Mirtle Mailbag: Will Nylander play with Matthews, trading Ceci’s contract, analytics, RFA quagmires and more

Three days from the opening of training camps across the NHL, and the MirtBag is mighty full. Let’s dive in and see what you wanted to talk about this time around.

Q. Is Nylander on Matthews’ wing? 

He darn well better be.

William Nylander is not going to be worth a $7-million AAV at third-line centre. One of the reasons the Leafs went out and added a whole bunch more options down the middle is that so, when injuries hit, Nylander never has to be bumped down the lineup again to play with lesser players in limited minutes at a position he hasn’t skated at much the past three years.

The only other acceptable answer in this space is that, if Marner doesn’t sign, Nylander could get some minutes with Tavares. But he should be stapled – nay, crazy-glued – to one of this team’s top two centres. They need him to have a big year.

Q. As a journalist, do you ever hear newsworthy stories that you decline to write due to the potentially hurtful impact on the subject?

I’m thinking along the lines of drug use. 

You hear about things all the time. But the impact on the subjects is almost never the mitigating factor.

We’re trying to report out the facts, as best we can. With anything sensitive (or illegal), however, you would need ironclad proof of what you’re reporting or you open yourself up to all kinds of criticism and blowback, including legal liability. Your job could be on the line if you’re wrong.

Now, that burden of proof is a good thing.

You shouldn’t be able to publish unfounded accusations or whatnot in the media without facing consequences. But there are a lot of things that just don’t quite meet the standards of being “writeable” in those circumstances.

Q. Ceci’s contract includes zero signing bonus. A surprising move for the Leafs as it would boost his trade value and make him a more movable asset. Is it reasonable to assume the Leafs pushed for a full signing bonus, but Ceci refused knowing it would have increased his odds of being dealt? Am I missing something?

I’ve tried to attack the Ceci question a lot of ways in the offseason.

It’s a hard one to report “the truth” because the team insists they want and value him. Any talk of a contract makeup that would indicate otherwise is dismissed as a result.

Is that real?

I guess we’ll see. Your reasoning makes sense to me. Why would Ceci want to go all-bonus if he wants some stability – on a good team, with a good D partner – for a pivotal year for his career?

There was an RFA negotiation that had to take place, and Ceci accepted no term and barely a raise to carry him to UFA next summer. It’s the ultimate prove-it contract, for the player and the team. And he’s going to get a great environment in which to perform and put up numbers.

I’m planning on writing more on Ceci during training camp, so let’s table this until that point. Definitely one of the more intriguing subplots entering the year.

Q. Who gets more points this year: Nylander or Marner?

Assuming Marner gets signed, I can easily see a scenario where it’s Nylander.

I can’t. If Marner signs, he’s playing with Tavares again. And on PP1. Even if you believe his 94 points last season was an inflated total due to on-ice shooting percentage or whatever, he’s going to pile up a lot of offence.

While Nylander will likely get a whole lot of minutes alongside Matthews for a full season — meaning there will be assists — finding him a home on PP1, however, is going to be a challenge, assuming Toronto’s big three forwards and a defenceman are all there. (The final forward spot is up for grabs, but they’ll need players at net front and they’ll need someone who can make plays on PP2. Maybe they find a way to shoehorn Nylander in, but even then, he likely won’t be as involved in the play as Marner.)

Marner’s career points per 60 at 5-on-5 isn’t that much higher (2.38) than Nylander’s (2.01), so they aren’t completely out of one another’s league, especially if you remove the first half of Nylander’s dreadful shortened year last season. On the power play, however, Marner has been in a different class, with 7.19 points per 60 (compared to 5.76 for Nylander). That’s not only tops on the Leafs, it’s seventh-best leaguewide, and a reflection of just how much Toronto’s power play runs through Marner on the right half-wall.

The Leafs second unit should be better this year, with the addition of Jason Spezza, Alexander Kerfoot and Tyson Barrie (who could bump Rielly to PP2), but Marner’s probably getting a 10-plus point boost simply due to opportunity alone on the top unit. Especially considering new PP coach Paul McFarland is known for leaning on his first group a lot more than the Leafs have in recent history. Even if Nylander has a huge bounceback year, Marner’s almost certainly outpointing him.

Q. What is the breaking point at which the Leafs decide they need to move one of Marner or Nylander? Another first-round loss to Boston and the defense gets exploited? A bad cap situation in-season leading to a weaker team?

There’s no doubt the Leafs cap situation could be tricky over the coming years, as laid out here over the summer. But I think this comes down to the kind of season that Nylander has and where the Marner negotiation goes. If Nylander bounces back alongside Matthews and has a 70-plus point season, who’s talking about trading him then? Consistent production along those lines and Nylander’s deal could end up looking like a value contract.

Marner, meanwhile, isn’t signed. We don’t know what that deal is going to look like, if it gets done at all. Maybe it’s only a two- or three-year contract? And maybe when it comes time to renegotiate, the ask has gone from $11.634-million to another stratosphere? There’s no doubt another first-round loss next spring would have to lead to some widespread soul searching for the organization. But that can’t be the only basis for making a franchise-altering decision like the one you’re talking about. A trade like that has to make sense on many, many levels, including what the return would be. It can’t be kneejerk. In an ideal world, both of them are staying put at least through their early prime and this contention window the Leafs are currently in. That’s currently the intent of management.

Q. Is Kyle Dubas making a mistake by not signing Jake Muzzin or/and Tyson Barrie to new contracts?

Since other teams usually sign players right away after acquiring them. Such as Vegas with Max Pacioretty and Washington with Nick Jensen. You’re often not in a very good leverage situation at that point, though. You’ve just acquired the player – of course, as a GM, you like them and have an interest in continuing the relationship. If you’re the player or the agent, is that the time for a reasonable compromise?

With UFA so close?

Muzzin is going to want at least $5.5-million a season long term, and he’s 31 in February. Barrie’s ask is going to be far higher than that, potentially north of $7-million given his point production.

Do you like the look of either of those contracts, two or three years from now when, presumably, Travis Dermott and Rasmus Sandin are in your top four and needing new deals?

I think the Leafs are going to have to find value somewhere given what they’re paying their forwards. Defence and goal may well be it. And I’m not sure to what degree Muzzin and Barrie can outperform high-priced UFA contracts like those.

It definitely creates some uncertainty on the blue line beyond this season. And there’s a valid concern that you gave up a first-round pick, Nazem Kadri and some prospect capital to bring them both in. But that doesn’t mean rushing into a long-term commitment makes sense here.

Waiting this out has some logic to it.

Q. Can you give us any update on anything new the Leafs are doing with analytics that put them at the forefront of the field? Are they using tracking devices?

I wish.

Kyle Dubas learned from Lou Lamoriello well on this front. This kind of info just isn’t getting out of the organization. The Leafs closely guard whatever innovations the R&D department is coming up with.

If any of them want to slide into my DMs, however, I’m always ready. Throw me a bone, Charron.

Talking to Leafs players, you can’t get a lot of insight. I tried to do a story along those lines last season and there just wasn’t enough there to justify the copy. They wouldn’t reveal much. Maybe there’s a gag order?

The tracking device question is interesting, though. The Leafs do use a Catapult system during practice for biometrics and other data, but NHL players aren’t currently allowed to wear those during games. If Toronto wanted to track games, they’d have to use an optical system run out of the press box or another location, and I’ve never seen any hint that’s happening.

I wouldn’t put it past this group, though. They’ve probably looked into it all. And I do believe they’ve advanced well beyond the metrics that are available publicly.

Q. Will this be the year that Travis Dermott solidifies himself as a top-four defenceman and earns Babcock’s trust in playing different in-game situations?

I don’t have a clue.

It’s a big year for him. Obviously given he needs a new contract, which could be a long, pay-for-potential one. But also because he was hurt a lot of last season and didn’t really take the next step we thought he might.

I really like Dermott, but I’m just not sure what he is yet. I didn’t think he looked comfortable on the PK last year, where Babcock tried to get him some minutes. It’s going to be tough for him, missing camp and coming into the year with an unfamiliar partner on the third pair in November and he’s turning 23 before midseason. If he’s going to be a top-four D consistently, it’s time to take big steps in that direction, including gaining more trust from the coaching staff. There’s a huge opening for him in those minutes in 2020-21. He just has to show he can handle them, and they’re his.

Q. Do you believe SDA will be a serviceable NHLer?

It’s not looking great, is it?

Six goals, in the OHL, in the year after you’re drafted, doesn’t scream top prospect. But SDA – AKA Semyon Der-Arguchintsev – was always going to be a project, at his size and where he was picked. Because he didn’t really take the next step last season with the Petes, he simply looks more project-y than ever.

I do like that the Leafs are searching for inefficiencies in the draft every year. Size is a huge one and has been for decades, although that’s especially true on defence rather than up front. If a player who was 6-foot-4 had SDA’s draft-year totals, they would have been picked 40 spots higher. We all know this. And that extra five inches in height seems to be becoming less and less of a factor as the NHL moves more and more to a skill-first game.

I love his creativity and hands, but I think the odds are against SDA playing a regular role in the NHL at this point.

That said, he doesn’t even turn 19 until this weekend, so it’s way too early to write him off. I’m sure he’ll get in a few years of development work with the Marlies staff once he graduates from junior, and what he does with those years will be vital in determining if he’s a minor leaguer, a tweener or something more.

The kid has personality, so I hope he’s around for a while.

Q. Not much has been said about Kerfoot yet. What do you think Babcock’s plan is with his line? I’m assuming a shutdown role, but then who does he put on Kerfoot’s wings with Brown gone? Kapanen deserves to be on Matthews’ and Nylander’s line more than Mikheyev, but is Mikheyev capable of being a shutdown player?

Ian Tulloch went on an ultra deep dive on Kerfoot this summer, if you missed it.

I think you spread the wealth a little bit on the wing, rather than stuff all your top talent onto the top two lines. Presuming Marner signs, you’ve got him, Nylander and Kapanen all as natural right wingers to fill out your top three lines. The tough thing is, without Hyman to start the year, the Leafs are definitely thin on the left side.

Mikheyev figures to get a shot there, along with someone like Trevor Moore.

Knowing Babcock, he’s definitely going to keep the defensive side of things in mind, which is another reason keeping Kapanen on the third line makes a lot of sense. Babcock’s talked in the past about having “pairs” on his forward lines and rotating the third player more frequently. Matthews-Nylander, Tavares-Marner and Kerfoot-Kapanen feel like natural options, although Kapanen is going to have to get more comfortable shooting the puck given Kerfoot’s playmaking abilities.

Once Marner is back, that Tavares line is probably getting the tough assignments. I don’t think they’ll necessarily need to worry as much about secondary matchups, but it probably comes down to which wingers are where in terms of which line gets sheltered. It is something that is definitely going to be interesting to watch once they get on the ice on Friday.

Babcock likes to start looking at NHL-calibre lines right away, so we should have an idea what he’s thinking within the first few days.

Q. Are the players/agents uniting (colluding) to change the nature of second contracts or are they waiting for the CBA agreement to finalize? Or something else? Will a player lose a whole season over this?

I don’t think the CBA is a factor at this point. Most expect the agreement will be extended here. And it’s impossible to guess what a new one will look like, whenever it’s finally negotiated. Who’s to say it’s necessarily more favourable to young players?

Second contracts have been changing dramatically over the last several years. There was the Draisaitl deal, the Eichel contract, the Nylander stalemate, even Matthews’ deal … it’s been an evolution that’s taken us to here, with 10+ high profile RFAs playing a high-stakes game of chicken with camps set to open in a very short period of time. I do think there’s a real danger of a player burning a season on this.

The RFA “playbook” is written in pencil right now and using Nylander as any kind of precedent is a shaky foundation. What if, on Dec. 1, a team calls the bluff and doesn’t sign them? They’re leaving millions of dollars on the table, in one of their prime seasons, and will have to be back at the negotiating table again the next summer in order to resume their career. It doesn’t make a lot of sense. For either side.

Now, the players have the hammer in that their teams in most cases desperately want and need them in the lineup. More and more, entry-level players have become difference makers in the NHL, which is a huge reason they have more leverage than before after only three years in the league.

It’s a huge difference if you’re one of a team’s leading scorers threatening to sit compared to a bit player.

Is what’s happening collusion?

Only in the sense that players (and their agents) can read the tea leaves here. They all see the shift happening, and the leverage they have, and they’re using it. Which is fine.

What hasn’t been established yet is what exactly we’re shifting to. If Marner signs for three years at $9-million a season next week, that’s a dramatic departure from what we’ve seen in the past, and it’ll impact star RFA contracts for years to come. Suddenly, maybe, they can get big money on a bridge.

The new normal is still in flux here and that uncertainty is playing a huge role in the stalemates. It’s hard to find certainty in uncertain times. Hopefully, it doesn’t derail someone’s promising career.

Q. What do you think of an RFA deadline of Sept. 15 instead of Dec. 1?

Sure, that would be preferable. Or make it two weeks into the season.

They have to change something. I’d like to see players out of their entry-level deals getting access to arbitration, like almost every other RFA in the league. The NHL’s arb system isn’t perfect – in fact, it’s kind of a mess – but it gets contracts signed and players on the ice.

The league has fought increased access to arbitration in the past as it views it as inflationary, but would it really be in this situation?

Arb relies on comparables. The current RFA climate is quickly moving away from established norms, so using comparables could actually be deflationary. Plus, with escrow and the linkage system, the league is paying out 50 percent of revenues no matter what.

Who cares if more of the pie starts going to young players via arbitration agreements?

At least your best young players are on the ice, playing, and selling tickets. Feels more important.

Q. Does Hyman get the Brown treatment at the end of the season to fit Barrie plus one other in on D?

The huge difference between Zach Hyman and Connor Brown is where they play in the lineup.

Hyman is making only $2.25-million on the cap to play on your best, shutdown line and huge PK minutes. Forget the defensive ability though. In the last two years, Hyman has 78 even-strength points, which ranks tied for 83rd among all NHL forwards, ahead of a long list of bigger-name stars. You keep that contract until it expires. And you miss it when it’s gone.

There’s not a lot of extra cap space to be gained there anyway. You can’t pay eight of your 12 wingers league-minimum deals.

Q. Dubas and Babcock seemed at loggerheads at times last year, with the coach making the odd semi-disrespectful public remark. What do you think is the state of their relationship at this point?

I’ll keep this one brief. Winning solves a lot of things. If the Leafs continue to stall in the first round, there isn’t going to be a relationship long term.

Simple as that.

Q. I was looking at the Leafs’ CapFriendly page and noticed they have seven picks in the last two rounds of next year’s draft. I can’t say I’ve ever seen a team with that many low-round picks. Any idea what they are doing with that given there is a limit on how many contracts you can have on the books?

They’re stacking up lottery tickets. We’ve seen again and again in the analysis done that the value of a seventh-round pick isn’t really that far off of that of a mid-third-rounder. And yet if the Leafs had stockpiled a ton of third-rounders, we’d likely be hearing a lot more about it.

You can only have 50 NHL contracts, but with a lot of these kids, you’re buying time to further evaluate 18-year-olds and then decide who deserves that commitment after making a pick. The NHL draft is a very inexact science at this point, especially beyond the top 20 picks. In light of that, second- and third-round picks are probably overvalued and seventh rounders undervalued.

Q. Are you as tired of thinking and talking about the cap, the CBA, unsigned RFAs, etc. as I am?

I’m not sure what this says about me, but I actually love this stuff. I don’t have a personal stake in how teams or players perform, so there’s not an emotional element to it.

I’m interested in the business side of the league as an intellectual exercise. I enjoy learning how it all functions, how negotiations work and how smart executives and agents work their sides of the deal. The business side of hockey can be really fascinating, behind the scenes.

There’s a lot that goes into all of this that doesn’t always get talked about. And there are a lot of smart people involved. I feel fortunate to get a window into their thought process. I really like writing lockout stories like this, which I know a lot of fans find as fun as burnt toast.

The day the next new CBA comes out, I’ll be downloading that PDF and settling in for a nice long read.

Q. What are you looking forward to with the Newfoundland trip?

I went to Halifax with the Leafs during camp several years ago, and it was one of the more memorable road trips I’ve had over the years. I grew up on the west coast and that was my first time in Atlantic Canada; I loved it and always wanted to go back. When my kids are older, I’m sure we’ll see more of it. Newfoundland has always been on my to-do list. Plus I keep hearing about this screech stuff. I can’t wait to see Siegel kiss a fish.

Awesome questions this time around. I appreciate all of them and apologize for those I didn’t get to. If you like The Athletic, do us a favour and send this subscription link to a friend.