Confirmed with Link: Nyquist re-signed for 4 years

[Frk It]

Excellent news. Now unload one of Big E or Quincey and Joker.

Does that cap space include Mule being on LTIR?

He's not on LTIR, so I am assuming they are counting his contract.

 

[InjuredChoker]

He's not on LTIR, so I am assuming they are counting his contract.

well they can't put him on LTIR yet..

 

[JPE123]

I think we're around 1.7 mil with 12/7/2.

1.7, Just enough to sign Daniel

 

[HomersWorld]

Yikes. This is just out to lunch.

29 goals is a ton in today's NHL, and Tatar isn't much better than Nyquist (if at all). I don't understand the mancrush on Tatar and yet the slamming of Nyquist, but we see that on here pretty frequently. Tatar had a better season, but Nyquist has shown that he can do more.

That's just how it goes. A year ago a lot of people were ready to ship Tatar to Buffalo. I'm happy to have both guys going forward.

 

[Frk It]

well they can't put him on LTIR yet..

Exactly, that's what I'm saying...

 

[SoupNazi]

I'll just repost what I said on the main board:


This deal is a lose-lose for Detroit. It's a 4 year deal at a decent term that makes Nyquist a free agent at age 30.

Let's say he improves and gets better (I'm not sure how much better he's gonna get considering he's 26 and has played over 200 games at the NHL level). Detroit then has to cough up at least 6.5 million +. That would mean one of Detroit's highest paid players is a winger which we all know is the least important position on the ice. What great asset and cap management right there. This also means Detroit is going to be paying lots of money to a player soon exiting his prime. Again, great asset management.

On the flip side, he becomes a UFA in 4 years, and his price is too high, or he regresses so Detroit lets him walk for nothing. Now Detroit lost a decent player when they could have traded him for a Top 4 dman that Detroit desperately needs.

Like I said, it's a lose-lose situation.

Well that looks at the bright side that we just locked him up to a fair deal.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I'll just repost what I said on the main board:


This deal is a lose-lose for Detroit. It's a 4 year deal at a decent term that makes Nyquist a free agent at age 30.

Let's say he improves and gets better (I'm not sure how much better he's gonna get considering he's 26 and has played over 200 games at the NHL level). Detroit then has to cough up at least 6.5 million +. That would mean one of Detroit's highest paid players is a winger which we all know is the least important position on the ice. What great asset and cap management right there. This also means Detroit is going to be paying lots of money to a player soon exiting his prime. Again, great asset management.

On the flip side, he becomes a UFA in 4 years, and his price is too high, or he regresses so Detroit lets him walk for nothing. Now Detroit lost a decent player when they could have traded him for a Top 4 dman that Detroit desperately needs.

Like I said, it's a lose-lose situation.

If Nyquist regresses and they let him walk, how did we lose a decent player for nothing? If he plays poorly enough in four years where he isn't worth another contract, what exactly did we lose out on?

Also four years from now assumes Datsyuk is gone, the cap has gone up, and other players are getting paid more. Nyquist with his next contract is not going to be one of the highest paid players unless he improves a decent amount. 6.5 is not going to be nearly that much by then.

 

[SirloinUB]

I'll just repost what I said on the main board:


This deal is a lose-lose for Detroit. It's a 4 year deal at a decent term that makes Nyquist a free agent at age 30.

Let's say he improves and gets better (I'm not sure how much better he's gonna get considering he's 26 and has played over 200 games at the NHL level). Detroit then has to cough up at least 6.5 million +. That would mean one of Detroit's highest paid players is a winger which we all know is the least important position on the ice. What great asset and cap management right there. This also means Detroit is going to be paying lots of money to a player soon exiting his prime. Again, great asset management.

On the flip side, he becomes a UFA in 4 years, and his price is too high, or he regresses so Detroit lets him walk for nothing. Now Detroit lost a decent player when they could have traded him for a Top 4 dman that Detroit desperately needs.

Like I said, it's a lose-lose situation.

Posts like this make me want to smash my head against a brick wall...

You are bringing up hypothetical situations 4 years from now, to definitively call the contract a lose-lose. Your post is 99% baseless. Not to nitpick, but you couldn't even get the games played right man. Hard to take you seriously.


What we do have, is a player locked up for the majority of his prime at a fair price for both sides. That is a GOOD THING

 

[joe89]

He was a sweet, sweet angel.

generalfanager.com has us at -500k cap space with this signing. I'm not really sure what to believe, to be honest.

Also saw this:



Who knows, man.

Generalfanager has 9 defensemen on our active roster, including Ouellet & Marchenko that can both be sent down without waivers.

 

[Pavels Dog]

I'll just repost what I said on the main board:


This deal is a lose-lose for Detroit. It's a 4 year deal at a decent term that makes Nyquist a free agent at age 30.

Let's say he improves and gets better (I'm not sure how much better he's gonna get considering he's 26 and has played over 200 games at the NHL level). Detroit then has to cough up at least 6.5 million +. That would mean one of Detroit's highest paid players is a winger which we all know is the least important position on the ice. What great asset and cap management right there. This also means Detroit is going to be paying lots of money to a player soon exiting his prime. Again, great asset management.

On the flip side, he becomes a UFA in 4 years, and his price is too high, or he regresses so Detroit lets him walk for nothing. Now Detroit lost a decent player when they could have traded him for a Top 4 dman that Detroit desperately needs.

Like I said, it's a lose-lose situation.

What a terribly pessimistic view. Like, unrealistically pessimistic. Neither of your "lose" scenarios makes any sense.

If he improves, he is a steal. If he regresses, at least he's not locked up for 10 years on an untradeable contract.

This is a solid deal. Not sure what you wanted this contract to be, because this is right in the expected ballpark.

 

[LeftBackLegend]

Really happy with this. Holland has gone a long way this off-season to restoring my confidence in him. Long may it continue.

 

[Adityase]

I'll just repost what I said on the main board:


This deal is a lose-lose for Detroit. It's a 4 year deal at a decent term that makes Nyquist a free agent at age 30.

Let's say he improves and gets better (I'm not sure how much better he's gonna get considering he's 26 and has played over 200 games at the NHL level). Detroit then has to cough up at least 6.5 million +. That would mean one of Detroit's highest paid players is a winger which we all know is the least important position on the ice. What great asset and cap management right there. This also means Detroit is going to be paying lots of money to a player soon exiting his prime. Again, great asset management.

On the flip side, he becomes a UFA in 4 years, and his price is too high, or he regresses so Detroit lets him walk for nothing. Now Detroit lost a decent player when they could have traded him for a Top 4 dman that Detroit desperately needs.

Like I said, it's a lose-lose situation.

You're right. Even if we win 4 cups the next 4 years it's just going to be a disaster.

 

[sean3250]

Well that looks at the bright side that we just locked him up to a fair deal.

I think it's currently a fair deal (money wise), although I'm worried about the future implications of this deal.

If Nyquist regresses and they let him walk, how did we lose a decent player for nothing? If he plays poorly enough in four years where he isn't worth another contract, what exactly did we lose out on?

Also four years from now assumes Datsyuk is gone, the cap has gone up, and other players are getting paid more. Nyquist with his next contract is not going to be one of the highest paid players unless he improves a decent amount. 6.5 is not going to be nearly that much by then.

When I mention Nyquist regressing, I'm talking about him regressing to a 20 goal, 45 point winger not some scrub.

And what did we lose out on? Well, we lost out on trading him when his value was highest. Smart asset management is selling high on an asset that comes from a position of strength to help deal with an organizational weakness.

4 hears ago the cap was set at 64.3 million dollars (Source: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=5669160). I believe the cap is currently 71 million or so. That means the Cap has gone up about 7 million in 4 years. Lets make a conservative estimate and say the cap is at 80 million in 4 more years. That's not a huge increase. And while Dats will be gone and Z may be LTIR'd , Detroit still has players like Tatar, Sheahan, Dekeyser and Mrazek and hopefully Larkin, Mantha, and Svech along with others who will need to be paid as well. There's a lot (good and bad) that can happen in 4 years.

Posts like this make me want to smash my head against a brick wall...

You are bringing up hypothetical situations 4 years from now, to definitively call the contract a lose-lose. Your post is 99% baseless. Not to nitpick, but you couldn't even get the games played right man. Hard to take you seriously.


What we do have, is a player locked up for the majority of his prime at a fair price for both sides. That is a GOOD THING

Gus Nyquist.
Regular season GP: 179
Playoffs GP: 30

179+30=209. That's more than 200 games right?

Listen, I understand I have a different opinion than most, but that doesn't mean it carries any less "weight" or "value" than anyone else"s around here.

It's hard to take me seriously? Next time you nitpick my opinion, at least get the facts straight.

 

[detredWINgs]

Fine deal. Right in the ballpark of what I expected. I love that middle-term deals affecting UFAS years are making a comeback.

With regards to cap space, I think Holland should be able to pull off a Kindl trade. Retain 600k and you can get two of the kids in for Kindl's space.

 

[Kronwalled55]

This is honestly the perfect contract for him in my opinion... He's obviously going to play well enough to live up to it. Plus by the time his contract is over Nyquist will be playing an even larger role on this team. If he continues to grow as a player and becomes our leading scorer then we know where to go from there and pay him accordingly. If he falters, we can pay him less or even move on.

 

[Kronwalled55]

Fine deal. Right in the ballpark of what I expected. I love that middle-term deals affecting UFAS years are making a comeback.

With regards to cap space, I think Holland should be able to pull off a Kindl trade. Retain 600k and you can get two of the kids in for Kindl's space.

Couldn't we just waive Kindl? It would be great to get something for him, but what team doesn't already have someone of his caliber somewhere in their organization?

 

[PullHard]

This is honestly the perfect contract for him in my opinion... He's obviously going to play well enough to live up to it. Plus by the time his contract is over Nyquist will be playing an even larger role on this team. If he continues to grow as a player and becomes our leading scorer then we know where to go from there and pay him accordingly. If he falters, we can pay him less or even move on.

The timing is right IMO, because I'd imagine, regardless (not the right word) of his production, he will be looked at as an important part of the team's leadership and might even be wearing a letter on his jersey by the end of this deal, or else looking to get one in the not-so-distant future after it.

Once a guy reaches a certain level of team identity and "core" status within the room and organization they seem to be willing to work with Holland to take a lesser cap hit due to tacking a year or two on a contract at a lesser rate or w/e.

Ericsson is basically the only exception I can think of in this, where he clearly recognized he was going to be somewhere between #2-4 on the team's defensive depth chart and had Holland over a barrel.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Awesome contract, happy Goose is locked up. I think this will be a bargain for Detroit shortly.

Holland is having an awesome off-season.

Lock up DK and dump Quincey, hopefully get Sheahan done to something would be the cherry on top.

 

[InjuredChoker]

I think it's currently a fair deal (money wise), although I'm worried about the future implications of this deal.



When I mention Nyquist regressing, I'm talking about him regressing to a 20 goal, 45 point winger not some scrub.

And what did we lose out on? Well, we lost out on trading him when his value was highest. Smart asset management is selling high on an asset that comes from a position of strength to help deal with an organizational weakness.

4 hears ago the cap was set at 64.3 million dollars (Source: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=5669160). I believe the cap is currently 71 million or so. That means the Cap has gone up about 7 million in 4 years. Lets make a conservative estimate and say the cap is at 80 million in 4 more years. That's not a huge increase. And while Dats will be gone and Z may be LTIR'd , Detroit still has players like Tatar, Sheahan, Dekeyser and Mrazek and hopefully Larkin, Mantha, and Svech along with others who will need to be paid as well. There's a lot (good and bad) that can happen in 4 years.





Gus Nyquist.
Regular season GP: 179
Playoffs GP: 30

179+30=209. That's more than 200 games right?

Listen, I understand I have a different opinion than most, but that doesn't mean it carries any less "weight" or "value" than anyone else"s around here.

It's hard to take me seriously? Next time you nitpick my opinion, at least get the facts straight.

4 years ago, players got 57% of the revenue..

 

[Hammettf2b]

I'll just repost what I said on the main board:


This deal is a lose-lose for Detroit. It's a 4 year deal at a decent term that makes Nyquist a free agent at age 30.

Let's say he improves and gets better (I'm not sure how much better he's gonna get considering he's 26 and has played over 200 games at the NHL level). Detroit then has to cough up at least 6.5 million +. That would mean one of Detroit's highest paid players is a winger which we all know is the least important position on the ice. What great asset and cap management right there. This also means Detroit is going to be paying lots of money to a player soon exiting his prime. Again, great asset management.

On the flip side, he becomes a UFA in 4 years, and his price is too high, or he regresses so Detroit lets him walk for nothing. Now Detroit lost a decent player when they could have traded him for a Top 4 dman that Detroit desperately needs.

Like I said, it's a lose-lose situation.

What do you suggest to make it a win-win situation?

 

[hot dog]

The next contract is going to be so awkward with him. He'll probably be playing at around the same level he's at now or a little bit better, and want a big raise given a) his impending UFA status and b) a potentially higher cap. Going into his age 30 season... I agree with the guys who say that's going to probably end up being a bad contract, because I can definitely see Holland extending him for 6 years at that point if it's what it takes to keep a homegrown guy around.

Presuming Kenny is still here, of course...

And that said, I do like this AAV. Just wish we could get an extra year. I would've paid an extra .5 in AAV at least for an extra two.

 

[sean3250]

What a terribly pessimistic view. Like, unrealistically pessimistic. Neither of your "lose" scenarios makes any sense.

If he improves, he is a steal. If he regresses, at least he's not locked up for 10 years on an untradeable contract.

This is a solid deal. Not sure what you wanted this contract to be, because this is right in the expected ballpark.

Money wise it's a very fair deal, I can agree with that. Basically, I would have rather tried to trade Nyquist for a Top 4 dman than keep him and I probably expressed that in the wrong way on my last post.

I honestly wish Nyquist nothing but the best, and now that he's here for the long term I hope he develops into a great winger.

You're right. Even if we win 4 cups the next 4 years it's just going to be a disaster.

I love the Wings and always will win or lose. I'd obviously be ecstatic if the Wings even won one Cup in the next 5 years. I may have come off as a fan who is never pleased, but that is definitely not the truth. The Wings could become like Buffalo was this year and I'd still watch every game.

4 years ago, players got 57% of the revenue..

And I believe they currently get 50% now. I do not know how much that 7% affects the players though. I know it obviously does, but is a 7% difference really that much? (Honestly asking).

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Money wise it's a very fair deal, I can agree with that. Basically, I would have rather tried to trade Nyquist for a Top 4 dman than keep him and I probably expressed that in the wrong way on my last post.

I honestly wish Nyquist nothing but the best, and now that he's here for the long term I hope he develops into a great winger.




I love the Wings and always will win or lose. I'd obviously be ecstatic if the Wings even won one Cup in the next 5 years. I may have come off as a fan who is never pleased, but that is definitely not the truth. The Wings could become like Buffalo was this year and I'd still watch every game.



And I believe they currently get 50% now. I do not know how much that 7% affects the players though. I know it obviously does, but is a 7% difference really that much? (Honestly asking).

7% on 64.3M is 4.5M. So at 50% of HRR it would have been 59.8M. So instead of going up 7, it's gone up at least 11.

 

[InjuredChoker]

And I believe they currently get 50% now. I do not know how much that 7% affects the players though. I know it obviously does, but is a 7% difference really that much? (Honestly asking).

on a quick math about 8 million. so yeah, a lot.

salary cap was 70.2 mil for 12-13, then came the lockout and revenuers were tied 50/50 and cap dropped back to 64.3 mil the next season (13-14).

 

[InjuredChoker]

7% on 64.3M is 4.5M. So at 50% of HRR it would have been 59.8M. So instead of going up 7, it's gone up at least 11.

math isn't my strength but that is counting 7% from only players share and we should look to find that 7% from total revenue, no?