Confirmed Signing with Link: [TOR] Maple Leafs sign Nikita Zaitsev to extension (7 years, $4.5m AAV)

[Tim Raines]

Don Cherry said last round that he didn't like the idea of 7 years and showed defensive break downs. Wasn't overly impressed.

That's basically all I know about him.

Your first problem was tuning in Don Cherry.

 

[Jerkini]

$4.5m for a rookie playing 20+ minutes per night? You guys are insane if you think this is too much money.

 

[LTIR Trickery]

I know hes good, but... I don't know, man, it seems like just a little much a little too soon. On the other hand, this could be brilliant in 1-3 years if he keeps developing. Scared money don't make none.

 

[Puckstuff]

I can honestly say he's a legitimate top 4 NHL D-man at 24 years old. Worth the money. His ceiling however is a #2 or #3. This could be a steal... and at worst you have a good top 4 guy at 4.5 million.

 

[BL92]

7 years? Not smart.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Wow 7 years. I thought the new Mgt with the Leafs would cut down on the long term contracts that the previous Mgt teams were criticized for. Probably 2-3 years longer than I would have preferred.

 

[LTIR Trickery]

7 years takes him to his, what, age 31/32 season? I don't find that unreasonable.

 

[Habs Halifax]

7 years? Not smart.

I tend to agree it's too much term. A lot can happen in 7 years! He ain't no Duncan Keith! I think a 4 or 5 year deal would of been less risky and accomplished the same thing they were looking for (cheaper AAV).

Giving anyone a 7 year deal after only one year of NHL experience is not a smart move. It may work out just fine or it may back fire and then you have a problem on your hands. True character of a player is determined by more than just one season.

However, having said all of this. It always takes two sides in any negotiation. Nobody knows what each side started at in term and in AAV.

 

[Habs Halifax]

7 years takes him to his, what, age 31/32 season? I don't find that unreasonable.

Except your banking on Zaitsev being the exact same player for those 7 years. It does have risk as he only ever played one season in the NHL! It has nothing to do with age. Most long term deals (6+ years) are given to player who have proven themselves over several seasons!

 

[The Winter Soldier]

7 years takes him to his, what, age 31/32 season? I don't find that unreasonable.

I think he is 25, turning 26 in October. 33 when this contract ends.

 

[Habs Halifax]

7 years takes him to his, what, age 31/32 season? I don't find that unreasonable.

I think he is 25, turning 26 in October. 33 when this contract ends.

26 in the next season. 32 in his last season of the 7 year deal. (26,27,28,29,30,31,32)

 

[pylon17]

Yushkevich was one of Zaitsev's first KHL coaches. I'm sure a recommendation regarding Zaitsev's work ethic and character has long since been communicated. And Yushkevich has high standards.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

26 in the next season. 32 in his last season of the 7 year deal. (26,27,28,29,30,31,32)

Thanks, I think this is what I said. When his contract ends at the end of the season. He will be 33 or more correctly turning 33.

 

[bobermay]

Wow 7 years. I thought the new Mgt with the Leafs would cut down on the long term contracts that the previous Mgt teams were criticized for. Probably 2-3 years longer than I would have preferred.

Of course, you don't like anything the Leafs does...

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Of course, you don't like anything the Leafs does...

I'm actually ok with the caphit. But as I and others have noted. The term is questionable for a player with one NHL year under him that is recovering from a concussion.

 

[xxreact9]

I can honestly say he's a legitimate top 4 NHL D-man at 24 years old. Worth the money. His ceiling however is a #2 or #3. This could be a steal... and at worst you have a good top 4 guy at 4.5 million.

You can say he earned that role for 1 season, on a bottom-5 defensive unit in the league.


If you look at his comparable contracts they got fairly fleeced, the term is completely unwarranted. Josi, Lindholm, Klingberg, etc all received very similar deals**

**However, those players earned their contracts by playing several strong seasons in the NHL, several several seasons that were all better than Zaitsev's.

He's played 1 singular season in the league and while I realize they absorbed all difficult responsibilities to protect Gardiner's flaws, he was still over -20 in his only year in the league.

Even if it had 5mil cap hit but for only 4 years, it would be a better contract for the leafs.

I really just don't see the point in the astronomical term, that is only advisable when the player has long-term upside and can eventually make the contract a bargain. Zaitsev just doesn't have a ton of upside, probably a #3 defender in the league is his peak.

There are PLENTY of downsides too. His downside is a 3rd pairing / not even NHL defender / goes to KHL and isn't in the league.

He isn't an established career top-4 D who's been doing it for 10 years. He played the role once on a team that had no one else who could. KEY point.

 

[bobermay]

You can say he earned that role for 1 season, on a bottom-5 defensive unit in the league.


If you look at his comparable contracts they got fairly fleeced, the term is completely unwarranted. Josi, Lindholm, Klingberg, etc all received very similar deals**

**However, those players earned their contracts by playing several strong seasons in the NHL, several several seasons that were all better than Zaitsev's.

He's played 1 singular season in the league and while I realize they absorbed all difficult responsibilities to protect Gardiner's flaws, he was still over -20 in his only year in the league.

Even if it had 5mil cap hit but for only 4 years, it would be a better contract for the leafs.

I really just don't see the point in the astronomical term, that is only advisable when the player has long-term upside and can eventually make the contract a bargain. Zaitsev just doesn't have a ton of upside, probably a #3 defender in the league is his peak.

There are PLENTY of downsides too. His downside is a 3rd pairing / not even NHL defender / goes to KHL and isn't in the league.

He isn't an established career top-4 D who's been doing it for 10 years. He played the role once on a team that had no one else who could. KEY point.

He also isn't a kid coming from Junior. He was a top pairing D-man in the 2nd best league in the world for a couple of seasons too.

 

[TOGuy14]

Don Cherry said last round that he didn't like the idea of 7 years and showed defensive break downs. Wasn't overly impressed.

That's basically all I know about him.

Here is Don Cherry on scouting and how he would draft and build a team

 

[Liferleafer]

Wow 7 years. I thought the new Mgt with the Leafs would cut down on the long term contracts that the previous Mgt teams were criticized for. Probably 2-3 years longer than I would have preferred.

So you'd prefer going 3-4 years at alot more cap hit?

 

[Liferleafer]

I'm actually ok with the caphit. But as I and others have noted. The term is questionable for a player with one NHL year under him that is recovering from a concussion.

The only way to get that caphit is to go that term.

 

[BertCorbeau]

The only way to get that caphit is to go that term.

Not necessarily when you consider the Leafs had to buy 6 years of free agency, particularly all of Zaitsev's prime years.

Term is longer than I would have preferred. 5 would have been good in my books... it's a risk.

 

[Canada4Gold]

You can say he earned that role for 1 season, on a bottom-5 defensive unit in the league.


If you look at his comparable contracts they got fairly fleeced, the term is completely unwarranted. Josi, Lindholm, Klingberg, etc all received very similar deals**

**However, those players earned their contracts by playing several strong seasons in the NHL, several several seasons that were all better than Zaitsev's.

He's played 1 singular season in the league and while I realize they absorbed all difficult responsibilities to protect Gardiner's flaws, he was still over -20 in his only year in the league.

Even if it had 5mil cap hit but for only 4 years, it would be a better contract for the leafs.

I really just don't see the point in the astronomical term, that is only advisable when the player has long-term upside and can eventually make the contract a bargain. Zaitsev just doesn't have a ton of upside, probably a #3 defender in the league is his peak.

There are PLENTY of downsides too. His downside is a 3rd pairing / not even NHL defender / goes to KHL and isn't in the league.

He isn't an established career top-4 D who's been doing it for 10 years. He played the role once on a team that had no one else who could. KEY point.

Klingberg, Klefbom, and Josi all got their contracts after 1 NHL season. Hence why the cap hits are so low. If those teams had waited 2 more years to give those players 7 year deals they would be in the 5.5-6 range at least. Josi would probably be even higher.

 

[The List Of Jericho]

Wow 7 years. I thought the new Mgt with the Leafs would cut down on the long term contracts that the previous Mgt teams were criticized for. Probably 2-3 years longer than I would have preferred.

So you sign him for 2-3 years, if he progresses which he likely will you risk losing him as a UFA or you have to pay him 6-7 mil a year when you'll have to pay the Big 3. Worst case scenario is he regresses and likely bolts to Russia which then causes his contract to be voided, this was brilliant by Leafs management.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

Put me down for "Yikes" as well.

 

[Legend123]

bad deal. Idk why they would do this type of commitment. Hes played just one season. And wasnt anything special to deserve a 7 year deal. He isnt amazing offensively nor defensively, hes just good to decent at both ends of the ice. Weird deal.