Forums/NHL Signings

Vegas Golden Knights signed William Karlsson (1 Year / $5,250,000 AAV)

Was this a good signing?
The chart has been hidden

Poll Options

 

Aug 4 at 11:41 am
#1
William Karlsson has signed a new contract with the Vegas Golden Knights.
STANDARD CONTRACT
COMPARE THIS CONTRACT
LENGTH: 1 YEAR
EXPIRY STATUS: RFA
SIGNING TEAM: Vegas Golden Knights
VALUE: $5,250,000
C.H.% : 6.60
SIGNING DATE: August 4, 2018
SOURCE: CapFriendly
SEASONCLAUSECAP HIT AAV P. BONUSES S. BONUSES BASE SALARY TOTAL SALARY MINORS SALARY
2018-19$5,250,000$5,250,000$0$500,000$4,750,000$5,250,000$5,250,000
TOTAL$5,250,000$5,250,000$0$500,000$4,750,000$5,250,000$5,250,000
Aug 4 at 11:47 am
#2
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 30
Likes: 32
This case is so interesting and not so common considering his breakout season.

I think this is a good contract because no one can predict how it's going to play out this year for Karlsson.

He got a nice 5M$ reward for his 43 goals, but it's going to impact on his next deal if he doesn't replicate those numbers.

He's still RFA next summer, so good deal for both parties.
Sleeping0ut1992, ConnorMcHellebucyk, buxvet and 8 others liked this.
Aug 4 at 12:09 pm
#3
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 504
Likes: 35
I hope Wild Bill proves the doubters wrong and puts up 50 goals next year
wild24 liked this.
Aug 4 at 12:17 pm
#4
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 314
Likes: 33
Can't believe he only got 5.25
Aug 4 at 12:26 pm
#5
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 55
Likes: 9
Quoting: Trickster
Can't believe he only got 5.25


It's hard based on 1 year
If he get over 40 next year
He'll get 9m
Aug 4 at 12:27 pm
#6
Potemkyne
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 36
Likes: 1
Quoting: Trickster
Can't believe he only got 5.25


I'd be surprised if he was a multiple time 43 goal-scorer, but as GaryMcBettman said, it's a reward for this last season and an opportunity he can score as many this year as he did last year. Dude had no choice, VGK had all the cards ; he couldn't force them into a multiple-year deal with the arbitration coming. I'm confident he's going to score a lot and get a long term deal next year
Aug 4 at 1:01 pm
#7
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 7
Likes: 9
Good deal for both sides. Karlsson gets close to the 6 mil. he wants, and Vegas gets the term they want
Aug 4 at 1:48 pm
#8
GM in the Making
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 625
Likes: 65
I hope Karlsson puts up 50 goals next season. More proof Tortz is a total jackass
Aug 4 at 2:32 pm
#9
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 7,924
Likes: 1,129
The perfect "prove you can do it again" contract
Panarin and Zubrowka liked this.
Aug 4 at 2:50 pm
#10
Col's AGM 2018-19 V3
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 335
This is a perfect deal. I’ve thought Wild Bill was a lucky year as a fluke. This gives Vegas the chance to see if he can repeat. Good Prove me Deal contract.
Aug 4 at 3:51 pm
#11
Majors and minors
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Edited Aug 4 at 4:08 pm
the answers simple. from Vegas view it's a steal. Eichel, Seguin Matthews,Monohan were all similar points per game. from players perspective he lost 5 million. maybe that's why it's only a 1 year... and if you so much as mention break out year or initial explain some of these others after 1 year. PS I would have fired Gallant and seriously looked hard at whether Mcphee knew what he was doing. PSS why do u think Clarksons LTIR came with Karlsson, that's another 10.5 mil to pay off.
Aug 4 at 5:06 pm
#12
GM67
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 92
Likes: 23
Good money signing based on his very good production last season. I am sure Vegas wanted to sign him longer but he chose to see if he could produce big time again and thus nail down a bigger and longer contract with Vegas or somewhere else. Most likely Vegas wanted to pay less per year for more years and he then said well I will prove you wrong and then we can go from there. And they said , Prove It!
Aug 4 at 5:46 pm
#13
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 31
Likes: 1
I thought 6×6 would of been fair for both sides , plus they keep him long term!
Aug 4 at 10:05 pm
#14
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 638
Deal makes sense for both sides. Karlsson gets a nice bump for having a breakout year, but still leaves the door open to make even more if he can repeat with another great year. For Vegas the only way it hurts is if he goes on to blow last years numbers out of the water (and it only hurts on the next contract because obviously they'd love for him to have an even better year). Pretty standard "prove it" contract.
Aug 5 at 2:27 am
#15
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 81
Likes: 10
Vegas should've offered 8 years at $6M AAV long-term. Karlsson is great defensively and even if he regresses to about 30G and 60 points this would be a steal. I predict that this will end up costing George McFee at least $3M more annually next summer when we do this all over again. Karlsson was team MVP last season and a top 10 Center in the league. If he repeats his numbers and defensive play from last season he'll be in line for $9M+ AAV.
Aug 5 at 12:34 pm
#16
Habs/Pens fan
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 447
Likes: 82
This is what I wanted Schultz to get last year so this is a prove to me this isn't a fluke.
Aug 7 at 2:05 pm
#17
mothariah
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 122
Likes: 37
Next year he gets 8
Mon at 11:45 am
#18
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 25
Likes: 7
This shows a lot of restraint from Vegas. I think Karlsson will prove to be a very good player still, but his 43 goals was a mirage. Unless he has the best wrist shot the league has ever seen, by a massive margin, or he has another gear that allows him to create twice as many chances, he isn't this type of scorer. Trying to price him long term based on this type of season is near impossible, so I think giving him a reward for a year, and figuring out exactly where he falls next year will be a good bet.

Chances are he will fall back considerably next year in terms of goals, but still have a solid season. The rebound will get his long term price down from whatever it would have been now, and Vegas can likely buy low on a good player with more info on hand. Think of how the Leafs managed Kadri after a relatively lucky season. His percentages came down, but he actually improved his play, then they managed to get him for a steal. Now that he is settled in for what he really is (50-60pt center), he is an absolute steal.
Mon at 12:04 pm
#19
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 25
Likes: 7
Quoting: Brian2016
Vegas should've offered 8 years at $6M AAV long-term. Karlsson is great defensively and even if he regresses to about 30G and 60 points this would be a steal. I predict that this will end up costing George McFee at least $3M more annually next summer when we do this all over again. Karlsson was team MVP last season and a top 10 Center in the league. If he repeats his numbers and defensive play from last season he'll be in line for $9M+ AAV.


I think the hard part may have been getting a long term number that worked for both sides. $6M could be ok in theory, but would Karlsson have signed that? Does 8 years make sense for a guy if he isn't a superstar?

The risk of Karlsson getting those types of numbers again are very low. He had an absurd shooting percentage, and has never done anything to this point in his career to suggest that his shooting percentage is repeatable over the long term. To put it in perspective, the best high rate finishers in the league right now are Crosby, Matthews, Laine, and Stamkos. He ran hotter than any of those guys ever has in a season. By a lot. So unless Karlsson is a substantially better shooter than Stamkos is, and in fact is better than Stamkos was during his 60 goal season, he is not repeating his goal scoring from last year. I don't know if anyone in the modern era has ever scored 40 goals on less than 200 shots, and I really don't think it will magically turn out that Karlsson is the greatest shooter in NHL history. So unless he starts massively increasing his shots on goal, he is likely going to regress heavily.

I think Karlsson is a good player, but given how ridiculous of a season he had, it was probably nearly impossible to correctly value him or for him to get the correct value on a long term deal. I think truthfully he is a player you should be comfortable giving something in the low-mid $5M range too for the long term, but if he comes out next year and puts up 15 goals, 40 points and he has 8 years at over $6M, it could get pretty ugly.
Tue at 5:48 am
#20
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 81
Likes: 10
Quoting: Danny12357
I think the hard part may have been getting a long term number that worked for both sides. $6M could be ok in theory, but would Karlsson have signed that? Does 8 years make sense for a guy if he isn't a superstar?

The risk of Karlsson getting those types of numbers again are very low. He had an absurd shooting percentage, and has never done anything to this point in his career to suggest that his shooting percentage is repeatable over the long term. To put it in perspective, the best high rate finishers in the league right now are Crosby, Matthews, Laine, and Stamkos. He ran hotter than any of those guys ever has in a season. By a lot. So unless Karlsson is a substantially better shooter than Stamkos is, and in fact is better than Stamkos was during his 60 goal season, he is not repeating his goal scoring from last year. I don't know if anyone in the modern era has ever scored 40 goals on less than 200 shots, and I really don't think it will magically turn out that Karlsson is the greatest shooter in NHL history. So unless he starts massively increasing his shots on goal, he is likely going to regress heavily.

I think Karlsson is a good player, but given how ridiculous of a season he had, it was probably nearly impossible to correctly value him or for him to get the correct value on a long term deal. I think truthfully he is a player you should be comfortable giving something in the low-mid $5M range too for the long term, but if he comes out next year and puts up 15 goals, 40 points and he has 8 years at over $6M, it could get pretty ugly.


Even if he regresses to let's say 25G and 60 points, which would be a huge regression given his role in Vegas and his line mates Smith and Marchessault, his defensive abilities more than establish him as a true 1st line Center. $6M would still be tremendous value at that point. Look at what Turris signed for and his numbers were far below what Karlsson should be projected at.
Tue at 12:56 pm
#21
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 25
Likes: 7
Quoting: Brian2016
Even if he regresses to let's say 25G and 60 points, which would be a huge regression given his role in Vegas and his line mates Smith and Marchessault, his defensive abilities more than establish him as a true 1st line Center. $6M would still be tremendous value at that point. Look at what Turris signed for and his numbers were far below what Karlsson should be projected at.


My issue with that thought is that you place his floor at 25G and 60 points. I think that is really optimistic, as I see the floor as much lower, and I would be surprised if he put up 25G or more this year.

The thing is, neither side wants to screw this up. Karlsson knows that even if he falls back to earth quite a bit, he can likely get over $5M on a longer term deal with the cap going up, so even if he could have gotten $6, why would he take it when he knows a big season would blow that out of the water? Most athletes would take that bet on themselves.

Vegas shouldn't be offering a nickel over say $6.25M on a deal with any amount of term. I think Karlsson is a good player, but that season was an aberration. He didn't generate enough chances to warrant that type of production, but pucks went in. There is no way you can pay him based on that production, and I would be very comfortable betting on his shooting percentage taking a massive dip, likely below half of what he did last season.

I think this is a case where the player will be on himself, and Vegas was not going to offer enough of an incentive for him to skip on that, so a one year deal just makes sense.

If something miraculous happened and he did put up over 30G on 180 shots again, I wouldn't want to sign him for that and would just say thank you, trade him, and let someone else overpay for him in terms of assets and salary. There really isn't that much risk for Vegas. Him putting up another massive season will make him a tremendous asset, and if they still don't feel it's sustainable, RFA's are easier to trade than guys with big contracts.

Personally, I think he will regress very heavily, and may struggle to score even 20 goals. If he misses the 20G threshold and puts up 40-50 points, he is still a good player, but the disappointment likely turns his salary into a great value on a longer term deal. If he has a good season, in the 20-25 goal, 50+ point realm, you are getting him for a number similar to what you were saying anyway, or maybe still less.
Tue at 4:38 pm
#22
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 81
Likes: 10
Quoting: Danny12357
My issue with that thought is that you place his floor at 25G and 60 points. I think that is really optimistic, as I see the floor as much lower, and I would be surprised if he put up 25G or more this year.

The thing is, neither side wants to screw this up. Karlsson knows that even if he falls back to earth quite a bit, he can likely get over $5M on a longer term deal with the cap going up, so even if he could have gotten $6, why would he take it when he knows a big season would blow that out of the water? Most athletes would take that bet on themselves.

Vegas shouldn't be offering a nickel over say $6.25M on a deal with any amount of term. I think Karlsson is a good player, but that season was an aberration. He didn't generate enough chances to warrant that type of production, but pucks went in. There is no way you can pay him based on that production, and I would be very comfortable betting on his shooting percentage taking a massive dip, likely below half of what he did last season.

I think this is a case where the player will be on himself, and Vegas was not going to offer enough of an incentive for him to skip on that, so a one year deal just makes sense.

If something miraculous happened and he did put up over 30G on 180 shots again, I wouldn't want to sign him for that and would just say thank you, trade him, and let someone else overpay for him in terms of assets and salary. There really isn't that much risk for Vegas. Him putting up another massive season will make him a tremendous asset, and if they still don't feel it's sustainable, RFA's are easier to trade than guys with big contracts.

Personally, I think he will regress very heavily, and may struggle to score even 20 goals. If he misses the 20G threshold and puts up 40-50 points, he is still a good player, but the disappointment likely turns his salary into a great value on a longer term deal. If he has a good season, in the 20-25 goal, 50+ point realm, you are getting him for a number similar to what you were saying anyway, or maybe still less.


And what if Fleury regresses to his much more pedestrian numbers from his last few years in PIT? A goalie who can't stop the puck is useless. An excellent defensive Center who regresses from 43G is still an exceptionally valuable asset.
Wed at 9:18 am
#23
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 25
Likes: 7
Quoting: Brian2016
And what if Fleury regresses to his much more pedestrian numbers from his last few years in PIT? A goalie who can't stop the puck is useless. An excellent defensive Center who regresses from 43G is still an exceptionally valuable asset.


I don't disagree that he is a valuable asset, but any asset that you massively overpay for becomes less valuable. My argument is that I don't think Karlsson will accept $6M on a long term deal after scoring 43 goals because he knows he will still have value if he regresses, and will likely get $5M+ even if he falls to being a 20 goal guy who is good defensively. He also knows he will get paid massive if he manages to really defy expectations, so he is basically risking $1M a year or less to maybe push that well north of $7M. From Vegas perspective, I get why they wouldn't offer enough of a premium to get him to sign now rather than bank on himself for another massive season.

All I am saying is getting a long term deal right now is probably extremely difficult. Karlsson has no reason not to take a shot at really driving the number up, and Vegas really shouldn't risk offering enough right now to entice him not to bet on himself.

With Karlsson there are virtually no comparables, so it's a hard deal to get done, and I think both sides wanted to avoid going through that arbitration process once it got close, so I think a 1 year deal makes complete sense.
Wed at 1:18 pm
#24
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 81
Likes: 10
Quoting: Danny12357
I don't disagree that he is a valuable asset, but any asset that you massively overpay for becomes less valuable. My argument is that I don't think Karlsson will accept $6M on a long term deal after scoring 43 goals because he knows he will still have value if he regresses, and will likely get $5M+ even if he falls to being a 20 goal guy who is good defensively. He also knows he will get paid massive if he manages to really defy expectations, so he is basically risking $1M a year or less to maybe push that well north of $7M. From Vegas perspective, I get why they wouldn't offer enough of a premium to get him to sign now rather than bank on himself for another massive season.

All I am saying is getting a long term deal right now is probably extremely difficult. Karlsson has no reason not to take a shot at really driving the number up, and Vegas really shouldn't risk offering enough right now to entice him not to bet on himself.

With Karlsson there are virtually no comparables, so it's a hard deal to get done, and I think both sides wanted to avoid going through that arbitration process once it got close, so I think a 1 year deal makes complete sense.


A repeat of last season will push his value closer to $10M per season. Couture just signed for $8M AAV and he's 29 years old while Karlsson is only 25. Kopitar is at $10M per season and he signed that deal before he broke out for a massive season last year. I guess you're right though: Why not play it safe w/ a one year deal for Karlsson? He's still RFA and he's not going anywhere. I just don't think guys can score 43G in the NHL these days and have it be a fluke. It's just too difficult to score these days.
Thu at 10:49 am
#25
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 25
Likes: 7
Quoting: Brian2016
A repeat of last season will push his value closer to $10M per season. Couture just signed for $8M AAV and he's 29 years old while Karlsson is only 25. Kopitar is at $10M per season and he signed that deal before he broke out for a massive season last year. I guess you're right though: Why not play it safe w/ a one year deal for Karlsson? He's still RFA and he's not going anywhere. I just don't think guys can score 43G in the NHL these days and have it be a fluke. It's just too difficult to score these days.


I agree, if he puts up 35+ it would definitely drive up his value a lot. That's the reason I don't think he would have been willing to sign at $6M, because the low end if he regresses a lot, but still plays well, is probably a low $5M contract. That's not too much risk if $6M was the most he could have gotten long term, considering there is definitely potential to get it far higher. However, if I am Vegas, I am very comfortable taking that risk. The season was an extreme outlier, no matter how you look at. While you may think it's too difficult for anyone to score 43G as a fluke in today's NHL, I would argue it's just as hard to imagine any shooter maintaining a 23% shooting percentage over the long term. I don't think WK just magically became a shooter who is about 40% more accurate than Patrik Laine.

I also think that Vegas top line will get a lot more attention from the get go, which will make things a little harder on them. Again, I think WK is a very good player, but I feel like Vegas would have offered him something in the 7's to get him not to bet on himself, and I don't think that would have been a good deal if the reality is he probably scores between 15-25G a year for the rest of that contract.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Submit Poll Edit