Jump to content

2014 UFA Signing Thread


Devilsfan118

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't have given him 5 years. More like 3. Brassard has yet to produce 20 goals or 50 points in a season. His possession time was 53.5 percent. Right in line with Zuccarello (53.8) and Pouliot (55.1). The quality of competition should be tougher for Brass and Zucc on the second line. I wouldn't necessarily call him a soft minute scorer. He'll get his nose dirty. He's been a solid performer the last two postseasons. Now that he's got his contract, there'll be more pressure to perform consistently.

 

Soft minutes doesn't refer to a player's toughness, it refers to the level of competition, and how often the player starts his shifts in the offensive zone.  I think Pouliot and Zuccarello are the guys who are driving the possession on that line - Brassard has no real history with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soft minutes doesn't refer to a player's toughness, it refers to the level of competition, and how often the player starts his shifts in the offensive zone.  I think Pouliot and Zuccarello are the guys who are driving the possession on that line - Brassard has no real history with that.

 

I gotcha. My mistake. I don't disagree. Both Pouliot and Zuccarello are strong possession guys. The line had excellent chemistry. The QOC was between 28-29. They weren't facing the same level of competition as Stepan or Nash. They were at 30.1.

 

See the Leafs finally made a wise move and signed Gardiner for 5 years at $20.25 million. I looked at the value of LT contracts and why it's better to invest in young assets. Threw out the Ennis and Brassard contracts along with Henrique and a couple of other notables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gotcha. My mistake. I don't disagree. Both Pouliot and Zuccarello are strong possession guys. The line had excellent chemistry. The QOC was between 28-29. They weren't facing the same level of competition as Stepan or Nash. They were at 30.1.

See the Leafs finally made a wise move and signed Gardiner for 5 years at $20.25 million. I looked at the value of LT contracts and why it's better to invest in young assets. Threw out the Ennis and Brassard contracts along with Henrique and a couple of other notables.

I actually think most of the Leafs moves this off-season were solid. Definitely got helped by being beaten in the stupid contract dept by FLA on signing Bolland, but aside from that, their moves seemed to all be sensible for a change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually think most of the Leafs moves this off-season were solid. Definitely got helped by being beaten in the stupid contract dept by FLA on signing Bolland, but aside from that, their moves seemed to all be sensible for a change.

 

I just got into an argument with a Leafs fan about Schneider.  Jesus.  They aren't going to be a successful team unless they can learn to limit shots against.  They can't win games when they allow close to 30+ shots per game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just got into an argument with a Leafs fan about Schneider.  Jesus.  They aren't going to be a successful team unless they can learn to limit shots against.  They can't win games when they allow close to 30+ shots per game. 

True. I think they took a step forward though by not signing Bolland, re-signing Gardiner, signing Winnik and Booth. I think all those moves and the one non move, lol, are all positive ones for the Leafs. I don't think it's enough to make them a competitive team, but they may not be quite as bad as they have been. They really need to dump Carlyle before they make real progress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That contract is not a bargain. It's market value. In a few years, it sadly will be. Subban got paid. If the Habs were smart, they would've just signed him earlier and saved. The Slats did it with McDonagh. The biggest bargain in the league. Hawks also did it with Keith. Two time Norris winner. The sooner you lock up a player, the more you save. The lockout is coming because the market is out of control. It will only become worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bargain for Subban - and yes, the lockout is coming, but only because that's how the owners want it.

 

I wouldn't call it a "bargain" to be honest.  What would you value his remaining RFA years at?  7.5 per?  And his UFA years?  Maybe 9.5-10 on the open market if Sather had the space?

 

Average it all together...even 9m seems high.  Hard to justify PK at 9 when Doughty's at 7..obviously signed at different times but still.  9AAV is setting a dangerous precedent.  Which brings me to my final point...

 

 

Wow... countdown to the next lockout is in full effect. 

 

Yep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That contract is not a bargain. It's market value. In a few years, it sadly will be. Subban got paid. If the Habs were smart, they would've just signed him earlier and saved. The Slats did it with McDonagh. The biggest bargain in the league. Hawks also did it with Keith. Two time Norris winner. The sooner you lock up a player, the more you save. The lockout is coming because the market is out of control. It will only become worse.

 

No, that just isn't true.  The Rangers signed McDonagh for 6 years.  The Rangers got 3 years of UFA.  When McDonagh is eligible for UFA, he is going to be due an AAV of at least $9M, and he is not as good as PK Subban.  The Habs got 2 years at 2.9M, now they will get 8 years at 9M.  They are paying more now, but they are saving later, as Subban would be eligible for at least an $11M AAV if he were signed to a $6M/6 year type deal like you are proposing.

 

The lockout is coming because the owners can.  A player like PK Subban is worth considerably more than Montreal is paying him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't call it a "bargain" to be honest.  What would you value his remaining RFA years at?  7.5 per?  And his UFA years?  Maybe 9.5-10 on the open market if Sather had the space?

 

Average it all together...even 9m seems high.  Hard to justify PK at 9 when Doughty's at 7..obviously signed at different times but still.  9AAV is setting a dangerous precedent.  Which brings me to my final point...

 

 

 

Yep.

 

Doughty signed away 4 years of UFA in his deal, Subban signed away 6, and the cap is higher now than it was when Doughty signed his contract.  I do think Subban is better than Doughty as well.  Doughty's contract ends in 2019 - he will be paid $10M a season at least at that point.  So again, the point I made above - Subban at 8 years brings him to when he is 33, Doughty will be 29 when his current deal expires.  You have to add on the 3 years that Doughty will be getting that should be considerably above $10M/yr and remember again that Subban is probably > Doughty though it's close, and yes, you are talking about a bargain contract.  

Edited by Triumph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have an opt out after eight years iirc so that'd really be six seasons left of labor peace.

I really think labor disruptions will be minor at this point. The differences now are minimal, in that it really comes down to a number for the revenue split. I suppose the players might want to take a stand against escrow, but ultimately it doesn't seem like you have a lot if teams circling the drain anymore, and the long term front loaded deals that could cripple a team are gone.

This is essentially what the NFL lockout came down to, and that got resolved without losing any games, whereas in the past the owners had resorted to replacement players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think labor disruptions will be minor at this point. The differences now are minimal, in that it really comes down to a number for the revenue split. I suppose the players might want to take a stand against escrow, but ultimately it doesn't seem like you have a lot if teams circling the drain anymore, and the long term front loaded deals that could cripple a team are gone.

This is essentially what the NFL lockout came down to, and that got resolved without losing any games, whereas in the past the owners had resorted to replacement players.

 

The owners in the NFL resorted to replacement players over 20 years ago.  The sports labor landscape has changed considerably since then.  The reason why the NFL season started without any games missed is because NFL careers are so short that missing even one week of exhibition games costs the players considerable money, money that they will never get back.  The NHL union is not so desperate.  The NFL players caved on everything except an 18 game season and during the next labor negotiation the same thing will happen and the NFL owners will continue to get richer.

 

The NHL owners are not negatively impacted by lockouts as a whole.  As such, it makes sense to have them because they squeeze the players for as much money as possible.  And that is what will happen next time too.  The NHL doesn't have enough healthy franchises to where they're going to want to avoid labor strife, as is the case in MLB, in which most teams are doing fairly well and which has been seriously impacted by labor strife.  The owners will opt out in 6 years and there will be a lockout - enjoy early season hockey until then, because it is absolutely inevitable.  You just have to do the math.

Edited by Triumph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think labor disruptions will be minor at this point. The differences now are minimal, in that it really comes down to a number for the revenue split. I suppose the players might want to take a stand against escrow, but ultimately it doesn't seem like you have a lot if teams circling the drain anymore, and the long term front loaded deals that could cripple a team are gone.

This is essentially what the NFL lockout came down to, and that got resolved without losing any games, whereas in the past the owners had resorted to replacement players.

 

Like Tri said, the owners/Bettman will always find an excuse to lockout until proven otherwise.  Especially considering the NHL was less negatively effected by losing a complete season than MLB was by losing a World Series.  

 

Granted I think this time around people (and more importantly corporations) had finally gotten pretty close to the breaking point where they had enough and you run the risk of more organized boycotts in the age of social media, evenmoreso than people did in 2004 because anyone with a brain knew the game was damaged at that point with the # of teams going bankrupt.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.