Kukla's Korner

Abel to Yzerman

What The Next Contract For Dylan Larkin May Look Like

from Craig Custand of The Athletic,

Based on Larkin’s performance so far, not to mention the Red Wings’ cap situation, a full-term eight-year contract seems like it would be very hard to pull off.

That puts us in the six-year range.

The floor would likely be a player like Vancouver’s Bo Horvat. He signed a six-year deal worth $5.5 million annually. He signed his contract last September coming off a 20-goal season with 52 points. Larkin had 11 more points last season and probably has more upside than Horvat. So that’s the minimum.

On the higher side of the six-year comparable is Boston’s David Pastrnak. He signed a six-year deal worth $6.67 million per season, also last September. He signed his deal coming off a 34-goal, 70-point season.

The Jets got Nikolaj Ehlers done at $6 million per season on a seven-year deal after his 64-point season last year, one more than Larkin finished with this season.

If you’re Larkin’s camp, you’re pointing out that neither of those players are a center, which comes at a premium.

more (paid subscription)

Filed in: | Abel to Yzerman | Permalink
 

Comments

Alan's avatar

I know the cap isn’t necessarily the end-all be-all, but with only 2.8m in space available, I’m interested to see what kind of arrangements the organization makes to get Larkin signed, have a 23-man roster, and get it all done under the cap ceiling.

Posted by Alan from Atlanta on 07/12/18 at 05:29 PM ET

dreamsofhope's avatar

Posted by Alan from Atlanta on 07/12/18 at 06:29 PM ET

I think once Franzen is back on LTiR it’s around 6.5/6.7 total. I’d imagine him on a 5.5 deal, but that’s pretty optimistic.

Posted by dreamsofhope from Colorado on 07/12/18 at 08:14 PM ET

bigfrog's avatar

I’d imagine him on a 5.5 deal,

Sounds realistic.  smile

Posted by bigfrog on 07/12/18 at 09:43 PM ET

Avatar

This is our next Captain.  Offer him $6M and get it done.

Posted by Matt_in_MI on 07/13/18 at 06:19 AM ET

Avatar

This is our next Captain.  Offer him $6M and get it done.

Man, for all the complaining about the Red Wings’ cap there sure are lots of people who just want to throw money around.

But hey, why not give him $6M and then you can fill the rest of the roster spots with the $780K left over.  rolleyes

Posted by CharDeeMacDennis on 07/13/18 at 07:25 AM ET

Avatar

Posted by CharDeeMacDennis on 07/13/18 at 08:25 AM ET

We should be paying our youth with potential and high ceilings.  Its not his fault we have all the other bloated contracts to work around.  $6.5 seems to be the comparable from what the article says.  On term, give what it takes but retain RFA if possible.

Posted by murph1jj on 07/13/18 at 08:26 AM ET

Colin's avatar

3 years, $5.5M per is the best thing for team and player.

Larkin gets to make millions and prove over 3 years that he’s worth $10-11M per year.

He will be 25 and still RFA (his last RFA offseason) when the contract expires, meaning the team will have more bargaining power and be safe from any flight risk and he can get an 8-year, big money extension without the risk of becoming an overpaid pariah in his late 30s.

His 8-year extension will encompass the entirety of his prime, and we can then move to shorter extensions afterwards.

The signing of his next deal will fall in the same year the Zetterberg, Helm, and Glendening contracts come off the books as well as the Weiss buyout.

That’s exactly how I would do it.

Posted by Colin from Ken Holland's new yacht, "Incompetence" on 07/13/18 at 08:27 AM ET

Avatar

How many goals did Larkin score? Why is he going to be worth 10M in 3 years??? smile

Posted by Pasha1277 on 07/13/18 at 09:01 AM ET

Colin's avatar

How many goals did Larkin score? Why is he going to be worth 10M in 3 years???

Posted by Pasha1277 on 07/13/18 at 10:01 AM ET

He gets to prove he is worth that much. I never said he was.

Posted by Colin from Ken Holland's new yacht, "Incompetence" on 07/13/18 at 09:48 AM ET

TreKronor's avatar

We should be paying our youth with potential and high ceilings.

We have done that, and here’s a few examples. 

First, Abdelkader: he was making 1.8, putting up pretty solid point totals in the 40’s.  He was going to be “the next captain” and all that BS, looked to have a solid, modest but promising future as a grinding Winger who can play hard, so we give him $4.2 for 7 years and he disappears. 

Next up, Dekeyser: Starts by making 2.2, has three very strong first seasons as a rookie dman, and looks to many to be a solid #3 Dman as he gets older and more experienced.  He gets a $5 mil contract, and falls off the radar. 

Finally, Nyquist: making less than 1.0 a year at the beginning, he comes up just shy of the 30 goal mark (28 and 27) in his early 20’s, so he looks like a guy who can easily become a 30 goal scorer.  They give him $4.75 and he only barely cracked the 20 goal mark once since then (21 last season). 

Blame it on coaching, management, players leaving - whatever it may be.  That’s hindsight.  When you are looking to the future though, you want to go off past performance and based on that you hope to see players continually improve. 

When you pay them for what you think you will be getting out of them, sometimes it works.  But sometimes it doesn’t.  We all want to think Larking, Mantha, AA will continue to improve and be our future stars and whatnot, but it doesn’t always happen that way.

Posted by TreKronor on 07/13/18 at 10:10 AM ET

MurrayChadwick's avatar

Posted by TreKronor on 07/13/18 at 11:10 AM ET

I agree with what you said, but I also think all of those players were in UFA years, or 1 year away? Whereas Larks in 4 correct? If the wings are buying 4 years of RFA and 4 years of UFA, that should be a nice discount on a long term deal.

Posted by Colin from Ken Holland’s new yacht, “Incompetence” on 07/13/18 at 09:27 AM ET

If they’re going short, I would not take it to 1 year of RFA with Larkin, I’d do a 2 year deal. Whether he develops into a elite star or a damn good player, I think the general consensus is that we want him here. Leaving him with 1 year leaves a 1 year arb opportunity on the table. Moreso though, leaves the wings with having to pay mostly for UFA years, discounts come with paying premiums on RFA years, see my point above. I think this is why they’re going long.

Posted by MurrayChadwick from Holland Hate Hyperbole Town (HHHT) on 07/13/18 at 10:44 AM ET

TreKronor's avatar

Part of me really would not mind seeing Larkin signed to an 8 year 6.5 mil contract.  But part of me also wonders what his top-end salary potential is.  In another 3 years, I still don’t think he would be getting more than $9 a year…I just don’t think he’s quite got that potential.

So, do you lock him up for 8 years at 6.5 and hope he remains a steady player, or do you take the risk and see what happens.  Here’s two examples, completely spitballing figures here:

1) If they sign him on a 2 year deal now for $5 mil, and then a 6 year deal at 8mil after that, it comes out to $58 mil over the life of the contract. 

2) If they were to, say, give him 8 years @  6.5, that’s $52 mil. 

Not a huge difference, and a lot less risk of signing a young player to a long contract.

Posted by TreKronor on 07/13/18 at 10:58 AM ET

Colin's avatar

Posted by MurrayChadwick from Holland Hate Hyperbole Town (HHHT) on 07/13/18 at 11:44 AM ET

I see where you’re coming from, but I think this team will be in a rather unique financial position in the next 3 years, and if he goes to arbitration and gets awarded a 1 year deal then UFA, we just signing a UFA. I think we can also assume that if Larkin is going to arbitration at 25 and UFA-1 year, then he probably hasn’t reached his potential.

Consider the following as to why a 3-year deal is best:

1. He will still be an RFA (his last RFA year) for his next contract, eliminating flight risk (see Tavares, John) and giving the team a bit more bargaining power.

2. While I love Larkin, we have only ~1.5 seasons of good to great track record and we still don’t know what he is yet, but we will in 3 years. We’ll know if he’s a good to great 2C or a true 1C with a 3-5 year track record and will have the cap space and contract structure to pay him accordingly. At the time of his next deal in a 3yr extension scenario, the only current roster players still on bad money contracts will be Abdelkader, Nielsen, and DeKeyser. That’s it.

3. It keeps his cap hit low when we are really struggling because we are eating no UFA years, and his next deal will fall in the same offseason that Zetterberg’s, Helm’s, and Glendening’s contracts as well as Weiss’ buyout all come off the books and a good portion of our core (Zadina, Ras, & Co.) outside of Mantha, Bertuzzi, and (if he is still around) Athanasiou will still be on entry-level or bridge contracts. We’re in a fairly good position financially in this year, and will be stellar in the following year, where we can REALLY push for a cup.

4. A two-year deal now would mean Larkin would be getting a new contract the same year as Mantha, Athanasiou (if he’s still around), and Bertuzzi. It would be better, in my opinion to space Larkin out from these 3 as regardless of how well our youth develops you are going to have to sign a couple of vets that year with DeKeyser being literally the only defensive vet under contract at that point.

*Please note that I am pushing his age up a year from where he is at now because his birthday is in two weeks, so he will be 22 by the time the 18-19 season starts.

Posted by Colin from Ken Holland's new yacht, "Incompetence" on 07/13/18 at 11:02 AM ET

Colin's avatar

1) If they sign him on a 2 year deal now for $5 mil, and then a 6 year deal at 8mil after that, it comes out to $58 mil over the life of the contract. 

2) If they were to, say, give him 8 years @  6.5, that’s $52 mil. 

Not a huge difference, and a lot less risk of signing a young player to a long contract.

Posted by TreKronor on 07/13/18 at 11:58 AM ET

1) With the financial position the team will be in in 2-3 years, we won’t have to worry about paying a player what he’s worth.

2) In 8 years, Larkin will be seeking a big extension at age 30 right in the middle of his prime, which would put us at VERY high risk of having a bad albatross contract in his late 30s when we will have to think about the next generation of players again.

I would take the risk of having to pay a player what he’s worth from 25-33 over the risk of having to pay a player much more than he’s worth at 35+ any day of the week, week of the month, month of the year.

Posted by Colin from Ken Holland's new yacht, "Incompetence" on 07/13/18 at 11:08 AM ET

Avatar

Posted by TreKronor on 07/13/18 at 11:10 AM ET

You conveniently ignored the fact that I said high ceiling as well.

The amount Abby is getting paid, is not completely the problem.  He had reached his peak.  I would expect that his points would drop when not on a line with Datsyuk.  He also battled injuries.  What I do have a problem with is the amount of money coupled with long term and a NTC.  Maybe it was a stretch for years 1-2, but holy shit 3-7.  BTW he was 28 when he signed the 7 year deal.  But nice comparison.

Dekeyser:  $5MM (currently paid as #2, which he is not) is a bit high for someone slotted at #3, but livable.  That is for teams that have a quality top paring, which we haven’t had since he signed.  If we had a top pair, I don’t think that we would be talking about his contract, again a touch high, or his play.

Finally, Nyquist:  Actually your best argument.  So you got me on this one.  He has not been the goal scorer we had hoped.  The issue her is he should have been traded before hit NTC kicked in.  This is the one that was a risk with potential reward, and we lost so far.

So looking at that, we have one risky loss, and two other issues.  I’m a little surprised you didn’t throw Helm or Glen in there somewhere.

This team has an issue, it has no superstars.  It is filled with role players.  If we did we wouldn’t be concentrating on the Nyquist contract.  It was a chance.

We have no Piano pullers.  Just the Pianos.

If this team is ever going to turn around, we have to move past our current issues and take a chance on the future.  Yet another reason for a new GM.  If a new GM came in and signed larkin to a 6 yr 6.6MM contract, we would probably cheer for locking up our talent pool.  Because we would not be focusing on the baggage associated with that GM.

That statement made me throw up a little, as it is the closest I have come to supporting KH or defending him since 2008.  I might have hit the fifth stage of grief.


.

Posted by murph1jj on 07/13/18 at 11:53 AM ET

TreKronor's avatar

Posted by murph1jj on 07/13/18 at 12:53 PM ET

I didn’t mean to miss anything about a high ceiling, but just pointing out something that time has helped us all forget:

We all (commenters, media, management) thought those guys had more to give and room to grow, and none of them have done it.  And that’s the thing when you sign a guy to a contract longer than 2 years…you just don’t know.

Posted by TreKronor on 07/13/18 at 12:15 PM ET

Avatar

Posted by TreKronor on 07/13/18 at 01:15 PM ET

Agreed, let hope that these three are more of a calculated risk than a leap of faith.

Posted by murph1jj on 07/13/18 at 12:23 PM ET

Colin's avatar

Posted by TreKronor on 07/13/18 at 01:15 PM ET

I very much doubt many fans and media thought that at 28, Abdelkader was capable of MORE playing away from Datsyuk. I know I didn’t. I hated that contract from the moment it was announced, and I still do now.

Posted by Colin from Ken Holland's new yacht, "Incompetence" on 07/13/18 at 12:26 PM ET

Colin's avatar

Posted by TreKronor on 07/13/18 at 01:15 PM ET

I very much doubt many fans and media thought that at 28, Abdelkader was capable of MORE playing away from Datsyuk. I know I didn’t. I hated that contract from the moment it was announced, and I still do now.

Posted by Colin from Ken Holland's new yacht, "Incompetence" on 07/13/18 at 12:26 PM ET

TreKronor's avatar

I hated that contract from the moment it was announced, and I still do now.

I hated the contract as well, but we still had high expectations and hopes for Abdelkader up until the minute before that contract was announced.  Once that was announced I think we all knew it was a little generous for his ceiling, and he just hasn’t been able to live up to the contract.

Posted by TreKronor on 07/13/18 at 12:43 PM ET

Avatar

So many hated it Colin that he was asked about it and Holland said he’d worry about it in 6 years.  I assume he took that approach with all his contracts, hence the position were in.  But that’s from the horses mouth.  “Well worry about that later”

Posted by ThatGuy on 07/14/18 at 08:53 AM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Abel to Yzerman

Welcome to Abel to Yzerman, a Red Wing blog since 1977.  No other site on the internet has better-researched, fact-laden and better prepared discussions than A2Y.  Re-phrase: we do little research, find facts and stats highly overrated and claim little to no preparation.  There are 19 readers of A2Y. No more, no less. All of them, except maybe one, are juvenile in nature.  Reminding them of that in the comment section will only encourage them to prove that. Your suggestions and critiques are welcome: wphoulihan@gmail.com