[Speculation] Boeser not close to extension

[DrJockitch]

Just now, Alflives said:

That’s my thinking too.  If Ntock gets the security of a long term, he might take less than if it was a shorter term.  7x7?

It is a funny day when a sniper with under 150 games and under 60 goals is worth $49M and it seems reasonable.

[combover]

SO Jim will throw 6 mill for 6 years for eriksdone who’s been a total disappoint  4 mill for a third line sutter is will to pay big for ufas 

But when it comes to guys who actually have skill and youth tries to nickel and dime them.lol. .... geez brock if only you were a 30 year old third liner Jimmie would be bouncing off the walls to get you and give you whatever you want. 

 

 

[Where'd Luongo?]

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

Absolutely.   That would be the deal of the decade for us.   It’s not like we aren’t going to protect him from expansion anyways, and at that price our cap would be in great shape going forward.  I’d do it for 7.0 even. 

Now are you a Mike Gillis fan?

[CanuckGAME]

38 minutes ago, combover said:

SO Jim will throw 6 mill for 6 years for eriksdone who’s been a total disappoint  4 mill for a third line sutter is will to pay big for ufas 

But when it comes to guys who actually have skill and youth tries to nickel and dime them.lol. .... geez brock if only you were a 30 year old third liner Jimmie would be bouncing off the walls to get you and give you whatever you want. 

 

 

 

 

Posts like this make absolutely no ****ing sense.

 

The idea in the salary cap era is to nickel and dime and save cash so you have more left over to pay the rest of the guys.  Why would Benning hand Boes a blank cheque and sign him for whatever because he earned it?

 

There is a HUGE difference between signing a RFA and signing a UFA like Louie, who came off a huge season in Boston and was probably the #1 forward available during that years free agency.

 

Guys like you are the 1st I'm sure to start talking **** about cap management if guys are over paid, or we dont have enough to pay other players.  

 

****in armchair managers.... I swear....

[IBatch]

9 hours ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

Now are you a Mike Gillis fan?

No.  But I’m a fan of 6 x 8 with the last few years (UFA ones only) having a NMC if that’s remotely possible...as per the post I was replying to I’d even go as high as 7 to make that happen.   I’m on the Boeser will undoubtably be a star in this league for a long time bus.   He reminds me of Brett Hull...wonder if Calgary would take a re-do on that trade, keep Hull for their cup RUNs and leave Ramage alone?  I’d bet their fans would they traded one cup for a chance at a half dozen.   Fluery, Roberts, Joe N, Hull, AL MaCinnes all just getting their feet wet plus a plethora of good vets?  With EDM dissolving they’d have had a powerhouse that could have rivalled the PIT teams of the early nineties.   How many goals would that first line get?  How many 500 goals scorers did that team have?  Then Hull goes on a tear that rivaled Gretzky’s early years.  

 

Boeser should be signed to a fair contract, if adding clauses for his UFA years means we get him for cheaper I’m all in.  Nope not a MG fan...but I am a BB fan.

[IBatch]

11 hours ago, DrJockitch said:

It is a funny day when a sniper with under 150 games and under 60 goals is worth $49M and it seems reasonable.

Yep.  About as funny as the day we signed Messier to a 6 x 3 contract at 35?  Or how about Sundin at 10 million just before retirement (and even funnier how fans somehow think that made a difference to the Sedins, just like fans think Messier made Näslund the player he was, good grief).    7-8 million is the new 5-6 million, what star players that are entering UFA status last year and will this year or in a year we’re getting paid...

 

What matters is overall percentage of the cap more than anything...and that is going up which is quite concerning.   

 

Who knows, maybe the GMs should have an emergency meeting and come together and agree to lowball all the current UFA class to re-set the balance and stop the bleeding that McDavid and Eichels contracts started.  Doubt it, but is I was a GM I’d be thinking about calling around and getting this in motion before it’s too late (it’s probably already too late).  GMs just can’t help handing out bad contracts.  And it affects the entire NHL.  

[WeneedLumme]

12 hours ago, DrJockitch said:

It is a funny day when a sniper with under 150 games and under 60 goals is worth $49M and it seems reasonable.

Really? Have you checked out NBA or NFL salaries?

[DrJockitch]

1 hour ago, WeneedLumme said:

Really? Have you checked out NBA or NFL salaries?

Have you seen what they make in women's hockey, how about in baseball of Premier league.

These things aren't really comparable.  

The contracts means little in the NFL as a lot of the money isn't guaranteed and they are a $9B industry.  

NBA again is smaller team, better TV deals and sponsorship.  Their percentage of the cap is pretty similar I believe.  

The NHL is still primarily a gate based league.  Every dollar the salary goes up is two dollars they have to squeeze directly out of us.

I have no problem with players getting their money as otherwise it just goes into the owners pocket.  I do have a problem with the constant push to increase revenue every year, to bleed more money out of the fans so that players with under 160 games experience can get massive amounts of money instead of huge amounts of money.

I am not trying to be critical of Brock though, he should be trying to get every penny he can, I just think because of the points I highlighted in earlier posts that this is a guy who a bridge deal should work for both the team and the player.

[DrJockitch]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

Yep.  About as funny as the day we signed Messier to a 6 x 3 contract at 35?  Or how about Sundin at 10 million just before retirement (and even funnier how fans somehow think that made a difference to the Sedins, just like fans think Messier made Näslund the player he was, good grief).    7-8 million is the new 5-6 million, what star players that are entering UFA status last year and will this year or in a year we’re getting paid...

 

What matters is overall percentage of the cap more than anything...and that is going up which is quite concerning.   

 

Who knows, maybe the GMs should have an emergency meeting and come together and agree to lowball all the current UFA class to re-set the balance and stop the bleeding that McDavid and Eichels contracts started.  Doubt it, but is I was a GM I’d be thinking about calling around and getting this in motion before it’s too late (it’s probably already too late).  GMs just can’t help handing out bad contracts.  And it affects the entire NHL.  

While I am not sure exactly what you are trying to say here, Brock is not comparable to these, he is an RFA with no arbitration rights.

Yes overall percentage of cap at time of signing is likely the better way to look at it, like you I would like to see that stay lower especially on a second contract.  

The last part is collusion.

I actually don't have an issue with McDavid's contract as he falls into he exceptional player variety (plus, Edmonton is paying it).  Eichel was a terrible contract that was just bad for the league.  Very good player but not a true elite player and a number of red flags regarding his injuries and rumours about influencing coaching decisions.

GMs are always fighting for their jobs.  They don't care if they hand out 7 or 8 year contracts to players because it is someone else problem as they get to the later years.

[Ralph.]

1 hour ago, WeneedLumme said:

Really? Have you checked out NBA or NFL salaries?

To be fair, NFL revenue is like four times that of the NHL. The NBA is a different story (makes about 25-30% more in revenue?), which I don't know enough about to comment on. Maybe different sponsorship structures?

[Rollieo Del Fuego]

14 hours ago, DrJockitch said:

It is a funny day when a sniper with under 150 games and under 60 goals is worth $49M and it seems reasonable.

Brock will score 40 goals/yr within 2 years....probably next year....so ya...7x7 is a deal that is not likely to happen, but I hope it does....Brock is worth way more than Nylander for instance.

[theo5789]

11 minutes ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:

Brock will score 40 goals/yr within 2 years....probably next year....so ya...7x7 is a deal that is not likely to happen, but I hope it does....Brock is worth way more than Nylander for instance.

Crystal ball? This is why you bridge for both sides. If Boeser himself feels confident he can hit 40 as soon as next year, then he will be paid far greater than taking a long term deal. If you pay him with the expectation of him hitting 40 and he doesn't reach that, then who's to blame? Management surely (even though it's been suggested by some posters here who won't criticize themselves for making the proposal to do so), so there's no incentive for management to give him a long term with potential expectations. Keep in mind Boeser has had a back injury, wrist issues and groin issues.

 

He may be worth more than Nylander, but why should that be the benchmark when it's likely league-wide information that he's considered "over-paid"? Is Brock worth more than MacKinnon if we are pulling out singular examples? If Mackinnon is the benchmark, then Boeser is worth like 3.5 million a year. So in the end, the horrible contracts like Nylander's even out with the incredible ones like MacKinnon and you get somewhere in the middle. Boeser IMO is worth no more than 6 million dollars a year (and quite honestly it's being generous for an RFA and not playing a full season yet). So it should come down to term at those dollars. If he feels he can shine very soon, then take a 3 year deal. If he wants to buy a bit more time then take a 5 year deal. If he wants to secure his money, then sign a long term deal and take into account buying UFA years and growth and do 7 million for 8 years (you have to consider that we are overpaying during the RFA years by getting 7 million a year, so you take on the overpay to the UFA years and he's basically getting over 8.5 million in his UFA years).

[iceman64]

On 5/30/2019 at 4:41 PM, debluvscanucks said:

Done.

Ahhhh the voice of reason strikes again....

[Sedinery33]

2 hours ago, Gäz said:

To be fair, NFL revenue is like four times that of the NHL. The NBA is a different story (makes about 25-30% more in revenue?), which I don't know enough about to comment on. Maybe different sponsorship structures?

NBA has higher revenue, less players to pay. Rosters are 12 players deep, a lot more money to go around. Huge TV deal, sponsors on jerseys ect.

[Odjick29willkillyou]

There is a small part of me that cannot help but wonder how much Minnesota's interest in him via the "Zucker" trade request is making him re-think a long-term deal here. I played in a tournament in Blaine, MN this past February and met his life-long family friends at the local brewery as they are super close to the Hendrickson family who run the tourney. He is a Burnsville, MN boy who loves the state and has a ton of friends still there. His GF is a Vikings cheerleader and according to the gentleman I spoke with, his daughter and Brock are super close. He actually tried calling Brock as it was an off-night for the Nucks, but he did not answer. He showed me his phone although he would not let me copy the # lol. Anyhoo it is speculation on my part, but I hope this is not the case.  

[Rollieo Del Fuego]

2 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Crystal ball? This is why you bridge for both sides. If Boeser himself feels confident he can hit 40 as soon as next year, then he will be paid far greater than taking a long term deal. If you pay him with the expectation of him hitting 40 and he doesn't reach that, then who's to blame? Management surely (even though it's been suggested by some posters here who won't criticize themselves for making the proposal to do so), so there's no incentive for management to give him a long term with potential expectations. Keep in mind Boeser has had a back injury, wrist issues and groin issues.

 

He may be worth more than Nylander, but why should that be the benchmark when it's likely league-wide information that he's considered "over-paid"? Is Brock worth more than MacKinnon if we are pulling out singular examples? If Mackinnon is the benchmark, then Boeser is worth like 3.5 million a year. So in the end, the horrible contracts like Nylander's even out with the incredible ones like MacKinnon and you get somewhere in the middle. Boeser IMO is worth no more than 6 million dollars a year (and quite honestly it's being generous for an RFA and not playing a full season yet). So it should come down to term at those dollars. If he feels he can shine very soon, then take a 3 year deal. If he wants to buy a bit more time then take a 5 year deal. If he wants to secure his money, then sign a long term deal and take into account buying UFA years and growth and do 7 million for 8 years (you have to consider that we are overpaying during the RFA years by getting 7 million a year, so you take on the overpay to the UFA years and he's basically getting over 8.5 million in his UFA years).

My crystal ball is always in play...

 

Brock was on pace for 45 goals his rookie season, then he got injured....last season he had 3 injuries and revolving linemates....

Injuries happen ( more so to us than most teams ) but you still have to pay the man and the only relevant contracts are the ones within the last year at most.

There is always going to be upwards pressure on the amount you have to pay until the Payroll limit goes down instead of up.

 

I would jump at a 7x7 for Brock and expect that it would seem like a steal within a year or so....

[theo5789]

6 minutes ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:

My crystal ball is always in play...

 

Brock was on pace for 45 goals his rookie season, then he got injured....last season he had 3 injuries and revolving linemates....

Injuries happen ( more so to us than most teams ) but you still have to pay the man and the only relevant contracts are the ones within the last year at most.

There is always going to be upwards pressure on the amount you have to pay until the Payroll limit goes down instead of up.

 

I would jump at a 7x7 for Brock and expect that it would seem like a steal within a year or so....

Boeser had 29 goals in 62 games which equates to 38 over a full season if the pace continued. He's since had a back injury, wrist issues (major for a shooter if can't get back to 100%), and groin issues.

 

This past season he had 26 goals in 69 games which gets to around 30-31 goals over a full year. So he "regressed" and yet the belief is he will become a 40-50 goal guy and overcome all of his injuries like all players who have suffered injuries before have done? The back and groin took him a while to recover in season and his skating only looked decent for a couple of stretches and his shot has not looked as deadly as his 1st season which is a concern. If he feels he can get back to 100% and get back on track with his rookie season prior to his injuries, then he should sign a 2-3 year deal and earn the big pay.

 

No one was suggesting we pay Horvat 7 million dollars a year because he would be worth it by now, which he likely is at this point. The reason why it's a good deal is because we signed him for market value at that time. Horvat chose to buy all his RFA years. Boeser has a choice to take his market value now for his RFA years or buy a couple of UFA years with the expectation of a minor jump in production or he can take a shorter deal and bank on himself for a bigger payout sooner.

[Where'd Luongo?]

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

Boeser had 29 goals in 62 games which equates to 38 over a full season if the pace continued. He's since had a back injury, wrist issues (major for a shooter if can't get back to 100%), and groin issues.

 

This past season he had 26 goals in 69 games which gets to around 30-31 goals over a full year. So he "regressed" and yet the belief is he will become a 40-50 goal guy and overcome all of his injuries like all players who have suffered injuries before have done? The back and groin took him a while to recover in season and his skating only looked decent for a couple of stretches and his shot has not looked as deadly as his 1st season which is a concern. If he feels he can get back to 100% and get back on track with his rookie season prior to his injuries, then he should sign a 2-3 year deal and earn the big pay.

 

No one was suggesting we pay Horvat 7 million dollars a year because he would be worth it by now, which he likely is at this point. The reason why it's a good deal is because we signed him for market value at that time. Horvat chose to buy all his RFA years. Boeser has a choice to take his market value now for his RFA years or buy a couple of UFA years with the expectation of a minor jump in production or he can take a shorter deal and bank on himself for a bigger payout sooner.

Skinner was also going to be done and never score 30 goals again after his conkys. There are always people like you, and there are always people like the other dude who you replied to. Deal with it, you're both probably going to be wrong.

[Where'd Luongo?]

9 hours ago, IBatch said:

No.  But I’m a fan of 6 x 8 with the last few years (UFA ones only) having a NMC if that’s remotely possible...as per the post I was replying to I’d even go as high as 7 to make that happen.   I’m on the Boeser will undoubtably be a star in this league for a long time bus.   He reminds me of Brett Hull...wonder if Calgary would take a re-do on that trade, keep Hull for their cup RUNs and leave Ramage alone?  I’d bet their fans would they traded one cup for a chance at a half dozen.   Fluery, Roberts, Joe N, Hull, AL MaCinnes all just getting their feet wet plus a plethora of good vets?  With EDM dissolving they’d have had a powerhouse that could have rivalled the PIT teams of the early nineties.   How many goals would that first line get?  How many 500 goals scorers did that team have?  Then Hull goes on a tear that rivaled Gretzky’s early years.  

 

Boeser should be signed to a fair contract, if adding clauses for his UFA years means we get him for cheaper I’m all in.  Nope not a MG fan...but I am a BB fan.

What if at the final year, Boeser demanded a trade and only to Minnesota? Would JB be the devil for signing that contract?

[The Lock]

24 minutes ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

What if at the final year, Boeser demanded a trade and only to Minnesota? Would JB be the devil for signing that contract?

If that's the worst scenario of that contract I'd be all for that. lol