Domi's next contract

[dlbalr]

One of Montreal's bigger decisions this offseason will be what to do with Max Domi.  Has he done enough to earn a long-term extension and become part of the core for years to come?  Is the jury still out?  Does the emergence of some of the other centres mean that he's expendable in a trade to find a defensive upgrade?  Some of our writers offered up their two cents on what might happen...any predictions from you?

 

http://www.habsworld.net/2020/04/writers-weigh-in-max-domis-montreal-future/

[DON]

Like his grit and when he decides wants to go to net hard with puck, not fond of so much yapping and other post whistle BS.

Habs still need upgrade on top line and top pairing and if a package including Domi is needed to get that done, is fine by me.

I not knowing $$ wise what to expect; but, doubt he gets a long term deal.

[alfredoh2009]

Good article.

I have been pushing the idea that Domi is a good trading chip. When he is engaged, he is a gritty, energetic, fast point-producing player. When he is frustrated, he is a liability. And when he is sulking, he is a drag on the team.

 

I would sign him for a bridge deal, like dlbalr suggests; but will be looking throughout the year to trade him for an upgrade on LD

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I like Domi, but he is a transitional C - definitely good enough to be top-6 on a middling/weak team, not complete enough to be a top-6 C on a strong team, not good enough on W to be shifted over if and when better Cs show up.

 

If I could get a LD for him, I would take my chances with Suzuki and Danault in the short run, and hope like hell that KoKo can still emerge as a legit top-6 C in the medium term.

 

But to trade him, you probably still have to sign him. I therefore like a shorter-term deal (2-3 years) at whatever money is fair (I have no idea what the $$$ would be, but you have to pay him like a #2C IMHO).

[Commandant]

3 years

 

I'll tell you the money, once I know the cap. 

[hab29RETIRED]

I think it needs to be a 3 yr deal - don’t want next contract to walk him straight into being a UFA, and want some term that allows flexibility of a real hockey trade if another one our other young centres (Suzuki, KK, Poehling), leapfrogs him out of the top 6. This would allow us to move him to fill other needs (domi has shown he is pretty useless as a winger).

 

But as one of the writers has stated it can’t have a NMC - I hate them and it’s really stupid that NHL gm’s hand out no trade/NMC’s like candy at Halloween.  It’s ridiculous that GM’s have created a situation where players are getting the $, term and the NMC/NTC. I can see giving a player a NMC/NTC if they take a significant home town discount or reduced term for an older player - and even than it should be reserved for top players. These days 3rd liners and 2nd/3rd pairing dman are getting those clauses.

 

As far as salary - it will depend on cap - I don’t think he’s earned a s significant increase - May even need to be a reduction depends on if there is a significant drop in the cap. 
 

 

[dlbalr]

3 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

But as one of the writers has stated it can’t have a NMC - I hate them and it’s really stupid that NHL gm’s hand out no trade/NMC’s like candy at Halloween.  It’s ridiculous that GM’s have created a situation where players are getting the $, term and the NMC/NTC. I can see giving a player a NMC/NTC if they take a significant home town discount or reduced term for an older player - and even than it should be reserved for top players. These days 3rd liners and 2nd/3rd pairing dman are getting those clauses.

 

The only years that can have any trade protection is UFA years so in a three-year deal, only the last year could have no-trade protection. 

[hab29RETIRED]

2 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

The only years that can have any trade protection is UFA years so in a three-year deal, only the last year could have no-trade protection. 

Realize that  - that was the situation Subban and Jeff Carter were in when they signed their extensions and were traded before the protection kicked in. Would not want to provide protection for even that last year. 

I think you should be a Crosby, ovechkin, McKinnon, or McDavid type of player to warrant that type of protection - at least if I was a GM those are the type of players I’d be comfortable giving that protection to those type of players. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

45 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Realize that  - that was the situation Subban and Jeff Carter were in when they signed their extensions and were traded before the protection kicked in. Would not want to provide protection for even that last year. 

I think you should be a Crosby, ovechkin, McKinnon, or McDavid type of player to warrant that type of protection - at least if I was a GM those are the type of players I’d be comfortable giving that protection to those type of players. 

 

The only situation where it might be worth deviating from this very sound principle is if you think you have a legit, win-now contender and you're hard up against the cap and need to keep the core. Then, you might be seriously tempted to bestow NTCs in return for lower cap hits. That's what Mike Gillis did in Vancouver, and although it did not work out - and gave the Canucks big headaches after 2011 - I think it was a reasonable approach under the circumstances.

 

For a mediocre team like the Habs to throw around NTCs would be idiotic.

[hab29RETIRED]

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

The only situation where it might be worth deviating from this very sound principle is if you think you have a legit, win-now contender and you're hard up against the cap and need to keep the core. Then, you might be seriously tempted to bestow NTCs in return for lower cap hits. That's what Mike Gillis did in Vancouver, and although it did not work out - and gave the Canucks big headaches after 2011 - I think it was a reasonable approach under the circumstances.

 

For a mediocre team like the Habs to throw around NTCs would be idiotic.

I think in Vancouver, the sedins warranted NTC’s, but giving them to Kesler and Luongo and some of the 3rd rate dmen is a case study of what not to do.  Giving NTC/NMC’s clauses to two many players limits flexibility when things go south and you are forced to trade good players to only the small number of teams they are willing to waive their clauses for.  Again, GM’s have no one to blame except themselves.  I think Gillis probably could have even gotten some of those players without the clauses.  One thing I will say in the Canucks defence is that it’s absolute bullshit that they have to pay cap recapture penalties for Luongo last deal now when those deals were allowed under the old CBA.  Even worse is the recapture nashville will be hit with if Weber retires early - when they aren’t even the ones who made the contract offer. But than. We are taking about the NHL - a. League that allowed Pronger to work in a managemt role while still being paid as a player.

[DON]

Still think will be short term deal of medium cash and no NMC or NTCs

[Commandant]

There is always a cost to a NTC or NMC.  If you are giving them out for no reason, then the GM is doing it wrong.  But if the player wants a NTC, the GM should be making him take less money and a lower cap hit to get it.

 

Who? When? How much of a discount?  All of it depends on the situation and the player... but Im not willing to say they should or shouldnt give a NTC.  It all depends on the discount given.