Confirmed with Link: Nyquist re-signed for 4 years

[Realgud]

I think this whole "play-off performer" thing is massively overblown. Honestly if you can score during the regular season, you can score during the playoffs. Generally teams play safer hockey in the playoffs and attempt to limit opportunities from the opponent, thus scoring goes down, particularly for players that other teams label as scorers. Beyond that the playoffs are much shorter so small sample sizes dominate facts. If a guy has a cold streak two years in a row (and every scorer has cold streaks) he's "soft" and a regular season guy.

On the other end if a guy has a hot streak all of a sudden he's a playoff performer. Saad is a great example of this: starts his career with some bad playoffs, is instantly labeled a regular season player. Has two good playoffs in a row and now he's a big game guy. Let's look at Tampa because they had a big run. Stamkos had a bad playoffs. He shot a ton but the puck didn't find the twine=bad player. Tyler Johnson had an incredible playoffs. As good as Johnson is, no one in their right mind would take him over Stamkos. So why would anyone even for a picosecond consider Abby over Nyquist? The answer is Abby having one good playoffs and Nyquist having two bad ones. Which seems unbelievable to me.

I understand what you mean by massively overblown and kind of agree, but what you said is not 100% true. There are some goalscorers that were never able to replicate their regular season success in the playoffs mostly because they can't elevate their competitive level.

Here is a perfect example, the guy is called Rick Nash : http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8470041&docid=TeamPlayerBio:44395#&navid=nhl-search

 

[HisNoodliness]

I understand what you mean by massively overblown and kind of agree, but what you said is not 100% true. There are some goalscorers that were never able to replicate their regular season success in the playoffs mostly because they can't elevate their competitive level.

Here is a perfect example, the guy is called Rick Nash : http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8470041&docid=TeamPlayerBio:44395#&navid=nhl-search

Nash is definitely someone that's been labeled as a playoff failure and I do think he's one of the less hard working guys in the league so he suffers come playoff time, but he was 1/4 GPG this year in the playoffs which isn't bad at all. I think he is still much better in the playoffs than people give him credit for. It's almost impossible to score more than 1 goal per four games at that time of year. The top scorers aren't producing more than a goal every other game and it's unfair to expect anyone to do that. Nash should produce what he did in this playoffs every year. Stamkos should produce at least that much but when guys go cold it can ruin one's reputation.

 

[HockeyinHD]

Some context to these numbers

Nyquist is either a playoff goalscorer or he is not a playoff goalscorer. If his performance is something which has to be buttressed, massaged, and intensely spun with context, that goes rather a long way towards admitting his production isn't what it ought to be, given his regular season production.

Hopefully it improves. If we're in 2017 and he's still scoring a playoff goal once every 7-10 games...

12-13 - Nyquist played 12:35 of Ice time per game. That was inbetween Samulesson and Emmerton, for some perspective there. So nearly half (14/30) of his NHL playoff games have been played being given 4th line minutes.

And this was somehow his most productive NHL postseason.

13-14 - Entire team was manhandled against Boston. Scored 6 goals in 5 games as a team.

That's kind of a situation it'd be nice for an elite goalscorer to change, yes? Maybe one the team is paying almost 5 mil a year to?

14-15 - Nyquist was reportedly injured, which kept him from participating in the World Championships. In addition, he was playing with Zetterberg, who had the worst playoff series of his career.

Was that the Chicken or the Egg?

So yeah, 3 goals in 30 playoff games is lousy. When you look at the context though, does not look nearly as bad.

It looks terrible in any context. Dan Cleary has more playoff goals the past three years than Nyquist. Luke Glendenning has the same amount and he didn't even play in 12-13. Drew Miller is one back.

I look at this upcoming post-season as especially important. I think he rises to the occasion and proves his worth.

He may. I hope he does. He desperately needs to.

 

[Frk It]

Nyquist is either a playoff goalscorer or he is not a playoff goalscorer.

Yeah, I don't really think this is a case where you can deal in absolutes like this. He only has 30 career play-off games. And again, half of those where he played on average 12 minutes. Funny that the folks that support how he was held back from having more NHL experience are the same ones disappointed he doesn't produce in the play-offs. Gee, maybe that additional NHL experience would have came in handy?

I would bet that moving forward his play-off scoring production is on par with his regular season production, because I have faith in Nyquist, he has found ways to produce at every level he has played at.

That's kind of a situation it'd be nice for an elite goalscorer to change, yes? Maybe one the team is paying almost 5 mil a year to? ;

Well, he wasn't paid 5 million at the time.... He had very little NHL experience at the time... and I'm not sure if you watched that series, but we couldn't even get the puck out of our end.

Oh, and how did we get into the play-offs again that year? I remember Z and Datsyuk being hurt, and then someone dragged us into the play-offs by like leading the league in goals scored over 3-4 months. What was that guy's name?

 

[Bench]

Nyquist is either a playoff goalscorer or he is not a playoff goalscorer. If his performance is something which has to be buttressed, massaged, and intensely spun with context, that goes rather a long way towards admitting his production isn't what it ought to be, given his regular season production.

Context matters.

Who during the last two playoffs HAS performed to expectations with production? Basically Pavel Datsyuk. Full stop.

 

[Mijatovic]

Probably throw in Mrazek for our last one

 

[Bench]

Probably throw in Mrazek for our last one

0 points. Dude is a bust.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Context matters.

Who during the last two playoffs HAS performed to expectations with production? Basically Pavel Datsyuk. Full stop.

Brendan Smith has preformed above expectations in my opinion.

We know why buy Datysuk was pretty abysmal as that series went on because of the ankle. As people will throw tons of blame on Ericsson, Datsyuk got eaten alive by Johnson to blow our probable 3-1 lead.

 

[Frk It]

Brendan Smith has preformed above expectations in my opinion.

We know why buy Datysuk was pretty abysmal as that series went on because of the ankle. As people will throw tons of blame on Ericsson, Datsyuk got eaten alive by Johnson to blow our probable 3-1 lead.

He also won us game 1.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

He also won us game 1.

Most would argue Mrazek won us game 1. Still I get the point and I understand why he wasn't there for the back-half the series. But to say he performed to his level isn't accurate either. It was pretty disgusting to watch the way Tampa targeted his leg in my opinion, but that is playoff hockey. Still Datsyuk was the victim of a couple slew-foots which drives me crazy, I hate that play an incredible amount.

Abdelkader, Smith, Glendening and Mrazek did and that is about it unfortunately.

Glendening was also quite good against Boston, so he and Smith are in the two year discussion.

 

[Frk It]

Most would argue Mrazek won us game 1. Still I get the point and I understand why he wasn't there for the back-half the series. But to say he performed to his level isn't accurate either. It was pretty disgusting to watch the way Tampa targeted his leg in my opinion, but that is playoff hockey. Still Datsyuk was the victim of a couple slew-foots which drives me crazy, I hate that play an incredible amount.

Abdelkader, Smith, Glendening and Mrazek did and that is about it unfortunately.

Glendening was also quite good against Boston, so he and Smith are in the two year discussion.

Mrazek was huge, Datsyuk was 100% of our offense that game though. Agree he clearly was laboring the remainder of that series and was not effective.

Yeah 2 year stretch? There is not much to speak of there. I don't remember noticing Glendening a whole lot against Boston, to be honest. I thought Smith was fantastic against Boston, and I just thought he was just ok this year.

For as much **** as Nyquist gets for dipping in the post-season, Dekeyser has not looked great in either post-season IMO. But I think he, like Nyquist, will improve through just getting more experience.

 

[Henkka]

Can't wait Dekeyser to be the next hated player after he signs for more than Kronwall.

 

[Kronwalled55]

Can't wait Dekeyser to be the next hated player after he signs for more than Kronwall.

He'll put it on himself if so. He's a good defenseman, but he is awful under pressure.

 

[Ricelund]

I can't believe we've got anti-Nyquist people here.

 

[HockeyinHD]

Context matters.

Who during the last two playoffs HAS performed to expectations with production? Basically Pavel Datsyuk. Full stop.

Then the argument you are presenting is 'Nyquist isn't a playoff performer but since most other people aren't either we should ignore that with him.'

I find that argument a less than convincing effort towards explaining how Nyquist is great/elite.

Also, I think other guys actually did meet or exceed production expectations. Datsyuk, Tatar, Sheahan, Glendening, Miller and Ericsson this year certainly. The 13-14 playoff was an offensive dumpster fire to be sure... but shouldn't a great/elite goalscorer be able to fix that, at least a little bit?

 

[Frk It]

I find that argument a less than convincing effort towards explaining how Nyquist is great/elite.

Well then no worries, because he sure as hell isn't getting paid like an elite player.

 

[HockeyinHD]

Yeah, I don't really think this is a case where you can deal in absolutes like this. He only has 30 career play-off games.

You are confusing 'is' with 'can be'.

'Nyquist either is or is not a playoff performer' presents an entirely different series of questions than 'Nyquist can or can not be a playoff performer'.

Right now Nyquist is not a playoff performer. Perhaps some day he can be. I hope that's the case, given the nature of his deal.

And again, half of those where he played on average 12 minutes.

And again, that was his most productive playoff. If he was tearing it up when he played more per game and that first season of relatively little IT was holding him back, you'd have a point. Holding up limited IT when that period of limited IT was the only time he actually produced kicks a little bit of a hole in the notion that it was IT holding him back in the first place.

Funny that the folks that support how he was held back from having more NHL experience are the same ones disappointed he doesn't produce in the play-offs. Gee, maybe that additional NHL experience would have came in handy?

Ok, now come on. Are you trying to make a case that had Nyquist played an extra NHL season or even just a portion of an NHL season he'd be better in the playoffs? Has there been some kind of upward trend in his playoff production that lends itself to such a consideration?

I would bet that moving forward his play-off scoring production is on par with his regular season production, because I have faith in Nyquist, he has found ways to produce at every level he has played at.

"Faith." You're talking in terms of aspiration and not evidence. That's fine, that's what being a fan is all about really, but I'm coming from an angle that relies much more heavily on trend, history, and patterns.

I can "believe" something will happen, I can "hope" it happens, but that doesn't mean it's likely to or that it's something which should be anticipated.

Well, he wasn't paid 5 million at the time.... He had very little NHL experience at the time... and I'm not sure if you watched that series, but we couldn't even get the puck out of our end.

Do you think being paid more makes a player better? What is the requisite number of games of NHL experience before someone can be expected to play well in the playoffs?

Oh, and how did we get into the play-offs again that year? I remember Z and Datsyuk being hurt, and then someone dragged us into the play-offs by like leading the league in goals scored over 3-4 months. What was that guy's name?

... and then disappearing. That's kind of what we're talking about here, right? If Nyquist was a plug scoring 12 goals a year I don't think anyone would be reasonably expecting him to score a lot in the playoffs. It is the fact that he's scored frequently in the regular season yet hardly at all in the playoffs which has spawned this discussion. Is the reason for this internal? External? Is it just a small sample size?

With the onset of his new contract those questions will become more onerous until they are answered either wonderfully by Nyquist having a good playoff, terribly by him having a third straight poor one, or just dangling out there with a mediocre performance.

 

[r0bert8841]

A playoff performer/underachiever is a real thing. The game is a bit different than the regular season with increased intensity, refs calling things differently, and a more defensive game. While these differences may seem minor, it makes all the difference in the world at the extremely competitive level of hockey they play at. Many younger players struggle in the playoffs but they usually end up figuring it out with more experience and a bit more strength. It took Datsyuk awhile before he figured out the playoffs. If Nyquist continues to underachieve in the playoffs over these next 4 years, then we have a problem. But I see him figuring things out before then.

 

[BinCookin]

I can't believe we've got anti-Nyquist people here.

I have to agree. I mean this board if anything favors prospects and draft picks right. But when we develop a 4th rounder into a 50+ pt scorer... and his first contract OVER 1M. And we start having reasons to complain about him? You guys do realize he scored almost 60 goals for us making under 1M per year right? I mean we kinda owe him at least a fair deal. And I think he got a fair deal. We are not "getting screwed over" by simply paying a player what he is worth guys.

Having 2-3 pages of comments arguing about how he has done in the playoffs is stupid considering Zetterberg our captain has performed just about as badly. They play on the same line. Zetterberg did nothing this year, and he was apparently healthy. We should be blaming our highest paid player? ... Nah... Lets blame the player playing his first full season in the NHL.

Jeez guys.. Lets get some perspective.

Nyquist is "not a playoff performer" ... its more like "the Detroit Red Wings as a whole" are not playoff performers the last 2 years. Honestly Ive been impressed with Datsyuk in the playoffs every year. After that... no one really. Lets not get into a hissy fit over how well our 26, 25, 24,23 yr old players are doing in playoff games that number 12 in the last 2 years. Where we lost both the series.

I would think this site would be massively behind Nyquist, Tatar, Sheahan, Jurco, Pulkkinen and less behind players like Ericsson, Quincey, Kronwall, Zetterberg, Franzen.

Because some are young and can improve
Others are Older and we know what they are.

I did that Defensive rating system all year to try to actually see who we "complained" about and if my random numbers from our GDT actually reflected our complaints. Suprisingly Quincey did really well. Zidlicky when he was here was a welcome addition. And mostly Smith was the player with the most mistakes every game. Yet Smith has alot of support around here.

But hey, everyone has their favorite.

Can we agree a 4 year deal for Nyquist is Fair. I am THRILLED he will stay here at least another 4 years. And be paid fairly. I do not think we are screwed over by this salary figure. I do not think it stops us from signing any more of our young kids. Basically we are in really good shape here guys. "How much will he be paid in 4 years" means nothing right now. Lets see if he keeps gettign 50+ pts a year first shall we? Maybe he gets 60, 70, maybe he goes back to 40+... who knows. But cant we just all cheer for him to do well? I think considering his history, he got a fair deal. I dont see anyone here saying we overpaid him massively.

 

[HockeyinHD]

Well then no worries, because he sure as hell isn't getting paid like an elite player.

He's getting paid like a great/elite player who is still an RFA. Is there a long list of RFA forwards making more than him? I can find 11 in the whole NHL. Tarasenko, O'Reilly, Stamkos, Nugent-Hopkins, Hall, Duchesne, Sequin, Skinner, Landeskog, Tavares, Kane.

So, yeah... when those are the only RFAs making more than you, you're being paid like an elite player who is an RFA.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

In what world is 4.75 being paid great/elite RFA money? 4.75 is role player money. Which is exactly what Nyquist is. 5.5-6.0 million a year is elite RFA money, like Dougie Hamilton got.

Nyquist is turning 26 in less than two months. The majority of the other players on RFA deals are younger than him by 2-3 years.

In 1-2 years there will be a lot more forwards making significantly more than Nyquist makes per season.

 

[Frk It]

In what world is 4.75 being paid great/elite RFA money? 4.75 is role player money.

Nyquist is turning 26 in less than two months. The majority of the other players on RFA deals are younger than him by 2-3 years.

In 1-2 years there will be a lot more forwards making a significant amount more than Nyquist makes per season.

Apparently there's 140 elite players in the NHL.

He's getting paid like a great/elite player who is still an RFA. Is there a long list of RFA forwards making more than him? I can find 11 in the whole NHL. Tarasenko, O'Reilly, Stamkos, Nugent-Hopkins, Hall, Duchesne, Sequin, Skinner, Landeskog, Tavares, Kane.

So, yeah... when those are the only RFAs making more than you, you're being paid like an elite player who is an RFA.

There's frankly just not a lot of similar contracts to use as a comparison. So it doesn't mean much. A lot of those guys you listed are younger, are projected to improve a lot because they were high picks, and have a varying amount of UFA years bought and RFA years remaining. So they're not even good comparables to Nyquist's situation and contract. They're all RFA's... but that's about it.

 

[BinCookin]

They're all RFA's... but that's about it.

Everyone one of them is a first round pick too.

He has basically compared Nyquist to the top dogs (age 21-23) in the league. Taken out of context it would appear Nyquist is massively overpaid. Moreso this goes to show that Detroit is the only team to have an RFA outside the first round play well enough to get paid.

Also he didnt mention Saad. another RFA to do well. Or Bickell. Or etc etc... players that don't make as nice a point

 

[Shaman464]

All I will really say about Nyquist in the playoffs is that I believe he may have been a victim of Babcock's playoff strategy. I will reserve judgement until I have seen him play in the playoffs under Bash.

 

[Eastopia]

Everyone one of them is a first round pick too.

He has basically compared Nyquist to the top dogs (age 21-23) in the league. Taken out of context it would appear Nyquist is massively overpaid. Moreso this goes to show that Detroit is the only team to have an RFA outside the first round play well enough to get paid.

Also he didnt mention Saad. another RFA to do well. Or Bickell. Or etc etc... players that don't make as nice a point

Bickell is a very good example to bring up because he plays that gritty style that Nyquist apparently should ape and got paid his dollars because of his playoff performance. Now look at him. Yeah, I'll take Nyquist at 4.75 any day.