Player Discussion The Slaf Thread - Parabolic Growth Edition

[Habs Halifax]

So same as Suzuki and Caufield right?



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

I'm good either way

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.

Caufield was on a 40+ goal pace with MSL before the contract was signed. Slaf put up good numbers at age 19 and is showing potential. Basically, the hype in Slaf is a great half of a season like Caufield but at a younger age.

Slaf has earned 60-80 pts talk. Not 80-100. So yeah, if the Habs decide to offer the Caufield/Suzuki contract this summer, I don't think this is an offer his agent turns down lightly. It's a fair approach to what we know today. He doesn't deserve more than Suzuki and yes, it's what we know today bud.

 

[417]

Caufield was on a 40+ goal pace with MSL before the contract was signed. Slaf put up good numbers at age 19 and is showing potential. Basically, the hype in Slaf is a great half of a season like Caufield but at a younger age.

Slaf has earned 60-80 pts talk. Not 80-100. So yeah, if the Habs decide to offer the Caufield/Suzuki contract this summer, I don't think this is an offer his agent turns down lightly. It's a fair approach to what we know today.

No but it probably means he wants to negotiate this deal like it's the year 2024-25 and not 2021-22.

You're failing to recognize a factor that is significant and IMO, it's not something that can or should be glossed over.

The cap hit is less important than the % that his new contract would take up.

 

[Habs Halifax]

No but it probably means he wants to negotiate this deal like it's the year 2024-25 and not 2021-22.

You're failing to recognize a factor that is significant and IMO, it's not something that can or should be glossed over.

The cap hit is less important than the % that his new contract would take up.

I don't agree with the probably they turn it down because they prefer to do this a year later. What happens if he puts up the same type of numbers next season as the season he just did? The $8M contract may not be an option anymore. We all love his progression but man... it was for half a season playing with Suzuki full time bud.

What you are failing to recognize is stalled growth in the last year of his ELC. There are still some fragile things for Slaf to overcome. You seem to be banking on automatic growth with the earned 60-80 pts talk and refuse to consider any set backs.

You think the $8M is easily reachable but I think the team is reaching to offer it in the first place. All this on a good half of a season playing with Suzuki.

 

[417]

I don't agree with the probably they turn it down because they prefer to do this a year later. What happens if he puts up the same type of numbers next season as the season he just did? The $8M contract may not be an option anymore. We all love his progression but man... it was for half a season playing with Suzuki full time bud.

And? Is that factor going to change or something? Did this penalize Caufield's negotiations when he was up for his extension?

I'm not sure why playing with Suzuki, which is likely to be his center for a long time, a penalizing factor?

What you are failing to recognize is stalled growth in the last year of his ELC. There are still some fragile things for Slaf to overcome. You seem to be banking on automatic growth with the earned 60-80 pts talk and refuse to consider any set backs.

Of course not, that's why I said i'm comfortable with a 2 year bridge deal if that's what they think is more prudent. I just know that if you're negotiating an 8 year deal with ANY player, than you're doing it that on the PREMISE that you ARE banking on his growth and reaching his potential.

If you don't think it's a sure thing...then DON'T OFFER HIM A 8 YEAR CONTRACT EXTENSION lol.

It's really not that complicated. You just have conflicting points of view...on one hand you doubt his ability to continue to progress and you think his numbers are inflated playing with Suzuki, but at the same time, you want to sign him to a maximum amount of years?

That doesn't make sense.

You think the $8M is easily reachable but I think the team is reaching to offer it in the first place. All this on a good half of a season playing with Suzuki.

So in other words, you want Slafkovsky to sign for a maximum amount of years, while also taking a discounted deal compared to his peers on the team and throughout the league.

Hey if he and his agent are agreeable to that, that would be amazing.

 

[Habs Halifax]

And? Is that factor going to change or something? Did this penalize Caufield's negotiations when he was up for his extension?

I'm not sure why playing with Suzuki, which is likely to be his center for a long time, a penalizing factor?



Of course not, that's why I said i'm comfortable with a 2 year bridge deal if that's what they think is more prudent. I just know that if you're negotiating an 8 year deal with ANY player, than you're doing it that on the PREMISE that you ARE banking on his growth and reaching his potential.

If you don't think it's a sure thing...then DON'T OFFER HIM A 8 YEAR CONTRACT EXTENSION lol.

It's really not that complicated. You just have conflicting points of view...on one hand you doubt his ability to continue to progress and you think his numbers are inflated playing with Suzuki, but at the same time, you want to sign him to a maximum amount of years?

That doesn't make sense.

So in other words, you want Slafkovsky to sign for a maximum amount of years, while also taking a discounted deal compared to his peers on the team and throughout the league.

Hey if he and his agent are agreeable to that, that would be amazing.

Spinning in circles over and over again. It's become a who said the last word debate now.

 

[417]

Spinning in circles over and over again. It's become a who said the last word debate now.

Maybe you're spinning in circles, i'm not lol.

You're the one questioning his growth but at the same time you want him signed to an 8 year deal.

You literally wrote the following

"What you are failing to recognize is stalled growth in the last year of his ELC. There are still some fragile things for Slaf to overcome."

IF that's what YOU think, then AGAIN I ask...why do you want to sign him to an 8 year deal?

This is like being unsure you're with the right partner, but you decide to sign off on a mortgage together lol.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Maybe you're spinning in circles, i'm not lol.

You're the one questioning his growth but at the same time you want him signed to an 8 year deal.

You literally wrote the following

"What you are failing to recognize is stalled growth in the last year of his ELC. There are still some fragile things for Slaf to overcome."

IF that's what YOU think, then AGAIN I ask...why do you want to sign him to an 8 year deal?

This is like being unsure you're with the right partner, but you decide to sign off on a mortgage together lol.

A lot has been said bud. I'm not playing the "got cha game" any deeper at this stage. You have your opinion and I have mind. Too much repeating going on now.

 

[417]

A lot has been said bud. I'm not playing the "got cha game" any deeper at this stage. You have your opinion and I have mind. Too much repeating going on now.

You "gotcha" yourself lol

I'm just holding up the mirror, don't blame me for the reflection

 

[Miller Time]

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.

In fairness, I bet both Hughes and Nurse expected his career to progress better than it has...

From looking like a young guy with Norris potential future, to a Travis Yost feature article on the d-pairing killing the Oilers cup chances is not how they likely saw his career trending.

 

[tooji]

Slaf gets so fired up in international play, can’t wait to see him when they games really matter in the NHL

 

[KevSkillz4]

The tools of Slaf are much on 75-90 pts per season than 60-80..

I think some people need to understand that Slaf is that type of guy.

He is much closer to Rantanen talent than Kreider//Lucic//Landeskog like Craig Button said this year lol.

 

[417]

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.

Get in a DeLorean, travel back to 1957 and convince Ted Lindsay and Doug Harvey to not form a player’s union to protect players contractual rights?

 

[Habs Halifax]

Get in a DeLorean, travel back to 1957 and convince Ted Lindsay and Doug Harvey to not form a player’s union to protect players contractual rights?

Nah... You're not comprehending it well. It's a 50/50 revenue split. Players get 50% and in the claw back I was talking about, the ones who get complacent loose a bit to the ones who show up game/game.

 

[Habs Halifax]

In fairness, I bet both Hughes and Nurse expected his career to progress better than it has...

From looking like a young guy with Norris potential future, to a Travis Yost feature article on the d-pairing killing the Oilers cup chances is not how they likely saw his career trending.

Agreed. Growth was assumed and can't blame them too much. I believe most thought it was a bit bloated when it was announced though. He got that deal right at the time when Covid was derailing revenue too right?

 

[JustAHabFan]

What comes after ''parabolic''?

Vertical.

 

[417]

Nah... You're not comprehending it well. It's a 50/50 revenue split. Players get 50% and in the claw back I was talking about, the ones who get complacent loose a bit to the ones who show up game/game.

It's give and take though, how many players significantly out-perform their contract?

Contracts are guarantees of remuneration, not guarantees of performance.

Who knows?, maybe one day the NHL is going to move to non-guaranteed contracts like the NFL, and then you’d get your wish ?

 

[LaP]

Vertical.

And after vertical it's a black hole.

 

[BaseballCoach]

And? Is that factor going to change or something? Did this penalize Caufield's negotiations when he was up for his extension?

I'm not sure why playing with Suzuki, which is likely to be his center for a long time, a penalizing factor?



Of course not, that's why I said i'm comfortable with a 2 year bridge deal if that's what they think is more prudent. I just know that if you're negotiating an 8 year deal with ANY player, than you're doing it that on the PREMISE that you ARE banking on his growth and reaching his potential.

If you don't think it's a sure thing...then DON'T OFFER HIM A 8 YEAR CONTRACT EXTENSION lol.

It's really not that complicated. You just have conflicting points of view...on one hand you doubt his ability to continue to progress and you think his numbers are inflated playing with Suzuki, but at the same time, you want to sign him to a maximum amount of years?

That doesn't make sense.

So in other words, you want Slafkovsky to sign for a maximum amount of years, while also taking a discounted deal compared to his peers on the team and throughout the league.

Hey if he and his agent are agreeable to that, that would be amazing.

I'm inclined to bridge Slaf for two or three years and take the chance we might be paying him more from ages 24-30/31.

I'm not crazy about the attitude I'm seeing at the WC. I'd like to see him focused on more growth and not assuming he has 'made it' now.

 

[Wats]

I'm inclined to bridge Slaf for two or three years and take the chance we might be paying him more from ages 24-30/31.

I'm not crazy about the attitude I'm seeing at the WC. I'd like to see him focused on more growth and not assuming he has 'made it' now.

Haven't been watching, is it really that bad?

 

[waitin425]

Haven't been watching, is it really that bad?

I haven't been watching the games, but if the attitude is based off him doing the crying motion, and losing it in the penalty box, I'm not overly concerned about it. I'm interested in hearing what @BaseballCoach has to say though, I like his takes for the most part.

 

[Heffyhoof]

Haven't been watching, is it really that bad?

Not at all. Anyone reading into his passion and hard play as anything but that, especially 'him assuming he has made it' is just being silly and alarmist. IMO it just seems like it's the new board manufactured thing to pretend to worry about.

 

[CanadienShark]

I'm inclined to bridge Slaf for two or three years and take the chance we might be paying him more from ages 24-30/31.

I'm not crazy about the attitude I'm seeing at the WC. I'd like to see him focused on more growth and not assuming he has 'made it' now.

Can you please elaborate?

 

[Habs Halifax]

It's give and take though, how many players significantly out-perform their contract?

Contracts are guarantees of remuneration, not guarantees of performance.

Who knows?, maybe one day the NHL is going to move to non-guaranteed contracts like the NFL, and then you’d get your wish ?

Nah. Missed again. I'm prefer the 50/50 revenue split and I would not touch that. That would be the number 1 rule and untouchable. Where you are miss comprehending is how that 50% of revenue is distributed. My idea is to have some of it open for the players who have great seasons. I think this is great incentive and makes the game more competitive.

The only change I would make is claw backs to someone like Nurse. Maybe he gets $6M guaranteed and up to $9.5M in performance bonuses. If Nurse has a bad season, he gets $6M and his bonus money goes to others (like RNH or Hyman or Bouchard). Understand now?

Someone like McDavid gets the entire guaranteed contract. Each team would be allowed 2 or 3 franchise tags for players like this. After that, other players still get paid very well but they just don't get the high end if they become complacent. Especially on max bloated 8 year contracts. You see it a lot... player bust their ass off in a contract year, get their contract, and then fade a bit. This part annoys me big time and I think it's a flaw they can improve on.

A lot would have to be figured out but where there is a will, there is a way. They did create the Escrow which is genius.

 

[BaseballCoach]

I haven't been watching the games, but if the attitude is based off him doing the crying motion, and losing it in the penalty box, I'm not overly concerned about it. I'm interested in hearing what @BaseballCoach has to say though, I like his takes for the most part.

Very critical of refs with speech laced with profanities at least twice so far at the tourney (shown on TV). A bit arrogant/cocky in comments.

Funny thing, totally unknown to me when I gave my thoughts, I found this link this morning:

Martin St-Louis n’aime pas l’attitude de Juraj Slafkovsky au championnat du monde

Juraj Slafkovsky est devenu une vraie bête de cirque au championnat du monde.

hockey30.com

Might be unreliable clickbait, though, so again I stress that I made my comments independently.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Not at all. Anyone reading into his passion and hard play as anything but that, especially 'him assuming he has made it' is just being silly and alarmist. IMO it just seems like it's the new board manufactured thing to pretend to worry about.

I'm not going to make a mountain out of a molehill but I will support the Habs if they decide to bridge Slaf and take the chande of a higher AAV if he hits the stratosphere.