Dylan Cozens next contract

[sweetlou]

I've seen a post about TnT new contract and if Sabres should extend now, wait til middle of season or next off season.  I want to see the opinion of posters on what they should do with Cozens.

 

After Necas's 2 year deal with Canes and Roy's 5 year deal with Vegas, it got me thinking to extend Cozens now and not wait until next off season.  I believe these are two very comparable players to Cozens and would like to see a contract for him similar to these.  I believe Vegas got a steal by signing Roy for 5 years at an AAV of $3million.

If you bridge him for 2 years then you're looking at $3 million.

If you want to go long term then you go 6-8 years and try to keep him around $4-5 million.   

 

 

[Eleven]

There's no point in bridging him early, and I can't see him agreeing to 6-8 years at 4-5 mil.

[sabresparaavida]

While It may make sense for Tage to sign a contract now (coming off a 38 goal season), I don’t see much incentive for Cozens to sign now. Signing a bridge deal is possible, but would expect him to try to have a big year this year and increase his value. And he wouldn’t want to sign a long term deal if he thinks he can break out still, which I’m sure Cozens thinks he can.

[Curt]

14 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

While It may make sense for Tage to sign a contract now (coming off a 38 goal season), I don’t see much incentive for Cozens to sign now. Signing a bridge deal is possible, but would expect him to try to have a big year this year and increase his value. And he wouldn’t want to sign a long term deal if he thinks he can break out still, which I’m sure Cozens thinks he can.

It depends on the player. Some guys do sign long term deals for medium money before they have “broken out”.  There is some value in grabbing the security of ~$35M (or so) guaranteed when you have the opportunity.

I agree that it’s fairly rare though.

Edited August 10, 2022 by Curt

[sweetlou]

I don't care much for long term contracts.  Too many teams get burdened with horrible contracts. 

I'd love to see the new CBA restrict contracts to 3 years or less for RFA's, with UFA's being able to get 5 years max on open market or 6 years if extended with current club. Also eliminate the trade clause restrictions.  Players then have to choose if they want more money, to play in a state with no taxes, or have the best opportunity to win.  I don't care if salaries go up if the salary cap increases,  I just don't like teams being restricted.

[mjd1001]

I'm all for long term contracts if done BEFORE you have to pay the guys top dollar.

I said in a previous post, the way you get really good is betting on players with long term deals when they are younger, so when they are in the prime of their career you can have the back end of that deal where you have them playing for 'under market'.  You 'overpay' them early (when you have cap room) so that when you have a few of them at the top of their game, you can 'underpay' them on that same deal.   Is that easy to do? No, but you want to be a dominant team, that is what you do.

If you 'wait' for guys to prove themself first, you are going to make less mistakes, but you will never have that team with guys on great deals at the back end.  Don't take chances and you might almost assure yourself of having a 'good' team, but never a 'great team.'

With that said, I have NO idea just how good Cozens can/will be.  Hopefully Adams/Granato have a much better idea and will make the appropriate move.

Edited August 11, 2022 by mjd1001

[dudacek]

If I'm Dylan's agent, I'm saying "You're heading for a long career regardless, kid. Whatever they'd be willing to sign for now, one good year is going to double that."

Dylan seems like the type who has no problem betting on himself.

 

[Zamboni]

4 years 

1. SB 3M + 1.0 salary

2. SB 3M + 1.5 salary

3. SB 3M + 2.0 salary

4. SB 1M + 4.5 salary

Cap hit 4.75 per

 

Cozens gets the financial security with the signing bonus of 10M over four years. Sabres get the security of not overpaying in term for a player who may or may not become a “high end” player.

Worry about what happens after the 4th year when in comes. It will take care of itself if Cozens makes or breaks. 
 

Just a thought 

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

4 years 

1. SB 3M + 1.0 salary

2. SB 3M + 1.5 salary

3. SB 3M + 2.0 salary

4. SB 1M + 4.5 salary

Cap hit 4.75 per

 

Cozens gets the financial security with the signing bonus of 10M over four years. Sabres get the security of not overpaying in term for a player who may or may not become a “high end” player.

Worry about what happens after the 4th year when in comes. It will take care of itself if Cozens makes or breaks. 
 

Just a thought 

FOur years marches him straight to unrestricted free agency

[Taro T]

41 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

I'm all for long term contracts if done BEFORE you have to pay the guys top dollar.

I said in a previous post, the way you get really good is betting on players with long term deals when they are younger, so when they are in the prime of their career you can have the back end of that deal where you have them paying for 'under market'.  You 'overpay' them early (when you have cap room) so that when you have a few of them at the top of their game, you can 'underpay' them on that same deal.   Is that easy to do? No, but you want to be a dominant team, that is what you do.

If you 'wait' for guys to prove themself first, you are going to make less mistakes, but you will never have that team with guys on great deals at the back end.  Don't take chances and you might almost assure yourself of having a 'good' team, but never a 'great team.'

With that said, I have NO idea just how good Cozens can/will be.  Hopefully Adams/Granato have a much better idea and will make the appropriate move.

Don't see Adams making that long term bet on a player until at least their 3rd contract.  Which, to a degree negates some of the value of having gone all in on a young team because, as you state, he isn't going to end up with that homerun true value contract at the end deal.  Maybe that's by design as he tries to be a players' GM & doesn't want anyone on a deal substantially under market & if he has gentlemen's agreements with the players that they won't hold the team over a barrel later on, it might work.  But he's already had Hall & Ullmark's contract statuses work against the club.  So, personally, would rather see him give guys like Cozens & Power LT deals coming off their ELCs; but doubt he'll do that.

So, expecting his next deal to be 2 years at fairly low price.

8 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

4 years 

1. SB 3M + 1.0 salary

2. SB 3M + 1.5 salary

3. SB 3M + 2.0 salary

4. SB 1M + 4.5 salary

Cap hit 4.75 per

 

Cozens gets the financial security with the signing bonus of 10M over four years. Sabres get the security of not overpaying in term for a player who may or may not become a “high end” player.

Worry about what happens after the 4th year when in comes. It will take care of itself if Cozens makes or breaks. 
 

Just a thought 

Can't see a 4 year deal under any circumstance.  Gut feel is 2, 3, or 6 years w/ almost no chance of 6.  Said best guess is 2 years.

[DarthEbriate]

Cirelli was a 3x$4.8 cap hit (base salaries from 900k to $3.3M to $7.2M... wow) ending in RFA after this upcoming season, and then the extension already signed to an 8x6.25. This will look either fantastically cheap if he continues to improve and takes over top 6 minutes and PP time from Stamkos, or utterly horrible if he can't ever get past Stamkos/Point or whomever takes over after them. Cozens is being used in a similar "mostly defensive" center approach to start his career, but with expectations to be the 2C, so I can see a similar contract path.

Now, if Mitts or Krebs takes off and claims the 2C role and Cozens gets permanently relegated to a 3C -- then getting a Nick Paul/Nicholas Roy level contract could be very advantageous to the team and himself.

[sweetlou]

That's my whole issue in regards to having all the young players come up at once. If they all turn out good, you can't keep them all because you can't afford them all.  Don't get me wrong that is a good problem to have.  

But,  If they are all taking positions from each other and certain players don't thrive, they may elsewhere if given the opportunity.  

Tampa had so many young players coming up, but eventually lost some because they had signed players to longer contracts and couldn't afford to keep younger better players.   Gourde, JT Miller, and Verhaeghe and even Coleman were all moved because of older players tied up on long term contracts.

[Eleven]

42 minutes ago, sweetlou said:

If they all turn out good, you can't keep them all because you can't afford them all.

Chicago managed it.  Edmonton is managing it.  But it is better to swing and connect on a couple of early contracts.  Cozens just isn't going to be one of them--there is no incentive for him right now.

Edited August 10, 2022 by Eleven

[dudacek]

41 minutes ago, sweetlou said:

That's my whole issue in regards to having all the young players come up at once. If they all turn out good, you can't keep them all because you can't afford them all.  Don't get me wrong that is a good problem to have.  

But,  If they are all taking positions from each other and certain players don't thrive, they may elsewhere if given the opportunity.  

Tampa had so many young players coming up, but eventually lost some because they had signed players to longer contracts and couldn't afford to keep younger better players.   Gourde, JT Miller, and Verhaeghe and even Coleman were all moved because of older players tied up on long term contracts.

This is exactly why Adams isn’t signing UFAs or even his own players to long-term contracts.

He’s going to wait as long as he can to see how his core emerges and hopefully minimize mistakes.

The flip side of that is that he may cost himself a bargain or two in the process. 

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

This is exactly why Adams isn’t signing UFAs or even his own players to long-term contracts.

He’s going to wait as long as he can to see how his core emerges and hopefully minimize mistakes.

The flip side of that is that he may cost himself a bargain or two in the process. 

 

The flip side is that he WILL cost himself some bargains. 

The hope is that those guys that get priced way to far out of his structure (whatever that turns out to be, we still aren't at the point any of it is above the footers, they they are down & in place which is more than we can say for his predecessor & to a degree his predecessor's predecessor) either truly are core and worth that price or (more likely IMHO) aren't truly core and can be shipped out for pieces that will extend the window once it has opened (the crank is turning, but not even sure it's been cracked enough to let a drizzle in from a monsoon) or that the remaining guys are close enough to core that losing a core piece or 2 isn't truly devastating.

The fear is that losing out on those bargains will force the window to close quicker than it should've which IMHO is a legit fear, but it is so far off in the future that it isn't fully factoring in (& Tampa has shown, if you're good enough at evaluating talent that it'll still be open a darn long time).

Adams is definitely playing the long game and has the team entertaining enough as it builds (theoretically) to contender status that the fans won't revolt and he'll still be employed here when that long game starts to produce significant results.  Gut feel is the Pegulas will give him at least until Levi arrives before he needs to be concerned for job security.  And let's face it, if they aren't in the playoffs by then he should be gone & probably should've been gone sooner. 😉

 

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, Eleven said:

Chicago managed it.  Edmonton is managing it.  But it is better to swing and connect on a couple of early contracts.  Cozens just isn't going to be one of them--there is no incentive for him right now.

Should be noted that Chicago won BEFORE they signed their young players to big deals. It’s something occasionally overlooked when talking about how we need to keep space to pay all our young players.

The part about winning before doing so sometimes goes unmentioned. 

[Thorner]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

This is exactly why Adams isn’t signing UFAs or even his own players to long-term contracts.

He’s going to wait as long as he can to see how his core emerges and hopefully minimize mistakes.

The flip side of that is that he may cost himself a bargain or two in the process. 

You can find a way to win while you have a bunch of young players on ELCs, you can find a way to lock up your young players to value deals so you can have a sustained window, but wading water while waiting to see who you need to pay big $ and then attempting to win once paying everyone out might be a lot more difficult. You really gotta bullseye your talent evaluations and the supplemental team building after that. 

It doesn’t look like we are really planning on going on a run while we have our young guys on ELCs (that could change), so IMO I do think Adams has to swing for some longer, value deals. 

Presumably he’s working with guys who WANT to be here, right? This is where you play that card. If you can’t play it here, it’s not really a card at all. 

Cozens is where we need that Scheifele-esque deal 

Edited August 10, 2022 by Thorny

[RangerDave]

6 hours ago, dudacek said:

Dylan seems like the type who has no problem betting on himself.

He also seems like the type who cares less about maximizing his dollar worth and more about maximizing his enjoyment of playing the game.   (...removes rose-colored glasses...)

[Curt]

He may not be interested in signing an early extension this offseason.

However, let’s say that Cozens shows modest improvement over last season, 17 goals, 43 points, something like that, and continued development as a 200 ft player.  That might be viewed as disappointing by many, but I’d love to sign him long term next offseason to a 6-8 year $5-6M deal after a season like that.

I’d be willing to bet on a guy with his character and physical skills.  The Sabres need to get a couple guys on good value contracts.

[dudacek]

In my view, the Cozens discussion is moot because the gap between his potential and performance at the moment is too great to find a middle ground in each party’s best interest before seeing what plays out in the coming season.

I think that’s probably true for all of the Sabres youngsters who are eligible for extensions, save Thompson.

Edited August 10, 2022 by dudacek

[Sabres Fan in NS]

If I were KA, I would give Dylan a 3 year $13.5M contract to take him to 1 year RFA remaining and then see about signing him long-term.

If I were the Sabres GM I think I would be trying to sign him to a six year $35M extension that would take away 2 UFA years.

[Curt]

Just now, dudacek said:

In my view, the Cozens discussion is moot because the gap between his potential and performance at the moment is to great to find a middle ground in each party’s best interest before seeing what plays out in the coming season.

I think that’s probably true for all of the Sabres youngsters who are eligible for extensions, save Thompson.

I don’t disagree regarding Cozens or your overall point.  A couple exceptions might be Asplund and Samuelsson.  I don’t think either has the offensive upside that makes a possible offensive “breakout” a risk to signing a long term deal.

Could be good business to lock either/both up to a 5-6 year deal at $3-3.5M.  Next offseason maybe.

[Archie Lee]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Should be noted that Chicago won BEFORE they signed their young players to big deals. It’s something occasionally overlooked when talking about how we need to keep space to pay all our young players.

The part about winning before doing so sometimes goes unmentioned. 

I think the plan is to win with a bunch of players on ELCs. It’s just that is is the next batch, not the current batch that we will win with (if all goes according to plan). 
 

Fast forward two off-seasons and Thompson, Cozens, Asplund and Samuelsson will be on higher contracts. Dahlin, Power, Joker, Bryson, Krebs, Mitts, Olofsson, Comrie will all need new deals. Not all will be kept, either because they didn’t fully pan out or because we can’t afford them all. But, Quinn and Peterka will still be on their ELCs as will the last four 1st rd picks (Rosen, Savoie, Östlund and Kulich) not to mention all the later picks and possibly Levi and Johnson. 
 

It seems clear to me that we have more or less determined that Dahlin, Power, Samuelsson and likely Joker are the future of our top four D. In net we have a cascade of 3 goalies (4 if you count Portillo) who are separated by age who are going to get opportunities to grab the #1 job; Comrie gets 1st shot, then Luukkonen, then Levi. Up front Thompson, Cozens, Mitts, Krebs, Asplund and Olofsson are getting a shot to show they are indispensable along with Tuch and Skinner (who likely can’t be moved). Not all will stick. The pipeline of ELCs upfront is intended to keep the forward group productive through a 6-8 year window where we have Dahlin, Power and Samuelsson along with the final winner of the goaltending derby dominating on the backend.

At least, that’s the way the next decade plays out in my mind. 

Edited August 10, 2022 by Archie Lee

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Archie Lee said:

I think the plan is to win with a bunch of players on ELCs. It’s just that is is the next batch, not the current batch that we will win with (if all goes according to plan). 
 

Fast forward two off-seasons and Thompson, Cozens, Asplund and Samuelsson will be on higher contracts. Dahlin, Power, Joker, Bryson, Krebs, Mitts, Olofsson, Comrie will all need new deals. Not all will be kept, either because they didn’t fully pan out or because we can’t afford them all. But, Quinn and Peterka will still be on their ELCs as will the last four 1st rd picks (Rosen, Savoie, Östlund and Kulich) not to mention all the later picks and possibly Levi and Johnson. 
 

It seems clear to me that we have more or less determined that Dahlin, Power, Samuelsson and likely Joker are the future of our top four D. In net we have a cascade of 3 goalies (4 if you count Portillo) who are separated by age who are going to get opportunities to grab the #1 job; Comrie gets 1st shot, then Luukkonen, then Levi. Up front Thompson, Cozens, Mitts, Krebs, Asplund and Olofsson are getting a shot to show they are indispensable along with Tuch and Skinner (who likely can’t be moved). Not all will stick. The pipeline of ELCs upfront is intended to keep the forward group productive through a 6-8 year window where we have Dahlin, Power and Samuelsson along with the final winner of the goaltending derby dominating on the backend.

At least, that’s the way the next decade plays out in my mind. 

None of Chicago, LA, Tampa or Colorado won the Cup with their best players on ELCs.

Its a good second contract that is pivotal.  Chicago won cups with Kane, Toews, and Seabrook on nice 2nd contracts.  LA had Kopitar and Doughty on nice long term 2nd contracts.  Tampa was a little different because they were so good for so long before they won.  Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman, and Vasilevsky were all on huge deals already, but Point was on a bargain contract.  Colorado is kinda of like Tampa in that Rantanen, Landeskog, and Makar were all on huge deals, but their superstar MacKinnon is on a steal of a contract.

The point is not that you need guys on ELCs to win the cup.  Cup winners rarely have ELC guys playing top-6 or top-4 for them.  But you need a couple top-6/top-4 players signed to really good value deals.

They need to find a way to get a couple of Dahlin, Power, Samuelsson, Thompson, Cozens, Mittelstadt, Krebs........signed to long term deals that end up being very good value.

Edited August 10, 2022 by Curt

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Archie Lee said:

I think the plan is to win with a bunch of players on ELCs. It’s just that is is the next batch, not the current batch that we will win with (if all goes according to plan). 
 

Fast forward two off-seasons and Thompson, Cozens, Asplund and Samuelsson will be on higher contracts. Dahlin, Power, Joker, Bryson, Krebs, Mitts, Olofsson, Comrie will all need new deals. Not all will be kept, either because they didn’t fully pan out or because we can’t afford them all. But, Quinn and Peterka will still be on their ELCs as will the last four 1st rd picks (Rosen, Savoie, Östlund and Kulich) not to mention all the later picks and possibly Levi and Johnson. 
 

It seems clear to me that we have more or less determined that Dahlin, Power, Samuelsson and likely Joker are the future of our top four D. In net we have a cascade of 3 goalies (4 if you count Portillo) who are separated by age who are going to get opportunities to grab the #1 job; Comrie gets 1st shot, then Luukkonen, then Levi. Up front Thompson, Cozens, Mitts, Krebs, Asplund and Olofsson are getting a shot to show they are indispensable along with Tuch and Skinner (who likely can’t be moved). Not all will stick. The pipeline of ELCs upfront is intended to keep the forward group productive through a 6-8 year window where we have Dahlin, Power and Samuelsson along with the final winner of the goaltending derby dominating on the backend.

At least, that’s the way the next decade plays out in my mind. 

Can’t give the post enough likes. Best explanation I’ve seen of the business rationale underpinning the hockey plan.

This is why they aren’t spending now or trading picks. They will spend on the cream of the current group and profit on the play of every pick they made (and will make) after Power on cheap 1st and 2nd deals.