, would it?

 

[BAM]

This isn't the first time we've seen what amounts to Nylander+ for Panarin and Savard. We can't do it right now because of the Jones injury, and it only makes sense for the Leafs if it becomes clear Nylander will not sign with Toronto but will sign with Columbus - which seems a bit of a stretch.

* * *​

A signed Panarin is considerably more valuable than that.

Except for the fact that everyone knows Panarin is leaving the Jackets. It's not like there's a shot of him re-signing. The Jackets don't get extra value for the negotiations Panarin makes with the team he's being traded to. The Jackets will get low-ball offers for Panarin similar to Karlsson because everybody knows he's gone once July.1 hits.

 

[Viqsi]

Yeah, but it wouldn’t matter to clb since he said he wouldn’t re sign with them, would it?

It matters a great deal to us because having Panarin as a rental is something that has high value to us as well.

And there's a subtle bit that folks keep missing in Panarin proposals - it's not "I don't want to sign with Columbus", it's "I want to test free agency". He's been very explicit about the latter. Just because some folks like to use it as a euphemism for "get me the hell out of here" doesn't mean that's Panarin's plan - every indication we've gotten is that he's not pre-negotiating a damn thing. Normally the difference is academic, but there's plenty of indications that he really likes it here, so we're not totally out of the running like we would normally be. (That said, most folks still expect him ultimately to leave.)

 

[Viqsi]

Except for the fact that everyone knows Panarin is leaving the Jackets. It's not like there's a shot of him re-signing. The Jackets don't get extra value for the negotiations Panarin makes with the team he's being traded to. The Jackets will get low-ball offers for Panarin similar to Karlsson because everybody knows he's gone once July.1 hits.

This is wrong for three reasons:
1) It assumes that there is no hope of Panarin signing (there is, it's just a very small one), AND
2) It further assumes that, due to mistaken assumption #1, that there is no profit in allowing Panarin to stay because "he's disgruntled and wants to leave" (not the case; he wants to explore the League rather than committing in advance)
3) It even further assumes that, due to both of the above, that the Jackets should and must trade Panarin for anything valuable we can possibly get before the situation turns toxic or we "lose him for nothing" or whatever.

We are not Ottawa. We are not the New York Islanders, either. Please stop presuming those scenarios apply in full.


EDIT: There's a fourth issue I missed - it assumes that Jackets fans are presuming there's value to be had in Panarin pre-negotiating an extension. That's BS because a) we're basing it on his value as a rental to us, and b) we all know quite well he's not pre-negotiating anything with anybody at all, not just us.

 

[tmlfan98]

This proposal is also based off of the assumption Nylander sticks to his 8-8.5M ask and doesn't cave like Gaudreau (which is what I still think will end up happening).

The fact is Nylander is not worth 8+, so he will not get it from the Leafs. Max he's worth is the Tarasenko contract. If he doesn't bring his ask down to at least that, the Leafs would be better off trading him.

 

[BAM]

This is wrong for three reasons:
1) It assumes that there is no hope of Panarin signing (there is, it's just a very small one), AND
2) It further assumes that, due to mistaken assumption #1, that there is no profit in allowing Panarin to stay because "he's disgruntled and wants to leave" (not the case; he wants to explore the League rather than committing in advance)
3) It even further assumes that, due to both of the above, that the Jackets should and must trade Panarin for anything valuable we can possibly get before the situation turns toxic or we "lose him for nothing" or whatever.

We are not Ottawa. We are not the New York Islanders, either. Please stop presuming those scenarios apply in full.

1. Where has there been any indication Panarin is not leaving? Honestly curious
2. You guys are about to be the Isles 2.0 with JT leaving them
3. If I were you guys, I'd keep him and see how you're doing at the TDL, if you're having a great season and holding down a divisional spot, I'd ride it out with him. If you guys are barely hanging onto a WC spot, I'd trade him for a 1st +

 

[HockeyDBspecialist]

This is wrong for three reasons:
1) It assumes that there is no hope of Panarin signing (there is, it's just a very small one), AND
2) It further assumes that, due to mistaken assumption #1, that there is no profit in allowing Panarin to stay because "he's disgruntled and wants to leave" (not the case; he wants to explore the League rather than committing in advance)
3) It even further assumes that, due to both of the above, that the Jackets should and must trade Panarin for anything valuable we can possibly get before the situation turns toxic or we "lose him for nothing" or whatever.

We are not Ottawa. We are not the New York Islanders, either. Please stop presuming those scenarios apply in full.


EDIT: There's a fourth issue I missed - it assumes that Jackets fans are presuming there's value to be had in Panarin pre-negotiating an extension. That's BS because a) we're basing it on his value as a rental to us, and b) we all know quite well he's not pre-negotiating anything with anybody at all, not just us.

He explicitly said he wanted to play in a big city for him and his Girlfriend, No way he stays in a city like Columbus when he could play in Los Angeles or Chicago. Ohio is not a hockey state, far from it.

 

[Viqsi]

1. Where has there been any indication Panarin is not leaving? Honestly curious

This is a misphrasing of the situation. He wants to see what else is out there. It's not "I want away from Columbus", it's "I want to see what the rest of the League is like."

2. You guys are about to be the Isles 2.0 with JT leaving them

I'm sorry, how many games did the Islanders' series with the eventual Cup Champions last year go, again?

We. Are. Not. The. Islanders.

3. If I were you guys, I'd keep him and see how you're doing at the TDL, if you're having a great season and holding down a divisional spot, I'd ride it out with him. If you guys are barely hanging onto a WC spot, I'd trade him for a 1st +

That's close to what the plan appears to be, only I think the threshold for "trade him for what you can get" is a bit lower than that.

 

[Viqsi]

He explicitly said he wanted to play in a big city for his Girlfriend dreams, No way he stays in a city like Columbus when he could play in Los Angeles or Chicago

No, he didn't say that. There have been indications that he likes larger cities, but nothing explicit, and the "girlfriend" connection was explicitly debunked a long time ago.

And you are arguing the wrong point to begin with. Whether or not he leaves here is immaterial w/r/t our value of the guy. We value him as an elite-level rental of exactly the sort of skillset we need. That's not something a team gives up easily. His status does not affect the price in any way; the only thing it affects is whether or not someone else is willing to pay it - and we are not in a position such that we are obliged to sell for "whatever we can get", so that's not some kind of problem to be solved.

 

[BAM]

This is a misphrasing of the situation. He wants to see what else is out there. It's not "I want away from Columbus", it's "I want to see what the rest of the League is like."



I'm sorry, how many games did the Islanders' series with the eventual Cup Champions last year go, again?

We. Are. Not. The. Islanders.


That's close to what the plan appears to be, only I think the threshold for "trade him for what you can get" is a bit lower than that.

1. LOL what else do you think that means? He signs one year deals with teams he wants to play for and then returns to the Jackets after he's done exploring?

2. No the team isn't, however the principle of potentially losing your best forward for nothing is the same.

 

[easton117]

No, he didn't say that. There have been indications that he likes larger cities, but nothing explicit, and the "girlfriend" connection was explicitly debunked a long time ago.

And you are arguing the wrong point to begin with. Whether or not he leaves here is immaterial w/r/t our value of the guy. We value him as an elite-level rental of exactly the sort of skillset we need. That's not something a team gives up easily. His status does not affect the price in any way; the only thing it affects is whether or not someone else is willing to pay it - and we are not in a position such that we are obliged to sell for "whatever we can get", so that's not some kind of problem to be solved.

Not saying this deal is a good one either way, but just out of curiosity when would you want CBJ to let Panarin go?

Like 4th in the division come the TDL? Outside looking in at that time?

Or ride out the season and go the pray for a miracle in the summer type thing?

Again, not judging. If Bergeron was in this spot I don’t know what I’d want either.

 

[HockeyDBspecialist]

No, he didn't say that. There have been indications that he likes larger cities, but nothing explicit, and the "girlfriend" connection was explicitly debunked a long time ago.

And you are arguing the wrong point to begin with. Whether or not he leaves here is immaterial w/r/t our value of the guy. We value him as an elite-level rental of exactly the sort of skillset we need. That's not something a team gives up easily. His status does not affect the price in any way; the only thing it affects is whether or not someone else is willing to pay it - and we are not in a position such that we are obliged to sell for "whatever we can get", so that's not some kind of problem to be solved.

Oh I totally agree, you are going to receive an amazing offer in February or before.
Even a rental like Panarin would bring more than what the OP offered.
Let's say your DG trades Panarin in Los angeles and he signs there as the trade goes on, The return would be big seeing what Pacioretty got us.

Only thing that scares me is the price asked, some teams don't want to trade as much for a Guy who might be on his third team after 4 years.
As a Superstar elite player, we rarely see a player as good move from teams to teams so much so early in a career.

I Really hope you sign this franchise player though.

 

[Viqsi]

1. LOL what else do you think that means? He signs one year deals with teams he wants to play for and then returns to the Jackets after he's done exploring?

All it means is that the situation isn't a desperate one, and therefore there's no rush to trade him.

2. No the team isn't, however the principle of potentially losing your best forward for nothing is the same.

This is the wrong comparison. There's two questions that go into that evaluation.

The first is "what impact on the team does losing this guy after this year have?" Some teams can more readily weather the loss of their best forward than others. Columbus isn't the best example (better examples would be Pittsburgh or Toronto), but our competitiveness has a lot more to do with our blueline and goaltending skill than it does our forwards. Losing Panarin sucks and it's obviously preferable to keep him if at all possible, but we've played well (and made the playoffs) without him before.

The second is "what impact on the team does trading him for assets during this year have?" Consider the sorts of possible returns we could get from a trade:

• Depth scoring forwards: not useful to us; we've got so damn many of these that such guys would have nowhere to play - so the team would be made worse this year by Panarin's absence, and we'd also likely be losing valuable assets to waivers
• Picks and generic young prospects: not useful to us unless we're getting a future superstar; we already have one of the youngest teams in the League and are trying to start competing now, so the team's made weaker now by Panarin's absence, and not improved in the future because we still have a metric ****ton of depth as is
• Young up-and-coming forwards: not useful to us; we already have a ton of these guys, so we're going to end up in the same "weakening the team for effectively nothing" situation (see "Depth scoring forwards", above)
• Young up-and-coming defensemen: left as an exercise for the reader
• Goaltending, of any kind: LOL
• Replacement elite superstar scoring forward: being in fantasyland is fun but it's not possible to live there
• Replacement star scoring forward: also unlikely, but you can't win if you don't try

So, really, the idea of trading him is less "get what you can for him before you lose" and more holding out hope for an unlikely return, because most of the possible returns do not actually improve the team now, and are vanishingly unlikely to do so in the future.

 

[Viqsi]

Not saying this deal is a good one either way, but just out of curiosity when would you want CBJ to let Panarin go?

Like 4th in the division come the TDL? Outside looking in at that time?

Or ride out the season and go the pray for a miracle in the summer type thing?

Again, not judging. If Bergeron was in this spot I don’t know what I’d want either.

Personally? I don't see a likely scenario in which we don't make the playoffs, and in that case I want to ride through. The exception is if we're a bubble team at best at the deadline and get an impossibly good offer.

 

[easton117]

Personally? I don't see a likely scenario in which we don't make the playoffs, and in that case I want to ride through. The exception is if we're a bubble team at best at the deadline and get an impossibly good offer.

Ya I think they make it too unless the wheels fall off your goalie.

Always tough these ufa deals. You need the guy, don’t want to lose the guy, but don’t want to get nothing for the guy....

 

[Digitalbooya]

That’s actually insanely bad asset management

Your giving a 22 year old star away for a rental

There is a star involved in this deal but it isn’t Nylander. At least not yet. I do agree it’s bad asset management though.

 

[Pi]

No thanks. If Panarin is traded as a rental, he's not getting anywhere close to Nylander in value. Rest of the pieces going both way don't really matter too much to either team.

 

[audfroid]

Just trying to gauge how close this would be for both the Leafs and the Flames..

Leafs trade: William Nylander (Flames given permission to talk to and sign) and 1 of Andreas Borgman or Calle Rosen

Flames trade: Juuso Valimaki, Sam Bennett and Michael Stone (for cap purposes)

Justification for Leafs - They get a young potential top 4 in Valimaki and a wild card in the development of Sam Bennett. Stone would even out Salaries and offer Depth on D.

Justification for Flames - They get a young controllable asset who will upgrade their top 6 and woeful powerplay. They can replace Valimaki with their great depth on D and an equally young Rasmus Andersson. Borgman or Rosen replaces Stone for depth at a much better cost.