Mark Fraser gets 1 year deal

[DaneykoIsGod]

then you move elias to some other position, either RW or C as the situation demands.

I'm of the mind that Zubes is playing center unless Josefson makes the team, and in that case he moves to RW. That said, yeah, you could play Elias at C or RW. But re-acquiring Arnott just to have someone not named Elias play on his left side seems like a sin. Maybe it's just the sentimental side of me. Plus, Elias is absolutely atrocious in the faceoff circle.

[ice dog]

I think this is great. Fraser is solid and a good kid...he got his one year deal and a chance to play in the NHL.

Was not at all happy about the way he was used in the playoffs...he sat him for over a month and then inserted him in a playoff game.

Now with the prospects on D and the 2 free agent signings that gives Lou some wiggle room on how to proceed.

Congrats FRASER!

[BlueSkirt]

so who is more likely to be gone from the Devils because of this signing..Salvador or White?

Both have 2 years left on their contracts - White gets 3M, Salvador 2.9M and it 2 years older than White.

Maybe it will be a non-defender ?

[Neb00rs]

Good for both sides: Fraser gets to stay up and Lou doesn't have to pay him anything really.

Lesson to Fraser: Don't fvck with Lou - I don't buy this crap about them being stuck because of a 2-way/one-way contract argument. Fraser wanted more money, Lou was not to be pushed and Fraser found that out.

[Triumph]

Good for both sides: Fraser gets to stay up and Lou doesn't have to pay him anything really.

Lesson to Fraser: Don't fvck with Lou - I don't buy this crap about them being stuck because of a 2-way/one-way contract argument. Fraser wanted more money, Lou was not to be pushed and Fraser found that out.

lou was not to be pushed? what would fraser lose with going to arbitration? i think it's unlikely that fraser comes out of that with a two-way contract with his superficial stats as good as they are. fraser, like eckford and taormina, has likely been made aware of what's going on with the devils' defense, and the lesson is simple - the guy with the lowest contract is more likely to make the team.

not to mention that fraser was new jersey's only arbitration-eligible player after clarkson re-upped, and that i don't think it's an accident that fraser elected for arbitration.

[Neb00rs]

lou was not to be pushed? what would fraser lose with going to arbitration? i think it's unlikely that fraser comes out of that with a two-way contract with his superficial stats as good as they are. fraser, like eckford and taormina, has likely been made aware of what's going on with the devils' defense, and the lesson is simple - the guy with the lowest contract is more likely to make the team.

not to mention that fraser was new jersey's only arbitration-eligible player after clarkson re-upped, and that i don't think it's an accident that fraser elected for arbitration.

It's simple I think Fraser wanted more money. He didn't get it.

[Sarge18]

It's simple I think Fraser wanted more money. He didn't get it.

If he really wanted more money he goes to arbitration and takes his chances rather than signing 2 days before his hearing for the league minimum.

Edited July 28, 2010 by Sarge18

[Triumph]

It's simple I think Fraser wanted more money. He didn't get it.

he didn't get it? so why didn't he go to arbitration and try to get it there? is lou the arbitrator?

fraser might want more money, but there is a huge demand for place-fillers at league minimum salary, that's why there's contracts like john scott's, bryan bickell's, oskars bartulis's, and even PL³'s. the higher fraser's salary goes, the more likely it is that new jersey cannot afford him, and the more likely it is that he passes through waivers. he could make an extra 100k, but that's penny wise and pound foolish - fraser should want as much time in the NHL as possible to establish that he is a passable defenseman, and he increases the chances of having that time by taking a minimum salary.

Edited July 28, 2010 by Triumph

[Neb00rs]

If he really wanted more money he goes to arbitration and takes his chances rather than signing 2 days before his hearing for the league minimum.

Unless Lou told him he would trade him before paying him more.

fraser should want as much time in the NHL as possible to establish that he is a passable defenseman, and he increases the chances of having that time by taking a minimum salary.

Yes that's what Fraser should want. No saying as to how HE feels about his level of play or what he deserves.

[Chimaira_Devil_#9]

It's simple I think Fraser wanted more money. He didn't get it.

I think this is wrong, from TG's blog earlier he said the main consideration was a one way contract. Fraser would have played for the complete minimum on a one way contract than get more on a two way.

TG commented that the one way deal would save the Devils some cap so it made sense.

IMO this was more about Fraser getting his shot in the NHL for another year than money.

[Neb00rs]

I think this is wrong, from TG's blog earlier he said the main consideration was a one way contract. Fraser would have played for the complete minimum on a one way contract than get more on a two way.

IMO this was more about Fraser getting his shot in the NHL for another year than money.

I understand what TG's blog said.

You're right it turned out to be that it was about Fraser getting a shot in the NHL. But if as you said: The one-way contraact saves the Devils cap room then why would he have to argue for it? Did Lou just wake up one day and decide to give him a one way contract?

[Devil Dan 56]

I understand what TG's blog said.

You're right it turned out to be that it was about Fraser getting a shot in the NHL. But if as you said: The one-way contraact saves the Devils cap room then why would he have to argue for it? Did Lou just wake up one day and decide to give him a one way contract?

Because they wanted the option to dump him in Albany if he doesn't make the team or gets outplayed by 1 or 2 prospects.

[Neb00rs]

Because they wanted the option to dump him in Albany if he doesn't make the team or gets outplayed by 1 or 2 prospects.

With Fraser being good enought to stay up, why would Lou give him a more expensive two-way than a cheaper one-way?

[insanity_gallops]

With Fraser being good enought to stay up, why would Lou give him a more expensive two-way than a cheaper one-way?

This argument is becoming roundabout, and I don't follow what your point is anymore. At first it was that Lou essentially intimidated Fraser into a league minimum contract. Then you were focusing on Fraser focusing on getting a shot in the NHL, hence accepting the deal for league minimum. Now this post is pointing out that Fraser is "good enough" to stay in the NHL, and that Lou would be foolish to pay him $525K/$100K two-way instead of $500K one-way. But I think it's a safe bet that Lou was offering a higher NHL-level pay as part of the two-way deal; that way, if Fraser proves he belongs as a regular, he gets rewarded with a higher salary, and if he can't hack it, the Devils save cap space by having him hopefully clear waivers - and then avoid re-entry waivers on the way back up.

I think Fraser is hoping that the Devils are afraid of losing him to waivers, and that by signing a one-way deal he won't be considered for demotion if, as DevilDan pointed out, he gets outplayed by defensive prospects. Or if it's not about the Devils, he must feel confident that some team would be willing to snag him on re-entry waivers (if he were demoted) for the possibility of more playing time... depth defender for $250K would be attractive to a cap-troubled team.

[Neb00rs]

This argument is becoming roundabout, and I don't follow what your point is anymore. At first it was that Lou essentially intimidated Fraser into a league minimum contract. Then you were focusing on Fraser focusing on getting a shot in the NHL, hence accepting the deal for league minimum. Now this post is pointing out that Fraser is "good enough" to stay in the NHL, and that Lou would be foolish to pay him $525K/$100K two-way instead of $500K one-way. But I think it's a safe bet that Lou was offering a higher NHL-level pay as part of the two-way deal; that way, if Fraser proves he belongs as a regular, he gets rewarded with a higher salary, and if he can't hack it, the Devils save cap space by having him hopefully clear waivers - and then avoid re-entry waivers on the way back up.

I think Fraser is hoping that the Devils are afraid of losing him to waivers, and that by signing a one-way deal he won't be considered for demotion if, as DevilDan pointed out, he gets outplayed by defensive prospects. Or if it's not about the Devils, he must feel confident that some team would be willing to snag him on re-entry waivers (if he were demoted) for the possibility of more playing time... depth defender for $250K would be attractive to a cap-troubled team.

My argument is pretty straighforward. Fraser wanted more money on a one-way deal, Lou was offering less money on a one-way deal. Fraser didn't like that scenario and went to arbitration. He realized the only thing he was going to get out of arbitration was a one-way deal at minumum or a two-way with a little more money. He settled with Lou before he went to arbitration and got on Lou's bad side.

[Triumph]

My argument is pretty straighforward. Fraser wanted more money on a one-way deal, Lou was offering less money on a one-way deal. Fraser didn't like that scenario and went to arbitration. He realized the only thing he was going to get out of arbitration was a one-way deal at minumum or a two-way with a little more money. He settled with Lou before he went to arbitration and got on Lou's bad side.

so you are calling mark fraser's agent a liar, because just yesterday, his agent claims that lou wasn't offering a one-way deal. and since mark fraser ended up signing a league minimum one-way deal, your timeline doesn't make any sense, nor do your justifications.

Edited July 28, 2010 by Triumph

[Neb00rs]

so you are calling mark fraser's agent a liar, because just yesterday, his agent claims that lou wasn't offering a one-way deal. and since mark fraser ended up signing a league minimum one-way deal, your timeline doesn't make any sense.

I'm not calling his agent a liar, just someone who wants to portray his client in the best way possible - Lou would agree to that. Fraser realized this was his best option after thinking it out and opted not to go to arbitration, because either he never really wanted to or at first he thought it was a good idea. He was hoping Lou would give him a little more on a one way. The fact that he signed a minimum deal shows Fraser's doubts about what he could get in arbitration.

Edited July 28, 2010 by ben00rs

[Devil Dan 56]

My argument is pretty straighforward. Fraser wanted more money on a one-way deal, Lou was offering less money on a one-way deal. Fraser didn't like that scenario and went to arbitration. He realized the only thing he was going to get out of arbitration was a one-way deal at minumum or a two-way with a little more money. He settled with Lou before he went to arbitration and got on Lou's bad side.

Fraser wanted a one way, Lou wanted a 2 way.

[Neb00rs]

Fraser wanted a one way, Lou wanted a 2 way.

I just don't believe that. My last post expands upon the thought.

[Devils731]

I think it makes sense Lou wanted Fraser on a 2 way contract. I'm of the opinion that Fraser will probably be passed on the depth chart by a few of the other young defenseman on the team, so the team would rather have, assuming they have a good camp, Eckford or Taormina, up than Fraser. But they'd like to be able to call Fraser up if people get hurt. Now, even if Fraser is behind Eckford/Taormina, Fraser will likely make the team since those guys can be moved up and down without waivers while Fraser can't.'

I think Fraser on a 1 way deal means the Devils will probably break camp without the defense they want to carry but with the defense they feel compelled to carry due to waivers.

[Neb00rs]

I think it makes sense Lou wanted Fraser on a 2 way contract. I'm of the opinion that Fraser will probably be passed on the depth chart by a few of the other young defenseman on the team, so the team would rather have, assuming they have a good camp, Eckford or Taormina, up than Fraser. But they'd like to be able to call Fraser up if people get hurt. Now, even if Fraser is behind Eckford/Taormina, Fraser will likely make the team since those guys can be moved up and down without waivers while Fraser can't.'

I think Fraser on a 1 way deal means the Devils will probably break camp without the defense they want to carry but with the defense they feel compelled to carry due to waivers.

Then why didn't Lou just go to arbitration if he felt he was being prevented from having the defense he wanted?

[Devils731]

Then why didn't Lou just go to arbitration if he felt he was being prevented from having the defense he wanted?

Going to arbitration wasn't going to get Lou the defense he wanted either.

I think there was an incredibly minuscule chance Lou could argue Fraser should have a 2 way deal from the arbitrator. So he made the best of the situation and both sides compromised. Neither got what they wanted it looks like to me.

[Neb00rs]

Going to arbitration wasn't going to get Lou the defense he wanted either.

I think there was an incredibly minuscule chance Lou could argue Fraser should have a 2 way deal from the arbitrator. So he made the best of the situation and both sides compromised. Neither got what they wanted it looks like to me.

Cmon now 731, neither got what they wanted? Why make such a compromise? If Lou's whole defense was going to be affected something else would have been done to prevent that. He might as well havee gone to arbitration and took a shot. I think he knew he was going to end up giving Fraser a one way cheap contract. Maybe he offered something else at first for negotiation purposes. (EX: he offered Fraser a two-way contract for 600, just so Fraser would come back with the current deal.

[grcenter47]

maybe we can get this mark fraser post to be as long as the kovy post

[Chimaira_Devil_#9]

I understand what TG's blog said.

You're right it turned out to be that it was about Fraser getting a shot in the NHL. But if as you said: The one-way contraact saves the Devils cap room then why would he have to argue for it? Did Lou just wake up one day and decide to give him a one way contract?

I think Lou elected to avoid arbitration.

TG said in arbitration the NHLPA would be figting for Fraser, the NHL would be backing the Devils, the complete reverse of the Kovy drama.

Maybe he thought it was best that the PA didn't see a different side of lou and the organisation at such a critical time, and for the sake of a one way contract just decided to suck it up and maybe risk losing Fraser down the line?