GDT Game #6 Oct. 24, Devils vs Canadiens, 7:15 PM

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

29 minutes ago, DON said:

 

That is odd, no one else seems to think that?

But anyways, if not Nylander or drafting in top 2 next season, a highly skilled forward would still be lacking and needed more sooner we hope than later.

Nylander gets a bad wrap but it's unwarranted.. l. He consistently shows up for the big games and seems to always be their best player in the playoffs

[hab29RETIRED]

6 hours ago, tomh009 said:

Matheson cannot be a mentor?

He’s only coming into his own recently and hasn’t won anything. 

[hab29RETIRED]

2 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

Nylander gets a bad wrap but it's unwarranted.. l. He consistently shows up for the big games and seems to always be their best player in the playoffs

I don’t disagree, but the leafs put themselves in this position by signing Tavares. Personally, i would have moved Marner over Nylander- Marner is probably going to want over $11m.

 

having said that, I wouldn’t want to pay Nylander $10m to get him if he makes it to free agency.

[hab29RETIRED]

6 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I also think Savard is a good mentor, the young defensemen must respect the way he puts his body on the line for the team blocking shots like he does. 

But he does not belong on the first pairing. If you are trying to win, you can’t pair him on the first pairing (and if even argue 2nd pairing) with a Hutson, Reinbacher, or Mailloux. 

[GHT120]

21 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

But he does not belong on the first pairing. If you are trying to win, you can’t pair him on the first pairing (and if even argue 2nd pairing) with a Hutson, Reinbacher, or Mailloux. 

And he won't be when winning supersedes development.

[Commandant]

On 10/26/2023 at 5:44 PM, Sir_Boagalott said:

So big no to Toffs due to he's 32 and he'd be a bidding war, so get into a bidding war for Nylander and over pay him for 8 years and sign him until he's 36 because no one wants an expensive albatross contract?  Ok then, glad that's cleared up.  🤪

 

Nylander is the worst idea ever, UFA or otherwise.  

 

That suggestion shows that a ton of people here aren't paying attention to the culture the Habs are developing.  Clearly, Nylander wanting over 10 mil/yr goes against the concept of Nick being the highest paid guy on the team.  

 

Pettersson is also another bad example for the same reason plus how he does he perform in the playoffs?  That's TBD.

 

 

 

1) you can only sign a UFA to 7 years not 8. Hed be up at age 34.

 

2) with nylander you get his age 28, 29, 30, 31, seasons.  4 seasons of prime years.  Yeah 33 and 34 might be bad.  But toffoli is 32 now.  He might be dropping off the moment you sign him.  At least with nylander you know the first 4-5 years will be good.

[Sir_Boagalott]

On 10/26/2023 at 6:47 PM, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

Nylander gets a bad wrap but it's unwarranted.. l. He consistently shows up for the big games and seems to always be their best player in the playoffs

 

I don't disagree.  I believe the only reason the Habs beat the Leafs in 21 was due to Nylander played less than 19 mins/game.  Had they increased his ice-time in games 5-7 they likely would have won the series.  However, he is still unproven in the playoffs beyond round 1.  The real issue with him is the $ that he wants would mess up the Habs entire "culture" that they are building.

 

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

1) you can only sign a UFA to 7 years not 8. Hed be up at age 34.

 

2) with nylander you get his age 28, 29, 30, 31, seasons.  4 seasons of prime years.  Yeah 33 and 34 might be bad.  But toffoli is 32 now.  He might be dropping off the moment you sign him.  At least with nylander you know the first 4-5 years will be good.

 

The funny thing about Toffoli is that his stats are on an upwards trajectory.  The amount and length I'm suggesting isn't the same comparison or what I suggested at all.  i.e. pay Toffs like he'd a 2nd liner for 3-4 years with expectation of getting 1 yr of 1st line, 2 yrs of 2nd line and 1 yr of 3rd line.  You might over pay him in year 4.  However, you hope he can be 1st liner for several years and then a 2nd liner for remainder.  

 

It is the same idea with all 3 of them.  Pearson is a 3rd liner, sign him @ 2-2.5 max mil for 2-3 yrs, get 1-2 yrs of 3rd liner, 1-2 yrs 4th line.  Same with Manahan, sign for for 3-4yrs, he can be 1st line and 2nd and eventually he'll be 3rd line c in year 3 or 4.  As they age the prospects will develop and they all remain but they change lines.   The Habs need to make room for Beck, Roy, and 1 more.

 

ex:  Manahan at 4-5 mil x 4 yrs, in yr 4 he'll be 3rd line C making 4-5 mil, in 4 yrs if he makes what Dvorak currently gets that'll apparently bankrupt the Habs?   My proposed contract for Toffoli would basically be the same weight as Andersons, in the last year he'd be a 3rd liner making close to 6 mil.  Plus, the cap will keep going up so those contracts wouldn't be albatross by any means.

 

The idea would work when you don't pay them at their current line rate for the entire contract like you are thinking. 

 

The most comical part of this disagreement is that getting Nylander or anybody else that doesn't give a discount would cause exactly what you are saying.  ex:  Nylander @ 10 mil x *7* years would be paying him 10 mil/yr to be not just a 3rd but 4th liner in yr 6 and/or 7.  

 

 

[DON]

On 10/26/2023 at 5:55 PM, hab29RETIRED said:

having said that, I wouldn’t want to pay Nylander $10m to get him if he makes it to free agency.

 

But, he will be getting a boatload, from someone dont you think? 

 

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, DON said:

 

But, he will be getting a boatload, from someone dont you think? 

 

For sure/ if he becomes a UFA SOMEONE will pay him what he wants. I’d want him as well if it’s $9m. If it’s over $10m, it may limit our ability to build a complete team. We got a lot of kids coming up that are probably going to get big contracts.  I just don’t want to be in the Leafs situation where you have too many holes because you are paying 4 around 50% of you cap space, or like Edmonton who overpaid Nurse.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

Nylander will NOT hit the free agent market, Treliving will not make the same mistake twice.  When the Leafs score I don't mind seeing Nylander get points as it means the Leafs will have to open the vault just a little bit more.  The Leafs are in a tough spot with Nylander. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I don’t understand why we would not pay Nylander $10 mil or whatever as a 28 year old, assuming he becomes a UFA. 30-40 goals, PPG in the bank, hell of a dynamic player, several prime years left. If you don’t want to sign Nylander, then you must be saying that you do not believe in signing an elite player as a UFA. Or that you only will pay top dollar for a true franchise player like McDavid or Matthews, i.e., guys that never, ever hit the UFA market any more. So that amounts to the same thing as saying you’ll never sign them.

 

I can respect the latter position, but it does mean the Habs will never sign a top-end talent on the UFA market. Period.

[hab29RETIRED]

51 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

I don’t understand why we would not pay Nylander $10 mil or whatever as a 28 year old, assuming he becomes a UFA. 30-40 goals, PPG in the bank, hell of a dynamic player, several prime years left. If you don’t want to sign Nylander, then you must be saying that you do not believe in signing an elite player as a UFA. Or that you only will pay top dollar for a true franchise player like McDavid or Matthews, i.e., guys that never, ever hit the UFA market any more. So that amounts to the same thing as saying you’ll never sign them.

 

I can respect the latter position, but it does mean the Habs will never sign a top-end talent on the UFA market. Period.

There’s very few cup winning teams that were built though a big free agency signing - mainly because you usually have to overpay to get the player (Chara is probably the exception).  Free agent signings that do work are when the UFA wants to go to a team and takes less than what they are probably worth, or another team is willing to pay. A example is Pietrangelo. He’s a guy that probably didn’t take the most money offered, and Vegas got him at a very good cap hit (albeit they do have the no state tax advantage which makes it easier for the player to take the lower salary). If you can get an elite  superstar UFA winger, centre, or dman that take a bit less, you sign him. But if it’s going to prevent you to being a contender, and you are in cap hell, I’d rather to continue to build through that draft and make trades. We have a LOT of picks, they can be used to as assets in trades.

 

If you look at teams like Tampa (again have the no state tax advantage), they even play hardball with their own UFA’s, because they know it’s necessary to do so to build a contender.
 

but other teams without the no state tax advantage also had guys sign for team friendly deals (Crosby, Malkin, and arguably Letang). So players have taken less to make sure their teams can still build around them.

 

Would I want Nylander on our team - definitely. But it’s got to be at a price that allows us us to build a contender. He can be a great contributor to building a cup winning team, but he is not someone who can carry you into the semifinals and finals. Now if you can get a MCDavid, McKinnon type guy as a UFA and they want $12/$13m, or Makar wants $11m, you sign them without thinking twice. But even if they want the max 20%, you gotta pass on them as well - because you probably can’t surround them with enough guys to build a cup winner. 
 

if the plan is to sign the best players you can and have an exciting team, and attract more fans, you pay Nylander the $10m-$11m it will take (Toronto can probably get him at $9.5m-$10m on an 8 year deal), but if you want to build an elite team that can consistently challenge for the cup, you can’t pay that much for a guy that is an important piece, but he isn’t the straw that shakes the drink. Shutt was a 40 goal scorer that scored 60 one year. If he was available as a UFA today, I’d be willing to sign him for $8m. On the other hand, If Lafleur who was a 50 goal/125-130 point guy was available you sign him for the $12m-$13m it will take.

 

i see Nylander as a Shutt, not Lafleur.

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

There’s very few cup winning teams that were built though a big free agency signing - mainly because you usually have to overpay to get the player (Chara is probably the exception).  Free agent signings that do work are when the UFA wants to go to a team and takes less than what they are probably worth, or another team is willing to pay. A example is Pietrangelo. He’s a guy that probably didn’t take the most money offered, and Vegas got him at a very good cap hit (albeit they do have the no state tax advantage which makes it easier for the player to take the lower salary). If you can get an elite  superstar UFA winger, centre, or dman that take a bit less, you sign him. But if it’s going to prevent you to being a contender, and you are in cap hell, I’d rather to continue to build through that draft and make trades. We have a LOT of picks, they can be used to as assets in trades.

 

If you look at teams like Tampa (again have the no state tax advantage), they even play hardball with their own UFA’s, because they know it’s necessary to do so to build a contender.
 

but other teams without the no state tax advantage also had guys sign for team friendly deals (Crosby, Malkin, and arguably Letang). So players have taken less to make sure their teams can still build around them.

 

Would I want Nylander on our team - definitely. But it’s got to be at a price that allows us us to build a contender. He can be a great contributor to building a cup winning team, but he is not someone who can carry you into the semifinals and finals. Now if you can get a MCDavid, McKinnon type guy as a UFA and they want $12/$13m, or Makar wants $11m, you sign them without thinking twice. But even if they want the max 20%, you gotta pass on them as well - because you probably can’t surround them with enough guys to build a cup winner. 
 

if the plan is to sign the best players you can and have an exciting team, and attract more fans, you pay Nylander the $10m-$11m it will take (Toronto can probably get him at $9.5m-$10m on an 8 year deal), but if you want to build an elite team that can consistently challenge for the cup, you can’t pay that much for a guy that is an important piece, but he isn’t the straw that shakes the drink. Shutt was a 40 goal scorer that scored 60 one year. If he was available as a UFA today, I’d be willing to sign him for $8m. On the other hand, If Lafleur who was a 50 goal/125-130 point guy was available you sign him for the $12m-$13m it will take.

 

i see Nylander as a Shutt, not Lafleur.

 

 

I think we’re saying the same thing in different ways - i.e., you don’t support paying market value for any UFA that would ever be likely to become available, no matter how good they are.

 

When was the last time a Lafleur hit the UFA market, with lots of years left in the tank? I can’t think of an example. So holding out for a Lafleur is equivalent to never signing anyone.

 

Franchise players aside, the only way the Habs are ever going to get an elite player on a *discount* is if we are already heavy-duty contenders, and are perceived as such around the league. Then a guy who is hot to trot for a Cup might take a discount. Other than that, it’s not gonna happen. 

 

I respect your rigorous approach to cap management. But I’m not sure how much I agree with it. I would point out that if you’d had your way, we would not have signed Price; and therefore we’d never have made the finals in ‘21. Also, paying a Nylander $2 mil more than you’d like does not, in and of itself, put the Habs in “cap hell.” Especially not with our two best players locked up long term, such that the deal would not ramify for our salary structure. 

 

I can go either way on this question, but if we look at our organization and say to ourselves, “we do not have the critical mass of elite talent at FW that we will need to win the Cup within 5-6 years,” I think you have to bite the bullet and sign that player as a UFA, provided he is young enough. The problem with Nylander may be that his window of peak performance may be another 4-5 years at most…so it depends when we see the Habs’ Cup window opening. He may come on the market just slightly early to really fit our requirements. 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

2 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

There’s very few cup winning teams that were built though a big free agency signing - mainly because you usually have to overpay to get the player (Chara is probably the exception).  Free agent signings that do work are when the UFA wants to go to a team and takes less than what they are probably worth, or another team is willing to pay. A example is Pietrangelo. He’s a guy that probably didn’t take the most money offered, and Vegas got him at a very good cap hit (albeit they do have the no state tax advantage which makes it easier for the player to take the lower salary). If you can get an elite  superstar UFA winger, centre, or dman that take a bit less, you sign him. But if it’s going to prevent you to being a contender, and you are in cap hell, I’d rather to continue to build through that draft and make trades. We have a LOT of picks, they can be used to as assets in trades.

 

If you look at teams like Tampa (again have the no state tax advantage), they even play hardball with their own UFA’s, because they know it’s necessary to do so to build a contender.
 

but other teams without the no state tax advantage also had guys sign for team friendly deals (Crosby, Malkin, and arguably Letang). So players have taken less to make sure their teams can still build around them.

 

Would I want Nylander on our team - definitely. But it’s got to be at a price that allows us us to build a contender. He can be a great contributor to building a cup winning team, but he is not someone who can carry you into the semifinals and finals. Now if you can get a MCDavid, McKinnon type guy as a UFA and they want $12/$13m, or Makar wants $11m, you sign them without thinking twice. But even if they want the max 20%, you gotta pass on them as well - because you probably can’t surround them with enough guys to build a cup winner. 
 

if the plan is to sign the best players you can and have an exciting team, and attract more fans, you pay Nylander the $10m-$11m it will take (Toronto can probably get him at $9.5m-$10m on an 8 year deal), but if you want to build an elite team that can consistently challenge for the cup, you can’t pay that much for a guy that is an important piece, but he isn’t the straw that shakes the drink. Shutt was a 40 goal scorer that scored 60 one year. If he was available as a UFA today, I’d be willing to sign him for $8m. On the other hand, If Lafleur who was a 50 goal/125-130 point guy was available you sign him for the $12m-$13m it will take.

 

i see Nylander as a Shutt, not Lafleur.

 

 

You make a lot of good points, Chara was definitely the exception and was one of the best free agent signings ever. A top pairing defensemen at a reasonable cap hit for many many years. 

 

I would also want Nylander on my team but not at any price. I hope he scores a hat trick tonight and the Leafs lose 8-5.

[tomh009]

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Franchise players aside, the only way the Habs are ever going to get an elite player on a *discount* is if we are already heavy-duty contenders, and are perceived as such around the league. Then a guy who is hot to trot for a Cup might take a discount. Other than that, it’s not gonna happen.

I think this is true for most teams. By the time a top player hits free agency, he has made a significant amount of money already, and what most of them really want to do is win the cup, so you need to be a credible cup contender (or possibly soon-to-be-contender) in order to be attractive.

 

Pure home-town discounts really are not common? I really doubt Tavares would have been so keen on the Leafs without them having Matthews, Marner and Nylander on the roster.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

24 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

I think this is true for most teams. By the time a top player hits free agency, he has made a significant amount of money already, and what most of them really want to do is win the cup, so you need to be a credible cup contender (or possibly soon-to-be-contender) in order to be attractive.

 

Pure home-town discounts really are not common? I really doubt Tavares would have been so keen on the Leafs without them having Matthews, Marner and Nylander on the roster.

 

Home town discounts are more common when a player is toward the latter end of their career, has made most of their money and just want to win (ie. Spezza, Giordano), Tavares was still in his prime and I don't think 11M/year was any kind of discount.  I agree that he likely wouldn't have been so keen had the Leafs been a mediocre team. 

[hab29RETIRED]

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I think we’re saying the same thing in different ways - i.e., you don’t support paying market value for any UFA that would ever be likely to become available, no matter how good they are.

 

When was the last time a Lafleur hit the UFA market, with lots of years left in the tank? I can’t think of an example. So holding out for a Lafleur is equivalent to never signing anyone.

 

Franchise players aside, the only way the Habs are ever going to get an elite player on a *discount* is if we are already heavy-duty contenders, and are perceived as such around the league. Then a guy who is hot to trot for a Cup might take a discount. Other than that, it’s not gonna happen. 

 

I respect your rigorous approach to cap management. But I’m not sure how much I agree with it. I would point out that if you’d had your way, we would not have signed Price; and therefore we’d never have made the finals in ‘21. Also, paying a Nylander $2 mil more than you’d like does not, in and of itself, put the Habs in “cap hell.” Especially not with our two best players locked up long term, such that the deal would not ramify for our salary structure. 

 

I can go either way on this question, but if we look at our organization and say to ourselves, “we do not have the critical mass of elite talent at FW that we will need to win the Cup within 5-6 years,” I think you have to bite the bullet and sign that player as a UFA, provided he is young enough. The problem with Nylander may be that his window of peak performance may be another 4-5 years at most…so it depends when we see the Habs’ Cup window opening. He may come on the market just slightly early to really fit our requirements. 

I was using the Lafleur - Shutt example to just illustrate how I would value UFA’s differently. The issue with free agency is that teams start paying Shutt’s as if they are Lafleur.

 

i disagree that you will never get UFA’a to sign unless you overpay them. It depends if the guy is chasing the money, or wants to sign with a particular team. Even with the no-state taxes in Florida, Stamkos could probably have earned more with the Toronto offer and the additional endorsement deals he could have gotten if he was playing for the leafs, but he wanted to stay in Toronto. Pieterangelo also could have gotten a little bit more money from another team, but he wanted to play in Vegas. The bigger issue we have is players have not wanted to pay in Montreal. Francophones have steered clear, and have only used Montreal as a bargaining chip and have only come here when they were washed up like Briere).

 

I also don’t think that it’s only $2m for one player, lets say we sign Nylander for $10.5m, and Roy score 40 two years from now. He’s going to want around the same. We have a lot of young players right now, and I hope we continue to see good early long term signings like the Suzuki and Caufield contracts, to ensure we manage the cap as we get more good players, rather than be the oilers and sign Nurse for $9m. Yes he is a #1 dman for them, but he doesn’t compare at all to other $9m dmen. They are lucky that Draisaitl and Nugent Hopkins are in value deal or they would be screwed!

 

tampa has done a real good job managing their cap, I’d use them as the model - and yes I know that they have the no-state tax and no-snow advantage.
 

we need to get into a position that we are seen as a destination, because 1) players see a chance to win, 2) they are the type of players who want to win in a demanding market like Montreal.

 

lastly, no, I would not have signed Price to that $10.5m contract. I hated the deal when it was signed. I love Price, and everything he’s done, , I just don’t think you can allocate that much of your cap to a goalie - even if he is your best player. When Crosby went down in the finals in 2008 or 2009, the penguins still won the cup. When he went down in other seasons for concussions, they still made the playoffs. If Price goes down we don’t make the playoffs. I don’t think you can pay a goalie that much. Tampa can get away with paying their goalie (who is the best in the league) around $8.5m, and I think that’s about as much I’d ever be willing to pay a goalie under the current cap. Yes, I get that with no state tax savings Vasilevskiy’s take home is about the same as Price. But the cap hit is more manageable.

In my optinion the top 3 goalies today or Vasilevskiy, Soriano and Helleybuyck, and the later just signed a pretty damn reasonable contract. 

 

lets not forget, without Covid we would have missed the playoffs in the finals year, as well as the play-in year.

 

[hab29RETIRED]

2 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

You make a lot of good points, Chara was definitely the exception and was one of the best free agent signings ever. A top pairing defensemen at a reasonable cap hit for many many years. 

 

I would also want Nylander on my team but not at any price. I hope he scores a hat trick tonight and the Leafs lose 8-5.

I hope he scores all 5 goals 😄

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

I think this is true for most teams. By the time a top player hits free agency, he has made a significant amount of money already, and what most of them really want to do is win the cup, so you need to be a credible cup contender (or possibly soon-to-be-contender) in order to be attractive.

 

Pure home-town discounts really are not common? I really doubt Tavares would have been so keen on the Leafs without them having Matthews, Marner and Nylander on the roster.

I also think the Tavares signing (as well as caving into Marner and than only signing him for 5 years at that cap hit, is what is killing the leafs. I don’t want to make the same mistake!

[GHT120]

36 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

... we need to get into a position that we are seen as a destination, because 1) players see a chance to win, 2) they are the type of players who want to win in a demanding market like Montreal.

 

Ideal

 

36 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

... lastly, no, I would not have signed Price to that $10.5m contract. I hated the deal when it was signed. I love Price, and everything he’s done, , I just don’t think you can allocate that much of your cap to a goalie - even if he is your best player ...

 

Me too

 

37 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

... lets not forget, without Covid we would have missed the playoffs in the finals year, as well as the play-in year.

 

More obvious in the "play-in" year ... but before you get slammed, I'll agree

[Commandant]

The Habs wouldnt be making the Leafs mistake.  The Leafs issue is that Marner and Matthews were still on ELCs when they got Tavares and then they asked for the moon.

 

With Suzuki and Caufield both signed at around 8mill a year and long term, and the cap going up, you can absolutely afford to add Nylander at 10m.

 

 

[hab29RETIRED]

52 minutes ago, Commandant said:

The Habs wouldnt be making the Leafs mistake.  The Leafs issue is that Marner and Matthews were still on ELCs when they got Tavares and then they asked for the moon.

 

With Suzuki and Caufield both signed at around 8mill a year and long term, and the cap going up, you can absolutely afford to add Nylander at 10m.

 

 

And if Guhle, Roy and Slafkovsky break out over the next two years, are we going to be able to keep everyone? If they break out like we hope, I want to be able to sign them to similar deals as Suzuki and Caufield. Last 3 years of Nylander at $10m (if he goes to free agency I think he will actually get more than $10m), the last three years may also make it to resign the next group expected to join the team next year. If Hutson is anywhere as good in the NHL as he is in college, he is a guy that it will cost $10m-$11m long term on his second deal. I think he can be as good or better than Hughes, but not quite as good as Makar.  If he is he is going to want a big second deal like they got.

 

Fun time to be a habs fan, when you have a prospect like that to look forward to!

[Commandant]

Reinbachers contract hasnt even started yet.  By the time hes due for his second deal the cap will have risen likely 4 times. Plus price will be done, gallaghers contract will done before that happens.

 

On Slaf and Guhle the cap will have risen twice before their new deals start. Plus armia, petry retention, edmundson retention, savard and dvorak will be off the cap.

 

Starting next year we are gonna see the big cap rises come back every year as the players have now paid back the extra escrow caused by Covid.

 

All the shit contracts from the last regime are also gonna age out and be off the cap as the kids deals become due.

 

But the one thing ill also say, we HOPE that those kids become as impactful as Nylander, a guy who can put up 30+ goals and 80+ points every year.  Hes already done it.  If we have him and then Slaf and Reinbacher and Guhle are also 8, 9, 10m worthy players, we deal.with it.  Its a good problem to have.  But there is no guarantee any of them is as good as Nylander.

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

Reinbachers contract hasnt even started yet.  By the time hes due for his second deal the cap will have risen likely 4 times. Plus price will be done, gallaghers contract will done before that happens.

 

On Slaf and Guhle the cap will have risen twice before their new deals start. Plus armia, petry retention, edmundson retention, savard and dvorak will be off the cap.

 

Starting next year we are gonna see the big cap rises come back every year as the players have now paid back the extra escrow caused by Covid.

 

All the shit contracts from the last regime are also gonna age out and be off the cap as the kids deals become due.

 

But the one thing ill also say, we HOPE that those kids become as impactful as Nylander, a guy who can put up 30+ goals and 80+ points every year.  Hes already done it.  If we have him and then Slaf and Reinbacher and Guhle are also 8, 9, 10m worthy players, we deal.with it.  Its a good problem to have.  But there is no guarantee any of them is as good as Nylander.

You’re assuming the cap will continue to rise at a regular pace. From what I’ve read players are tired of the annual escrow payments and may not want the escalator percentage increase above the regular revenue increase, so they don’t have to continue paying escrow.

 

I’m any event I’d say it will be low odds on Nylander becoming a free agent and even if he does, lower chances of him or anyone else signing with us, until it’s pretty clear we are ready to compete.

[GHT120]

12 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

You’re assuming the cap will continue to rise at a regular pace. From what I’ve read players are tired of the annual escrow payments and may not want the escalator percentage increase above the regular revenue increase, so they don’t have to continue paying escrow.

 

I’m any event I’d say it will be low odds on Nylander becoming a free agent and even if he does, lower chances of him or anyone else signing with us, until it’s pretty clear we are ready to compete.

My understanding is that for the last couple of years the normal cap formula in the CBA would have raised the cap if it weren't for the "Covid escrow recapture" ... without need for invoking the escalator.