[Re-signing] TOR extends William Nylander 8 years, $11.5M AAV (full NMC)

[JeremyCuddles]

For as much as we meme the contract. At least of the big name guys on Toronto Nylander shows up in the playoffs. Even Toronto fans say this.

[sassbs]

2 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

They still have never won past the second round.

What do you mean,  they went to 3 rounds. Oh wait yeah you’re right lollll.  
 

[King Heffy]

5 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

It is very bizarre for Canucks fans to go and label other teams contenders or pretenders, when our team has only qualified for the playoffs twice in the last decade.  Regardless of whether you think the Leafs are primed for playoff success, they have consistently passed the first hurdle of actually making the playoffs.  It is more important than you think for a team to win regular season games.  I don't care about the Toronto cup hype - what matters is that they get in every year.  How many Canucks GMs and head coaches have gotten fired for failing to reach that first hurdle?

 

And yes, Rielly is their best defenceman.  Nobody in the league is disputing that.  Every NHL recognizes that and focuses on covering him as the pointman.  They also focus exploiting his defensive weaknesses, but his partner Brodie does a solid job of covering for him.

 

And yes, I do trust the attitude of Leafs fans, especially after a loss.  I don't care whether they think they have the best players or worst players in the league.  But when guys like Rielly/Nylander consistently gets praised after both wins AND losses, they are clearly not the problem.

 

 

If you think the regular season is so meaningless, explain to me why the Canucks have consistently failed to make the playoffs.  I'm never going to suggest this Leafs team can make the Cup final.  But I'm also never going to suggest this team is trash.  They're not.  If they really were trash, they'd look like Chicago.

 

Tell me - are you not enjoying watching the Canucks right now?  Does all the joy and excitement mean absolutely nothing to you if we don't get past the first round?  Is that what you're trying to say?

Everything you've said about his defensive play is captured in the analytics you seem to despise so much.  Not even the biggest Rielly fan is going to suggest he is a good defender, but not even the biggest hater is going to suggest he isn't a great NHL player.

 

Offensive output is irrelevant in what context?  Erik Karlsson is the reigning Norris Trophy winner because of his offensive output.  By acclamation, he was the most valuable defenceman last year.  How can you reconcile that (and the fact that Rielly is heavily praised across the league) with your opinion?  And then how can you pass off your opinion as some kind of proof?

We'll have to agree to disagree.  You seem to think it's acceptable for a defenceman to be completely incapable of playing defence at the NHL level; I don't, regardless of offensive output.  Untill Rielly decides to make winning a priority and attempt to stop disgracing the sport with his atrocious play in his own zone, the correct place for him is in the AHL press box where he can be taught how to play his position.  If you're willing to tolerate him playing like trash in his own zone, that doesn't make you superior to me regardless of all the analytics garbage you want to pretend has any value.

[AatuD2]

On 1/6/2024 at 10:06 PM, Slegr said:

Toronto is so bad at giving in to its players and resetting the salary norm across the NHL. 
Nylander is really taking them to town, because he can, as a UFA at end of season. They have no choice but to given in or he leaves for nothing. 8 years at $11+m? Trying to match his jersey number #88? 
Petey as an RFA should get around the same. But I hope he realizes he’s the third best player on this team most nights, behind Hughes and Miller, who have both left more money on the table to help build a winner.

 

Exactly! 

 

I would not use any Toronto deals as comparables. They are living in their own demented world. 

[Miss Korea]

14 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

We'll have to agree to disagree.  You seem to think it's acceptable for a defenceman to be completely incapable of playing defence at the NHL level; I don't, regardless of offensive output.  Untill Rielly decides to make winning a priority and attempt to stop disgracing the sport with his atrocious play in his own zone, the correct place for him is in the AHL press box where he can be taught how to play his position.  If you're willing to tolerate him playing like trash in his own zone, that doesn't make you superior to me regardless of all the analytics garbage you want to pretend has any value.

 

This isn't a matter of agree/disagree.  This is a matter of you needing to back your own words up with those of someone else's.  I've asked you multiple times now to link some kind of article suggesting Rielly doesn't belong in the NHL.  It can be a Leafs article.  It can be a non-Leafs article.  

 

At least I can back my own words up.  Rielly and Karlsson and any other hyper-offensive D-man belong in the NHL by virtue of them actually playing in the league right now.  More than that, actually.  Most of them are leaders on their team, with a 'C' or 'A' on their chest.  They score a lot of points.  They play a lot of minutes.  They earn a ton of money.  And they earn accolades for best defenceman too.  So you've got the media that thinks these players are some of the NHL's best.  You've got management AND coaches who think these players are some of the NHL's best.  And of course, you've got the players themselves who talk about how these guys are some of the NHL's best.  Literally the entire hockey world backing me up... against your opinion.

 

And you think you can strut around with this "proven to be AHL trash" nonsense.  I've been waiting for your proof and all you've shown me is opinion after opinion after opinion.  Screw the Jfresh cards and screw the analytics.  Be a big boy and show me some proof (AKA something that someone has written/said) that can actually back up what you're saying.  Please.

[King Heffy]

30 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

This isn't a matter of agree/disagree.  This is a matter of you needing to back your own words up with those of someone else's.  I've asked you multiple times now to link some kind of article suggesting Rielly doesn't belong in the NHL.  It can be a Leafs article.  It can be a non-Leafs article.  

 

At least I can back my own words up.  Rielly and Karlsson and any other hyper-offensive D-man belong in the NHL by virtue of them actually playing in the league right now.  More than that, actually.  Most of them are leaders on their team, with a 'C' or 'A' on their chest.  They score a lot of points.  They play a lot of minutes.  They earn a ton of money.  And they earn accolades for best defenceman too.  So you've got the media that thinks these players are some of the NHL's best.  You've got management AND coaches who think these players are some of the NHL's best.  And of course, you've got the players themselves who talk about how these guys are some of the NHL's best.  Literally the entire hockey world backing me up... against your opinion.

 

And you think you can strut around with this "proven to be AHL trash" nonsense.  I've been waiting for your proof and all you've shown me is opinion after opinion after opinion.  Screw the Jfresh cards and screw the analytics.  Be a big boy and show me some proof (AKA something that someone has written/said) that can actually back up what you're saying.  Please.

Again, it's my opinion.  These guys are hurting their teams, and most teams would be better off putting them in the press box and telling them the only way they get out is by learning how to play defence.  Just because you disagree does not mean I don't have the right to my opinion.  We both clearly have different standards so let's just drop the argument because there's nothing either of us can say that will change the other's mind.

[Miss Korea]

6 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Again, it's my opinion.  These guys are hurting their teams, and most teams would be better off putting them in the press box and telling them the only way they get out is by learning how to play defence.  Just because you disagree does not mean I don't have the right to my opinion.  We both clearly have different standards so let's just drop the argument because there's nothing either of us can say that will change the other's mind.

 

No no, you're just trying to weasel your way out of this.  This isn't my opinion against yours.  This is the opinion of the entire hockey community.  Literally the entire community.  It's not me you have to worry about.  The players disagree with you.  The coaches disagree with you.  Management disagrees with you.  The media disagrees with you.  From management to coaches to players to media to fans... literally every single person who watches hockey disagrees with you.  Unless you can show me otherwise.

 

You are welcome to have your own opinion but the problem is you can't seem to back it up with even one piece of evidence.  Show me one opinion.  Just one.  One opinion from literally anywhere or anyone (not on this forum) that suggests Rielly belongs in the AHL.  It can't be that hard to find just one person who agrees with you, man.

[King Heffy]

3 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

No no, you're just trying to weasel your way out of this.  This isn't my opinion against yours.  This is the opinion of the entire hockey community.  Literally the entire community.  It's not me you have to worry about.  The players disagree with you.  The coaches disagree with you.  Management disagrees with you.  The media disagrees with you.  From management to coaches to players to media to fans... literally every single person who watches hockey disagrees with you.  Unless you can show me otherwise.

 

You are welcome to have your own opinion but the problem is you can't seem to back it up with even one piece of evidence.  Show me one opinion.  Just one.  One opinion from literally anywhere or anyone (not on this forum) that suggests Rielly belongs in the AHL.  It can't be that hard to find just one person who agrees with you, man.

Here's the issue for you: since it's simply my opinion, I don't really care enough to look for validation to satisfy your request.  Anyways, I don't think there's much point in derailing this thread further.  I'm not worried about you, and we've been over exactly how much respect I have for what you have to say, so let's not continue this.  

[Miss Korea]

23 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Here's the issue for you: since it's simply my opinion, I don't really care enough to look for validation to satisfy your request.  Anyways, I don't think there's much point in derailing this thread further.  I'm not worried about you, and we've been over exactly how much respect I have for what you have to say, so let's not continue this.  

 

I think it shows that you're not willing to stand up for your own beliefs.  If someone challenges to me to back up my own opinion, it's really not that hard.  I'll pull something up.  Because unlike you, I actually believe in what I say.  With the amount of energy you've put into responding to me and constantly crusading your message to everyone else, you could've put this debate to rest at any point by backing your words up with some hard evidence.  One link and I would've backed right off.  The problem here is... you can't.  Because there's literally no one in the hockey world you who agrees with what you're saying.

 

If you're going to go out there and say something wild, it's pretty reasonable that you'll be expected to prove it.

Edited January 8 by Miss Korea

[King Heffy]

4 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

I think it shows that you're not willing to stand up for your own beliefs.  If someone challenges to me to back up my own opinion, it's really not that hard.  I'll pull something up.  Because unlike you, I actually believe in what I say.  With the amount of energy you've put into responding to me and constantly crusading your message to everyone else, you could've put this debate to rest at any point by backing your words up with some hard evidence.  One link and I would've backed right off.  The problem here is... you can't.  Because there's literally no one in the hockey world you who agrees with what you're saying.

 

If you're going to go out there and say something wild, it's pretty reasonable that you'll be expected to prove it.

The hard evidence is that he's absolute trash in his own zone.  You admit to that and still think it's acceptable.  I don't think it's wild for an ability to actually play defence to be a requirement to be a legit NHL defenceman.

[Miss Korea]

35 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

The hard evidence is that he's absolute trash in his own zone.  You admit to that and still think it's acceptable.  I don't think it's wild for an ability to actually play defence to be a requirement to be a legit NHL defenceman.

If you really think it's that normal, you should easily be able to find someone who agrees with you.  Anyone who truly believes in what they say should have the confidence to back their words up.  I'm always ready to back my words with evidence/proof.  This is a forum, after all.

 

It is completely reasonable to ask for some sources to back your claim.  Stubbornly rfusing to do so severely undermines any opinion you might have.

[IBatch]

17 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

He's going to continue regressing, but should be good enough to support the second line.  Maybe a 3 x $4M?

Tavares is right around where the Sedins were when they signed their last deal (4 years) plus or so older as far as production goes.  They got close to 11% each for four more years ... He's going to get more dough than that somewhere.    Although he does owe TO a solid and should take a big pay cut, unless he falls off the planet (doubtful), can't see someone offering him a lot more than that.   Given second line centers get 7 or more these days (the good ones), and it can be a tough position to fill.    He's not going to sign for that .. 

[Alflives]

Sounds like it’s done. 11.5x8

[chris12345]

12 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Sounds like it’s done. 11.5x8

It is

[The Arrogant Worms]

[Bob Long]

14 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

It is very bizarre for Canucks fans to go and label other teams contenders or pretenders, when our team has only qualified for the playoffs twice in the last decade.  Regardless of whether you think the Leafs are primed for playoff success, they have consistently passed the first hurdle of actually making the playoffs.  It is more important than you think for a team to win regular season games.  I don't care about the Toronto cup hype - what matters is that they get in every year.  How many Canucks GMs and head coaches have gotten fired for failing to reach that first hurdle?

 

And yes, Rielly is their best defenceman.  Nobody in the league is disputing that.  Every NHL recognizes that and focuses on covering him as the pointman.  They also focus exploiting his defensive weaknesses, but his partner Brodie does a solid job of covering for him.

 

And yes, I do trust the attitude of Leafs fans, especially after a loss.  I don't care whether they think they have the best players or worst players in the league.  But when guys like Rielly/Nylander consistently gets praised after both wins AND losses, they are clearly not the problem.

 

 

If you think the regular season is so meaningless, explain to me why the Canucks have consistently failed to make the playoffs.  I'm never going to suggest this Leafs team can make the Cup final.  But I'm also never going to suggest this team is trash.  They're not.  If they really were trash, they'd look like Chicago.

 

Tell me - are you not enjoying watching the Canucks right now?  Does all the joy and excitement mean absolutely nothing to you if we don't get past the first round?  Is that what you're trying to say?

Everything you've said about his defensive play is captured in the analytics you seem to despise so much.  Not even the biggest Rielly fan is going to suggest he is a good defender, but not even the biggest hater is going to suggest he isn't a great NHL player.

 

Offensive output is irrelevant in what context?  Erik Karlsson is the reigning Norris Trophy winner because of his offensive output.  By acclamation, he was the most valuable defenceman last year.  How can you reconcile that (and the fact that Rielly is heavily praised across the league) with your opinion?  And then how can you pass off your opinion as some kind of proof?

 

Karlsson getting the Norris was a joke. He cheated for an entire year and the moron press corps couldn't hand it too him fast enough.

 

It's handed out by the media, that's how it's reconciled. 101 pts and a -26? Literally didn't play defense that year.

 

 

Edited January 8 by Bob Long

[Bob Long]

19 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Sounds like it’s done. 11.5x8

[Rekker]

Mostly just not a fan of eight years contracts, too long and unpredictable. Should be six max by the team holding your rights, five year max otherwise. Maybe a one per club exemption. 

[Rekker]

14 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

It is very bizarre for Canucks fans to go and label other teams contenders or pretenders, when our team has only qualified for the playoffs twice in the last decade.  Regardless of whether you think the Leafs are primed for playoff success, they have consistently passed the first hurdle of actually making the playoffs.  It is more important than you think for a team to win regular season games.  I don't care about the Toronto cup hype - what matters is that they get in every year.  How many Canucks GMs and head coaches have gotten fired for failing to reach that first hurdle?

 

And yes, Rielly is their best defenceman.  Nobody in the league is disputing that.  Every NHL recognizes that and focuses on covering him as the pointman.  They also focus exploiting his defensive weaknesses, but his partner Brodie does a solid job of covering for him.

 

And yes, I do trust the attitude of Leafs fans, especially after a loss.  I don't care whether they think they have the best players or worst players in the league.  But when guys like Rielly/Nylander consistently gets praised after both wins AND losses, they are clearly not the problem.

 

 

If you think the regular season is so meaningless, explain to me why the Canucks have consistently failed to make the playoffs.  I'm never going to suggest this Leafs team can make the Cup final.  But I'm also never going to suggest this team is trash.  They're not.  If they really were trash, they'd look like Chicago.

 

Tell me - are you not enjoying watching the Canucks right now?  Does all the joy and excitement mean absolutely nothing to you if we don't get past the first round?  Is that what you're trying to say?

Everything you've said about his defensive play is captured in the analytics you seem to despise so much.  Not even the biggest Rielly fan is going to suggest he is a good defender, but not even the biggest hater is going to suggest he isn't a great NHL player.

 

Offensive output is irrelevant in what context?  Erik Karlsson is the reigning Norris Trophy winner because of his offensive output.  By acclamation, he was the most valuable defenceman last year.  How can you reconcile that (and the fact that Rielly is heavily praised across the league) with your opinion?  And then how can you pass off your opinion as some kind of proof?

We are too far apart to warrant my time with this discussion, we just look at things completely different. All good, to each their own. 

[Coconuts]

20 minutes ago, Rekker said:

Mostly just not a fan of eight years contracts, too long and unpredictable. Should be six max by the team holding your rights, five year max otherwise. Maybe a one per club exemption. 

 

NHLPA would never go for it though 

[Coconuts]

Looks like it's finally happening though, richest contract given out in Leafs history

[Devron]

28 minutes ago, Rekker said:

Mostly just not a fan of eight years contracts, too long and unpredictable. Should be six max by the team holding your rights, five year max otherwise. Maybe a one per club exemption. 

Huberdeau 8 years

 

[EdgarM]

17 hours ago, Rekker said:

Such big monies and accolades being tossed around because of stats. Stats don't win games. When you score, against who, what you do in your end, takes, gives, board battles. Even if you put this on a fancy chart it means little to me. I know the player that is the flamingo type, and I know the player that rips the head of a bunny rabbit to win. It's in the mind and heart. No charts for this. No charts for real hockey vs shinny hockey, garbage time vs crunch time. Watch the game, its often obvious.

There are many on here who don't see the big picture Rekker. Many see the shiny new toy and go "gaga" over it. 

In hockey, its not who has the most toys wins, you know like Edmonton/Toronto? Its the cohesiveness of the entire group like Vegas. Everybody running on the same path which when it works, it works.

Character players are the bread and butter of the team and they are very hard to find. Miller and Hughes come to mind for us, as is Demko. Team first mentality and salary, awards etc. second.

When teams like Toronto and Edmonton win s Stanley Cup? then we can discuss the idea of having the most high priced players on the team. Until then, we need to see what the teams who have won and what kind of recipe they used to find their success IMO.

[Devron]

2 things 

 

He’s a winger 

 

and 

 

He’s not even a PPG over his career. 
 

Brutal contract imo 

[Bob Long]

3 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

There are many on here who don't see the big picture Rekker. Many see the shiny new toy and go "gaga" over it. 

In hockey, its not who has the most toys wins, you know like Edmonton/Toronto? Its the cohesiveness of the entire group like Vegas. Everybody running on the same path which when it works, it works.

Character players are the bread and butter of the team and they are very hard to find. Miller and Hughes come to mind for us, as is Demko. Team first mentality and salary, awards etc. second.

When teams like Toronto and Edmonton win s Stanley Cup? then we can discuss the idea of having the most high priced players on the team. Until then, we need to see what the teams who have won and what kind of recipe they used to find their success IMO.

 

I really do think hockey media is a big part of the perception problem of what a good team is. They are just so lazy. They love to focus on the smallest number of people possible. McDavid. Oh OK maybe Karlsson for one season if he hits "100" which is a fun number to type.

 

You rarely see a good, detailed analysis of how teams win. Because its hard work. The fact is most media people are just really lazy.

 

Edited January 8 by Bob Long