Speculation: Willy Nilly XX

Which contract would you sign if you were William Nylander


  • Total voters
    207
Status
Not open for further replies.

Nithoniniel

Registered User
Sep 7, 2012
20,913
16,749
Skövde, Sweden
I would be thrilled to see 3 more years of Willy and then deal with his next contract at that time.... AM34 is good for 50 goals now.
Nothing wrong with a bridge contract. I've mentioned it before. It helps us short-term, hurts us medium-term, and might help us again long-term. A long-term deal now sets us up for a scenario where he'll get a huge third deal well into his thirties, which might not be desirable.
 

Advanced stats

Registered User
May 26, 2010
11,651
7,551
Not saying it will happen today but leaning toward trading Willie.
Dubas already had a face to face with Willie. To me it seems they are still far apart from what both sides want. What’s the point of meeting with the agent? Both sides are firm in where they stand.
Hard to believe their far apart if they met yesterday and today after already meeting face to face late last week. Obviously some progress has been made. Trade is looking less likely by the day
 

4thline

Registered User
Jul 18, 2014
14,378
9,688
Waterloo
Nothing wrong with a bridge contract. I've mentioned it before. It helps us short-term, hurts us medium-term, and might help us again long-term. A long-term deal now sets us up for a scenario where he'll get a huge third deal well into his thirties, which might not be desirable.

Blasphemy. All that matters is the higher cost in years four through six.
 

Not My Tempo

Registered User
Feb 22, 2015
3,670
3,711
Toronto
Nothing wrong with a bridge contract. I've mentioned it before. It helps us short-term, hurts us medium-term, and might help us again long-term. A long-term deal now sets us up for a scenario where he'll get a huge third deal well into his thirties, which might not be desirable.
Yea and tbh I’d rather have the 3 of Marner, Matthews and Nylander have staggered contracts anyways so we don’t have to give them big UFA raises all at once too. I always envisioned it as 7 years for Willy, 7 for Marner and then 8 for Matthews so they’d just expire one year after the other but a bridge accomplished the same thing
 

Gabriel426

Registered User
Jun 30, 2015
16,570
10,188
Hard to believe their far apart if they met yesterday and today after already meeting face to face late last week. Obviously some progress has been made. Trade is looking less likely by the day
I think someone mentioned it here, they are either close or really far apart.
Either way, I just want this to be over and done with bc the TO media will pound on this and make it a distraction if nothing else is happening with the Leafs, ie not losing, Maathews getting 20+minutes....
 

Gabriel426

Registered User
Jun 30, 2015
16,570
10,188
Nothing wrong with a bridge contract. I've mentioned it before. It helps us short-term, hurts us medium-term, and might help us again long-term. A long-term deal now sets us up for a scenario where he'll get a huge third deal well into his thirties, which might not be desirable.
I agree completely. I am a strong believer that players coming off ELC should sign a team friendly bridge deal and make the big bucks on their third contract.
 
  • Like
Reactions: freshwind

Gary Nylund

Registered User
Oct 10, 2013
29,919
22,195
I think someone mentioned it here, they are either close or really far apart.
Either way, I just want this to be over and done with bc the TO media will pound on this and make it a distraction if nothing else is happening with the Leafs, ie not losing, Maathews getting 20+minutes....

I wouldn't worry about it too much. I agree that distractions aren't good but if it wasn't this, it would be something else.
 

HamiltonNHL

Parity era hockey is just puck luck + draft luck
Jan 4, 2012
20,555
11,033
geezus H man chill out

we are 9 games into a 10 year run as true cup contenders.

exactly.

even if we lose fussy Nylander for the whole year it's not earth shattering bad news.

3 year bridge and willy see crappy PP time and 3/4 line time if he messes up.
 

Gabriel426

Registered User
Jun 30, 2015
16,570
10,188
I wouldn't worry about it too much. I agree that distractions aren't good but if it wasn't this, it would be something else.
Agree completely, but having a contract dispute or sitting out.... is a bit different bc players might not mind in the beginning....but after a while it takes such a negative effect since some reporters ie Simmons might ask Kadri, do you think it is fair for Willie to sit out while you took a discount to stay with the team?
 

Gary Nylund

Registered User
Oct 10, 2013
29,919
22,195
Agree completely, but having a contract dispute or sitting out.... is a bit different bc players might not mind in the beginning....but after a while it takes such a negative effect since some reporters ie Simmons might ask Kadri, do you think it is fair for Willie to sit out while you took a discount to stay with the team?

True enough. The mere thought of some idiot asking Kadri that makes me a little bit ill.
 

Advanced stats

Registered User
May 26, 2010
11,651
7,551
I think someone mentioned it here, they are either close or really far apart.
Either way, I just want this to be over and done with bc the TO media will pound on this and make it a distraction if nothing else is happening with the Leafs, ie not losing, Maathews getting 20+minutes....
If their far apart they wouldn't be talking this much.
 

Ziggdiezan

Registered User
Apr 10, 2015
10,847
5,676
I agree completely. I am a strong believer that players coming off ELC should sign a team friendly bridge deal and make the big bucks on their third contract.
The problem is the leafs might not be the team who can give Nylander big bucks after his bridge.

I dont see how the leafs can afford to resign Nylander after a bridge. There would have to be a serious increase in the cap or he would have to severely underperform as I think he is a lock for 70 points at least once in the next couple years and so will get paid a lot.

Have to consider a Rielly resign not far after any bridge deal so ya I really dont want a bridge option unless he is being traded.
 

Carltons Cup

Let's Do This..
Feb 22, 2018
2,876
4,595
Nothing wrong with a bridge contract. I've mentioned it before. It helps us short-term, hurts us medium-term, and might help us again long-term. A long-term deal now sets us up for a scenario where he'll get a huge third deal well into his thirties, which might not be desirable.
Essentially this is a "put up" or "shut-up" contract for Willy. He can put his money where his mouth is to see if he's worth more...
 

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,329
12,670
South Mountain
Its actually 10 million in four years... But its still more than I thought. Most of that is due to the NHLPA using their escrow to inflate the cap though.

Actually, you have it backwards. The NHLPA has been deflating the cap in recent years by winding down their use of the escalator. If they had instead used the default escalator the cap would be around $82m this season.

Escrow doesn't inflate or deflate the cap itself, revenue from the prior year determines the cap. And the escalator doesn't compound itself year to year.
 

Alerion

Registered User
Dec 24, 2012
11,035
5,108
Halifax, NS

There's a bunch of good quotes in there, but this one stood out to me.
I don’t begrudge an RFA or a player for trying to get what he thinks he is worth, but thinking pragmatically, they are fighting an uphill battle in a situation where the system is stacked against you. You are not going to get $6 million on a two-year deal. You are not going to get $7-8 million on a six-year deal. You better find out what number you can live with on a short-term deal, get back to work, score some goals, get your salary arb rights, and stick it right up the you-know-what of the Toronto Maple Leafs when the system favours you more than it favours the club.
 

MyBudJT

Registered User
Mar 5, 2018
7,429
4,576
Actually, you have it backwards. The NHLPA has been deflating the cap in recent years by winding down their use of the escalator. If they had instead used the default escalator the cap would be around $82m this season.

Escrow doesn't inflate or deflate the cap itself, revenue from the prior year determines the cap. And the escalator doesn't compound itself year to year.

This past year after the Vegas expansion you're right... But I was generalizing since the Toews/Kane contracts...
 

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,329
12,670
South Mountain
This past year after the Vegas expansion you're right... But I was generalizing since the Toews/Kane contracts...

Doesn’t make a difference. The escaltor doesn’t change growth rates over multiple year periods. If the PA had used 0% every year since Kane/Toews or 5% every year the total cap growth over that period would be almost identical.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad