• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
amato

Next contracts for the young guns

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

Larkin has the drive, work ethic, and skill to be a core player on this team for a long time. If he ends up on a bridge deal now, he'll end up making big money in his 30s. 

An 8 year deal for him now would also mean having him on a lower cap hit in his prime years instead of having him on too high of a cap hit in his 30s. 8 years is the obvious route for Larkin IMO. He's only gonna keep getting better. 

I think that's okay though. We don't really have anyone else making big money by that time and almost all of our contracts would be off the books. 

I can't imagine being stuck with him for 8 years with an NMC if he ends up being a bust. I know we're all Larkin fans, but there's no proof he's going to end up becoming an elite player. He's had a total of maybe 1.5 years of NHL in his 3 year career.

Hell, even McDavid and Eichel were more proven and consistent and hence are locked up for 8 years each. Both of them have had 3 solid years in the NHL and neither suffered from a sophomore slump or whatever it is. 

 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, Larkin's ceiling is a top 10 center, while his floor is a top 50 center. He likely ends up somewhere in between. If we can somehow lock him up long term at $5-6M, it's a no brainer for me. Worst case scenario, we're paying our 2C $5.5M for 8 years (we're currently paying our 3C $5.25M for another 4 seasons...). Best case scenario, we're paying our 1C $5.5M for 8 years (well below the average for top centers). Like has been mentioned, giving Larkin a long term contract shouldn't be much of a risk. His work ethic and determination is what sets him apart. He's not going to get paid and take the foot off the gas like others have. He's our future captain, and very likely top line center. Pay him as such. I can see a bridge deal really biting us in the ass with a player like Larkin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

In my opinion, Larkin's ceiling is a top 10 center, while his floor is a top 50 center. He likely ends up somewhere in between. If we can somehow lock him up long term at $5-6M, it's a no brainer for me. Worst case scenario, we're paying our 2C $5.5M for 8 years (we're currently paying our 3C $5.25M for another 4 seasons...). Best case scenario, we're paying our 1C $5.5M for 8 years (well below the average for top centers). Like has been mentioned, giving Larkin a long term contract shouldn't be much of a risk. His work ethic and determination is what sets him apart. He's not going to get paid and take the foot off the gas like others have. He's our future captain, and very likely top line center. Pay him as such. I can see a bridge deal really biting us in the ass with a player like Larkin.

Yeah, Larkin is reading this and saying “I’m not getting trapped getting underpaid for 8 years and then am no longer in my prime”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, The Datsyukian Deke said:

Sure, would be smart on his part to say "no, no" to max. term. ;)

A "top 10 1C" getting $5 million per? Yeah I'd walk away especially when my buddy Eichel is making a lot more and has only 6 more points than me. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really cannot believe Buffalo gave Eichel that extension! $10M cap hit? Seriously? This does not bode well for us! There goes our cap space.

Using that example, I see both Larkin and Mantha 8x8.  AA 3yrs x $5M minimum. There goes any hope of attracting a UFA. Green may even be out of reach. Ugh, these GM's, isn't this why we had the first lockout?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Yeah, Larkin is reading this and saying “I’m not getting trapped getting underpaid for 8 years and then am no longer in my prime”

Absolutely. I'm not saying he would accept a long term, cap friendly deal. All I'm saying is that from Holland's perspective, it would be very wise to try your hardest to lock him up to such a deal.

13 minutes ago, kickazz said:

A "top 10 1C" getting $5 million per? Yeah I'd walk away especially when my buddy Eichel is making a lot more and has only 6 more points than me. 

Eichel is massively overpaid in my opinion. I hope Larkin isn't looking for anything close to $10M, max term.

Eichel also has 43 more points in 25 less games than Larkin. $7M would be the max I would be comfortable going with Larkin, but even that, I'd be hesitant this early in his career.

2 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

I really cannot believe Buffalo gave Eichel that extension! $10M cap hit? Seriously? This does not bode well for us! There goes our cap space.

Using that example, I see both Larkin and Mantha 8x8.  AA 3yrs x $5M minimum. There goes any hope of attracting a UFA. Green may even be out of reach. Ugh, these GM's, isn't this why we had the first lockout?

One team overpaying doesn't set the market price. There are plenty other comparables throughout the league on fair contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we give Larkin an 8 year deal now, it will run till he's 29. And at 29 he'll likely get another max term deal which we will have to pay him a lot more money. 29 is still considered prime. Pretty sure Z and Dats scored their highest totals around that age. And also the time Z got his long term contract. 

Better to give him a 4 year deal now and assess him. Once he's 25 give him a max deal till he's 33. By then his prime is over and we'll probably end up saving money and won't have to necessarily be stuck with him till he's 37 years old; paying him god knows what.

Trust me my scenario works in our favor. We dont need to give this guy 2 max contracts till his late 30s or 40s if we don't need to. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

Absolutely. I'm not saying he would accept a long term, cap friendly deal. All I'm saying is that from Holland's perspective, it would be very wise to try your hardest to lock him up to such a deal.

Eichel is massively overpaid in my opinion. I hope Larkin isn't looking for anything close to $10M, max term.

Eichel also has 43 more points in 25 less games than Larkin. $7M would be the max I would be comfortable going with Larkin, but even that, I'd be hesitant this early in his career.

One team overpaying doesn't set the market price. There are plenty other comparables throughout the league on fair contracts.

The Hawks already set the bar with Toews and Kane’s deals awhile back. The top young players on any team are going to want massive salaries, even if they aren’t at an elite level. I’m sure that’s how Eichel got his money. Buffalo needs him for the future, they’ll give him what he wants. They can’t let him walk.

Wings may end up in a similar situation with Larkin. He’s the best they have, with the most pressure on him to perform, and he’s going to want to be paid accordingly. Try to lowball him, he’ll bail and sign elsewhere, even for less if it doesn’t come with the same pressures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

Hard to say...Not sure how many actual years he's played...

Capture.PNG?ts=1405875176

Can he go to arbitration consequtively like that?

Looks like he can.

 

—-

$5.5 x 6 or $6x8 for an unproven player is ridiculous. Nyquist and Tatar had to put in a lot more years to earn their contracts. 

Larkin hasn’t even had a consistent 82 game season yet. (He might this year).

This league is terrible if that ends up happening. I hope Holland lowballs the s*** out of him and they end up meeting halfway.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Can he go to arbitration consequtively like that?

Looks like he can.

 

—-

$5.5 x 6 or $6x8 for an unproven player is ridiculous. Nyquist and Tatar had to put in a lot more years to earn their contracts. 

Larkin hasn’t even had a consistent 82 game season yet. (He might this year).

This league is terrible if that ends up happening. I hope Holland lowballs the s*** out of him and they end up meeting halfway.

What do Nyquist and Tatar have to do with anything? Larkin is a potential #1 center. They were undersized potential top 6 wingers. The HYPE isn't even close to comparable. 

If you want to lock in a player of Larkin's caliber for 8 years you have to pay. Obviously theres risk in that. It's a gamble for both sides. 

It's all about recent comparables.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Son of a Wing said:

At minimum Larkin is going to get Bo Horvat money. 

$5.5m x 6

No way his agent settles for less unless they're doing a bridge deal. 

$6m x 8 sounds alot more realistic. It's always more than you think when it's a long-term deal for a key young player. 

I'd be completely okay with this, and wouldn't be surprised if he gets this or something close.

44 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

The Hawks already set the bar with Toews and Kane’s deals awhile back. The top young players on any team are going to want massive salaries, even if they aren’t at an elite level. I’m sure that’s how Eichel got his money. Buffalo needs him for the future, they’ll give him what he wants. They can’t let him walk.

Wings may end up in a similar situation with Larkin. He’s the best they have, with the most pressure on him to perform, and he’s going to want to be paid accordingly. Try to lowball him, he’ll bail and sign elsewhere, even for less if it doesn’t come with the same pressures.

Larkin isn't going to be looking for Toews / Kane money and he's not going to get it. Certainly not from Holland. I don't think we should lowball him, but Larkin isn't going anywhere. I'm not worried in the least about that. He'll be a career Wing, likely the captain in a few years.

I'd prefer 8 years, I'd be okay with 5-6 years, I think 2-3 years would be a huge mistake. Same goes for Mantha. I wouldn't sign him to anything less than 4-5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Can he go to arbitration consequtively like that?

Looks like he can.

 

—-

$5.5 x 6 or $6x8 for an unproven player is ridiculous. Nyquist and Tatar had to put in a lot more years to earn their contracts. 

Larkin hasn’t even had a consistent 82 game season yet. (He might this year).

This league is terrible if that ends up happening. I hope Holland lowballs the s*** out of him and they end up meeting halfway.

I agree the league is terrible these days with how unproven players get big money. What did Nugent-Hopkins ever do to earn $6 million a year? Be a #1 pick? Eichel makes 2-3 million less than the guy who went ahead of him in his draft year who has vastly outplayed him in every aspect, won awards, and his lived up to the hype of being the best player to enter the league since Crosby. 

It’s crazy. The cap has done nothing to make salaries more reasonable. In the Oilers, Hawks and Pens cases, they have 1/4 of their combined cap tied up in two players, give or take. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, krsmith17 said:

I'd be completely okay with this, and wouldn't be surprised if he gets this or something close.

Larkin isn't going to be looking for Toews / Kane money and he's not going to get it. Certainly not from Holland. I don't think we should lowball him, but Larkin isn't going anywhere. I'm not worried in the least about that. He'll be a career Wing, likely the captain in a few years.

I'd prefer 8 years, I'd be okay with 5-6 years, I think 2-3 years would be a huge mistake. Same goes for Mantha. I wouldn't sign him to anything less than 4-5.

Maybe he won’t, but he’s not gonna settle for cheap. He knows if he bails, the Wings are set back. Plenty of ridiculous deals handed out across the league he can reference in his negotiations. He’s not worth ten million a year, but neither is a Eichel if you look at production and impact. Eichel is the best young player they currently have though. That’s worth more money just the same in leverage.

I think they’ll work it out, but this is one negotiation that Holland does not have the upper hand in. Might have to just bite the bullet. He gave Abby 4.2 or whatever for 8 seasons. Double that for Larkin isn’t so far fetched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Son of a Wing said:

What do Nyquist and Tatar have to do with anything? Larkin is a potential #1 center. They were undersized potential top 6 wingers. The HYPE isn't even close to comparable. 

What does size have to do with anything? Didn't know NHL paid based off of height and weight. Nyquist scored 27 and 28 goals consecutively and still got a fair bridge contract. His hype was huge; maybe you've forgotten. A lot of Larkin's hype is theoretical unlike Nyquist or Tatar's who had legit consistent production for a few years.

53 minutes ago, Son of a Wing said:

If you want to lock in a player of Larkin's caliber for 8 years you have to pay. Obviously theres risk in that. It's a gamble for both sides. 

Are we talking about locking his actual calibre? or potential? because the two are different things. 

53 minutes ago, Son of a Wing said:

It's all about recent comparables.

It's not. Holland has taken his last 5 RFAs to arbitration. He doesn't blindly go with what other GMs do. That's probably the one big thing I like about the guy. He's good about his RFAs. Always has been. 

He's not going to overpay (if he thinks it's an overpayment even if it isn't compared to what other GMs have done) for Larkin. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

I agree the league is terrible these days with how unproven players get big money. What did Nugent-Hopkins ever do to earn $6 million a year? Be a #1 pick? Eichel makes 2-3 million less than the guy who went ahead of him in his draft year who has vastly outplayed him in every aspect, won awards, and his lived up to the hype of being the best player to enter the league since Crosby. 

It’s crazy. The cap has done nothing to make salaries more reasonable. In the Oilers, Hawks and Pens cases, they have 1/4 of their combined cap tied up in two players, give or take. 

Nuge is actually a good comparable.

He signed that after his 3rd year and he'd had 2 out 3 years where he was a 50+ pt. player (and only played 62 games in one of those years) and the year he wasn't, was the lockout year, but his 24 pts would be around 50 or just below if equated to a whole season. To me that was definitely a record to demand 6 mill. People are really down on RNH now, but that wasn't the case early in his career.

He outproduced Larkin in every compareable year (though he might get more than RNH's 3rd year tally of 56 pts. this year). Plus Larkin had that down 2nd year.

And just thinking of the Nuge's dropoff, such would be the gamble of signing Larkin to a similar deal. i like me some Larkin, but maybe we should go bridge deal here for cap reasons and with Larkin's last year, I still think there's some uncertainty with him.

Edited by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this