So next season nylander’s QO is 15.9m.... what stops him from signing it?

Do you think he is the type of person to go back on his word? As the description says, have an agreement worked out with him, assume that he is not a piece of trash that will go back on his word.

Unfortunately the world doesn’t work that way. I also believe there are rules that stop this sort of cap circumvention. Could you imagine the press conference where dubas tries to explain a 16m 1 yr bridge deal? This whole idea has been put up and shot down multiple times. I say we sign nylander at 6.5m x 6yrs and keep everyone out of deep trouble for trying to circumvent the CBA.

This just cracks me up lol.

There are rules that would make it difficult, but not impossible. The only problem would be what the league does in response, though with the Leafs being such a cornerstone it would likely be less severe than if Carolina or Arizona tried this kind of stunt.

Why? Because you would you are an untrustworthy person who would make a deal that pays you 64M then break it out of greed, or because I actually believe people will keep their word unless they show otherwise?

Oh the penalty would be exactly the same.... this would not be allowed to stand and I’m pretty sure when nylander turns down his QO we end up losing so much in cap space that we can’t sign Matthews anyway.

I do love how much you trust nylander... must be his boyish good looks. Hockey deals are made on paper not with winks and handshakes... this isn’t 1957

Not sure how you lose cap space but ok. In this situation he is not extended a QO, goes UFA which eliminates the minimum Leafs need to pay him, and signs a 7 year deal as a UFA. No one part of this violates the CBA, but combined it is massaive cap circumvention, so I'm not sure how the league deals with it although loss draft picks seems like the only actual thing they could do.
Why wouldn't I trust that a guy who wants 64M over 8 years will accept 64M over 8 years? Could he get more? Yes. Tavares could have as well, so could a lot of players. I would trust most people to keep their word if they haven't proven otherwise, especially when they are getting exactly what they wanted from the start.

I’m thinking a cap recapture penalty... whether or not they could I’m not sure. I would have to read more into the cba.

So nylander goes ufa???? Wow that is a really bad idea lol...

It's such a weird situation, hypothetical or not, that trying to figure out what would happen is a dice roll at best. For even more complications, what if when TML go out and acquire their yearly 4C for a 2nd rounder they throw in a meh+ prospect and a 7th as an additional back room deal, Nylander's rights are traded for that same 7th, the acquiring team is 'unable' to make space for the qualifying offer, and Nylander goes UFA as a member of another team then signs with the Leafs. I've pretty much decided this post is now "how to give Bettman an aneurysm" the comment section.

You’re going to give me an aneurysm...

Stop with the nonsense. No such thing as a gentlemen's agreement. Under the CBA, severe front loaded contracts are not allowed.... Nothing in for Nylander to "honour" the illegal contract in the second year.

I wonder if it would be prudent in the next CBA, to have an escalator clause in the contracts. Example figuring a 3% increase in cap. A player signs a 5 year contract with optional "increase". n a 5 year contract, a
5m in year one, 5,150,000, 5,300,000, 5,450,000, 5,600,00, 5,750,000..

PS. In you're proposed Nylander contract, "gives Bettman an aneurysm". as you suggest. I'm all for it.

An escalator clause would be a reasonable idea, therefore no way it happens. Of course there is such a thing as gentlemen's agreements, giving someone a few dollars to grab you a coffee when they go to Timmies is a gentlemen's agreement. If you mean they don't happen in the NHL again I disagree, the Plekanec trade last season was very much such a deal. Mtl trades him to a near by team, and he resigns and eats defensive minutes on a bad team. And it isn't a front loaded contract technically, it's a high value 1 year deal, followed by a more reasonable multi-year deal, again technically. No one part of it violates rules, though all together it is an insult to the spirit of the CBA. Finally, why wouldn't Nylander sign after the first year, it is a 7million a year for 7 year contract, he likely doesn't get much more somewhere else, and unless he dislikes Toronto he will take a reasonable offer and stay.

what happens if he gets seriously hurt? or has a bad year? Toronto would walk away.

What happens if he scores 100 points, why would he honor a handshake agreement and leave a ton of money on the table?

i laugh that you think only nylander would walk away from a handshake deal.

this is gibberish.

you came up with a bad idea, got called out on it and are now lashing out at people. walk away.

Very good points, not really sure on the injury front although he would be making more than if he signed a 2 year bridge. As for what happens if he scores 100 points, you sit down with him and either 1 say we don't think your a hundred point player, it was a fluke, if you disagree what are your preferences as a trade destination we can at least try and accommodate. Or 2, say ok your a 100 point player we will pay you like one, and you ship out cap from elsewhere. Having too many 100 point players is not a problem a would mind having, personal preference too having too few 100 point players.

I believe that most people are willing to honor their agreements, because most people I have met do so. Guess I'm lucky that handshake agreements work out for me.

What part is not understood? It probably is a bad idea but I don't see how explaining points and asking for clarification oncertain points is lashing out.

Does anyone know the actual rules on this? Cause there is obviously a reason that real GMs haven't already tried this.