Gurn Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 11 minutes ago, Grape said: It's ALWAYS about the future Mostly, but not always, Burrows and years ago Smyl got contracts at the end that paid for past deeds and not future expectations. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckNORRIS4Cup Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 3 minutes ago, Grape said: That's because my logic is nowhere close to being applicable to Brock. I think I understand your point now, but you can re-read my last post because I think you misunderstood mine. Last thing I will say is, (and this is a gross exaggeration of my argument but still applicable), if we hypothetically went back to summer 2016 and asked CDC how much they would pay for Loui Eriksson knowing that his abilities would decline the way they did: do you CDC would cite past performance and say we should pay him his 36M contract? Or would CDC look towards the future projections and say we should pay Loui an amount closer to ZERO. It's ALWAYS about the future, not how much someone "deserves," as seen from Loui here No the problem here is you trying to say going back to your first reply to me, that this is like any other profession out there, which it's not, it's totally different. I get what you've been saying, but it's this one part you keep jumping back and forth on because you originally wanted to make this the same as how someone in a normal job gets a raise, and my point to you has been it's not the same. So I asked you things to see how you would react using your logic towards it, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 6 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Yeah... No. 3 hours ago, aGENT said: Actually, yeah. Brock's agent should have taken that reported deal and run (if even true...I mean...Sekeres) and Brock frankly, should be looking for new representation 3 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Why. Keller just got more. Nylander got more. Gaudreau 3 years ago got 6.75 for 6 years having very comparable numbers and being in the same class of RFA status .89p/gp vs .83p/gp. The cap has went up 12% since then. Simple math suggests brock should be getting 7.56 for 6 years. Maybe he’s earns slightly less due to injuries. Fine drop it to 7.25 per year. 3 hours ago, aGENT said: Nope. Stopped reading there. 22 minutes ago, aGENT said: 'fact': 7.15 is now more than 7.25-7.5 Unless I’m missing something, $7.15 and $7.25M are both higher than $7M, the number the conversation and subsequent messages are referencing. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 Just now, Monty said: Unless I’m missing something, $7.15 and $7.25M are both higher than $7M, the number the conversation and subsequent messages are referencing. Nope you’re not missing anything. @aGENT is just trying to move the goalposts again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MystifyNCrucify Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 10 hours ago, N4ZZY said: Please no. We need Brock. Good chemistry with EP, and he's a goal scorer. If there's one area that the Canucks struggled in recently, it's putting pucks in the net. Boeser helps with that tremendously. I think Benning and Co does eventually get Brock signed before the season begins. I also think that Boeser is hating missing training camp as well. If he's not signed by the time regular season begins, he's going to be behind the eight ball, and might be injured at some point just trying to catch up. Look...i dont know the dialog of whats going on between boesers camp and benning. Im just saying, and reading (possibly reading into), the signs im seeing. If boeser (or his agent) is really this hard core about $500k or they really want to hit free agency asap, i say explore a trade while hes young and only semi broken. Grab a pick or two and a prospect and cut bait.....because that doesnt sound like a person who wants to really be a Canuck. Character wins cups. Toronto will never win anything with their willy nilly model. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 27 minutes ago, Monty said: Unless I’m missing something, $7.15 and $7.25M are both higher than $7M, the number the conversation and subsequent messages are referencing. 6 hours ago, aGENT said: Plus or minus...8 years at $7.25-$7.5, $7 x 7, $6.5 x 6, $6 x 5, $5.5 x 4 8 years. $7.25-$7.5. More than $7.15 Math = hard apparently 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Gaudette Celly Posted September 13, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted September 13, 2019 Once again, Dhaliwal doing what he doesn't do best. 1 2 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 I would guess that Boeser's agent wants a Timo Meier like contract. Which is a terrible contract. Based off what Weisbrod is saying. Sure it looks great but the qualifying offer for the next contract will be horrendous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 34 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: Once again, Dhaliwal doing what he doesn't do best. This is seemingly who Dhaliwal is now. Just another one of the many speculators in this city. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 Based on all the rumors I've read...I think it went down like this... JB: Offers 6 x $7M BB: Counter-offers 4 x $7M. Current impasse. What I think will happen... 4 x $6M ($24M total) back-loaded so final year is around $8M. Not an insane deal like Meier where the final year is $10M. But big enough of an increase for a good QO. And lays the ground work for the next contract. Risk to VAN if Brock doesn't improve and stuck with a bad QO. Risk to BB by taking (perceived) less and banking on his next contract. WIN / WIN ??? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliboy Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 (edited) 6 hours ago, BPA said: Based on all the rumors I've read...I think it went down like this... JB: Offers 6 x $7M BB: Counter-offers 4 x $7M. Current impasse. What I think will happen... 4 x $6M ($24M total) back-loaded so final year is around $8M. Not an insane deal like Meier where the final year is $10M. But big enough of an increase for a good QO. And lays the ground work for the next contract. Risk to VAN if Brock doesn't improve and stuck with a bad QO. Risk to BB by taking (perceived) less and banking on his next contract. WIN / WIN ??? If this were true and the Boeser camp offered to sign a 4 X $7M, then why not take it? My understanding is that he would still be RFA, or is that incorrect? Edited September 14, 2019 by aliboy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 9 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Yeah... No. No, he did not deserve more? No he should have accepted that figure if it was, in fact, correct? I personally believe that would have been a pretty good offer. A marginal raise on Nylander. Boeser more grounded, some extra size. A little less volatile in other area's of the game. But by no means a stealth defensive weapon. For all the storm clouds surrounding Nylander. he's a very talented player. Its also higher than Pastrnak's deal. But I suppose two years inflation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Fivehole0 Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, aGENT said: 'fact': 7.15 is now more than 7.25-7.5 You've literally had no rebuttal but trying to be a smart ass. I'd say that gif is more how Forsberg responded to you Edited September 13, 2019 by 5Fivehole0 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Fivehole0 Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 2 hours ago, aGENT said: 8 years. $7.25-$7.5. More than $7.15 Math = hard apparently Math doesn't count when you just arbitrarely throw out random numbers from your arm chair. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure2Win Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 Ok Brock Mitch has now signed....get this friggin thing done already.....Sigh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 Provorov just signed @ $6.7 mill x 6 years. Boeser is more offensively dynamic. Provorov, I suppose like Brock, is coming off a bit of a down year. Sill an exciting young player! But Provorov is a 25 minute a game, all situations defenseman. In most regards, more important to his team than Boeser? My take? Provorov decided that some of the arguments, not perfect possession metrics, were going to weigh down discussions. Might have been a tiny bit cheap. I had both projected at the 6 x $7 mill. At the end of the day? He wanted to play. $40 million bucks is still a hell of a life prize. I would not be against the $7.15 mill deal Keller signed. Clayton has had better, and worse seasons than Boeser. Arguably goals are worth more than speed & agility? So $7.25 or $7.35 on 8 years for Boeser the better goal scorer? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, Grape said: Bolded pt 2., you are paying them based off of "production" because it is a good indicator of future performance. Now say if one of your employees contracted something hypothetical that limited them to doing their job at 50% of their former production, would you still give them the raise based off of past production? Bolded pt 1. It has always been like what I just said if you look at it from that perspective. If younger players were getting paid less in the past than now (which is not true, read the rest of the post), it's because as RFA's there isn't much leverage to use. The reason UFA's get paid more is because they are able to choose where they go, not because a team thinks a 30 year old player who has produced x amount the past season "deserves" more than a 22 year old player who produced x amount as well. Kane and Toews have leverage as older players, which is why they signed for more. If you go back and tell 22 or so year old versions of Kane and Toews they could choose wherever they went, you don't think Chicago would lock them up for just as much of a percent of their team's salaries now vs. before? Furthermore, you're citing a specific example where Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews both definitely surpassed their projected performance, which would definitely skew the argument in favor of getting paid less back then. Another IMPORTANT factor is that, if you use the same player you have to factor in time horizon and the growth of the salary cap. I'll use you're Kane example: he signed for around 6.3M per year back in 2009, when the cap was at 56.8M, that's 11% of what the team can spend. Under today's cap of 81.5M, that would be 9M. Is that any different from what a 21 year old Kane comparison now, such as Dylan Larkin or Elias Pettersson, would earn if they were a RFAs now? Probably not (both of them actually have higher PPGs than Kane back then). That's why examples like Jack Eichel's 10M contract, Nylander's 6.9M contract, McDavid's 12.5M contract aren't that crazy when they signed them compared to Kane's present adjusted 9M contract back in 2009, when he had 70 points in 82 games. For this reason exactly, the first bolded part is an illusion due to the salary cap uptick. RFA's or younger players have ALWAYS gotten paid like this, they are not getting more greedy as was inferred by "ChuckNORRIS4Cup" Grape you need to do go back and do a few a lot more comparisons - Yes I’m aware that McDavids contract percentage wise isn’t much different then Crosby’s was either - and for that I don’t have any issue with those two and Ovi are special generational types. Eichels I do have a problem with. He’s not Tavares and yet is getting paid a lot more percentage wise then Tavares was back then. Nylander at 7 (that’s his contract it’s pro-rated for the games he missed last year) for scoring 60 points a couple times as AM wingman .... well go find a guy like him and see what he made in a similar contract percentage wise. AM? He’s maybe a top ten center but definitely not a top five yet - at 11.7 hows that not inflationary? And it’s not even buying any UFA years ... AHOs deal too. How’s it not inflationary when just a few years ago similar or better players (McKinnon, Pastrnak) were signing deals for 6.6 ish (not much more then Meir - and his QO is 10 - like wtf?). Has the cap gone up that much in two years? No it hasn’t - the entire hockey world has been discussing the possibility of what’s going on since AM and Nylander were signed. Guys are getting richer then they ever were before and taking a much bigger chunk of the cap - percentage wise. Edit: Add Marner to your research - another guy making almost 11 with a year of UFA bought.... wow. Edited September 13, 2019 by IBatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 25 minutes ago, 5Fivehole0 said: Math doesn't count when you just arbitrarely throw out random numbers from your arm chair. My 'arbitrary numbers' are what we were discussing there e-tough guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yung1 Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 (edited) ???????? Edit: To be more clear, this guy is at the camp in Victoria and this may be alluding to a deal being done. That's my own speculation though, Edited September 13, 2019 by Yung1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanukfanatic Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 3 hours ago, Hutton Wink said: Once again, Dhaliwal doing what he doesn't do best. Dhaliwal becoming dreger 2.0 with making s$1& up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts