Player Discussion The Slaf Thread - Parabolic Growth Edition

[Habs Halifax]

I can see Slaf's agent recommending a bridge deal, 2 years x 5 and roll the dice for a huge payday when he is 23

Yeah, the looming cap increase is also a factor. Agents will probably be all over this. If Slaf don't like the Suzuki offer this summer, I am perfectly fine with him playing out his ELC.

I'd bridge him to one RFA year left and then pay him for what he actually is at that point. We would get him longer this way.

This is why it's so important to prolong our draft power for as long as possible. Future ELC on guys like (Roy for Example) are must haves. Tampa had it with Point and Sergachev.

 

[417]

For as much as we like his development, He's not worth $8M today. IMO, 8x $6M would be him getting fleeced.

8x $8M would mean we are reaching to overpay him in the next 2 seasons (after EL), fair AAV for 3 more, and then possibly underpaid in the last 3.

Even if he becomes a 60-80 pts forward next year, does that mean he is worth more than $8M? The only way I see him getting fleeced with this deal is if he turns into a 80-100 pts forward.

If the Habs want to sign him to a contract that's reflective of his worth today and not what they project his worth to be over the next several years.

Then they should negotiate a short-term bridge deal.

 

[Habs Halifax]

He pays his agent to look after his best interest, so that's what he's going to do.

Fleecing him would be 8x $6M. What happens if he turns into a 60-80 pts forward? Is $8M fleecing him then?

This is all about the future predictions. Some are pumping him a bit too much IMO.

If he don't like the Suzuki contract offer. Just let him play out his ELC and see if he can do the same with Dach next year. I rather test him vs spoil him with Suzuki all the time.

If the Habs want to sign him to a contract that's reflective of his worth today and not what they project his worth to be over the next several years.

Then they should negotiate a short-term bridge deal.

OK, put your money where your fingers are. What do you ask for as his agent on a 8 year extension this summer? $9M or $10M AAV?

You're agent resume is just about to start. Go... haha

 

[417]

Fleecing him would be 8x $6M. What happens if he turns into a 60-80 pts forward? Is $8M fleecing him then?

There's no way he would sign a deal for 8 years x 6M anyway, i'm not even sure why anyone is discussing "fleecing" anyone. That should never be the goal of any negotiation.

This is all about the future predictions. Some are pumping him a bit too much IMO.

If he don't like the Suzuki contract offer. Just let him play out his ELC and see if he can do the same with Dach next year. I rather test him vs spoil him with Suzuki all the time.

To me as I always say, it's a lot of worry about nothing...there's a salary range for any type of deal they want to negotiate, whether it's a bridge deal for 2 years or a Jason Robertson type of deal where he signs for 4 years or if they want to negotiate a longer term 8 year deal,

There are pros and cons to every package,

 

[417]

OK, put your money where your fingers are. What do you ask for as his agent on a 8 year extension this summer? $9M or $10M AAV?

You're agent resume is just about to start. Go... haha

Well if I was his agent, I would advise AGAINST signing an 8 year deal unless they're talking about a 9M-10M AAV (which of course, the Habs won't do). I'd be advising him to sign a bridge deal or a deal similar to what Jason Robertson did (4 years).

But to participate in this fun excercise....on an 8 year extension, with the cap projected to be at say 92M by the time this extension kicks in (2025-26 season), i'm asking for the same cap % as Suzuki/Caufield got when they signed their contract extensions, which is 9.4%.

9.4% of 92M = about 8.6M AAV, and that's conservative given the cap is probably going to be around 94-96M by the time Slafkovsky's even reached his prime age (around 23-24)

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

Tom wilson just got 6.5 mill x 7 , so I expect if slaf signs right now it will be 8-9 , tom just had his first 50 point season in 2021 at the age of 27-28. He also has a cup though and its a bit of a legacy deal.

Similar players but Slaf will end up better.

But yeah he's gonna get paid , if i'm his agent im waiting it out.

Well if I was his agent, I would advise AGAINST signing an 8 year deal unless they're talking about a 9M-10M AAV (which of course, the Habs won't do). I'd be advising him to sign a bridge deal or a deal similar to what Jason Robertson did (4 years).

But to participate in this fun excercise....on an 8 year extension, with the cap projected to be at say 92M by the time this extension kicks in (2025-26 season), i'm asking for the same cap % as Suzuki/Caufield got when they signed their contract extensions, which is 9.4%.

9.4% of 92M = about 8.6M AAV, and that's conservative given the cap is probably going to be around 94-96M by the time Slafkovsky's even reached his prime age (around 23-24)

 

[Habs Halifax]

Tom wilson just got 6.5 mill x 7 , so I expect if slaf signs right now it will be 8-9 , tom just had his first 50 point season in 2021 at the age of 27-28. He also has a cup though and its a bit of a legacy deal.

Similar players but Slaf will end up better.

But yeah he's gonna get paid , if i'm his agent im waiting it out.

If there is a 8 year deal to be done this summer, I suspect it's around the Suzuki deal. If there is interest to see more development as the cap increases, They will let the ELC play out and see where they stand then.

I have no problem offering the Suuzki deal this summer. If his agent thinks he can get more over time, I let him try and if he earns it, I'm OK with it.

Rantanen got $9.5M after two back/back 80+ pts seasons. I suspect Slaf will be in the 60-80 pts range over the next 2 seasons. That's my read on his progression. If he puts up 80+ next year, we will have to pay him more than Suzuki.... with the looming cap increases to come.

So the question is... do you think Slaf leap frogs Suzuki in the next year or two? I don't. I see them as equal talent and Slaf catching him but not passing him.

I think this is more about % of the cap to come. $92M+ is not far away

 

[417]

If there is a 8 year deal to be done this summer, I suspect it's around the Suzuki deal. If there is interest to see more development as the cap increases, They will let the ELC play out and see where they stand then.

I have no problem offering the Suuzki deal this summer. If his agent thinks he can get more over time, I let him try and if he earns it, I'm OK with it.

Rantanen got $9.5M after two back/back 80+ pts seasons. I suspect Slaf will be in the 60-80 pts range over the next 2 seasons. That's my read on his progression. If he puts up 80+ next year, we will have to pay him more than Suzuki.... with the looming cap increases to come.

So the question is... do you think Slaf leap frogs Suzuki in the next year or two? I don't. I see them as equal talent and Slaf catching him but not passing him.

If that's the case, shouldn't they get the same % of the pie at the time they signed?

I think this is more about % of the cap to come. $92M+ is not far away

It's projected to be at 92M for the 2025-26 season.

 

[Habs Halifax]

If that's the case, shouldn't they get the same % of the pie at the time they signed?

It's projected to be at 92M for the 2025-26 season.

Depends on how many RFA/UFA years there are. I'm not a fan of agents trying to pump up players and looking at cap increase greed. I don't like one sided deals and I do think the Habs are reaching more than they should with a 8x $8M offer. I think Slaf and his agent consider this more than you think. If I'm wrong, both Slaf and his agent think he is a sure shot 80-100 pts player. Today, I have confidence Slaf can be a 60-80 pts forward. 80-100+? I think that is pumping things. And when I evaluate, I look at someone like Gaudreau... 100 pts with talent and 60-80 pts with less talent. His career average so far is basically 80 pts which would be fair. So are we going to pay Slaf for his best season he can do with talent or his average over the next 8 years after his ELC.

Absolute max deals rarely work for both the team and player on the ice. I think Hughes manages this well. Open to 8 year deal but if that is not in the cards, he makes Slaf earn it. And one thing I would do is have Slaf produce with Dach vs Suzuki. See if the progression remains with a different center.

 

[waitin425]

Anywhere from the actual amount that Suzuki and Caufield make to the projected same cap %.

So 7.85 to 8.6 mil is what I would love to see happen over an 8 year period. If he signs now, for next year, he will be 29 when it is time to re-up. Likely still good enough to get another 8 year deal at max money.

 

[417]

Depends on how many RFA/UFA years there are. I'm not a fan of agents trying to pump up players and looking at cap increase greed.

But that's their job lol...as I've told you before, I suggest you stop only looking this through the lens of a fan and team perspective.

Players have bargaining rights too.

Absolute max deals rarely work for both the team and player on the ice. I think Hughes manages this well. Open to 8 year deal but if that is not in the cards, he makes Slaf earn it. And one thing I would do is have Slaf produce with Dach vs Suzuki. See if the progression remains with a different center.

I didn't propose even close to a max deal, there's no such thing as a max deal in the NHL, no player has come close to getting one. The highest any NHL player can make on a cap hit is 17M I believe and the highest paid player currently has a cap hit of 12.6M (MacKinnon) with an actual salary of 16.5M

I proposed that Slafkovsky get the same % of the cap as Suzuki and Caufield, which was the parameters you set forth, which is still more than half of what any max contract would be lol.

The issue is you want Slafkovsky to sign a deal with a rising cap, at the same % of when the cap was flat at 81.5M.

If that's what the team wants, than Slafkovsky and his agent, aren't being the greedy ones here.

 

[417]

Anywhere from the actual amount that Suzuki and Caufield make to the projected same cap %.

So 7.85 to 8.6 mil is what I would love to see happen over an 8 year period. If he signs now, for next year, he will be 29 when it is time to re-up. Likely still good enough to get another 8 year deal at max money.

On an 8 year deal...it HAS to be somewhere between those numbers.

If that's not something the Habs can stomach, which I don't see why they wouldn't...then sign him to a bridge deal.

Pretty simple

 

[Habs Halifax]

But that's their job lol...as I've told you before, I suggest you stop only looking this through the lens of a fan and team perspective.

Players have bargaining rights too.

I didn't propose even close to a max deal, there's no such thing as a max deal in the NHL, no player has come close to getting one. The highest any NHL player can make on a cap hit is 17M I believe and the highest paid player currently has a cap hit of 12.6M (MacKinnon) with an actual salary of 16.5M

I proposed that Slafkovsky get the same % of the cap as Suzuki and Caufield, which was the parameters you set forth, which is still more than half of what any max contract would be lol.

The issue is you want Slafkovsky to sign a deal with a rising cap, at the same % of when the cap was flat at 81.5M.

If that's what the team wants, than Slafkovsky and his agent, aren't being the greedy ones here.

IMO, the agents job is to get the best situation and pay for their player. Ensure they are not being taken advantage of. 8x $8M is not being taken advantage of. 8x $6M is though.

The main problem is the agent could ruin things with their % hit on the contract. They will sometimes feed bloated info to the player and try to use leverage against the team (future cap increases). After all, they do get paid by % of contract. Not all agents are this way so it's difficult to nail down.

You don't have to agree but if the Habs offer the Suzuki contract this summer, it's fair. I don't think Slaf and his agent would quickly turn this down.

 

[417]

IMO, the agents job is to get the best situation and pay for their player. Ensure they are not being taken advantage of. 8x $8M is not being taken advantage of. 8x $6M is though.

But you wrote that you're not a fan of agents "pumping up their players and looking at cap increases".

That's EXACTLY what they're paid to do.

8x8 is not being taken advantage of, that's fair...but does it accurately reflect the value that you think you're worth as a player moving forward? That's the debate.

Either way, we're splitting hairs over 500-750K annually, it's really not worth it.

The main problem is the agent could ruin things with their % hit on the contract. They will sometimes feed bloated info to the player and try to use leverage against the team (future cap increases). After all, they do get paid by % of contract. Not all agents are this way so it's difficult to nail down.

Again, i'm confused why you think an agent doing his job is a bad thing.

You don't have to agree but if the Habs offer the Suzuki contract this summer, it's fair. I don't think Slaf and his agent would quickly turn this down.

Fair or not doesn't matter to me...if they offer that Suzuki deal, is it reflective of the current and future market.

I think not, but if Slafkovsky and his agent don't care...than they'll sign it.

 

[Habs Halifax]

But you wrote that you're not a fan of agents "pumping up their players and looking at cap increases".

That's EXACTLY what they're paid to do.

8x8 is not being taken advantage of, that's fair...but does it accurately reflect the value that you think you're worth as a player moving forward? That's the debate.

Either way, we're splitting hairs over 500-750K annually, it's really not worth it.


Again, i'm confused why you think an agent doing his job is a bad thing.

Fair or not doesn't matter to me...if they offer that Suzuki deal, is it reflective of the current and future market.

I think not, but if Slafkovsky and his agent don't care...than they'll sign it.

Nah, they are paid to get good deals for the players. You are confused with the greedy agents who go for absolute max deals and the most % of the contract they can get.

Sorry, we are not on the same page in terms of what role the Agent should play. You are talking about the greedy agents bud. Marner can go cry me a river with his max deal and how that has back fired on him today with all the pressure. I'm sure he would be just as rich with a $8.5M contract and maybe the team would be in a better place.

There is no truth in what players are "worth". It's timing of contracts and how the player is trending. I personally like deals that are good for both the team and player. I think Hughes was this kind of agent.

To be clear. I think Slaf becomes a 60-80 pts forward and his career average falls in that range when we look back. If his agent tries to tell me he should be paid as a 80-100 forward, I get annoyed. That's greed to me.

I'll flip it on you. Habs choose not to offer the 8x $8M because they think it's too much. Lets talk about this angle. I think we are thinking the Habs easily offer this but where is the truth in this? I think you can make an argument it's reaching if we do.

 

[417]

Nah, they are paid to get good deals for the players. You are confused with the greedy agents who go for absolute max deals and the most % of the contract they can get.

So let me get this straight, you don't think agents look into where the market is going when negotiating contracts for their clients?

and I don't know why you keep referring to "max deals", no player is even close to making a max deal lol

But yes, agents will try to maximize earnings for their clients...there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, just like GMs are commissioned to keep salary costs as low as possible.

Sorry, we are not on the same page in terms of what role the Agent should play. You are talking about the greedy agents bud. Marner can go cry me a river with his max deal and how that has back fired on him today with all the pressure. I'm sure he would be just as rich with a $8.5M contract and maybe the team would be in a better place.

The reason were not on the same page, is because you seem to think agents work for the team, and not the player. You seem to think agents are paid to work out deals that are fair for the team and the client.

Agents don't give a damn about what's fair for the team. That's not their job lol.

The confusion, all due respect, lies with you here...not me.

There is no truth in what players are "worth". It's timing of contracts and how the player is trending. I personally like deals that are good for both the team and player. I think Hughes was this kind of agent.

Yes, perfectly written, timing and trends.

2 things you apparently think agents should ignore, or else, they're being greedy.

 

[Habs Halifax]

So let me get this straight, you don't think agents look into where the market is going when negotiating contracts for their clients?

and I don't know why you keep referring to "max deals", no player is even close to making a max deal lol

But yes, agents will try to maximize earnings for their clients...there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, just like GMs are commissioned to keep salary costs as low as possible.

The reason were not on the same page, is because you seem to think agents work for the team, and not the player. You seem to think agents are paid to work out deals that are fair for the team and the client.

Agents don't give a damn about what's fair for the team. That's not their job lol.

The confusion, all due respect, lies with you here...not me.

Yes, perfectly written, timing and trends.

2 things you apparently think agents should ignore, or else, they're being greedy.

The root of the disagreement in this conversation is you think Slaf is a future 80-100 pts player and the Agent will push to get paid this way.

No, I don't think the agent works for the team. You're reaching on this.

It's just your typical long term deal vs bridge negotiation. Happens all the time. But in my opinion, if the 8 year deal is something both sides are seriously interested in getting signed, I think the Suzuki contract or something in the middle of Suzuki and Caufield is a good deal for both sides. That's with what we know today (not some 80-100 pts forecast). More like 60-80 pts and good in many areas

I think his progression and development is being pumped. So yeah, do you think he will be a 60-80 or 80-100. Depends on who you ask.

 

[Miller Time]

I personally like deals that are good for both the team and player. I think Hughes was this kind of agent.

This caught my eye... Not so sure Holland & the Oilers feel that way after getting taken to the woodshed by nurse & Hughes

 

[Habs Halifax]

This caught my eye... Not so sure Holland & the Oilers feel that way after getting taken to the woodshed by nurse & Hughes

Was Hughes Nurse's agent? I was not aware of that. If so, I retract my statement lol.

Interesting situation with Nurse though. He did get paid for future growth but never lived up to his previous 3 seasons that got him that contract. He was on a great track. 41 in 82, 33 in 71 and then 36 in 56 with 16 goals at the right time.

Basically, he was paid more assuming he would improve but basically stayed the same or got worse. This part of the CBA annoys me.... I wish there was some sort of claw back if these situations happened. Seems like there is a fair amount of players who get their deal and then become complacent.

The Nurse contract is exactly why I dislike players going after absolute max deals. At the end of the day, it's the ultimate team game and 50% of the revenue goes to the players. Basically, Nurse took money away from RNH. Agents will talk/look/focus on the Marchand value contract and use only that in their approach.... in terms of players being underpaid.

 

[417]

The root of the disagreement in this conversation is you think Slaf is a future 80-100 pts player and the Agent will push to get paid this way.

I actually haven't said anything about what point potential I think he has, i'm not a fortune teller.

I based my response on the parameters you gave me, an 8 year deal at similar cap % as Suzuki and Caufield.

That means we're talking anywhere from 7.875M to 8.6M on an 8 year deal signed this offseason.

No, I don't think the agent works for the team. You're reaching on this.

It's just your typical long term deal vs bridge negotiation. Happens all the time. But in my opinion, if the 8 year deal is something both sides are seriously interested in getting signed, I think the Suzuki contract or something in the middle of Suzuki and Caufield is a good deal for both sides. That's with what we know today (not some 80-100 pts forecast). More like 60-80 pts and good in many areas

As long as you realize that the Suzuki and Caufield contracts were negotiated in a flat cap at 81.5M...this extension for Slafkovsky would start when the cap is projected to be at 92M.

If Slafkovsky signs an 8 year extension this summer, it means by the time he's 22-23, the cap will be at about 94-96M...that's 14-15-16M more than when Suzuki and Caufield signed. The pie is bigger.

You have to factor this into your negotiation. You can't ignore facts and act like they're still negotiating in a flat cap. It just doesn't make sense.

The point forecast i'm not arguing, I don't know how many points he's going to get, just like they didn't know how many Suzuki or Caufield would get either.

I think his progression and development is being pumped. So yeah, do you think he will be a 60-80 or 80-100. Depends on who you ask.

Of course his agent is going to pump his progression and development, just like the Habs are if they're negotiating an 8 year deal, by default, you're acknowledging that this player is going to progress.

Again you're bringing up the point prediction, if teams/player's knew what players would get in terms of points, negotiations would be a lot easier.

The only thing that matters is if you're negotiating an 8 year deal for Slafkovsky, like you did Suzuki and Caufield, it's because like them, you think he's going to be one of your teams leading contributors.

If you think Suzuki is going to be a PPG player with the contract you offered him, clearly, you must also thin Caufield is (and you paid him with that projection), so the same applies to Slafkovsky.

If you're not sure...that's also fine, just sign him to a bridge and get more certainty, but this also comes at a cost.

There's no certainty for either side, just calculated guesses. Pros and Cons.

 

[Habs Halifax]

I actually haven't said anything about what point potential I think he has, i'm not a fortune teller.

I based my response on the parameters you gave me, an 8 year deal at similar cap % as Suzuki and Caufield.

That means we're talking anywhere from 7.875M to 8.6M on an 8 year deal signed this offseason.

As long as you realize that the Suzuki and Caufield contracts were negotiated in a flat cap at 81.5M...this extension for Slafkovsky would start when the cap is projected to be at 92M.

If Slafkovsky signs an 8 year extension this summer, it means by the time he's 22-23, the cap will be at about 94-96M...that's 14-15-16M more than when Suzuki and Caufield signed. The pie is bigger.

You have to factor this into your negotiation. You can't ignore facts and act like they're still negotiating in a flat cap. It just doesn't make sense.

The point forecast i'm not arguing, I don't know how many points he's going to get, just like they didn't know how many Suzuki or Caufield would get either.

Of course his agent is going to pump his progression and development, just like the Habs are if they're negotiating an 8 year deal, by default, you're acknowledging that this player is going to progress.

Again you're bringing up the point prediction, if teams/player's knew what players would get in terms of points, negotiations would be a lot easier.

The only thing that matters is if you're negotiating an 8 year deal for Slafkovsky, like you did Suzuki and Caufield, it's because like them, you think he's going to be one of your teams leading contributors.

If you think Suzuki is going to be a PPG player with the contract you offered him, clearly, you must also thin Caufield is (and you paid him with that projection), so the same applies to Slafkovsky.

If you're not sure...that's also fine, just sign him to a bridge and get more certainty.

Like I said before, lets bookmark or remember this conversation. See if there is an extension this summer and what it is. If not, lets see how it plays out and how the 8x $8M contract would look like in 3+ years. What does Slaf do in the next 4 years... including his last year on the ELC. 60 (+/-), 60-80, or 80-100.

I'd like to run a poll now. What are Slaf's point average over the next 4 seasons? See what the majority thinks. Slaf's next contract (Bridge or not) seems to be a sticky topic of conversation for us GM wantabees.

 

[417]

Like I said before, lets bookmark or remember this conversation. See if there is an extension this summer and what it is. If not, lets see how it plays out and how the 8x $8M contract would look like in 3+ years. What does Slaf do in the next 4 years... including his last year on the ELC. 60 (+/-), 60-80, or 80-100.

I'd like to run a poll now. What are Slaf's point average over the next 4 seasons. See what the majority thinks. Slaf's next contract (Bridge or not) seems to be a sticky topic of conversation for us GM wantabees.

Well you certainly sound skeptical about his future point output, so to me the answer is simple if management feels the same.

2 year bridge deal…get more certainty, and if he progresses like you hope, you're going to sign him to a 10M+AAV deal in 2 off-seasons from now.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

I think Slaf would accept a 8 years x 7.8 M deal right now.
That's a lot of money for a player who so far only had a 10 pts season and 50 pts season.

 

[Habs Halifax]

I think Slaf would accept a 8 years x 7.8 M deal right now.
That's a lot of money for a player who so far only had a 10 pts season and 50 pts season.

That's my opinion as well. I think some fans are pumping him to 80-100 pts to quickly. My guess is he becomes a very good 60-80 pts player with a few seasons north of 80 but his career average falls in the 60-80 range.

It would be a great team core with all 3 of Slaf, Suzuki, Caufield paid around the same. Dach could break that open if he does what we think he can do. If that happens and Slaf is on a bridge deal, I fear we have two players asking for more of the cap.

Well you certainly sound skeptical about his future point output, so to me the answer is simple if management feels the same.

2 year bridge deal…get more certainty, and if he progresses like you hope, you're going to sign him to a 10M+AAV deal in 2 off-seasons from now.

Not skeptical. I have high standards for players in the 80-100 range. Slaf to me has earned 60-80 pts range talk. I have pumped him up a bit but not to the 80-100 range.

If Slaf and his agent really do believe he is a future 80-100 pts player, I let them prove me wrong and be happy about it. But he only gets paid after he earns that point range in potential.

Remember when Fans were worried Caufield will earn $9M+? That wasn't that long ago.

 

[417]

That's my opinion as well. I think some fans are pumping him to 80-100 pts to quickly. My guess is he becomes a very good 60-80 pts player with a few seasons north of 80 but his career average falls in the 60-80 range.

It would be a great team core with all 3 of Slaf, Suzuki, Caufield paid around the same. Dach could break that open if he does what we think he can do. If that happens and Slaf is on a bridge deal, I fear we have two players asking for more of the cap.



Not skeptical. I have high standards for players in the 80-100 range. Slaf to me has earned 60-80 pts range talk. I have pumped him up a bit but not to the 80-100 range.

So same as Suzuki and Caufield right?

If Slaf and his agent really do believe he is a future 80-100 pts player, I let them prove me wrong and be happy about it. But he only gets paid after he earns that point range in potential.

Exactly, sign him to a bridge deal and if he proves you wrong, be ready to pay.

I'm good either way

Remember when Fans were worried Caufield will earn $9M+? That wasn't that long ago.

I don't think 9M+ was ever a real consideration, but signing for 8M + certainly was.

They managed to get it just under Suzuki, again negotiating in a flat cap, so that worked out.

The circumstances are not the same this time around...if it ends up playing out that way, great.

But to act like it's the end of the world if Slafkovky ends up making a bit more than Suzuki when the cap is 12M higher than it was when Suzuki signed, seems very silly to me.