Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Jake's Contract..Looks Like What???


Nuxfanabroad

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

Jake Virtanen is a 21 year old prospect with high expectations.  He has not met those expectations yet, but there's is still a lot of room for improvement.  Why does anyone think he would agree to anything longer than a 2 year deal?

 

Let's say he gets offered $10 million for 4 years, 2.5/yr.  Why would he take this?  If he thinks he will improve and score 30-50 points in the coming years he will be worth more than just that.  Better to take two years at a cheaper rate and work his way towards the big payday.

 

On the office side, a shorter term deal is better if you're trying to trade the asset... for some odd reason.

The flip side is he's offered ten million, enough money for a lifetime of working for the average schmuck, and turns it down, takes a bridge and finds himself in Europe like dozens of other busts.  

 

I like JV and hope he's a keeper, but it's not a foregone conclusion yet either.  A short term deal makes sense for the team for a variety of reasons, I don't see anything more than a two or three year deal been on the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparables......JV has 8-9-17 to date this season

 

Baertchi 2 @ 1.85 coming off a 15-13-28 season

 

Ferland 2 @ 1.75 coming off a 15-10-25 season

 

Duclair 1 @ 1.2 coming off a 5-10-15 season

 

There are probably better comparables but I'm not digging through the whole league.  It's pretty clear that he will get less than Baertschi and Ferland.   I think that Duclair is slightly below Jake as well but is not far off.

 

Let's try 2 @ 1.35-1.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

So say he "shows us", big-time?! Around the same moment, you'll be juggling Brock's BIG $$$ raise, EP's expiring ELC, etc...

 

Also assuming we'll perhaps deal for 1 or 2 D-men that require some major pesoes. Maybe Try-man returns too.

 

I CAN'T see Jake(23, 24 yo) playing at a level below 2 mill/value. For this reason, I try to stretch this contract.

For one there's no way Jake signs a long term contract unless it's north of 3mil and max 3-4 years. 

 

Second, a money issue because Canucks all of a sudden have a plethora of stars does not sound like a bad thing.

 

Bridge contract is really the only logical way for both sides. He is showing signs of constant improvement and his agent will not sell him short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MikeyBoy44 said:

For one there's no way Jake signs a long term contract unless it's north of 3mil and max 3-4 years. 

 

Second, a money issue because Canucks all of a sudden have a plethora of stars does not sound like a bad thing.

 

Bridge contract is really the only logical way for both sides. He is showing signs of constant improvement and his agent will not sell him short.

In 2 years, he should be worth money

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...