Jake Virtanen's next contract (Discussion)

[Toews]

Jake Virtanen had a fantastic season this year. He is young, he is hungry and I believe that having Miller on the team is just going to keep bringing out the best in Jake. I think he will just become better and better with time. I believe we should bet on Jake being a top 6 forward for us long term. Signing him long term is going to cost us in cap space in the short term but it is well worth it as a bridge would give us next to no leverage to negotiate his next contract, assuming my prediction holds true. Signing and paying Jake like a top 6 forward may end up leaving Toffoli on the outside but I am good with that knowing that Hoglander and Podkolzin are coming soon. I think it simply makes far too much sense to sign a young player that is on an upwards trajectory vs. a pending UFA who will likely want top $. 

 

What are some decent comparable contracts for bridge/long term? Also I am assuming its two years to UFA? Need some confirmation on this one. @mll

 

If you had to pick two of Boeser, Virtanen, Toffoli, who would you let go? Nod to @stawns for Boeser, I would never look to trade him in a million years. He would get good value in a trade though, something that I doubt is the case with Virtanen. 

[mll]

26 minutes ago, Toews said:

[...]  Also I am assuming its two years to UFA? Need some confirmation on this one. 

 

Yes in 2 years.  UFA is the earliest between age 27 and 7 pro-seasons - he has 5 already.  

[luckylager]

I'd be very hesitant to throw Jake a long term contract. Dont get me wrong, I love the kid and steps he's taken in the last few years, but I definitely get the feeling if Jake isn't properly motivated he could very easily fall back into some bad habits / work ethic issues.

 

As for the last part, I'd do what I could to keep all 3.

[JM_]

I agree with @luckylager Jake has needed motivation. But we're also at a point with him where you'd like to buy up some of that UFA time since he'll still be pretty young.  Its a toughie. 

 

You could go for a 1 year 3.5 mil deal to further motivate Jake since he's still an RFA and won't likely sit out, and then he really cashes in. Or you go long on him and play the hometown card, say a 4 year 20 mil deal where if he continues to grow he becomes a bit of a discount. But going long risks you ending up with 4 years of fat Jake. But he seems to have grown up so maybe thats not that big a risk anymore, you'd have to be around him a lot to know. 

 

@Toews If I must pick 2/3 of Jake, Brock or TT, I say goodbye to Toffoli since Jake seems to be coming into his own finally, and Brock has a very high goal production ceiling, AND we've got Podz and Hogz one the way, and we should be able to get Jake for well under what Toffoli is going to sign for. Plus we could probably move Brock for a legit top 2 d-man if we really wanted to after next year. Toffoli won't get us that. 

 

 

Edited May 2, 2020 by Jimmy McGill

[luckylager]

9 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I agree with @luckylager Jake has needed motivation. But we're also at a point with him where you'd like to buy up some of that UFA time since he'll still be pretty young.  Its a toughie. 

 

You could go for a 1 year 3.5 mil deal to further motivate Jake since he's still an RFA and won't likely sit out, and then he really cashes in. Or you go long on him and play the hometown card, say a 4 year 20 mil deal where if he continues to grow he becomes a bit of a discount. But going long risks you ending up with 4 years of fat Jake. But he seems to have grown up so maybe thats not that big a risk  

 

 

4 years of fat Jake is what I'd be trying to avoid 

Edited May 2, 2020 by luckylager

[-AJ-]

I would concur with the notions here that Jake shouldn't be given a long contract yet. I'd throw him a 1-3 year contract and personally, I wouldn't worry too much about his UFA status. As much as Jake is great, he's not as vital to our success as someone like Boeser or Horvat, so I don't think he has as much bargaining power as those other two would. I'd say he's probably in the $3.0M to $3.5M market right now.

[TNucks1]

i'd say 3.5 for 3-4 would be decent, like ferlands deal.

[JM_]

59 minutes ago, luckylager said:

4 years of fat Jake is what I'd be trying to avoid 

yeah i know, its risky. But if he's actually had his brain catch up to his body then it could be a great deal. Or he's a 300 lbs slob in some Abby dive in 5 years. 

[John_Guest]

2 hours ago, Toews said:

If you had to pick two of Boeser, Virtanen, Toffoli, who would you let go? 

For me, the better question would be who would you give up to keep those three.

[bree2]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I agree with @luckylager Jake has needed motivation. But we're also at a point with him where you'd like to buy up some of that UFA time since he'll still be pretty young.  Its a toughie. 

 

You could go for a 1 year 3.5 mil deal to further motivate Jake since he's still an RFA and won't likely sit out, and then he really cashes in. Or you go long on him and play the hometown card, say a 4 year 20 mil deal where if he continues to grow he becomes a bit of a discount. But going long risks you ending up with 4 years of fat Jake. But he seems to have grown up so maybe thats not that big a risk anymore, you'd have to be around him a lot to know. 

 

@Toews If I must pick 2/3 of Jake, Brock or TT, I say goodbye to Toffoli since Jake seems to be coming into his own finally, and Brock has a very high goal production ceiling, AND we've got Podz and Hogz one the way, and we should be able to get Jake for well under what Toffoli is going to sign for. Plus we could probably move Brock for a legit top 2 d-man if we really wanted to after next year. Toffoli won't get us that. 

 

 

hmm I would  keep Boeser and Toffoli, both work hard and I just feel that Jake still has lazy games that he takes off and he has had 5 years to mature, but he hasn't quite got there yet

Edited May 2, 2020 by bree2

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, bree2 said:

hmm I would  keep Boeser and Toffoli, both work hard and I just feel that Jake still has lazy games that he takes off and he has had 5 years to mature, but he hasn't quite got there yet

its tough. But to hear Miller talk about Jakes potential makes me think he could turn out to be a stud. 

[bree2]

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

its tough. But to hear Miller talk about Jakes potential makes me think he could turn out to be a stud. 

yes but he also talks about Boeser and Toffoli, also Boeser is very popular with Pettersson and Quinn, I am not so sure Jake is. 

[J.I.A.H.N]

4 hours ago, Toews said:

Jake Virtanen had a fantastic season this year. He is young, he is hungry and I believe that having Miller on the team is just going to keep bringing out the best in Jake. I think he will just become better and better with time. I believe we should bet on Jake being a top 6 forward for us long term. Signing him long term is going to cost us in cap space in the short term but it is well worth it as a bridge would give us next to no leverage to negotiate his next contract, assuming my prediction holds true. Signing and paying Jake like a top 6 forward may end up leaving Toffoli on the outside but I am good with that knowing that Hoglander and Podkolzin are coming soon. I think it simply makes far too much sense to sign a young player that is on an upwards trajectory vs. a pending UFA who will likely want top $. 

 

What are some decent comparable contracts for bridge/long term? Also I am assuming its two years to UFA? Need some confirmation on this one. @mll

 

If you had to pick two of Boeser, Virtanen, Toffoli, who would you let go? Nod to @stawns for Boeser, I would never look to trade him in a million years. He would get good value in a trade though, something that I doubt is the case with Virtanen. 

Well, since I am full of it today, I will give you my Humble opinion....

 

By Ability, it is Boeser, Toffoli, Virtanen

By Tenacity it is Toffoli, Virtanen, Boeser

By impact it is Boeser, Toffoli, Virtanen

By Ease of internal replacement it is Virtanen, Toffoli, Boeser

By competitive edge it is Toffoli, Virtanen, Boeser

By age it is Boeser, Virtanen, Toffoli

 

 

All in all, if the numbers worked, I would move Virtanen first, because McEwen can best replace him

 

By return, I would move Boeser, so I am in the Stawns camp, but I like Boeser

[Junkyard Dog]

Short 2 year show me deal around 2.5-3ish million. Would expire when Beagle/Roussel/Eriksson contract's are up and we can definitely sign him long term then.

 

Sign Gaud to a similar 2 year deal but we can sign him to a less cap hit probably due to the fact he has no RFA rights.

[Lancaster]

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

its tough. But to hear Miller talk about Jakes potential makes me think he could turn out to be a stud. 

Well.... I do also remember how Demitra said that Bernier reminded him of Tkatchuk and how Mason Raymond reminded him a bit of Gaborik.  

[stawns]

28 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Well, since I am full of it today, I will give you my Humble opinion....

 

By Ability, it is Boeser, Toffoli, Virtanen

By Tenacity it is Toffoli, Virtanen, Boeser

By impact it is Boeser, Toffoli, Virtanen

By Ease of internal replacement it is Virtanen, Toffoli, Boeser

By competitive edge it is Toffoli, Virtanen, Boeser

By age it is Boeser, Virtanen, Toffoli

 

 

All in all, if the numbers worked, I would move Virtanen first, because McEwen can best replace him

 

By return, I would move Boeser, so I am in the Stawns camp, but I like Boeser

I don't want people to think I don't like Boes, I do.  I just think foe the money they'll have to pay for points, he's not worth the cap hot, nor will it be worth the cost of players they'll eventually have to get rid of to keep Petey, Hughes and Boes. He will also bring back the best return and Toffoli replaces everything Boes brings to the table, and more.

[Wanless]

10 minutes ago, stawns said:

I don't want people to think I don't like Boes, I do.  I just think foe the money they'll have to pay for points, he's not worth the cap hot, nor will it be worth the cost of players they'll eventually have to get rid of to keep Petey, Hughes and Boes. He will also bring back the best return and Toffoli replaces everything Boes brings to the table, and more.

I agree

 

Last summer I suggested Boeser in a deal for Draisaitl and people lost their $&!#.

 

Boeser is good but because he was also the first really bright spot offensively fans got too attached to him.

 

I believe his best value to the team is in a trade

[EdgarM]

I would like to see who gives us the most in the playoffs. So tired of being great in the regular season and seeing all of our faults or weaknesses in the playoffs. I say we don't hand out any big contracts until we see what they can do in the post season. 

[Toews]

2 hours ago, stawns said:

I don't want people to think I don't like Boes, I do.  I just think foe the money they'll have to pay for points, he's not worth the cap hot, nor will it be worth the cost of players they'll eventually have to get rid of to keep Petey, Hughes and Boes. He will also bring back the best return and Toffoli replaces everything Boes brings to the table, and more.

Just to be clear I wasn't trying to put you on blast. I disagree with you but I don't think you are out to lunch. The return is crucial, if we can get a top 4 RHD who is still fairly youngish, I would obviously consider that but it has to be the right player. I would be very worried that we are essentially re-enacting the Hall for Larsson trade.

[stawns]

10 hours ago, Toews said:

Just to be clear I wasn't trying to put you on blast. I disagree with you but I don't think you are out to lunch. The return is crucial, if we can get a top 4 RHD who is still fairly youngish, I would obviously consider that but it has to be the right player. I would be very worried that we are essentially re-enacting the Hall for Larsson trade.

All good, didn't think you were, at all.  That's always my go to caveat.  I really do like him, but think his point production over values his overall effectiveness.  Mostly, it's because keeping him, Petey and Hughes means they'll have to jettison more than a cpl of important players.