Confirmed with Link: Wings sign Larkin to 5 year deal (6.1 AAV)

[The Zetterberg Era]

This has pretty much happened in Toronto for Nazem Kadri, and could as well happen to us with Larkin. Our higher drafted kids could just overtake him as more talented players. Kadri is currently second liner and Babcock has started matching against opposite team top lines as a defensive top center.

Kadri after 2014-15 season:
250 games, 64+88=152, 0.61 points/game, 16:44 AVG TOI.

Larkin after 2017-18 season:
242 games, 56+84=140p, 0.58 points/game, 17:32 AVG TOI.

Kadri became a third liner a few weeks ago.

Kadri has always been decent on special teams, I think Larkin has more room for growth there. To me Larkin has a higher ceiling than Kadri. He has a more explosive element to his game. Larkin needs to consolidate last year, but I believe he will. He looks to have figured out controlling pace of the game and making big adjustments to his game night in and night out. I believe in why I think he improved but again he needs to consolidate it. While Kadri is a good #2, I don't think Larkin is capped out there, I think he has more potential growth and I think we see that again this year. He is a tireless worker, but that is a part of why I believe he will get there.

 

[Oddbob]

Yep Kadri is going to be 3rd line center in TO now, with Matthews and Tavares ahead of him. Kadri is Babcock's shutdown guy when the play against Crosby/McDavid for example. Live in Leaf land and they never stop talking about everything and anything leafs.

 

[njx9]

Kane's extension is fine. Since he's signed that deal he's put up 106, 89, and 76 points. Toews has some nice intangibles...or something...maybe by the end of his contract putting up 55 points for $10.5m won't seem so out of line.

Yeah, I'm having some fun poking Chicago with a stick over this after all of the crap I had to hear about how great Toews was when the team around him was great.

I think it's less about Kane's contract now (which he definitely would've gotten anyways), and more that if Chicago had originally extended him for more than 5 years or whatever in 2010, they might have had the cap flexibility for a second run in 2016 or 2017.

At the end of the day though, you take those 3 cups and run. People said after their first cup that they were cooked cap wise but still won again. Who knows if the Hawks are completely done or if a retool can get them back into contention.

It's really about the fact that in 2010, they had to re-up both guys for huge money. If they'd gone longer on both on their initial extensions, they'd have saved ~$8m, and could've possibly made a run in '16. Instead, they had to commit the right amount of money to Kane and overpay Toews a year or two early. They certainly had other dumb contracts, but perfect also shouldn't be the enemy of good.

Doesn't this potentially go both ways though? If Zadina, Mantha, Hronek, etc all blow up into all stars and demand big contracts and Larkin stagnates and is "only" a 60 point center...wouldn't it be a good thing we didn't sign him to a 7.5/8 million a year contract for a longer term? I guess my point is that both types of contracts could be beneficial or detrimental down the road and no one (at this point, 5-8 years out) really has any idea what is likely to happen.

Absolutely - but I guess I'd rather bet on our ability to develop Larkin. I mean, if Zadina, Mantha and Hronek all blow up but Larkin fails, we're pretty boned without a real C anyways.

I dunno, I get the arguments for giving him less years (even if I disagree with them), but I don't think it's fair to say you can just pay him if he earns it later. There are still potentially damaging ramifications of doing that.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I don't think there is an ideal way to sign him, anyway.

How much do you think you need to pay Larkin to get a full 8 years? Does Larkin want to wait 8 years for his big UFA payday knowing he has the potential to cash in?

 

[Frk It]

How much do you think you need to pay Larkin to get a full 8 years? Does Larkin want to wait 8 years for his big UFA payday knowing he has the potential to cash in?

Typically most players want to go right to UFA or as close to it as possible, while the team wants the opposite. Having guys prime years cost-controlled is the name of the game (IMO).

I am surprised that while having inferior stats it appears it would have cost us more money long-term with Larkin than what Scheifele and Monahan got. I thought those guys getting reasonable deals while having superior stats was really working in our favor to garner a team-friendly max length deal. I get that he may have hit UFA years earlier, but those guys got 8 year deals, so there was definitely some UFA years in play for them as well.

I would like to know what the ask was from Larkin's side on a 7-8 year deal. We will have to see how these next few years play out. This deal feels fair and I don't see a lot of risk on Detroit's side. But if I am on Larkin's agent, I would have to feel really good about being able to negotiate a deal at 25-26 years old that will be entirely UFA.

 

[newfy]

Typically most players want to go right to UFA or as close to it as possible, while the team wants the opposite. Having guys prime years cost-controlled is the name of the game (IMO).

I am surprised that while having inferior stats it appears it would have cost us more money long-term with Larkin than what Scheifele and Monahan got. I thought those guys getting reasonable deals while having superior stats was really working in our favor to garner a team-friendly max length deal. I get that he may have hit UFA years earlier, but those guys got 8 year deals, so there was definitely some UFA years in play for them as well.

I would like to know what the ask was from Larkin's side on a 7-8 year deal. We will have to see how these next few years play out. This deal feels fair and I don't see a lot of risk on Detroit's side. But if I am on Larkin's agent, I would have to feel really good about being able to negotiate a deal at 25-26 years old that will be entirely UFA.

Scheifele actually had really comparable stats to Larkin when he signed his deal. He signed a couple more years but was also at a higher percent of the cap and isnt much of a defensive player. I think if Larkin wasnt solid defensively and didnt PK you would basically have Sheifele as a comparable. Larkin is a bit better at the time they signed their long term deals so it makes sense that they each got what they got.

Scheifele even was similar in their PP vs EV point totals. By finding a little more success on the PP the next year Scheifele turned into a 70+ point player. I dont think its a stretch to say Larkin can do the same

 

[Frk It]

Scheifele actually had really comparable stats to Larkin when he signed his deal. He signed a couple more years but was also at a higher percent of the cap and isnt much of a defensive player. I think if Larkin wasnt solid defensively and didnt PK you would basically have Sheifele as a comparable. Larkin is a bit better at the time they signed their long term deals so it makes sense that they each got what they got.

Scheifele even was similar in their PP vs EV point totals. By finding a little more success on the PP the next year Scheifele turned into a 70+ point player. I dont think its a stretch to say Larkin can do the same

Well, Winnipeg got Scheifele to sign a 8 year deal at 23 where they were able to buy 4 UFA years.

We signed Larkin to a 5 year deal at virtually the same caphit, while only buying 1 UFA year.

I don't think Larkin's 200 ft game off-sets the fact Scheifele was a higher pick with better numbers, and a higher projected ceiling. That really should have been our comp, and we should have pushed for a similar style deal IMO.

I would guess that we got a little hung up on
-- long term deals spurning us in the past
-- lack of current cap space
-- uncertainty around Holland's future

 

[newfy]

Well, Winnipeg got Scheifele to sign a 8 year deal at 23 where they were able to buy 4 UFA years.

We signed Larkin to a 5 year deal at virtually the same caphit, while only buying 1 UFA year.

I don't think Larkin's 200 ft game off-sets the fact Scheifele was a higher pick with better numbers, and a higher projected ceiling. That really should have been our comp, and we should have pushed for a similar style deal IMO.

I would guess that we got a little hung up on
-- long term deals spurning us in the past
-- lack of current cap space
-- uncertainty around Holland's future

Scheifele was a reach of a pick 7 spots earlier, I'm not sure that had much of an impact. But he was really seen as a pure offense guy and I think the value of 2 way centers is higher among GMs than a lot of people think. But ya the three reasons you said are likely part of it, plus I think Winnipeg was in a position that they could afford to go super long term with him and not worry about it as much. Winnipeg was in a different position than Detroit and I agree that Detroit might not have wanted an 8 year deal that badly. Winnipeg has always sucked, whereas Holland has signed some brutal contracts, for all we know ownership told Holland not to go long term with any of his contracts because hes done shortly

 

[Frk It]

Scheifele was a reach of a pick 7 spots earlier, I'm not sure that had much of an impact. But he was really seen as a pure offense guy and I think the value of 2 way centers is higher among GMs than a lot of people think. But ya the three reasons you said are likely part of it, plus I think Winnipeg was in a position that they could afford to go super long term with him and not worry about it as much. Winnipeg was in a different position than Detroit and I agree that Detroit might not have wanted an 8 year deal that badly. Winnipeg has always sucked, whereas Holland has signed some brutal contracts, for all we know ownership told Holland not to go long term with any of his contracts because hes done shortly

Yeah, I also think they probably had an easier time selling him they were about to compete and take a team-friendly deal than maybe we would.

The Larkin deal is solid. Just don't think it was a home run like Winnipeg was able to pull off. Kudos to them.

 

[odin1981]

I don't necessarily think so either in general... but by giving him a 5x6.1 contract, the Wings obviously do. Also, he did it on a god-awful team and he did it without a crazy shooting percentage or his linemates having a crazy shooting percentage. Everything he did just seems sustainable. Like he was getting assists because he was gaining the zone and maintaining possession. He was simply doing hockey plays.

It wasn't something like David Clarkson where it was clear as day he wasn't going to score 30 again. Dylan Larkin was just in the right place to drive the play. It wasn't like Abby where he got 20 goals because Pavel Datsyuk could bank it in off his ass.

So maybe his floor isn't established at 60 points... but there is a much higher probability than not that he lands over the every year.

I see his floor as a 55-65 point 2 way center potentially for a few years, then maybe he can be a prime clone of Bergeron type ala 65-75 points, 60% face offs (this will be most difficult), and the guy you want shutting down the other teams top line.

If we can get a stud offensive center from a upcoming draft he could slot into the second line or we can default to a 1a- 1b situation again.

 

[DRW204]

Larkin had a pretty underrated year EV scoring wise.

According to NSS, once removing the guys labeled as Cs that were Ws, ranked 19th among Cs at 2.43 ESP/60. His 52 ESP's were ranked 12th and was 1 of 2 players in the league that had 60 or more points with less than 10 PP points.

 

[lilidk]

Both Datsyuk and Zetterberg got their contracts half that amount

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Both Datsyuk and Zetterberg got their contracts half that amount

And? The cap was like 45M then. When Datsyuk and Zetterberg signed their second deals, they basically did bridge deals that covered a couple years. It is completely irrelevant what Datsyuk and Zetterberg got on their second deals. I feel both were still RFAs at the end of them, it was against a much much more restrictive cap, and the Wings were prohibitive Cup favorites every year not hoping that this year they could trip over themselves and end within 10 points of the 8 seed out of the playoffs.

I mean, hell... Mantha got half the amount. They think close to the same about him as they do about Larkin.

 

[Henkka]

Datsyuk had 2-year contract worth 3.9M on the first salary cap seasons.

So at season 2005-2006, his 3.9M was 10% of the cap. Nowadays 7.95M.
When cap rised to 44M for next season, it was 8,86%. Nowadays 7.05M

At summer of 2007, he made a 7-year deal worth 6.7M.
Cap rised to 50.3 million, so that 6.7M was 13.3% of cap. Nowadays 10.6M.

At same time Pavel entered on his career peak, we did win a Cup and he did win many individual Trophies.

***

Zetterberg had 4-year deal for 2.65M after the lockout. That was a total steal.

2.65M against 39-44-50.3-56.7M caps:

Nowadays:
2005-06, 5.4M
2006-07, 4.8M
2007-08, 4.2M (Wins Conn Smythe)
2008-09, 3.7M

Then he made his 12-year deal, worth 6.083M per year. This was made against 56.8M cap, which was 10.7% of cap. Nowadays 8.5M. His real salary was 7.4M at 2009-10 season, which would mean 10.4M against nowadays cap.

 

[Konnan511]

Larkin had a pretty underrated year EV scoring wise.

According to NSS, once removing the guys labeled as Cs that were Ws, ranked 19th among Cs at 2.43 ESP/60. His 52 ESP's were ranked 12th and was 1 of 2 players in the league that had 60 or more points with less than 10 PP points.

Not only that, but if you take every player in the league born on a Tuesday who also has a mother named Sidney, he is first in every offensive category statistically!

 

[DRW204]

Both Datsyuk and Zetterberg got their contracts half that amount

Datsyuk 3.9M Cap hit in 2005 was 10% of the cap....Zetterberg was 6.79% but had a career high of 44 pts at the time. Larkin 7.67% of the cap.

@Henkka hit it on the head

 

[Henkka]

Pavel Datsyuk salary history:

2001-02, 700k (2-year deal, 23-year old)
2002-03, 675k
2003-04, 1.5M (1-year deal, 25-year old)
2004-05, lockout
2005-06, 3.9M (2-year deal, 27-year old)
2006-07, 3.9M
2007-08, 6.7M (7-year deal, 29-year old)
2008-09, 6.7M
2009-10, 6.7M
2010-11, 6.7M
2011-12, 6.7M
2012-13, 6.7M
2013-14, 6.7M
2014-15, 10M (3-year deal, 36-year old)
2015-16, 7.5M
2016-17, 5.5M (contract terminated)

 

[Henkka]

Henri Zetterberg salary history:

2002-03, 875k (2-year deal, 22-year old)
2003-04, 675k
2004-05, lockout
2005-06, 2.4M (4-year deal, 25-year old)
2006-07, 2.6M
2007-08, 2.7M
2008-09, 2.9M
2009-10, 7.4M (12-year deal, 29-year old)
2010-11, 7.75M
2011-12, 7.75M
2012-13, 7.75M
2013-14, 7.5M
2014-15, 7.5M
2015-16, 7.5M
2016-17, 7.5M
2017-18, 7.0M
2018-19, 3.35M
2019-20, 1.0M
2020-21, 1.0M (40-year old)

 

[HockeyinHD]

Actual salary per year (CapFriendly)- interesting
2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23
$6,750,000 $7,000,000 $4,750,000 $6,750,000 $5,250,000

I was flying through this thread to see if anyone else cared about this. That middle year is genuinely interesting to me. I have literally no idea why a team would structure a contract that way. The cheap years at the end I get. The cheaper years at the beginning I get. The cheap year in the bleeping middle? I don't get. I mean, I guess there might be some benefit to structuring a contract that way if you were intending a buyout, although why you'd have a buyout in mind while putting a long term deal together I have no idea.

I even checked when the CBA expires to see if it was some kind of lockout protection tomfoolery but nope, the CBA runs through the 21-22 season.

Anyone?

 

[newfy]

I was flying through this thread to see if anyone else cared about this. That middle year is genuinely interesting to me. I have literally no idea why a team would structure a contract that way. The cheap years at the end I get. The cheaper years at the beginning I get. The cheap year in the bleeping middle? I don't get. I mean, I guess there might be some benefit to structuring a contract that way if you were intending a buyout, although why you'd have a buyout in mind while putting a long term deal together I have no idea.

I even checked when the CBA expires to see if it was some kind of lockout protection tomfoolery but nope, the CBA runs through the 21-22 season.

Anyone?

I would guess he wanted to make some of the money quick to get a jump on making some money and then after he made a good chunk they just kinda put that in wherever to lower the hit a bit. That way he doesnt go into the last year of his contract making a lot less money but he gets paid next year and gets some money built up

but thats just a guess obviously

 

[Pavels Dog]

I was flying through this thread to see if anyone else cared about this. That middle year is genuinely interesting to me. I have literally no idea why a team would structure a contract that way. The cheap years at the end I get. The cheaper years at the beginning I get. The cheap year in the bleeping middle? I don't get. I mean, I guess there might be some benefit to structuring a contract that way if you were intending a buyout, although why you'd have a buyout in mind while putting a long term deal together I have no idea.

I even checked when the CBA expires to see if it was some kind of lockout protection tomfoolery but nope, the CBA runs through the 21-22 season.

Anyone?

I think that’s the year where a lockout is predicted to happen.

 

[WingsMJN2965]

Both Datsyuk and Zetterberg got their contracts half that amount

Why in the world would you compare to contracts signed over a decade ago...

 

[Shaman464]

Datsyuk had 2-year contract worth 3.9M on the first salary cap seasons.

So at season 2005-2006, his 3.9M was 10% of the cap. Nowadays 7.95M.
When cap rised to 44M for next season, it was 8,86%. Nowadays 7.05M

At summer of 2007, he made a 7-year deal worth 6.7M.
Cap rised to 50.3 million, so that 6.7M was 13.3% of cap. Nowadays 10.6M.

At same time Pavel entered on his career peak, we did win a Cup and he did win many individual Trophies.

***

Zetterberg had 4-year deal for 2.65M after the lockout. That was a total steal.

2.65M against 39-44-50.3-56.7M caps:

Nowadays:
2005-06, 5.4M
2006-07, 4.8M
2007-08, 4.2M (Wins Conn Smythe)
2008-09, 3.7M

Then he made his 12-year deal, worth 6.083M per year. This was made against 56.8M cap, which was 10.7% of cap. Nowadays 8.5M. His real salary was 7.4M at 2009-10 season, which would mean 10.4M against nowadays cap.

First year to year actual pay is useless information. They can pay a player 15 million one year, but the cap hit could be less than 10. Cap hit is king. Percentage of cap hit gives the most information. Second, as these deals aged, they aged much more gracefully than people give credit for because the percentage of cap drops each year over most of the life of these contracts. Larkin would be the same. A longer, moderately higher contract would have been as much as a value as this intermediate contract with a lower cap hit.

 

[Shaman464]

Both Datsyuk and Zetterberg got their contracts half that amount

See my post above but their cap hits as a percentage of cap was much higher than Larkin's.

 

[waltdetroit]

I was flying through this thread to see if anyone else cared about this. That middle year is genuinely interesting to me. I have literally no idea why a team would structure a contract that way. The cheap years at the end I get. The cheaper years at the beginning I get. The cheap year in the bleeping middle? I don't get. I mean, I guess there might be some benefit to structuring a contract that way if you were intending a buyout, although why you'd have a buyout in mind while putting a long term deal together I have no idea.

I even checked when the CBA expires to see if it was some kind of lockout protection tomfoolery but nope, the CBA runs through the 21-22 season.

Anyone?

There are two possible lockout seasons, 2020-21 and 2022-23. Either side can cancel the CBA in the earlier year I believe.